2030 Climate Action Plan

The City Council is looking for five volunteers to help update the City’s Climate Action Plan. Resident input is vital to the process of creating the 2030 greenhouse gas reduction target and strategies to reduce emissions.

The City is specifically seeking residents who have an interest or expertise in environmental issues and climate science to serve on this Task Force. The City Council will appoint four of the Task Force’s members and the Board of Education will appoint one Piedmont High School Student.  Applications must be received at City Hall on or before the deadline of February 24, 2017. Download application here.

The Task Force will meet approximately once a month, beginning in the end of March, for one year or until a Draft 2030 Climate Action Plan is completed, whichever is earlier.

All meetings of the Task Force will be noticed and open to the public.

Bike lanes to be added to the Oakland Avenue Bridge along with bulbouts.

The Oakland Avenue Bridge designed by architect Albert Farr in 1910 is proposed to undergo changes. – 

Grant funds may be available through “One Bay Area Grants (OBAG2)” supporting focused growth, regional transportation priorities, and the Bay Area’s land-use and housing goals.

OBAG 2 is projected to total about $800 million to fund projects from 2017-18 through 2021-22.  Some $354 million in federal funds will be directed to Congestion Management Agencies.  They are responsible for soliciting, evaluating and selecting eligible projects within their counties.

Piedmont’s OBAG Grant proposal for Cycle  #2 is $169,000 for Oakland Avenue Improvements developed with the help of Coastland Engineers. The Oakland Avenue Bridge construction proposal includes: resurfacing, new bike lanes, relocation of a fire hydrant, a “bulbout” at the corner of Howard and Oakland Avenues.

The Council has heard from public speakers that pedestrians face a perilous walk on the narrow bridge sidewalks, originally 6 feet wide. No proposals have been made to return to the original sidewalk width.  Bike lanes are proposed on the roadway.

Bulbouts often reduce one or two parking slots and are controversial. Some drivers may cut across the bulbout, bumping up over the curb and down as they make a tight turn.

According to the staff report there could be a shortfall of over $200,000 for the project. – 

“The Engineer’s Estimate for the construction cost is $400,000, so the grant will cover approximately 42% of the projected cost. The additional funding will most likely come from Measure B and BB Bike & Pedestrian Funds.

“On a separate but related note, the City is currently working on a pedestrian railing and lighting project across the Oakland Avenue Bridge which was not included in the OBAG2 project application since the goal is to have this installed prior to 2019 when the OBAG2 monies will be available. “

The Alameda County Transportation Commission, which has a Piedmont representation, will announce the projects they select on July 31, 2017.

Read the full report with diagrams of the proposal showing bike lanes and bulbouts  here.

Read agenda for Monday, February 6, 2016 here.

Should elderly and disabled persons be accommodated on the price and availability of  backyard waste can service? Do you want to or like carting all of your garbage cans in and out of your backyard every week?  Would Piedmont look cleaner if everyone had backyard service?

Your input is needed by the City to assist in Piedmont’s upcoming contract procurement for waste disposal.  

You can help by doing the following:

 +     Filling out the City’s online waste survey linked below:

 (https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/piedmontcommunitysurvey

(Paper versions of the survey will be available at the Public Works Counter at City Hall, 120 Vista Avenue.)

+     Attending the Thursday, Work Session on Waste Disposal:

Thursday, February, 2,  at 7 p.m.

     Veterans Hall, 401 Highland Avenue. 

+       Contacting your council members and letting them know the service you think is appropriate at: >  citycouncil@ci.piedmont.ca.us.

The League of Women Voters Piedmont (LWVP) is proud to host Great Decisions 2017. Great Decisions is America’s largest discussion program on world affairs focusing on the most critical global issues facing America today.  The program and materials are organized by the Foreign Policy Association. The course runs for eight weeks with each week focusing on a new topic. The 2017 season digs into the following global issues:

– The Future of Europe
– Trade and Politics
– Conflict in the South China Sea
– Saudi Arabia in Transition
– U.S. Foreign Policy and Petroleum
– Latin America’s Political Pendulum
– Prospects for Afghanistan and Pakistan
– Nuclear Security

The program model involves independently reading the subject write-up in the provided Great Decisions Briefing Book, joining the group to watch a brief 30-minute video on the topic, then discussing the material together. The League of Women Voters Piedmont hosts multiple discussion groups each winter to allow participants maximum flexibility to participate. Each week participants may shift to from group-to-group, as their schedule permits. Participants are not required to be LWV members in order to participate.

COST: $25 which covers the cost of program materials including a personal Great Decisions Guide Book.TO REGISTER: Please email Jen Cavenaugh (jcavenaugh@sbcglobal.net).

“Now more than ever it is important for us to come together and think critically about the issues facing our country and our role in the world.  We hope you will join League of Women Voters members to work together and discuss solutions for the future.”

Editors Note: The League of Women Voters and Piedmont Civic Association are independent organizations.

Correspondence between residents and Mayor Wieler.

Thank you for your prompt response Mayor Wieler. There is nothing in law or code to suggest existing homes would be “non-conforming” if Piedmont zoning remains as is- that should not be an impetus and it’s certainly not a rationale.

We are in full agreement with the spirit and most of the substance of the editorial on the January 22, 2017 Piedmont Civic Association website.

1) What is the purpose of this omnibus approach to zoning in our city?  What’s the benefit to us, to our neighbors? Piedmont Planning Director Kevin  Jackson has repeatedly cited historically high variance approval rates as an indication that our zoning rules are outdated. Is it possible those high approval rates are a function of reasonable plans and compromises engendered by the variance approval process itself?

2) Smaller lot sizes (which as you know are already accounted for in the current code), reduced set backs and potentially larger structure footprints will encourage the construction of larger homes and more density which will- over time- change and, in our opinion erode the character of broad sections of our community

3) Absence of material change to Zone E lot sizes and set backs – hmmmmmm.

We hope you and the city council will consider Piedmont Civic Association’s recommendation  for more transparency, clarity and outreach in these matters.  The power to effect changes of this magnitude should not reside with staff and a few select committees. We urge our city government to take the necessary steps to seek formal approval from our citizens before these changes are adopted.

Respectfully,

 Philip & Jean Stein

Piedmont

The City is in the process of developing a Request For Proposals (“RFP”) for a new Waste Collection service provider, and has retained R3 Consulting. My 1/15/2017 letter to Council is attached. I have requested an Age 70 Senior and Disabled “accommodation” to be included in any RFP; the accommodation is backyard service at curbside rate. This would be opt-in and you can default to curbside. I feel the small cost of this minor subsidy can be off-set if needed by (1) an overall slight total contract cost increase (2) a marginally higher backyard rate for non-seniors though overall a larger premium for backyard service is needed than our current contract, or (3) have a higher rate for zone E (> 20,000 to 100,000 + square feet) properties.

My research found the senior age 70/disabled accommodation in nine Marin County cities. On 1/17/17 Councilman Rood asked Garth Schultz of R3 Consulting about this as Schultz had included this in his slideshow to Council. Mr. Schultz stated this senior 70/disabled accommodation is “standard” and is offered in other venues when backyard service is otherwise not provided. The Senior 70/disabled accommodation is evidently quite normal.

While outside of Piedmont controlling costs for fixed income seniors seems nearly universal, Piedmont is entirely devoid of any senior cost considerations. Our School Tax exceeds other School taxes by minimally double to literally one hundred times, and many other school taxes having a senior exemption.

How to support the Senior 70/Disabled accommodation:
1. Attend the Thursday Feb. 2 7pm Town Hall meeting at the Veteran’s Hall to support the accommodation. This is a good opportunity.
2. Take the city survey and include the accommodation as a comment:http://www.ci.piedmont.ca.us/input-sought-on-waste-collection-contract/   I suggest also supporting curbside service as the default. This will keep overall cost down.
3. Write letters in support to the Piedmonter  jkawamoto@bayareanewsgroup.com or the Post atnews@piedmontpost.org   Keeping to 200 words increases publication chances.
4. Likely Council will approve the RFP early in March as it is scheduled to be issued March 13. A letter or better yet an appearance before Council is most effective.

A few other fundamentals concerning Waste Collection cost: to date the City survey on Waste Collection of 650+ responses shows 67% of residents supporting a curbside default. 45% of residents have been using the backyard service and 46% are willing to pay double for backyard over curbside; the current backyard premium is $5 monthly. On 10/17/2016 City Administrator Benoit reported to City Council that for Republic Services to continue “would require a significant rate increase, perhaps in the range of 30% to 40% (and) Republic Services could not sustain the current level of backyard service and that it would have to be substantially reduced.” Unmistakably, backyard service and the too low premium for it in our current contract is a major cost driver. My survey shows the backyard premium is often in the $15 monthly range or higher in other Cities.

Overall the R3 Consultant found Piedmont’s Waste Collection fee to be 20%+ higher though exact comparisons are sometimes difficult with different service packages in different Cities. While Piedmont’s Trash Collection is expensive, it is a comprehensive and appropriate package of services for Piedmont; I am hopeful most elements can be retained at a competitive cost and continuing good diversion rates for recycling. And the time is well past for backyard service at curbside rates for age 70 seniors and disabled.

Rick Schiller, Piedmont Resident

 Editors’ Note: Opinions expressed are those of the author.

The current solid waste collection and disposal agreement with Republic Services ends on June 30, 2018 and the City of Piedmont has begun the process of selecting the next solid waste services provider. Community members are invited to participate in a workshop to discuss waste disposal services for  garbage, recycling, and composting.

Workshop on Waste Services

Thurs., Feb. 2nd – 7 p.m.  – Veterans’ Hall

In 2007 the City contracted with R3 Consulting Group to investigate service providers, obtain bids and make a recommendation to the City.  Waste Management (“WMI”) and Republic Services (“RSS”) submitted bids. RSS had the lowest customer rates for both backyard and curbside collection for 20 and 32 gallon collection.  Curbside pickup service was the default rate, but once Piedmont customers sign up for the optional backyard pickup rate, they are automatically continued in it.

Is there any description in the voluminous city documents of the total eventual impact on our city?  Will these proposals, in combination, lead to a tear down of many old Piedmont homes? Will residents only find out what’s really in this massive proposal after the Council passes it?

The multiple issues encompassed in this hydra-headed proposal should be dealt with separately, with appropriate opportunity for public input for each.

Did you know the City is considering big changes to what you, your neighbors, developers, and the City can construct in Piedmont? Once proposed Piedmont laws are approved, resident concerns can become moot. 

Some of the issues:

• No surveys of Piedmonters’ preferences
• Scant public input
• Short term rentals recommendations (airbnb, etc.)
• Zone use changes without citizen vote
• Numerous building rule changes 
• Reduction in parking requirements
• Zero lot line construction
• City Staff review and decisions on projects rather than control by citizen commissioners who know the community standards best
• Building requirements for public property removed
• No public workshops
• Exclusion of public input in staff documents.

Study Session: 6:30 p.m., Monday, January 23, 2017, City Hall, 120 Vista Avenue.  Viewable from the City website and on cable Channel 27.

Ask your neighbor, friend, or any resident if they are aware of the zoning and building changes being considered for Piedmont and you will likely get a shoulder shrug.  Despite the fact that the Planning Department and the Planning Commission have spent enormous amounts of time reviewing Chapter 17, engagement with the residents of Piedmont has been minimal.  The mammoth amount of documents present challenges to even a hardy observer of Piedmont zoning and construction rules.

Recently, the City Council on January 11, 2017 held a “Study Session” in an unrecorded meeting in the Emergency Operations Center of the Piedmont Police Department.  The purpose of the meeting was to educate the City Council about staff driven changes to Chapter 17 of the Municipal Code. Piedmont residents could not watch the proceedings from their computers or TVs because the meeting was not broadcast or recorded. Relative few residents attended that meeting or other prior meetings.

When is the public going to be educated on the proposals? 

Were hundred or thousands of Piedmont residents expected to go to the Piedmont Planning Commission meetings and wait for hours to be heard or to learn about the proposed changes?  When was the opportunity for an open exchange of ideas between policy makers and Piedmont residents? The residents who attended a Planning Commission meeting often found the allowed 3 minute time snippet for input often ignored rather than engagingly discussed?

Some changes purport to clean up Chapter 17, the ordinance controlling construction in Piedmont, other proposals change rules: allow the City to build whatever it wants on public property, change zone uses without voter approval, increase density, reduce parking requirements, and so forth.

The changes are too numerous and undelineated to list here.  All changes have not been listed by the City in a cohesive and manageable form. The voluminous public documents overwhelm the reader. Rather than small pieces considered in an orderly manner, interested residents are faced with about 500 pages of documents to slog through.  Yet the City presses on without surveying residents or setting up workshops as done with garbage, recycling, and recreation.  No round table discussions, extensive outreach to residents, or on line surveys have been provided by the City.

One speaker at the recent “Study Session” suggested minimally sending a comprehensive and specific letter to all Piedmont residents. An announcement was subsequently sent on January 17 to all Piedmont addresses.  The City announcement is brief and does not alert or inform the recipient of the numerous significant changes proposed.  Readers are directed to the mountains of information online without issues enumerated. The “public hearings” held by the Planning Commission praised in the announcement received little publicity and little public attendance or engagement.

The City relies on unfounded legal documents, an outdated poll, and the obscure generally unknown Piedmont General Plan, which was approved following limited public input with contradictory internal statements and inconsistencies.

Public Engagement During the Election –

Public engagement was frequently mentioned during the recent 2016 Piedmont election, however thus far the public has been largely screened out of the zoning and construction change decisions by indeterminant consideration times, difficult or no broadcast of considerations, unclear documents, and confusing data.  Organization of the material for ready residents understanding has been lacking.

As of this writing, the City has planned no further actions to inform and engage the Piedmont public.  The planning staff is pushing ahead for a prompt adoption of the voluminous ordinance on March 6, 2017.

Is the public intentionally being disregarded by a lack of clarity and opportunities for meaningful involvement?

The following letter from the Planning Director was sent to those who took the initiative to ask to be informed.  The links lead to complexities difficult for most residents to sort through.   _______________________

You are receiving this email because you had asked to be notified of any activity by the Planning Commission or City Council related to revisions of City Code Chapter 17 (the Zoning Code) and/or revisions to regulations of short term rentals.

Notice

As noted on the City of Piedmont’s website, the City Council has undertaken the process of considering a recommendation from the Planning Commission regarding updates to the Planning and Zoning Provisions of the City Code, the City’s Design Guidelines, and Policies and Procedures related to Planning matters in early 2017. The Council held a study session on January 11^th and will be holding another study session as follows:

Study Session: 6:30 p.m., Monday, January 23, 2017, City Hall, 120 Vista Avenue.  [This session is evidently going to be broadcast from the City website and on cable channel 27 as it is being held in the Council Chamber where video streaming is available.]

The City Council will not be taking action at the study session.

Following the study sessions, the Council is tentatively scheduled to take the first step in considering the recommendation for adoption at its regular meeting of March 6, 2017.

      Regular Meeting: 7:30 p.m., Monday, March 6, 2017, City Hall, 120 Vista Avenue

Documents on the City Website

The staff report to Council dated March 6, 2017 [It is unknown why this 522 page report has been produced and dated prior to hearing from the Council or public.], the Planning Commissioner’s Summary and Navigation Tips, and other documents related to this project are available on the City’s website at www.ci.piedmont.ca.us. The webpage also contains links to previous staff reports, meeting minutes, the General Plan, the current Zoning Code (Chapter 17) and the Zoning Map.

Public Engagement

The opportunity for public input is available throughout this process. Interested members of the public are encouraged to attend the study sessions and regular meetings at which the City Council will consider this item. Questions about the project and requests to receive email notification of activities related to Zoning Code revisions should be directed to Planning Director Kevin Jackson at kjackson@ci.piedmont.ca.us or (510) 420-3039.

Written comments to the City Council on this matter may be submitted by clicking the following link > citycouncil@ci.piedmont.ca.us  or 120 Vista Avenue, Piedmont, CA 94611.

Please let me know if you wish to be removed from this email distribution list.

Sincerely,

Kevin Jackson, AICP, Planning Director, City of Piedmont, 120 Vista Avenue, Piedmont, CA 94611 Tel: (510) 420-3039 Fax: (510) 658-3167

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

For more City produced information, click here.

Article updated on January 21, 2017