A special meeting of the City Council of the City of San Ramon was called to order on November 20, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, 2222 Camino Ramon, Mayor Tatarka presiding.

PRESENT: Councilmembers Cambra, Dickey, Hudson, and Mayor Tatarka

ABSENT: Vice Mayor Wilson

STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Jim Randall, Acting City Attorney Ben Stock, Assistant City Manager Jim Estep, and Deputy City Clerk Susan Gibbs

* * * *

Mayor Tatarka led Council, staff and those present in the audience in the pledge of allegiance.

Mayor Tatarka: We are here this evening in the special meeting on our proposed Civic/City Center Master Plan and this is a public hearing to hear from you. And, I am not sure if you are doing a presentation or not, by Dan Howard, just briefly, and then I am going to open the public hearing and take your public comment from everyone and I have a couple to read as well. Mr. Howard.

Dan Howard: I would like to take 10 minutes and sort of summarize what we have been doing for the last few months and specifically focusing on the introduction that we used last week in preparation for your responding to the model and the plans that we showed you last week. When we were engaged, the City had given us a rather large bankers box full of all kinds of information and we spent weeks pouring through that trying to come to understand really what information had been generated by the community since the visioning plan back in 1998. The visioning plan set the basis for a process that went forward and led to the development of the specific building program that is to say a book that very carefully laid out what the City was expecting to get as part of the Civic/City Center Plan. And that was specifically in reference to the components that were going to be proposed for the site. While we were wading through that and coming to understand the information that was contained there and we also explored the site a little more, we came to understand the perimeters of the site, the traffic that is currently going around the site, particularly the traffic – the City’s engineering department – they gave us the traffic numbers, we looked at the utilities and we looked in fact, if you will, at the corridor from Alcosta Boulevard all the way down to the 680 freeway to try to get some sense of that corridor much like perhaps the City is doing now with the Crow Canyon corridor. In doing that we became familiar with the program elements, we became familiar with what the City’s expectations were and we became aware of what the site opportunities were.

That led to us having a workshop, and I will just sort of go through the boards. That workshop led to ten teams working individually but we came up with a lot of unanimous feelings about the site. (Difficulty with microphone)

We engaged an independent facilitator, a woman we had worked with us Sharon Bennett, and Sharon’s role was to come and be your eyes and ears to make sure we didn’t simply ask you some ideas and then not pay attention. She was there to make sure that every voice was heard and everybody has a chance to speak and to make sure that when we go back to our office and we do our analysis, that we have in fact heard you properly. She kind of comes in and grills us and says "what about this and what about that". So, we felt that was a very useful person to have as part of the team, to in fact, I think, validate the presentation that we are making this evening.

Those ten teams that worked at the workshop really came up with ten unanimous points and these were sort of what we had heard and what we had taken from looking at the model and I would like to enter these into the record, I did last time and I would like to do again this evening. The unanimous features were:

1. There should be large landscaped areas;
2. The landscaped area was for the most part aggregated to the middle of the site;
3. That the view opportunities of Mt. Diablo was important;
4. The focusing to be on culture, because the arts and the children’s’ museum were always placed on the 11-acre parcel;
5. Retail should be included on the 11-acre parcel;
6. Parking should be concealed by being structured with either buildings or landscape treatment on top;
7. Linkages to adjacent sites and urban fabrics is important, specifically Central Park;
8. Individual buildings rather than all the blocks pushed together into one large, mega-shape;
9. Buildings placed closer to the streets rather than closer to the middle of the site;
10. Water in one form or the other played an important or large part in the definition of the open space use.

The other thing that we did, we took each of the sites that the ten teams had done and placed the elements here, and they – the colors represent the same colored blocks that you used, the children’s museum was brown, and we found for the most part that the brown was located close to Central Park, the library was the purple color and for the most part was always on the 11-acre parcel primarily here or here, again, in connection to the park, the Center for the Arts was always placed on this side of the site close to the Camino Ramon part of it, the City Hall was primarily placed here, or on the 7-acre parcel. The aquatic facility was primarily placed here before the 7-acre parcel was introduced at the workshop and then was quickly moved over to here. And the retail was distributed throughout the site as opposed to being a single, freestanding element; it was sort of placed in various relationships to the different buildings. In that workshop which lasted three hours, there was an awful lot of information that we gave to the public and the members who were working with the models and everything. One of the things that we really didn’t have a chance to tell the people was the fact that the City Hall and the Council Chambers has a very large public component – one of the reasons for building the City Hall – well, there are probably four reasons. It’s to aggregate the City staff that are currently spread across the City and have them work more efficiently. Secondly, by aggregating them into one building, it frees up space in the other buildings such as the Community Center that would be translated back into program use that the public could use. It also takes people out of offices where we are paying rent. Thirdly, it would get them out of here and allow the police department to expand to area that they need to conduct their business properly. Having said all of that, we felt that because we didn’t really have time to explain all of that to you, that really, the City Hall by its very nature of having a Council Chamber that could be used for public meetings, smaller meeting rooms that could be used by various groups, whether you are a stamp club or a quilting group, you could all come together at the City Hall in that public room something that the City has a desperate need for that we felt that the City Hall had you known about it, would probably had likely placed on the 11-acre parcel. So what we did, when we looked at the information that we did when we analyzed the site, we felt that logically the ... center for San Ramon could be considered the Center for the Arts and placed on this corner, the City Hall could be placed here and the library could be placed here adjacent to the park. In a crude diagram illustrated here. The aquatic center, we felt had two ideal locations, one of them was in this quadrant on the 11-acre parcel immediately adjacent to Central Park. We felt it was appropriate there because it was an open facility as opposed to a closed facility. We felt that the staff report that went to City Council regarding the aquatic facility talked about an enclosed building and an enclosed building with a 10 meter diving tower has a certain bulk and mass to it that we felt was probably was not appropriate for the 11-acre parcel and if it was going to be enclosed, it would probably be on the 7-acre parcel. That was kind of our thinking at the time.

With that we began to work with our landscape architects Cynda and Aleksandra, who are here from the SWA Group. They work with Jim Lane, and they produced an illustrated landscape plan that represented how the site might be developed. And while they were doing that, or in concert with them doing that, we took essentially the same colored blocks that the workshop had, placed them on the site, put some trees on them using the same colored paper and set up a site plan, and these two really do work together. What we have done, we have placed the Center for the Arts on this corner of the site, we have tucked in some retail here and here to add a major street front, they have put the children’s museum on this side, close to the library and close to the park, and we placed the City Hall on this corner and placed the library on this corner. If you look at the landscape plan and site plan, you will see that there is a formal organizational structure to the landscape plan here, if you will, the more formal gardens where people could come together under a "bosk" of trees, maybe have a farmer’s market or an outdoor art show, a possibility for an amphitheater, what we were trying to do was look at all of the activities that currently go on in San Ramon and try to make sure that they could happen here. Not only that, to provide opportunities for new programs to be developed and take place here. As we move across the site, the site becomes less ... or right angles and more organic as it blends in to Central Park.

The water element being a major feature was placed in the middle with some formal runnels or troughs of water going this way, and more informal troughs of water making down here. We had talked about connections to the urban fiber going to Central Park, we have shown a linkage over Bollinger Canyon Road, we have shown a possible linkage to the 7 –acre parcel and down in this corner we have a possible linkage to the other side of Camino Ramon. At that point in time we felt that we heard you pretty carefully, initially, and we did try to take into account some of the information we had gleaned from meeting with the various committees and groups such as the recreation advisory committee, the Economic Advisory Committee, the Traffic Advisory Committee and come up with a plan that respected that. These buildings have all been placed if you will on top of some structured parking, so you could enter into the site here and drive into the site here, the circulation that happens on the site happens below the podium level but sort of at street level. Having said that, what we had done last week was present this image to you, we really didn’t have an opportunity with the structure of that meeting to respond to it and really the first time you have had to see the information. The model has been on display at the Community Center and we have received numerous written comments that we have transcribed and have entered into the record. Tonight was really an opportunity for you to come forward and tell us what you thoughts were about the site and our ideas here. Our goal is to come back to City Council on the third of December with the recommendation. We are going to listen very carefully this evening, we are going to go away and we are going to do some serious work if that his what you want, we are going to do some fine tuning if that is what you want, and we are going to come back on the third of December having heard all of you and with a recommendation to City Council on the site. You will have another opportunity at that evening to speak again if you wish, my take is that with Thanksgiving next week and everything that we can make some modifications to the model before then but it’s probably unlikely that we will get it on display before the meeting we can probably bring it down the day of the meeting. We are going to be at Iron Horse Middle School on December 3^rd, we probably need to discuss amongst yourselves, you probably haven’t yet, where would be a good place to put this on display so people can see it, it may or may not be at the school given the sensitivity to the public being on schools these days but maybe at the Community Center again. We will try to get it on display early Tuesday morning and then take it over to Iron Horse Middle School in the evening. I introduced two members of our team, I would like to introduce one more, Steve Fust, from Swinerton Management Consulting who was added to the team about three weeks ago now, to bring in the expertise of the construction manager to keep us real with respect to cost, time frame and to help us plan as we move forward on the appropriate steps. On that night, I am going to go back up behind the dais and I have a little keyboard and I am going to take some notes. The City Council also recorded this and will be transcribing it – my notes tend to be more notes and not verbatim, just a sense of what is going on. That will allow me a couple of days to jump ahead to get started on whatever modifications you may or may not decide to do. On that note, I think in order to speak, you need to fill out a speaker card, and if you have not done so, they are at the back and they are blue, in the back corner there with the pencils, I think that is probably it for me.

Mayor Tatarka opened the public hearing.

Chuck Jenkins: If you don’t remember me, I am the pool man. My life is pools. By professional, and also with my kids, my wife. I came here to speak with regards to our having a pool as a serious consideration for the entire project. We made a - well I was part of an ad-hoc committee that was sponsored somewhat by the City, several months ago. We met twice a month for several months. We put together a comprehensive report, we studied quite a few aspects of the needs of the San Ramon area – aquatics needs primarily. Our city is going to grow within the next 5-10 years double what it is now. And, right now we have one pool in the San Ramon area that is used for public use and that is our Cal Hi pool – Olympic Pool. There will be another pool on the burner, supposedly, we have in Dougherty Valley, a new high school out there, hopefully, I believe within the next few years. But, the downtown pool we thought would be a major plus to helping with the draw to the downtown area here. Not only would we kill two birds basically, the absolute need we that spelled out in our aquatics needs report which I believe the workshop, somebody was – mentioned in the workshop – however I believe some of them either did not know about or chose to ignore it – but I believe that the aquatic needs was spelled out in quite detail for the future of our city. The downtown pool would not only help with obviously the water use that is greatly needed, the Master swimmers the lap swimmers water polo, competitive recreation, swim lessons, scuba, as well as the employer recreation associations that are right around the neighborhood right here, not to mention the meets and tournaments that would benefit hotels and restaurants. It would also help draw – create an additional draw to this downtown area, and I especially, I heard earlier that you in fact consider retail, that is a major point that if you do have retail in here, and sell retail space – rent retail space, the amount of walk-in and walk-out on a daily basis, with all of your facilities here running, an aquatic facility would be a major impact to that and would help greatly. During our report, Abram Wilson mentioned that if you build they, they will come. Well, it is true and I felt that that is something that should be considered, when you build this, you should build this you should build this with in mind you want people to come to this on a regular basis, you want to have the turnover, you want to have the foot traffic and all of these things are great ideas, but you have to look at it as a whole, and what you are going to be drawing to this area. I think that in summation the aquatics needs in San Ramon are great, now we are impacting the Cal Hi pool, and I think that in a ... manner, especially the neighborhood, and as time goes on and we grow, it is – the needs are going to grow and grow as time goes on. I believe the pool will greatly compliment this facility and be a major plus to the downtown area. Thank you.

Cm. Cambra: Chuck, a question, I was only at one of your meetings, and I think you guys did an excellent job on the aquatic needs area, did they see any problem at all in having the pool together with retail on a site – at all – was there any mention of that being a problem?

Mr. Jenkins: No, no, as a matter of fact, we thought that it would be a plus. Because especially, let’s take swim lessons for example, and you have the parents there, well, what are they going to do all day long while the kids are having a swim lesson for an hour, whatever, a half-hour. Whether it is a coffee shop or a restaurant, or a book store or something going on that you feel would fit in that area there, you’ve got an on-going foot traffic that is going to keep those doors open and not to mention that the meets and the recreation, the downtown area is roughly 30,000 employees or more, I think, and each one of those large companies have their own recreation associations and even put something ... where they are going to be coming down using – morning, lunch time, afternoon, lap swimmers, things like that, you are going to have an on-going situation there not to mention just the regular swim teams and everything else going on that you are aware of.

Cm. Cambra: So not only is it a benefit to the residents but also to the business community....

Mr. Jenkins: Oh, most definitely. You can really keep that – a shot in the arm – I think it by itself it is a great idea – it is beautiful, I like the idea, but I think an additional with a pool would add so much more and keep it thriving.

Cm. Cambra: Any mention at all on the committee - the 11-acre versus the 7-acre or any preference one-way or the other?

Mr. Jenkins: When we first thought about it, we thought it would go downtown somewhere and as things got put together, the gardens and so forth, look quite nice, I think it is a neat idea, if we could somehow incorporate everything together I don’t see a problem with that myself. As long as there is a pool and size, configuration, covering, those things should be worked out, but the fact that you have one down there that is big enough and designed well enough to accommodate many uses, you know, you have a major plus.

Cm. Cambra: Thanks a lot – appreciate it.

Harvey Riggs: I’d like to address the City/Civic Center from the standpoint of circulation. I think in general, what our consultants have proposed is fine. But I’d like to direct your attention to the fact that traffic on and off the site, be it below grade, is going to create a lot of traffic interruption, particularly on El Camino. And we need to insure that appropriate mitigations measures are made and taken for traffic on and off the site. Secondly, one of the items that Mayor Tatarka, you will remember when we were on the group that studied this, was the need for an over-crossing on Bollinger Canyon. Certainly, as that street is widened, and we all know it will be widened, that over-crossing would become of even greater importance to our citizens. In the General Plan, in the public facilities section, we note in there the importance of the Iron Horse Trail to our citizens for recreation purposes spelled out to include jogging, walking, bicycling and equestrian. No matter where that pool goes, which side of the road, that over-crossing becomes more important to our citizens, particularly the young folks going to and from the pool. One of the other very important reasons for an over-crossing is that we tent to support our Market Place center down there which is destination retail and we don’t really intend to put destination retail in the City/Civic Center. So, from a circulation stand point, I hope that I am pleased to see that the over-crossing is there – from a mitigation – as far as the over-crossing itself, I would suggest that the consultants’ go down and look at the job that San-Trans has done with the Estero concrete work down there and look at the mitigation efforts from landscaping that has been done on that. Now, as to the theater itself, one of the things that I hope you consider and I recognize it is a model, but the fly for scenery in scenery storage – the construction areas within the performing arts center and the stage area itself is going to have to be served by off-site vehicles. It ought to be oriented so that there is an easy access from either Bollinger or Camino Ramon without pulling trucks on the site to serve that location. Thank you very much.

Norman Rhett: You may recall several months ago you passed a resolution that committed San Ramon to pursuing the highest, reasonable level of LEEDS rating, that’s the Leadership Energy and Environmental Design. In support of that goal, I think it would be very helpful to the citizens to understand what is going into the building that contributes to the environmental quality and the green nature with some public record or list or exposition of what those measures are going to be, it would be helpful. Perhaps on the web site, something like that so citizens know what is going into it that makes it a better place for them and the City employees. Thank you.

Ed Cheng: I am the Vice-Chair of the Library Advisory Committee and I am reporting back from the committee. The Committee wants to thank the Council for putting forth the effort to get our opinions and want to thank the architects for pulling together these box loads of information into this plan that we are reviewing today. The – our committee met tonight, based on the presentation we had last week and we put together pages of comments but we tried to be succinct and put it down to five points. The first one was we really liked the location of the library on the southeast quadrant. It addresses a number of issues with libraries today – it is visible, it is accessible. These are points that as we move forward with our State Prop 14 Grant; they will be looking for these things. The State wants to put libraries that will be used by the community. The easiest thing is to make it accessible - make it visible so that people know where they are so they can go visit them. Second point was adjacencies – we think that the library should be - or the children’s museum should be closer – maybe to the point where you are sharing a lobby. There is a lot of synergy between children’s programs and the children ... Children’s museums tend to be hands-on very active, filled with energy – lots of little kids – maybe that is not appropriate for a performing arts. We have and we don’t have an issue with where the pool is – our concern is with the pool and having the swim meets and the energy – we like the idea of sharing – having the library available for moms and dads and their kids who aren’t at the meet, but we have an issue with the sound that it generates and how it affects the library. We like the proximity to the performing arts – I think there is some synergy there with our program at night and the performing arts. Number three, we really think that this library should be two levels with a parking structure below. And we made that recommendation because I have had a history of working in libraries and also with input from the County, three levels is going to cost more to operate and long term the cost to operate will overrun whatever you put into it in capital. Library service is based on labor – it is not so much the books, when you have three levels, or anytime you have more than one level, libraries – you can’t to double duty so you end up putting people and staff, which is your cost, up on multiple floors and that runs up. Fourth point is – and we think this is kind of a detail, but it is kind of a heads-up, is the plans – the architect is going to hate us but you gave us details so we are going to comment on it – we looked at the details of the building and how you laid – and I realize that you probably did that just to try and get an idea of how big it should be – the concern there is that as you locate the library – and it’s more importantly the entrances to that library, you have to be aware of how the library operates and an example is entrances, as you know in our library, the conference rooms are outside of the library. That is because the conference rooms are can be used during off library hours. Well that sort of dictates where you put the entrances at best off of the parking lot or is it in what I sort of call that spine between the library and the performing arts. In the ground parking structure, placement of elevators - libraries take shipments of books from the County – in and out – you need like a freight elevator that takes up parking. The use of the decks – great idea, however, there is a liability issue. You’ve got kids – my kids through themselves off decks – but you know, I am sort of being cavalier about it but it is a labor/cost issue because it is supervision. So you are always trading off what looks good and what costs you to supervise. What we would ask you is that before you go forward with the next set of recommendations is that we understand that Kathy Paige who I know and has worked on the San Francisco Public Library, she knows the ins and outs of how a library works and ... from a macro standpoint she should take a look at how the building is laid out and give you at least some advice as to how the entrances work and we would like you to report back to the Library Advisory Committee on how the entrances and how the pieces work and lastly, you know, who would every have thought that we would outgrow out library that we built – what, 15 years ago – the one that we are sizing right now and are applying for the Prop 14 Grant is supposed to be out to 2023 or 25. But really, what we should be is thinking beyond that, I think I’ll still be alive, I don’t think my kids will be living in San Ramon, and it does not cost anymore right now while you are putting pencil to paper to think about how you would expand it. And the example I use is, if you are going to expand a library to the north, then you wouldn’t want to put bathrooms on the north wall because that is plumbing that you would have to rip out. You would want to put shelving because shelving is relatively easy to remove. So it is that kind of thinking where you identify it and sort of work your design around that as a parameter. With that, those are our five points and I thank you for listening to us.

Cm. Cambra: One real quick question, on your point about the pool and the noise and that type of thing, was there any discussion about whether in moving it to across Bollinger which is noisy anyway - would impact it at all. The 7-acre site – you would prefer not to have a pool or could it moved to the other site?

Mr. Cheng: I think that if you moved it to the 7-acre site it would be acceptable to us. We are not against the pool, it is a sound issue.

Christy Winter: I am Chairman of the Board of the San Ramon Chamber of Commerce. We have a three-part position on the City Center. The first part of our position is that the San Ramon City Center should be recognized as an asset to the entire San Ramon community and that all stakeholders concerns be considered. I’d like to begin by commending you for the process that you have gone through. I have been impressed and amazed at – what I say, what we came up with as ten tables, I was reminded of the joke of how a camel came into existence – that is was a horse that was built by committee and I was quite pleased to see that the end result is not in fact a camel. Congratulations. And, I commend you on the process that you have gone through to get to this – it could be a horse. The second position that we have is that the project must be financially sound. Construction and operation of the City Center must not adversely effect the City’s financial position. Estimated capital and anticipated operating costs for each component must be clearly defined up front, project funding should conform to accepted good financial management processes, excluding the new City Hall it must be decided how much cost recovery, if any, there will be for each component. For example, to what extent the City will subsidize the facilities in the City Center. To avoid indebting the City, maximum limits should be placed on any subsidies. Prudent fiscal management might dictate that facilities might be prioritized, and that the project be constructed in phases. Design of the City Center should follow accepted prudent land use planning practices and each facility at the City Center should be designed and located so that it can be successful. Our third point, our third point of our position is that the project must not negatively affect the San Ramon businesses or the San Ramon business climate. Funding of the City Center Project must not place an unacceptable or inequitable financial burden on San Ramon business. Facilities at the City Center should compliment and not unfairly compete with existing San Ramon business. Thank you.

Cm. Cambra: Given that fact that we have got a look at the plan here, I would like to just address – have you address what you said – do you think that this particular design is an asset to our City? The entire City.

Ms. Winters: I think that it would be that – all things being equal, clearly the biggest concerns that we have right now are the unknown financial ramification. And the Chamber of Commerce wont take a position supporting or opposing the City Center until we see what those financial ramifications are.

Cm. Cambra: In terms of the design –

Ms. Winters: It is very pretty.

Cm. Cambra: Okay, and do you see the design as negatively impacting business – your point three. Or not. Competing.

Ms. Winters: I think what – again, I think that the key there is going to be the retail space and the configuration of the retail space and specifically one of the other questions that I don’t believe has been answered but certainly will have to be is that who actually will be the property manager for this retail space. Who will be – how will the decisions be made as to what retail goes in there. I am a capitalist from the cradle and I believe that ultimately we, the citizens of San Ramon will vote on what retail goes in there. But the success or failure of that retail will significantly be impacted by the configuration.

Cm. Cambra: And lastly, do you share Mr. Jenkins opinion that the pool would be an asset to the business community.

Ms. Winters: Actually, I have no way of knowing that. We have not done any surveys of the employees of the businesses. And I will say that I am particularly concerned about, again, the operating costs of a swimming facility and making sure that there is some way to recoup those costs.

Cm. Cambra: How about you personally. Do you feel it would be a benefit to the business community?

Ms. Winters: Me, personally? I’ve got to tell you, I don’t have an opinion on the pool. I am not going – put the bond measure on the ballot and I’ll vote then.

Melanie Prole: First off I want to say how happy I am that we are moving forward and planning the Civic Center – and especially the performing arts center. I have lived in San Ramon for six years, but I previously lived in San Francisco where I had very easy access to the arts. But since I have been here I have found over the years that Contra Costa has a lot of good quality arts already, but most of them are in Walnut Creek. But as - as San Ramon grows, I am really hoping that we can develop into an arts center similar to Walnut Creek. And one of the arts that I specifically enjoy is symphony orchestra and choruses. And earlier this year I had the privilege of joining the board of the Tassajara Symphony Orchestra, which is in their fifth season playing here locally in the Valley. And I started dreaming when I heard about the performing arts center that wouldn’t it be nice if the Tassajara Symphony could call the performing arts center its’ home. And, right now we play in a church, so we really would like to have a concert hall. So while, you know, going forward with my dream, there is a lot of work to be done and maybe I am stepping a little bit forward, but I feel that we need to kind of look into the interior of the performing arts center. Right now we are just looking at the outside of it, and we do have some drawings on the inside but I feel that we need to have the arts groups involved in giving feedback specifically to the interiors. I don’t have any specific comments now, but I would really hope that we could have a kind of a group that gets together and canvasses all of the arts that may be performing in the arts center about how it should be designed inside. The other thing that I am afraid of is that the performing arts center in Walnut Creek is very expensive for local, community players like ourselves, to play in. We have had one concert there last year that we had a very well know soloist, we also raised our ticket prices – the average ticket price was $50 versus what we charge now which is $22.50. So, that is another concern that I have going forward is you know, when you get a big performing arts center like 800 – is it – are we going to cost if out so that the local community orchestras, choruses, bands, can’t afford to play there. So in summary I would like to ask the City Council to obtain community input and of course, specifically the Tassajara Symphony – our executive director, music director, would be happy to give feedback. And also, design a cost structure that our local arts organizations can afford to play at the center. Thank you.

Patty White: I participated in the October design and just wanted to thank you all for the opportunity to contribute. It was a lot of fun. I enjoyed giving my two cents so much that I am here to do it again, so be careful of what you ask for. I did want to comment on the resulting design that was presented last week. And a lot of this comes from the group – the table – that I was involved with. I am going to list those things that actually have been incorporated into the design first. One was the hidden parking. Second, is the enlarged landscape toward the middle of the 11-acre parcel with the water being a part of that. I support the performing arts as the focus of the area. I like the idea of the elevated terraces, the outdoor stage – amphitheater idea, that wasn’t anything – you guys came up with that kind of after the fact. The access to the building was ... in from the streets, we hadn’t thought that far along. That was a good idea. I also applaud the idea of the educational opportunity using the run-off from the buildings in some form. A couple of things that I would like to see possibly modified, the way that it is laid out right now – it appears to be very – not - I want to say top heavy but street heavy in terms of the southwest corner. Having all of the buildings fronting the streets I recommend that another look be taken at shifting the buildings instead of them being squared off to the corners at the ends of the streets to make it more appealing to the eye. If they were somehow shifted, I know a couple of the tables had done that in their design. I would also like to see if the performing arts building is to remain at that location is to have it shifted off the street a little bit so that it is not so overwhelming as you approach that corner. The open space that is provided that leads into Central Park, it is about two football fields worth, and I’d like to see some of that space actually be redistributed around the other buildings so that it – so that it is not so heavily presented along the streets. And the other things I felt that the children’s museum did not belong adjacent to the performing arts center - that perhaps a better location would be adjacent to the library. I am not opposed to the swim complex, but I am opposed to it on the 11-acre parcel. And I would like to – just bring to your attention that if you look at those unanimous features and how they faced all of the buildings from the different ten tables there were only two tables out of the ten that placed the swim complex on the original 11-acres. Okay, that was before we were given the other acres or given the additional 7 or 8 acres on the other side. In terms of my table, we heavily opposed putting the swim complex on the 11-acre parcel. So, let’s see – that’s it. Thank you very much.

Peter Oswald: I am Senior Vice President of Sunset Development Company; we are the owners and operators of Bishop Ranch Business Park. I want to thank you for the opportunity to comment on your proposed Civic/City Center design as of this time. However, we find it difficult or pre-mature to comment because we don’t see a total plan for the entire 18-acres, we only see a partial plan. And while we never had any objections considering a performing arts theater, library or City Hall or children’s museum, at this point I would really question if whether an aquatic center is an appropriate place in the heart of the City. It might be better located in conjunction or adjacent to a school. So we ask that that is something that should be looked at. Your next steps are to start I believe a CEQA process and we really question how you can go forward when a good portion of the 7-acres is not identified for any use. CEQA requires cumulative analysis and impact and as of this time, that would be inadequate. Finally, much like the Chamber of Commerce, we have major concerns over both timing and financing. As of this point, no fiscal or financial plan has been presented either on a timing basis or over the longer term. As the major or one of the major landowners and property taxpayers in the City of San Ramon, we have great concern about the fiscal integrity of the City not only in the short term but over the longer term. And we have yet to see a plan that addresses how the capital costs are going to be provided and the on-going maintenance and operating costs of this project. Those are my comments, thank you very much for letting me comment.

Cm. Cambra: Just want to make sure that you do not feel that an aquatic center would benefit the business community here.

Mr. Oswald: Correct. Not in this location.

Cm. Cambra: Okay – on either side?

Mr. Oswald: Correct.

Cm. Cambra: And – just – any comments at all about the design in terms of how Bishop Ranch feels that this would fit in with – because you are a major stakeholder.

Mr. Oswald: Well, I really question your term of design. It is really a placement of three uses on a site plan. There really is no design as of this time. And that is something that we would have to look at in the future. But certainly the placement of a library and performing arts theater, children’s museum and the City Hall on these parcels is something that we have always supported.

Cm. Cambra: And in terms to the connection to the adjacent sites – is that adequate for what Bishop Ranch would be requiring.

Mr. Oswald: Well, I really can’t speak to that. I think in terms of that over the long term as a gathering place you need to have these connections to make it work, and so, what we again, have not seen any specific design other than just a concept of going across either a street or the Iron Horse Trail.

Cm. Cambra: I would just like to ask that you do take a look at the plan and give us your input as a company – it is very important to us because we are right next door to ....

Mr. Oswald: That’s what I am doing tonight.

Cm. Cambra: Just in terms of the design or the placement – would be great – I’d appreciate it.

Dina Visuri: Thank you for this opportunity to come before you and give you our comments. I am the Board President of the Valley Children’s Museum. I am a Livermore resident. We are pleased to be part of this Civic/City Center process and we are looking forward to bring the Valley Children’s Museum regional facility into reality. After taking part in the recent workshops, and reviewing the recommended Master Plan, our Board of Directors and the Valley Children's Museum Site Committee, would like to offer the following comments. The first one is regarding circulation. The current plan does not sufficiently – or is currently not developed to determine if there would be an adequate amount of surface parking adjacent to the Valley Children's Museum, bus parking and access, as well as a drop off zone. Secondly, we have previously expressed our desire for a direct link to the Iron Horse Trail and a – with a strong functional pedestrian connection to Central Park. This is not indicated in the current model. The second point would be the adjacent uses. The recommended master plan would link the Valley Children's Museum to the performing arts center. We do not believe that this is necessarily the most appropriate setting for either of these uses. Sharing and lobby and/or restrooms facilities with the performing arts center would be problematic. Additionally, we believe our programming would be much more compatible with the library that with the performing arts facility. The Valley Children's Museum also believes that the family-child oriented uses including the Valley Children's Museum, should all be located on the eastern portion of the site. This view was held in nine of the – out of the ten models that were developed out of the workshop. But it was not incorporated into the recommended master plan. And the Valley Children's Museum does place a high premium on being located adjacent to the park. In holding with the notion that some of the buildings should be combined, we believe that a superior location for the Valley Children's Museum would be on north side of the library, adjacent to the open space. This would place the Valley Children's Museum on the eastern portion of the site, in which the vast majority of the workshop participants did deem most appropriate for the children’s museum. And the third point that I would like to comment on is regarding the landscaping or the open space – we are generally pleased with the size and the location of the on-site open space and the Valley Children's Museum would like to also thought consider a small, open space area that is specifically designed for the Valley Children's Museum potentially for a garden use for an outdoor education area. This site could be unsightly at times – the children would be the ones doing the growing, so it may need to be somewhat in a non-prominent location or have some type of walls around this area so it is not necessarily a public use space at all time, but we would need some green space for that purpose. The fourth area that I wanted to comment on was regarding phasing and clustering. A stand alone building would be easier to fund and to develop as part of the project phase than separate portions of a single building next to future tenants, i.e. the library and the children’s museum. The cost saving results from the development from one building with multiple uses would be forfeited if the construction and occupancy of each portion did not occur in a timely matter or concurrent. The Valley Children's Museum would encourage development of spaces providing some multi-use rooms for City use within the Valley Children's Museum facility – there could be some shared space between or shared open conference room type space with some of the other adjacent projects that are being proposed. And that is my comment. Any questions?

Jim Blickenstaff: I have been following it for a little while and am more or less pleased to see it starting to come to fruition – starting to have some sense of substance to it. And I am also pleased in terms of the potential here that still allows us opportunities to get it done right the first time. In that regard I would like to see us a little more, if I may as a side statement just mention that I am more or less agreeing with Peter Oswald on this point, always like to make little comments like that because of the irony of it, and I don’t get a chance that often – but we really do need to look at the whole 18+ acres. And it is important to integrate this project in terms of the surrounding acreage. Obviously the 8 to 7 acres next door is obviously a key component but also the retail catty-corner and the community park it all has to kind of fit together in this project has to be more or less a good neighbor to these other uses and fit within to a certain degree and there are different uses around it. And we want to make it all fit together and that is where the 7 acres becomes important. In regards to the 7 acres, I don’t see anything wrong with City Hall kind of uses on the 7 acres rather than the 11. It opens up the 11-acres and gives us more opportunities to do better landscaping with the 11 acres. Somebody mentioned earlier about maybe too much massing near the streets, a little too crowded looking, you move City Hall to the 7-acres and now you have room to do some better landscaping and architecture perhaps on the 11 acres and open it up even more. In regard to that, I am pleased to see that they seriously wanted to make an integration with the community center – not the community center, I mean the community park. I think that is very important. That is going to be very appealing part of this whole Civic Center is how successful integrate it to the adjoining uses and obviously community park. Because it is not terribly expensive to have an appealing open space element that has a low intensity recreational usage and it draws people and fits nicely with other uses and so I like our potential there especially with a water component again, it is very attractive to the people, aesthetically pleasing, they are more compelled to go to a place that has an attractive water component – it does not have to be anything super elaborate like a Japanese Garden – we could go a different direction and make this an American Garden to some degree. Just be a little different – but definitely make it a serious water component that is aesthetically attractive and appealing and compels people to want to come there for a park-like setting to a large degree and we can integrate that as already has been started here with the scenic and cultural uses. And I think they will blend quite well together. Just as a side to that, I notice that we still have lots of geese in this area. I think there is – history - before this area was really settled there were wetlands and geese were a serious part of this area and they still are they actually come down and land in some school yard areas and lawn areas because I guess they are used to doing that over the decades. I don’t know if it is seriously possible to make the natural water component authentic enough to make it appealing to that component of nature but if it was, it would be fantastic. And it would be kind of setting a trend for Civic Centers in terms of integrating in a successful way civic uses, cultural uses, with nature and natural settings. But anyway, regardless of the potential with that, I think that water is a key component of the open space part of this whole plan. Pedestrian overpass is also key. You have 18 acres here, you are going to want it to fit together, you are going to want it to have a connectiveness, you are going to need people to walk easily from the Iron Horse Trail to different sections of the Civic Center and from different uses from the 11-acres to the 7 and I think it is money well spent when do a pedestrian over-crossing – I don’t know if that means one or two - certainly at least one. But I think it will improve dividends in terms of making it a pedestrian friendly and also opening up both sides for people to make better uses of both sides of the total 18-acres. I think – oh, the other thing I just want to mention briefly is performing arts. It is a valuable component here, I think it will be something the City will end up being quite proud of, if done correctly, in that regards I want – I would like to see the performing arts center serve the local region rather than the broad Bay Area kind of region, in other words, not too big, because sometimes you start to look in terms of eight hundred thousand seats or more, you are starting to exclude the potential for the local artist and people in the surrounding area to utilize it, just because of the expense and the pricing involved. So I think something a little smaller than the wide regional kind of uses that get into the 1,000 seats or almost that much would be appropriate for City uses and the surrounding communities including our neighbors to the north and south. Children’s museum should be near the library, it should be probably away from Bollinger Canyon Road and I think the speaker earlier mentioned an appropriate place for the children’s museum – I think that will work well, as well. So, thank you.

Cm. Hudson: Actually, the second one here, you didn’t mean to say an 800,000 seats did you? 800 or 1,000 seats? (Laughter) Where you were going with this – look into it being smaller – you talk faster than me, Jim. Are you thinking we should have looked at something smaller than 800 to 1,000, is that what you are saying?

Mr. Blickenstaff: Yes, 800 to 1,000. I am glad you asked me to clarify that, I didn’t want people to think I was looking at you know, a super stadium or something like that.

Cm. Hudson: And the other thing, I must have been dozing off, did I hear you say that you agree with Peter Oswald? (Laughter)

Maurine Behrend: I am happy to be here tonight. We have been a resident of San Ramon for 27 years now, so very excited to see this project moving along. I am a member of the newly formed Housing Advisory Committee and even though we have only been formed for a month, we have our idea for the site. And I think one of the disadvantages of our idea is that we are so late to the project. But we think that our idea for the 7-acre site is a good one and has some definite advantages, so we would like for you to hear what we have in mind. We have only been meeting since September, I think, and at our second meeting, I think it was even our first meeting, we invited Dan Howard to come and talk to us about the Civic Center site. And one of the first questions we asked was at that time there was nothing on that 7-acre site. We said hey, maybe that would be a good place for some mixed income housing and so we developed that idea a little further. We, at our next meeting, we had a representative from Eden Housing show us some beautiful apartment-like developments that were just very well designed that we thought that would just blend in really nicely with the buildings at Bishop Ranch in that part. So that was a big plus for us that it would blend in with the business park pretty well over there. We liked the idea of mixed-income senior housing. We thought that the rest of the Civic Center doesn’t really have a strictly senior component – there are a lot of things for youth and a lot of things families, so we thought that this might bring the senior element in. So that was a nice piece. We thought the mixed use would – we are thinking little shops that could be supported by the residents and that would be kind of useful. One of the big advantages we thought of having the senior housing there was that it would be basically a zero traffic zone and I know a lot of people were concerned about traffic. So, that is our proposal, we would like you to consider it and I am open for any questions or comments, or whatever you have.

Kathy Berner: I basically am following Chuck on the Chair of the Aquatics Facility Needs Committee, the ad-hoc committee, but have also served as president of the Aquacats for 3 years, meet director, various roles in that swimming pool. The swimming pool - even with all the pools we have right now, including Royal Vista, is way over-crowded, terribly over-crowded. We have to turn away people who want to be on a swim team who want to take swimming lessons; I don’t know if that SRVLA has that problem, they have that problem too – it is a matter of space for the swimming needs of this community. We’ve noticed an increase in those needs over the years. I had to smile when the gentleman from the library brought up the noise factor of the pool – yes, that is true. The neighbors of San Ramon Olympic Pool complaining massive amounts of complaints about the swimming pool being there. Parking is a major issue, noise is an issue, and the noise that they are complaining about are the Saturday morning swim meets starts – have you heard those start buttons? That, well on Saturday mornings, I would think most businesses won't be in session so that would be an advantage – that is why the committee looked at all the sites we looked at – I believe we looked at nine sites. Level sites were an issue – we needed to find level and one of our key goals was to find sites that weren’t in a neighborhood. That weren’t destroying the quiet peacefulness of a neighborhood and that is why we were looking at this site. Then I didn’t know I was suppose to disagree with the gentleman from Sunset, but - going to Great America – you know Great America is surrounded by business parks and I think it is working. So to me the best advantage would be to put this pool there, send the swim meets there, water polo there, the noise there, and then we wont wake anybody up – they are already up for work, and there is plenty of parking. Thank you very much.

John Dickenson: I am here representing myself and my family. I first want to thank you for an excellent effort at getting the community involved – I was there at the planning session in October and I have a couple of points. I want to start off with some quotes from the consultants' notes from that planning session, which tie into some of points that I’ll make. Some of those quotes are " San Ramon Town Square", "walking Main Street", "a gathering space", "San Ramon City Plaza", "on the green", "Viable, active area, plenty of retail", and last quote I had was "retail draws people at all times". My points off of all these is what it appeared to me through the participation I’ve had in this is what people really want and need in San Ramon as a living, breathing, vibrant downtown. We don’t have that- we have a bunch of shopping centers, car oriented not pedestrian or for bicycling orientated shopping centers. What I want and what comes out of the documents I say was a vibrant downtown as daytime activity, nighttime activity, with weekday activity, weekend activity, constant activity. I travel a lot and from what I have seen around the world – all different places of the world and what I have seen in new developments in the United States that worked that satisfy what the people want is that they have substantial retail associated with it. Putting up pure non-retail space – it is a space that does not live and breath. It dies at night, it dies on the weekends. An arts theater will of course help mitigate that but I think you know, fully mitigated if you have very substantial retail. And that would include restaurants, at some point over the last year or two some brought up the idea of an arts/movie theater there, I think that is an excellent point. So, another point on this is I think to do that you need to tie in all of these different parcels and as a couple people mentioned, I think, look at it in an holistic view, not just this 11-acres, but the 7-acres, the Market Place, the Shops at Bishop Ranch, the Bishop Ranch 2 office building, that is noted on one of your documents as a possible future development. That whole area I think needs to be looked at holistically in terms of becoming a living-breathing downtown that has I think needs pedestrian links in order to do it. As side note is I swim myself, my family swims, I love swimming, I’d love to have an aquatic center but I think it does not make any sense in a downtown. I think some other place in the City should be found for that. Lastly, I think a way to do this – Bollinger Canyon is a large street. It is a street with a presence in what the City needs to look into in architects is some way to make Bollinger Canyon into a – you might say – a boulevard type thing with as a pedestrian and bicycling as well as cars – a boulevard that ties in all of those things that start with the Target store and go all the way up to the Market Place and look at the whole thing in one holistic way before proceeding. Those are the comments I would like to make. Thank you.

Michelle Cowles: Unlike Jim Blickenstaff, I would like to disagree with Peter Oswald and the fact of not having a swimming pool at this site. I think I speak on behalf of my neighbors and residents – we back up to a privately owned swimming pool that leases out its water to a swim team. It is very annoying, it is very loud, parking is atrocious, and not being on the Aquatic Needs Facility I know that they did look at other areas there is not other areas to accommodate a pool. We all know that there is a need for this. Being located here it is right off or near the Iron Horse Trail where children can ride their bikes there, they can go from the park over to the pool. And there is I believe no other school location that you can put this large of a pool next to it as Peter Oswald had mentioned unless you are discussing Dougherty Valley but as we all know that is many years to come and the need is now. So I am all in favor of having it at the adjacent site, I don’t think it makes sense to put it at the 11-acre site but I do think it would a good idea to have it at the other site. So on behalf of residents that back up to swimming pools, I think this makes perfect sense and would accommodate the needs. Thank you.

Jim Hansen: I am happy to follow John Dickenson because I can save us a little time – I agree with everything he said. I don’t believe that the swimming pool belongs on the 7-acres. Having been a high school swim coach and a community swim coach, I believe whole-heartedly in swimming as an activity for children but that is the wrong place for the swim complex. I agree with Jim Blickenstaff though that that is a perfect site for a town square type development with a City Hall and perhaps a library, I don’t know if it is big enough for both, but it would set up kind of a town square civic center part of the complex and then you could have the City Center side on the other side. And I know Nancy, you and I have been going back and forth about Civic Center and City Center, but I think we can have it both if we have both parcels. And I am a little concerned about the orientation and the massing - I think that would kind of help us with that if we kind of use the whole site. And I think, I am sure that we are not at the design phase yet but I think that the City Center itself needs to be a little more prominent and that is why I thing the 7-acres would help that. So, without belaboring – well, I have a couple of other things just to go over – we need a gathering place, the children’s museum, I am real concerned that we are not addressing the needs of youth and young adults either. So, hopefully, that will be taken care of in the retail. And also, I have been saying through the City Center Task Force and in the exercise you went through in October that I think we need some of that retail oriented to the Trail. Just even an ice cream shop so that people that are walking down the Trail can just sort of stop in and have some refreshment. I am a little concerned about the orientation but I know that this is not a final plan. I like Maureen’s idea about senior housing but I have not had a time to think about that – that – all right, we thank you for the opportunity to speak.

Mark Ballock: I am President of the San Ramon Arts Foundation and a member of the Arts Advisory Committee, ... been along with this project for a long time now. The – I have got a couple of concerns about the performing arts. All my comments are pretty much performing arts. The performing arts center with the children’s museum, doesn’t seem to be a great mix. It probably will have a lot of confusion with the kids, the performing arts programs, don’t like to have it with the same lobby, same restrooms. Like to have that separated. Actually, we would like to have it more connected to the library. That would leave a stark side of that building – I think that building can be terraced out – and have outdoor terraces so that you don’t have these stark walls on the side of the performing arts center. The other question I have is the accessibility – service ability of the performing arts center with the service driveway going down into basically the parking structure or basement and then being used with a loading elevator to get the props and such up to the stage level. That is totally cumbersome – probably should not be a .......... And then to have the performing arts center and all of these other buildings on top of a parking garage seems that it would be pretty expensive to reinforce that for earthquake. We are only twelve miles off the Hayward fault, so that goes, we’ve got problems out here too. The placing of the performing arts center we originally would have liked to have it back towards the Sunset Development parking garage. That way you can have an alley to service it, there is better place to build the scene shop and have that separated from the performing arts center. And, as far as the swimming pool goes, I – this is my personal comment on the swimming pool, I don’t think it belongs anywhere in that downtown area. I am all for a swimming pools, I think the kids need a place to swim. I would encourage you to take a look at the Dougherty Valley when they build that new high school out there. And there probably isn’t any reason why it couldn’t be built before the high school. That way the City can use the – work with the school district and try to reduce some of the cost of building that swim center. The City offices I originally wanted to have on the 7-acres – and then pull it the performing arts center more towards the parking structure. And then have more area – plaza type area – in the center of the project for outdoors use – we can bring some wind harps and have some public art display that way. And it would be beautiful with some water elements coming through that center too. And the gallery, there is a gallery – these is a visual arts gallery, I am trying to say, as it stands now, it is facing the City office buildings. I’d like to see that connected to the lobby of the performing arts center so we can have access from the lobby into the gallery, so that during shows it can be open and it – I just think it would be a better use for that just as part of the project. That’s about all that I have tonight.

Melody Lundgren: I recently became a Parks Commissioner and as such I was able to sit in on many of the Aquatic Needs Facilities Committee meetings that took place. I was very impressed with the group of residents that came together to work on this and they were terrible effective. I listened for many hours as they evaluated locations and then benefits – the benefits to the families in San Ramon, the benefits to the children, the benefits to the community as a whole, plus benefits to the business and surrounding community that would be available in this downtown location. Coincidentally, I was also one of the appellants in opposition to a proposed heliport by Sunset at Bishop Ranch 3. I am amazed that Sunset would believe that an aquatic needs center was not appropriate and yet a private use executive heliport within 150 feet of the City Center property, within 400 feet of Iron Horse Trail, and 500 feet of the park, was in fact, appropriate. I would hope that Sunset as a major force in this City, would be more open minded in evaluating what was best not only for Sunset, but this community as a whole. Thank you.

Diane Schinnerer: I have to say that I am a little disappointed with the creativity of the design. Because I thought the whole point of Fisher Friedman was to get the two – the 7-acre and the 11-acre site working together really well and I don’t think that we are there and I also think that one of the main issues was a view – a vista view corridor, through to Mt. Diablo. And I understand the reason for placing the arts center on the corner, but I think what you are doing is a trade-off with your view to Mt. Diablo and having a focal point on the corner. I agree with a couple of the previous speakers that it makes far more sense to move the arts center backing up to the existing parking area – the theater will be – certainly, the largest and most heavily parked facility, so it makes more sense to me to move it back and retain your view corridor to Mt. Diablo. And I would like to address the pool issue. I certainly – my daughter was ranked No. 2 in the United States in swimming, I was a national and international referee and stroke and turn judge – I am obviously very, very aquatic supportive, but I don’t think this is the right location of – for a pool. I would like to see this – the City offices on the other side – and I don’t know – if we can ever take a stray poll of the citizens – how we are going to get there, but obviously we are kind of all over the place. The other thing that I think really needs work is Bollinger Canyon. I think that whole street needs to be reworked – just a whole new concept and I feel that very, very strongly. Thank you.

Jenny Lynn and Lisa: I am Lisa...and I am the Assistant Executive Director of Miracle Repertory Theater, and I am Jenny Lynn Campbell, and I am the Managing Director of Miracle Repertory Theater. And our producer, Gabriel, was involved in the process of the building blocks and setting things up and we just really want to commend you on having just drew everybody in and in a whole session was able to come up with this unique design, so on his behalf, since he could not be here, I want to thank you for that process. I would like to just add a couple of comments about some of the things brought up from the point of view of providing a theater for the City of San Ramon and all of the Tri-Valley. I think a theater in this particular complex would serve both serve San Ramon and the entire Tri-Valley here to Livermore and could be a regional theater specifically catering to the needs of this area. I remember that was it – someone mentioned when she was living in San Francisco, she had easy access – I think a lot of the citizens of this area would like to participate more in the performing arts but it is just not easy access when you have to get on a freeway and go a least 30 minutes or risk traffic if you want get dinner and a show somewhere. So, I think that this would be something that can be thought of for the whole tri-valley when you are thinking of population and traffic and when people are coming in. Also, would like to also agree with two people that mentioned that the performing arts center should be closer the parking structure. Theaters, performing arts centers, frequently attract older patrons, and sometimes walking – imagine people walking around City Hall to get to the building and that is very, very difficult for many of our patrons. I’d also like to agree with Ed, Patty, Ms. Visuri, and a number of people who said that probably the best place for the children’s museum would be with the library, I also believe that is true, and also, Mr. Harvey Riggs, mentioned the loading dock and so did Mark Ballock, that there is traffic concerns, there is aesthetic concerns about what happens to a site when you don’t have adequate loading, if you end up having a vehicle, a heavy vehicle, going across non-vehicular pavement. I have seen it happen on sites before that I have been involved with so it is very important that we provide easy access for loading into that building. And it would keep the whole site more beautiful as well. And, oh, Maureen’s idea of low-income or mixed income housing – there is a fabulous example of sliding scale housing for artists in New York City that would be a wonderful model to look at. I am sure we have plenty of under paid starving artists in the area who would like to integrate into a site directly across from a performing arts center. There are a lot of ways to do that. And, one other point that was made that I would like to reinforce, the idea of bus parking, not just for the children’s theater and the library, but frequently, theater’s will bring in buses with seniors, students for matinees, so wherever the bus parking is it needs to also have easy pedestrian walkway from that area to the performing arts area. I just wanted to agree with what Mark mentioned about having arts in the lobby and accessible to our theater patrons. I think that is extremely important and when we were talking about a performing arts center, and not only focusing on the symphonies needs, but also our visual artists –sculpture, painting, I think that is just very key and you have got a captive audience in a lobby for 20 minutes before the show and during intermission – what a great place to have your work on display. And I know as theater directors, we would love to be able to support the local artists – love that we are near a library, that is very key for us with the research that we need to do for our shows and hopefully our library would help us in having lots of great research materials for us to be able to use. Also, would love to be a part of those two drawings that are talking about what the inside of the theater is going to look like. Gabriel did walk us through some of your initial ideas – not sure how concrete those are but there are a couple of concerns that I have and I would love to somehow be part of as that materializes. Definitely, the loading dock from a scenic perspective, very cumbersome to have to unload a truck, put it into an elevator – who knows what size – and then get it up to the space, it a concern. As well as the design of the space for performing – vocal or instrumental music compared to performing theatrical, speaking, dance performances, and such. The needs acoustically are going to be very different so concerned about what that is going to look like as well. Thank you – we are so happy that you – we are going to a regional center for the arts here in the Tri-Valley. I am so excited. Thank you.

Stacey Douglas: I have been here going on eleven years this year, I am a firefighter and also a paramedic. And the reason I am here is – I recognize a few faces here that I know - I am a concerned parent who has one child on SRVLA and also a child on San Ramon Valley Divers. And one of our problems that we have is we don’t have access to the pool as much as the accessibility as we would like to. And so we would really like to have the new pool with the facility that can be accessible to multiple groups. Some of the things that I have found out recently is we have a synchronized swimming group which is year around and they can’t get any time in the pool. They have pool share time so they can’t even be involved in this area. So our youth in the community is drastically being affected because people can’t participate. We also have water polo clubs that participate eight months out of the year, and we have both a high school group as well as private clubs which do not have accessibility...(taping changing, did not record)...just the general ability to go in and I mean, considering I am one of the people that goes in for SRVLA to start the snack bar at 5:30 6 o’clock in the morning I wouldn’t want to be one of the neighbors. I will be honest with you. It is cold, it is our day to sleep in as well, but you know the kids are there at you know, quarter to seven and practice starts at 7 o’clock. In the Dougherty High School which is a recommendation, to my understanding it is going to be another neighborhood pool. So we are going to be involving the same problems with waking the neighbors with the swim meets. Whereas this one is more of a business environment which will hopefully will be waking them up. If we do, it shouldn’t be there. The whole thing that I think really you know, I think the theater is a nice idea, I think it is going to be very nice for the youth at night, I don’t know what kind of daytime activities are going to be planning, but I cannot recommend enough the skills as being a paramedic that the life guard training, the workout program, the structure, the discipline that Chris over at San Ramon Valley pool has instilled in his people, the you know, people are coming from all over to want to be a life guard and to be trained there. And I mean, you cannot get enough people to learn CPR or First Aid or anything else in today’s society. And I think that something you know, with the new pool, will be able to get more children and more high schoolers with jobs – we do have a shortage of life guards, you know, and what better field to get them to go into I know of at least five that are going into the fire department or public service, as far a police or otherwise. And I mean, this is a great object that they can you know, get involved in and they can turn around and actually put it into a successful career which they can be actually help their community. And you know, the San Ramon Divers, you know, we have been here about two years or so plus, and you know, it is really taking off. You know, it – according to the San Ramon Olympic Pool Aquatic Park use, we had 929 people just taking lessons- this is strictly through the community program, this has nothing to do with the diving team. And, you know, we have children ranging let’s see my son is going to start the team in spring, he is 6 years old. We have to practice at 7:15 at night to 8:30 dead of winter cause we are year around and you know, it’s – that is the only time we have access to the pool. So we are out there Monday through Thursday and on Saturdays, you know, and the same thing with San Ramon Valley or SRVLA we are out there Monday through Friday, you know, we just do not have enough access to the pool as we really need it – it is good for the kids, it gets them off the street, and it gets them in a positive, structural environment and make decent money at it and they become successful. I know some college students that are even coming back to be life guards again – next year – I mean you cannot, you know, they are going into paramedic and medical fields – it is just wonderful for the kids and it is a good way to get them off of the streets and be productive. Thank you.

Seti Ghotbzadeh: I am the Co-Chair – President of the San Ramon Foundation Board for the library. I just came from the meeting – we concurred with the members as well as the consulting librarians on the issues that were concerning the library. And we actually command the public to pick the corner we think is the safest for children to travel from one – from the library to the community center – which is the corner of Iron Horse Trail and Bollinger Canyon Road. And, then we discussed the structure of the library which based on the plans that were forwarded to us was supposed to be four floors. The problems that we had with that is first of all safety – in case of an earthquake, or fire, it is going to be extremely difficult for us to evacuate the building as quickly as possible. Secondly, it will be a costly matter for us because staff being – staffing would be an issue. We need a maximum of two floors to be able to accommodate all of those issues in an economical and safe manner. Then, the third matter that we were discussing was the fact that we could not have the library next to the aquatic center for two reasons, the first reason is noise level – a public library is supposed to be a quiet place where people are to be able to concentrate on what they are reading and researching, they would not be able provide it for them if there is a noisy area next to them. Secondly, for the factor that is – we think is very, very important which is moisture which will be causing our products to be destroyed sooner than later and those are costly materials. The last thing on our agenda was the fact that there was a friends book room with a shop located at in the library was omitted in the plans of the architecture structure. Now, that would be the only place where we can constantly fund raise in order to have the successful programs that we have been able to provide for our children, our teens and seniors and so on and so forth. Without that, we will have to do fund raisings- it is going to be an extremely difficult thing to do for the much larger library we are going to be having with the number of fund raisings available to us as programs. So, we would like to have that friends book room added to our structure again. Thank you very much.

Mayor Tatarka: That is the last speaker card I have. Thank you Susan, for numbering them and getting them to me. I do have though, an e-mail that was received that wants to be read into the record and I want to do that. It says:

I don’t have any other speaker cards or anything else so I am just going to close this public hearing. Dan, I am going to wrap up a little bit and then we will go to Public Comment.

Dan Howard: I still don’t have a microphone so I will just talk loud again. I would like to introduce one other member of the design team from Ellerbe Beckett.

Thank you all very much for your input and I will even thank those people who left early after giving their input. I didn’t hear anything today that made me feel that we could not give it valid and due consideration and to take it into account. I think what I am hearing quite strongly is certainly... performing arts center, ... the Valley Children’s Museum needs to be closer to the library, ... I do think we need to look at ... performing arts center in terms of traffic and how well that works. Certainly what we were trying to do with respect to buildings and pushing them ... the landscape space was to try to give some street preference… a lot of San Ramon, certainly a significant part of it, is a beautiful, beautiful business park, expertly maintained, the only thing we find wrong with it is set back from the street... and parking and to us ... mentioned earlier... so we thought by moving the buildings closer to the streets we would go and try to energize this to give a sense of presence. Almost all of these buildings are probably much, much smaller that the buildings currently in Bishop Ranch, they are large buildings and large... so what we were trying to do was move closer to the street so that…scale to balance the larger business park …There is no doubt that we have our work cut out for us for the next week …In December...  I look forward to all of you coming out again on the third of December … I am not sure, I think should just say now that we will put it on display at the Community Center, they have been very gracious so far... The morning of the third of December.

Mayor Tatarka: Okay, we are not moving forward to Public Comment. Okay, I don’t see another card so this meeting is adjourned.

There being no further business to come before the City, the meeting was adjourned at 8:46 P.M.

Signed:

Nancy Tatarka, Mayor
Susan Gibbs, Deputy City Clerk