Sunteți pe pagina 1din 71

Thanks for meeting with us today and for agreeing to issue fines for the early morning yard and truck activity in violation of the compliance plan. I'm forwarding the email the community sent to Rachel and Richard with attached photos documenting just 5 of the days that the violations have occurred. As we noted this morning, most if not all of the activities we listed in our email to Rachel and Richard have been occurring on a daily basis (Mon-Fri) despite section 6 of the plan being in effect since Nov 21.

The first zip file has photos from Jan 5 showing:

• 7 trucks total left the 57th St yard

• 3 trucks moved from east Lowell parking lot into 57th St yard

• 1 truck moved from parking lot loaded in 57th St dock

• Trucks did not leave during two 3-minute intervals

• 4 trucks left at once

The second zip file has photos from:

Nov21

• forklifts exit yard onto 57th with product and load truck on Lowell

• truck is moved from parking lot and directed into 57th St dock

Nov24

• forklifts moved out of yard into 57th St to Lowell

• unknown truck unloaded with forklift on SE Lowell with product moved into 57th St yard

Dec23

• loaded forklift leaves 57th St yard and drives out to Lowell

• loaded forklift leaves 57th St yard and drives out to Lowell

• lights and activity behind drawn blue curtain

Aside from the photos sent to Rachel and Richard, I sent Chris Candell this information from:

Jan29

See 3 videos on dropbox:

1-29-15 435 am 3 trucks leave yard 1-29-15 440 am curtain closes-4th truck leaves 1-29-15 457 am 5th and 6th trucks leave

Here's a run down of the activity this morning, just like any other morning two 3-minute intervals, and activity was occurring behind the curtain.

more than 5 trucks left, trucks were not restricted to

4:35 am - 3 trucks leave yard 4:40 - blue curtain closes, 4th truck leaves yard 4:51 - truck moves from E Lowell parking lot to park on SE corner of Lowell 4:52 - blue curtain opens 4:57 - 5th and 6th trucks yard from behind curtain 5:07 - curtain closes again

19

6:29 - forklift drives south on Lowell crossing 5th

I will keep sending more days of documentation as I have time.

I'll try to upload more video to dropbox and alert you as I do.

Thanks,

more video to dropbox and alert you as I do. Thanks, Dear Rachel and Richard, ,
more video to dropbox and alert you as I do. Thanks, Dear Rachel and Richard, ,
more video to dropbox and alert you as I do. Thanks, Dear Rachel and Richard, ,
more video to dropbox and alert you as I do. Thanks, Dear Rachel and Richard, ,
more video to dropbox and alert you as I do. Thanks, Dear Rachel and Richard, ,
more video to dropbox and alert you as I do. Thanks, Dear Rachel and Richard, ,

Dear Rachel and Richard,

and alert you as I do. Thanks, Dear Rachel and Richard, , Dan Kalb <dkalb@oaklandnet.com> Please

,

and alert you as I do. Thanks, Dear Rachel and Richard, , Dan Kalb <dkalb@oaklandnet.com> Please
and alert you as I do. Thanks, Dear Rachel and Richard, , Dan Kalb <dkalb@oaklandnet.com> Please

Dan Kalb <dkalb@oaklandnet.com>

Please review the information below concerning Suprema's numerous violations to the Compliance Plan and respond as soon as possible regarding each of the issues raised.

Thank you in advance for your prompt attention,

raised. Thank you in advance for your prompt attention, / MATERIAL BREACH OF COMPLIANCE PLAN &
raised. Thank you in advance for your prompt attention, / MATERIAL BREACH OF COMPLIANCE PLAN &
raised. Thank you in advance for your prompt attention, / MATERIAL BREACH OF COMPLIANCE PLAN &

/

MATERIAL BREACH OF COMPLIANCE PLAN & ASSOCIATED FINES

As you both know, the Compliance Plan clearly states that:

"Failure to satisfy the deadlines and timelines prescribed in this Work Plan or to abide by any specific condition will constitute and a material breach of the Compliance Plan and will result in Administrative Fines of up to $1,000 per day for as long as the performance schedule is not met."

20

Based on documented evidence of numerous violations below, we expect the City to charge Suprema with Administrative Fines of up to $1,000 per day going back to the beginning of each material breach. We also expect Suprema to forfeit their $40,000 performance bond, held by the City as insurance of Suprema's faithful completion of all Plan requirements on time.

NOISE FROM OPEN FACILITY BETWEEN 9 PM to 7 AM

Plan requirement (by 11120114): Suprema will:

• Discontinue all delivery staging activities, including movement of vehicles, equipment, and product into position for loading, loading and unloading activities, and vehicle and equipment maintenance activities in the 57th St open facility between 9 pm and 7 am.

• Limit delivery activity noise to two 3-minute window periods during which up to three delivery trucks can exit; maximum of 3 trucks in each window, maximum 5 delivery truck exits.

Violations: 4 to 7 am loading activities continues m~l!~ffllHmJRmll~ll:

• Loading at least one truck in the s?'h St loading dock; the first typically around 4 am

• Truck staging west of the Suprema property line on the public right of way, in front of residential properties

• Movement within the open facility of forklifts, pallet jacks, and product

• Movement of forklifts, pallet jacks, and product from within the open facility out into s?'h St, Lowell St, and the open parking lot (on the east side of Lowell St)

• Trucks exiting open facility at random times that are not within two 3-minute windows

• More than 5 trucks leaving the open facility before 7 am (Suprema operates 11 trucks)

• Trucks being staged or maneuvered

NOISE & TRAFFIC IMPACTS FROM BIG RIG DRIVING & UNLOADING ON 57th ST.

Plan requirement: Concurrent with execution of the Compliance Plan, Suprema will:

"Use their best efforts in good faith to comply with the Exhibit B truck management plan procedures (see below) to prevent big rigs from using 57th St. and other nearby local streets to travel to and from Suprema."

Exhibit B, "Delivery Truck Management Plan" requirements: As of Nov. 1, 2014, Suprema will:

• Inform carriers that driving big rigs on 57th St. is prohibited due to Suprema's changed address to Lowell St.

• Each time Suprema is made aware of a violation it will issue a verbal warning to the driver and a written warning to the trucking company about the violation.

• Copy the City's Inspection Services Manager on all correspondence above and enter the incident and actions taken on the Complaint Log and submit it to the Inspection Services Manager.

• Not accept deliveries from carriers who repeat this violation.

Please Note: We informed Greg Minor that the assumption the public will report to and engage directly with Suprema management is unrealistic given its proven track record of harassment and intimidation of neighbors. Instead, we recommended that the City take responsibility for tracking compliance by either assigning staff to witness the daily violations OR installing surveillance cameras so that the City staff can do the monitoring.

By all accounts, neighbors went beyond due diligence by bringing Suprema's numerous code violations to the City's attention in Nov. 2013. Once that occurred, it was the City's responsibility to bring Suprema into compliance on all fronts in a timely manner. Continued failure to do for the last 14 months has been at the public's expense.

Violations: Residents asked several big rig drivers if they received or were aware of Suprema's new address and arrival routes and business hours. All said they were not. The same drivers also said they dreaded doing business with Suprema because of how narrow the streets are, the problems of getting stuck, the risks of hitting parked cars, and the proximity to residential properties.

Below are two incidents of big rig traveling on side streets. Video evidence of other incidents is available upon request.

21

Dec. 31, 2014 -- 3 pm: A big rig (Knight) going to Suprema on Los Angeles St, significantly damaged a parked minivan and ran over curbs to turn onto Arlington St. Miguel Jara appeared on the scene.

Nov. 14, 2014 --11:07 am to 11:19 am: A big rig used s?'h St. (between Adeline and Lowell) going to Suprema and got stuck at bend in the block and again in intersection of s?'h@Lowell.

Please Note: The paperwork for at least the two incidents above should have been copied to the City by Mr. Jara. Please inform us whether the City received these reports and if so, then explain why the big rigs continue use residential streets traveling to and from Suprema day and night.

22

Minor, Gregory

From:

Quesada, Bill

Sent:

Thursday, February 05, 2015 1:44 PM

To:

Low, Tim; Minor, Gregory

Subject:

FW: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations

Attachments:

Compliance with compliance plan comparing conditions to observationsBversion.docx; Summary of compliance with plan 2 4 15.docx

Tim & Greg, Fyi. I don't think Chris meant to exclude you guys on this. Sorry. Bill

-----Original Message----- From: Candell, Chris Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2015 1:24 PM To: Flynn, Rachel; Kalb, Dan; Jonsson, Ulla-Britt; Miller, Scott; Ranelletti, Darin; Quesada, Bill; Sandercock, Deborah

Cc: lllgen,

Darin; Quesada, Bill; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: lllgen, Subject: RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations I have
Darin; Quesada, Bill; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: lllgen, Subject: RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations I have
Darin; Quesada, Bill; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: lllgen, Subject: RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations I have
Darin; Quesada, Bill; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: lllgen, Subject: RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations I have
Darin; Quesada, Bill; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: lllgen, Subject: RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations I have
Darin; Quesada, Bill; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: lllgen, Subject: RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations I have

Subject: RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations

Subject: RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations I have attached two files regarding compliance with the

I have attached two files regarding compliance with the Compliance Plan signed by SMC on 10/20/14. One attachment is a table outlining compliance plan items, status per staff observations, and observations by neighbors. The other attachment is a summary of the status of compliance.

In preparing these documents we used direct staff observation, review of the video record from 10/20/14 to 2/4/15 and the following documentation from SMC:

letters sent to trucking companies; mailing lists of who they were sent to; and complaint logs which include the nature of the complaints, the response by SMC and resolution of the complaints.

I will leave the status of the planning review to Ulla and Scott.

-----Original Message----- From: Flynn, Rachel Sent: Friday, January 09, 2015 2:50 PM To: Kalb, Dan; Jonsson, Ulla-Britt; Miller, Scott; Ranelletti, Darin; Quesada, Bill; Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah

Cc: lllgen, Richard;

Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: lllgen, Richard; Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Dan,
Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: lllgen, Richard; Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Dan,
Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: lllgen, Richard; Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Dan,
Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: lllgen, Richard; Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Dan,
Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: lllgen, Richard; Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Dan,
Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: lllgen, Richard; Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Dan,

Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations

Dan, Bill Quesada (zoning compliance) and Ulla Jonsson (planning application) are handling the Suprema Meats case.

Bill and Ulla, Can you please coordinate a response to

Thanks, Rachel

case. Bill and Ulla, Can you please coordinate a response to Thanks, Rachel 23 on her

23

on her complaints? And copy Dan Kalb.

>On Jan 9, 2015, at 2:35 PM, "Kalb, Dan" <DKalb@oaklandnet.com> wrote:

>

>Rachel, Richard -

>

> Please keep me in the loop on the timely follow-up here. >Thanks, >-Dan

>

>

>-Dan Kalb >City Councilmember >District One >Oakland, CA > 510-238-7001

>

>

>

»On Jan 9, 2015, at 1:38 PM, "

>>

>>

»On Jan 9, 2015, at 1:38 PM, " >> >> wrote: >> » Dear Rachel and

wrote:

>>

»

Dear Rachel and Richard,

» Please review the information below concerning Suprema's numerous violations to the Compliance Plan and respond as soon as possible regarding each of the issues raised.

»Thank you in advance for your prompt attention,

raised. »Thank you in advance for your prompt attention, » >> >> »MATERIAL BREACH OF COMPLIANCE
raised. »Thank you in advance for your prompt attention, » >> >> »MATERIAL BREACH OF COMPLIANCE
raised. »Thank you in advance for your prompt attention, » >> >> »MATERIAL BREACH OF COMPLIANCE
raised. »Thank you in advance for your prompt attention, » >> >> »MATERIAL BREACH OF COMPLIANCE
» >>
»
>>

>>

»MATERIAL BREACH OF COMPLIANCE PLAN & ASSOCIATED FINES

>>

»As you both know, the Compliance Plan clearly states that: "Failure to satisfy the deadlines and timelines prescribed in this Work Plan or to abide by any specific condition will constitute and a material breach of the Compliance Plan and will result in Administrative Fines of up to $1,000 per day for as long as the performance schedule is not met." Based on documented evidence of numerous violations below, we expect the City to charge Suprema with Administrative Fines of up to $1,000 per day going back to the beginning of each material breach. We also expect Suprema to forfeit their $40,000 performance bond, held by the City as insurance of Suprema's faithful completion of all Plan requirements on time.

>

»NOISE FROM OPEN FACILITY BETWEEN 9 PM to 7 AM Plan requirement (by 11/20/14): Suprema will:

24

» - Discontinue all delivery staging activities, including movement of vehicles, equipment, and product into position for

loading, loading and unloading activities, and vehicle and equipment maintenance activities in the 57th St open facility

between 9 pm and 7 am.

>>

» - Limit delivery activity noise to two 3-minute window periods during which up to three delivery trucks can exit; maximum of 3 trucks in each window, maximum 5 delivery truck exits. »Violations: 4 to 7 am loading activities continues [see Attachments 1&2] :

»

- Loading at least one truck in the 57 th St loading dock; the first typically around 4 am

>>

»

- Truck staging west of the Suprema property line on the public right of way, in front of residential properties

>>

»

- Movement within the open facility of forklifts, pallet jacks, and product

>>

» - Movement of forklifts, pallet jacks, and product from within the open facility out into 57 th St, Lowell St, and the open parking lot (on the east side of Lowell St)

>>

»

- Trucks exiting open facility at random times that are not within two 3-minute windows

>>

»

- More than 5 trucks leaving the open facility before 7 am (Suprema operates 11 trucks)

>>

»

- Trucks being staged or maneuvered

»NOISE & TRAFFIC IMPACTS FROM BIG RIG DRIVING & UNLOADING ON 57th ST. Plan requirement: Concurrent with execution of the Compliance Plan, Suprema will:

»"Use their best efforts in good faith to comply with the Exhibit B truck management plan procedures (see below) to

prevent big rigs from using 57th St. and other nearby local streets to travel to and from Suprema." Exhibit B, "Delivery Truck Management Plan" requirements: As of Nov. 1, 2014, Suprema will:

»

- Inform carriers that driving big rigs on 57th St. is prohibited due to Suprema's changed address to Lowell St.

>>

» - Each time Suprema is made aware of a violation it will issue a verbal warning to the driver and a written warning to the trucking company about the violation.

>>

» - Copy the City's Inspection Services Manager on all correspondence above and enter the incident and actions taken on the Complaint Log and submit it to the Inspection Services Manager.

>>

»

- Not accept deliveries from carriers who repeat this violation.

>>

»

Please Note: We informed Greg Minor that the assumption the public will report to and engage directly with

Suprema management is unrealistic given its proven track record of harassment and intimidation of neighbors. Instead, we recommended that the City take responsibility for tracking compliance by either assigning staff to witness the daily violations OR installing surveillance cameras so that the City staff can do the monitoring. By all accounts, neighbors went beyond due diligence by bringing Suprema's numerous code violations to the City's attention in Nov. 2013. Once that occurred, it was the City's responsibility to bring Suprema into compliance on all fronts in a timely manner. Continued failure to do for the last 14 months has been at the public's expense. ,

>

»Violations: Residents asked several big rig drivers if they received or were aware of Suprema's new address and arrival routes and business hours. All said they were not. The same drivers also said they dreaded doing business with Suprema because of how narrow the streets are, the problems of getting stuck, the risks of hitting parked cars, and the proximity to residential properties. »Below are two incidents of big rig traveling on side streets. Video evidence of other incidents is available upon request.

» - Dec. 31, 2014 -- 3 pm: A big rig (Knight) going to Suprema on Los Angeles St, significantly damaged a parked minivan and ran over curbs to turn onto Arlington St. Miguel Jara appeared on the scene.

25

» - Nov. 14, 2014 -- 11:07 am to 11:19 am: A big rig used 57

got stuck at bend in the block and again in intersection of 57

>> >> »Please Note: The paperwork for at least the two incidents above should have been copied to the City by Mr. Jara. Please inform us whether the City received these reports and if so, then explain why the big rigs continue use residential streets traveling to and from Suprema day and night.

>> >> >> »<Attachment 1.zip>

» <Attachments_2 .zip>

th St. (between Adeline and Lowell) going to Suprema and th@Lowell.

26

Minor, Greg9ry

From:

mmjara@comcast.net

Sent:

Friday, February 06, 2015 12:44 PM

To:

Minor, Gregory

Subject:

Fwd: Weekly Complaint Log for SUPREMA

Attachments:

Driver sign Logjpg; Navajo driver signedjpg; Suprema Meat Company DIRECTIONS.docx; Noise Complaint Log 1.xlsx; Noise Complaint Log 2.xlsx

From: "MARIO E" <tiomarito@comcast.net> To: "Chris Candell" <ccandell@oaklandnet.com> Cc: "Miguel" <mmjara@comcast.net>, "Steve Hassing" <stevehassing@yahoo.com> Sent: Friday, February 6, 2015 10:46:00 AM Subject: Weekly Complaint Log

Good morning Chris,

This week we had a few complaint situations with the same trucking company: Navajo.

On Saturday evening there was a truck parked outside, Miguel passed by and took care of that, that same company had a driver come help another one of their drivers, although he was not making a delivery to Suprema, he did come in the wrong way, I emailed our complaint to Navajo,

I also emailed it to you, and I am also forwarding their response.

We started a sign in log for all the delivering drivers , to make them aware of the Commercial Refrigeration Unit regulations, I am attaching this log. We are also sending out new directions to delivering companies in how to get to us through a truck route that will not create problems, these

delivery instructions specify the route, that there is no overnight parking and that they must shut off truck and reefer upon arrival. I am also attaching this.

I will be sending you a weekly complaint log, I hope that fulfills your requirements, if anymore info or actions are needed please let me know. Thank you.

Best.

Mario E Jara Operations Manager Suprema Meat Company 5655 Lowell Street Oakland, CA. 94608 (510) 654-9282 (510) 655-9566 fax (510 376-3010 cell Mario.suprema@comcast.net tiomarito@comcast.net

27

Minor, Gregory

From:

Quesada, Bill

Sent:

Wednesday, February 11, 2015 10:58 AM

To:

Minor, Gregory

Subject:

FW: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations

fyi

From:

FW: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations fyi From: [mailt Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 5:17 AM

[mailt

Meats Compliance Plan violations fyi From: [mailt Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 5:17 AM To: Candell,

Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 5:17 AM To: Candell, Chris Cc: Flynn, Rachel; Kalb, Dan; Jonsson, Ulla-Britt; Miller, Scott; Ranelletti, Darin; Quesada,

:

Illgen, Richard;

Illgen, Richard;
Illgen, Richard;
Illgen, Richard;
Illgen, Richard;
Illgen, Richard;
Illgen, Richard;
Illgen, Richard;

Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations

Good Morning,

.11•

I•

1•11

Compliance Plan violations Good Morning, .11• I• 1•11 Starting at 4:40 am this morning SMC is

Starting at 4:40 am this morning SMC is loading two trucks partially concealed behind their blue curtain in the open yard in blatant violation of the agreement they signed. Forklifts are beeping, flashing, and moving, and loading stacks of pallets into the backs of the trucks. This does in fact happen every morning Mon-Fri and others besides me can attest to this fact. I called OPD but they didn't arrive in time.

Again, if you want to witness the daily activity, you will need to be here starting at 4 am.

daily activity, you will need to be here starting at 4 am. On Mon, Feb 9,

On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Hi Chris,

at 4 am. On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Hi Chris, wrote: Thank you
at 4 am. On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Hi Chris, wrote: Thank you

wrote:

Thank you for your upd~tes. We understand that these inspections and wading through footage and photos are tedious and time consuming. We have first hand experience since we've been documenting, and reporting noise and other violations for well over a year now.

We can prove that the violations of section 6 of the compliance plan are not minor or occasional, but are ongoing, daily, Monday to Friday.

We agree that no big rigs have been unloaded on 57th St since the compliance plan was signed, but your overall summary and conclusions about early morning/night time activity and big rig traffic are potentially misleading for the following reasons.

Inspections for violations of section 6 were not carried out early enough. Most of the violations occur Monday to Friday between 4 and 5: 15 am and include movement of equipment and product within the yard and more than 5 trucks total leaving before 7 am. Activity also occurs in the streets, which while not a technical violation of section 6, is not helping to minimize the night time noise and nuisance impacts. All activity came to a halt during the hour that Ulla-Brit Jonsson and Scott Miller were observing, but we were able to show them video with audio of loading and activity that occurred that morning starting just after 4 am. Greg Minor has only visited in the evening outside of normal business hours before 9 pm.

29

The video records of staging, vehicle movement, and equipment/product movement with forklifts, and loading between 4 and 7 am are examples of what we feel are ongoing serious violations of the compliance plan. The videos and photos submitted for the 5 dates you mention are just a small but representative sample. You implied in your summary that these are the only dates violations occurred out of the 103 days since the plan was signed.

Neighbor submitted videos and photos of big rigs traveling on 5?1h street only covered the period through the first week in December. There is no evidence that big rig traffic has "decreased dramatically". We just haven't had the time to examine all of the video to make a determination one way or the other. In January, I personally went out to speak with two big rig drivers to request they shut their refers off and on Dec 31 there was an accident at Los Angeles and Arlington involving a big rig and a parked minivan.

To clarify, we never stated that we reported violations of the truck management plan to SMC. We said previously in our emails that we don't agree we should have to report directly to SMC staff. We reported the violations with photo documentation to Greg Minor and Bill Quesada.

Thanks,

photo documentation to Greg Minor and Bill Quesada. Thanks, On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 1:24

On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Candell, Chris <CCandell@oaklandnet.com> wrote:

PM, Candell, Chris <CCandell@oaklandnet.com> wrote: I have attached two files regarding compliance with the

I have attached two files regarding compliance with the Compliance Plan signed by SMC on 10/20/14. One

attachment is a table outlining compliance plan items, status per staff observations, and observations by neighbors. The other attachment is a summary of the status of compliance.

In preparing these documents we used direct staff observation, review of the video record from 10/20/14 to 2/4/15 andthe following documentation from SMC:

letters sent to trucking companies; mailing lists of who they were sent to; and complaint logs which include the nature of the complaints, the response by SMC and resolution of the complaints.

I will leave the status of the planning review to Ulla and Scott.

-----Original Message-----

From: Flynn, Rachel Sent: Friday, January 09, 2015 2:50 PM To: Kalb, Dan; Jonsson, Ulla-Britt; Miller, Scott; Ranelletti, Darin; Quesada, Bill; Candell, Chris; Sandercock,

Deborah

~

~

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

Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations

Dan,

Bill Quesada (zoning compliance) and Ulla Jonsson (planning application) are handling the Suprema Meats

case.

30

Bill and Ulla, Can you please coordinate a response to

Thanks, Rachel

Ulla, Can you please coordinate a response to Thanks, Rachel on her complaints? And copy Dan

on her complaints? And copy Dan Kalb.

>On Jan 9, 2015, at 2:35 PM, "Kalb, Dan" <DKalb@oaklandnet.com> wrote:

>

>

Rachel, Richard -

>

>Please keep me in the loop on the timely follow-up here. >Thanks, >-Dan

>

>

>-DanKalb

> City Councilmember

> District One

> Oakland, CA > 510-238-7001

>

>

>

>>On Jan 9, 2015, at 1:38 PM, " >>

>>

>>

. >> Please review the information below concerning Suprema's numerous violations to the Compliance Plan and respond as soon as possible regarding each of the issues raised.

>> Thank you in advance for your prompt attention,

>> Dear Rachel and Richard,

your prompt attention, >> Dear Rachel and Richard, wrote: >> >> >> >>
your prompt attention, >> Dear Rachel and Richard, wrote: >> >> >> >>

wrote:

prompt attention, >> Dear Rachel and Richard, wrote: >> >> >> >>

>>

>>

Dear Rachel and Richard, wrote: >> >> >> >> >>MATERIAL BREACH OF
Dear Rachel and Richard, wrote: >> >> >> >> >>MATERIAL BREACH OF
Dear Rachel and Richard, wrote: >> >> >> >> >>MATERIAL BREACH OF
Dear Rachel and Richard, wrote: >> >> >> >> >>MATERIAL BREACH OF
Dear Rachel and Richard, wrote: >> >> >> >> >>MATERIAL BREACH OF
Dear Rachel and Richard, wrote: >> >> >> >> >>MATERIAL BREACH OF
Dear Rachel and Richard, wrote: >> >> >> >> >>MATERIAL BREACH OF
Dear Rachel and Richard, wrote: >> >> >> >> >>MATERIAL BREACH OF
Dear Rachel and Richard, wrote: >> >> >> >> >>MATERIAL BREACH OF
Dear Rachel and Richard, wrote: >> >> >> >> >>MATERIAL BREACH OF
Dear Rachel and Richard, wrote: >> >> >> >> >>MATERIAL BREACH OF

>>

>>

>>MATERIAL BREACH OF COMPLIANCE PLAN & ASSOCIATED FINES

>>

>>As you both know, the Compliance Plan clearly states that: "Failure to satisfy the deadlines and timelines prescribed in this Work Plan or to abide by any specific condition will constitute and a material breach of the Compliance Plan and will result in Administrative Fines of up to $1,000 per day for as long as the performance schedule is not met." Based on documented evidence of numerous violations below, we expect the City to

31

charge Suprema with Administrative Fines of up to $1,000 per day going back to the beginning of each material breach. We also expect Suprema to forfeit their $40,000 performance bond, held by the City as insurance of Suprema's faithful completion of all Plan requirements on time.

>

>>NOISE FROM OPEN FACILITY BETWEEN 9 PM to 7 AM Plan requirement (by 11/20/14): Suprema will:

>> - Discontinue all delivery staging activities, including movement of vehicles, equipment, and product into position for loading, loading and unloading activities, and vehicle and equipment maintenance activities in the 57th St open facility between 9 pm and 7 am. >> >> - Limit delivery activity noise to two 3-minute window periods during which up to three delivery trucks can exit; maximum of 3 trucks in each window, maximum 5 delivery truck exits. >>Violations: 4 to 7 am loading activities continues [see Attachments 1&2] :

>> - Loading at least one truck in the 57 th St loading dock; the first typically around 4 am >>

>> - Truck staging west of the Suprema property line on the public right of way, in front ofresidential properties >>

>>

>> >> - Movement of forklifts, pallet jacks, and product from within the open facility out into 57 th St, Lowell St, and the open parking lot (on the east side of Lowell St) >> >> - Trucks exiting open facility at random times that are not within two 3-minute windows >> >> - More than 5 trucks leaving the open facility before 7 am (Suprema operates 11 trucks) >> >> - Trucks being staged or maneuvered >>NOISE & TRAFFIC IMPACTS FROM BIG RIG DRIVING & UNLOAPING ON 57th ST. Plan requirement: Concurrent with execution of the Compliance Plan, Suprema will:

>>"Use their best efforts in good faith to comply with the Exhibit B truck management plan procedures (see below) to prevent big rigs from using 57th St. and other nearby local streets to travel to and from Suprema." Exhibit B, "Delivery Truck Management Plan" requirements: As of Nov. 1, 2014, Suprema will:

>> - Inform carriers that driving big rigs on 57th St. is prohibited due to Suprema's changed address to Lowell St. >> >> - Each time Suprema is made aware of a violation it will issue a verbal warning to the driver and a written warning to the trucking company about the violation. >> >> - Copy the City's Inspection Services Manager on all correspondence above and enter the incident and actions taken on the Complaint Log and submit it to the Inspection Services Manager. >>

- Movement within the open facility of forklifts, pallet jacks, and product

>> - Not accept deliveries from carriers.who repeat this violation. >> >>Please Note: We informed Greg Minor that the assumption the public will report to and engage directly with Suprema management is unrealistic given its proven track record of harassment and intimidation of neighbors. Instead, we recommended that the City take responsibility for tracking compliance by either assigning staff to witness the daily violations OR installing surveillance cameras so that the City staff can do the monitoring. By all accounts, neighbors went beyond due diligence by bringing Suprema's numerous code violations to the City's attention in Nov. 2013. Once that occurred, it was the City's responsibility to bring Suprema into compliance on all fronts in a timely manner. Continued failure to do for the last 14 months has been at the

32

public's expense.

>

>>Violations: Residents asked several big rig drivers if they received or were aware of Suprema's new address and arrival routes and business hours. All said they were not. The same drivers also said they dreaded doing business with Suprema because of how narrow the streets are, the problems of getting stuck, the risks of hitting parked cars, and the proximity to residential properties. >>Below are two incidents of big rig traveling on side streets. Video evidence of other incidents is available upon request. >> - Dec. 31, 2014 -- 3 pm: A big rig (Knight) going to Suprema on Los Angeles St, significantly damaged a parked minivan and ran over curbs to turn onto Arlington St. Miguel Jara appeared on the scene. >> - Nov. 14, 2014 -- 11 :07 am to 11 :19 am: A big rig used 57 th St. (between Adeline and Lowell) going to Suprema and got stuck at bend in the block and again in intersection of 57 th@Lowell. >>

>>

>>Please Note: The paperwork for at least the two incidents above should have been copied to the City by Mr. Jara. Please inform us whether the City received these reports and if so, then explain why the big rigs continue use residential streets traveling to and from Suprema day and night. >>

>>

>> >> <Attachment I .zip> >> <Attachments_2 .zip>

33

Minor, Gregory

From:

Quesada, Bill

Sent:

Wednesday, February 11, 2015 10:59 AM

To:

Minor, Gregory

Subject:

FW: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations

fyi

-----Original Message-----

From:

Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 7:31 AM

To:

Cc: Flynn, Rachel; Kalb, Dan; Jonsson, Ulla-Britt; Miller, Scott; Ranelletti, Darin; Quesada, Bill; Sandercock, Deborah;

Ranelletti, Darin; Quesada, Bill; Sandercock, Deborah; [mailto: Candell, Chris lllgen, Richard; Subject: RE:

[mailto:

Candell, Chris

Quesada, Bill; Sandercock, Deborah; [mailto: Candell, Chris lllgen, Richard; Subject: RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan

lllgen, Richard;

Deborah; [mailto: Candell, Chris lllgen, Richard; Subject: RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations I
Deborah; [mailto: Candell, Chris lllgen, Richard; Subject: RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations I
Deborah; [mailto: Candell, Chris lllgen, Richard; Subject: RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations I

Subject: RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations

Subject: RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations I heard all the noise this morning as I

I heard all the noise this morning as I was in the bathroom and the window faces that way and my daughter got up complaining about the noise whose bedroom window also faces Suprema. Why doesn't the city help us?

also faces Suprema. Why doesn't the city help us? Occupancy Specialist From: Sent: Wednesday, February 11,

Occupancy Specialist

From:

doesn't the city help us? Occupancy Specialist From: Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 5:17 AM To:
doesn't the city help us? Occupancy Specialist From: Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 5:17 AM To:

Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 5:17 AM To: Candell, Chris Cc: Flynn, Rachel; Kalb, Dan; Jonsson, Ulla-Britt; Miller, Scott; Ranelletti, Darin; Quesada, Bill; Sandercock, Deborah;

lllgen, Richard;

Darin; Quesada, Bill; Sandercock, Deborah; lllgen, Richard; Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Good
Darin; Quesada, Bill; Sandercock, Deborah; lllgen, Richard; Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Good
Darin; Quesada, Bill; Sandercock, Deborah; lllgen, Richard; Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Good

Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations

Good Morning,

Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Good Morning, Starting at 4:40 am this morning SMC is

Starting at 4:40 am this morning SMC is loading two trucks partially concealed behind their blue curtain in the open yard in blatant violation of the agreement they signed. Forklifts are beeping, flashing, and moving, and loading stacks of pallets into the backs of the trucks. This does in fact happen every morning Mon-Fri and others besides me can attest to this fact. I called OPD but they didn't arrive in time.

Again, if you want to witness the daily activity, you will need to be here starting at 4 am.

daily activity, you will need to be here starting at 4 am. On Mon, Feb 9,

On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Hi Chris,

to be here starting at 4 am. On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Hi

••••••••l:mailto:

34

to be here starting at 4 am. On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Hi

>wrote:

Thank you for your updates. We understand that these inspections and wading through footage and photos are tedious and time consuming. We have first hand experience since we've been documenting, and reporting noise and other violations for well over a year now.

We can prove that the violations of section 6 of the compliance plan are not minor or occasional, but are ongoing, daily, Monday to Friday.

We agree that no big rigs have been unloaded on 57th St since the compliance plan was signed, but your overall summary and conclusions about early morning/night time activity and big rig traffic are potentially misleading for the following reasons.

Inspections for violations of section 6 were not carried out early enough. Most of the violations occur Monday to Friday between 4 and 5:15 am and include movement of equipment and product within the yard and more than 5 trucks total

leaving before 7 am. Activity also occurs in the streets, which while not a technical violation of section 6, is not helping to minimize the night time noise and nuisance impacts. All activity came to a halt during the hour that Ulla-Brit Jonsson and Scott Miller were observing, but we were able to show them video with audio of loading and activity that occurred that morning starting just after 4 am. Greg Minor has only visited in the evening outside of normal business hours before

9 pm.

The video records of staging, vehicle movement, and equipment/product movement with forklifts, and loading between

4 and 7 am are examples of what we feel are ongoing serious violations of the compliance plan. The videos and photos submitted for the 5 dates you mention are just a small but representative sample. You implied in your summary that these are the only dates violations occurred out of the 103 days since the plan was signed.

Neighbor submitted videos and photos of big rigs traveling on 57th street only covered the period through the first week in December. There is no evidence that big rig traffic has "decreased dramatically". We just haven't had the time to examine all of the video to make a determination one way or the other. In January, I personally went out to speak with two big rig drivers to request they shut their refers off and on Dec 31 there was an accident at Los Angeles and Arlington involving a big rig and a parked minivan.

To clarify, we never stated that we reported violations of the truck management plan to SMC. We said previously in our emails that we don't agree we should have to report directly to SMC staff. We reported the violations with photo documentation to Greg Minor and Bill Quesada.

Thanks,

photo documentation to Greg Minor and Bill Quesada. Thanks, On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 1:24

On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Candell, Chris <CCandell@oaklandnet.com<mailto:CCandell@oaklandnet.com» wrote:

wrote: I have attached two files regarding compliance with the

I have attached two files regarding compliance with the Compliance Plan signed by SMC on 10/20/14. One attachment is a table outlining compliance plan items, status per staff observations, and observations by neighbors. The other attachment is a summary of the status of compliance.

In preparing these documents we used direct staff observation, review of the video record from 10/20/14 to 2/4/15 and the following documentation from SMC:

letters sent to trucking companies; mailing lists of who they were sent to; and complaint logs which include the nature of the complaints, the response by SMC and resolution of the complaints.

35

I will leave the status of the planning review to Ulla and Scott.

-----Original Message----- From: Flynn, Rachel Sent: Friday, January 09, 2015 2:50 PM To: Kalb, Dan; Jonsson, Ulla-Britt; Miller, Scott; Ranelletti, Darin; Quesada, Bill; Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah

Cc: Ill en Richard·

Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: Ill en Richard· Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Dan,
Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: Ill en Richard· Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Dan,
Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: Ill en Richard· Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Dan,
Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: Ill en Richard· Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Dan,
Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: Ill en Richard· Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Dan,
Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: Ill en Richard· Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Dan,
Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: Ill en Richard· Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Dan,

Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations

Dan, Bill Quesada (zoning compliance) and Ulla Jonsson (planning application) are handling the Suprema Meats case.

Bill and Ulla, Can you please coordinate a response to

Thanks, Rachel

Can you please coordinate a response to Thanks, Rachel on her complaints? And copy Dan Kalb.

on her complaints? And copy Dan Kalb.

>On Jan 9, 2015, at 2:35 PM, "Kalb, Dan" <DKalb@oaklandnet.com<mailto:DKalb@oaklandnet.com» wrote:

>

>Rachel, Richard -

>

> Please keep me in the loop on the timely follow-up here. >Thanks, >-Dan

>

>

>-Dan Kalb >City Councilmember

> District One

>Oakland, CA

>

510-238-7001<te1:510-238-7001>

>

>

>

»On Jan 9, 2015, at 1:38 PM, "

>>

>>

>>

»Dear Rachel and Richard,

» Please review the information below concerning Suprema's numerous violations to the Compliance Plan and respond as soon as possible regarding each of the issues raised.

»Thank you in advance for your prompt attention,

raised. »Thank you in advance for your prompt attention, <mailt•<m••••••••> wrote:

<mailt•<m••••••••> wrote:

you in advance for your prompt attention, <mailt•<m••••••••> wrote: >> » 36
>> »
>>
»
you in advance for your prompt attention, <mailt•<m••••••••> wrote: >> » 36
you in advance for your prompt attention, <mailt•<m••••••••> wrote: >> » 36
you in advance for your prompt attention, <mailt•<m••••••••> wrote: >> » 36

36

» >>
»
>>

>>

»MATERIAL BREACH OF COMPLIANCE PLAN & ASSOCIATED FINES

>>

»As you both know, the Compliance Plan clearly states that: "Failure to satisfy the deadlines and timelines prescribed in this Work Plan or to abide by any specific condition will constitute and a material breach of the Compliance Plan and will result in Administrative Fines of up to $1,000 per day for as long as the, performance schedule is not met." Based on documented evidence of numerous violations below, we expect the City to charge Su pre ma with Administrative Fines of up to $1,000 per day going back to the beginning of each material breach. We also expect Suprema to forfeit their $40,000 performance bond, held by the City as insurance of Suprema's faithful completion of all Plan requirements on time.

>

»NOISE FROM OPEN FACILITY BETWEE~ 9 PM to 7 AM Plan requirement (by 11/20/14): Suprema will:

» - Discontinue all delivery staging activities, including movement of vehicles, equipment, and product into position for

loading, loading and unloading activities, and vehicle and equipment maintenance activities in the 57th St open facility

between 9 pm and 7 am.

>>

» - Limit delivery activity noise to two 3-minute window periods during which up to three delivery trucks can exit; maximum of 3 trucks in each window, maximum 5 delivery truck exits. »Violations: 4 to 7 am loading activities continues [see Attachments 1&2] :

» - Loading at least one truck in the 57 th St loading dock; the first »typically around 4 am

>>

» - Truck staging west of the Suprema property line on the public

» right of way, in front of residential properties

>>

» - Movement within the open facility of forklifts, pallet jacks, and »product

>>

» - Movement of forklifts; pallet jacks, and product from within the

»open facility out into 57 th St, Lowell St, and the open parking lot

» (on the east side of Lowell St)

>>

» - Trucks exiting open facility at random times that are not within »two 3-minute windows

>>

» - More than 5 trucks leaving the open facility before 7 am (Suprema »operates 11 trucks)

>>

» - Trucks being staged or maneuvered

»NOISE & TRAFFIC IMPACTS FROM BIG RIG DRIVING & UNLOADING ON, 57th ST. Plan requirement: Concurrent with execution of the Compliance Plan, Suprema will:

»"Use their best efforts in good faith to comply with the Exhibit B truck management plan procedures (see below) to

prevent big rigs from using 57th St. and other nearby local streets to travel to and from Suprema." Exhibit B, "Delivery Truck Management Plan" requirements: As of Nov. 1, 2014, Suprema will:

» - Inform carriers that driving big rigs on 57th St. is prohibited due to Suprema's changed address to Lowell St.

>>

» - Each time Suprema is made aware of a violation it will issue a verbal warning to the driver and a written warning to. the trucking company about the violation.

37

>>

» - Copy the City's Inspection Services Manager on all correspondence above and enter the incident and actions taken on the Complaint Log and submit it to the Inspection Services Manager. >>

»

- Not accept deliveries from carriers who repeat this violation.

>>

»

Please Note: We informed Greg Minor that the assumption the public will report to and engage directly with

Suprema management is unrealistic given its proven track record of harassment and intimidation of neighbors. Instead, we recommended that the City take responsibility for tracking compliance by either assigning staff to witness the daily violations OR installing surveillance cameras so that the City staff can do the monitoring. By all accounts, neighbors

went beyond due diligence by bringing Suprema's numerous code violations to the City's attention in Nov. 2013. Once that occurred, it was the City's responsibility to bring Suprema into compliance on all fronts in a timely manner. Continued failure to do for the last 14 months has been at the public's expense.

>

»Violations: Residents asked several big rig drivers if they received or were aware of Suprema's new address and arrival routes and business hours. All said they were not. The same drivers also said they dreaded doing business with Suprema because of how narrow the streets are, the problems of getting stuck, the risks of hitting parked cars, and the proximity to residential properties.

» Below are two incidents of big rig traveling on side streets. Video evidence of other incidents is available upon request.

» - Dec. 31, 2014 -- 3 pm: A big rig (Knight) going to Suprema on Los Angeles St, significantly damaged a parked minivan and ran over curbs to turn onto Arlington St. Miguel Jara appeared on the scene.

» - Nov. 14, 2014 -- 11:07 am to 11:19 am: A big rig used 57

got stuck at bend in the block and again in intersection of 57 th@Lowell.

>>

>>

»Please Note: The paperwork for at least the two incidents above should have been copied to the City by Mr. Jara. Please inform us whether the City received these reports and if so, then explain why the big rigs continue use residential streets traveling to and from Suprema day and night. >>

>>

>> »<Attachment 1.zip>

th St. (between Adeline and Lowell) going to Sup re ma and

» <Attachments_2 .zip>

38

Minor, Gregory

From:

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Subject:

Quesada, Bill Wednesday, February 11, 2015 11:33 AM Minor, Gregory Low, Tim; Illgen, Richard; Candell, Chris Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violation - Restricted side yard loading hours

Greg, I contacted Suprema Meats this morning to follow up on these two complaints and spoke to both Mario Jara and Miguel Jara. Both of them admitted that they indeed loaded delivery trucks early this morning in violation of the Compliance Plan, and that this practice has been generally occurring before today. Miguel Jara's explanation was that he thought staging product & loading trucks behind a curtain under the canopy in the side lot was allowed by the Compliance Plan. He also said he heard from his attorney {Steve Hassing) this morning who confirmed that he was mistaken.

Since the Suprema owner/operators have today admitted to prohibited activities that have caused nuisance noise reported from last night and previous nights, I agree that your office should move forward to cite them aggressively as we've discussed.

Bill Quesada Zoning Inspection Supervisor

238-6345

-----Original Message-----

.From:

mailt

Supervisor 238-6345 -----Original Message----- .From: mailt Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 7:31 AM To: Cc: Flynn,

Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 7:31 AM

To:

Cc: Flynn, Rachel; Kalb, Dan; Jonsson, Ulla-Britt; Miller, Scott; Ranelletti, Darin; Quesada, Bill; Sandercock, Deborah;

Ranelletti, Darin; Quesada, Bill; Sandercock, Deborah; Candell, Chris lllgen, Richard; Subject: RE: Suprema Meats

Candell, Chris

lllgen, Richard;

Bill; Sandercock, Deborah; Candell, Chris lllgen, Richard; Subject: RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations I
Bill; Sandercock, Deborah; Candell, Chris lllgen, Richard; Subject: RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations I
Bill; Sandercock, Deborah; Candell, Chris lllgen, Richard; Subject: RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations I

Subject: RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations

Subject: RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations I heard all the noise this morning as I

I heard all the noise this morning as I was in the bathroom and the window faces that way and my daughter got up complaining about the noise whose bedroom window also faces Suprema. Why doesn't the city help us?

window also faces Suprema. Why doesn't the city help us? Occupancy Specialist From: Sent: Wednesday, February

Occupancy Specialist

Why doesn't the city help us? Occupancy Specialist From: Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 5:17 AM

From:

Why doesn't the city help us? Occupancy Specialist From: Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 5:17 AM

Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 5:17 AM To: Candell, Chris Cc: Flynn, Rachel; Kalb, Dan; Jonsson, Ulla-Britt; Miller, Scott; Ranelletti, Darin; Quesada, Bill; Sandercock, Deborah;

lllgen, Richard;

Darin; Quesada, Bill; Sandercock, Deborah; lllgen, Richard; Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Good
Darin; Quesada, Bill; Sandercock, Deborah; lllgen, Richard; Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Good
Darin; Quesada, Bill; Sandercock, Deborah; lllgen, Richard; Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Good
Darin; Quesada, Bill; Sandercock, Deborah; lllgen, Richard; Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Good

Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations

Good Morning,

39

Bill; Sandercock, Deborah; lllgen, Richard; Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Good Morning, 39

Starting at 4:40 am this morning SMC is loading two trucks partially concealed behind their blue curtain in the open yard in blatant violation of the agreement they signed. Forklifts are beeping, flashing, and moving, and loading stacks of pallets into the backs of the trucks. This does in fact happen every morning Mon-Fri and others besides me can attest to this fact. I called OPD but they didn't arrive in time.

Again, if you want to witness the daily activity, you will need to be here starting at 4 am.

daily activity, you will need to be here starting at 4 am. On Mon, Feb 9,

On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Hi Chris,

starting at 4 am. On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Hi Chris, mailto: w

mailto:

wrote:

Thank you for your updates. We understand that these inspections and wading through footage and photos are tedious and time consuming. We have first hand experience since we've been documenting, and reporting noise and other violations for well over a year now.

We can prove that the violations of section 6 of the compliance plan are not minor or occasional, but are ongoing, daily, Monday to Friday.

We agree that no big rigs have been unloaded on 57th St since the compliance plan was signed, but your overall summary and conclusions about early morning/night time activity and big rig traffic are potentially misleading for the following reasons.

Inspections for violations of section 6 were not carried out early enough. Most of the violations occur Monday to Friday between 4 and 5:15 am and include movement of equipment and product within the yard and more than 5 trucks total leaving before 7 am. Activity also occurs in the streets, which while not a technical violation of section 6, is not helping to minimize the night time noise and nuisance impacts. All activity came to a halt during the hour that Ulla-Brit Jonsson and Scott Miller were observing, but we were able to show them video with audio of loading and activity that occurred that morning starting just after 4 am. Greg Minor has only visited in the evening outside of normal business hours before

9pm.

The video records of staging, vehicle movement, and equipment/product movement with forklifts, and loading between 4 and 7 am are examples of what we feel are ongoing serious violations of the compliance plan. The videos and photos submitted for the 5 dates you mention are just a small but representative sample. You implied in your summary that these are the only dates violations occurred out of the 103 days since the plan was signed.

Neighbor submitted videos and photos of big rigs traveling on 57th street only covered the period through the first week in December. There is no evidence that big rig traffic has "decreased dramatically". We just haven't had the time to examine all of the video to make a determination one way or the other. In January, I personally went out to speak with two big rig drivers to request they shut their refers off and on Dec 31 there was an accident at Los Angeles and Arlington involving a big rig and a parked minivan.

To clarify, we never stated that we reported violations of the truck management plan to SMC. We said previously in our emails that we don't agree we should have to report directly to SMC staff. We reported the violations with photo documentation to Greg Minor and Bill Quesada.

Thanks,

directly to SMC staff. We reported the violations with photo documentation to Greg Minor and Bill

40

On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Candell, Chris <CCandell@oaklandnet.com<mailto:CCandell@oaklandnet.com» wrote:

wrote: I have attached two files regarding compliance with the

I have attached two files regarding compliance with the Compliance Plan signed by SMC on 10/20/14. One attachment is a table outlining compliance plan items, status per staff observations, and observations by neighbors. The other attachment is a summary of the status of compliance.

In preparing these documents we used direct staff observation, review of the video record from 10/20/14 to 2/4/15 and the following documentation from SMC:

letters sent to trucking companies; mailing lists of who they were sent to; and complaint logs which include the nature of the complaints, the response by SMC and resolution of the complaints.

I will leave the status of the planning review to Ulla and Scott.

-----Original Message----- From: Flynn, Rachel Sent: Friday, January 09, 2015 2:50 PM To: Kalb, Dan; Jonsson, Ulla-Britt; Miller, Scott; Ranelletti, Darin; Quesada, Bill; Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah

Cc: lllgen, Richard;

Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: lllgen, Richard; Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Dan,
Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: lllgen, Richard; Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Dan,
Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: lllgen, Richard; Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Dan,
Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: lllgen, Richard; Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Dan,
Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: lllgen, Richard; Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Dan,

Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations

Dan, Bill Quesada (zoning compliance) and Ulla Jonsson (planning application) are handling the Suprema Meats case.

Bill and Ulla, Can you please coordinate a response to

Thanks, Rachel

Can you please coordinate a response to Thanks, Rachel on her complaints? And copy Dan Kalb.

on her complaints? And copy Dan Kalb.

>On Jan 9~ 2015, at 2:35 PM, "Kalb, Dan" <DKalb@oaklandnet.com<mailto:DKalb@oaklandnet.com» wrote:

>

>

Rachel, Richard -

>

> Please keep me in the loop on the timely follow-up here. >Thanks, >-Dan

>

>

>-Dan Kalb >City Councilmember

> District One

>Oakland, CA

>

510-238-7001<te1:510-238-7001>

>

>

>

>>On Jan 9, 2015, at 1:38 PM, "

>>

>>

>>

»Dear Rachel and Richard,

Jan 9, 2015, at 1:38 PM, " >> >> >> »Dear Rachel and Richard, 41 mailto

41

mailto

>wrote:

» Please review the information below concerning Suprema's numerou~ violations to the Compliance Plan and respond as soon as possible regarding each of the issues raised.

»Thank you in advance for your prompt attention,

raised. »Thank you in advance for your prompt attention, >> » >> >> »MATERIAL BREACH OF
>> »
>>
»
you in advance for your prompt attention, >> » >> >> »MATERIAL BREACH OF COMPLIANCE PLAN
you in advance for your prompt attention, >> » >> >> »MATERIAL BREACH OF COMPLIANCE PLAN
you in advance for your prompt attention, >> » >> >> »MATERIAL BREACH OF COMPLIANCE PLAN
you in advance for your prompt attention, >> » >> >> »MATERIAL BREACH OF COMPLIANCE PLAN

>>

>>

»MATERIAL BREACH OF COMPLIANCE PLAN & ASSOCIATED FINES

>>

»As you both know, the Compliance Plan clearly states that: "Failure to satisfy the deadlines and time lines prescribed in this Work Plan or to abide by any specific condition will constitute and a material breach of the Compliance Plan and will result in Administrative Fines of up to $1,000 per day for as long as the performance schedule is not met." Based on documented evidence of numerous violations below, we expect the City to charge Su pre ma with Administrative Fines of

up to $1,000

$40,000 performance bond, held by the City as insurance of Suprema's faithful completion of all Plan requirements on

per day going back to the beginning of each material breach. We also

expect Su pre ma to forfeit their

 

time.

>

»

NOISE FROM OPEN FACILITY BETWEEN 9 PM to 7 AM Plan requirement (by 11/20/14): Suprema will:

»

- Discontinue all delivery staging activities, including movement of vehicles, equipment, and product into position for

loading, loading and unloading activities, and vehicle and equipment maintenance activities in the 57th St open facility

between 9 pm and 7 am.

>>

» - Limit delivery activity noise to two 3-minute window periods during which up to three delivery trucks can exit; maximum of 3 trucks in each window, maximum 5 delivery truck exits. »Violations: 4 to 7 am loading activities continues [see Attachments 1&2] :

» - Loading at least one truck in the 57 th St loading dock; the first »typically around 4 am

>>

» - Truck staging west of the Suprema property line on the public »right of way, in front of residential properties

>>

» - Movement within the open facility of forklifts, pallet jacks, and »product

>>

» - Movement of forklifts, pallet jacks, and product from within the

»open facility out into 57 th St, Lowell St, and the open parking lot

» (on the east side of Lowell St)

>>

>> - Trucks exiting open facility at random times that are not within »two 3-minute windows

>>

42

» - More than 5 trucks leaving the open facility before 7 am (Suprema »operates 11 trucks) >>

» - Trucks being staged or maneuvered

»NOISE & TRAFFIC IMPACTS FROM BIG RIG DRIVING & UNLOADING ON 57th ST. Plan requirement: Concurrent with execution of the Compliance Plan, Su pre ma will:

»"Use their best efforts in good faith to comply with the Exhibit B truck management plan procedures (see below) to

prevent big rigs from using 57th St. and other nearby local streets to travel to and from Suprema." Exhibit B, "Delivery Truck Management Plan" requirements: As of Nov. 1, 2014, Suprema will:

»

- Inform carriers that driving big rigs on 57th St. is prohibited due to Suprema's changed address to Lowell St.

>>

» - Each time Suprema is made aware of a violation it will issue a verbal warning to the driver and a written warning to the trucking company about the violation. >>

» - Copy the City's Inspection Services Manager on all correspondence above and enter the incident and actions taken on the Complaint Log and submit it to the Inspection Services Manager. >>

»

- Not accept deliveries from carriers who repeat this violation.

>>

»

Please Note: We informed Greg Minor that the assumption the public will report to and engage directly with

Suprema management is unrealistic given its proven track record of harassment and intimidation of neighbors. Instead, we recommended that the City take responsibility for tracking compliance by either assigning staff to witness the daily

violations OR installing surveillance cameras so that the City staff can do the monitoring. By all accounts, neighbors went beyond due diligence by bringing Suprema's numerous code violations to the City's attention in Nov. 2013. Once that occurred, it was the City's responsibility to bring Suprema into compliance on all fronts in a timely manner. Continued failure to do for the last 14 months has been at the public's expense.

>

»Violations: Residents asked several big rig drivers if they received or were aware of Suprema's new address and

arrival routes and business hours. All said they were not. The same drivers also said they dreaded doing business with Suprema because of how narrow the streets are, the problems of getting stuck, the risks of hitting parked cars, and the proximity to residential properties.

» Below are two incidents of big rig traveling on side streets. Video evidence of other incidents is available upon request.

» - Dec. 31, 2014-- 3 pm: A big rig (Knight) going to Suprema on Los Angeles St, significantly damaged a parked

minivan and ran over curbs to turn onto Arlington St. Miguel Jara appeared on the scene.

» - Nov. 14, 2014 -- 11:07 am to 11:19 am: A big rig used 57 th St. (between Adeline and Lowell) going to Suprema and

got stuck at bend in the block and again in intersection of 57 th@Lowell.

>>

>>

»Please Note: The paperwork for at least the two incidents above should have been copied to the City by Mr. Jara. Please inform us whether the City received these reports and if so, then explain why the big rigs continue use,residential streets traveling to and from Suprema day and night. >>

>>

>> »<Attachment 1.zip>,

» <Attachments_2 .zip>

43

Minor, Gregory

From:

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Subject:

Flynn, Rachel Wednesday, February 11, 2015 12:47 PM Minor, Gregory

Low, Tim; Quesada, Bill; Illgen, Richard; Candell, Chris

RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violation -

Restricted side yard loading hours

Greg, When can you cite them and what are the penalties? Daily fines? We need to act today, if at all possible. Thanks, Rachel

From: Quesada, Bill Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 11:33 AM To: Minor, Gregory Cc: Low, Tim; lllgen, Richard; Candell, Chris Subject: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violation - Restricted side yard loading hours

Greg, I contacted Suprema Meats this morning to follow up on these two complaints and spoke to both Mario Jara and Miguel Jara. Both of them admitted that they indeed loaded delivery trucks early this morning in violation of the Compliance Plan, and that this practice has been generally occurring before today. Miguel Jara's explanation was that he thought staging product & loading trucks behind a curtain under the canopy in the side lot was allowed by the Compliance Plan. He also said he heard from his attorney (Steve Hassing) this morning who confirmed that he was mistaken.

Since the Suprema owner/operators have today admitted to prohibited activities that have caused nuisance noise reported from last night and previous nights, I agree that your office should move forward to cite them aggressively as we've discussed.

Bill Quesada Zoning Inspection Supervisor

238-6345

-----Original Message-----

From:

Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 7:31 AM To: Candell, Chris Cc: Flynn, Rachel; Kalb, Dan; Jonsson, Ulla-Britt; Miller, Scott; Ranelletti, Darin; Quesada, Bill; Sandercock, Deborah;

Ranelletti, Darin; Quesada, Bill; Sandercock, Deborah; [mailt lllgen, Richard; Subject: RE: Suprema Meats
Ranelletti, Darin; Quesada, Bill; Sandercock, Deborah; [mailt lllgen, Richard; Subject: RE: Suprema Meats

[mailt

Darin; Quesada, Bill; Sandercock, Deborah; [mailt lllgen, Richard; Subject: RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan

lllgen, Richard;

Bill; Sandercock, Deborah; [mailt lllgen, Richard; Subject: RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations I
Bill; Sandercock, Deborah; [mailt lllgen, Richard; Subject: RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations I
Bill; Sandercock, Deborah; [mailt lllgen, Richard; Subject: RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations I

Subject: RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations

Subject: RE: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations I heard all the noise this morning as I

I heard all the noise this morning as I was in the bathroom and the window faces that way and my daughter got up complaining about the noise whose bedroom window also faces Suprema. Why doesn't the city help us?

daughter got up complaining about the noise whose bedroom window also faces Suprema. Why doesn't the
daughter got up complaining about the noise whose bedroom window also faces Suprema. Why doesn't the

44

From:

From: Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 5:17 AM To: Candell, Chris Cc: Flynn, Rachel; Kalb, Dan;
From: Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 5:17 AM To: Candell, Chris Cc: Flynn, Rachel; Kalb, Dan;

Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 5:17 AM To: Candell, Chris Cc: Flynn, Rachel; Kalb, Dan; Jonsson, Ulla-Britt; Miller, Scott; Ranelletti, Darin; Quesada, Bill· Sandercock

lllgen, Richard;

Darin; Quesada, Bill· Sandercock lllgen, Richard; Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Good
Darin; Quesada, Bill· Sandercock lllgen, Richard; Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Good
Darin; Quesada, Bill· Sandercock lllgen, Richard; Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Good
Darin; Quesada, Bill· Sandercock lllgen, Richard; Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Good

Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations

Good Morning,

Starting at 4:40 am this morning SMC is loading two trucks partially concealed behind their blue curtain in the open yard in blatant violation of the agreement they signed. Forklifts are beeping, flashing, and moving, and loading stacks of pallets into the backs of the trucks. This does in fact happen every morning Mon-Fri and others besides me can attest to this fact. I called OPD but they didn't arrive in time.

Again, if you want to witness the daily activity, you will need to be here starting at 4 am.

daily activity, you will need to be here starting at 4 am. On Mon, Feb 9,

On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Hi Chris,

starting at 4 am. On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Hi Chris, <mailto >wrote:
starting at 4 am. On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Hi Chris, <mailto >wrote:

<mailto

4 am. On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Hi Chris, <mailto >wrote: Thank you

>wrote:

Thank you for your updates. We understand that these inspections and wading through footage and photos are tedious and time consuming. We have first hand experience since we've been documenting, and reporting noise and other violations for well over a year now.

We can prove that the violations of section 6 of the compliance plan are not minor or occasional, but are ongoing, daily, '

Monday to Friday.

We agree that no big rigs have been unloaded on 57th St since the compliance plan was signed, but your overall summary and conclusions about early morning/night time activity and big rig traffic are potentially misleading for the following reasons.

Inspections for violations of section 6 were not carried out early enough. Most of the violations occur Monday to Friday between 4 and 5:15 am and include movement of equipment and product within the yard and more than 5 trucks total leaving before 7 am. Activity also occurs in the streets, which while not a technical violation of section 6, is not helping to minimize the night time noise and nuisance impacts. All activity came to a halt during the hour that Ulla-Brit Jonsson and Scott Miller were observing, but we were able to show them video with audio of loading and activity that occurred that morning starting just after 4 am. Greg Minor has only visited in the evening outside of normal business hours before

9pm.

The video records of staging, vehicle movement, and equipment/product movement with forklifts, and loading between 4 and 7 am are examples of what we feel are ongoing serious violations of the compliance plan. The videos and photos submitted for the 5 dates you mention are just a small but representative sample. You implied in your summary that these are the only dates violations occurred out of the 103 days since the plan was signed.

Neighbor submitted videos and photos of big rigs traveling on 57th street only covered the period through the first week in December. There is no evidence that big rig traffic has "decreased dramatically". We just haven't had the time to examine all of the video to make a determination one way or the other. In January, I personally went out to speak with two big rig drivers to request they shut their refers off and on Dec 31 there was an accident at Los Angeles and Arlington involving a big rig and a parked minivan.

45

To clarify, we never stated that we reported violations ofthe truck management plan to SMC. We said previously in our emails that we don't agree we should have to report directly to SMC staff. We reported the violations with photo documentation to Greg Minor and Bill Quesada.

Thanks,

photo documentation to Greg Minor and Bill Quesada. Thanks, On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 1:24

On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Candell, Chris <CCandell@oaklandnet.com<mailto:CCandell@oaklandnet.com» wrote:

wrote: I have attached two files regarding compliance with the

I have attached two files regarding compliance with the Compliance Plan signed by SMC on 10/20/14. One attachment is a table outlining compliance plan items, status per staff observations, and observations by neighbors. The other attachment is a summary of the status of compliance.

In preparing these documents we used direct staff observation, review of the video record from 10/20/14 to 2/4/15 and the following documentation from SMC:

letters sent to trucking companies; mailing lists of who they were sent to; and complaint logs which include the nature of the complaints, the response by SMC and resolution of the complaints.

I will leave the status of the planning review to Ulla and Scott.

-----Original Message----- From: Flynn, Rachel Sent: Friday, January 09, 2015 2:50 PM To: Kalb, Dan; Jonsson, Ulla-Britt; Miller, Scott; Ranelletti, Darin; Quesada, Bill; Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah

Cc: Ill en Richard·

Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: Ill en Richard· Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Dan,
Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: Ill en Richard· Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Dan,
Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: Ill en Richard· Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Dan,
Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: Ill en Richard· Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Dan,
Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: Ill en Richard· Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Dan,
Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: Ill en Richard· Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Dan,
Candell, Chris; Sandercock, Deborah Cc: Ill en Richard· Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations Dan,

Subject: Re: Suprema Meats Compliance Plan violations

Dan, Bill Quesada (zoning compliance) and Ulla Jonsson (planning application) are handling the Suprema Meats case.

Bill and Ulla, Can you please coordinate a response to

Thanks, Rachel

Ulla, Can you please coordinate a response to Thanks, Rachel on her complaints? And copy Dan

on her complaints? And copy Dan Kalb.

>On Jan 9, 2015, at 2:35 PM, "Kalb, Dan" <DKalb@oaklandnet.com<mailto:DKalb@oaklandnet.com» wrote:

>

>

Rachel,. Richard -

>

> Please keep me in the loop on the timely follow-up here. >Thanks, >-Dan

>

>

>-Dan Kalb >City Councilmember

> District One

46

>Oakland, CA > 510-238-7001<tel:510-238-7001>

>

>

>

>>On Jan 9, 2015, at 1:38 PM, "

>>

>>

Jan 9, 2015, at 1:38 PM, " >> >> mailto wrote: >> » Dear Rachel and

mailto

wrote:

>>

»

Dear Rachel and Richard,

» Please review the information below concerning Suprema's numerous violations to the Compliance Plan and respond as soon as possible regarding each of the issues raised.

»Thank you in advance for your prompt attention,

raised. »Thank you in advance for your prompt attention, >>. » >> >> »MATERIAL BREACH OF
>>. »
>>.
»
you in advance for your prompt attention, >>. » >> >> »MATERIAL BREACH OF COMPLIANCE PLAN
you in advance for your prompt attention, >>. » >> >> »MATERIAL BREACH OF COMPLIANCE PLAN
you in advance for your prompt attention, >>. » >> >> »MATERIAL BREACH OF COMPLIANCE PLAN

>>

>>

»MATERIAL BREACH OF COMPLIANCE PLAN & ASSOCIATED FINES

>>

»As you both know, the Compliance Plan clearly states that: "Failure to satisfy the deadlines and timelines prescribed in this Work Plan or to abide by any specific condition will constitute and a material breach of the Compliance Plan and will result in Administrative Fines of up to $1,000 per day for as long as the performance schedule is not met." Based on documented evidence of numerous violations below, we expect the City to charge Suprema with Administrative Fines of up to $1,000 per day going back to the beginning of each material breach. We also expect Suprema to forfeit their $40,000 performance bond, held by the City as insurance of Suprema's faithful completion of all Plan requirements on time.

>

»NOISE FROM OPEN FACILITY BETWEEN 9 PM to 7 AM Plan requirement (by 11/20/14): Suprema will:

» - Discontinue all delivery staging activities, including movement of vehicles, equipment, and product into position for

loading, loading and unloading activities, and vehicle and equipment maintenance activities in the 57th St open facility

between 9 pm and 7 am.

>>

» - Limit delivery activity noise to two 3-minute window periods during which up to three delivery trucks can exit; maximum of 3 trucks in each window, maximum 5 delivery truck exits. »Violations: 4 to 7 am loading activities continues [see Attachments 1&2] :

» - Loading at least one truck in the 57 th St loading dock; the first »typically around 4 am >>

» - Truck staging west of the Suprema property line. on the public

» right of way, in front of residential properties

>>

47

» - Movement within the open facility of forklifts, pallet jacks, and »product

>>

»

- Movement of forklifts, pallet jacks, and product from within the

»open facility out into 57 th St, Lowell St, and the open parking lot »(on the east side of Lowell St)

>>

» - Trucks exiting open facility at random times that are not within »two 3-minute windows

>>

» - More than 5 trucks leaving the open facility before 7 am (Suprema »operates 11 trucks)

>>

»

- Trucks being staged or maneuvered

»NOISE & TRAFFIC IMPACTS FROM BIG RIG DRIVING & UNLOADING ON 57th ST. Plan requirement: Concurrent with

execution of the Compliance Plan, Suprema will:

»"Use their best efforts in good faith to comply with the Exhibit B truck management plan procedures (see below) to prevent big rigs from using 57th St. and other nearby local streets to travel to and from Suprema." Exhibit B, "Delivery Truck Management Plan" requirements: As of Nov. 1, 2014, Su pre ma will:

»

- Inform carriers that driving big rigs on 57th St. is prohibited due to Suprema's changed address to Lowell St.

>>

» - Each time Suprema is made aware of a violation it will issue a verbal warning to the driver and a written warning to the trucking company about the violation.

>>

» - Copy the City's Inspection Services Manager on all correspondence above and enter the incident and actions taken on the Complaint Log and submit it to the Inspection Services Manager.

>>

»

- Not accept deliveries from carriers who repeat this violation.

>>

»

Please Note: We informed Greg Minor that the assumption the public will report to and engage directly with

Suprema management is unrealistic given its proven track record of harassment and intimidation of neighbors. Instead, we recommended that the City take responsibility for tracking compliance by either assigning staff to witness the daily violations OR installing surveillance cameras so that the City staff can do the monitoring. By all accounts, neighbors went beyond due diligence by bringing Suprema's numerous code violations to the City's attention in Nov. 2013. Once that occurred, it was the City's responsibility to bring Suprema into compliance on all fronts in a timely manner. Continued failure to do for the last 14 months has been at the public's expense.

>

»Violations: Residents asked several big rig drivers if they received or were aware of Suprema's new address and arrival routes and business hours. All said they were not. The same drivers also said they dreaded doing business with Suprema because of how narrow the streets are, the problems of getting stuck, the risks of hitting parked cars, and the proximity to residential properties.

» Below are two incidents of big rig traveling on side streets. Video evidence of other incidents is available upon request.

» - Dec. 31, 2014 -- 3 pm: A big rig (Knight) going to Suprema on Los Angeles St, significantly damaged a parked minivan and ran over curbs to turn onto Arlington St. Miguel Jara appeared on the scene.

» - Nov. 14, 2014 -- 11:07 am to 11:19 am: A big rig used 57 th St. (between Adeline and Lowell) going to Suprema and got stuck at bend in the block and again in intersection of 57 th@Lowell.

>>

>>

»Please Note: The paperwork for at least the two incidents above should have been copied to the City by Mr. Jara. Please inform us whether the City received these reports and if so, then explain why the big rigs continue use residential streets traveling to and from Suprema day and night.

48

>>

>>

>>

»<Attachment 1.zip>

» <Attachments_2 .zip>

Minor, Gregory

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Steve <sjh@hassinglaw.com> Wednesday, February 11, 2015 4:43 PM Minor, Gregory; Illgen, Richard; Candell, Chris; mmjara@comcast.net; cmiers@mierscottarchitects.com; Quesada, Bill

RE: Recording of Memornadum of Agreement

I left the original with Mr. lllgen. It contained my original notarized signature. So I don't have the original, the city does.

sjh

From: Minor, Gregory [mailto:GMinor@oaklandnet.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 1:44 PM To: Illgen, Richard; Steve; Candell, Chris; mmjara@comcast.net; cmiers@mierscottarchitects.com; Quesada, Bill Subject: RE: Recording of Memornadum of Agreement

Hi Mr. Hassing-

Unfortunately our last attempt to record suprema's memorandum failed as the document did not contain your original signature. Can you please send my office the agreement with your original signature so that I can add my original signature and get the document recorded? And fyi, tomorrow is a city holiday.

Thank you,

Greg Minor Assistant to the City Administrator Nuisance Abatement/Special Activity Permits Division 1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, 11th Floor Oakland, CA 94612 Phone: (510)238-6370 Fax: (510) 238-7084 gminor@oaklandnet.com

From: Illgen, Richard Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 6: 10 PM To: Steve; Minor, Gregory; Candell, Chris; mmjara@comcast.net; cmiers@mierscottarchitects.com Subject: RE:Recording of Memornadum of Agreement

Steve,

Greg Minor indicated he will sign the document and has a notary in his office. Sorry, I thought this had been taken care of.

Richard

Richard,

Today I received a call from Miguel Jara, Jr. in connection with a notice he received from Mr. Candell concerning the recording of the Memorandum of Agreement that I prepared, signed before a notary on November 10 on behalf of

Suprema and brought to your office at approximately 3:00 p.m. that day because the recorder would not record it without

a signature from the City.

Bill was not in so I came over to your office. You were not in either.

a signature line for the City and added an acknowledgment. I came back to your office on the 12th or 13th, met on November 12 (Nov at which time you represented that you would get it signed by someone at the city and that you would

see that it got recorded. not been recorded.

I took the Memorandum back to my office and added

I haven't heard a word about it until this afternoon. Mr. Candell and Mr. Minor report that it has

Please advise.

Thanks,

sjh

copy attached.

P.S. Just got off the phone with Mr. Minor who has evidently already found out this info from another source. of help let me know.

sjh

If I can be

This is a confidential attorney-client communication. This email contains confidential attorney-client privileged information and is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and any attachments.

~ Please consider the environment before printing this email

51

[v1.03]

Minor, Gregory

From:

Candell,· Chris

Sent:

Friday, February 13, 2015 9:23 AM

To:

Minor, Gregory

Subject:

RE: draft suprema notice of compliance plan violation

Greg, I don't understand the last sentence, spraying of chemicals? I don't remember that as a complaint or anything I've

seen in the video record. Was that from a

draft?

I've seen in the video record. Was that from a draft? From: Minor, Gregory Sent: Thursday,

From: Minor, Gregory Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2015 8:47 PM To: Illgen, Richard Cc: Quesada, Bill; Candell, Chris; Vasquez, Susan Subject: draft suprema notice of compliance plan violation

Richard-

If you have a moment to review, attached is a draft notice of violation I've put together for suprema. It's a little different than citations I usually issue because it's a breach of contract (so no right to administrative appeal I believe) and the compliance plan didn't articulate exactly what notification would look like. I've copied photos documenting the violations onto a CD that we will enclose with the letter.

If it looks ok I'd like to get this out tomorrow (Friday).

thanks

Greg Minor Assistant to the City Administrator Nuisance Abatement/Special Activity Permits Division 1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, 11th Floor Oakland, CA 94612 Phone: (510)238-6370 Fax: (510) 238-7084 gm i no r@oakla nd net.com

52

Minor, Gregory

From:

MARIO E <tiomarito@comcast.net>

Sent:

Friday, February 13, 2015 2:22 PM

To:

Candell, Chris

Cc:

Bill Quesada; Minor, Gregory; JARA, MIGUEL; Hassing, Steve

Subject:

Weekly Complaint log

Attachments:

IMG_OOOl.jpg; IMGjpg

Hello Chris,

This week, I am sending you the delivery drivers sign log, there are a few changes, aside from that the only other complaint was made by Mr. Bill Quesada, he called to let us know that we were not in compliance with the loading agreement, apparently I was misinformed based an a misinterpretation of the agreement. Later in the day, I spoke to Miguel, which in turn spoke to Steve Hassing and then Miguel and Mr. Quesada had a conversation where I believe things got cleared up. We were loading 3 trucks a day before, and those trucks were parked on the driveway, in the morning we were loading three other trucks under the hallway roof, and I guess that that was the problem. After that call, we are now loading all of the early morning routes a day before, and the rest we do not load until after 7:00 a.m. If an apology is necessary, please accept it from us, we are going to do whatever is necessary to be in compliance, so whatever else needs to be done, please just let me know. Thank you.

Best Regards.

Mario E Jara Operations Manager Suprema Meat Company 5655 Lowell Street Oakland, CA 94608 (510) 654-9282 (510) 655-9566 fax (510 376-3010 cell Mario.suprema@comcast.net tiomarito@comcast.net

53

Minor, Gregory

From:

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Subject:

fyi

Quesada, Bill Tuesday, February 17, 2015 9:44 AM Minor, Gregory Candell, Chris FW: Suprema

From: mmjara@comcast.net [mailto:mmjara@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 6:05 PM To: Quesada, Bill

Subject: Suprema

Hi Bill

All 6 trucks park on driveway loaded.

Thanks

Miguel

1

Minor, Gregory

From:

MARIO E <tiomarito@comcast.net>

Sent:

Friday, February 13, 2015 2:58 PM

To:

Candell, Chris

Cc:

Bill Quesada; Minor, Gregory; JARA, MIGUEL; Hassing, Steve

Subject:

Suprema's outgoing I incoming truck route change

Attachments:

IMG.jpg; IMG_OOOljpg

Hello again Chris,

On one of the prior weekly complaint logs I had mentioned about a gentleman that lived on 56th street that had complained about our truck driving very early in the morning through his street. After receiving that complaint that I wrote a memo to all our drivers basically saying that we now have to take only permitted truck routes, in this case the truck route makes us go south on Lowell to Adeline st, then left on Adeline, right on 55th, then right on Martin Luther King Jr. to the freeway

(980).

Prior to that we had instructed our driver that when they came out of out driveway, not to turn left on 57th Street, because we had received complaints. I am attaching the memo ( in Spanish) with the drivers signatures, I can also assure you that since February 2nd, we have not had a driver turn on 56th street on their way out of or into Suprema. If you have any questions, or need more information regarding this matter, just let me know. Thank you.

Mario E Jara Operations Manager Suprema Meat Company 5655 Lowell Street Oakland, CA 94608 (510) 654-9282 (510) 655-9566 fax (510 376-3010 cell Mario.suprema@comcast.net tiomarito@comcast.net

2

Minor, Gregory

From:

Quesada, Bill

Sent:

Tuesday, February 17, 2015 9:44 AM

To:

Minor, Gregory

Cc:

Candell, Chris

Subject:

FW: Suprema

fyi

From: mmjara@comcast.net [mailto:mmjara@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2015 7:41 PM To: Quesada, Bill Cc: Candell, Chris

Subject: Suprema

Hi Bill

Loaded 8 trucks today before 7:00p

Thanks

Miguel

3

Minor, Gregory

From:

Vasquez, Susan

Sent:

Tuesday, February 17, 2015 3:01 PM

To:

Quesada, Bill; Candell, Chris; Illgen, Richard; Flynn, Rachel; Kalb, Dan

Cc:

Minor, Gregory

Subject:

955 - 57th ST dba Suprema Meats

Attachments:

DOC021715.pdf

Hi,

Attached is your file copy. Copies were sent out to all offices and officials that may be affected by our actions.

Thanks,

SLAMNY\I V~~

City Administrator's Office Nuisance Abatement Division 1 Frank Ogawa Plaza, 11th floor (510) 238-7487

4

Minor, Gregory

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Candell, Chris Wednesday, February 18, 2015 8:53 AM Quesada, Bill; Minor, Gregory RE: Suprema

Only problem with this is how many are leaving before 7? 6-8 are too many.

From: Quesada, Bill Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 9:44 AM To: Minor, Gregory Cc: Candell, Chris Subject: FW: Suprema

fyi

From: mmjara@comcast.net [mailto:mmjara@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2015 7:41 PM To: Quesada, Bill Cc: Candell, Chris

Subject: Suprema

Hi Bill

Loaded 8 trucks today before 7:00p

Thanks

Miguel

5

Minor, Gregory

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Candell, Chris Wednesday, February 18, 2015 8:56 AM Minor, Gregory RE: suprema meats notice of violation for review

Until the address change is completed, that is still the address. At some point soon we may have to send to two addresses because when the address changes there will be a time lag for the post office to pick up on the change yet we will have changed the address. Should not be a problem and both letters will get there.

From: Minor, Gregory Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 10:04 AM To: Illgen, Richard Cc: Quesada, Bill; Candell, Chris; Vasquez, Susan Subject: suprema meats notice of violation for review

Passing along a slightly revised notice of violation for suprema meats for your review. I would like to send out today; so please send comments by this afternoon.

Also, is suprema's mailing address still technically 955 5ih street?

thanks

Greg Minor Assistant to the City Administrator Nuisance Abatement/Special Activity Permits Division .1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, 11th Floor Oakland, CA 94612

Phone: {510)238-6370 Fax: (510) 238-7084

gminor@oaklandnet.com

6

Minor, Gregory

From:

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Subject:

Quesada, Bill Wednesday, February 18, 2015 11:09 AM Minor, Gregory; Candell, Chris Illgen, Richard RE: Recording of Memornadum of Agreement

Chris would be the one to have it on our side. He wa.s out yesterday, is in the field now, and will reply by end of day.

From: Minor, Gregory Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 10:19 AM To: Quesada, Bill; Candell, Chris Cc: Illgen, Richard Subject: RE: Recording qf Memornadum of Agreement

Folks- can we confirm today whether or not we have mr hassing's original version of the memorandum? lfwe lost it, not the end of the world, I just want us to check before asking mr hassing to re sign/notarize.

Thanks

greg

From: Minor, Gregory Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 5:15 PM To: Quesada, Bill; Candell, Chris Cc: Illgen, Richard Subject: FW: Recording of Memornadum of Agreement

Bill and chris- do you happen to have the original? Richard believes he passed it on to one of us and I don't think I have it. Thanks greg

From: Steve [mailto:sjh@hassinqlaw.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 4:43 PM To: Minor, Gregory; Illgen, Richard; Candell, Chris; mmjara@comcast.net; cmiers@mierscottarchitects.com; Quesada, Bill Subject: RE: Recording of Memornadum of Agreement

I left the original with Mr. lllgen. It contained my original notarized signature. So I don't have the original, the city does.

sjh

From: Minor, Gregory [mailto:GM inor@oaklandnet.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 1:44 PM To: Illgen, Richard; Steve; Candell, Chris; mmjara@comcast.net; cmiers@mierscottarchitects.com; Quesada, Bill Subject: RE: Recording of Memornadum of Agreement

Hi Mr. Hassing-

7

Unfortunately our last attempt to record suprema's memorandum failed as the document did not contain your original signature. Can you please send my office the agreement with your original signature so that I can add my original signature and get the document recorded? And fyi, tomorrow is a city holiday.

Thank you,

Greg Minor Assistant to the City Administrator Nuisance Abatement/Special Activity Permits Division 1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, 11th Floor Oakland, CA 94612 Phone: (510)238-6370 Fax: (510) 238-7084 gm ino r@oakla nd net.com

From: Illgen, Richard Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 6: 10 PM To: Steve; Minor, Gregory; Candell, Chris; mmjara@comcast.net; cmiers@mierscottarchitects.com Subject: RE:Recording of Memornadum of Agreement

Steve,

Greg Minor indicated he will sign the document and has a notary in his office. Sorry, I thought this had been taken care of.

Richard

From: Steve [mailto:sjh@hassinglaw.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 4:47 PM To: Illgen, Richard; Minor, Gregory; Candell, Chris; mmjara@comcast.net; cmiers@mierscottarchitects.com Subject: Recording of Memornadum of Agreement

Richard,

Today I received a call from Miguel Jara, Jr. in connection with a notice he received from Mr. Candell concerning the

recording of the Memorandum of Agreement that I prepared, signed before a notary on November 10 on behalf of Suprema and brought to your office at approximately 3:00 p.m. that day because the recorder would not record it without

a signature from the City.

·

Bill was not in so I came over to your office. You were not in either. I took the Memorandum back to my office and added a signature line for the City and added an acknowledgment. I came back to your office on the 12th or 13th, met on November 12 (Nov at which time you represented that you would get it signed by someone at the city and that you would see that it got recorded. I haven't heard a word about it until this afternoon. Mr. Candell and Mr. Minor report that it has not been recorded.

Please advise.

Thanks,

sjh

copy attached.

P.S. Just got off the phone with Mr. Minor who has evidently already found out this info from another source. If I can be of help let me know.

8

sjh

This is a confidential attorney-client communication. This email contains confidential attorney-client privileged information and is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and any attachments.

.Jl, Please consider the environment before printing tHis email

9

[v1.03]

Minor, Gregory

From:

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Subject:

Candell, Chris Wednesday, February 18, 2015 4:25 PM Minor, Gregory; Quesada, Bill Illgen, Richard RE: Recording of Memornadum of Agreement

I'm not finding it here. I know it was returned from the County but I don't remember seeing it after I sent it off.

From: Minor, Gregory Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 10: 19 AM To: Quesada, Bill; Candell, Chris Cc: Illgen, Richard Subject: RE: Recording of Memornadum of Agreement

Folks- can we confirm today whether or not we have mr hassing's original version of the memorandum? If we lost it, not the end of the world, I just want us to check before asking mr hassing to re sign/notarize.

Thanks

greg

From: Minor, Gregory Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 5:15 PM To: Quesada, Bill; Candell, Chris Cc: Illgen, Richard Subject: FW: Recording of Memornadum of Agreement

Bill and chris- do you happen to have the original? Richard believes he passed it on to one of us and I don't think I have it. Thanks greg

From: Steve [mailto:sjh@hassinglaw.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 4:43 PM To: Minor, Gregory; Illgen, Richard; Candell, Chris; mmjara@comcast.net; cmiers@mierscottarchitects.com; Quesada, Bill Subject: RE: Recording of Memornadum of Agreement

I left the original with Mr. lllgen.

sjh

It contained my original notarized signature.

So I don't have the original, the city does.

From: Minor, Gregory [mailto:GMinor@oaklandnet.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 1 :44 PM To: Illgen, Richard; Steve; Candell, Chris; mmjara@comcast.net; cmiers@mierscottarchitects.com; Quesada, Bill Subject: RE: Recording of Memornadum of Agreement

Hi Mr. Hassing-

10

Unfortunately our last attempt to record suprema's memorandum failed as the document did not contain your original signature. Can you please send my office the agreement with your original signature so that I can add my original signature and get the document recorded? And fyi, tomorrow is a city holiday.

Thank you,

Greg Minor Assistant to the City Administrator Nuisance Abatement/Special Activity Permits Division 1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, 11th Floor Oakland, CA 94612 Phone: (510)238-6370 Fax: (510) 238-7084 gminor@oaklandnet.com

From: Illgen, Richard Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 6: 10 PM To: Steve; Minor, Gregory; Candell, Chris; mmjara@comcast.net; cmiers@mierscottarchitects.com Subject: RE:Recording of Memornadum of Agreement

Steve,

Greg Minor indicated he will sign the document and has a notary in his office. Sorry, I thought this had been taken care of.

Richard

From: Steve [mailto:sjh@hassinglaw.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 4:47 PM To: Illgen, Richard; Minor, Gregory; Candell, Chris; mmjara@comcast.net; cmiers@mierscottarchitects.com Subject: Recording of Memornadum of Agreement

Richard,

Today I received a call from Miguel Jara, Jr. in connection with a notice he received from Mr. Candell concerning the recording of the Memorandum of Agreement that I prepared, signed before a notary on November 10 on behalf of Suprema and brought to your office at approximately 3:00 p.m. that day because the recorder would not record it without a signature from the City.

Bill was not in so I came over to your office. You were not in either. I took the Memorandum back to my office and added a signature line for the City and added an acknowledgment. I came back to your office on the 12th or 13th, met on November 12 (Nov at which time you represented that you would get it signed by someone at the city and that you would see that it got recorded. I haven't heard a word about it until this afternoon. Mr. Candell and Mr. Minor report that it has not been recorded.

Please advise.

Thanks,

sjh

copy attached.

P.S. Just got off the phone with Mr. Minor who has evidently already found out this info from another source. If I can be of help let me know.

11

sjh

This is a confidential attorney-client communication. This email contains confidential attorney-client privileged information and is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and any attachments.

J';, Please consider the environment before printing this email

12

[v1.03]

Minor, Gregory

From:

Sent:

To:

Steve <sjh@hassinglaw.com>

Wednesday, February 18, 2015 5:47 PM Minor, Gregory; Illgen, Richard; Candell, Chris; mmjara@comcast.net; cmiers@mierscottarchitects.com; Quesada, Bill

Subject: RE: Recording of Memornadum of Agreement

OK, no problem, I will get another one signed, notarized and to you.

sjh

From: Minor, Gregory [mailto:GMinor@oaklandnet.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 4:29 PM To: Steve; Illgen, Richard; Candell, Chris; mmjara@comcast.net; cmiers@mierscottarchitects.com; Quesada, Bill Subject: RE: Recording of Memornadum of Agreement

Hi Mr Hassing-

It appears the City may have misplaced the original memorandum with your notarized signature. If you could provide us with another original we will see that it is accompanied by a City Of Oakland representative's notarized signature and is properly recorded. Apologies for the mix-up and please send/deliver the original to me at the following address:

Greg Minor Assistant to the City Administrator Nuisance Abatement/Special Activity Permits Division 1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, 11th Floor Oakland, CA 94612 Phone: (510)238-6370 Fax: (510) 238-7084 gminor@oaklandnet.com

From: Steve [mailto:sjh@hassinglaw.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 4:43 PM To: Minor, Gregory; Illgen, Richard; Candell, Chris; mmjara@comcast.net; cmiers@mierscottarchitects.com; Quesada, Bill Subject: RE: Recording of Memornadum of Agreement

I left the original with Mr. lllgen. It contained my original notarized signature. So I don't have the original, the city does.

sjh

From: Minor, Gregory [mailto:GMinor@oaklandnet.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 1 :44 PM To: Illgen, Richard; Steve; Candell, Chris; mmjara@comcast.net; cmiers@mierscottarchitects.com; Quesada, Bill Subject: RE: Recording of Memornadum of Agreement

Hi Mr. Hassing-

13

Unfortunately our last attempt to record suprema's memorandum failed as the document did not contain your original signature. Can you please send my office the agreement with your original signature so that I can add my original signature and get the document recorded? And fyi, tomorrow is a city holiday.

Thank you,

Greg Minor Assistant to the City Administrator Nuisance Abatement/Special Activity Permits Division 1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, 11th Floor Oakland, CA 94612

Phone: (510)238-6370 Fax: (510) 238-7084

gminor@oaklandnet.com

From: Illgen, Richard Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 6: 10 PM To: Steve; Minor, Gregory; Candell, Chris; mmjara@comcast.net; cmiers@mierscottarchitects.com Subject: RE:Recording of Memornadum of Agreement

Steve,

Greg Minor indicated he will sign the document and has a notary in his office. Sorry, I thought this had beeri taken care of.

Richard

From: Steve [mailto:sjh@hassinglaw.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 4:47 PM To: Illgen, Richard; Minor, Gregory; Candell, Chris; mmjara@comcast.net; cmiers@mierscottarchitects.com Subject: Recording of Memornadum of Agreement

Richard,

Today I received a call from Miguel Jara, Jr. in connection with a notice he received from Mr. Candell concerning the recording of the Memorandum of Agreement that I prepared, signed before a notary on November 10 on behalf of Suprema and brought to your office at approximately 3:00 p.m. that day because the recorder would not record it without a signature from the City.

Bill was not in so I came over to your office. You were not in either. I took the Memorandum back to my office and added a signature line for the City and added an acknowledgment. I came back to your office on the 12th or 13th, met on November 12 (Nov at which time you represented that you would get it signed by someone at the city and that you would

see that it got recorded. not been recorded.

I haven't heard a word about it until this afternoon. Mr. Candell and Mr. Minor report that it has

Please advise.

Thanks,

sjh

copy attached.

P.S. Just got off the phone with Mr. Minor who has evidently already found out this info from another source. of help let me know.

If I can be

14

sjh

This is a confidential attorney-client communication. This email contains confidential attorney-client privileged information and is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and any attachments.

J,, Please consider the environment before printing this email

15

(v1.03]

Minor, Gregory

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Excellent.

Minor, Gregory From: Sent: To: Subject: Excellent. Wednesday, February 18, 2015 5:49 PM Minor, Gregory; Re:
Minor, Gregory From: Sent: To: Subject: Excellent. Wednesday, February 18, 2015 5:49 PM Minor, Gregory; Re:

Wednesday, February 18, 2015 5:49 PM

Minor, Gregory;

Re: 955 - 57th ST dba Suprema Meats

PM Minor, Gregory; Re: 955 - 57th ST dba Suprema Meats Thanks so much for moving
PM Minor, Gregory; Re: 955 - 57th ST dba Suprema Meats Thanks so much for moving

Thanks so much for moving this forward.

Validation is a beautiful thing.

On Wednesday, February 18, 2015 2:02 PM, "Minor, Gregory" <GMinor@oaklandnet.com> wrote:

fyi

From: Vasquez, Susan Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 3:01 PM To: Quesada, Bill; Candell, Chris; Illgen, Richard; Flynn, Rachel; Kalb, Dan Cc: Minor, Gregory Subject: 955 - 57th ST dba Suprema Meats

Hi,

Attached is your file copy. Copies were sent out to all offices and officials that may be affected by our actions.

Thanks,

s~v~~

City Administrator's Office

Nuisance Abatement Division 1 Frank Ogawa Plaza, 11th floor (510) 238-7487

16

Minor, Gregory

Minor, Gregory From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 7:06 PM Minor, Gregory Re:

From:

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Subject:

Minor, Gregory From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 7:06 PM Minor, Gregory Re:

Wednesday, February 18, 2015 7:06 PM Minor, Gregory

Subject: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 7:06 PM Minor, Gregory Re: 955 - 57th ST dba Suprema
Subject: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 7:06 PM Minor, Gregory Re: 955 - 57th ST dba Suprema

Re: 955

- 57th ST dba Suprema Meats

Thanks so much Greg. Is it possible to get a copy of the cd so we know the specific evidence provided should it be appealed?

know the specific evidence provided should it be appealed? On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 5:53

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 5:53 PM, Minor, Gregory <GMinor@oaklandnet.com>wrote:

We'll see how they respond. They may try to contest this citation; I'll let you know how it plays out.

Best,

Greg

From:

[mailto-

Sent: Wednesday, February 1~

To: Minor, Gregory;

Subject: Re: 955 - 57th ST dba Suprema Meats

Gregory; Subject: Re: 955 - 57th ST dba Suprema Meats Excellent. Thanks so much for moving
Gregory; Subject: Re: 955 - 57th ST dba Suprema Meats Excellent. Thanks so much for moving

Excellent.

Thanks so much for moving this forward.

Validation is a beautiful thing.

On Wednesday, February 18, 2015 2:02 PM, "Minor, Gregory" <GMinor@oaklandnet.com> wrote:

fyi

From: Vasquez, Susan Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 3:01 PM To: Quesada, Bill; Candell, Chris; Illgen, Richard; Flynn, Rachel; Kalb, Dan Cc: Minor, Gregory Subject: 955 - 57th ST dba Suprema Meats

17

Hi,

Attached is your file copy. Copies were sent out to all offices and officials that may be affected by our actions.

Thanks,

and officials that may be affected by our actions. Thanks, City Administrator's Office Nuisance Abatement Division

City Administrator's Office

Nuisance Abatement Division

1 Frank Ogawa Plaza, 11th floor

(510) 238·7487

18

Minor, Gregory

From:

From:  
 

Sent:

Wednesday, February 18, 2015 8:32 PM Candell, Chris; Minor, Gregory

To:

Cc:

     

Subject:

Re: compliance plan violations

Hi Chris and Greg,

·A couple updates

Yesterday (Tuesday Feb 18) I was up from 4 am until after 5. I took some time stamped video with audio on my cell phone using a new app. The footage is unfortunately darker than in other video we've provided, but it does document forklift movement in the yard and noise from activity behind the blue curtain which was drawn as usual just before 5 pm. Four trucks left at about 4:40 (only three should be leaving at once).

Also, as of the last 2 to 3 days the HVAC units I compressors have been adjusted again and there is now a completely new hum which is like a constant single note accompanied by another sound like a buzzing electrical wire. It might not exceed allowable limits but it's close and it's extremely annoying. I can just hear this constant single pitch hum through closed windows. It seems to me that amateur adjustments are probably being made to squeak past the ordinance. If there was real concern on Suprema's part to make this right, they would hire an acoustical engineer to advise on correct mitigation of this nuisance noise.

Thanks,

advise on correct mitigation of this nuisance noise. Thanks, On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 9:13

On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 9:13 PM, Hi Chris,

noise. Thanks, On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 9:13 PM, Hi Chris, wrote: The 4 am
noise. Thanks, On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 9:13 PM, Hi Chris, wrote: The 4 am

wrote:

The 4 am activity continues. I don't know if you're finished your review of compliance plan violations thus far, but from this morning, uploaded more photos and videos to drop box in new folder: Photos & Videos\Compliance Plan violations night yard.

Feb 4 - violations: moving of trucks into position for loading, loading, movement of equipment behind curtain, more than 5 trucks leaving, trucks leaving during more than two 3-minute intervals.

• 4:18 am suprema truck moved from Lowell lot to 57th St dock for loading

• 4:40 am 2 trucks including one moved from Lowell leave dock and yard

• 4:41 am 3rd and 4th trucks leave from rear of yard

• 4:47 blue curtain drawn - can see flashing I movement of equipment

• 5:05 curtain opens and 5th and 6th trucks leave from rear of yard

• 5:22 curtain repositioned toward rear yard

• 5:28 big rig arrives from N Lowell and jockeys into position at SW comer

rear yard • 5:28 big rig arrives from N Lowell and jockeys into position at SW

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 6:39 PM,

rear yard • 5:28 big rig arrives from N Lowell and jockeys into position at SW

19

Thanks Chris.

I want you all to know that the 4-7 am activity in the yard is still going on every day Mon to Fri. It includes

loading in the loading dock, activity including movement of forklifts concealed behind the blue curtain which is

opened and closed repeatedly, more than 5 total trucks leaving, sometimes 4 trucks leaving at once at 4:35 followed by random trucks leaving until just after 5 am, loading suprema trucks on Lowell St or in the parking lot on the east side of Lowell, occasional forklifts in the street.

I highly recommend that you do another inspection between 4 and 5:30 am to see and hear first hand the bulk

of what's going on. There's a lull between 5:30 and 7 when the big rigs arrive so if you come then you will have missed the violations occurring in the yard behind the blue curtain as well as the first 5 or 6 trucks to leave the yard.

as well as the first 5 or 6 trucks to leave the yard. On Fri, Jan

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 4:56 PM, Candell, Chris <CCandell@oaklandnet.com> wrote:

I just received material from SMC in response to my request for him to document various compliance items. We will respond next week.

From:

various compliance items. We will respond next week. From: [mailto: Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 11:35

[mailto:

compliance items. We will respond next week. From: [mailto: Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 11:35 AM

Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 11:35 AM To: Candell, Chris

Subject: Re: compliance plan violations

Hi Chris,

They're under Photos & Video\Videos. Shooting you another direct link now.

The morning activity is pretty consistent and the vast majority of it happens between 4 and 5:30. Then it gets pretty quiet until 7 when the big rigs start unloading and more delivery trucks are loaded in the dock. The office opens at 3:30 sharp. Usually a truck is loaded in the loading dock at 4. Around 4:30 3 or 4 trucks leave in the first batch. Activity occurs behind the curtain, including (I believe) loading of trucks that leave a bit later from the back of the yard randomly through 5 or 5:30. I have seen forklifts in the streets loading trucks on Lowell. I didn't see where the forklift I saw yesterday morning heading south on Lowell came from, but assumed it was heading to the truck that was pulled out of the east parking lot and parked on Lowell. Technically speaking the plan prohibits movement of people, product, equipment, and loading activity in the yard, so it doesn't surprise me that Miguel would think it's okay to load on the street instead, producing the noise and nuisance the plan was meant to stop.

20

Last night around 11 pm, I listened to the freezer hum for a while and took one decibel reading. The humming was the typical humming that we've listened to all year except now it is quieter, although not by much. He's figured out a way to reduce it to ~55-58 dBA. The much higher pitched fan noise could be heard along with the humming and seemed to be coming from a slightly different location on the roof. A quiet fan like whirr.

When are you submitting the plan violations summary to Bill so he can provide a response to the com:munity email to Rachel Flynn and Richard Illgen?

Ulla says the public notice for the permits and CUP and variance application is going out next Friday which is Feb 6 coincidentally the one year anniversary of the NOV you issued for the loading noise

year anniversary of the NOV you issued for the loading noise On Fri, Jan 30, 2015

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 8:46 AM, Candell, Chris <CCandell@oaklandnet.com> wrote:

I don't see these when I open the drop box site, is it under shared videos? I can see the photo of the truck coming site, is it under shared videos? I can see the photo of the truck coming

down 57th turning on Lowell. I was there for my January inspection yesterday. I arrived at 5:00 AM so I missed the truck drive aways. However, I did observe the final one, a ih truck parked on Lowell drove away at 5:15 just after I did a quick walk around the block looking for activity. That is not covered by the agreement. Technically there is one violation of the extra truck and drive away.

I can see next time I will have to get there at 4:00 which means getting up at about 3:00! I saw one employee arrive at about 6:00 and Miguel close up an shut off the lights at 6:15. Then he drove around the block and headed off NB on Lowell. I wanted to stay until 7:00 but could not. Since I left at about 6:20 I just missed the forklift activity. Do you know what the forklift did?

From:

forklift activity. Do you know what the forklift did? From: [mailto- Sent: Thursday, January~ To: Candell,

[mailto-

Sent: Thursday, January~

To: Candell, Chris; Minor, Gregory;

Subject: Re: compliance plan violations

From: [mailto- Sent: Thursday, January~ To: Candell, Chris; Minor, Gregory; Subject: Re: compliance plan violations 21

21

Hi Chris,

I'm attaching another big rig on 57th St photo from last Sunday. Arrived from Adeline to Lowell along 57th. Also, on Sunday a big rig arrived before 7 am and at least 3 others including the one that arrived on 57th St were queued along Lowell by 7:50 in the morning, including one with engine and/or refer running. There were at least 12 or 13 big rigs unloaded on Sunday, more than I've ever seen. Non-stop forklifts in the streets until 4 in the afternoon. Truck washing was also going on in the parking lot starting around 9.

I also added 3 videos from this morning to the drop box site:

1-29-15 435 am 3 trucks leave yard

1-29-15 440 am curtain closes-4th truck leaves

1-29-15 457 am 5th and 6th trucks leave

Here's a run down of the activity this morning, just like any other morning

not restricted to two 3-minute intervals, and activity was occurring behind the curtain.

more than 5 trucks left, trucks were

4:35 am - 3 trucks leave yard

4:40 - blue curtain closes, 4th truck leaves yard

4:51 - truck moves from E Lowell parking lot to park on SE comer of Lowell

4:52 - blue curtain opens

4:57 - 5th and 6th trucks yard from behind curtain

5:07 - curtain closes again

I

6:29 - forklift drives south on Lowell crossing 57th

Thanks,.

yard from behind curtain 5:07 - curtain closes again I 6:29 - forklift drives south on

22

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:27 PM,

Hi Chris,

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:27 PM, Hi Chris, I just forwarded yo-q the letter

I just forwarded yo-q the letter we sent to Rachel Flynn summarizing compliance plan violations which focused mainly on the 4-7 am noise.

Below is a little more detailed info on the big rig issue. Miguel Jara said in an email a few weeks ago that he noticed all carriers of his new address and not to drive on 57th St, but his evidence was a message pasted into his email, so we don't know how or when it went out or what companies it went to. I have been going outto talk to big rig drivers late in the evening recently to find out if they received any such message which should have. included that they can't park overnight. None of the drivers I've talked with received any notice. One of the drivers I talked to said his instructions were to arrive and park overnight on Lowell St and another driver told me his instructions were to or to arrive good and early well before 7 am due to long queues at suprema. One stayed and ran his refer all night while others have agreed to leave in search of a place to spend the night.

o Big rigs continue to arrive via 57th St from both east and west and via other small streets (e.g., Los Angeles). Often unable to see the carrier name, but violating carriers include Central, Big Red, PLM Trailer Leasing, Swift Premium, and Waymore

23

Minor, Gregory

Minor, Gregory From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 8:52 PM Candell, Chris; Minor,

From:

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Subject:

Minor, Gregory From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 8:52 PM Candell, Chris; Minor,

Wednesday, February 18, 2015 8:52 PM Candell, Chris; Minor, Gregory

February 18, 2015 8:52 PM Candell, Chris; Minor, Gregory Re: compliance plan violations Before I forget,
February 18, 2015 8:52 PM Candell, Chris; Minor, Gregory Re: compliance plan violations Before I forget,

Re: compliance plan violations

Before I forget, mid to late in the afternoons Suprema is now moving trucks into the loading dock one after another (2 or 3 trucks) to preload them for the 4-5 am deliveries. For 10-15 minutes while each truck is pre- loaded, the refer engine is running. The other day I witnessed a big black plume of smoke presumably from starting the refer. In addition to the excessive noise and vibration, the smoke and diesel fumes are being emitted very close to windows of the neighboring residential property where two children and two elderly people and three adults live.

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 8:31 PM, Hi Chris and Greg,

A couple updates

18, 2015 at 8:31 PM, Hi Chris and Greg, A couple updates Yesterday (Tuesday Feb 18)

Yesterday (Tuesday Feb 18) I was up from 4 am until after 5. I took some time stamped video with audio on my cell phone using a new app. The footage is unfortunately darker than in other video we've provided, but it does document forklift movement in the yard and noise from activity behind the blue curtain which was drawn as ·

usual just before 5 pm. Four trucks left at about 4:40 (only three should be leaving at once).

Also, as of the last 2 to 3 days the HVAC units I compressors have been adjusted again and there is now a completely new hum which is like a constant single note accompanied by another sound like a buzzing electrical' wire. It might not exceed allowable limits but it's close and it's extremely annoying. I can just hear this constant single pitch hum through closed windows. It seems to me that amateur adjustments are probably being made to squeak past the ordinance. If there was real concern on Suprema's part to make this right, they would hire an acoustical engineer to advise on correct mitigation of this nuisance noise.

Thanks,

advise on correct mitigation of this nuisance noise. Thanks, On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 9:13

On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 9:13 PM, Hi Chris,

noise. Thanks, On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 9:13 PM, Hi Chris, wrote: The 4 am
noise. Thanks, On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 9:13 PM, Hi Chris, wrote: The 4 am

wrote:

The 4 am activity continues. I don't know if you're finished your review of compliance plan violations thus far, but from this morning, uploaded more photos and videos to drop box in new folder: Photos & Videos\Compliance Plan violations night yard.

Feb 4 - violations: moving of trucks into position for loading, loading, movement of equipment behind curtain, more than 5 trucks leaving, trucks leaving during more than two 3-minute intervals.

• 4:18 am suprema truck moved from Lowell lot to 57th St dock for loading

• 4:40 am 2 trucks including one moved from Lowell leave dock and yard

• 4:41 am 3rd and 4th trucks leave from rear of yard

• 4:47 blue curtain drawn - can see flashing I movement of equipment

24

• 5:05 curtain opens and 5th and 6th trucks leave from rear of yard

• 5:22 curtain repositioned toward rear yard

• 5:28 big rig arrives from N Lowell and jockeys into position at SW comer

arrives from N Lowell and jockeys into position at SW comer On Fri, Jan 30, 2015

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 6:39 PM, Thanks Chris.

SW comer On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 6:39 PM, Thanks Chris. wrote: I want you
SW comer On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 6:39 PM, Thanks Chris. wrote: I want you

wrote:

I want you all to know that the 4-7 am activity in the yard is still going on every day Mon to Fri. It includes

loading in the loading dock, activity including movement of forklifts concealed behind the blue curtain which is

opened and closed repeatedly, more than 5 total trucks leaving, sometimes 4 trucks leaving at once at 4:35 followed by random trucks leaving until just after 5 am, loading suprema trucks on Lowell St or in the parking lot on the east side of Lowell, occasional forklifts in the street.

I highly recommend that you do another inspection between 4 and 5:30 am to see and hear first hand the bulk

of what's going on. There's a lull between 5:30 and 7 when the big rigs arrive so if you come then you will have missed the violations occurring in the yard behind the blue curtain as well as the first 5 or 6 trucks to leave the yard.

as well as the first 5 or 6 trucks to leave the yard. On Fri, Jan

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 4:56 PM, Candell, Chris <CCandell@oaklandnet.com> wrote:

I just received material from SMC in response to my request for him to document various compliance items. We will respond next week.

From:

various compliance items. We will respond next week. From: [mailto Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 11:35

[mailto

compliance items. We will respond next week. From: [mailto Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 11:35 AM

Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 11:35 AM To: Candell, Chris

Subject: Re: compliance plan violations

Hi Chris,

They're under Photos & Video\Videos. Shooting you another direct link now.

The morning activity is pretty consistent and the vast majority of it happens between 4 and 5:30. Then it gets pretty quiet until 7 when the big rigs start unloading and more delivery trucks are loaded in the dock. The office opens at 3:30 sharp. Usually a truck is loaded in the loading dock at 4. Around 4:30 3 or 4 trucks leave in the

25

first batch. Activity occurs behind the curtain, including (I believe) loading of trucks that leave a bit later from the back of the yard randomly throughS or 5:30. I have seen forklifts in the streets loading trucks on Lowell. I didn't see where the forklift I saw yesterday morning heading south on Lowell came from, but assumed it was heading to the truck that was pulled out of the east parking lot and parked on Lowell. Technically speaking the plan prohibits movement of people, product, equipment, and loading activity in the yard, so it doesn't surprise me that Miguel would think it's okay to load on the street instead, producing the noise and nuisance the plan was meant to stop.

Last night around 11 pm, I listened to the freezer hum for a while and took one decibel reading. The humming was the typical humming that we've listened to all year except now it is quieter, although not by much. He's figured out a way to reduce it to ~55-58 dBA. The much higher pitched fan noise could be heard along with the humming and seemed to be coming from a slightly different location on the roof. A quiet fan like whirr.

When are you submitting the plan violations summary to Bill so he can provide a response to the community email to Rachel Flynn and Richard Illgen?

Ulla says the public notice for the permits and CUP and variance application is going out next Friday which is Feb 6 coincidentally the one year anniversary of the NOV you issued for the loading noise

year anniversary of the NOV you issued for the loading noise On Fri, Jan 30, 2015

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 8:46 AM, Candell, Chris <CCandell@oaklandnet.com> wrote:

I don't see these when I open the drop box site, is it under shared videos? I can see the photo open the drop box site, is it under shared videos? I can see the photo of the truck coming

down 5]1h turning on Lowell. I was there for my January inspection yesterday. I arrived at 5:00 AM so I missed the truck drive aways. However, I did observe the final one, a ih truck parked on Lowell drove away at 5:15 just after I did a quick walk around the block looking for activity. That is not covered by the agreement. Technically there is one violation of the extra truck and drive away.

I can see next time I will have to get there at 4:00 which means getting up at about 3:00! I saw one employee arrive at about 6:00 and Miguel close up an shut off the lights at 6:15. Then he drove around the block and headed off NB on

Lowell. 'I wanted to stay until 7:00 but could not. know what the forklift did?

Since 1ll'!ft at about 6:20 I just missed the forklift activity.

Do you

26

From:

From: [mailto Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 11:50 PM To: Candell, Chris; Minor, Gregory; Subject: Re:

[mailto

Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 11:50 PM

To: Candell, Chris; Minor, Gregory;

Subject: Re: compliance plan violations

Minor, Gregory; Subject: Re: compliance plan violations Hi Chris, I'm attaching another big rig on 57th

Hi Chris,

I'm attaching another big rig on 57th St photo from last Sunday. Arrived from Adeline to Lowell along 57th. Also, on Sunday a big rig arrived before 7 am and at least 3 others including the one that arrived on 57th St were queued along Lowell by 7:50 in the morning, including one with engine and/or refer running. There were at least 12 or 13 big rigs unloaded on Sunday, more than I've ever seen. Non-stop forklifts in the streets until 4 in the afternoon. Truck washing was also going on in the parking lot starting around 9.

I also added 3 videos from this morning to the drop box site:

1-29-15 435 am 3 trucks leave yard

1-29-15 440 am curtain closes-4th truck leaves

1-29-15 457 am 5th and 6th trucks leave

Here's a run down of the activity this morning, just like any other morning

not restricted to two 3-minute intervals, and activity was occurring behind the curtain.

more than 5 trucks left, trucks were

4:35 am - 3 trucks leave yard

4:40 - blue curtain closes, 4th truck leaves yard

4:51 - truck moves from E Lowell parking lot to park on SE comer of Lowell

4:52 - blue curtain opens

4:57 - 5th and 6th trucks yard from behind curtain

5:07 - curtain closes again

6:29 - forklift drives south on Lowell crossing 57th

27

Thanks, .

Thanks, . On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:27 PM, Hi Chris, wrote: I just forwarded

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:27 PM,

Hi Chris,

Thanks, . On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:27 PM, Hi Chris, wrote: I just forwarded

wrote:

I just forwarded you the letter we sent to Rachel Flynn summarizing compliance plan violations which focused mainly on the 4-7 am noise.

Below is a little more detailed info on the big rig issue. Miguel Jara said in an email a few weeks ago that he noticed all carriers of his new address and not to drive on 57th St, but his evidence was a message pasted into his email, so we don't know how or when it went out or what companies it went to. I have been going out to talk to big rig drivers late in the evening recently to find out if they received any such message which should have included that they can't park overnight. None of the drivers I've talked with received any notice. One of the drivers I talked to said his instructions were to arrive and park overnight on Lowell St and another driver told me his instructions were to or to arrive good and early well before 7 am due to long queues at suprema. One stayed and ran his refer all night while others have agreed to leave in search of a place to spend the night.

o Big rigs continue to arrive via 57th St from both east and west and via other small streets (e.g., Los Angeles). Often unable to see the carrier name, but violating carriers include Central, Big Red, PLM Trailer Leasing, Swift Premium, and Waymore

28

Minor, Gregory

From:

MARIO E <tiomarito@comcast.net>

Sent:

Friday, February 20, 2015 12:42 PM

To:

Candell, Chris

Cc:

Quesada, Bill; Minor, Gregory; JARA, MIGUEL; Hassing, Steve

Subject:

Weekly complaint log

Attachments:

IMGjpg; IMG_OOOljpg; IMG_0002jpg

Good morning Chris,

Here is this weeks Log :

There were only two truck that did not come in or complied with Suprema's new rules:

One of them was a Booker truck that came in west on 57th street, the other was a Stevens Truck that parked here overnight, I sent both companies an email letting them know if the new directions and the procedures once they got here, both of those emails, I cc'd you on them. The driver for the Stevens Truck, I gave him a copy of the new directions and procedures, and I had him sign one, I am attaching the signed copy of the driver ( Jose Anaya ) and our weekly sign in log. We continue to load all of our truck a day before and the morning routes we load after 7:00 a.m.,

and every time we get less and less trucks coming in the wrong way or the wrong hours good !!!

and that is

Regards.

Mario E Jara Operations Manager Suprema Meat Company 5655 Lowell Street Oakland, CA. 94608 (510) 654-9282 (510) 655-9566 fax (510 376-3010 cell Mario.suprema@comcast.net tiomarito@comcast.net

30

Minor, Gregory

Minor, Gregory From: Sent: To: Cc: Sunday, February 22, 2015 8:15 PM Candell, Chris; Minor, Gregory

From:

Minor, Gregory From: Sent: To: Cc: Sunday, February 22, 2015 8:15 PM Candell, Chris; Minor, Gregory

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Sunday, February 22, 2015 8:15 PM Candell, Chris; Minor, Gregory

February 22, 2015 8:15 PM Candell, Chris; Minor, Gregory Subject: Re: compliance plan violations Attachments:
February 22, 2015 8:15 PM Candell, Chris; Minor, Gregory Subject: Re: compliance plan violations Attachments:

Subject:

Re: compliance plan violations

Attachments:

2-22-15 1211 am USKO identification numbers.JPG; 2-22-15 1211 am USKO license plate.JPG; 2-22-15 1211 am USKO orders to 955 57th 8 am.JPG; 2-22-15 2111 am USKO arrives 57th.JPG

Hi Greg and Chris,

Last night just after midnight at big rig arrived from the west on 57th St and turned south on Lowell. I went out

to find Terry, the driver, settling for the night with his refer running. I explained the situation. The company is

USKO. Terry has been here before and says he can't stand delivering to suprema because he gets lost on small · streets, there's no loading dock, and no unloading schedule resulting in long wait times. Terry's phone number is

He says he's happy to talk with anyone at the City to explain the frustration.

Attached are photos of the truck and of the Terry's order which states to deliver to 955 57th. He received no instructions for the new address, not to drive on 57th, and not to park overnight.

address, not to drive on 57th, and not to park overnight. On Wed, Feb 18, 2015
address, not to drive on 57th, and not to park overnight. On Wed, Feb 18, 2015
address, not to drive on 57th, and not to park overnight. On Wed, Feb 18, 2015
address, not to drive on 57th, and not to park overnight. On Wed, Feb 18, 2015

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 8:52 PM,

Before I forget, mid to late in the afternoons Suprema is now moving trucks into the loading dock one after another (2 or 3 trucks) to preload them for the 4-5 am deliveries. For 10-15 minutes while each truck is pre- loaded, the refer engine is running. The other day I witnessed a big black plume of smoke presumably from starting the refer. In addition to the excessive noise and vibration, the smoke and diesel fumes are being emitted very close to windows of the neighboring residential property where two children and two elderly people and three adults live.

rote:

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 8:31 PM, Hi Chris and Greg,

rote: On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 8:31 PM, Hi Chris and Greg, wrote: A couple
rote: On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 8:31 PM, Hi Chris and Greg, wrote: A couple

wrote:

A couple updates

Yesterday (Tuesday Feb 18) I was up from 4 am until after 5. I took some time stamped video with audio on my cell phone using a new app. The footage is unfortunately darker than in other video we've provided, but it does document forklift movement in the yard and noise from activity behind the blue curtain which was drawn as usual just before 5 pm. Four trucks left at about 4:40 (only three should be leaving at once).

Also, as of the last 2 to 3 days the HVAC units I compressors have been adjusted again and there is now a completely new hum which is like a constant single note accompanied by another sound like a buzzing electrical wire. It might not exceed allowable limits but it's close and it's extremely annoying. I can just hear this constant single pitch hum through closed windows. It seems to me that amateur adjustments are probably being made to squeak past the ordinance. If