body,date,page,text,path
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,1,"MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY- - -NOVEMBER 6, 2007--7:30P.M. -
Mayor Johnson convened the Regular City Council Meeting at 8:05
p.m.
ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers
deHaan,
Gilmore,
Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 5.
Absent :
None.
AGENDA CHANGES
(07-517) Mayor Johnson announced that Resolutions of Appointment
[paragraph no. 07-518] would be addressed first.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(07-518) Resolution No. 14154, ""Appointing Peter Y. Horikoshi as a
Member of the Civil Service Board. Adopted; and
(07-518A) - Resolution No. 14155, ""Appointing Jeff Wood as a Member
of the Golf Commission. Adopted.
Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolutions.
Vice Mayor Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
The City Clerk administered the Oath of Office and presented
certificates of appointment to Mr. Horikoshi and Mr. Wood.
***
Mayor Johnson called a recess to hold the Special Joint City
Council and Community Improvement Commission Meeting at 8:09 p.m.
and reconvened the Regular City Council Meeting at 8:15 p.m.
***
AGENDA CHANGES
(07-519) Mayor Johnson announced that the Public hearing to
consider an appeal of the Planning Board's decision to approve the
First Addendum [paragraph no. 07-528] was removed from the agenda
due to the Appellant withdrawing the appeal.
PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
None.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
1
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,2,"CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Johnson announced that the Minutes [paragraph no. 07-520] and
Introduction of Ordinance [paragraph no. 07-523] were removed from
the Consent Calendar for discussion.
Councilmember deHaan moved approval of the remainder of the Consent
Calendar.
Vice Mayor Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5. [ Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an
asterisk preceding the paragraph number. . ]
(07-520) - Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings
held on October 16, 2007.
Councilmember deHaan stated that the October 9 Closed Session
minutes do not have the disposition of the voting.
The City Attorney stated said minutes report out the Mayor's
statement on the action taken; normally, votes are not reported;
the vote is public record information; the vote can be added.
Councilmember deHaan requested that the vote be added to the
minutes.
The City Clerk noted that the October 9 minutes were previously
approved on October 16.
The City Attorney noted that the vote could be reflected in the
October 16 Closed Session minutes when the October 9 announcement
was made.
Councilmember deHaan moved approval of the minutes with adding the
October 9 Closed Session vote to the October 16 Closed Session
minutes.
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
Councilmember deHaan requested Closed Session votes be represented
in the Minutes.
(
*07-521) Ratified bills in the amount of $3,700,971.35
( *07-522 - ) Recommendation to approve Amendment No. 5 to the Alameda
County Emergency Dispatch Consortium Mutual Aid Agreement to assign
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
2
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,3,"the rights and obligations of the Regents of the University of
California to Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC. Accepted.
(07-523) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal
Code by Amending Chapter XIII (Building and Housing) by Repealing
Article I (Uniform Codes Relating to Building, Housing and
Technical Codes) in Its Entirety and Adding a New Article I
(Uniform Codes Relating to Building, Housing and Technical Codes)
to Adopt the 2007 California Building Code, the 2007 California
Historical Building Code, the 2007 California Electrical Code, the
2007 California Plumbing Code, the 2007 California Mechanical Code,
the 2007 California Energy Code, the 1997 Uniform Housing Code, and
the 1997 Edition of the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous
Buildings, and by Amending Chapter XV (Fire Prevention) by
Repealing Section 15-1 in Its Entirety and by Adding a New Section
15-1 - to Adopt the 2007 Edition of the California Fire Code.
Introduced.
Vice Mayor Tam inquired what is the City's stance on monitoring
soft story buildings, provisions of enforcement, and eventual phase
out because of seismic integrity.
The Building Official responded staff is working on an ordinance
addressing soft story buildings and providing standards for
retrofitting and the option to make it mandatory or voluntary.
Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether said ordinance would be in addition
to tonight's ordinance, to which the Building Official responded in
the affirmative.
Vice Mayor Tam moved introduction of the ordinance.
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
( *07-524) Ordinance No. 2974, ""Amending the Alameda Municipal Code
by Repealing and Amending Various Sections of Article I (Parking
Lots) and Article II (On Street Parking Meter Zones) of Chapter XII
(Designated Parking) and Adding a Definition Section (Section 12-0)
Applicable to All Articles to Provide for the Regulation of Public
Parking Surface Lots and Parking Structures Administered by the
City of Alameda. Finally passed.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(07-525) Public Hearing to consider adopting Amendment #1 to
Fiscal Year 2007-2008 Community Development Block Grant Action
Plan, and authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and execute
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
3
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,4,"district.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether some of the money could be
used for more bike racks or bus shelters which would encourage
people to get out of cars.
The Development Services Director responded that she would have to
defer the question to the City Attorney; stated she would assume
that the money could used in any way -
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
4
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,5,"Councilmember Gilmore suggested broadening the enabling language so
that there would be an opportunity to use the funds for other
things.
The Development Services Director stated that the business
community was told that they would have some input as to how the
incremental funds would be spent.
Councilmember Gilmore stated that the language should be broadened
to allow input from the business community; the matter would not
have to be revisited again if there is a consensus to install more
bike racks or shelters on Park Street.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the money could be used
for something else.
The City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated an ordinance
covers the parking meter fund uses and has almost every imaginable
use related to parking; Council has the legal ability to amend the
ordinance.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired why the ordinance is coming to
Council now and then going back to the Transportation Commission
and Economic Development Commission.
The Development Services Director responded the entire parking
study would go back to the Transportation Commission; stated the
item was extracted out because it can be done without the analysis
of other parking district issues which analyze capacity, etc.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired why the issue is coming to Council
now if the study has not been finalized.
The Development Services Director responded the parking study is
falling behind; stated adjusting all of the meter heads will take
many weeks; the meters need to be ready when the garage opens.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the Transportation
Commission or Economic Development Commission have a recommendation
at this time.
The Development Services Director responded in the negative; stated
that she is not sure whether the Transportation Commission has
jurisdiction over setting rates.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the increase would provide enough
incentive to impact repeat offenders.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
5
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,6,"The Development Services Director responded staff has made the
information available; stated enforcement will increase.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether another ticket is issued after the
first ticket, to which the Development Services Director responded
in the affirmative.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether there is an extra fine for a second
ticket.
The Police Lieutenant responded a second ticket can be issued after
twenty-four hours.
Mayor Johnson stated that the time for the second issuance needs to
be changed; credit card meters should be reviewed; changing parking
to one hour in premium areas could be considered after the
situation has been monitored.
The Development Services Director stated the whole parking issue is
an experiment; things will need to be tried and tweaked if
necessary.
Richard Neveln, Alameda, stated the issue belongs in front of the
Transportation Commission first; revenues can be raised through
stricter enforcement of illegal left turns.
Jon Spangler, Alameda, stated that he supports the staff
recommendation; the timeline needs to be met in connection with the
opening of the parking structure; bike racks are needed; the City
of Oakland has decimated its bike parking inventory by going to the
computerized meters; he hopes that bicycle parking will be provided
at necessary levels.
Robb Ratto, Park Street Business Association (PSBA). stated the
PSBA Board voted overwhelmingly to support the staff
recommendation; the proposed increase needs to be in conjunction
with the opening of the garage he has had numerous conversations
with repeat offenders; repeat offenders will be reported to the two
new parking technicians and would be ticketed; PSBA looks forward
to working with Council on determining how the additional revenue
would be spent.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the Alameda Avenue and Oak
Street parking lots are full, to which Mr. Ratto responded there is
one vacancy.
Councilmember deHaan stated redevelopment funds from all over the
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
6
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,7,"City were used for the parking structure; there might be a problem
in separating the additional funds; the healthy way to handle the
issue would be to put the money into the existing fund.
Mayor Johnson stated that Vice Mayor Tam and Councilmember Gilmore
addressed the use of existing provions.
The City Attorney stated the parking meter fund is not restricted
by the area nor does the proposed resolution purport to restrict
any part of the funds to any area.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the proposed resolution addresses
how the money might be used, not where the money is used.
The City Attorney responded the proposed resolution sets the fee;
the use of the parking fund is controlled by ordinance, which is
very broad.
Councilmember Matarrese stated that he has no problem with raising
parking violation penalties; timing should allow input and
recommendations from the Economic Development Commission.
The Development Services Director stated that the Public Works
Department advises that it will take four to six weeks to change
out the meter heads.
Mayor Johnson stated that she does not feel the issue is at a level
for the Economic Development Commission's consideration; parking
fees are low and should have been changed years ago; parking fees
should be adjusted on an ongoing basis; Council should move forward
on the matter.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether the Transportation
Commission has the authority to raise parking fees or penalties, to
which the City Attorney responded in the negative.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether said issues would ever
normally go to the Transportation Commission, to which the City
Attorney responded in the negative.
Councilmember deHaan stated that Page 5 of the staff report states
that approximately $180,992 will be used solely on parking and
street improvements within the Park Street Business District with
Council's approval.
Mayor Johnson stated the resolution does not include said language;
Council can clarify that the money would be put into a fund under
the current ordinance.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
7
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,8,"Counci lmember Matarrese stated the matter would have been reviewed
by the Economic Development Commission under the normal processi
the staff reports states that the incremental additional revenue
will be spent within the Park Street Business District, which is
not reflected in the resolution; the resolution does not have an
effective date and is like a rough draft.
The City Attorney stated resolutions usually do not have an
effective date; lead time is needed to change out the meter heads ;
an additional action would be needed to earmark the increment.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether fund use was an important
factor for PSBA to support the fee increase, to which the
Development Services Director responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether PSBA would support the
increase without said condition, to which the Development Services
Director responded she would need to go back and ask.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether $900,000 of parking meter
funds was put into the parking structure.
The Development Services Director responded in the negative; stated
there is a commitment for $250,000 per year for debt service; a
lump sum was not taken.
Mayor Johnson stated that she does not think that designating meter
revenue to certain areas should be considered; a precedent should
not be set.
Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether the rate increase would be confined
to the area between Lincoln Avenue and Encinal Avenue, to which the
Development Services Director responded in the affirmative.
Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether rate increases would be reviewed
for other areas once the Wilbur Smith Associates (WSA) study is
complete.
The Development Services Director responded that she is not sure
whether the WSA study would recommend parking fee increases
anywhere else; stated WSA has not identified any other high demand
areas ; parking problems arise over time as parking demand
increases.
Councilmember Gilmore stated that she sees nothing wrong with using
the incremental revenue generated from raising the parking fees in
the Park Street Business District and spending the money in the
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
8
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,9,"Park Street Business District; parking would not be in demand if
said district was not successful; the Park Street District is
generating an income stream to help with the parking issues; the
same logic would apply in the event that the Webster Street
District faced the same parking demands in the future.
Mayor Johnson suggested separating out the issue and considering
what to do with the revenue at a later point if Council agrees to
move forward with the suggested changes in the meter fees.
Councilmember Gilmore stated that she feels that business owners
supported the increase because the revenue would go back into the
District; PSBA needs to be advised if this is not the case.
Mayor Johnson stated the meter rates should be changed even if PSBA
said that the meter rates should not be changed.
Mr. Ratto stated PSBA was told about the incremental revenue being
kept in the Park Street District; he speculates that the vote would
not have been 7 to 2 if said issue was not the plan; however, the
PSBA Board probably still would have approved the plan.
Councilmember Matarrese stated that he is curious to know what the
parking study shows in final form; rates have not been raised since
1994; parking space costs and meter maintenance have not gone down;
inquired whether anyone looked into the possibility of raising the
rate across the City and keeping the garage the same; raising rates
versus revenue spending are separate issues.
Councilmember deHaan stated that everyone agrees that rates need to
be raised because of comparisons with other cities; he feels that
rates should be raised across the board.
Councilmember Matarrese suggested reviewing the parking study to
see if the study examines raising the rates across the City;
decoupling the increase from the expenditure is a good idea because
the City already has an ordinance that addresses how parking meter
revenue is expended.
The Development Services Director stated that the preliminary work
done by WSA talks about demand areas; other areas throughout the
City do not have the same meter demands as Park Street; the Park
Street District parking meter rates are established at $1.00; said
rate is in the ordinance but has not been implemented.
The City Attorney stated the parking meter rate was included with
the fees for the Master Fee Resolution in the past the Master Fee
resolution has an incremental increase which makes no sense with
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
9
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,10,"the parking rate; the meter schedule, which is different from what
was adopted in the resolution, may state $1.00 but is not what the
meters reflect and does not reflect the action taken by Council;
the proposed resolution separates the parking meters from the
Master Fee Resolution.
Mayor Johnson stated that she has no problem with bringing
something back to raise meter rates throughout the City; the garage
rates should start out at a lower rate and for a longer period of
time to encourage long-term users to park in the parking structure;
other cities have shorter term parking in high priority areas;
garage structure rates will be easy to adjust to because there are
no individual meters; the rates can be changed later if necessary.
Vice Mayor Tam moved adoption of the resolution.
Vice Mayor Tam stated that the resolution does not address how and
where the funds would be expended and would be governed by the
existing ordinance.
Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether there
would be future discussion on how the funds would be expended and
whether or not the funds should be designated for Park Street.
The City Manager responded the matter would be addressed in the
budget discussion, which could include input from PSBA.
Councilmember Matarrese requested input from the Boards and
Commissions identified in the report when the overall parking study
is completed.
Councilmember deHaan stated that he feels a flat rate charge
throughout the City would be better.
Mayor Johnson stated the Webster Street District might be a concern
because said District is not as robust as the Park Street District;
the matter needs to be reviewed; directed staff to review raising
meter rates throughout the City.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
(07-527) Resolution No. 14157, ""To Increase Civil Penalties for
Parking Violations. Adopted.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
10
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,11,"[Note: Refer to Resolution to Increase On-Street Parking Meter
Rates [paragraph no. 07-526] for Council discussion.
Richard Neveln, Alameda, stated the increase changes from parking
regulation into revenue generation and will keep people of lower
economic status from going to Park Street.
Mayor Johnson stated increased fines would be used to recover
costs, not generate revenue.
Robb Ratto, PSBA, stated the PSBA Board supports the increase;
there has been a lack of resources in enforcement ; raising meter
rates and fines as well as having parking enforcement in the
district Monday through Saturday should be effective.
Bill Smith, Alameda, discussed public transit.
Jon Spangler, Alameda, stated that he is in favor of increasing
parking fines; it is the appropriate time to approve the increase.
Councilmember Gilmore moved adoption of the Resolution.
Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Vice Mayor Tam noted the median rate for parking
in a disabled zone is $275; she would like the rate increased from
$250 to $275.
Councilmembers Gilmore and deHaan agreed to amend the motion to
change the fine for parking in a disabled zone to $275.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
(07-528) Public hearing to consider an appeal of the Planning
Board's decision to approve the First Addendum to the Catellus
Alameda Landing Mixed Use Development Project Supplemental
Environmental Impact Report, the revised Waterfront Promenade
Development Plan, and the second amendment to the Site-wide Master
Landscape Plan; and adoption of related resolution. Withdrawn at
the Appellant's request.
(07-529) Public hearing to consider an appeal of the Planning
Board's decision to approve Design Review DR07-0003 - at Tract 7884
(Alameda Landing Retail Center) ; and
(07-529A) Resolution No. 14158, "" Upholding the Planning Board
Approval of Design Review, DR07-0003, at Tract 7884 (Retail
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
11
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,12,"raised crosswalk would force traffic to slow down.
The Planning Services Manager responded that a speed table would
cause cars to slow.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether the resolution includes new
language regarding the right turn lane addressed in [Planning
Board] Condition 6.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
12
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,13,"The Planning Services Manager responded in order to eliminate the
open checkbook problem, staff is recommending adding back the
underlined language in the resolution, which was removed by the
Planning Board; stated in addition to said language, the following
new sentence should be added at the end of the condition: ""Not
withstanding the above, if a right turn lane is provided as part of
the Stargell Extension Project, this condition shall no longer be
in effect.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired who would pay for the Stargell
extension.
The Planning Services Manager responded the project is a joint
effort between Catellus and the City further stated staff and the
adjacent property owner are discussing trading a remnant piece of
land at the east side of her property for the land needed to create
a right turn pocket; creating the right turn would guarantee access
to her property; everything in the condition would stand if the
plan does not work; the only additional cost would be for 8 feet of
asphalt if the land swap is done.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether Vice Mayor Tam's suggestion
to raise crosswalks would create disabled access issues, to which
the Planning Services Manager responded in the negative; stated the
raising would be ADA compliant.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the Planning Board wanted to
have the walkway due to the problems at Towne Center, to which the
Planning Services Manager responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the parking plan was
problematic or whether Catellus was simply concerned about losing
parking spaces.
The Planning Services Manager responded the loss of parking is
always a concern for retailers; stated the total loss in the
Planning Board plan was not astronomical; the real concern was
circulation.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether having a penetration every
other aisle was considered, to which the Planning Services Manager
responded said suggestion is another iteration that could be
explored.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the Planning Board felt
strongly about the plan.
The Planning Services Manager responded the Planning Board was
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
13
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,14,"never provided with the compromise plan; stated the matter could be
remanded back to the Planning Board.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the Planning Board requested
sidewalks on both sides, to which the Planning Services Manager
responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether issue is loss of parking.
The Planning Services Manager responded the Master Plan established
the maximum amount of parking; stated all plans are well within the
Master Plan.
Mayor Johnson opened the Public Hearing.
In favor of remanding to the Planning Board Jon Spangler, Alameda;
and Karen Bey, Alameda.
Aidan Berry, Catellus, outlined the project; stated Catellus
concurs with the staff recommendations; the appeal was filed
without animosity because philosophical differences were reached;
Catellus likes the suggestion to create raised crosswalks and will
discuss the matter with its engineers; Catellus supports taking the
parking plan back to the Planning Board.
There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public
portion of the hearing.
Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of: 1) sending the
compromise plan back to the Planning Board for review; 2)
[
adoption of the resolution) incorporating staff recommendations 1
and 2 regarding the Master Demolition, Grading, Infrastructure and
Phasing Plan (MDGIP) and the driveway; and 3) adding additional
language [to the resolution] to incorporate the language regarding
the Stargell driveway right-hand turn condition.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether the entire matter should be
remanded to the Planning Board since the matter has evolved.
The Planning Services Manager responded there is new information
regarding the plan, which is why staff thought the matter should be
remanded to the Planning Board; stated there is not new information
on the MDGIP and driveway.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the Planning Board was
concerned about said two items [MDGIP and driveway]
The Planning Services Manager responded the Board's concern was
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
14
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,15,"very small regarding the MDGIP; the Board did not want the driveway
closed; the additional sentence addresses how to resolve the issue.
Vice Mayor Tam requested clarification on remanding the matter to
the Planning Board.
The Planning Services Manager stated the site plan would be
remanded with direction to reconsider the decision in light of the
new information.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether it might not be procedurally correct
to send the other two items [MDGIP and driveway ] back to the
Planning Board.
The Planning Services Manager responded the matters could be sent
back.
Mayor Johnson stated taking the two items off the table might make
sense.
Councilmember Matarrese restated the motion approval of staff
recommendations 1 and 2 [regarding the MDGIP and driveway and
sending site plan 4 back to the Planning Board for review, comment
and approval.
Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether the motion
included the additional sentence regarding the right turn lane, to
which Councilmember Matarrese responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether the motion included
direction to have the Planning Board review raised crosswalks, to
which Councilmember Matarrese responded in the affirmative.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
Councilmember deHaan stated that he has seen the project design and
has concerns regarding the size and mass of Buildings A and B; the
Planning Board wants to take a second look at the matter; Building
A is 67 feet tall and only houses one story.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether said matter is part of the agenda
item and should be discussed.
The City Attorney stated the agenda item is specific to the appeal
and the three items in the appeal, which should be the Council' S
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
15
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,16,"focus.
Councilmember Matarrese stated the matter should be addressed by
the Planning Board; the Council should receive copies of the
design, but the Planning Board should finish its job; the matter
can be called for review if Councilmembers object to the outcome.
Mayor Johnson concurred; stated the Council should receive copies,
but should not discuss something that is still at the Planning
Board level.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether design review has been done.
The Planning Services Manager responded in the affirmative; stated
design review was approved with the condition that the two
buildings mentioned be further refined; height was a specific
issue.
Councilmember deHaan stated that he would address the matter under
Council Communications.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
(07-530) Michael John Torrey, Alameda, provided a newspaper
article; discussed emergency alerts.
(07-531) Bill Smith, Alameda, discussed raising the standards for
earthquakes.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(07-532) Councilmember Matarrese stated that he has received
complaints regarding not having public restroom access at Alameda
Power & Telecom; requested staff to review the matter.
(07-533) Councilmember Matarrese requested an update on the
elevator at Independence Plaza.
The Assistant City Manager stated an Off Agenda Report was
distributed today.
(07-534) Councilmember deHaan stated the public should be
permitted to use the restroom facility on the second floor at AP&T.
(07-535) Councilmember deHaan stated that he comments on size and
mass of structures at Alameda Landing.
Mayor Johnson stated that she wanted to make sure that
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
16
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,17,"Councilmembers could comment on issues that are before the Planning
Board; she does not want to get in trouble with the legal process.
The City Attorney stated there could be a perception of bias if
Councilmembers comment on something that is going to be under the
jurisdiction of an advisory group, such as the Planning Board,
which could later come to Council either as an appeal or Call for
Review; the matter is an appropriate item to discuss during Council
Communications.
Councilmember deHaan stated Council talked about environmentally
sound buildings that would be efficient and more sustainable; he is
concerned with buildings that have large volumes inside,
particularly big boxes; square footage within buildings should be
reviewed; there are concerns with having buildings that are sixty-
five feet tall for a single story building; Council needs to take a
position on said issues; the City has an ordinance that prohibits
billboards he hopes that the City refrains from mock billboards
Council should do a review before design and mass situations
develop.
ADJOURNMENT
(07-536) - There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned
the Regular Meeting at 10:34 p.m. in memory of Ichinkhorloc
Bayarsaikhan.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
17
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,18,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY- - -NOVEMBER 6, 2007--6:00P.M. -
Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:10 p.m.
ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers
deHaan,
Gilmore,
Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 5.
Absent :
None.
The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider :
(07-512) Conference with Labor Negotiators: Agency Negotiators :
Craig Jory and Human Resources Director Employee Organizations:
All Public Safety Bargaining Units.
(07-513) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation;
Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section
54956.9; Number of cases: One.
Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened
and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Labor, Council received
a briefing on the procedures and status of negotiations with public
safety bargaining units; no action was taken; regarding Litigation,
Council received a briefing from its Legal Counsel on the matter of
potential litigation; no action was taken.
Adjournment
There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the
Special Meeting at 7:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Special Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,19,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND HOUSING
AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS (HABOC) MEETING
TUESDAY - -NOVEMBER 6, 2007- -7:25 P.M.
Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 7:38 p.m.
Commissioner Torrey led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL -
Present : Councilmembers/Board Members deHaan,
Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, Commissioner
Torrey, and Mayor/Chail Johnson - 6.
Absent :
None.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Commissioner Torrey moved approval of the Consent Calendar.
Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 6. [Items so enacted or adopted are
indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. . ]
( *HABOC) Minutes of the Special Board of Commissioners meeting held
September 4, 2007. Approved.
AGENDA ITEMS
(07-514) Recommendation to authorize the City Manager or her
designee to accept a Deed of Release of Restrictions from the
National Park Service for Neptune Park and a Declaration of
Restrictions for a new City-owned parcel located near Towata Park
and to enter into a license agreement with the Housing Authority to
provide parking for Independence Plaza residents on an 11,575
square foot tract of land on Neptune Park.
louncilmember/Commissioner Gilmore stated that she would recuse
herself from the item because of the possible appearance of bias.
Vice Mayor/Commissioner Tam inquired what is the parking need.
The Housing Authority Executive Director responded the parking need
is for the Independent Plaza Senior Complex as well as the Housing
Authority office; stated the Senior Complex requires .75 parking
spaces per unit; the Complex has 186 units; the office parking need
has a formula and is also left to the judgment of the Planning
Director; a total of 195 or 198 parking spaces are required; the
proposed additional parking spaces would bring the total to 180
spaces ; Berkeley studies have shown that low-income senior
complexes can get by with .6 parking spaces per unit; experience
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and Housing
1
Authority Board of Commissioners
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,20,"has proven that more is needed.
Vice Mayor/Commissioner Tam inquired whether the combination of the
housing units and office space bumps up the need to .75 parking
spaces per unit as opposed to . 6.
The Housing Authority Executive Director responded the additional
parking would provide for less than .75 parking spaces per unit.
Vice Mayor/Commissioner Tam inquired whether some consideration was
given to improving access from the housing units to the bus stops
stated bus stops are gated off; further inquired whether efforts
were made to improve access to public transit in lieu of providing
more vehicle access.
The Housing Authority Executive Director responded that he is not
sure whether there was a discussion about bus stop accessi stated
fences are in place for security purposes; the complex has gates in
the back, side, and front.
Vice Mayor/Commissioner Tam inquired whether seniors have easy
access to and from the bus stops.
The Housing Authority Executive Director responded seniors have to
walk farther to the bus stop at the corner of Webster Street and
Atlantic Avenue; stated seniors would need to walk through the
parking lot if there was a gate; there is no room for sidewalks;
another bus stop at the front of the office is accessible.
Vice Mayor/Commissioner Tam inquired whether consideration was
given to the issue in 2005.
The Housing Authority Executive Director responded that he does not
recall any discussion regarding adding gates in order to improve
access to bus stops.
Vice Mayor/Commissioner Tam inquired whether consideration was
given to relocating bus stops or providing easier access to
transit.
The Housing Authority Executive Director responded in the negative;
stated automobiles and parking are being discussed, not buses.
Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that the assumption that senior housing
requires less parking is not accurate.
The Housing Authority Executive Director stated Seniors are more
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and Housing
2
Authority Board of Commissioners
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,21,"active at Independence Plaza; automobiles provide independence;
paratransit is available; a bus from Chinatown shows up quite a
bit.
Vice Mayor/Commissioner Tam inquired whether a car-sharing program
is available, to which the Housing Authority Executive Director
responded that he does not know.
Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the City of Berkeley has a good car
sharing program; suggested staff look into the matter.
Vice Mayor/Commissioner Tam stated the Housing Authority estimates
that it would cost $190,000 to build the Independence Plaza parking
lot; inquired whether said cost would be recouped from rent
increases.
The Housing Authority Executive Director responded funding would be
from reserves; stated reserves get refunded from grants.
Vice Mayor/Commissioner Tam inquired whether parking would be free,
to which the Housing Authority Executive Director responded in the
affirmative.
Vice Mayor/Commissioner Tam inquired whether there are
opportunities to acquire additional park space on the West End as
opposed to east of Park Street [near Towata Park]
The Housing Authority Executive Director responded the National
Park Service does not allow deed restriction on an existing park;
stated the additional parcel from East Bay Municipal Utility
District (EBMUD) was not a park; the deed restriction needs to be
placed on non-park land.
Vice Mayor/Commissioner Tam inquired whether there are
opportunities to expand an existing park on the west side.
The Housing Authority Executive Director responded [West End] parks
or property were not identified.
Vice Mayor/Commissioner Tam inquired about the Coast Guard housing
area, to which the Housing Authority Executive Director responded
said area was not available at the time.
Richard Neveln, Alameda, suggested that the matter be referred to
the Transportation Commission.
Kim Nicholis, Alameda, discussed parking.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and Housing
3
Authority Board of Commissioners
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,22,"Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired how many parking spaces
are needed for the Housing Authority office.
The Housing Authority Executive Director responded two parcels are
involved; stated one parcel would add an additional twenty to
twenty-two parking spaces fourteen parking spaces would be needed
on the eastern portion.
Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the equation
would change to 0.6 parking spaces per tenant.
The Housing Authority Executive Director responded the parking
space would increase to 0.7 and would be less than the 0.75
required in the City ordinance.
Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan stated seniors are staying in the
workforce longer dynamics have changed.
Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan moved approval of the staff
recommendation.
Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether some Housing Authority
vehicles are parked off site.
The Housing Authority Executive Director responded said vehicles
are all parked on site; stated some vehicles are locked inside the
garage; others are parked behind the gate in a secured area.
Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the preference is to avoid taking away
any green area for parking; inquired whether Housing Authority
vehicles could be parked off site.
The Housing Authority Executive Director responded the fenced area
behind the gate is a secured area and is used for ingress and
egress for maintenance vehicles.
Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether additional spaces would be
added for Housing Authority vehicles, to which the Housing
Authority Executive Director responded in the negative.
Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether trees would be
removed, to which the Housing Authority Executive Director
responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether similar, mature
trees would be replanted, to which the Housing Authority Executive
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and Housing
4
Authority Board of Commissioners
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,23,"Director responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the Public Works
Department is comfortable with the plan.
The Housing Authority Executive Director responded the matter has
been discussed with the Recreation and Parks Department, not Public
Works.
Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese stated the same issues were
discussed in 2005; the City has a Vehicle Procurement Policy the
next step is to get a Vehicle Use Policy; the vacant lot purchased
from EBMUD would be designated as a park, which is a positive stepi
the motion should include that the staff recommendation is accepted
with the provision that the City develop a Vehicle Use Policy and
that no more park space be taken from the site.
Vice Mayor/Commissioner Tam stated that she does not think that
this [parking lot] is the best use of the parkland; she will not
support the staff recommendation.
Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion with
direction that the City develop a Vehicle Use Policy and that no
more park space be taken from the site.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following
voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers/Commissioners deHaan, Matarrese,
Commissioner Torrey, and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 4. Noes
:
Councilmember / Commissioner Tam - 1. Abstentions: Councilmember /
Commissioner Gilmore - 1. [Note: Councilmember/Commissioner Gilmore
recused herself from the item because of the possible appearance of
bias ]
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the
Special Joint Meeting at 8:05 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and Housing
5
Authority Board of Commissioners
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,24,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND
COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING
TUESDAY - -NOVEMBER 6, 2007- - -7:29 P.M.
Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 8:09 p.m.
ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers/Commissioners
deHaan,
Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor/Chair
Johnson - 5.
Absent :
None.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor/Chair Johnson announced that the recommendation to approve a
Lease with Alameda Wine Company [paragraph no. 07-045 CIC] was
removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion.
Vice Mayor/Commissioner Tam moved approval of the remainder of the
Consent Calendar.
Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion, which
carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted
are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.
]
( 07-515 - CC/*07-043 CIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council
and Community Improvement Commission meeting held on October 16,
2007. Approved.
(*07-044 CIC) Recommendation to approve a Contract with Ampco
Parking, Inc. in the amount of $124,682 for the management and
operation of the Civic Center parking structure. Accepted.
(07-045 CIC) Recommendation to approve a Lease with Alameda Wine
Company for 2315 Central Avenue in the Historic Alameda Theater.
The Development Services Director provided a brief presentation.
Commissioner Gilmore stated Section 7 of the Lease specifies how
the winebar would be used; she would like to add specific language
requiring that the winebar remain a winebar and not be allowed to
convert to a wine store; the Commission did not intend to have a
third wine store in the Park Street District the intent was to
have a wine bar that serves food; inquired whether the winebar
owner has filed for licenses.
The Development Services Director stated the owner does not want to
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and Community
1
Improvement Commission
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,25,"file for the licenses until the lease is approved because of the
fees.
Commissioner Gilmore inquired what type of licenses are needed.
The Development Services Director responded food and beverage
licenses are not separate; stated the major issue would be the Use
Permit for the exterior seating; the owner would need a full liquor
license from Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC) i the facility will be
an ""over 21"" establishment.
Commissioner Gilmore moved approval of the staff recommendation
with direction to add language to Section 7 of the lease requiring
that the wine bar not be allowed to convert to a wine store.
Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
(*07-046 CIC) Recommendation to approve a Lease with BurgerMeister
Management, Inc. for 2319 Central Avenue in the Historic Alameda
Theater. Accepted.
AGENDA ITEM
(07-516 CC/07-047 CIC) Public Hearing to consider approval of a
first addendum to the Alameda Landing Mixed-use Development Project
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, first amendment to the
Development Agreement, and first amendment to the Disposition and
Development Agreement for the Alameda Landing Mixed Use Project to
modify the Public Waterfront Promenade;
(07-516A CC) Adoption of Resolution Certifying the Addendum to the
Alameda Landing Mixed-Use Development Project Supplemental
Environmental Impact Report;
(07-516B CC) Adoption of Resolution Approving and Authorizing
Execution of a First Amendment to a Disposition and Development
Agreement with Palmtree Acquisition Corporation (Successor by
Merger to Catellus Development Corporation) for the Sale and
Development of Certain Real Property at the Fleet Industrial Supply
Center (FISC) ;
(07-047A CIC) Adoption of Resolution Approving an Addendum to the
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Alameda Landing
Mixed-Use Development Project Authorizing the Executive Director to
Amend the Disposition and Development Agreement with Palmtree
Acquisition Corporation (Successor by Merger to Catellus
Development Corporation) for the Sale and Development of Certain
Real Property at the FISC; and,
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and Community
2
Improvement Commission
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-11-06,26,"(07-516C CC) Introduction of Ordinance Approving a First Amendment
to Development Agreement DA-06-003 By and Between the City of
Alameda and Palmtree Acquisition Corporation (Successor by Merger
to Catellus Development Corporation) Continued to December
4,
2007.
.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the
Special Joint Meeting at 8:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and Community
3
Improvement Commission
November 6, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf