I went to the City Council meeting on Monday, November 21 at 7:30 p.m. in Piedmont’s City Hall.  The City Council meets every first and third Monday of each month at 7:30 p.m.  The members of the Council and various citizens meet to discuss and solve prominent issues within the community.

    Throughout the course of this meeting six major issues were discussed, the first of which was a report by the Chief of Police regarding recent crimes in the neighborhood.  The Chief of Police highlight a recent series of break-ins, robberies, a pig’s head being left at the doorstep of a resident, and remarks about deportations written in chalk on Linda Avenue. In response to the series of break-ins and robberies the Chief of Police assured the citizens that they review their patrolling patterns and devise a cohesive plan.  After a short investigation, the police discovered that the pig’s head was meant for another former resident as a joke.  The police have no further leads on the remarks written on Linda Avenue, though this leaves troubling thoughts in my mind as a resident of Piedmont living on Linda Avenue.  It deeply troubles me that someone living in what I viewed as an inclusive environment could justify in any way using language regarding deportation.  Even more troubling is its proximity to Beach Elementary School where the language used could show younger children that what was said was socially acceptable.

    The second issue discussed was the consideration of a fee waiver request for the residence of 42 Craig Avenue.  The residents received a design review which lasted for twelve months, after which it would become void.  After twelve months and the review becoming void the claim was submitted by the residents in addition to a request for the payment required for the submission to be waived.  The City Council ruled that the second fee would not be waived as the work done to clear the waiver needed to be paid for even though the work had already been done in the past.

    The next issue discussed was the elimination of the parking restriction of the 700 block of Highland Avenue from 6 p.m. to 8 a.m.  This restriction was initially put into place in 1971 due to complaints of young people convening there and creating noise.  Removal of this restriction would in turn create sixteen parking spots.  The daughter of a current resident spoke out against the removal of this restriction stating that in the short term its removal could increase noise and crime, while in the long term home value could drop.  The City Council ruled to accept the motion, removing the parking restriction from the 700 block of Highland Avenue.

    The fourth topic discussed during the meeting was whether to refute or remain impartial on the subject of Alameda County Waste Management’s new 2016 ordinance that would ban the use of plastic bags in Piedmont stores and restaurants.  Choosing no action would only impact McMullins and Ace Hardware, forcing them to remove plastic bags and charge ten cents for paper bags in an attempt to push for reusable bags.  Piedmont High student Keith Sibal spoke in favor of choosing no action, drawing on his knowledge of the dangers of plastic bags pooling into the environment stating that the small cost of their removal will be outweighed by the protection afforded the environment.  The City Council ruled in favor of no action.

    The subsequent topic was authorizing the implementation of a community choice aggregation program.  The City Council approved the aggregation program, stating that it would give the people of Piedmont more choices and freedom to choose.

   The final topic covered during the City Council meeting was considering the agreements with Computer Courage for IT support services and Client First Technology Consulting for IT management services.  This was primarily to discuss the proper compensation for the work the two companies have done and will do in the future.  The City Council approved a budgeted compensation for the two companies.

   With the scheduled topics coming to a close and the City Council meeting being adjourned I had the opportunity to interview Jen Cavanaugh.  Ms. Cavanaugh stated that her presence was due to a letter she helped write from the School Board revolving around inclusion in schools that the City Council read.  She then explained that her next step is to meet with the School Board in an attempt to get real change going, stating, “There’s talk and then there’s action”.

Jacob Watson, Piedmont High School Senior

Editors Note: Opinions expressed are those of the author.

   On November 14, 2016, I attended the Planning Commission meeting.  The Commission meets on the second Monday of every month at 5:00 p.m. to make decisions regarding proposed modifications or construction to homes and buildings in Piedmont. Some of the major issues that were brought up at the meeting were modifications that people wanted to make to their homes requiring the Planning Commission’s approval. The first project brought up was at 26 Littlewood Drive, where they wanted to add a second unit, enlarge a deck, and make modifications to windows and doors at the back and left side of the house. This was approved by the Planning Commission.

The second modification that was brought to the meeting for approval was at 108 Moraga Avenue.* The project was the most controversial one that was brought up because these homeowners wanted to build a second story onto their home, however it would obstruct the views of the neighboring home. The owners that wanted to build the second story did as much as they could to compromise with their neighbors by making several changes to their design as to not block their neighbors views. The project was approved because the homeowners did so much to try to compromise and in reality the only windows where views would be obstructed were two windows in a hallway and one in a bathroom. The homeowners, the architect, and neighbor all spoke on this topic. The homeowners explained the project and their reasoning for it. The architect was able to provide more specific details about the project and answer questions about the design. After the owners spoke and all of the questions were answered, the neighbor spoke and explained her concerns about the project. After this was done, the Planning Commission discussed what they thought of the project, keeping both sides of the argument in mind and came to the decision to approve the project.

    During the dinner break between 6:30 and 7:00 p.m., I interviewed Paki Muthig. Muthig attended the meeting seeking approval from the Planning Commission for the addition of a basement to his home at 306 Magnolia Avenue. He is both the owner of the home as well as the architect. Muthig said that if the project is approved, he will move forward with the project but if it is not he will “address the reason and come back.” After presenting his proposal to the Planning Commission they discussed his project and reviewed his designs and approved his project.

Josh Wood, Piedmont High School Senior

Editors Note: Opinions expressed are those of the author. * The 108 Moraga Avenue Planning Commission decision was appealed by a neighbor at the Dec. 19, 2016 City Council meeting.  The appeal was denied by the Council thus allowing the renovation to the house as approved by the Planning Commission.  The Council staff report can be read here. 

On November 14th, 2016, I attended the Piedmont Planning Commission from 5:00 to 7:30 p.m.  The Planning Commission meets once monthly (the second Monday of each month) to discuss and approve the modification and construction of houses and buildings in Piedmont.

During tonight’s meeting, the Commission discussed a variety of proposed modifications and projects, and approved many.  The meeting opened, however, with a Public Forum, during which I (being a newcomer to the realm of local government meetings) was able to “Speak Out” in the form of a question.  I asked the officials just how an application gets to their desk this evening- the steps each project from tonight’s meeting had to go through prior to the fateful moment of approval or rejection. I followed up with a question and comment about variances. I learned more in the first five minutes of the commission than I could have imagined. Additionally, I was comforted by the use of Robert’s Rules of Order, with which I have been familiar due to ASB’s [Associated Student Body] annual Constitutional Convention held in the City Council Chambers. Following the Public Forum, the Commission approved the Minutes of last month’s meeting and also approved the Consent Calendar.

The meeting agenda then moved on to the main discussions, the first of which regarded a home on Littlewood Drive. Mr. Mohazab, the architect of the project spoke first, describing the addition of a second unit and small deck and window modifications as “benign”. After the homeowners spoke, the Commission Chair brought up an anonymous letter that had been sent by a presumed neighbor, complaining about the project impeding parking availability. The letter was soon discarded and the project approved; however, when it was made clear that a construction project down the street was causing temporary parking issues and anonymous letters are not to be considered as seriously as those with names on them. I agreed with the decision to approve the Littlewood Drive project, especially considering that the homeowner plans to retire soon and will no longer own his corporate car.

The next application, 108 Moraga Drive*, was slightly more tricky. This family had virtually nowhere to expand but up. They only had five feet forward of potential room, not enough for a bedroom, and were already pushing backward toward the neighbor’s yard. Erica Benson, a neighbor upset with the proposed project, spoke on behalf of her husband against the homeowners. While there was a slight discussion of adding a basement bottom floor- mostly proposed by the upset neighbor- this was not feasible as a bedroom living space. The homeowners had been to the Commission once before in July, and had made drastic improvements to their plan in an attempt to comply with the needs of their neighbors. One official asked the architect if she was familiar with the fact that Piedmont prefers smaller homes. This was quickly put to rest when it was made clear that 108 Moraga Drive was by no means a mansion, still below the national average size of new homes. While Ms. Benson expressed understandable concerns for her view and the proximity of 108 Moraga to her home, she was unwilling to compromise and the project was approved considering the impressive modifications made since July to address neighbor concerns.

Following this application was a very simple one- 1106 Warfield Avenue. First, a neighbor, the homeowner of 1102 Warfield spoke in favor of the project, elegantly portraying the supportive neighborhood of their street and her full and utter backing of the application. While the homeowner/contractor/designer did not have anything specific to say, he answered a simple question concerning an issue already addressed. The project was quickly approved.

During a quick break, I interviewed the next man on the agenda- Mr. Paki Muthig, a father of two young children currently living just outside of Piedmont on Trestle Glen. An “architect, as well as the owner of the home”, Mr. Muthig had already presented to the commission and had begun some work on his soon to be home, 306 Magnolia Avenue. This time, he “added modifications to the basement and it’s access to the backyard”. While the construction of the project had already begin on site, the specifics of the basement exterior door were waiting to be finalized, pending tonight’s decision. From his description of the project to me prior to its discussion, it seemed relatively simple. The Commission, however, experienced in the art of potential concerns regarding urban planning, voiced some concerns.  Mr. Muthig asked for two variances. After heavy discussion of parking availability (which I, quite frankly, found to be a little too pervasive) the project was approved. I was quite relieved and excited for Mr. Muthig; his young kids were planning on attending my former elementary school and I could tell how hard this architect had worked on his planning.  I also had never noticed a lack of parking on Magnolia (excluding Friday night football games, of course).

Overall, the meeting offered me a unique glimpse into the world of urban planning and government meetings. I feel excited to experience government on a local level, and I look forward to exploring law and government more in civics class and in college.

Natalie Stollman, Piedmont High School Senior

Editors Note: Opinions expressed are those of the author. * An appeal of the Commission’s action on 108 Moraga Avenue was appealed to the City Council and the appeal was denied at the Dec. 19, 2016 meeting.  The Council staff report can be read here. 

Volunteers needed for two committees to oversee H1 School Bond expenditures. 

H1 Citizen’s Oversight Committee

[Members to be chosen by the Board of Education]

The Piedmont Unified School District is soliciting applications for the H1 Facilities Bond Citizens’ Oversight Committee (COC).

Measure H1 was passed under the rules of Proposition 39, which directs that the Board of Trustees appoint an independent Citizens Oversight Committee (COC) to monitor bond expenditures. As provided in Education Code Section 15278, the role for the COC is to provide oversight of the District’s use of Measure H1 Bond proceeds and report to the Board and public on their findings.  Specifically, the COC will ensure that all funds are used in support of the projects included in the bond measure and not for unspecified projects or general operating expenses.

The 12-member COC is comprised of individuals from local businesses, senior citizen organizations, organizations involved with schools, a tax payers’ organization, legal, technical, and financial advisors, as well as involved parents of children residing in the Piedmont Unified School District. The COC will meet quarterly at a minimum. Members must be able to serve up to a two-year term.

The COC will also review the annual independent audits that are required of general obligation bond funds, make physical inspections of bond program projects during construction, review related District documents to gather information for the preparation of reports to the community, and report to the Board of Education annually on the activities of the committee.

Application Process:

A Citizen’s Oversight Committee (COC) application may be submitted for consideration using the following link: https://goo.gl/forms/9uTQnDWST465THCE2

The President and Vice President of the PUSD Board of Education will select participants from the pool of applicants.

Applications are due by January 18, 2017.

The application process and selection timeline will be announced at the December 8^th Budget Advisory Committee Meeting, the December 14^th and January 11^th Board of Education meetings, and the school bulletins. It will also be posted on the District Website.

The first COC meeting will occur in early February of 2017.

If the public has any questions, please contact Randall Booker, Superintendent at 510.594.2614 or rbooker@piedmont.k12.ca.us

~~~~~~~~~~~~

H1 Facilities Steering Committee

[This second committee will be chosen by the Superintendent and Director of Facilities. ]

On November 8, 2016, the voters approved Measure H1, authorizing the District to sell up to $66 million in school construction bonds.  The District will use bond funds to modernize and improve school facilities to better support our education programs.  We are extremely grateful for community support for these vital improvements, and we’re looking forward to getting started.

As part of the H1 Bond planning, we are developing two committees to assist in this work:  H1 Facilities Steering Committee and the H1 Citizen’s Oversight Committee.  While we are posting this information on the PUSD Website and the Piedmont Portal, as well as emailing all families in the District, I wanted to make sure that you had this information (see below) about how community members could submit an application.

Lastly, I want to direct you to the Board packet from December 14, 2016.  Under item VIII.A. H1 Facilities Bond – Next Steps, the District provided the Board with a timeline for work related to the H1 Bond, including how the public can submit an application to either the H1 Citizen’s Oversight Committee or the H1 Facilities Steering Committee.  I’ve provided the link below for the corresponding memo to the Board regarding H1 Facilities Bond – Next Steps.

https://agendaonline.net/public/Meeting/Attachments/DisplayAttachment.aspx?AttachmentID=510549&IsArchive=0

By clicking on this link, it will ask you to download a pdf file.  This file is the memo to the Board.  You can also access this memo by visiting the Board Agenda page at:

https://agendaonline.net/public/Meeting.aspx?AgencyID=1241&MeetingID=39841&AgencyTypeID=1&IsArchived=False

Please let me know if you have any questions.

 Sincerely,

Randall Booker, Superintendent Piedmont Unified School District

Student report on a City Hall gathering on the evening of the Tree Lighting ceremony. Although the Park Commission had cancelled its December meeting, Commissioners were encouraged to attend the December 7 Tree Lighting ceremony at the Community Hall. (read November 2 minutes of the Park Commission.)

On Wednesday, December 7, I attended the Park Commission gathering at the Piedmont City Hall. This commission meets once a month, but typically takes a recess during the Holiday season, so this meeting manifested itself as a casual event that involved people from all City Commissions and City Council members. I took this time to socialize with people who both held leadership positions in government and others who were simply curious about the meeting.

A major topic of conversation was the renovation of Hampton Park. This ongoing project was celebrated, as it is both on schedule and on budget. In response to the rain influencing construction of this project, I was informed that the new drainage system was working well avoiding any holdups for the project.

The recently completed Linda Triangle was another achievement spoken of at this event. People expressed their excitement for this addition to Piedmont, while some hoped to see some improvement, such as lighting fixes.

Upon arriving at the event, I spoke to a number of people, including the Mayor, the Vice Mayor, and the Public Works Director. Mayor Jeff Weiler said that he is particularly pushing for lighting improvement on the Oakland Avenue Bridge, in order to “make it safer for pedestrians.” Speaking from personal experience, it can often be unnerving walking on the Oakland Avenue Bridge, especially when people are driving fast and come right up next to the walkway, so I feel that lights would be a much needed addition.

Students spoke about our concern on the drought, but Mr. Weiler assured students that the California drought was not currently posing much of an issue to Piedmont parks, as the recent rains and the water used for firefighter training help keep the greens watered.

Halley Wolin, Piedmont High School Senior

Editors Note: Opinions expressed are those of the author. 

I attended the Recreation Commission meeting on Wednesday, November 16, 2016 at 7:30 p.m. in the Piedmont City Hall. The commissioners meet every third Wednesday of the month to discuss current projects in the city regarding recreational activities, parks and sports.

Chair Betsy Smegal Anderson began the meeting by calling public speakers to the stand to discuss any issues or suggestions that were not on the agenda. PHS students spoke regarding a desire for Triathlons put on by the Piedmont community that would include special ed students, creating more bike lanes and making running trails in various Piedmont parks. Anderson continued with a discussion of the progress of multiple Recreation Department Projects throughout Piedmont. The first project discussed was the Recreation Department Tot Lot play equipment which was approved on November 7th by the City Council. Now that the contract has been approved, the play equipment is looking to be finished by late January.

Next, Recreation Director Sara Lillevand described the progress of the Hampton Park Improvement Project which is working to turn the previous baseball field into a multi-functional park and sports field. She explained that the field is taking shape now that the grading, dugout and bleachers are almost finished and is on track to be finished by mid January. A plaque is also going to be placed on the backstop of the field to memorialize Oakland Police officer John Hege who was well known and loved by the community. The remaining details for the park including the ordering and paying for different sports equipment and storage will be taken care of before the opening.

Piedmont High School student Amelia Eldridge then spoke regarding the use of real grass or turf for the new park, a controversial decision on many fields in Piedmont. Director Lillevand explained that only a small portion of the field would be artificial turf and the remainder would be kept as natural grass and that the markings on the grass would be done seasonally to fit a variety of age groups and sports.

 The next topic discussed was the update on the Recreation Department/Veterans Hall Master Plan to optimize space efficiency for programs in the two buildings. Director Lillevand explained that the spaces in the Recreation Department and Veterans Hall are being assessed based on what is currently offered and what would be most efficient and beneficial to offer in the future. There are no set plans yet, although Public Works Director Chester Nakahara will be making the selection for the renovations using surveys from the public to get a wide range of opinions.

Another issue addressed was the current Kennelly Skate Park hours of operation. The limited park hours of  8 a.m. to 4 p.m. on weekdays and 3 p.m. to dusk on weekends are looking to be expanded to increase the availability of the park. Commission members pointed out issues of noise, safety, volunteer availability for monitoring and lack of park use by the public.  Steve Roland stated that the park seems to be used mainly by children and they are in school during the open hours of the park which makes the monitoring pointless. Student Amelia Eldridge confirmed that the park being closed is not necessarily a deterrent from kids entering the park, which poses a safety threat.

Director Lillevand responded to a group of Piedmont Middle School students that explained that the skate park has limited space with dangerous conditions which makes the park less desireable, by suggesting filling in the large bowl in the park to create more space. The Commission established that the purpose of the monitor should be revisited and the City should take a look at the current safety of the park and understand what age groups would be using it.

 I believe that the Recreation Committee should advertise the need for staff help for Skate Park monitoring in order to increase the park’s hours. If the students who attend the park are able to participate in the monitoring after engaging in a short safety training, the lack of staff would no longer be an issue. It is important to make the most use out of the limited park spaces in Piedmont.

Chair Anderson then discussed the new Aquatics Coordinator Tyler Waespi who was hired last June. Tyler earned his position with his impressive interview, intensive training and working success this past summer.

Anderson went on to discuss the Aquatics Master Plan Conceptual Design which is moving forward with pre ideas given by the hired architect. The plan is to create a larger, more attractive and ultimately more functional pool that will attract more use from the public. PHS student Skyler Liu asked a question regarding where the funds for the project will be coming from. Anderson responded by explaining the $15 million budget that would most likely come from private fundraising and a bond fund. After student Kerry O’Connor suggested a new ideas for the placement of the water polo cages, Anderson confirmed that any minor design details for the project have not been decided.

The last topic addressed was a recap of the Piedmont Recreation Department Haunted House that is held in the Recreation Building every Halloween weekend. Director Lillevand proudly reported that this year there were 720 visitors on Friday and over 1,000 total throughout the weekend despite the last minute change of theme. Anderson suggested that the entry fee of $5 should be revisited considering the tremendous amount of time, planning and money that goes into the event. PHS student Nina Adarkar suggested that the Adventure Crew Club could volunteer to sell food at the end of the Haunted House to raise money for the costs of the production.

At the end of the meeting, I was honored to speak with Director Sara Lillevand about her position and reasons for participating. As the Director of the Recreation Department, Sara explained that she was here to create solutions for the community and to hear the needs and desires of the public. She believes that recreation enhances people’s lives and introduces healthy and fun opportunities into people’s lives. Lillevand described recreation as a “huge umbrella” that has a broad impact on the community, from preschool and school mates to PHS Seniors.

Addie MacCracken, Piedmont High School Senior

Editors Note: Opinions expressed are those of the author.

 I placed my laptop on the floor as quietly as possible and scooted to the front of my chair, preparing myself to speak in front of Piedmont’s Recreation Commission. “Thank you,” the Commission Chair smiled, and I quickly raised my hand. For the past 30 minutes or so, middle school boys and their moms had been rotating through the stand to bring to light the dangers and potential fixes of Piedmont’s skate park, one of the issues being the park’s minimal hours.

Stepping up to the podium, the Commissioner’s faces gazed back at me expectantly. After stating my name, I inquired, “How big an effect on the budget does the monitor at the skate park have? Is the budget for the monitor the main issue?” A commission member responded that yes, the budget has a heavy influence, as well as the lack of staffing to supply monitors, so I followed, “What is the purpose the monitor serves? Is it absolutely essential to have a monitor there at all times?”, to which another member answered that the monitor serves myriad purposes, from safety to noise control. With the issues cleared up, I smiled a thank you, and walked back to my seat.

 According to their website, Piedmont’s Recreation Commission meets monthly on the third Wednesday to “[make] regarding field allocation at city parks and [advise] the city council regarding the creation or renovation of park properties,” and they fulfilled their purpose completely at this meeting. Though the commission reviewed Hampton Field’s renovation (going well) and gave an update on the new aquatics instructor (also going well), the most heated topic was the Skate Park.

The commission patiently listened to each middle schooler and parent describe the problems with the park and followed through, questioning how they would set the hours, who could remodel a skate park, or if there was an improvement they could make without a complete remodel.

I agree with the commission that a remodel would be extremely costly, and is not pressing enough an issue that the whole community would fundraise for it. I commend Sara Lillevand, Recreation Director, for creating a compromise, ending in a decision to possibly fill the dangerous bowl with the dangerous transitions the middle schoolers and moms had exposed and by adding better street skating obstacles on it. Expanding the park’s hours without a monitor also seems like a good solution the commission could follow up on. To address the safety issue, they could clearly advertise days and hours when a monitor is or is not present, so parents and guardians can always feel safe with their children skating.

Moving to the final issue, the committee chair introduced the annual Haunted House. Due to recent violent clown incidents, the theme had to be changed from Fun House extremely last minute, but was still, as always, a success. One member reminded the group that they tend to lose revenue on the Haunted House, as they have never changed the entrance fee to $5. The commission ponders this, as they know some Piedmonters would be up in arms if they increased the longstanding fee.

Though I hadn’t planned on speaking again, I raised my hand and returned to the podium, explaining that I’m the President of the Piedmont Community Service Crew (PCSC), and reminding them that PCSC has helped the Recreation Department out before, taking over this year’s July 4th Pancake Breakfast, and collaborated with them by running a lemonade stand at the Harvest Festival.

To increase the revenue, I suggested that near the exit of the Haunted House, they set up an area where families can mingle after their exciting experience and buy food and drinks. PCSC members could run the stand, tracking money and selling food, so no staff would have to be paid, and in addition could cook food earlier in the day, as PCSC has lots of cooking experience through making and serving dinner to the homeless at Hot Meals, cooking lunch for low-income seniors at St. Mary’s Center, and more. A commission member’s face lit up, as he agreed that this could increase a few thousand dollars in revenue. Sara Lillevand noted that she’ll keep in contact with me, and affirmed the crew’s work with the pancake breakfast this summer, serving around 2,000 people.

Once the meeting adjourned, I approached Commissioner Steve Roland to ask him a few questions. When I asked him why he joined the Recreation Commission, Roland explained that he wanted to do something civic for the town. He had already been involved in sports through coaching, but he wanted to make an active difference. No specific problem motivated him to join the commission, just the general desire to improve the parks.

Now that he’s joined the committee, Roland still aims for general park improvement throughout Piedmont. Roland revealed his main strategy for taking action: time tables. Much of the commission meetings include discussions and hearing the community’s voice, but the key is to immediately create goals and action plans. Roland wants to expedite the processes to give the community what it wants without being sloppy. He adds that this is a continual progression, and learns more as each issue arises on how to better pick apart the problems and take action on them.

As a high school student learning about government in Civics, meeting an adult with a desire to be involved purely to make a positive impact on the community is inspiring, and sadly, a contrast to some of the political leaders I’ve learned about in previous history and government studies. Because families primarily move to Piedmont for the excellent education, the parents generally are passionate about their children’s Piedmont experience, leading to the inspiring political leaders who serve double time as a parent or guardian.

Nina Adarkar, Piedmont High School Senior

Editors Note: Opinions expressed are those of the author.

On the City Council agenda for December 19, 2016 is an appeal to a Planning Commission decision for expanding the house at 108 Moraga Avenue, owned by S. D. B. Talwatte and L. J. Chandler.  Story Poles with red flags have been visible for weeks on the property located opposite from the Mountain View Cemetery wall.

Appellants Charles Constanti & Erica Benson, owners of the house at 115 Ronada Avenue located behind 108 Moraga Avenue, state in their appeal:

“GROUNDS FOR APPEAL – SECTION 17.2S.2 FILING : A significant error occurred in the application of the provisions of City of Piedmont Municipal Code Chapter 17 (“Chapter 17″). Specifically, we believe that the approval of the design for an upper level addition and upper level deck at 108 Moraga Avenue involved a significant error because the decision was made, in part: • Based on misleading statements by the architect for 108 Moraga Avenue. • Without adequate discussion of the violations of Chapter 17, due to the significant adverse effect on neighboring properties’ existing views and privacy (both of which were points of complaints we made to the Planning Commission in letters dated July 2, 2016 and November 9, 2016). • Without appropriate consideration of the reasonable opportunity to reduce the height of the addition with lower level excavation because of misleading statements by the architect of 108 Moraga Avenue. 1 EXHIBIT H Agenda Report Page 55 • Without thorough consideration of the fact that increasing the size of the 1,004-square-foot house at 108 Moraga Avenue by 1,375 and thereby producing a 2,379-square-foot house is excessively large and crowded compared with the existing pattern of neighborhood development given the close proximity to 115 Ronada Avenue because of misleading statements by the architect of 108 Moraga Avenue.”

Constanti and Benson have been joined in their opposition to the Planning Commission approval by  neighbors Mark & Melissa Wilk and Kong.

“Although invited in written comments submitted by the appellants on November 9, 2016 to view the proposed project from the rear yard and inside their house at 115 Ronada Avenue, the Commissioners did not take the opportunity to view the proposed project from the rear yard and house at 115 Ronada Avenue.”

Paul Benoit, City Administrator

City Administrator Benoit is recommending that the Council deny the appeal.

Click below to view photos and read full documentation on the appeal.

12/19/16 – PUBLIC HEARING Regarding an Appeal of the Planning Commission’s Decision to Approve with Conditions an Application for Variance & Design Review at 108 Moraga Avenue

The hearing can be viewed on Channel 27 or via the City website under videos.

The Council faces a full agenda on December 19, 2016, broadcast will be on Channel 27 and via the City website.  The Council will vote on elimination of Recreation Department transport of participants, addition of a full time Planning Technician, and a loan mechanism to pay for sewer work (see separate article.)

Agenda items:

Political appointments chosen by the Mayor to represent Piedmont on various Boards:

12/19/16 – Approval of Council Liaison Assignments through 12/31/17

Piedmont’s Planning Department continues to grow as a full time Technician is added to the Department.  At a recent Planning Commission meeting, five Planning Department employees were present.

12/19/16 – Authorization to Add a Full Time Planning Technician Position

Elimination of transport by the Recreation Department of juvenile participants:

12/19/16 – Report from the Recreation Director on the Discontinuation of Transportation Services

With a new Police Chief appointed from within the Police Department, a vacancy has occurred in the Police Captain position:

12/19/16 – Consideration of an Agreement with Bob Murray & Associates in the Amount of $24,400 for the Recruitment of a Police Captain

12/19/16 – Consideration of a Three Year Agreement with OpenGov, Inc. for Implementation of Interactive Financial Visualization Software in the Amount of $24,502.50 and an Appropriation to Fund the Agreement