2007-04-17 PacketCITYOFALAMEDA.CALIFORNJA
SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND
COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION
TUESDAY - -- - APRIL 17, 2007 - - - 6:00 P.M.
Time: Tuesday, April 17, 2007, 6 :00 p.m.
Place: City Council Chers Conference Room, City Ha11, corner
of Santa Clara Avenue and Oak Street
Agenda:
1. Roll Call - City Council, Community Improvement Commission
2. Public Comment on Agenda Items Only
Anyone wishing to speak on agenda items only, may speak for a
maximum of 3 minutes per item
3. Adjournment to Closed Session to consider:
CITY COUNCIL
3-A. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Agency negotiators: Craig Jory and Human Resources
Director
Employee organizations: All City Bargaining Units
COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC)
3-B. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
Property:
Negotiating parties:
APN 074- 0905 - 022 -05, 074-0905-027
and 074- 0905 - 028 -04
CIC and Union Pacific Railroad
Under negotiation: Price and terms
4. Announcement of Action Taken in Closed Session, if any
5. Adjournment - City Council, Community Improvement Commission
Beverly J n Mayor
Chair, mmunity Improvement
Commission
CITYOFALAMEDA•CALIFORNIA
IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL:
1. Please file a speaker's slip with the Deputy City
Clerk and upon recognition by the Mayor, approach the
podium and state your name; speakers are limited to
three (3) minutes per item.
2. Lengthy testimony should be submitted in writing and
only a summary of pertinent points presented verbally.
3. Applause and demonstration are prohibited during
Council meetings.
AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY
APRIL 17, 2007 - - - - 7 :30 P.M.
[Note: Regular Council Meeting convenes at 7 :30 pm, City Hall,
Council Chimers, 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 JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND 6:00 P.M.
COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CONFERENCE ROOM
Separate Agenda (Closed Session)
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT 7:31 P.M.
COMMISSION, CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Separate Agenda
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
1. ROLL CALL --- City Council
2. AGENDA CHANGES
3. PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
3 -A. Proclamation declaring April 21, 2007 as Earth Day. (Public
Works)
3 -B. Proclamation declaring the month of April as Fair Housing
Month. (Development Services)
3 -C. Presentation on Implementation of the CCG Consulting L.L.C.
Report, "An Analysis of Telecom Operations." (Alameda Power &
Telecom)
4. CONSENT CALENDAR
Consent Calendar items are considered routine and will be
enacted, approved or adopted by one motion unless a request
for removal for discussion or explanation is received from the
Council or a member of the public
4 -A. Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings held
on April 3, 2007. (City Clerk)
4-B. Bills for ratification. (Finance)
4 -C. Recommendation to award Contract in the amount of $125,000 to
Sally Swanson Architects, Inc. for update of the City's
Americans with Disabilities Act Transition Plan and Self -
Evaluation Plan. (City Attorney)
4 -D. Recommendation to approve joining the Joint Powers Agreement
known as the Bay Area Employee Relations Services (BAERS).
(Human Resources)
4 -E. Recommendation to award Contract in the amount of $857,200,
including contingencies, to Golden Bay Construction, Inc. for
Repair of Portland Concrete Sidewalk, Curb, Gutter, Driveway
and Minor Street Patching, Fiscal Year 2006 -07, Phase 8, No.
P.W. 08-06-18. (Public Works)
4 -F. Recommendation to accept the work of Ransome Company for Site
Improvements and Designed Mobile Systems Industries, Inc. for
Modular Building and Foundation Improvements associated with
the New Modular Building (Washington Park Community Center) at
Upper Washington Park, No. P.W. 05- 06 -17. (Public Works)
4 -G. Recommendation to award a five year Vehicle Tow Contract to
Ken Betts Towing. (Police)
4 -H. Recommendation to approve second amendment to Contract with
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. increasing the amount by
$25,000 for consultant services to assist with Ballena Isle
Marina negotiations. (Development Services)
4 -I. Recommendation to reject Sole Bid and Adoption of Resolution
Authorizing Open Market Negotiation of Contract Pursuant to
Section 3-15 of the Alameda City Charter and Purchase of a
Modular Recreational Building and Site Improvements at
Bayport, Project No. 83110100, and Authorizing the City
Manager to Enter into Such an Agreement. (Development
Services) [Requires four affirmative votes]
4 -J. Adoption of Resolution Vacating a Portion of a Ten -Foot Wide
Power Easement and Recordation of Quitclaim Deed Within Parcel
2, Parcel Map 2542 (Alameda Towne Centre) . (Public Works)
4 -K. Introduction of ordinance Amending Alameda Municipal Code
Subsection 23 -6.2 (Operation of Power Boats) of Section 23 -6
(Harbor and Tidelands) of Chapter XXIII (Parks, Recreation
Areas and Public Property) by Repealing Subsection 23 -6.2 in
Its Entirety and Adding a New Subsection 23 -6.2 (Operation of
Power Boats) that Incorporates Speed Limits for Vessels
Propelled by Machinery in an Estuary or Channel and Continues
the Prohibition of Power Boats in Lagoons. (Police)
5. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
5-A. Recommendation to receive the Report "Everyone Home, the
Alameda Countywide Homelessness and Special Needs Housing
Plan." (Development Services)
5 -B. Public Hearing to consider a recommendation to adopt FY 2007-
08 Community Development Block Grant Action Plan and authorize
the City Manager to negotiate and execute related documents,
agreements and modifications. (Development Services)
5--C. Recommendation to consider initiation of a Zoning Amendment in
the area generally bounded by Madison Street to the north,
Washington Street to the south, Fernside Drive to the east and
Peach Street to the west. (Planning and Building)
5 -D. Adoption of Resolution Expressing Support for Full Funding for
Transit Operations in the State's Fiscal Year 2007 -2008
Budget. (Public Works)
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.
CITYOFALAMEDAsCALIFORNIA
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION
TUESDAY - - - APRIL 17, 2007 - - -- 7 :31 P.M.
Location: City Council Clears, 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 April 3, 2007. (City Clerk)
2 -B. Recommendation to authorize the Executive Director to execute
a Consultant Agreement with Harris & Associates in an amount
not to exceed $540,000, to be reimbursed by the Developer
pursuant to the Disposition and Development Agreement, to
provide Engineering Review and Construction Support Services
for the Alameda Landing Project. (Development Services)
3. AGENDA ITEMS
3 -A. Update on the Alameda Theater, Cineplex and Parking Structure
Construction Project;
• Recommendation to amend the Construction Contract with C.
Overaa & Co. for the Civic Center Parking Garage to
increase the Scope of Work and approve reduction of the
contingency budget.
4. ADJOURNMENT - Community Improvement Commission
Beverly Johnso
Procl2imation
W1-(E1EAS, April 21, 2007, will be the 37th annual celebration of Earth Day; and
V1-E1EAS, Earth Day began in 1970 as a long term endeavor to build a planet that
would be clean, healthy, prosperous, and sustainable; and
W1-EiE14S, cities and communities can and must make major contributions to solving
our environmental and natural resource problems through land use,
transportation, solid waste, wastewater treatment, and zoning decisions that
shape our environment; and
WHEREAS, local governments currently operate numerous ride - sharing, recycling,
energy and water conservation, and hazardous waste programs that
depend on widespread understanding and participation in order to be
successful; and
WHEREAS, it is time for everyone to increase their understanding of the importance of
participating in these programs and their respect for all our natural
resources; and
WHE1EAS, Earth Day will reach beyond existing environmental constituencies to
involve the broadest possible cross- section of society including business,
media, religious, ?olitical, youth, academic and cultural leaders; and
k)1-(EiEAS, the CITY OF ALAMEDA, together with the community, can continue to
work to meet the challenges of sustaining our environment; and
W1-(E1EAS, the Public Works Department, the Alameda Recreation and Park
Department, and Alameda Power & Telecom are jointly sponsoring Earth
Day festivities on April 21, 2007, at Washington Park.
NOW, fl-(E1EFO1E, BE IT / that I, Beverly J. Johnson, Mayor of the City
of Alameda, do hereby proclaim April 21 as
EARTH' DATALAIIEDil 2007
and pledge the City's support and invite all Alameda citizens, businesses, civic groups,
government agencies, and other org. ' . 'ons to participate in local and regional celebratory and
educational activities.
Beverl
Ma
on
4
City Council
Agenda Item #3 -A
04- 17 -07
Proc(amation
wq-OE:1ZEAS, the City of Alameda is committed to addressing the rights of all
citizens to have access to fair housing; and
1-(E1EA5 April 11, 2007, marks the 39th anniversary of the enactment of
the Federal Fair Housing Act of 1968, Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act,
which states that discrimination in the sale and rental of housing
based on race, religion, sex, national origin, disability or familial status
is illegal; and
WHEREAS,
k)1-E1EAS,
WHEREAS,
WE1EAS
California State law also protects against discrimination in housing
based on marital status, age, sexual orientation, or any arbitrary
factor; and
the City Council has declared the City of Alameda a hate-free city,
reflecting the value this community places on equal opportunity for
all, including nondiscrimination in housing; and
the City of Alameda, in partnership with Sentinel Fair Housing,
supports equal opportunities in housin g for all; and
in order to heighten public awareness, the City of Alameda wishes to
focus public attention on Fair Housing Month.
NOW, T*(EgEFoiE, BE IT 1ESO LVED, that I, Beverly J. Johnson, Mayor of the
City of Alameda, do hereby declare the month of April 2007 as
Fr 14 Mo nth/
in the City of Alameda and encourages all citizens and community organizations to
celebrate the value of harmonious and diverse communities of neighbors and to observe
the mandate of the Fair Housing Act in supporting the goal of equal housing opportunity
for all people.
Beverly j
Ma
4
City Council
Agenda Item #3-B
04 -1 ? -07
UNAPPROVED
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY- -APRIL 3, 2007- -6 :00 P.M.
Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:10 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- ) Workers' Compensation Claim (54956.95); Claimant: Ronald
Wilhite; Agency Claimed Against: City of Alameda.
(07- ) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation;
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Subdivision (b) of
Section 54956.9; Number of cases: One.
Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened
and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Workers' Compensation,
Council received a briefing and gave staff settlement parameters
with direction; regarding Anticipated Litigation, Council received
a briefing from Counsel regarding a threat of litigation; no action
was taken.
Adjournment
There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the
Special Meeting at 7:40 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
April 3, 2007
UNAPPROVED
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY APRIL 3, 2007 - - - - 7:30 P.M.
Mayor Johnson convened the Regular City Council Meeting at 8:01
p.m.
ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese,
Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 5.
Absent: None.
AGENDA CHANGES
(07- ) Mayor Johnson announced that the recommendation to award
Vehicle Tow Contract [paragraph no. 07- ] was removed from the
agenda.
PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
(07- ) Proclamation honoring Tony Aiello upon his retirement from
St. Joseph Notre Dame High School.
Mayor Johnson read and presented the proclamation to Tony Aiello.
Mr. Aiello thanked Council for the proclamation; stated St. Joseph
Notre Dame High School has been part of the community for 125
years; he hopes that the close relationship will continue.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Johnson announced that the recommendation to adopt Plans and
Specifications [paragraph no. 07- ] and recommendation to
appropriate $12,400 [paragraph no. 07- ] were removed from the
Consent Calendar for discussion.
Vice Mayor Tam moved approval of the remainder of the Consent
Calendar.
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are
indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.]
( *07- ) 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. Approved.
( *07- ) Ratified bills in the amount of $7,184,337.90.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
April 3, 2007
1
(07- ) Recommendation to adopt Plans and Specifications and
authorize Call for Bids for Godfrey Park Play Field Renovations,
No. P.W. 03- 07 -06.
David Kirwin, Alameda, questioned who would benefit from the
proposed changes; stated the trees provide shade to soccer
spectators; upgrading play structure equipment is more important
than field renovations.
Mayor Johnson requested clarification on field space.
The Recreation and Park Director stated that the Godfrey Park
reconfiguration would benefit the entire sports community; the
Field Advisory Committee was very active in the selected design;
the new design would provide more usable, smaller fields and a full
size outfield; the field has a severe gofer problem; playtime is
limited because of the old irrigation system.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether the proposed renovation is
part of the Turf Management Plan.
The Recreation and Park Director responded in the affirmative;
stated the renovation is scheduled for the summer; Ritter Park is
scheduled for the fall and Woodstock Park would be next.
Councilmember deHaan requested information on tree removal and area
expansion.
The Recreation and Park Director responded the Field Advisory
Committee felt more soccer space would be provided by flipping the
fields; stated all removed trees would be replaced.
Councilmember deHaan inquired what type of trees would be planted,
to which the Recreation and Park Director responded that he did not
know.
Councilmember Matarrese stated that he would like to see a timeline
for playground equipment replacement; tree replacement should be
aggressive with sufficient biomass.
The Recreation and Park Director stated staff would work with the
Design Engineering team.
Councilmember Matarrese stated that the public should be informed
when the play structure is replaced; the field is pocked from
gofers.
Mayor Johnson stated that she is surprised the field is being used.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
April 3, 2007
2
The Recreation and Park Director stated the field has not been used
since Bayport opened.
Councilmember Gilmore stated that the grass is brown at Bayport.
The Recreation and Park Director stated the grass was cut twice
because of the length; the top layer is dead grass.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether Godfrey Park would have a raised
pitching mound, to which the Recreation and Park Director responded
in the affirmative.
Mayor Johnson stated that two raised pitching mounds were removed
from Krusi Park.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the bleachers would be
relocated, to which the Recreation and Park Director responded in
the affirmative.
Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation
with the conditions that: 1) a playground equipment replacement
timeline be provided and 2) trees be replaced with a greater than
one -to --one ratio.
Vice Mayor Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
( *07_ ) 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.
( *07- ) 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.
( *07- ) 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.
(07- ) 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.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
April 3, 2007
3
for Installation of Countdown Pedestrian Signal Head and Audible
Pedestrian Signal, No. P.W. 01- 07 -01.
Richard Neveln, Alameda, stated that he hopes the corner of Park
Street and Buena Vista Avenue is in the plan; two bus lines cross
the critical intersetion.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether said intersection is on the
list.
The City Engineer responded she does not have the list with her;
stated the intersection is probably included.
Mayor Johnson stated the Park Street and Buena Vista Avenue corner
should be on the list.
Councilmember deHaan moved approval' of the staff recommendation.
Vice Mayor Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
(07- ) Recommendation to award Vehicle Tow Contract to Ken Betts
Towing. Removed from the agenda.
( *07- ) Resolution No. 14079, "Authorizing the Destruction of
Specified Unnecessary Records of the Human Resources Department."
Adopted.
( *07- ) Resolution No. 14080, "Adopting a Policy for Naming City
Property, Facilities, and Streets." Adopted.
( *07- ) Ordinance No. 2964, "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." Finally passed.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(07- ) Recommendation to accept proposed bus shelter design
standards for all future installations in the City of Alameda.
The City Engineer provided a brief report.
Proponents (In favor of bus shelter standards): Greg Harper, A.C.
Transit; Richard Neveln, Alameda; Michael John Torrey, Alameda;
Susan Decker, Alameda Transit Advocates; David Kirwin, Alameda.
Following Mr. Harper's comments, Mayor Johnson inquired whether the
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
April 3, 2007
4
shelter design considered next bus readers.
The City Engineer responded accommodating next bus readers would
not be a problem if electricity is added.
Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether solar power is a possibility.
The City Engineer responded she would look into the matter.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the shelter design provides weather
protection.
The City Engineer responded weather protection could be provided;
stated sidewalk width and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
access would need to be considered.
Councilmember deHaan stated that Bayport bus shelters are the worst
and provide only two seats; the City's bus shelters provide three
seats; adequate seating should be provided; shelters should be
advertisement free.
The City Engineer stated advertisement was not included in the
standard because of previous discussions.
Councilmember deHaan stated that Alamedans for Responsible Transit
Shelters (ARTS) requested that a provision be added so that
continued bus shelter funding would be possible.
The City Engineer stated the current shelters are the shelters
provided by ARTS; steel or metal might not be available.
Councilmember Matarrese stated that he likes the design criteria;
maintenance bleeds into installation and operation; the criteria
should state that the first choice is for the most durable shelters
with the least maintenance; durability and simplicity should be
ranked high.
The City Engineer stated durability and maintenance could be
included.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether a maintenance budget would
be included when the next bus shelters are installed.
The City Engineer responded the budget report would address the
need for an increase if the current maintenance budget is not
sufficient.
Councilmember Gilmore stated that she was impressed with the
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
April 3, 2007
5
survey; the survey was very comprehensive; she was pleasantly
surprised at the number of responses; the website should be kept in
mind when doing other surveys.
The City Engineer stated credit needs to be given to the
Transportation Commission; bus riders were given an option to
obtain a hard copy of the report or use the website; impacted
communities were targeted.
Vice Mayor Tam commended the Transportation Commission and staff;
stated twenty -two potential sites are listed on the survey;
inquired whether a criteria would be used to determine bus shelter
locations.
The City Engineer responded twenty -four high priority locations
were previously identified by Council.
Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether the locations were based on
ridership, to which the City Engineer responded in the affirmative.
Mayor Johnson stated the list should be periodically reviewed by
the Transportation Commission or Council if ridership changes.
Councilmember Gilmore moved approval of the staff recommendation.
Vice Mayor Tam seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Mayor Johnson stated she that likes Councilmember
Matarrese's suggestion regarding durability and maintenance.
Councilmember Gilmore amended the motion to include that priority
be given to shelters with the highest durability and least amount
of maintenance.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
(07- ) 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
(07- A) Resolution No. 14080, "Upholding Planning Board Resolution
PB-07-03 Denying Planned Development (PD-05-0002) for 2241 and 2243
Clement Avenue (Boatworks Project)." Adopted.
The Planning Services Manager provided a brief presentation.
Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the hearing.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
April 3, 2007
6
Proponent (In favor of appeal): Robert McGillis, Philip Banta
Associates.
Opponents: (Not in favor of appeal): Joseph Woodward, Estuary
Park Action Committee (EPAC); Dorothy Freeman, EPAC (provided
comments) ; Virginia Dof f lemyer, EPAC; Rebecca Redfield, EPAC.
There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public
portion of the hearing.
Vice Mayor Tam stated that 4.8 acres were rezoned for residential
use; inquired whether the remaining 4.6 acres would be part of the
MU -5 Specified Mixed Use Area envisioned for the ten -acre Estuary
Park along the northwestern waterfront.
The Planning Services Manager responded the vision is for
continuous shoreline access along the entire northern waterfront;
stated larger, active waterfront parks would be along the
waterfront trail; the ten -acre Estuary Park is part of the 1991
General Plan; a portion [of the park] could be on the northern end
of the site.
Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether the Applicant was aware of the
plans.
The Planning Services Manager responded the Applicant was aware of
the rezoning that occurred in December 2006; stated that he is not
sure whether the Applicant was aware of the Estuary Park concept
adopted as part of the 1991 General Plan.
Councilmember Matarrese stated that the project does not conform
with the General Plan; the rezoning last fall was to implement the
General Plan.
Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution to uphold
the Planning Board's decision and deny the appeal.
Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
Councilmember deHaan requested an update on the implementation of a
Task Force to .address the Estuary and Beltline Parks.
The City Manager stated an update would be provided.
Councilmember deHaan requested that funding options be provided
also.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
April 3, 2007
7
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON- AGENDA
(07- ) Michael Krueger, Alameda, stated that bus shelter
maintenance has improved; thanked the Public Works Department for
all the hard work.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(07- ) Mayor Johnson introduced Interim Fire Chief Jim Reed.
The Interim Fire Chief stated it is a pleasure to serve the City of
Alameda.
(07- ) Vice Mayor Tam requested a status report on the City
Treasurer and County Auditor meeting to review of the City's
investment policy.
(07- ) Vice Mayor Tam stated that she attended the Lobby Day
session with the Alamedan's for Better Schools on March 28 in
Sacramento; she met with Senator Perata's staff; she and Mayor
Johnson were able to talk to Senator Torlakson regarding funding
equalizations for schools, which is a high priority for the
Legislature; there appears to be bipartisan support on the part of
Assemblyman Guy Houston to advance legislation to address
equalization issues.
(07- ) Councilmember deHaan stated that the Alameda Towne Centre
Old Navy grand opening will be on Thursday.
(07- ) Councilmember deHaan requested a Council review of the
Planning Board's decision to establish an Ad Hoc Committee to
address Measure A.
The City Manager stated that Council could request a review of the
Planning Board decision within ten days; the matter would need to
come back within the next three Council meetings; the action would
be suspended in the meantime.
Mayor Johnson inquired when the matter would come back to Council,
to which the City Manager responded in May.
(07- ) Councilmember Matarrese stated that he requested the City
Manager to review the . Governor's budget and the affect on public
transportation, particularly AC Transit; discussions have involved
cutting operational funds to transit districts; he would like
Council to deliberate on whether to consider a resolution to make
sure AC Transit is fully funded.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
April 3, 2007
8
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the matter is on a fast timeframe.
The City Manager responded that there would be a [State] budget
revision in May.
Mayor Johnson requested that Council be consider a resolution at
the next meeting.
(07- ) Mayor Johnson requested a status report on Mount
Trashmore; stated methane pipes are still present.
Councilmember Matarrese stated that he received information from
the Public works Director on the matter; venting is needed for ten
to fifteen more years.
(07- ) Councilmember Gilmore stated Public Works provided a
report outlining ways to make the Webster Tube crossing easier for
bicyclists; requested an update on whether the space between the
Tube is a feasible option.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the
Regular Meeting at 9:13 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
April 3, 2007
9
April 12, 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 Amount
158290 -- 158685 $1 ,884,289.86
E16396-E16528 $93, 979.20
EFT340 $1 71,645.29
Void Checks:
144447 ($335.07)
156752 ($150.00)
GRAND TOTAL
Respectfully submitted,
0
o'itita
\ ,. /,
• ' '
Pamela J. Sible
Council Warrants 04/17/07
$2,149,429.28
BILLS #4 -B
4/17/2007
CITY OF ALAMEDA
MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
From: Teresa L. Highsmith
City Attorney
Date: April 17, 2007
Re: Award Contract in the Amount of $125,000 to Sally Swanson Architects,
Inc. for the Update of the City's Americans with Disabilities Act Transition
Plan and Self- Evaluation Plan
BACKGROUND
The City Attorney's Office seeks Council approval to award a $125,000 bid to a
consultant with expertise in Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance, to update
the City's ADA, Title 11 Program, Transition Plan and Self - Evaluation Plan. The Council
assigned this project to the City Attorney's Office, Risk Management Division, during the
budget process of fiscal year 2006/2007.
In 1992, the City retained a consultant to prepare a Self- Evaluation Plan and a
Transition Plan, as required by Title 11 of the American with Disabilities Act of 1990
( "ADA ") and the Department's implementing regulation providing comprehensive civil
rights protections to individuals with disabilities in the areas of employment, public
accommodations, State and local government services and telecommunications. The
plan was designed in part to self - evaluate the City's need for modifications that would
make the City's buildings, parks and facilities accessible to persons with disabilities, as
well as designed to implement the modifications needed.
Title 11 mandates that every public entity must periodically re-evaluate its current
services, policies and practices to determine whether they are in compliance with non-
discrimination regulations of the ADA. An updated self - evaluation and transition plan is
required and intended to examine programs, activities and services, identify problems or
physical barriers that may limit accessibility by the disabled and describe potential
compliance solutions.
DISCUSSION
In late 2006, the City sent out a Request for Proposals with a budgeted and "not to
exceed" bid of $125,000. Fifteen firms attended the pre -bid meeting, and two firms
submitted proposals; however, only one proposal was responsive to the RFP. The bids
were as follows:
City Council
Agenda Item #4 -C
04 -17 -07
Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
1) Hibser Yamauchi Architects, Inc. $327,613
2) Sally Swanson Architects, Inc. $125,000
Page 2
April 17, 2007
The proposal submitted by Hibser Yamauchi Architects, Inc. was not responsive to the
RFP process. They failed to include the "self - evaluation plan" portion of the project
within the scope of their bid, and their bid was $202,013 more than our budgeted and
stated "not to exceed" number.
Finding the proposal submitted by Sally Swanson Architects, Inc. to be completely
responsive to the RFP and within budget, a 90- minute interview with the firm's project
team by City staff was conducted. The City's interview panel included Ed Sommerauer,
Associate Civil Engineer representing Public Works (Ed is also the City's outgoing ADA
Coordinator who worked with the Mayor's Committee on Disability), City Building
Official, Greg McFann, representing Planning and Building, Assistant City Attorney,
Donna Mooney and City Risk Manager, Darrell Handy, representing the City Attorney's
Office. All members of the interview panel agreed that Sally Swanson Architects were
well qualified for the project, having 25 years of accessibility consulting experience for
public agencies including cities (Vacaville, Fairfield, El Cerrito, San Rafael), counties
(Marin, Mendocino), school districts, special districts, and even the Division of the State
Architect. As part of the selection process, the interview panel reviewed examples of
the firm's projects identical to the project the City's project, and checked references.
With the cooperation of City Staff, the consultant will conduct field inspections of a
number of City facilities, will identify remaining accessibility issues, will update the City's
Self - Evaluation Plan, and will expand and update the City's existing Transition Plan.
When completed, the City will have a Transition Plan that is up -to -date, detailed,
strategic, and phased. Additionally, the City will be left with a formatted "living"
document, which staff can keep current and adjust to the needs of the City.
The acceptable phased - transition plan contains the following:
a) A list of the physical barriers in a public agency's facilities that limit accessibility
of its programs, activities or services to individuals with disabilities;
a) A list of the programs provided by the public agency, with an evaluation of their
accessibility or equivalent facilitation to all users;
b) An evaluation of the policies and procedures to determine if they promote equal
access to persons with disabilities;
c) A detailed outline of the methods to be used to remove these barriers and
make the facilities and programs accessible;
d) The phased - schedule for taking the necessary steps to achieve compliance
with Title 11 of the Americans with Disabilities Act; and
f) The contact information for the City's ADA Coordinator.
Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
Page 3
April 17, 2007
BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT
The cost of the project is budgeted as follows:
CIP 0480 Phase 1 Update Self - Evaluation
CIP 0530 Phase 2 Update Transition Plan
Current funding of both of the CIP's is sufficient for this project.
Involvement of City staff will be minimal with the exception of the ADA Coordinator who
will be the liaison between the project team and City staff.
RECOMMENDATION
Award the contract to update the City's ADA Transition Plan and Self- Evaluation Plan to
Sally Swanson Architects, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $'125,000.
Respectfully Submitted,
Teresa . Highsmit
City Attorney
B
Darrell Handy
Risk Manager
CITY OF ALAMEDA
Memorandum
TO: Honorable Mayor
and Councilmembers
FROM: Debra Kurita
City Manager
DATE: April 17, 2007
SUBJECT: Approve Execution of Joint Powers Agreement Known as the Bay
Area Employee Relations Service
BACKGROUND
The City has eight bargaining units and will be negotiating Memorandums of
Understanding (MOU) with these units over the next several years. The need for
comprehensive credible compensation and benefit information for other agencies
will be a critical component of these negotiations and will be useful for
classification and compensation studies in the future.
DISCUSSION
Bay Area Employee Relations Service ( BAERS) is an intergovernmental
association of city, county, and special district members in four San Francisco
Bay Area counties (Attachment A). All of the cities in the City's established
survey group are either members of BAERS or are cooperating contributors.
Member agencies utilize the site and service for compensation, benefit, and
salary survey information. The data and information maintained includes:
• Compensation records for over 4,300 Safety and Miscellaneous
classifications
• Bargaining agreement summaries and MOUs for over 270 bargaining
units
• Benefit summary and detailed benefit breakdown information
• Negotiation status information for expired MOUs
The system is a neutral, accurate, and credible information source and is
designed to provide on- demand survey data, benefits, settlement and bargaining
unit information, MOUs, pay plans, and classification research to the member
agencies. In addition, membership includes unlimited access to the BAERS
library of hard copy documents as well as on -going user support.
City Council
Agenda Item #4 -D
04-17-07
Honorable Mayor
and Councilmembers
April 17, 2007
Page 2 of 2
Staff recommends execution of the BAERS joint powers agreement for the
2007/08 fiscal year. Attachment B represents the full membership agreement
between the City and BAERS. If approved, the Human Resources Director will
serve on the Board of Directors of BAERS and ensure the City's needs are met.
In future years, membership fees will be requested as part of the City's normal
budget process.
BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS/ FINANCIAL IMPACT
The cost of the membership agreement is $14,142, which includes a 3% fee
increase for the 2007/08 fiscal year. The costs of this membership will be
absorbed in the current Human Resources budget appropriations through salary
savings achieved due to staffing restrictions.
RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the City Manager to execute the Joint Powers Agreement regarding
BAERS effective July 1, 2007, for the purpose of sharing and obtaining
information for salary surveys and other classification and compensation studies.
Respecffu . y Submitted,
Karen Willis
Human Resources Director
Attachment A: BAERS Members and Cooperating Non - Members
Attachment B: Joint Powers Agreement for the Bay Area Employee Relations
Service
Bay Area Employee Relations Service Members
1. Town of Atherton
2. City of Belmont
3. Belmont - San Carlos Fire
Department
4. City of Burlingame
5. City of Campbell
6. City of Cupertino
7. City of Daly City
8. East Bay Regional Park District
9. East Palo Alto (Not Reported)
10. City of Foster City
11. City of Fremont
12. Town of Hillsborough
13. City of Livermore
14. City of Los Altos
15. Town of Los Altos Hills
16. Town of Los Gatos
17. City of Menlo Park
18. Menlo Park Fire Protection District
19. City of Millbrae
20. City of Milpitas
21. City of Morgan Hill
22. City of Mountain View
23. City of Pacifica
24. City of Palo Alto
25. City of Pleasanton
26. City of Redwood City
27. City of San Carlos
28. City of San Mateo
29. City of San Rafael _
30. City of Santa Clara
31. Santa Clara County
32. Santa Clara County Central Fire
Protection District
33. Santa Clara Valley Water District
34. City of Saratoga
35. City of South San Francisco
36. City of Sunnyvale
37. West Valley Sanitation District
Cooperating Non Members
1. City of Alameda
2. Alameda County
3. City of Berkeley
4. City of Brisbane
5. City of Concord
6. City of Gilroy
7. City of Hayward
8. City of Napa
9. City of Oakland
10. City of Richmond
11. City of San Bruno
12. City of San Jose
13. City of San Leandro
14. San Mateo County
15. City of Union City
16. City of Vallejo
17. City of Walnut Creek
18. Town of Woodside
G:1Personnel\JK\ERS\Agency List.doc
City Council
Attachment A to
Agenda Item #4 -D
04-17-07
09/12/03
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT FOR
THE BAY AREA EMPLOYEE RELATIONS SERVICE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
RECITALS 1
ARTICLE 1- DEFINITIONS 2
ARTICLE 2- PURPOSES 2
ARTICLE 3- PARTIES TO THE AGREEMENT 2
ARTICLE 4 - POWERS OF THE BAY AREA EMPLOYEE RELATIONS SERVICE ........ 3
ARTICLE 5- METHOD BY WHICH THE PURPOSE OF THE AGREEMENT WILL BE
ACCOMPLISHED 3
ARTICLE 6- BOARD OF DIRECTORS 3
ARTICLE 7- POWERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS. 3
ARTICLE 8- MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS 4
ARTICLE 9- MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE .. 5
ARTICLE 10- POWERS OF THE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 5
ARTICLE 11- MEETINGS OF THE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 6
ARTICLE 12- OFFICERS OF BAERS 6
ARTICLE 13- ACCOUNTS AND RECORDS 7
ARTICLE 14- RESPONSIBILITY FOR MONIES 7
ARTICLE 15- RESPONSIBILITIES OF BAERS .. 8
ARTICLE 16- RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE MEMBERS •• 8
ARTICLE 17 -NEW MEMBERS 10
ARTICLE 18- LIABILITY 10
ARTICLE 19- WITHDRAWAL 11
ARTICLE 20- EFFECT OF WITHDRAWAL 11
ARTICLE 21- CANCELLATION 11
ARTICLE 22- TERMINATION AND DISTRIBUTION 11
ARTICLE 23- PROVISION FOR BYLAWS AND MANUAL 12
ARTICLE 24- NOTICES 12
ARTICLE 25- AMENDMENT 12
ARTICLE 26-SEVERABILITY 13
ARTICLE 27- ARTICLE HEADINGS .. 13
ARTICLE 28 -TERM OF AGREEMENT 13
ARTICLE 29 -FULL AGREEMENT 13
City Council
Attachment B to
Agenda Item #4 -D
04 -17 -07
BAERS AGREEMENT
9/12/03
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT FOR
THE BAY AREA EMPLOYEE RELATIONS SERVICE
This agreement is made and entered into on January 1, 2004, by and among the public
entities organized and existing under the Constitution or laws of the State of California,
hereinafter collectively referred to as "Members" or "Parties" and individually as
"Member ", which are parties signing this Agreement.
RECITALS
Whereas, California Government Code Section 6500 et seq. provides that two or more
public agencies may by agreement jointly exercise any power common to the contracting
parties; and
Whereas, the parties are public agencies as that term is defined in California Government
Code Section 6500 dealing with Joint Powers Agreements; and
Whereas, each of the parties to this Agreement are actively involved in employee
relations; and
Whereas, the parties have common powers and authority to collect, refine, analyze and
use information, research and assistance in their respective employee relations; and
Whereas, each of the parties to this Agreement desires to join together with the other
parties for the purpose of consolidating confidential information, research, and assistance
functions and services in preparation for and use for labor negotiations and other
authorized uses, in order to realize economic and operational efficiencies.
Whereas, the name of the Intergovernmental Employee Relations Service has been
changed to Bay Area Employee Relations Service to reflect the expanded membership
base of the nine bay area counties,
Now, therefore, for and in consideration of all the mutual benefits, covenants and
agreements contained herein, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1
BAERS,AGREEMENT
9/12/03
ARTICLE 1- DEFINITIONS
The following definitions shall apply to the provisions of this Agreement:
(a) Agreement shall mean the Joint Powers Agreement for the Bay Area
Employee Relations Service.
(b) BAERS shall mean the Bay Area Employee Relations Service.
(c) Board of Directors or Board shall mean the governing body of the Bay
Area Employee Relations Service.
(d) County shall mean the County of Santa Clara.
(e) Management Committee shall mean the Management Committee of the
Bay Area Employee Relations Service Board of Directors.
ARTICLE 2- PURPOSES
This Agreement is entered into by the Members pursuant to the provisions of the
California Government Code Section 6500 et seq. in order to consolidate information,
research and assistance functions and services in preparation for and use for labor
negotiations that are necessary and relevant to the operation of the respective employee
relations of the parties. By this Agreement, the parties do not create an agency or entity
separate from the parties themselves
The method of implementing purposes and executing these powers is to provide
employee relations services in accordance with the terms and conditions hereof through
the staff and facilities of the County of Santa Clara.
ARTICLE 3- PARTIES TO THE AGREEMENT
Each party to this Agreement certifies that it intends to and does contract with all other
parties who are signatories of this Agreement and, in addition, with such other parties as
may later be added as parties to and signatories of this Agreement pursuant to Article 17.
Each party to this Agreement also certifies that the deletion of any party from this
Agreement, pursuant to Article 19 and 20, shall not affect this Agreement nor the intent
to contract as described above with the other parties to the Agreement then remaining.
2
BAERS AGREEMENT
9/12/03
ARTICLE 4- POWERS OF THE BAY AREA EMPLOYEE RELATIONS
SERVICE
BAERS shall have the powers common to its Members and is hereby authorized to do all
acts necessary for the exercise of said common powers, including, but not limited to, any
or all of the following:
(a) To provide for the delivery of employee relations services through County
employees and at facilities of the County;
(b) To incur debts, liabilities or obligations in accordance with a duly
approved budget;
(c) To levy and collect fees and charges, including administrative and -
operating costs, as provided by this Agreement or by law;
(d) To exercise all powers necessary and proper to carry out the terms and
provisions of this Agreement, or otherwise as authorized by law.
ARTICLE 5- METHOD BY WHICH THE PURPOSE OF THE AGREEMENT
WILL BE ACCOMPLISHED
BAERS shall provide for the delivery of employee relations services using employees of
the County and at facilities of the County.
ARTICLE 6- BOARD OF DIRECTORS
BAERS shall be governed by the Board of Directors which is hereby established and
which shall be comprised of one representative from each Member. Each Member shall
have one (1) vote. Each Member shall also designate an alternate who shall serve in the
absence of its regular representative. The alternate shall have the authority to attend,
participate in and vote at any meeting of the Board of Directors when the regular member
for whom he or she is an alternate_ is absent from said meeting.
ARTICLE 7- POWERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
The Board of Directors shall have the following powers and functions:
(a) To establish priorities in the performance of services.
3
BAERS AGREEMENT
9/12/03
(b) To approve and adopt the annual fiscal year operating budget (July 1
through June 30) of BAERS.
(c) To receive and review periodic accountings of all funds under Article 13
and 14 of this Agreement..
(d) To have the power to conduct on behalf of BAERS all business of
• BAERS.
(e) To elect from its Members pursuant to Article 9 of this Agreement, a
Management Committee to which it may delegate authority to make and
implement any decision that the Board is authorized to make under this
A•greerment, except the following:
q
1.
Action that would require an amendment to this Agreement, under
(f)
Article 25 herein;
2. Change in the fee schedule;
3. Action that would financially obligate the parties in any way,
except as set forth in Article 10;
4. Selection of the President, Vice- President and members of such
Management Committee.
To review all acts of the Management Committee, and shall have the
power to modify and/or override any decision or action of the
Management Committee upon a majority vote of a quorum of the Board of
Directors, unless this would interfere with a legal obligation made by the
Management Committee and result in BAERS liability.
( g) To adopt Bylaws for the conduct of its business consistent with this
agreement and with all applicable laws.
(h) To have such other powers and functions as provided by this Agreement.
ARTICLE 8- MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
(a) Meetings. The Board of Directors shall establish its regular meetings. It
shall hold at least two regular meetings annually, at a time and -place
determined by the Management Committee. The Board may hold special
meetings as required.
4
BAERS AGREEMENT
9/12/03
(b) Minutes. BAERS shall keep minutes of regular and special meetings of
the Board of Directors and shall as soon as possible after each meeting,
forward a copy of the minutes to each member of the Board.
(c)
Quorum. A majority of the members of the Board of Directors shall
constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. A vote of the majority
of those members present at a meeting shall be sufficient to constitute
action by the Board of Directors.
(d) Compliance with the Brown Act. All meetings of the Board of
Directors, including regular and special meetings, shall be called, noticed,
held and conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Ralph M.
Brown Act, California Government Code Section 54950 et seq.
ARTICLE 9- MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
(a) There shall be a Management Committee of the Board of Directors, which
shall consist of seven (7) members, one of which shall be the County.
Two of the members of the Management Committee shall be the President
and Vice- President. The other members of the Management Committee
shall be elected by the Board of Directors pursuant to the conditions and
terms provided in the Bylaws. The President of the Board of Directors, or
the Vice- President in his or her absence, shall also serve as the President
of the Management Committee.
(b) Compliance with the Brown Act. All meetings of the Management
Committee, including regular and special meetings, shall be called,
noticed, held and conducted in accordance with the provisions of the
Ralph M. Brown Act, California Government Code Section 54950 et seq.
ARTICLE 10- POWERS OF THE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
The Management Committee of the Board of Directors shall have the following powers:
(a) To prepare the operating budget of BAERS for each fiscal year, subject to
review, modification and approval by the Board of Directors, as provided
for in Article S.
(b) To receive and act upon reports of any sub- committee established by the
Board of Directors.
(c) To create Bylaws as necessary.
5
BAERS AGREEMENT
9/12/03
(d) To review new members for acceptance or rejection.
(e) To solicit performance feedback of BAERS on a regular basis and provide
the information to the County.
(0 In conjunction with a representative of the County, to establish annual
performance objectives for the Director, Bay Area Employee Relations
Service. The Management Committee shall annually evaluate the
performance of the Director, Bay Area Employee Relations Service
against the performance objectives established. The County shall consider
Management Committee input in the formal County performance
evaluation of the Director, Bay Area Employee Relations Service.
In the event the position of Director, Bay Area Employee Relations
Service becomes vacant, the Management Committee and the County shall
jointly participate in the recruitment and selection process of a new
Director. The Management Committee shall make a hiring
recommendation to the County, which has the sole authority to select the
new Director, Bay Area Employee Relations Service.
Have such other powers and functions as are provided for in this
Agreement or as delegated by the Board of Directors.
(B)
(h)
ARTICLE 11- MEETINGS OF THE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
The meetings of the Management Committee shall be held at least twice a year at a time
and date set by the President.
ARTICLE 12- OFFICERS OF BAERS
(a) President. The Board of Directors shall elect a President, to hold office
for a one -year term, except as hereinafter provided and until a successor is
elected. In the event the President ceases to be a member of the Board of
Directors, the resulting vacancy shall be filled at the next regular meeting
of the Board of Directors held after such vacancy occurs. In the absence
or inability of the President to act, the Vice President shall act as
President. Should the Vice President not be available, the Management
Committee shall name an Acting President who shall serve until the next
regular Board meeting. The President serves at the pleasure of the Board,
6
BAERS AGREEMENT
9/12/03
and receives no compensation for these services. Reasonable expenses
incurred on the Board's behalf are reimbursable.
(b) Vice President. The Board of Directors shall elect a Vice President, to
hold office for a one-year term, except as hereinafter provided and until a
successor is elected. In the event the Vice President so elected ceases to
be a member of the Board of Directors, the resulting vacancy shall be
filled at the next regular meeting of the Board of Directors held after such
vacancy occurs. In the absence or inability of the President to act, the
Vice - President shall act as President. The Vice President serves at the
pleasure of the Board, and receives no compensation for service.
Reasonable expenses incurred on the Board's behalf are reimbursable.
(c)
Other. The Board of Directors may create other offices as needed
ARTICLE 13- ACCOUNTS AND RECORDS
(a) Annual Budget. The Board of Directors of BAERS shall adopt an annual
operating budget pursuant to Article 7 of this Agreement.
(b) Funds and Accounts. The County shall establish and maintain such
funds and accounts as may be required by good accounting practice and as
recommended by the Management Committee. Books and records of
BAERS shall be open to inspection, with reasonable notice, by
representatives from Member agencies.
(c) County's Fiscal Report. The County, within one hundred and twenty
(120) days after the close of each fiscal year, shall give a complete written
report of all financial activities for such fiscal year to the Board of
Directors and each Member.
(d) Annual Audit. The County shall provide for an annual audit of the
accounts and records of BAERS. The auditshall meet the minimum
requirements prescribed by the State Controller for special districts by the
California Government Code.
ARTICLE 14- RESPONSIBILITY FOR MONIES
(a) The County shall have the custody of and disburse BAERS funds
according to the policies and directions of the Board of Directors.
BAERS AGREEMENT
9/12/03
(b) The County shall assume the following duties described in California
Government Code Section 6505.5 including:
1. Receive and issue receipts for all money for BAERS and place it in
the County treasury in the account of BAERS;
2. Be responsible for the safekeeping and disbursement of all of
BAERS money so held by the County;
3. Pay any other sums due from BAERS only upon warrants signed
by the public officer performing functions of Controller; and
4. Report in writing, 15 days after the close of each fiscal quarter, to
the members the amount of money held for BAERS, the amount of
receipts since the last report, .and the amount paid out since the last
report.
ARTICLE 15- RESPONSIBILITIES OF BAERS
BAERS shall perform the following functions in discharging the responsibilities under
this Agreement:
(a) Develop and maintain a confidential Internet based database containing
employee relations data as set forth in the Bylaws for use by Members.
(b) Perform other special services as requested by individual Members related
to collection, refinement and analysis of data, and-other such research and
assistance functions essential for labor relations as set forth in the Bylaws;
and
(c)
Have such other responsibilities as deemed necessary by the Board of
Directors or Management Committee in order to carry out the purposes of
this Agreement.
ARTICLE 16- RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE MEMBERS
(a) Responsibilities. Each Member shall have the following responsibilities:
1. To appoint representative and an alternative representative with
pP a re p
knowledge of the Member's labor relations to the Board of
Directors, pursuant to Article 6 of this Agreement.
8
BAERS AGREEMENT
9/12/03
2. Each Member shall appoint an employee to be responsible for
responding to requests for information, and to serve as liaison to
BAERS.
3. Each Member shall pay all fees in accordance with the fee
schedule, adopted annually pursuant to the Bylaws, including fines
that may be assessed for not meeting member obligations..
4. Each Member shall provide BAERS with information related to
salaries, benefits, labor settlement information as stated in the final
Memoranda of Understanding and other data as may be necessary
for BAERS to carry out services provided under this Agreement.
5. Each Member shall comply with all bylaws, rules and regulations
adopted by the Board of Directors and Management Committee.
(b) Confidentiality. Each Member shall have access to all data and
information collected by BAERS in preparation for and during periods of
labor negotiations that are necessary and relevant to the operation of the
respective employee relations of the parties. Each Memberagrees to treat
such information in confidence and for use only for the purposes
contemplated in the Agreement. A Member shall not release any of the
information to any entity or other party except in the course of labor
negotiations or as consented to by the County. This shall not preclude a
Member from such limited reproduction and distribution of such
information within its own agency as is necessary for such Member's
employee relations activities, nor shall it preclude a Member from using
the information for purposes of discussing same with other Members. In
the event that a Member receives a California Public Records Act request,
subpoena, court order, or other legal document requiring release of the
information, or is informed that such document is being requested, the
Member shall notify the County in order to permit the County to review
the matter and provide a recommendation to insure uniform responses. In
its discretion, the County may seek a protective order or other similar
order. Members shall be responsible for maintaining effective procedures
and controls in respect to web site password security.
The Board may authorize BAERS to release data from the web site or
documents in its possession for sale to management officials of non-
member public jurisdictions with the understanding that the Liability
provisions in Article 18 shall apply.
9
BAERS AGREEMENT
9/12/03
ARTICLE 17 -NEW MEMBERS
With the approval of the Management Committee, new members may be added to
BAERS. Approval for new members shall be in accordance with the following
procedure:
(a) A public agency shall submit a letter of intent and application to the
County;
(b) The Management Committee shall review the application to determine
compatibility with the scope and purpose of BAERS.
Members entering under this Article shall become a party to this Joint Powers Agreement
and . shall execute such documents as necessary, which shall be appended to this
Agreement. .
ARTICLE 18-- LIABILITY
Each party to this JPA Agreement assumes all risks associated with the use of services
P � g indemnify, hold
provided by the County under Paragraph 2 of the Agreement, and will fy,
p y �
harmless and defend the County and all other parties to this Agreement from all claims
for money or damages arising from alleged errors or omissions of the County.
and notwithstanding the pro rata risk allocation which might otherwise be
In lieu of an g p
imposed between the parties pursuant to Government Code Section 895.6, the parties
agree that all losses or liabilities incurred by a party shall not be shared pro rata but
instead the County and each Member of this Joint Powers Agreement agree that pursuant
� and
to Government Code Section 895.4, each of the parties hereto shall fully indemnify
hold each of the other parties, their officers, board members, employees and agents,
harmless from any claim, expense or cost, damage or liability imposed for injury (as
harml y � P
defined
by Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of negligent acts or
omissions or willful misconduct of the indemnifying party, its officers, board members,
r
employees agents, under or in connection with the use by a party of any services or
data P rovided under this Agreement. No party, nor any officer, board member,
g
or
employee a ent thereof shall be responsible for any damage or liability occurring by
reason of negligent acts or omissions or willful misconduct of other parties hereto, their
officers, board members, employees or agents, under or in connection with or arising out
of the use by a party of any services or data provided under this Agreement.
10
BAERS AGREEMENT
9/12/03
ARTICLE 19- WITHDRAWAL
A Member of BAERS may not withdraw as a party to this Agreement and as a member
of the BAERS for a one -year period commencing with the effective date of its
participation ation in BAERS. Following the one -year irrevocable commitment to the BAERS,
a Member may withdraw only at the end of the fiscal year, provided it has given BAERS
at least three months written notice of its intent to withdraw from this Agreement.
ARTICLE 20- EFFECT OF WITHDRAWAL
The withdrawal of any Member from this Agreement, shall not terminate this Agreement
and no Member b y withdrawing withdrawin shall be entitled to payment or return of any deposits,
any consideration of property paid, or donated by the Member to BAERS, or to any
distribution of assets.
ARTICLE 21- CANCELLATION
BAERS shall have the right to cancel any Member's participation in BAERS for non-
compliance with the terms of the JPA upon a three- fourths vote of the entire Board of
Directors in a regular or special meeting of BAERS where a quorum is present, and with
at least 30 days written notice to the Member. Any Member so canceled shall, on the
effective date of the cancellation, be treated the same as if the Member had voluntarily
withdrawn from BAERS and may be subject to aprorated fee.
ARTICLE 22- TERMINATION AND DISTRIBUTION
(a) This .Agreement may be terminated with
1. The written termination request. of three - fourths of the Members,
tendered at least six months prior to the end of the fiscal year; or
2. The written termination request of the• County, tendered at least six
months prior to the end of the fiscal year, and,
(b) In the event that this. Agreement is terminated in accordance with Section
(a) of this Article, BAERS shall continue to exist for the purpose of
11
(c)
BAERS AGREEMENT
9/12/03
disposing of any claims, distribution of assets and all other functions
necessary to terminate the affairs of BAERS.
Upon termination of this Agreement, all property of the BAERS shall
become the property of the County, under the following terms:
1. Each Member shall be entitled to an electronic copy of the web-
based data created for BAERS.
2. Funds of BAERS shall be distributed among the Members in
accordance with and proportional to their base annual fee, as defined
in the Fee Schedule.
(d) The Management Committee is vested with all powers of BAERS for the
purpose of dissolving the business affairs of BAERS. The decisions of the
Management Committee under this article shall be final.
ARTICLE 23- PROVISION FOR BYLAWS AND MANUAL
The Board shall cause to be developed Authority Bylaws to govern the operations of
BAERS. Each Member shall have electronic access to any Bylaws developed under this
Article.
ARTICLE 24- NOTICES
Notices to Members hereunder shall be sufficient if delivered to the administrative office
of the respective Member via first class mail, facsimile or electronic mail with receipt
confirmation.
ARTICLE 25- AMENDMENT
This Agreement may be amended at any time by a two- thirds vote of the full
membership of the Board of Directors, with the exception of an amendment to Article 22,
which shall require a three - fourths vote of the entire Board of Directors.
Signatures shall required on any not be re uired such amendment by those Members, if any,
y
whose Director did not approve the amendment; however, such Members shall
nonetheless be bound by the amendment as if it were approved by all Members.
12
BAERS AGREEMENT
9/12/03
ARTICLE 26- SEVERABILITY
If any provision of this Agreement is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be
void, invalid or unenforceable, the same will either be reformed to comply with
applicable law or stricken if not so conformable, so as not to affect the validity or
enforceability of this Agreement.
ARTICLE 27- ARTICLE HEADINGS
All section headings contained in this Agreement are for convenience and reference only.
ARTICLE 28 -TERM OF AGREEMENT
This Agreement is effective on January I, 2004 and shall continue until and unless
terminated as provided in Article 22.
ARTICLE 29-FULL AGREEMENT
The foregoing constitutes the full and complete Agreement of the parties. There are no
oral understandings or agreements not set forth in writing herein.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have first executed this Agreement by
authorized officials thereof on the date indicated below:
Agency:
By:
Title:
Date:
Approved as to form and legality:
By:
Title:
Date:
13
BAERS AGREEMENT
9/12/03
Pursuant to actions by the County of Santa Clara Board of Supervisors on June 8, 2004,
approving the foregoing agreement with local agencies for continuing participation in the
Pp g
Bay Area Employee Relations Service and authorizing the County Executive to execute
BAERS Joint Powers Agreements, the following confirms execution of said Agreement
between and the County of Santa Clara.
By:
[Agency Name]
Title:
Date:
Approved as to form and legality:
By:
Title:
Date:
BAERSAGREEMENT9I243
14
08/26/04
BAY AREA EMPLOYEE RELATIONS SERVICE
BYLAWS
These - bylaws are adopted pursuant to Article 23 of the Joint Powers agreement
for the Ba y Employee Em to y ee Relations Service. Unless otherwise specified, the
definitions of terms in that Agreement shall also apply to these bylaws.
1. BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETINGS
The two regular meetings of the Board of Directors required in Article 8 of the
Agreement shall, unless otherwise determined by the Management Committee, be
scheduled in February and September of each year.
During the first meeting of the year, the Board shall elect officers for the
followin g fiscal year and develop a budget and fee structure to be considered as
early as possible in the budget process for the next fiscal year.
During the second meeting of the year, the Board may consider adjustments to
budget and fees that may be necessary.
Either of these meetings, or any special meeting that may be called, may also
include activities intended to define or address member needs.
2. MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ELECTIONS AND VACANCIES
As provided in Article 9 of the Joint Powers Agreement, the Management
Committee of the Board of Directors consists of seven (7) members, one of which
is from the County and two of which are the President and Vice- President of the
Board, who also serve as the President and Vice- President of the Committee
respectively.
Each of the other four members of the Management Committee shall be elected
by majority vote of a quorum of the Board of Directors.
3. MEMBER REPRESENTATIVES AND LIAISON
BAERS BYLAWS 08/26/04
Pursuant to Article 16 of the Agreement, Members will supply BAERS with the
names of representatives, alternates and a BAERS liaison annually and upon
departure of representatives from employment with the Member.
4. AMENDMENTS
Amendments to the Agreement: BAERS shall maintain copies of Amendments to
the .IPA Agreement that are enacted pursuant to Article 25. A copy of each
amendment shall be provided to each Member.
Amendments to these bylaws: These bylaws may be amended by a two- thirds
vote of a q uorum of the Board of Directors. An updated copy of bylaws shall be
provided to each member
CITY OF ALAMEDA
MEMORANDUM
Date: April 17, 2007
To: Honorable Mayor and
Cou ncilmembers
From: Debra Kurita
City Manager
Re: Award a Contract in the Amount of $857,200, Including Contingencies, to Golden
Bay Construction, Inc., for Repair of Portland Cement Concrete Sidewalk, Curb,
Gutter, Driveway, and Minor Street Patching, Fiscal Year 2006 -2007, Phase 8, No.
P.W. 08 -06 -18
BACKGROUND
On February 6, 2007, the City Council adopted plans and specifications and authorized a
call for bids for the Repair of Portland Cement Concrete Sidewalk, Curb, Gutter, Driveway
and Minor Street Patching, Fiscal Year 2006 -2007, Phase 8, No. P.W. 08- 06 -18. The
project consists of repairing approximately 10,000 linear feet of sidewalk in accordance
with the parameters identified in the Comprehensive Sidewalk Repair Program approved
by Council on February 6, 2007.
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 15, 2007.
Three contractors submitted bids. The list of bidders from lowest to highest for total project
cost is as follows:
Bidder
Location
Bid Amount
Golden Bay Construction, Inc.
Hayward, CA
$714,325.00
SpenCon Construction, Inc.
Foster City, CA
$807,1 20.00
Sposeto Engineering, Inc. A
Union City, CA
$964,380.00
Staff recommends awarding a contract to Golden Bay Construction, Inc., for a total amount
of $857,200, including contingencies. The engineer's estimate for the project is $984,580.
A copy of the contract is on file in the City Clerk's office.
City Council
Agenda Item #4 -E
04-17-07
Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
Page 2
April 17, 2007
BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT
The project is budgeted as CIP# 82 -02, with funds available from Measure B and the
General Fund.
MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
This action does not affect the Municipal Code.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this project is
Categorically Exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 1 5301 (c) — Existing Facilities.
RECOMMENDATION
Award a contract in the amount of $857,200, including contingencies, to Golden Bay
Construction, Inc., for repair of Portland cement concrete sidewalk, curb, gutter, driveway
and minor street patching, fiscal year 2006-2007, phase 8, No. P.W. 08-06-18.
Respect ly submitted,
atthew T. Naclerio
Public Works Director
Prepared by:
etp
CW Chung
Associate Civil Engineer
MTN:CWC:gc
cc: Watchdog Committee
CITY OF ALAMEDA
MEMORANDUM
Date: April 17, 2007
To: Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
From: Debra Kurita
City Manager
Re: Accept the Work of Ransome Company for Site Improvements and Designed
Mobile Systems industries, Inc., for Modular Building and Foundation improvements
Associated with New Modular Building (Washington Park Community Center and
Foundation) at Upper Washington Park, No. P.W. 05-06-17
BACKGROUND
On June 20, 2006, the City Council adopted plans and specifications and authorized a call
for bids for the New Modular Building (Washington Park Community Center and
Foundation) at Upper Washington Park, No. P.W. 05-06-17. Although two bids were
received, they exceeded the engineer's estimate and the Proposition 12 funding amount.
On September 5, 2006, the City Council rejected all bids and authorized the City Manager
to begin open market negotiations. Staff determined that the most competitive price could
be obtained by separating the site improvements from the modular building and foundation
construction. On November 20, 2006, the City awarded contracts in the amount of
$74,250, including contingencies, to Ransome Company for the site improvements and
$408,892, including contingencies, to Designed Mobile System Industries, Inc., for the
modular building and foundation improvements.
DISCUSSION
The project has been completed in accordance with the plans and specifications and is
acceptable to the Public Works Department. The Planning Board requirements for corner
edging on the building's exterior walls and additional trim enhancements on the windows
and door have also been provided. The final project cost is $61,020 for Ransome
Company and $365,720 for Designed Mobile Systems, Inc.
BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT
Funding for the project is budgeted under CIP# 02 -11 with $435,467 in Proposition 12
revenues and a reallocation of State grant revenues from Proposition 40 funding.
City Council
Agenda Item #4-F
04 -17 -07
Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
This action does not affect the Municipal Code.
ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE
Page 2
April 17, 2007
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this project is
Categorically Exempt under CEQA Guidelines, Section 15303(c) — New Construction or
Conversion of Small Structures.
RECOMMENDATION
Accept the Work of Ransome Company for site improvements and Designed Mobile
Systems Industries, Inc., for modular building and foundation improvements associated
with New Modular Building (Washington Park Community Center and Foundation) at Upper
Washington Park, No. P.W. 05-06-17.
Re s pectf u I l yes u kp-n itted
atthew T. Naclerio
Public Works Director
Prepared by,
(621 laiLLAAIL)
Ed Sommerauer
Associate Civil Engineer
MTN:ES:gc
CITY OF ALAMEDA
Memorandum
To:
From:
Date: April 17, 2007
Re:
Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
Debra Kurita
City Manager
Award Five -Year Vehicle Tow Contract to Ken Betts Towing
BACKGROUND
On September 19, 2006, the City Council approved specifications for law enforcement
towing services for the Police Department and authorized calling for bids. A Cali for Bids
was issued on September 30, 2007, and published in the Alameda Journal. In analyzing
the bids and developing a recommendation, staff considered such factors as specification
compliance, fees, customer convenience, and safety. The prior contract was awarded to
Ken Betts Towing on November 27, 2001, and expired on November 27, 2006.
DISCUSSION
The City Clerk received bids from the following companies:
• Palace Garage
• Berry Brothers Towing
• Ken Betts Towing
• Micki's Towing
• Ted and Joe's Towing
• ACT Towing
2051 Williams Street
598 55th Street
4825 San Leandro Boulevard
973 86th Avenue
1901 Everett Street
4800 East 12th Street
San Leandro
Oakland
Oakland
Oakland
Alameda
Oakland
Four of these bidders met the minimum specifications (attached), while two did not.
Palace Garage: Palace Garage met the minimum specifications and was the highest
bidder, at $165 for basic tow service. They are located 6.8 miles from City Hall.
Berry Brothers Towing: Berry Brothers Towing met the minimum specifications and was
the second highest bidder at $160 for basic tow service. They are located 7 miles from
City Hall.
City Council
Agenda Item #4 -G
04-17-07
Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
April 17, 2007
Page 2 of 3
Ken Betts Towing: Ken Betts Towing met the minimum specifications and was the third
highest bidder at $149 for basic tow service. They are located 1.08 miles from City Hall
and are public transit - accessible via A.C. Transit, making their location the closest and
most convenient for people who must retrieve towed vehicles. ken Betts Towing has been
the Police Department's tow contractor for the past two contract periods and has provided
excellent service.
Micki's Towing: Micki's Towing met the minimum specifications and was the fourth highest
bidder at $115 for basic tow service. They are located 4.89 miles from City Hall. Traveling
to Micki's storage lot using public transit requires multiple transfers taking both A.C.
Transit and BART.
Ted and Joe's Towing:, Ted & Joe's Towing did not meet the minimum specifications. They
do not have adequate indoor storage for evidentiary vehicles.
ACT Towing: ACT Towing did not meet the minimum specifications. They do not have
adequate heavy equipment towing capabilities.
In analyzing the four bids that met the minimum specifications, staff considered the cost of
basic tow service, ease of access to the lot, and safety and convenience for those who
must retrieve their vehicles. Ken Betts Towing, though not the lowest bidder, is the most
convenient for Alameda residents, since it has the closest location and is easily accessed
by public transit. They have also provided excellent customer service in the past.
BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no impact on the General Fund. The costs associated with Police Department
ordered tows for vehicles abandoned, dismantled, or inoperative on public streets are
charged to the registered owner of the vehicle. If not paid, the vehicle has a lien placed
against it and is sold by the tow company to cover losses, in compliance with State law.
Vehicles abated from private property under A.M.C. 8 -22 are by law dismantled and not
reconstructed or made operable. The tow company covers the cost of removal from the
owner of the parcel of land pursuant to A.M.C. 8- 22.15.
MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
This action does not affect the Municipal Code.
Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
RECOMMENDATION
Award the five -year contract for police tows to Ken Betts Towing.
Respectfully submitted,
Walter E3. Tibbet
Chief of Police
Attachment
DK/WBTlwjs
April 17, 2007
Page 3 of 3
SPECIFICATION MSP 9 -01 -1
SCOPE OF WORK:
Contractor shall provide twenty -four (24) hour tow services, on call as directed by the City
of Alameda Police Department.
Contractor shall provide indoor and outdoor secured storage for towed vehicles as
explained later in this specification.
Contractor and his/her operators shall fully cooperate with and assist Police Department
representatives in removing hazards and /or vehicles as directed by the Police Officer at the
scene. The Contractor will assist in obtaining vehicle identification numbers, motor
numbers or other identifying information as requested.
QUANTITY OF WORK:
The City makes no guarantee whatsoever, expressed or implied as to the number of tows
which the Police Department shall request during the contract period. With the exception of
aborted tows and tow services performed on City owned vehicles, the City of Alameda
shall not be liable for any charge or charges for towing or any other allied service unless
expressly agreed to in written form by the Chief of Police and/or his representative. It being
expressly understood and agreed that the Contractor shall make all charges to the owner
or owners of the vehicles to which the service is rendered. Towing of City owned vehicles
will be at no charge to the City. Service calls such as tire changes, bringing one gallon of
fuel for out of gas vehicle, and jumper starts on City owned vehicles outside the normal
working hours of the City's Maintenance Service Center shall be a professional courtesy
and without charge.
ALTERNATE TOWING COMPANIES:
It is also expressly stated and agreed that this tow contract shall not abrogate in any way
the right of the vehicle owner or owners or driver of any vehicle to specify a towing service
of any automobile association or motor club of which the vehicle owner or driver is, or is not
a member.
ASSIGNABILITY:
Any assignment of this contract without the prior written consent of the City shall be void.
SUBCONTRACTORS:
The Contractor shall perform all functions of this contract award without the use of sub-
contractors.
1
City Council
Attachment to
Agenda Item #4 -G
04 -17 -07
INSPECTIONS:
The City reserves the right to periodically inspect the Contractor's storage facilities and tow
vehicles, have vehicles towed and stored by the Contractor at no charge for the purpose of
observing the conduct of the Contractor's employees towards the public, and to evaluate
procedures to guard against theft or damage to towed vehicles exercised by the Contractor.
CHARGES FOR SERVICES:
Except as herein provided, the Contractor shall not make any other charge unless
specifically authorized by the vehicle owner or his/her authorized representative.
In addition, no charge will be made by the Contractor if the vehicle to be towed is removed
prior to the arrival of the towing truck.
If, however, the tow truck has arrived, the owner of the vehicle will be subject to a service
charge as described under the definition of an "aborted tow" described on page 4, in lieu of
the towing charge when the vehicle is not towed to the storage area.
All police initiated tows shall be charged at the basic tow rate as indicated below:
The method for calculating time begins when the driver arrives at the scene and
ends when the driver leaves with the towed vehicle.
A. TOWING CHARGES
Rate For Normal Tows:
1. The rate for towing of any vehicles requiring one hour or less from time of
arrival of tow truck until tow truck moved with vehicle in tow is $149.00.
2. The rate for towing services requiring more than one hour at the site of the
tow, prorated in 15 minute intervals after the first one hour period is $37.25.
3. The rate for towing services from within Alameda to a point outside the City
of Alameda but within a 10 mile radius of central Alameda (intersection of
Central Avenue and Grand Street) and not applicable to Police Tows is
$149.00.
4. The rate for towing services from within Alameda to a point outside the City
of Alameda but outside a 10 mile radius of central Alameda (intersection of
Central Avenue and Grand Street) and not applicable to Police Tows is
$199.00.
2
B. RATE FOR HEAVY EQUIPMENT OR COMPLICATED TOWS:
Equipment charges shall be based on the size of equipment required to perform the
work. The successful bidder may substitute heavy equipment to perform a normal
tow at the normal equipment tow rate.
1. The rate for tows requiring use of a heavy tow truck or more than one tow
truck, towing any vehicle requiring one hour or less from time of arrival of tow
truck(s) until tow truck(s) move with vehicle in tow is $199.00.
2. The rate for the above, but for towing services requiring more than one hour
at the site of the tow prorated in 15 minute intervals after the first one hour
period is $49.75.
3. The rate for towing services from within Alameda to a point outside the City
of Alameda but within a 10 mile radius of central Alameda (intersection of
Central Avenue and Grand Street) and not applicable to Police Tows is
$199.00.
4. The rate for towing services from within Alameda to a point outside the City
of Alameda but outside a 10 mile radius of central Alameda (intersection of
Central Avenue and Grand Street) and not applicable to Police Tows is
$249.00.
C. ABORTED TOWS:
The service charge for an Aborted tow is $65.00.
D. CITY OWNED VEHICLES:
1. Towing of City owned vehicles will be at no charge to the City.
2. Service calls such as tire changes, bringing one gallon of fuel for out of gas
vehicle, and jumper starts on City -owned vehicles outside the normal working
hours of the City's Maintenance Service Center shall be a professional
courtesy and without charge.
STORAGE CHARGES:
A. Storage charges for each licensed vehicle shall be $50.00 for the first twenty -four
(24) period with a minimum one day charge. Additional hours beyond 24 hours will
be charged at $10.00 per hour with a maximum of $50.00 per day.
B. A gate fee of $45.00 may be charged for granting access to the storage yard outside
of normal working hours (8 AM and 6 PM Monday through Friday, Closed on
weekend days) or when access is not incidental to claiming or removing a vehicle.
3
Access for Police Department representatives will be at no cost.
POLICE TOWS:
A police tow is to be defined as any tow ordered by the City of Alameda Police Department.
Tows, however, may include City -owned vehicles as specifically requested.
Police tows will not include the towing of abandoned vehicles unless they pose a problem
or danger. If any abandoned vehicle is found to be illegally parked, the Contractor may be
directed by the Police Department to move the vehicle into a legally parked position for a
later tow by any other firm designated to tow abandoned vehicles. It is not the intent of this
contract to include the normal towing of any abandoned vehicle except as otherwise herein
provided.
If in the normal performance of services under this contract any vehicle becomes
abandoned, the Alameda Police Department shall furnish a low cost vehicle appraiser
pursuant to the provisions of the California Vehicle Code and all other legal requirements in
order to expedite the removal or disposal of any such described vehicle by the Contractor.
ABORTED TOWS:
An aborted tow is defined as a police tow where a tow truck is dispatched but no tow is
made.
In the event that a police tow is dispatched but no tow is made (an Aborted Tow), the
Contractor will be allowed to collect a service charge in -lieu of the towing charge from the
vehicle owner or owners. If the Contractor is unable to collect the aborted tow service
charge from the vehicle owner or owners, the Contractor may submit billing to the City of
Alameda, together with assignment to attempt to collect for the charges. Such billing and
assignment to the City must be made within a period of One Hundred Eighty (180) days
from the date of the aborted tow service, but in any case the Contractor is required to make
every effort to collect from the vehicle owner and the billing and assignment to the City will
follow only after a minimum of One Hundred Twenty (120) day collection period effort by
the Contractor computed from the date of the aborted tow service.
In addition, billing and assignment of attempt to collect to the City will be allowed only after
it is shown that the tow truck responded to the original call within the minimum response
time as shown in this specification. Where the initial response time is longer than the
minimum response time, no billing or assignment to the City will be allowed.
RESPONSE TIME:
Contractor shall dispatch equipment and personnel to arrive at the location prescribed by
the Police Department within an average of twenty minutes from receipt of order from the
Police Department. Average response time will be measured over a six month period. The
Contractor will be evaluated periodically and advised of the results.
4
STORAGE:
All vehicles which are Police Tows may be stored in an outdoor or indoor facility meeting
the following conditions:
A. Outdoor storage must be fenced and adequately protected from unauthorized entry.
The fencing shall provide security and be of a type to provide adequate screening so
as not to present an unsightly appearance.
B. Indoor storage for a minimum of five (5) vehicles must be provided for Police
Department evidentiary purposes. This is a Police Storage Area and is not to be
considered a public access area.
24 HOUR OPERATION AND PUBLIC ACCESSIBILITY:
Contractor shall be required to have facilities available to the public for removal of towed
vehicles on a 24 -hour basis and the Contractor shall post all of the following information
conspicuously at all office locations open to the public:
A. Schedule of fees authorized by this contract.
B. Notice that copies of the contract and specifications are available at the offices of
the tow contractor for public inspection by any interested party.
C. Check cashing and credit card policy of the contractor.
D. Notice of 24 -hour operation, open to the public.
PROTECTION OF VEHICLE CONTENTS:
Contractor will, when assuming custody of a vehicle towed or stored by Police order,
inventory the contents of the vehicle including property in all unlocked storage
compartments. This inventory will be made jointly by the Contractor's operator and the
Police Officer ordering the tow or storage and shall be on forms approved by the Chief of
Police and shall, in addition, certify that any seals affixed by the Police Department are
intact. Notation will be made of any locked compartment. By signature on this inventory,
the Contractor acknowledges acceptance of any and all legal responsibility through the
action of his/her employees, or him /herself for the safe and proper tow and storage of the
vehicle and for the security of the inventoried personal property.
All vehicles which are ordered held for evidentiary purposes by the Police Department shall
be kept in the indoor storage facility until the Police Department has released the
evidentiary hold. These vehicles shall be handled by the tow personnel in such manner so
as to preserve evidence.
5
Contractor shall have secure indoor storage space, under lock and key and under 24 -hour
security for at least five (5) vehicles.
RELEASE OF TOWED VEHICLES:
The Contractor shall have one dedicated telephone number that the public or Police
Department may call for information on vehicles towed pursuant to this contract.
Contractor's personnel answering such telephones shall be courteous and provide
complete information regarding the location of the vehicle and method of obtaining its
release, including adequate directions to the location to effect the release, full
documentation required, exact charges to be paid and terms of payment. Sufficient
telephone lines, equipment and personnel shall be employed to provide public services at
all times without unreasonable delay.
The Contractor will follow the guidelines for releasing stored vehicles as stated below:
A. Claimants shall be required to provide identification and evidence satisfactory to the
tow firm representative that they are entitled to receive the vehicle. They must have
a copy of a vehicle release from the Alameda Police Department. Legal
responsibility for release of the vehicle to a person without such evidence shall fall
fully on the Contractor.
When necessary, the Police Department will provide the Contractor with reasonable
assistance in verifying vehicle registration information, except those vehicles towed
as abandoned during the normal course of performance under this contract.
B. When the Contractor's representative is satisfied that the requester is entitled to the
vehicle, the fees provided in this contract award shall be collected and the requester
promptly provided possession of the vehicle. If the vehicle is stored at a location
other than the one where the fees are paid, transportation to the vehicle will be
provided by the Contractor without any charge and within a reasonable period of
time. If transported in a tow truck, Contractor shall take reasonable precautions to
avoid any inconvenience and/or soiling of the Claimant's clothing and accessories.
C. Police Evidence Holds: In the event the towed vehicle has been identified as a
Police Evidence Hold, the vehicle cannot be released by the Contractor without
written authorization from the Police Department. During the period that the hold is
in effect, no charges for storage shall be made to the City or owner of the vehicle for
48 hours. The City will pay storage charges in excess of 48 hours at the rate of
$10.00 per day of storage. After the Evidence Hold is removed, the storage rate will
begin at the full rate.
REPAIR OR ALTERATION OF VEHICLES:
Contractor shall not make any repairs or alterations to any vehicle without the express
authorization of the registered or legal owner, and the owner's insurance carrier.
6
Contractor may make only emergency alterations in order to tow the vehicle; however, no
charge may be made to the owner of the vehicle.
TWO -WAY RADIO COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT:
Each tow truck shall be equipped with equipment capable of communications between the
Contractor's dispatching office and the tow truck.
ERROR OR OMISSIONS:
When any vehicle has been ordered towed by the Police Department and it appears that
the tow was in error through a mistake of fact, the Contractor shall release the vehicle to
the owner at no cost to the owner. In the event of a clerical error or oversight on the part of
the Police Department wherein a vehicle is stored for a period longer than it should have
been, the Contractor shall release the vehicle to the owner at no storage cost for such
excess storage period.
In the above cases, if the tow or excess storage charges resulted from an error of the
Alameda Police through a mistake of fact or a clerical error the Contractor may charge the
City at the rate of 50% of the towing and 50% of the storage charges per day of storage
beyond the owner's responsibility. Provided, however, that if the circumstances were
beyond the control of the Police Department, neither the City nor the vehicle's owner shall
be liable for such charges.
The Chief of Police and/or his /her designee shall make the determination as to errors or
mistakes of fact and shall notify the Contractor in writing.
ADMINISTRATION OF CONTRACT:
The administration of the contract, after award, is assigned to the Police Department.
Any appeals of decisions made by the Chief of Police may be made to the City Manager of
the City of Alameda ten (10)days of the determination by the Chief of Police. Any appeals
of decisions made after this ten (10) day period shall be deemed null and void. Any
decision by the City Manager for the City of Alameda shall be final and without further
appeal.
7
CITY OF ALAMEDA
MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
From: Debra Kurita
City Manager
Date: April 17, 2007
Re: Approve Second Amendment to Keyser Marston Associates Inc. Contract to
Increase the Contract Amount by $25,000
BACKGROUN D
On February 21, 2004, the City, Ballena Isle Marina, and Mission Valley Properties entered
into a two -year Exclusive Negotiation Agreement which provided for the Marina and the
developer to reimburse the City for its staff and out --of- pocket costs during negotiation of an
Amendment to the Ballena Isle Marina Ground Lease.
DISCUSSION
A contract with Keyser Marston Associates (KMA) was entered into on March 1, 2004, for
$45,000 for consultant services to assist with negotiations. The KMA contract was
amended in January 2006 to increase the amount by $25,000, for a total of $70,000, and
to extend the term to March 2007. Although negotiations are nearly complete, the contract
with KMA has been depleted; therefore, the developer has deposited additional funds
towards the Marina Amendment negotiations and a second amendment to the KMA
contract has been drafted to increase the contact amount by $25,000, for a total of
$05,000.
BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no impact to the General Fund. The Ballena Isle Marina operator has deposited
funds for pay for this increase in the contract price.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the second amendment to the KMA contract to increase the contract amount by
$25,000.
City Council
Agenda Item #4 -H
04-17-07
Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
Respec
ly submit
April 17, 2007
Page 2
Leslie A. Little
Development Services Director
By: Dorene E. Soto
Manager, Business Development Division
DK/LAL /DES:ry
cc: Bob Wetmore, Keyser Marston Associates Inc.
CITY OF ALAMEDA
MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and
Cou ncil members
From: Debra Kurita
City Manager
Date: April 17, 2007
Re: Reject the Sole Bid and Adopt a Resolution Authorizing Open Market
Purchase Pursuant to Section 3 -15 of the Alameda City Charter for the
Bayport Community Building, and Authorizing the City Manager to Enter Into
Such an Agreement (Requires Four Affirmative Votes)
BACKGROUND
On January 17, 2006, the City Council authorized the solicitation of bids for Bayport
Alameda Community Building and Park Project No. 83140100. In order to allow schedule
and development flexibility and to ensure that the park grounds would be completed and
available for school use in fall 2006, the base bid for the project was modified so that the
community building component of the project became an additive alternate.
Additive Alternate Bid
Each of the three contractors that responded to the original solicitation for construction of
the park submitted an additive alternate bid component for the community building, which
ranged from $753,000 to $1,059,390. Following a bid protest on the park base bid on April
4, 2006, the City Council authorized staff to separately re -bid both components of the park
and community building project.
Re -bid
Solicitation for the re -bid of the community building began on April 5, 2006, and was
advertised for a 30 -day period. To solicit the maximum number of bids, specifications were
provided to 18 separate Building Exchanges throughout the Bay Area (Building Exchanges
provide construction reporting, online databases, education, resources and other services
for the construction industry). In addition, a notice of bid was published in the Alameda
Journal, and a link to ebidboard.com through the City's website was established.
A total of six contractors attended the mandatory pre -bid meeting, which was held on April
13, 2006, with a bid due date of May 4, 2006. Chapot Construction Company of Alameda
was the sole bidder on the community building project. Chapot's bid, in the amount of
$839,000, was approximately $200,000 over the construction cost estimate of $600,000.
As a result, the City Council authorized the rejection of the bid on June 20, 2006.
City Council
Report Re:
Agenda Item #4 -I
04-17-07
Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
Second Re -bid
April 17, 2007
Page 2
Following substantial completion of the Bayport Park, solicitation for the second re -bid of
the community building began on January 15, 2007 and was advertised for a 30 -day
period. In order to generate a maximum number of bids, the same solicitation procedures
were followed as for the original bid process. During the mandatory pre -bid meeting, which
was held on January 25, 2007, a total of twelve contractors were present. Bids were due
on February 20, 2007. Staff expected four to five bidders to submit bids. However, M.A.
Davies Builders, Inc., was the sole bidder. M.A. Davies' bid in the amount of $1,61 6,000
was approximately $1 ,000,000 over the construction cost estimate of $000,000. Because
M.A. Davies was the sole bidder, staff made an attempt to negotiate with M.A. Davies.
M.A. Davies made an initial adjustment by reducing its bid by approximately $300,000 and
stated that they might be able come down an additional $300,000 with further review.
Even with the adjustments M.A. Davies was willing to consider, the reduced bid amount
would still have been $400,000 to $700,000 over the construction cost estimate and
Project budget.
DISCUSSION
The base bid for the community building included an allowance for permits and the
construction of a 1 ,700 square foot multipurpose building with a post tension slab, wood
frame, stucco exterior, fixtures, appliances, and landscaping. The bids received from the
last two rounds of bidding ranged between $500 and $940 per square foot for construction
costs.
For purposes of comparison, the construction cost estimate was approximately $350 per
square foot and actual unit construction costs for the adjoining new K -8 school averaged
approximately $380 per square foot based on approximately 50,000 square feet of similar
construction. For additional comparison, a 1 ,900 square foot modular community building
was constructed at Washington Park for a total cost of approximately $275 per square foot.
Possible reasons that bids received during the past two solicitations have exceeded the
construction estimate include bidding the project just prior to the start of a busy construction
season, increases in material costs, and smaller building square footage resulting in higher,
less efficient mobilization costs.
As a result of these circumstances, staff recommends rejecting the sole bid and substituting
new construction with the acquisition of a modular building. In order to accommodate the
budget, timing, space, and program needs, staff recommends that the City Council, by four
affirmative votes, authorize an open market purchase of a prefabricated, modular building.
This open market purchase will allow the City Manager to enter into an agreement to
purchase a modular building and have it installed on site. This approach would facilitate the
acquisition and installation of a building similar to the original design to be completed prior
to the end of the year for a cost within the original Project budget.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The community building, which is a component of the new four -acre park and school, was
included in the original environmental review for the Catellus Mixed -Use Project and is
Honorable Mayor and
Cou ncil members
April 17, 2007
Page 3
in compliance with the approved Catellus Alameda Project Master Plan and Site -wide
Landscape Development Plan. Therefore, no additional CEQA review is required.
BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT
Pursuant to the City's Fiscal Neutrality Policy, this project will not have any fiscal impact on
the City's General Fund. Funding for the project is generated from the Bayport Project.
MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
The requested actions will not affect the Municipal Code.
RECOMMENDATION
Reject the sole bid and adopt a resolution authorizing an open market purchase pursuant
to Section 3 -15 of the Alameda City Charter for the Bayport Community Building, and
authorize the City Manager to enter into such an Agreement (Requires four affirmative
votes).
LALIDC: dc
Res • e► ully submitt: d
r
Leslie A. Little
Development Services Director
By: Douglas H. Cole
Redevelopment Manager
CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO.
AUTHORIZING OPEN MARKET NEGOTIATION OF CONTRACT
PURSUANT TO SECTION 3 -15 OF THE ALAMEDA CITY CHARTER
AND PURCHASE OF A MODULAR RECREATIONAL BUILDING AND
SITE IMPROVEMENTS AT BAYPORT, PROJECT NO. 83140100, AND
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO SUCH AN
AGREEMENT (REQUIRES FOUR AFFIRMATIVE VOTES)
WHEREAS, on January 4, 2006, City Council approved Agreement
between the Alameda Unified School District and the City of Alameda for Use
L and Development of Real Property at the Ruby Bridges K -8 School and Park
16 site in the Bayport Residential Development Project; and
a
WHEREAS, on January 17, 2006, City Council authorized a call for bids
for the Bayport Park and Community Building Project No. 83140100 with
modification of the base bid to include the community building component as an
additive alternate; and
WHEREAS, on March 9, 2006, bids were opened and all three additive
alternate component bids to construct the community building exceeded the
engineers estimate of $600,000; and
WHEREAS, following a bid protest on the park base bid on April 4, 2006,
City Council authorized re- biding both components of the park and community
building as separate project; and
WHEREAS, on April 5, 2006, a call for bids for the community building
was properly advertised, and a mandatory pre -bid meeting held on April 13,
2006, with a sole bid received on May 4, 2006, and
WHEREAS, the sole bid exceeded the $600,000 engineer's estimate by
approximately $240,000, the bid was rejected by City Council on June 20, 2006
with authorization to re -bid the community building following substantial
completion of the park component of the project; and
WHEREAS, on January 16, 2007, a second call for bids for the
community building was properly advertised, mandatory pre -bid meeting held
on January 25, 2007, and another sole bid received on February 20, 2007, and
WHEREAS, this new sole bid also exceeded the $600,000 engineer's
estimate by approximately $1,000,000; and
WHEREAS, Bayport project revenues in the amount of $600,000 are
budgeted and will only be available to fund construction of the community
building until December 2007(the estimated date of completion and closeout of
Resolution #4 -I CC
04 -17 -07
the CIC's project obligations under the existing DDA which governs the Bayport
Residential Development project); and
WHEREAS, a reduction in the scope of work and open market
negotiations with a contractor that will provide a modular building is required to
avoid a delay in project completion and utilization of Bayport project revenues
in a timely manner; and
WHEREAS, Section 3-15 of the City Charter provides that the City
Council, by four affirmative votes, can authorize an open market negotiation if it
determines that great necessity or emergency requires immediate action; and
WHEREAS, because any further delay will likely cost the City both by the
loss of funding and further expenses related to the process of re- bidding without
the guarantee that the project will be within the budget appropriated,
NOW, THEREFORE, BET IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the
City of Alameda finds that great necessity requires that immediate action be
taken negotiate the contract for the modular community building and related site
improvements at Bayport.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Alameda,
pursuant to Section 3-15 of the City Charter, and by four affirmative votes, the
City Manager, in cooperation with the Development Services and Recreation
and Parks Departments, is hereby authorized to enter into open negotiations of
contract for the modular community building and related site improvements at
Bayport, Project No. 83140100, and authorizing the City Manager to enter into
such an agreement for a not to exceed amount of $600,000, including a 1O%
Contingency.
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
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 official
seal of said City this day of 2007.
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
City of Alameda
CITY OF ALAMEDA
MEMORANDUM
Date: April 17, 2007
To: Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
From: Debra Kurita
City Manager
Re: Adopt a Resolution Ordering Vacation of a Portion of a 10 -Foot Wide Power
Easement, and Recordation of Quitclaim Deed within Parcel 2, Parcel Map 2542
(Alameda Towne Centre)
BACKGROUND
on October 2, 1979, South Shore Center (now Alameda Towne Centre) granted a 10-
foot wide power easement to the City of Alameda for the installation of utilities, including
electrical distribution lines. The recent tenant improvements for the Alameda Towne
Centre development removed portions of the existing electrical distribution lines. A new
easement is not required.
DISCUSSION
Harsch Investment Realty, LLC, has provided the legal description (Exhibit A) and plat
map (Exhibit B) for the vacation of the existing easement. AP &T and Public Works
Department staff reviewed and are in agreement with the proposed easement vacation.
The Quitclaim Deed is on file in the City Clerk's Office.
BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no financial impact to the City as a result of vacating the subject easement.
The developer paid all costs associated with the requested vacation and removal of
existing electrical distribution lines.
MUNICIPAL CODE/POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
This action does not affect the Municipal Code.
City Council
Report Re:
Agenda Item #4 -J
04-17-07
Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
RECOMMENDATION
Page 2
April 17, 2007
Adopt a resolution ordering vacation of a portion of a 10 -foot wide power easement, and
recordation of Quitclaim Deed within Parcel 2, Parcel Map 2542 (Alameda Towne
Centre).
Respectfully submitted,
Matthew T. Naclerio
Public Works Director
Prepared by:
EfA 9e)ThAwAatiLsA,
Ed Sommerauerb� �
Associate Civil Engineer
MTN:ES:gc
Exhibits
EXHIBIT A
Parcel 1
AP &T Easement Quitclaim
South Shore Mali
Real property in the City of Alameda, County of Alameda, State of California, described
as follows:
Being a portion of Parcel 2 as shown on Sheet 2 of Parcel Map No. 2542, a ma p of
which was filed June 8, 1978, in Map Book 102 at Pages 51 and 52 in the office of the
County Recorder, Alameda County, California, more particularly described as follows:
A strip of land 10 feet wide, the centerline of which is described as follows:
Beginning at the southeasterly terminus of a 10' Wide Power Easement centerline
segment having a bearing of North 55° 13' 19" West and a length of 220.00 feet as
described in Parcel B of the Grant of Easement, which was filed October 2, 1979 as
Series No. 79- 196972 in the Office of the County Recorder, Alameda County, California;
Thence leaving said centerline segment South 34° 46' 41" West a distance of 158.90
feet to a point on a centerline segment of said Power Easement, said point being the
True Point of Beginning;
Thence along said centerline segment, South 34° 46' 41" West a distance of 114.10 feet
to a point being the terminus of this description.
Brio Engineering Associates, INC.
2858 Stevens Creek Blvd., Suite 208
San Jose, CA 95128
0
V
.'
SCALE: 1"=300'
EXHIBIT "B"
PLAT TO ACCOMPANY A DESCRIPTION
AP &T EASEMENT QUITCLAIM
CITY OF ALAMEDA
SOUTH SHORE MALL
Date:
02--- -05 -07
Scale:
1"=300'
Job:
SOSH 0101
Drawn By:
KSN
Designer:
KSN
Checked:
DMV
• Engineering
ASSOCIATES, INC.
2858 Stevens Creek Blvd., Suite 208
San Jose, CA 95128
Tel. (408) 241 -5494
Fax (408) 241 -5493
SHEET 1 of 2
r
L
BEGINNING
74' .)))44C.),p
L
T OF BEGINNING
(0
Nt-
w co
N
w"
(n
Q�
W Q
w
oz
oL
w cn
z
n
Z
wWo
0 r�
I 1
Q
owe
Co
Z
•._
L �
W
• Q
W o
O
• cc2
•
CD
W
CO
0
Blvd., Suite
SHEET 2 of 2
� co
a) • co
G) T 07 0)
0 07 L0 �n
<rT
a �
N a;
co oD
CD o o °
CO
0o ca v CO
�v - u
DESCRIPTION
ACCOMPANY
0
N
cmi
0
E-1
cip
0
SOSH 0101
0
0
a)
U
r
0
0
0
(.0
11
2
r0^
z
01
0)
rn
•
0)
0
02-05-07
0
0
C13
c
0
0
z
01
Approved as to Form
CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO.
VACATING A PORTION OF A 10 -FOOT WIDE POWER EASEMENT,
AND RECORDATION OF QUITCLAIM DEED WITHIN PARCEL 2,
PARCEL MAP 2542 (ALAMEDA TOWNE CENTRE)
WHEREAS, Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 2542 was filed June 8, 1978 in Map
Book 102 at Pages 51 and 52 in the Office of the County Recorder, Alameda
County, California; and
WHEREAS, subject Power Easement was dedicated to the City of
Alameda and filed in the Office of the County of Alameda Recorder on October
2, 1979, Series No. 79- 196972 in the Office of the County Recorder, Alameda
County, California; and
WHEREAS, commercial development has resulted in the removal of
portions of the existing electrical distribution lines; and
WHEREAS, a portion of the easement is no longer a necessity for
Alameda Power & Telecom operations and can be vacated; and
WHEREAS, a plat and legal description of the portion of the easement to
be vacated has been prepared; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Alameda that it hereby ordered that a portion of said easement (Alameda
County Recorder Series No.79-196972) within Parcel 2, Parcel Map 2542
(Alameda Towne Centre) be vacated pursuant to the provisions of Division 9,
Part 3, Chapter 4, Article 1, Section 833 (c) of the Streets and Highways Code.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk shall cause certified
copies of this resolution, attested under seal, to be recorded in the County
Recorder's Office and from and after the date of this resolution is recorded, said
portion of easement as recorded on October 2, 1979, Alameda County
Recorder Series #79. 196972, no longer shall constitute easement.
Resolution #4 -J CC
04 -17 -07
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 17th day of April 2007, by the following 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 17th day of April 2007.
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
City of Alameda
CITY OF ALAMEDA
Memorandum
To: Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
From: Debra Kurita
City Manager
Date: April 17, 2007
Re: Introduce Ordinance Amending Alameda Municipal Code Subsection 23.6 -2
(Operation of Power Boats) of Section 23.6 (Harbor and Tidelands) of
Chapter XXIII (Parks, Recreation Areas And Public Property) by repealing
Subsection 23.6 -2 in its entirety and adding a new subsection 23.6 -2
(Operation of Power Boats) that incorporates limits for vessels propelled by
machinery in an estuary or channel and the continued prohibition of power
boat operation in lagoons
BACKGROUND
The Alameda Police Department has had an active marine patrol program for over 16
years. During this time, the department has been responsible for boat safety inspections,
enforcement of all boating laws, and boating education for vessel operators. The
department is responsible for approximately 35 square miles of waterways that include the
AlamedalOakland Estuary and all San Francisco Bay areas surrounding the City of
Alameda. These waterways are patrolled in conjunction with the Oakland Police
Department and the Alameda County Sheriffs Office.
During the past few years, Police Department personnel have observed steadily increasing
safety issues pertaining to excessive speed and the resulting wake associated dangers,
particularly in the estuary. The boating community and local marinas have notified the
Alameda Harbor Patrol of these safety issues on multiple occasions.
DISCUSSION
The Alameda Harbor Patrol has worked closely with the City Attorney's Office to establish
a new Alameda Municipal Code subsection that clearly defines a new "No Wake Zone"
restriction along the shorelines of the city. With the implementation of this new ordinance,
which has been forwarded and approved as to form by the State's Department of Boating
and Waterways as required by Harbors & Navigation Code Section 660(a), the Police
Department will be able to cite "No Wake Zone" violators.
City Council
Report Re:
Agenda Item #4 -K
04 -17 -07
Honorable Mayor
and Counci imembers
April 17, 2007
Page 2 of 2
The Police Department has sought to aid in the enforcement of the speed and wake issues
by having two "No Wake" buoys installed in the area of Jack London Square by the United
States Coast Guard. These "No Wake" buoys were installed on March 14, 2007, and are
clearly visible to all mariners in that designated area.
BUDGET CONSIDERATION/FINANCIAL IMPACT
There will be no expense associated with the implementation of this ordinance. By
issuing citations under this ordinance, the City of Alameda can expect an increase in
revenue versus citing under State law (Harbors and Navigation Codes).
MUNICIPAL CODE/POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
This Municipal Code change affects Chapter 23 (Parks, Recreation Areas and Public
Property), Section 23-6 (Harbor and Tidelands), Subsections 23 -6(a) (Operation of Power
Boats Prohibited Within Certain Areas), (b) (Operation of Power Boats Prohibiting
Lagoons) and (c) (Boat Speed to be Posted). Each section has been thoroughly reviewed
and found to be compatible with the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This ordinance is exempt under the State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guideline Section 15061(b)(3), which is the "general rule" that CEQA does not apply
where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed
ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment.
RECOMMENDATION
Introduce the proposed amendment to the Alameda Municipal Code Subsection 23.6 -2
(Operation of Power Boats) of Section 23.6 (Harbor and Tidelands) of Chapter XXIII
(Parks, Recreation Areas And Public Property) by repealing Subsection 23.6 -2 in its
entirety and adding a new subsection 23.6 -2 (Operation of Power Boats) that incorporates
limits for vessels propelled by machinery in an estuary or channel and the continued
prohibition of power boat operation in lagoons.
Respectfully submitted,
Walter B. Tibbet
Chief of Police
WBT:arz
CITY OF ALAMEDA ORDINANCE NO.
New Series
AMENDING ALAMEDA MUNICIPAL CODE SUBSECTION 23.6 -2
(OPERATION OF POWER BOATS) OF SECTION 23.6 (HARBOR AND
TIDELANDS) OF CHAPTER XXIII (PARKS, RECREATION AREAS AND
PUBLIC PROPERTY) BY REPEALING SUBSECTION 23.6 -2 IN ITS
ENTIRETY AND ADDING A NEW SUBSECTION 23.6 -2 (OPERATION
OF POWER BOATS) THAT INCORPORATES SPEED LIMITS FOR
VESSELS PROPELLED BY MACHINERY IN AN ESTUARY OR
CHANNEL AND CONTINUES THE PROHIBITION OF POWER BOAT
OPERATION IN LAGOONS
WHEREAS, the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act
of 1970 (CEQA) have been satisfied and in accordance with Section
15061(b)(3), of the California Code of Regulations, this project is exempt from
the provisions of CEQA.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Alameda that:
Section 1. The Alameda Municipal Code is hereby amended by
repealing subsection 23.6 -2 (Operation of Power Boats) of section 23.6
(Harbors and Tidelands) of Chapter XXIII (Parks, Recreation Areas and Public
Property) in its entirety.
Section 2. The Alameda Municipal Code is hereby amended by
adding a new subsection 23.6 -2 (Operation of Power Boats) of section 23.6
(Harbors and Tidelands) of Chapter XXIII (Parks, Recreation Areas and Public
Property) to read as follows:
23.6 HARBORS AND TIDELANDS.
23.6-2 Operation of Power Boats.
a. Speed limit for vessels propelled by machinery in an estuary or channel.
No person shall operate any power boat or other motor powered vessel at a
speed in excess of five (5) miles per hour in the following areas of an estuary or
channel:
1. Within 100 feet of any person who is engaged in the act of
bathing. A person engaged in the sport of,water skiing shall not be considered
as engaged in the act of bathing for the purposes of this section.
2. Within 200 feet of any of the following:
(a) a beach frequented by bathers,
(b) a swimming float, diving platform, or lifeline,
Introduction of ordinance #4 -K CC
04 -17 -07
(c) a way or landing float to which boats are made fast or which is
being used for the embarkation or discharge of passengers.
3. No person shall operate a vessel in an estuary or channel in such
a manner that the speed thereof interferes with the operation of any other
vessel.
4. The City of Alameda may establish prima facie speed limits for
any area of an estuary or channel by posting such limits in or at the entrances
to such areas. When areas are so posted, the speed limits shall be as fully
effective as if specified herein.
5. Employees of governmental agencies are exempt from this
section while acting in the course of their official duties.
6. The City of Alameda, the City of Oakland, the County of Alameda
and the respective law enforcement officials thereof are given concurrent
jurisdiction and authority with the chief of police to enforce the provisions of this
section.
7. Any violation of this section is an infraction subject to the
provisions of California Government Code section 36900(b).
b. Operation of Power Boats Prohibited in Lagoons. It shall be unlawful for
any owner, operator or person in command of any power boat to operate same
or permit it to be operated upon those certain enclosed bodies of water situated
within the City, being commonly known and described as the South Shore
Lagoons, the bodies of water being generally along the line of Otis Drive.
Section 3. 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
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 th 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
official seal of said City this day of , 2007.
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
City of Alameda
CITY OF ALAMEDA
MEMORANDUM
To:. Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
From: Debra Kurita
City Manager
Date: April 17, 2007
Re: Receive the Report "EveryOne Home, the Alameda . Countywide
Homelessness and Special Needs Housing Plan"
BACKGROUND
Driven by Federal requirements that mandate the development of a long -range plan to end
chronic homelessness, Alameda County, in cooperation with local jurisdictions, consumers
and service providers, has developed EveryOne Home, the Alameda Countywide
Homelessness and Special Needs Housing Plan (Everyone Home). A Stakeholders
Steering Committee, which included City of Alameda staff, prepared a detailed analysis of
homelessness, including contributing factors such as mental health, substance abuse,
domestic violence, institutional care, lack of housing, and poverty. A copy of the EveryOne
Home Plan will be available for review at the City Clerk's office.
Countywide, over 16,000 people each year — 0,210 on any given night — are homeless, of
which 43% are families and 28% are children. Alameda County is among the top 10 least
affordable housing markets in the United States. A family earning minimum wage needs to
work over 130 hours per week to afford a modest two- bedroom apartment. A disabled
individual receives less per month from SSI than the fair market rent of a studio apartment.
The analysis highlighted the impact of the high cost of housing upon homelessness in the
county, making clear that long -term housing is critical for ending chronic homelessness.
DISCUSSION /ANALYSIS
In response to this issue, the County has developed the EveryOne Home Plan, which aims
to end chronic homelessness and reduce housing crises. It includes a 10 -year program -
based plan to end chronic homelessness within a broader 15 -year housing -based plan to
create safe, decent, and affordable housing options for individuals and families who are
homeless or individuals with HIV /AIDS or persistent mental illness in Alameda County.
City Council
Agenda Item #5 -A
04 -17 -07
Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
Every One Home has five major goals with strategies for implementation:
April 17, 2007
Page 2
1. Prevent homelessness and other housing crises. A key component of the Plan is to
improve access to crisis intervention services and services to people leaving institutions
including foster care, hospitals, jails, and prisons to prevent their exiting into
homelessness.
2. Increase housing opportunities for the homeless, mentally ill and people living with
HIV /AIDS. The Plan calls for the creation of 15,000 units of supportive housing in Alameda
County over the next fifteen years.
3. Deliver flexible services to support stability and independence. Support services must
accompany housing to help formerly homeless tenants be successful in housing.
4. Measure success and report outcomes. Mechanisms for measuring outcomes are
necessary to identify successful programs and target resources toward best practices.
5. Develop long -term leadership and build community support. The development of a
Tong -term leadership structure and community support is critical to implementing the plan
over the next fifteen years.
EveryOne Home outlines strategies that reorient homeless and housing services, including
existing funding and services (i.e. housing, health, mental health, social services,
transportation, etc.), to meet the Plan's goals. To accomplish this, Every One Home calls
for the creation of a Countywide Interim Leadership structure, followed by the creation of a
long -term Governing Board, comprised of County and city governments, private for - profit
and non - profit service organizations, faith -based organizations, and individual community
members.
City staff and other members of the HOME Consortium are participating in the Every One
Home leadership structure, specifically within the Fund and Program Development
Committees, which review any funding or housing development requests of the cities.
Every One Home was presented to the Social Service Human Relations Board ( SSHRB) on
January 25, 2007. The SSHRB has endorsed the Plan and looks forward to assisting with
its implementation. The SSHRB letter is included as an attachment to this staff report. In
addition, City staff will continue to work with the EveryOne Home leadership structure to
achieve the five goals outlined in the Plan.
BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no impact on the General Fund. Community Development Block Grant funds in
the amount of $7,345 are currently committed to the Continuum of Care Council and will be
transferred to EveryOne Home by FY 2007 -08.
Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
RECOMMENDATION
April 17, 2007
Page 3
Receive the Report "Everyone Home, the Alameda Countywide Homeless and Special
Needs Housing Plan."
LAL/D P/TW/sb
Attachment
cc: SSHRB Members
S. Brown, DSD
M. Jones, DSD
n
R:spe tf )II submitte
eslie A. Little
Development Se i es Director
B : De • bie - otter
Base Reuse and Community Development Manager
—T-e-Ph.A: 1.A.A.4.,ts,u.z-
By: Terri Wright
Community Development Program Manager
G:\Conndev\EveryOneHome\CouncilRpt41707Final.doc
F:HomelessnesslEveryOne Home (Alameda County Multi -Plan)
City of Alameda • California
February 14, 2007
To: Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Cynthia Wasko, Acting President
Social Service Human Relations Board
Subject: EveryOne Home, the Alameda Countywide Homelessness and Special
Needs Housing Plan
At the January 25, 2007 Meeting, the Social Service Human Relations Board ( SSHRB)
heard a presentation by Linda Gardner, Alameda County Housing and Community
Development Director regarding EveryOne Home, the Alameda Countywide
Homelessness and Special Needs Housing Plan (Everyone Home).
EveryOne Home aims to end chronic homelessness within ten years and includes five
major goals:
1. Prevent Homelessness and Other Housing Crises.
2. Increase Housing Opportunities for People who are Homeless, have Mental
Illness, or are Living with HIV /AIDS.
3. Deliver Flexible Services to Support Stability and independence of Clients
4. Measure Success and Report Outcomes
5. Develop Long -Term Leadership
Based on data presented, a disabled individual receives less per month from SSI than
the fair market value of a studio apartment. A family earning minimum wage in Alameda
County needs to work over 130 hours per week to afford a modest two - bedroom
apartment. The Alameda County homeless count in 2004 found that in suburban cities,
such as Alameda, 71% of the homeless are families..
This information is supported by our local findings. According to the 2006 City of
Alameda Social Service Human Relations Board's Community Needs Assessment,
approximately 13.6% of respondents have experienced homelessness in the last three
years. Nearly one in five families demonstrate risk factors for homelessness such as
having to choose between paying rent, utilities, health costs, and food bills. Alameda
service providers believe that some of the people who become homeless in other cities
may have started their descent into homelessness when they were Alameda residents.
Based on this information and past findings, the SSHRB in its 2007 Annual Needs
Statement has emphasized support for services that strengthen Alameda's safety net for
families and individuals who are vulnerable or in crisis. Priorities include: improving
access to affordable housing in Alameda, empowering Alamedans to achieve economic
1)evelopnaent Services Department
950 West Mall Square
Alameda, California 94501-7552
s 10749.5M' • Fax ; 1 0.749.5808 • TL)[) 510.522.7538
City Council
Attachment to
Agenda Item #5 -A
04 -17 -07
Mayor and Members of the City Council ATTACHMENT
February 14, 2007
Page 2
and social self - sufficiency and stability, and increasing access to housing and program
services for people with disabilities and for seniors.
The SSHRB finds the goals identified by Every One Home to be consistent with the
priority areas we have emphasized. The SSHRB agrees that homeless is a regional
problem and that efforts to improve regional coordination and cooperation to combat
homeless are needed. The SSHRB also believes that the needs of individual
communities differ and Looks forward to providing programmatic feedback as Every One is
implemented to ensure that Alamedan families receive services that enable them to
break the cycle of poverty and reduce the likelihood of becoming homeless again.
In accordance with the Social Service Human Relations Board's 2007 Needs Statement,
the Board endorses and recommends adoption of Every One Home, the Alameda
Countywide Homeless and Special Needs Housing Plan.
Sincerely,
Cy la Wasko, Acting President
So i I Service Human Relations Board
MJ /CW/TW:sb
Attachment
cc: Social Service Human Relations Board
Development Services Director
G : S SH R B1Co u n ci IIR a com m1Eve ryOne Ho me PI a no3o6o 7 . doc
F:
CITY OF ALAMEDA
MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor
and Councilmembers
From: Debra Kurita
City Manager
Date: April 17, 2007
Re: Public Hearing to Consider a Recommendation to Adopt the FY 2007/08
CDBG Action Plan and Authorize the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute
Related Documents, Agreements, and Modifications
BACKGROUND
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds from the Federal Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) finance programs and activities that benefit low-
and moderate - income persons and help prevent or eliminate slums and blight. The FY
2007/08 CDBG Action Plan, describing the proposed use of CDBG funds in the coming
year, must be approved by Council and submitted to HUD by May 15, 2007. All citizen
participation requirements have been met.
DISCUSSION
The FY 2007/08 draft Action Plan is enclosed as Attachment A. The Action Plan
Summary, Attachment B, summarizes the activities recommended for funding in the
2007/08 fiscal year. Staff recommendations discussed below are based on needs
identified through a variety of community engagement activities, including results from the
Social Service Human Relations Board's (SSHRB's) community needs survey, consultation
with community -based organizations, sponsorship or attendance at neighborhood and/or
community outreach events, media and website notices inviting citizen comments, two
SSHRB meetings, and the City Council's February 6, 2007, public hearing on housing and
community development needs.
Public Facilities & Improvements: One new public facility project is proposed. The
Alameda Point American Disability Act (ADA) Curb Cut project, which will install
approximately 40 curb cuts allowing ADA access to the homeless accommodation at
Alameda Point, is recommended for FY 2007/08 funding.
City Council
Public Hearing
Agenda Item #5 -B
04 -17 -07
Honorable Mayor
and Councilmembers
April 17, 2007
Page 2
Public Services: FY 2007/08 is the 2nd year of a two-year funding cycle. Attachment C lists
v gv
current and proposed funding for all public services providers approved for funding during
the FY 2006/07 Action Plan cycle. Priorities identified in the community participation
process appear as focus areas. Program descriptions and proposed service levels are
identified, and FY 06 -07 program performance is noted for all organizations that are
currently funded.
At Council's request, the SSHRB reviewed staff's public service recommendations and
heard public comment from two organizations expressing support for staff's
recommendations. These are the only comments received thus far in the 30 -day public
review period, which concludes with the public hearing before Council on April 17, 2007.
The SSHRB has concurred with staff's recommendations, as noted in the attached report
included as Attachment D.
Funding recommendations allocate 100% of available public service funding, estimated to
be $222,678, for FY 2007/08. Due to a reduction in the receipt of program income, public
service funding is $26,491 lower than last year's level. Anticipating the reduction in
available funding for FY 2007/08, funding for East Bay Community Mediation ($16,000)
was approved for FY 2006/07 only. It is recommended that the remaining funding gap of
$11,492 be closed by a 2% across - the -board cut to six organizations and agreed upon
funding cuts in excess of 2% for two organizations. Based on the need to close the
funding shortfall, and satisfactory FY 2006/07 contract performance, Public Service funding
for FY 2007/08 is recommended for authorization.
Additional program income received through June 30, 2007, can be used to increase the
Public Service Cap for FY 2007/08. To maximize available funding, staff, with the
concurrence of the SSHRB, recommends that the two organizations receiving cuts in
excess of 2 %, Bananas, Inc., and the Red Cross, Alameda Service Center, have funding
restored in the event additional program income is received.
On January 16, 2007, as part of the CDBG Annual Needs Hearing, staff was directed to
evaluate availability of CDBG funding for renovating the Teen Center located at the
Veterans Hall. To be eligible for CDBG funding, benefit to low- and moderate- income
households is required. Currently, systems to collect data necessary to determine funding
eligibility for the Teen Center are not in place. Development Services will work with ARPD
to explore funding eligibility based on income verification of program participants for the
next CDBG Public Services award cycle. CDBG funds may also be used for ADA
upgrades. The City is in the process of updating its ADA Transition Plan for all City
property, and the ADA needs of the Veterans Building will be identified. Staff will work with
the Risk Manager's office to evaluate CDBG funding for ADA upgrades to the Veterans
Building once the updated ADA Transition Plan is completed this summer.
Rehabilitation: The Substantial Rehabilitation Program is funded in accordance with the
requirements of the Guyton Agreement to develop new units in vacant or underutilized
space in existing residential and mixed -use structures. Residential predevelopment funding
will be used to identify future development opportunities for the Substantial Rehabilitation
program. Funds are recommended for the Housing and Rental Rehabilitation Programs to
Honorable Mayor
and Councilmembers
April 17, 2007
Page 3
implement the Alameda Accessibility Modification Program. Under the program, eligible
households can receive grant funds to make accessibility modifications to their homes.
Economic Development: Building upon the successes of previous CDBG- funded economic
development projects such as the downtown parking structure and the Microenterprise
Assistance program, two economic development projects are recommended for funding.
The City will be working with the Alameda Point Collaborative (APC) to obtain the
designation of Community -Based Development Organization (CBDO). The designation will
increase the City's flexibility to fund economic development initiatives such as employment
training, which is typically funded as a public service and constrained by the 15% Public
Service Cap. The funding will enhance existing APC entrepreneurial efforts including the
Bike Project and the Plough Shares and Growing Youth food security program. Funding is
also recommended for the development of an Economic Development Initiative to provide
assistance to commercial property owners and businesses for the purpose of creating or
retaining jobs. Marketing of the program will begin once staff develops program guidelines
and related agreements.
Technical Assistance "Swipe Card" Program: A long- standing initiative of the SSHRB to
create a computer -based intake or "swipe card" system, allowing for a single point of entry
for clients participating in CDBG - funded programs is recommended for funding. Once
implemented, the program will increase the capacity of non- profit agencies to streamline
and share client in -take data, benefiting both clients and non - profits. The data will also be
helpful in conducting community assessments, critical in identifying ongoing community
needs.
Continuation of Existing Activities: Programs and projects previously approved by Council
with prior years' funding will continue. Programs and projects include: construction of the
downtown parking structure using $7.8 million in Section 108 program and Brownfields
Economic Development Initiative (BEDI) funds; acquisition of the Food Bank Portable; and
continuation of the Woodstock to Webster Neighborhood Improvement project and Blight
Busters program.
Planning /Administration /Program Delivery: The Plan includes allocations for Fair Housing
services, Continuum of Care support, program delivery, planning, and administration
related to the development and implementation of all CDBG - eligible and CDBG - funded
projects. In furtherance of the CDBG objective of assistance to lower - income residents,
staff researches and applies for other funding sources to meet community needs and
provides support to the Rent Review Advisory Committee, the SSHRB, and other similar
activities.
Following approval of and in accordance with the FY 2007/08 CDBG Action Plan, Grant
Agreements or Modifications will be negotiated to fulfill Federal and City requirements. The
form of Agreements and Modifications are the same as those previously approved by the
Council and City Attorney.
Honorable Mayor
and Councilmembers
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
April 17, 2007
Page 4
The execution of related agreements and final funding commitments are subject to
satisfactory environmental clearance under 24 CFR Part 58.
BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT
CDBG funds provide services and improvements to low- and moderate- income residents
and neighborhoods. CDBG funds are also used to leverage millions of dollars of private,
foundation, and other public funds for Alameda through private investment and matching
grants. This Action Plan will allocate $1,377,883 in new CDBG Entitlement funds. Other
CDBG funds noted in the Plan include: an estimated $188,000 in program income from
loan repayments and $219;336 in reallocated prior year funding. This is a total budget of
$1,782,189. There is no impact on the General Fund.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the FY 2007/08 CDBG Action Plan and authorize the City Manager to negotiate and
execute Grant Agreements, Grant Modifications, and other related documents.
Res '.ec lly submitte
Leslie A. Little
Development Services Director
y: Debbie Potter
Base Reuse and Community Development Manager
LeA4A, ULU
sue_
By: Terri Wright
Community Development Program Manager
LAUD P/TW : sb
Attachment A: CDBG FY 2007/08 Draft Action Plan On file at the City Clerk's Office.
Attachment B: CDBG FY 2007/08 Action Plan Summary
Attachment C: CDBG Public Services Funding Summary
Attachment D: SSHRB FY 2007/08 Public Service Recommendations
cc: FY 2007/08 Public Service Subgrantees
Social Service Human Relations Rnard
Draft FY 2007 -08 ACTION PLAN SUMMARY
Final funding commitments are subject to satisfactory environmental clearance under 24 CFR Part 58. FY
2007 -08 is the 2nd year of a two -year Public Services funding cycle. Council with reauthorize the Public
Service contracts approved during the FY 2006 -07 funding cycle for the FY 2007 -08 Action Plan, subject to
funding availability and satisfactory contract performance.
NEW AND EXISTING PROJECT
ESTIMATED
CARRY - FORWARD
CDBG FUNDING
FY 2007 -08
CDBG
FUNDING
TOTAL
CDBG
FUNDING
CAPITAL PROJECTS
Alameda Point ADA Curb Cuts
Food Bank Modular Unit
Woodstock to Webster Neighborhood Imp.
Blight Busters
PUBLIC SERVICES
ACCESS Program (Alameda Red Cross)
Child Care Vouchers
Family Violence Prevention Services
Alameda Food Bank
Four Bridges
Housing Counseling
Midway Shelter
West Alameda Teen Club
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT &
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
Economic Development Initiative
Alameda Point Collaborative CBDO
Non-Profit "Swipe Card" Program
HOUSING REHABILITATION
Housing Rehabilitation
Rental Rehabilitation
Residential Predevelopment
Substantial Rehabilitation
PROGRAM DELIVERY
PLANNING/ADMINISTRATION
Continuum of Care
Fair Housing Services
General Administration
1 00,000.00
375, 000.00
1 05,000.00
10,000.00
175, 000.00
100,000.00
18,000.00
450,000.00
11 5,000.00 11 5,000.00
100,000.00
375,000.00
1 05,000.00
61,280.00 61,280.00
22,724.00 22,724.00
14, 578.00 14, 578.00
19, 939.00 19, 939.00
25,557.00 25,557.00
14,946.00 14,946.00
42,124.00 42,124.00
21, 530.00 21, 530.00
100, 000.00 110, 000.00
35,000.00 35,000.00
40,000.00 40,000.00
20, 000.00 195, 000.00
30, 000.00 130, 000.00
13,210.00 31,210.00
210, 812.00 660, 812.00
580, 590.00 580, 590.00
7,345.00 7,345.00
15,000.00 15,000.00
290,226.00 290,226.00
UNPROGRAMMED FUNDS 102,328.00
102,328.00
TOTAL 1 ,333,000.00 1 ,782,189.00
Total Anticipated Funding FY 2007 -08
FY 2007 -08 CDBG Entitlement
FY 2007 -08 Anticipated Program Income
Reallocated Funds from Prior Years
Total FY 2007 -08 CDBG Funds
1,377,853.00
185,000.00
219,336.00
1,782,189.00
3,11 5,189.00
City Council
Public Hearing
Attachment 2 to
Agenda Item #5 -B
04-17-07
CDBG PUBLIC SERVICE RECOMMENDATIONS July 1, 2007 - June 30, 2008
Total Public Services Available, FY07 -08
Program Description
D
co
O
L
N -�
0?
O U !a
�fg8
V)
EN
ca•
frito
o v
a
r ill
w N
E
00)< z
O
C U
mcf
'U C
❑ 0 •o
N O
a) o 2
Z c .N
o � �
a) U
a�
Vj C N
c E m ro
§ Td
N 0
E '
g 8 t
U
.92 = c .N
E
00
to
c 0 O
° Lz
o ca
c o
Ern
N v
cu a
ca ,
N[°v E
1
cd ((3 2
r
0 C c
v
7 `
a o- Q
C
v
•Z E
m •
N m ED
E w °'
E
0) 0 ca
2 h N
o.
0. v
° E
El c
c o a) ..E
2 m > a
>
G) --
E
w 5
C C L
g N
N N C 6 ( 1 a L
C C) n 32
v 6
N
E o a):v
c A 7,
v '3 v
an•E E
c5 x0. D)
N aL
a) O O
N
0 o c
w
L.) c 8),0
0 cn
0 ,D = c
C
8 r r' s
� E
v a)
cc E
❑ E
.0 .0
E 2
'
E ❑ a v
0 ca ❑ a
cca o v °
y t c» •U
E --
c�
( ) Q
Recommended for FY 2006107 funding only.
co
C0
C
c 0
N L]
.N 2
N
N
CD 13
9. O
N
Y
o
ca EQ
0
o v
N
to 0 •o
co E o
c
C
. E
S o 0.
U U
a
o
U ❑
C L
o -0
L U
8'
rn �
C C C
_ ro
❑
2) N N
E ❑ v
v
w 8 O
0)
0
E
0) C CD
2 as F ;r
a C
a) D
C
E)
c 'o E
E v m c
cd 03 !2:
a �:
a) E ai to a
m
C E C
w
a >"
5 0) E
.450 �
3
8 a,
0 a ro
(0 0 ..: V) 0
, a) .� c
a) Q] 'D rn
N 30 .0
Ea U N
E
v 0) m aNi
�, �? C3
o'a)•� _C
.2 ?).) 03 g
ti L 0 C
o o E
c U U g 0
E c
c 0)
ca •�n
v 8
c t L
o 'a cu
U C
f; Q
0.
o, c }' C
a. x
a 2 ' a)
0 .c c) o c
0 = 3
E') c O '3) ❑
`i] •N N 'c o
.0 0 t 0 (
o a v
0 y N
c c a
C [a cr)
_E 0- D •❑ ❑
D C L C
cNv E co
'4t r 'C t v
ca L a) .c
•a) .c /❑) ca ❑ gra
C
L
a ❑ 0
c v ` ❑
❑ N N Y
E c -c
c O a) m
c m v °
0
C
0 '3
E
0)8B
E
c
m 3 v ac)
v E
E o v v
m 8 a•s
a
E0)
m v
a0 N c
la CD N
v
Crl
o .c . a
14))
a) 0 N
f, o E. <.) 7
.Lc 3 3 ❑ N
a E
o
N ❑ o C o D
5
0 U > C U
a) L U
o) ❑ o o r
cn E � t:17. >
CD 0) L
7.3 §
2 `D a)
a a E E
0
ca
� , D
v o
E — 0
C
0 7 D a)
E
`
0
7D,0 ,, O)
o y ca
o N c
E ca
N 7+ C s
N D) 0� ❑
c a
0
n' L
a) 0
N 5
0
C`❑, '3) ~
m a 3
C a) 0
❑
fi
cp
C y ❑ D
fa Y L N D `D
8 8
0 C
U a) o
1
� m
❑ D C
O -2 {❑j a,
❑ — o c
v a c'3 >,
N .0 ❑ '❑ o
aa)) S. as m a
o E
< > 7 es a)
x
x
x
co
3<
x
x
CV
,C
x
x
x
7
U
FY 2006 -07
C 7 i,
vi
C �)
� a)
LL
(0 C3] N
o
5
U
LL 4]
Project Name / Organization
REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC SERVICE FUNDING
x
x
x
x
e-
O
0
O
0
0
co
CV
(D
0
a
2
0
69
(4
[V
u)
64
('1
CV
CV
69
0,
(')
3
0•
CO 0
CV 0
co °
CD O
69
c0
A
0
N
Erg
.4r o
CO 0
CV
69
0
0
0
c0
co
r^-
l)
(V
Co
CV rn
6.9
0}
co
CV
6R
C0 •
0)
ort
69 r-
CV
aD
69
C
w0 .8 U
E
o ¢(n
ca
E rnN v
❑ a) V7 E
c E U ro
�w
o U 1
sa c o
E .8 U w
E E Z v c
QUV]C10
Alameda Food Bank
a
O
a
69
Childcare Vouchers / BANANAS
0
East Bay Community Mediation
(0
N.
69
C
❑ a)
+, U
C C
N
N O
0
E
cts
5 UU3
8 U
ca 0- N 0
U
0)
N
0) C
o u,
0 U
O
c _ o
❑ c .�
U LL
E 0 c
v m
2 =- (.0
0
0
(0
co
0_
CV
4
07
(C)
CV
69
J
0
City council
Public Hearing
Attachment 3 to
Agenda Item #5 -8
04-17-07
5
o
15
o
s
ui -
o
co
2
� t
C7
r7n a�i
C
O
E N
0.
E ca
a) U
2
0 N
0 2
0 N c 2
E cC
E
q) N
0
•E .0
g
O 3
❑ ca o
8 I D
G)
E is
o
N
V1 7+ C N
-
-g
cal 1°2 cug
v • U 0
0
V1 C
`] �
.! la
cd 2 N
•C 4)
m c CEi
N N
.0 E
E
E ❑a •0
8 g
0) N
c
2
l w °. N_
N O 62 f
avi -a •3
E co G)
cv E ❑ fl.
a ,n °
cu, a
D-
E ( `,
N _c 0 ca
°
g k ° g
� � Q
< E�
ri
"'Additional funding allocated through Amendment
CITY OF ALAMEDA
MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor
and Councilmembers
From: Cynthia Wasko -
Acting President, Social Service Human Relations Board
Date: March 29, 2007
Re: Recommended FY2007 -08 CDBG Public Service Allocations
BACKGROUND
At the City Council's request, the Social Service Human Relations Board ( SSHRB) reviews
and comments on the Development Service Department's recommendations for Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) public services funding. At its January meeting, the
SSHRB considered priority needs for public service funding and recommended certain focus
areas, including strengthening the social service safety net, empowering economic and
social self - sufficiency, improving access to affordable housing, and making sure isolated
populations have awareness of and access to services through increased outreach and
publicity.
DISCUSSION /ANALYSIS
At its March meeting, the SSHRB reviewed staff's published funding recommendations. The
SSHRB also heard public comments from representatives of funded organizations. FY 07-
08 represents the second year of a two -year funding cycle, and staffs recommendation was
consistent with funding plans established last year. Based on the presentations and
discussion at these meetings, the SSHRB unanimously supports the staff recommendations.
The programs recommended for funding are established and have good track records. We
believe that the recommendations reflect the focus areas the Board identified. The
proposed funding represents a decrease in operating funds for all programs. We wish more
money were available for public services overall. Given the funding constraints, we believe
that the recommendations offer a balanced approach to the needs of the community.
Staff explained that a percentage of the additional program income received through
June 30, 2007 can be used to increase public services funding for FY 07 -08. If additional
funding becomes available, the board supports staff's recommendation to restore funding
to Banana's, Inc. first. Additional funding may be used to restore the American Red
Cross- Alameda Service Center. Increased funding for both agencies would be
contingent upon the agency's ability to maximize direct program benefit with the
additional funding.
City Council
Public Hearing
Attachment 4 to
Agenda Item #5 -B
04-17-07
Honorable Mayor March 29, 2007
and Councilmembers Page 2
RECOMMENDATION
The SSHRB unanimously recommends that City Council approve the CDBG public services
funding recommendations as published.
Re - pectfully su itted,
Cynthia Wasko, Acting President
Social Service Human Relations Board
CW:MJ:sb
cc: Social Service Human Relations Board
G :ISSHRB\COUNCILIRECOMMENIPublic Services Recs 07.doc
F:ISSHRBICouncil Relations 2007
CITY OF ALAMEDA
Memorandum
DATE: April 17, 2007
TO: Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
FROM: David Brandt
Assistant City Manager
RE: Consider Initiation of a Rezoning in the Area Generally Bounded by
Madison Street to the North, Washington Street to the South, Fernside
Drive to the East and Peach Street to the West.
BACKGROUND
On March 30, 2007, the City accepted a citizen request from Victor and Ann Quintell to
initiate a rezoning to create an overlay district in the "Ranch" neighborhoods of the
Fernside area. A petition signed by 44 of the 118 property owners accompanied the
request.
DISCUSSION
Pursuant to AMC Section 30 -22.2, property owners, City Council, or the Planning
Board, must initiate zoning amendments. If the City Council initiates a rezoning,
property owners within the subject area do not bear the cost of the process.
The proposed amendment would create a 20 -foot height limit in an area generally
bound by Madison Street to the north, Washington Street to the south, Fernside Drive to
the east, and Peach Street to the west. There are 118 properties in the amendment
area. The amendment would also limit new additions to no more than 800- square feet.
If initiated by City Council, staff will review the boundaries and the existing development
pattern and make recommendations to the Planning Board and City Council regarding
appropriate development standards for the general area, such standards may include
rezoning the area with an H, Special Height Combining District and/or creation of a
Planned Development District. It should be noted there are two active requests for
development in this area: one for a second story addition on Washington Avenue and
another for a new two -story residence on Adams Street.
City Council
Agenda Item #5-C
04-17-07
Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Page 2
April 17, 2007
Initiation of a rezoning is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA).
BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT
If directed by City Council to initiate the requested rezoning, costs would be absorbed
within the Planning & Building Department's existing budget. No additional funding
would be required.
MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
None.
RECOMMENDATION
Direct the Assistant City Manager to initiate a rezoning with special development
standards in the area of Madison Street to the north, Washington Street to the south,
Fernside Drive to the east, and Peach Street to the west.
Respectfully submitted,
,
Cathy /..dbury
Planning and Building Director
By:
Andrew homas
Planning Services Manager
Attachments:
1. Letter to David Brandt dated March 30, 2007 (12 pages)
G:\ PLANNING\ CC \REPORTS12007\04- 17- 07\Rezoning Initiation.doc
March 30, 2007.
City of Alameda
David Brandt
Dear David,
I am enclosing the signatures we have
get started with what needs to be done
would like to get started with what we
you so uch.
z._,e2.,. /...,0_,_
Cordially,
Victor and Arm Quintell
3286 San Jose Ave.
Alameda, CA 94501
510 -521 -8117
gotten for our neighborhood ordinance. Hopefully you can
. David McCarver has more signatures to get, but we
have. Please let us know what we do from here. Thank
City Council
Attachment to
Agenda Item #5 -C
04-17-07
REQUEST FOR ORDINANCE LAYOVER FOR THE
RANCH NEIGHBORHOODS OF EAST ALAMEDA
We the undersigned neighbors wish to have the City Council direct
the City of Alameda Planning Department to design an ordinance
protecting our neighborhoods from the development of oversized
additions, remodels and new construction.
Our neighborhoods may not yet meet the City of Alameda's
Historical requirements, but they do have a history. A history of
modest and equal sized ranch houses, where no one home
dominates or looms over another. We are very concerned about
the size and scale of the developments being approved by the
Planning Department which circumvent the statement "scale and
massing which will clash with the dominant verticality of the
neighborhood. "
For many of us in this wonderful neighborhood our homes will be
our legacy to our children and heirs. We are not a neighborhood of
million - dollar Mini- Mansions. We are a modest neighborhood and
we are greatly concerned with what these developments will do to
the quality of life on our streets and the values of our homes.
We ask that the following statements from the city of Alameda
Guide to Residential Design be stringently enforced within the
designated neighborhood areas:
SECTION 1— ADDITIONS (PG 16) "* The new building mass
must not loom over the street or neighboring yards... The scale
and massing should not clash with the dominant verticality of the
neighborhood."
Subsection 30 -37 -5 Requirements:
"Projects must be compatible with their site, any adjacent or
neighboring buildings or surroundings and promote harmonious
transitions in scale and character in areas between different
designated land uses". And jtemb. which states that "Projects
which do not meet the requirements of paragraph a. shall be
presumed detrimental to either existing property values or the
growth of proper0 values in the vicinity of the project "
ONPAGEI8-
Theform, mass and style o, f the second story addition must relate to both
that of the existing building and those of the surrounding neighborhood
And while such a new "sayIe" need not match the surrounding non-
historic buildings (e.g., a "new" Mediterranean revival may be introduced
into a neighborhood of 1950's ranch buildings) the scale and massing
should not clash with the dominant verticality of the neighborhood
PAGE 64 UNDER SUBSECTION 30 -37.5 REQUIREMETNS -
a4 Projects must be compatible with their site, any adjacent or neighboring
buildings or surroundings and promote harmonious transitions in scale
and character in areas between different designated land uses.
b. Projects which do not meet the requirements of paragraph a. shall be
presumed detrimental to either existing property values or the
growth ofproperty values in the vicinity of the project
We are seeking a layover ordinance which will limit the amount of
additional square footage to 800 square feet. The maximum height
to 20 feet. And the design to be such that it will maintain the
single story ranch character of the existing structures with the
addition place over the back 1/2 of the house.
We believe that such an ordinance will not downsize our
neighborhood costing us property value. We believe in fact that by
limiting the size of any development, our properly values will
maintain or increase as prospective buyers will appreciate the fact
that they can rest comfortably that no one can buy the home next
door and build it out to an out of scale and character monster home
that truly will diminish property value.
PRINT NAME SIGNATURE STREET
ADDRESS YEARS IN HOME DATE
PRINT NAME
SIGNATURE STREET
ADDRESS Y&IRS IN HOME DATE
z
.maintain or increase as prospective buyers will appreciate the fact
that they can rest comfortably that no one can buy the home next
door and build it out to an out of scale and character monster home
that truly will diminish property value.
PRINT NAME IGNIffijRE STREET
ADD SS YE44RS JN H'ME DIITE
$22C &v'iJ E ,11/ .T6/4$
328G • 4t'&E IIAiiS,
/-.2/--,Ree
//
v •
4
s ■ ��. JI 46'40
AA %..'1,1111iIMIR.A
1
42- ev
a� a-drio �J
2,1 9.17D
Y1 it is 03t P • ! a Sea
STREET
P' TNAME
SIGNA
ADDRESS YAR$ JN HOME DATE
� ,sA,/ 7"i • .9 gyre
�.
500 CE 14)01\16- • i>7 o2i ytarS
A2.7.1____S&LI*0 GE A vFAvE
c.
0
l2j
3zc.ti -- 54.. T �f �
3a.5� Sar, .lose
/....H1,1ilvt r7(I:ic
112k3. 7,-4.
OA- Zf'(
/17(Fzeo
r (
l7
maintain or increase as .prospective buyers will appreciate the fact
that they can rest comfortably that no one can buy the home next
door and build it out to an out of scale and character monster home
that truly will diminish property value.
PRINT NAME
SIGNATURE
ADDRESS YEARSINHOME DATE
J&Lr iovn bn
STREET
3 oz �?�� o� &1--,
Mdd ison.Sl•
PRINT NAME
SI NATURE
ADDRESS JE4RS IN HOM2? DATE
C P ) 3 1,g 11&42,44-
J
STREET
Aie
y V,eke
■rimi■vr
.4
ail-04"o
maintain or increase as prospective buyers will appreciate the fact
that they can rest comfortably that no one can buy the home next
door and build it out to an out of scale and character monster home
that truly will diminish property value.
PRINT NAME SIGNATURE
ADDRESS YEARSINHOME DATE
STREET
-2,t< 4°9yN -�.�/07
Nc
‘-•<04_,: 2
� ✓ �R 3_11L-"Ti(-1 (48a -;F2) b &41 3 2-7
IL? e9
FRTNTNAME SIGNATURE
ADDRESS YEARS 1N HQk!E DATE
.� J)2a/J7;2 aoRIJP ✓a
3G3.
STREET
IMiit — (7/s);e
l32
328 ;.:0 '15
.-)b cS?'
gT
T�
1
46JZi
a-/7Aq-
35
/ inhle Li
52,c:, A- sf- ct414-0
w k_✓ 0//h
3.351,U16_s_ � 0 1
C
2 L�
2/7/1,-
-fe
c46y6-
c4q 5
_x21-17 -0 7.
)r-k-yf 21,-2k-D7
J
J
0
U 3
›,
„mi.
s`C)
4) ,s
0
,,,„E
4-0
tip
o
ic.hbtign
00_
0 0 =1
=.0 ›,
0 ;s
0 4., 0
0 v)
etp
O
7:$ O
"ear"�
tD4 15 42
2
• 3 � t:Ig
��3
b
��b
o ›, g
"cl 42'
'4=1 "8
4.4 rc1:3 tit
iS .5 ‘ti (1) "
E 1.9
. o 124
a) 4:1 ,c1
,a .a C15 +.s
ti) ti
• E
CITY OF ALAMEDA
Memorandum
To: Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
From: Debra Kurita
City Manager
Date: April 17, 2007
Re: Adopt a Resolution Expressing Support for Full Funding for Transit
Operations in the State's FY 2007/08 Budget
BACKGROUND
In mid - January, Governor Schwarzenegger released his proposed FY 2007/08 budget,
which included a plan to cut public transportation funding by $1.1 billion. According to
AC Transit staff, the agency could lose about $7 million in FY 2007/08 as a result of this
proposal, and about $5 million in subsequent years.
DISCUSSION
Governor Schwarzenegger's proposed FY 2007/08 budget, released in January,
includes a shift of $1.1 billion of Public Transit Account (PTA) funds to offset costs that
are traditionally covered by the State's General Fund, including general obligation debt
service ($340 million), school bus service ($627 million), and transportation services for
the developmentally disabled ($144 million). According to the State Department of
Finance, the Governor intends the transfer to the Department of Education for school
bus service to be ongoing, while the other proposed transfers would occur only in FY
2007/08.
As a result of this proposed shift, funding will be reduced for the State Transit
Assistance (STA) program, which is an account within the PTA and is the only state
funding source for transit operating expenses. To compensate for the Toss of traditional
transit funding, the Governor's budget proposes backfilling the account using $600
million of the Proposition 1B transportation bond voters passed last November. The
bond funds, however, are for transit capital expenditures, not for operations.
The Governor will release a revised budget proposal, known as the May Revise, in mid -
May. It is unknown at this point whether the budget revision will include the transit
funding shift. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission, transit advocates,
environmentalists, and the Legislative Analyst's Office, however, have all expressed
concerns about this proposal.
City Council
Report Re:
Agenda Item #5 -D
04-17-07
April 17, 2007
Page 2
BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no impact to the General Fund from this action.
MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
This action does not affect the Municipal Code.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution expressing support for full funding for transit operations in the State's
FY 2007/08 budget.
Respectf omitted,
Matthew Naclerio •
Public Works Director
MTN:gc
CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO.
EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR FULL FUNDING FOR TRANSIT
OPERATIONS IN THE STATE'S FY 2007/08 BUDGET
WHEREAS, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger released his proposed
FY 2007/08 budget in January, 2007; and
WHEREAS, the draft budget includes a plan to cut public transit funding
in FY 2007/08 by $1.1 billion by using Public Transit Account funds to offset
costs that are traditionally covered by the State's General Fund; and
WHEREAS, A.C. Transit, which provides bus service to the residents
and businesses of Alameda, could lose $7 million as a result of this proposal in
FY 2007/08 and $5 million in subsequent years; and
WHEREAS, the Governor's January budget also proposes to make up
for some of this loss of transit operating money by using $000 million of the
Proposition 1B transportation bond passed by the voters last November; and
WHEREAS, the Proposition 1B bond funds are intended to be used for
transit capital expenditures, not for operations; and
WHEREAS, the Governor will release a revised budget proposal in May.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Alameda that the City expresses its support for full funding for transit
operations in the State's FY 2007/08 budget.
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
Resolution #5 -D
04 -17 -07
UNAPPROVED
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING
TUESDAY- -APRIL 3, 2007- -7:27 P.M.
Chair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 8:00 p.m.
Commissioner Gilmore led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL - Present: Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese,
Tam, and Chair Johnson -- 5.
Absent: None.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar.
Commissioner Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are
indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.]
( *07- ) Minutes of the Community Improvement Commission meeting
held on March 20, 2007. Approved.
( *07- ) 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.
AGENDA ITEMS
None.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the
Special Meeting at 8:01 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
April 3, 2007
CITY OF ALAMEDA
Memorandum
To: Honorable Chair and
Members of the Community Improvement Commission
From: Debra Kurita
Executive Director
Date: April 17, 2007
Re: Authorize the Executive Director to Execute a Consultant Agreement with
Harris & Associates in an Amount Not to Exceed $540,000, to be
Reimbursed by the Developer Pursuant to the DDA, to Provide City
Engineering Review and Construction Support Services for the Alameda
Landing Project
BACKGROUND
Harris & Associates ( "Harris ") was selected in 2001, through a formal competitive
selection process, as the City Engineer for the East Housing and Fleet Industrial Supply
Center (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.
On December 5, 2006 and January 16, 2007, the City Council and Community
Improvement Commission (CIC), approved all entitlements for the Alameda Landing
Mixed Use Development at the FISC. The proposed Project includes the development
of 400,000 square feet of office with supporting retail uses, 20,000 square feet of health
club uses, 300,000 square feet of retail uses, up to 300 housing units, and a 9 -acre
waterfront promenade.
The Developer has also submitted a Tentative Map and the Phase One Development
Plan, which will be presented to the Planning Board at its April 23rd meeting. Specific
Development Plans for Clif -Bar will be presented to the Planning Board at the May 29th
meeting. Site work is scheduled to begin in August 2007. Construction on Phase One is
scheduled to start in September 2007, and to be substantially complete and ready for
occupancy in the fall of 2008. All these activities require careful engineering review and
coordination.
Special CIC
Agenda Item #2 -B
04-17-07
Honorable Chair and
Members of the Community Improvement Commission
April 17, 2007
Page 2 of 4
Over the past three months, city staff and the Developer have been working
collaboratively on the development of the Master Demolition Infrastructure and Grading
Plan (MDIGP) and a Right-of-Entry Agreement that allows the Developer to access the
property to perform environmental and geotechnical testing and inspections of the
property. Additional work includes the review and submission of a Joint Aquatic
Resource Permit Application (DARPA) to the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality
Control Board (RWQCB), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), and San Francisco
Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC). As a result of those efforts,
activities were identified requiring the input of and review by the contract engineer.
DISCUSSION
Initially, Harris & Associates was retained as the City Engineer for the East
Housing/FISC project. In March 2002, the CIC approved an amendment to the
Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) with Catellus that bifurcated East
Housing from FISC and allowed the Bayport project to proceed on its own. Harris &
Associates has served as the City Engineer on the Bayport project for the past five
years and will complete its duties on that project by December 31, 2007. With re-
entitlements in place for the former FISC site, including a new DDA, a new agreement
for City Engineer services for Alameda Landing needs to be executed.
As part of preparing the new agreement with Harris & Associates, staff reviewed the
billing rates of several civil engineering firms that responded to a March 2006 Request
for Proposals (RFP) for On -Call Engineering Services issued by Public Works. The
work activities specified in the RFP for On -Call Services are similar to those required of
the City Engineer for Alameda Landing. In addition, as City Engineer for the project,
Harris & Associates is the licensed engineer for the project and stamps all of the
engineering drawings. In this capacity, Harris & Associates accepts all liability for those
drawings. Billing rates for firms responding to the RFP for On -Call Engineering
Services ranged from $125 -$150 an hour for project engineers to $190 -$225 an hour for
project directors/principles. Harris & Associates' billing rates range from $150 an hour
for project engineers to $220 an hour for project directors/principles.
It is recommended that the CIC retain Harris & Associates as the City Engineer for
Alameda Landing based on Harris & Associates' familiarity with the East Housing/FISC
project; long- standing relationships with the developer and the developer's consultants,
specifically, BKF, the project engineer, and third party regulators and utilities (e.g.,
Regional Water Quality Control Board, CalTrans, EBMUD, etc.); the need to coordinate
Bayport and Alameda Landing backbone infrastructure; Harris & Associates' willingness
to accept liability for engineering work associated with the project; and Harris &
Associates' competitive billing rates.
Honorable Chair and
Members of the Community Improvement Commission
April 17, 2007
Page 3 of 4
Harris & Associates will serve under the direction of the Development Services
Department in coordination with the Public Works Department. The scope of work
included in the Harris fee proposal is summarized as follows:
1. Program Management: Represent the Public Works Department on the Alameda
Landing Project through the preparation of conditions of approval,
recommendations, and evaluation of alternatives. Assist with coordination
between Public Works and other City departments, as required. Provide
assistance with meeting agenda development, meeting minutes, progress
reports, budget monitoring and analysis, scheduling, and document preparation
and review. Provide support to the City in review and resolution of environmental
and clean up issues as they develop. Develop and update mitigation monitoring
compliance checklist.
2. Master Demolition Infrastructure and Grading Plan (MDIGP) Technical Review:
Technical review of "project" MDIGP including: review /recommend design
exceptions; review engineering calculations and reports (soils, storm, sewer, etc);
set design criteria; review for compliance with City ordinances and
municipal /building codes; coordinate with Public Works and other departments;
assist in issues /conflict resolution and best practices; and review contract
documents.
3. In -tract Review for Commercial Office, Retail and Residential Development:
Perform technical review of phased final maps; check for compliance with City
ordinances, State Map Act, and conditions of approval; check closure
calculations; review CC &Rs and easements for completeness and accuracy;
draft the Subdivision Improvement Agreement; coordinate with Public Works and
other departments; provide compliance check list, improvement plans, and plot
plans. Review /recommend design exceptions; review engineering calculations
and reports (soils, storm, sewer, etc); set design criteria; check for compliance
with conditions of approval; review contract documents; provide compliance
check list; attend Development Review Team meetings and Planning Board if
needed; coordinate with Public Works and other departments. Provide
inspection services that would normally be provided by the Public Works
Department; review contractor submittals related to public facilities; maintain
inspection logs regarding public facilities inspected; and assist Construction
Manager with conflict resolution.
4. Willie Stargell & Webster Technical Support & Construction Management (CM):
Review plans, specifications, and cost estimates for Bidability and
Constructability. Assist the City with coordination with other project
infrastructure, schedule, and compatibility. Provide Resident Engineer
responsibilities for construction of the intersection project. Review grading and
backbone infrastructure construction documents for new intersection ect; J
ro'
p
provide bid period assistance (attend bid meetings, review bids, assist with
Honorable Chair and
Members of the Community Improvement Commission
April 17, 2007
Page 4 of 4
negotiations); review contractor selection; provide inspection services that would
normally be provided by the Public Works Department; review contractor
submittals related to public facilities; maintain inspection logs regarding public
facilities inspected; and assist Construction Management with conflict resolution.
The not -to- exceed fee of $540,000 for the above- referenced tasks is predicated upon
the Alameda Landing Commercial Phase One Preliminary Design and Production
Schedule provided by the Developer and includes a ten percent contingency allowance.
BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT
Since Harris & Associates will serve as the designated City Engineer for the Alameda
Landing Project, the Agreement with Harris is with the CIC and not the Developer. As a
result, Harris & Associates will be paid by the CIC from a deposit of funds from the
Developer to the CIC. No General Fund monies will be used to pay for any of the
expenditures required for implementation of the Alameda Landing Project.
MUNICIPAL CODE/POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
The proposed Agreement is in conformance with the City's Fiscal Neutrality Policy.
RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the Executive Director to execute a Consulting Agreement with Harris &
Associates in an amount not to exceed $540,000, to be reimbursed by the Developer
pursuant to the DDA, to provide city engineering review and construction support
services through December 2007, for the Alameda Lan • ing Project.
By:
DKILAL/DC: mlf
Res fully subm
f',,
1�t1
Leslie A. Little
Development Services Director
as Cole
Redevelopment Manager
ter
Base Reuse Community Development
Manager
CITY OF ALAMEDA
MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Chair and Members
of the Community Improvement Commission
From: Debra Kurita
Executive Director
Date: April 17, 2007
Re: (1) Receive Report on Alameda Theater, Cineplex, and Parking Structure
Project Construction Update; and (2) Add Scope of Work to the Civic
Center Parking Garage Construction Contract with C. Overaa & Co. and
Reduce Contingency Budget
BACKGROUND
The City of Alameda Community Improvement Commission (CIC) approved
construction contracts with C. Overaa & Co. (Overaa) on July 26, 2006, for the
rehabilitation and restoration of the historic Alameda Theater and the design -build new
construction of the Civic Center Parking Garage. The CIC approved the Theater
construction contract for $8,800,000 and approved the parking garage design -build
contract for $9,104,000, with the condition that the garage project be value- engineered
within the CIC's budget before the construction phase commenced. Since contract
approval in July, CIC staff and Overaa finalized the value - engineering for the garage
design, reducing the contract price to within the CIC's budget. The original contract
price of $9,104,000 was reduced by $604,000, resulting in a final contract price of
$8,500,000.
The Theater construction contract commenced in October 2006; the design phase of
the parking garage project started in August 2006; and the construction phase of the
parking garage began in October 2006. The overall project consists of an eight- screen
movie theater, including a 484 -seat, single- screen theater in the historic Alameda
Theater and seven screens in the new cineplex, 6,100 square feet of retail, and a 341 -
space parking garage.
DISCUSSION
The status of both the Theater and parking garage projects, including the budget with
contingency, payments, and schedule, are provided in Attachments 1 and 2,
respectively. Both projects are expected to be substantially complete by the end of
Special CIC
Agenda Item #3 -A
04-17-07
Honorable Chair and Members
of the Community Improvement Commission
April 17, 2007
Page 2
2007. Subsequently, Alameda Entertainment Associates (AEA), the movie operator, will
install tenant improvements in the historic Theater. The grand opening of the Alameda
Theater is currently anticipated for early 2008 (Attachment 3). A summary of the status
of each component of the project is provided below.
Alameda Theater
The Alameda Theater rehabilitation and restoration focused on finalizing the seismic
work, scaffolding the auditorium, demolishing the mechanical room in the alleyway, and
continuing with mechanical, plumbing, and electrical work. CIC staff allocated an
additional $30,000 from the contingency line item within the overall budget for additional
doweling and reinforcement required by the structural engineer, partially due to existing
footing conditions differing from the original as -built drawings. Overaa has also
commenced with plaster repair, lobby paint preparation, and marquee /blade sign work.
Cumulative current and pending contract changes are estimated to require the use of
approximately $212,000 in contingency funds, or approximately 19 percent of the C1C's
contingency budget. The total contingency budget for the Theater is $1.1 million
(Attachment 1).
Parking Garage
Overaa has poured the vertical columns and shear walls for the first floor of the garage.
They also have placed concrete masonry units (CMU) for the ramp and the sump
pumps and drains for the first level. Additionally, Overaa commenced backfilling the
ramp and forming the slab -on- grade. Current and pending contract changes are
estimated to require the use of approximately $133,000 in contingency funds, or
approximately 32 percent of the CIC's contingency budget. The total contingency
budget for the garage is $415,000 (Attachment 2).
As directed by the CIC at the February 20, 2007, meeting, CIC staff evaluated several
options for creating a more consistent, non - sloping design for the northern elevation of
the garage. The cost of revising the northern elevation design quoted by Overaa was
much greater than anticipated and ranged from $200,000 to $400,000. The options
included:
1) Pipe rails on top of cast -in -place crash walls with plaster/foam/framing at bottom
of crash wall. Columns to remain 24" with no foam or flutes. This alternative
would cost approximately $390,000 and add two months to the contract schedule
(Attachment 4).
2) Raised concrete crash walls on top with plaster/foam/framing at bottom of crash
wall. Columns to remain 24" with no foam or flutes. This alternative would cost
approximately $200,000 and add one and one -half months to the contract
schedule (Attachment 5).
Honorable Chair and Members
of the Community Improvement Commission
April 17, 2007
Page 3
3) Shortened concrete crash walls with metal panels spanning column to column.
Columns to remain 24" with no foam or flutes. Metal panels to utilize a
perforated /expanded metal infill panel. This alternative would cost approximately
$300,000 and add one month to the contract schedule (Attachment 6).
Overaa's quotes for altering the northern facade would use all or exceed the CIC's
remaining contingency of $282,000. CIC staff and its construction management team
have evaluated these proposed costs, which may exceed the prices that could be
achieved through a competitive bidding process. Even with a competitive bid, it is
possible that any of these alternatives could require that the CIC commit additional
funds to the project. As a result, CIC staff does not recommend accepting any of the
alternatives for the northern elevation at this time. If, once construction is complete and
Overaa has vacated the site, the CIC decides to allocate additional funds to the project,
a retrofit of the northern facade could be competitively bid to achieve the most
competitive results. In addition, other options that could be pursued after construction is
completed include a landscaping solution (i.e., vines or a installation of a landscape
screen) or a temporary vinyl mural, as originally conceived for the blank shear wall in
the original garage design. Staff would also revisit the possibility of seeking a landscape
easement from neighboring Longs Drugs to pursue tree planting along this elevation.
Implementation of any of these options would come at the end of the Overaa contract.
In the meantime, with the structure of a design -build contract, and the reduced risk to
the C1C for the remaining garage construction, CIC staff and its construction
management team recommend reducing the construction contingency for the garage
and adding back into the scope of work for the project items that were previously
eliminated during the value - engineering process but considered to be of high value to
the Oak Street facade design. CIC staff recommends the C1C select one of the following
scope - addition alternatives:
1) Alternative #1. Add the complete, originally designed blade sign and marquee
canopy back into the scope of work for $128,000, reducing the contingency to
$154,000, or to approximately three percent of the remaining contract work
(Attachments 7 and 8).
2) Alternative #2. Add the complete, originally designed blade sign without the
original marquee canopy; with limited signage underneath the blade sign; four
canopies over the pedestrian entryways into the garage; and the relief panels
over the entrances into the stair towers back into the scope of work for $124,000.
This option would reduce the contingency to $1 57,000, or to approximately three
percent of the remaining contract work (Attachments 7 and 8).
Attachment 9 depicts the originally designed parking garage before value - engineering,
including the complete blade sign, marquee canopy, awnings, and relief panels. The
design architect for the project, Komorous -Towey Architects (KTA), recommends
selecting Alternative #1 because of the significance of both these design elements.
Honorable Chair and Members
of the Community Improvement Commission
April 17, 2007
Page 4
Additionally, it would be much easier to add back the other two elements in Alternative
#2 (i.e., four individual canopies or relief panels) at a future date than adding back the
marquee canopy at a later date. Also, the marquee canopy provides down -- lighting that
will help illuminate the vehicular entrance to the garage, which increases nighttime
pedestrian and vehicular safety and drivers' ability to identify the entrance to the garage.
A full list of the items eliminated from the garage scope of work during the value -
engineering process is provided in Attachment 10.
Cineplex
The Cineplex is under construction. Work includes site work demolition and grading,
installation of drilled piers along the eastern foundations, and ongoing foundation
excavation.
BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT
There are no proposed changes to the CIC's total overall budget for the Alameda
Theater, Cineplex, and Parking Garage project. CIC staff does, however, recommend
reducing its garage contingency by adding either Alternative #1 or Alternative #2 into
the scope of work for the construction of the garage.
MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
Alameda Downtown Vision Plan 2000 -- Action B1.0 — Renovate /restore Alameda
Theater.
Alameda Downtown Vision Plan 2000 — Action F4 — Consider building a parking
structure as part of a Downtown parking management program.
RECOMMENDATION
Add either Alternative #1 or Alternative #2 (as described above) into the scope of work
of the construction contract with Overaa for the parking garage and reduce the garage
contingency budget accordingly.
Resp tf : u • ed,
A. Little
Development Services Director
Honorable Chair and Members
of the Community Improvement Commission
April 17, 2007
Page 5
By: Dorene E. Soto
Manager, Business Development Division
SL\
By: Jennifer Ott
Redevelopment Manager
DK /LALIDES /JO:dc
Attachments:
1. Monthly Progress Status Report for the Alameda Theater Rehabilitation and
Restoration
2. Monthly Progress Status Report for Civic Center Parking Garage
3. Alameda Theater Project Schedule Update
4. Pipe Rail and Cast-In-Place Option for Northern Elevation
5. Raised Concrete Option for Northern Elevation
6. Metal Panel Option for Northern Elevation
7. Recommended Alternatives for Parking Garage Scope Additions
8. Parking Garage Contingency Reduction Proposals
9. Civic Center Parking Garage Original Western Elevation Approved by City
Council on March 21, 2006
10.Value- Engineering Decision Matrix for Civic Center Parking Garage
Monthly Progress Status Report
Alameda Theater Rehabilitation and Restoration
City of Alameda
April 17, 2007 CIC Meeting
BUDGET :
CONTRACT, '. y
Construction $8,800,000
Contingency $1,106,040
Original Contract Amount $8,800,000
Previous Changes ($9,113)
,Executed Change Orders
Add Main Disconnect Switch $7,334
Total Contract Budget $9,906,040
Subtotal Executed Changes $7,334
Pending Change Orders (Cost Estimates)
Seismic Clarifications $60,000
Unforeseen Hazardous Materials Abatement $17,000
Alleyway Sewer Cleanouts /Street Grinding $15,000
Value- Engineering Enclosure $35,000
AP &T Electrical Changes $30,000
Revise Electrical Room $35,000
Re- Routing Power to Viva Mexico $19,765
Temporary Alleyway Trash Enclosure $2,500
PAYMENTS
Previously Paid $2,013,409
Payment this Period $738,777
Total Payment To Date $2,752,186
Subtotal Pending Change Orders $214,265
Total Changes $212,486
Estimated Revised Contract Amount $9,012,486
Remaining Contingency $893,554
CONTRACT STATUS,
PICTURES'
co
o
co
Notice to Proceed:
1 O- Nov -06
Contract Calendar Days:
410
• Time Extension's:
,
- - .,,0- �. =-
- ;�:.- �='-
,,—_ 6 . ,- ' -'..*: :''
_ Scheduled Completion;
:15- Dec -o7+
= :Time.: Used::
: Time :Remainin
.. 271:
Percent Time Expended . ■
: r;34 %
0
Base Bid Amount:
$8,800,000
Amount Paid to Date:
$2,752,186
Percent
ce t Cost Expended:
31 °/o
Change Orders to Date:
($1,779)
$214,265
Pending Change Orders:
Project Cost:
$9,012,486
Percent Contingency Expended:
19%
MILESTONES . ' . . :... _
Milestone
Baseline
Forecast
Approved
11/10/2006
Notice to Proceed
11/10/2006
11/10/2006
Substantial Completion
11/10/2007
11/1 0/2007
Final Completion
12/15/2007
12/15/2007
PROJECT. STATUS
Work Completed
This Period:
This Period:
Work Projects
Next Period:
Status:
• Continued with Electrical, Mechanical and Plumbing Rough -In
• Completed Scaffolding Auditorium
• Commenced Fire Sprinkler, and Waterproofing Work
• Completed Demolition of Mechanical Room
• Completed Re- routing of Viva Mexico Electrical
• Commenced Decorative Painting Preparation
• Commenced Marquee /Blade Sign Work
• Commenced Plaster Repair
• Commenced on West -side Walkway
• Install Electrical Switch Gear
• Commence Alleyway Improvements
• Scaffold Lobby
• Poured Front Columns
• Project is on Schedule
Special CIC
Attachment 1 to
Agenda Item #3 -A
04-17-07
Monthly Progress Status Report
Civic Center Parking Garage
City of Alameda
April 17, 2007 CIC Meeting
c.
i 'r''
UDGET .. �r::'
, ....
— ir - -r
CONTRACT s,`. ,:;� .,
Construction $8,499,889
• Contingency $415,000_
Original Contract Amount $9,104,000
Value Engineering (Credit) 0604,111)
Revised Contract Amount $8,499,889
Previous Changes ($11,027)
Executed Change Orders
Long's Driveway Out -of- Sequence $12,390_
Total Contract Budget $8,914,889
Subtotal Executed Changes $12,390
Pending Change Orders (Cost Estimates)
Dewatering of Site Groundwater Budget $60,000
Groundwater Contamination Budget $70,000
Potential Site Work Budget $17,000
Deletion of Handheld Device (Credit) ($15,000}
PAYMENTS
Previously Paid $1,743,366
Payment this Period $962,304
Subtotal Pending Change Orders $132,000
Total Changes $133,363
Estimated Revised Contact Amount $8,633,252
Remaining Contingency $281,637
Total Payment To Date $2,705,670
CONTRACT STATUS =
PICTURE - --
�
Notice. to Proceed:
1 O- Nov -06
�, • k(
- -.A, ,r r '.
v �. °� . , ,- ;�.: _ _
•s� •_.. — — _ .i • ,�i7. �.a;NiiEi�L�7 f`�+.,t .v — i(_. -.
`�tr� •r 5R'.i iJ -i9 Y'MSll��i:'Y';E ,l ]� !� � ti "1��.
_. _,..._ �''{ �; .;:..
:: _ . y -
- . - ,,
: . .
te +.,.
,.: , • • -
- . •
1: ! � .`
r •• !.. --, �
j' ,':• � -,- _
m�. , : ,,,, i
:
:,, - 1
Contract Calendar Da y s
Time Extensions:
Scheduled. `Com letion:
29_ Jan- B
• f' i •
M
�me Used.
r-
��..
139
Time Remaining:
°306
Percent- Ti me Expende f '
` : == : %
toi
0
0
Base Bid Amount:
$9,104,000
Amount Paid to Date:
$2,705,670
Per c en t Cost Expended:
30%
Value- Eng■ neerf n ■
($604,111 )
Previous /Pending Change Orders
$133,363
Project Cost:
$8,633,252
Percent Contingency Expended:
32%
MILESTONES
Milestone
_ Baseline
Forecast
Approved
11/10/2006
Notice to Proceed
11/10/2006
11/10/2006
Substantial Completion
12/15/2007
12/15/2007
Final Completion
1/29/2008
1/29/2008
Work Completed
This Period:
Work Projects
Next Period:
• Formed Columns and Walls
• Completed Three Vertical Pours
• Installed Sumps and Drains
• Installed CMU at Ramp
• Started Backfill at Ramp
• Form and Install Rebar for Slab -on Grade
• Pour Slab -on -Grade
Status: • Project is on Schedule
Special C1C
Attachment 2 to
Agenda Item #3 -A
04-17-07
Special CIC
Attachment 3 to
Agenda Item #3 -A
04 -17 -07
Status as of
April 17, 2007
l _
L.
� }ray
, Ji
g',—
.r,; w-'•�F
lr•
�.s;•�:.;Sc.
', >.`• ": •= t;:;.• }
Y Yyti
rigstt
R $
. ep-ri
��
;.
%'=y"'-- ''••f`•
S n
J+�- rf.•, *•P
�..� r
TF -=---
// ice:
� h
+;+
—
=ca::r
� :f }s`•`
•
,. s.
:•"_ ~
��17'r'
4—+
:.
0 W
2, �_
A.
yYt•
mss .,-
'..7
- ~ii =
'
t. ' ,1!
slr „-s_r:`: : _`•�
\ -_�.
. _) :•:
;:ice'
..wow
;7
rT` "' -4-�' �
T
s!
x�.xys
.,..
::S_r
•,� Ja=..
-��
~
\rl - F
°
Y rr
y' 1' •v'fx','j+s. x
•
i
���
Via-- -t • .� r:t_
`�`, #•:.i�,:
" 0
- -
i� % a
•r"
t
-•t rt'�'
= -_•
- . `,
4�
MOD
'ytn �•
........, �-
mp
o
w•.; �; ,, •: :.:fir
,}
'i:A..I:
t :�
— /.,^fi_4�:
al_.1ti
, . •_fir_ _. •�_
_�- :'•^a�, f'--�
>� -�an�
r
yr�f'w'
4i •.
. I- f,,:
cif - ��w`
om,.. t
Y v'” r
��
_
L
'�.�' t.
1
4+�_"iw L,r
�:e'i: � %r
���. �-
��r
14 IS,
A.
Y
ti ''.1.
:i�,� 'fi • r��!�
�:�.�• Una
'yl.•irY` ?4''�
�'
.
- .
i/
1:, i i ce`•'
��5' ~ �x
tom- rn
4'Ri
1
..,�• ,.
^; , ,.
�'L., � •l
kix...M1lwf.!' :r:t
..fir ���`�
'i�.�••'•`"��:: "•'
;i� ,' -'•;
.�� �
r I
.
�
.' .
ice..
0 C
on. L11
0 Fc
H W
?=
= F—
W
Z
<
CC _
<�
Q. C� r
Liii
J
C
W
Z
Z
0
Special CIC
Attachment 3 to
Agenda Item #3 -A
04 -17 -07
LO-11-170
v-c# Luau pue
o; i7 ;uauugoemi
313 Ie!Oeds
LILL.
1
L MOI- SaO11OI u L
S3W3H3S
NOI1d11313
H1NON
e!Wvple3 'epewei jo AID
pails )lep pue anueny le uaa
30vIv3 ONIAlted
N31N3O OIAIO
REVISIONS
8
5IXT1-4 FLOOR
TA1RD FLOOR
.9
SECOND FLOOR
0
LL
11 II 11 11 II II 11
11 n
I1
X1111111
J
0
U
3
J
N
0
LU
0
0
T
■
•
•
L0-11-170
v-£# we;i epue6y
s }uatuyau ; ;b
310 lu!OadS
S3W3HOS
NOIIVA313
H11ION
elwomeo `epewely '4!O
lams )1eo pue anuand'aqua°
2OV VJ ONI)1 JVd
N31■30 OIAIO
REVISIONS
ff
A
6
0
SIXTH FLOOR
FIFTH FLOOR
SECOND FLOOR
Jlll 11 11 1111 11
1111 1 111 11
EEEEE!
4B)
TALL CONCRETE CRASNWUALLS
at)
LO- 1 -7D
v-c# "a ;l upueGb
;uauwgoepy
313 le!Oadg
o
SIXTI -I FLOOR
F IFTI -1 FLOOR
FOURTI 4 FLOOR
THIRD FLOOR
0
0
1
u_
11 11 1111 11 II 11
11 11 lr 11 11 11 11
a�+
S3113H3S
NOIiVA313
Hl?JQN
elwo !Ieo `epaweld Jo Apo
leallS )1e0 Pue anuenv lei ;uap
co
z
0
w
IX
.
I JOB NO= 2530 I
(0
(1)
Ili
1
:131N30 01A10
o
SIXTI -I FLOOR
F IFTI -1 FLOOR
FOURTI 4 FLOOR
THIRD FLOOR
0
0
1
u_
11 11 1111 11 II 11
11 11 lr 11 11 11 11
a�+
Recommended Alternatives for Parking Garage Scope Additions
Item Amount
Alternative #1
Blade Sign $59,878
Marquee Canopy $68,092
TOTAL $127,970
Alternative #2
Blade Sign $59,878
Signage Under Blade Sign Budget (1) $20,000
Four Oak Street Canopies $25,601
Relief Panels $18,888
TOTAL $124,367
(1) This is a budget for a revised, limited signage design beneath the blade sign.
KTA would design the signage to meet the budget.
Special CIC
Attachment 7 to
Agenda Item #3.A
04-17-07
Parking Garage Contingency Reduction Proposals
Item Alternative #1 Alternative #2
Remaining Contract Work (1) $5,794,219 $5,794,219
Remaining Contingency $281,637 $281,637
Scope Additions $127,970 $124,367
Remaining Contingency after Scope Additions $153,667 $157,270
Contingency as a % of Remaining Contract Work 3% 3%
(1) Remaining Contract Work equals total contract amount Tess payments made to date.
,
Special CIC
Attachment 8 to
Agenda Item #3 -A
04- 17 -07
Atftttig
".•
•
Special CIC
Attachment 9 to
Agenda Item #3-A
04-17-07
Value- Engineering Decision Matrix for Civic Center Parking Garage
Execution of a new
a)
c
0
z
^
a
0
7)
)) 03
v-
o tv
L 06
T2•
-o L
0}
ni
0_ C
CD C
RS U a) a
73
a = c
o p =
U ° c
CO co
Et. 0 _ eL
CC To 0
r
Cost inflation
a)
C
0
z
0
0
0
C (1)
[ts • E
.�
— c -0 . a)
E a) 0) a
o w cz
. a) o
C c "o
4
.L3 a) >,-c
.c a
c
>C •
+ ❑ -a •
0 v a
❑ .a cri
C : 0 C
❑ o r❑n � o
_
E c -0 c
L ❑
a) ca c cz 07 0 2
a) •c c as
c .5 - •c CO C)
°� > .-C
0
C
Iii a9 a -a 0 E
0
Cost inflation
Date Passed
a)
c
0
z
0
0
0
N
V1
E ):
E
I)
ti�
o
To o
❑ •
a cz
c o
•N
.— -c
c CI)
0)
U
a)
0.) a
0 i
co
Cost inflation
Date Passed
a)
C
0
z
^
a
0
0
N
"mullions" shown on
and North elevation
• Special CIC
Attachment 10 to
Agenda Item #3 -A
04- 17 -07
Attachment 10
cc
5 CO
c o
o
C
2 x
vu
Early September
a)
0
z
co
Co
C c o
0)
4-=
a)
.0
c-7)
0
0 U
C -0
2 o
co
L
0
a)
u_
a)
0
z
0
ft
ID ID C)
C
o
N C = -a
I
v
° 0
U
cu V3 7 c
a5
a) ID
-0
t a) C
o ❑ a� c
zz IP
❑ 0 (/) C
° ❑
.- C
if/ o
0
0
a) a) o
j u) CC > [�
a) c7)
o
aQ J
c0
Date Passed
a)
0
z
0
Lc)
te-
s =c
v Q
a)
❑ � D
0 -0 c�
o m
cts
❑ a) a)
0 U
ro
v
I-0
ID-
❑ <
c Ess
0
ID
ID
ro
c
o �
o C a)
:E
o C
N
❑ ro
C
a)
0_ -CT)
derail 2/SK -3 for
Q.
E
ID
ID
ID
a
V)
c
co
0
Cost inflation
a)
❑
z
a
a
Sri
co
Attachment 10
Value- Engineering Decision Matrix for Civic Center Parking Garage
Cost inflation
Early September
0
z
0
0
C)
0)
C
a) .(0
CD o
0
s 4-
}'
C
0 92
=0
Date Passed
0
0
z
0
0
N
_c .w
}' r C
0)
o ° E
o 5
v 0 0 v
w N
E
E
0 n0
E L C
o
C .E
o c�
.� C.? 0 L)
N
.0 L
0 tea))
U
a Q
Revise the
0
Date Passed
0)
C
0
z
0s
N
°cs
C �
O C
J
o
v 6
a) .0
Es
0 0)
0
0
0 ,—
0)
❑ Q
Date Passed
0
0
z
00
0
c0
r
Q
co
cts
0
0 0]
L 0
0)En
cz
cD L
0 -0
- C
0
W •L
TD
.a
❑
Attachment 10
w
0
L
co
0
a)
.1
CU
a
,..
2
w
0
0
3
0
416:
•.,-
._
cli
2
c
.0
•(0
0
a)
O
0)
c
0i
w
c
0)
c
W
Oi
To
C
a7 C
' a 0 IP
77 c'
Iti)
CI) }'
8
L
c 0
a)�
O C
2 ct5
.c
Q
O
2
v
0
z
a
0
N
Co. 2
Q ❑
a)
v °6
v=
• CTS
N
0
(1)
T-
x)
2 1
45.
: C )
a'' c
a 0
= C "0
a) a)v
co
y _▪ U
TD '0
❑ o .c
co
T
Metal stair would be
E
y -0
w-- 4--+
• aT
a
0 c
0
> 0.3
_0 v
L co
•5 r
cr
L]
7L
Q
.0
2
c
0
z
C)
CA
te
0
a)
0
C
TD
a)
00
L
ru
To
v
E
TD T
CI 06
1-
T
O
gN
. C
v
c�
as m
v co
a o
E N • _C
E v
U) >
(0
0)
a
7
E
CD
L
N
0
N
(0
T
✓ -0
s C
- o
on!
N
(0 -C 0
✓ Cd 8.
5
v • r 0
v -c
o - 0
a 2 TD
.ao,o
O v c
c v
0 - o
U
d' v v
W _0 co
a)a_C
Ty C i--'
❑ < id
Lo
r
0 0 0
CL3 v
0 7 2 . C7 C)
o co
lC >.°�
U Z3 .0 .)
(0 .N 0 0 _a) 0
C 0 U }' -
.0) o
moo• (2 (0a
, C ; L 3 cn
a
- •N
Add alternate cost
v
E
C
Q
CO
N.
Co.
C
In
EA-
EA--6 0
m-
u)
.0 00)
C 0)
0 0
u)
co
v
ET p)
L
(0 _v
2 v
c ❑
.0)
a) cti
c Q
.I '_
v 'a
T
ui
a
E
0)
.0
0)
(0
0
ti
v
0)
costs related to
Attachment 10
a)
co
co
0
a)
c
.i.
cu
a
L
a)
c
a)
0
0
is
a
8
•>c
,_
ICI
2
r0
0
a)
D
0)
._
a)
a)
5
W
ai
3
To
-a
D
E 7, t 5c
U -a u)
•-0o-
C 0 0
v) 4_ 4-
• _ •
c c
o C 0 La
L
D) CL
•N
Add alternate cost
a)
E
c
Q
N
0)
0
co
co
to-
a
00
N
OD
0 0 j
0 -0—
C) U
a)
C •C a)
_0)
a)
c
c5 o
a c CO
0
x=
0 0 as
�
�0
L a)
to 8 ❑
ELV
0 o ri
c
c
0 U Q
N.
r
costs related to
requirements.
a)
cz
0)
.0
s
t
0
o
u) 0-
-a a
E co
C
0
cts U
; C
.c_ c,„
o=
-C C =
°
ai 0
E CCS 13
2 o
c a) Q
Q�
a)
in
co
op
to-
a
00
0
as 1.5. o CZ
DOI 4= TIZI . 4117$ g
ZI
CO Q
c a E �'
0 i <
0 00_ -o
•U(/)O1)
crs al oa)°as
CT
-Pi CO N _c
a) ° cti C .�.-
� _a .u) •C
U •C 0 L
-0
0 0 o c o_
E[ E co cn
00
c c D -o o c r o 0
.
L _o to Q) D 7
C C a)
> ( a) CV
.0 a] 0 5 70
C o 8 0 .0 U
— — a)
0) _ L C
00
co
(0
in-
6
00
te-
as
cts 75
2 U
C a�
cti o cm
0-
U o N Tz
a _ 0 as
LE E
Tu C L,d
CD •L
a
a o
CT0.
❑ a) c)
a
r
0
0
U
cz
(0
.0)
E
0)
0
c
0)
L
L
75 Tizs
a
-a-) •c
of sequence with
>
2
C
z
00
a
r
7) 0
U) -
U
a) 0 005
c0 cts
a) Ifj 't
al L u)
U. Al L
(a
c 0 2
0 , a
u) 0 r
CZ a) CZ
TD
C
o
CZ a .§
`�• L a)
�
CD . U
a)
T1)
❑ o ()
N
Attachment 10
Add alternate cost
as
2
W
co
0
0
0
0
[13
a)
Q
o
o �
Fes 5
N
C
as
o
15 co
a)
as 06
❑,--
N
a) cr
0 "0 -
U •5 0
c C.S.
a3 !
ctiu
0 v U
0
c
Z
`(0
0
J
Date Passed
c
Z
0
0
(0
te-
ca
cn
IT) 713
C
(1)
Q. U
N Cti
C =
ij
cts
cri _c
CI]
C
CD a
W a)
❑ CC
N
0
C
0)
0
J
1
0
1-
as
0
v
C
c
as
a)
O)
07
C
.co
U
2 a
a) -0
u) 0
S
C] o
0_
a) 45
o a)
0 :t:
C 0
o U
U 0 ci
i 5
Cl)
v 2
a3 � C
7,,0
C
ti
U c
o
E E c
}c. u o
' o
0 0-
o c o
- U a)
0 0 U
a, Ef
E co
ca o v
co a) TES
U D
•L U 0
•L
C)