{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-01-02", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -JANUARY 2, 2018- 7:00 P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 7:01 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese,\nOddie and Mayor Spencer - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\nNone.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\nNone.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(18-001) Steven Schiesser, Alameda, expressed concern with the imbalance of low\nwages versus increasing housing prices.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of the Consent Calendar.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the\nparagraph number.]\n(*18-002) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings Held on December\n5,2017. Approved.\n(*18-003) Ratified bills in the amount of $5,848,965.23.\n(*18-004) Ordinance No. 3207, \"Ordinance Approving a Real Estate Exchange\nAgreement between the City of Alameda (\"City\") and PUR Atlantic LLC (\"PUR Atlantic\")\nto Exchange Approximately 820 Square Feet of City Owned Property for Approximately\n2,173 Square Feet of PUR Atlantic Owned Property in Order to Facilitate Construction\nof the Cross Alameda Trail Project along Ralph Appezzato Memorial Parkway between\nMain and Webster Streets and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Documents\nNecessary to Implement Its Terms.\" Finally passed.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-01-02", "page": 2, "text": "REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(18-005) Resolution No. 15338, \"Appointing Jennifer Roloff as a Member of the\nCommission on Disability.' Adopted; and\n(18-005A) Resolution No. 15339, \"Appointing Brad Weinberg as a Member of the\nHousing Authority Board of Commissioners.' Adopted.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft made brief comments regarding Ms.\nRoloff's qualifications.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nThe City Clerk administered the Oath of Office and presented Ms. Roloff and Mr.\nWeinberg with certificates of appointment.\n(18-006) Public Hearing to Consider Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda\nMunicipal Code by Amending Section 30-4.23 \"Multi-Family Residential Combining\nDistrict,\" Section 30-4.17C \"G Special Government Combining District,\" and the Zoning\nMap to Ensure Consistency Between the City of Alameda Municipal Code, Zoning Map\nand the Naval Air Station (NAS) Alameda Community Reuse Plan for the North Housing\nProperty Located on Singleton Avenue on the Former Naval Air Station in Alameda in\nOrder to Convey the Property to CP VI Admirals Cove, LLC, Habitat for Humanity, and\nthe Alameda Housing Authority. Introduced. [The Proposed Zoning Amendments\nWould Not Result in Any New Environmental Impacts or More Severe Environmental\nImpacts Than Those Previously Identified with the Adoption of the Community Reuse\nPlan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) 2009 Addendum, and the Housing Element\n2012 EIR Addendum]; and\n(18-006A) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute a\nMemorandum of Understanding (MOU) with CP VI Admirals Cove, LLC for Construction\nof Infrastructure.\nCouncilmember Oddie suggested limiting the speaker time to 2 minutes each.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft concurred with Councilmember Oddie.\nMayor Spencer stated that she does not support the suggestion; the item has not come\nbefore Council previously.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved approval of limiting the public speaking time to 2 minutes\neach.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-01-02", "page": 3, "text": "Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion which carried by the following voice\nvote: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese and Vella - 3. Noes: Councilmember\nMatarrese and Mayor Spencer - 2.\nThe Community Development Director and Assistant Community Development Director\ngave a Power Point presentation and responded to questions.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the suggestions to remove the Multi-Family (MF)\nhousing designation and amend the Code and zoning map to add an additional zoning\ndistrict to accommodate the cap is possible.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded staff would not recommend\nthe suggestion; stated the MF overlay has other benefits and allows for important MF\nhousing.\nMayor Spencer suggested creating a special government combining district.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded a government combining\ndistrict is specifically for properties owned by the federal or State government; continued\nthe presentation.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired what is the impact of the new State legislation regarding the\ncap.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded Council has the right to do\nany of the three options regarding the cap.\nThe City Manager stated the Housing Authority can speak to the new Senate Bill 35\n(SB35), which might answer Council's questions.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the Assistant Community Development\nDirector responded if Option 1 is chosen the G overlay would be removed and the MF\nzoning would not be amended at all.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether Section 1 of the draft ordinance would be\nremoved and the other options renumbered, to which the Assistant Community\nDevelopment Director responded Section 1 would have to be removed to remove the\ncap entirely.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether or not accepting the recommendation from the\nPlanning Board and staff is the same as removing Section 1.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated\nremoving Section 1 is the original staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired why new housing is no being built.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-01-02", "page": 4, "text": "which the Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether there is currently an existing plan for what will be built.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-01-02", "page": 5, "text": "The Assistant Community Development Director responded there is a lot the developer\ncan build under the zoning.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Council is being asked to approve the developer's\nability to rehabilitate 146 units.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded Council is being asked to\nremove the G overlay, decide whether to put the cap back into the MF Overlay or not,\nand authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute the MOU related to the\ninfrastructure.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the item will return to Council.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded under the zoning, the\ndeveloper can rehabilitate units or rebuild.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the developer will rehabilitate the existing units.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the developer has told the\nCity the plan is to rehabilitate.\nMayor Spencer inquired what is the difference between building new versus\nrehabilitating a unit.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded everything has to be\nbrought up to the current Building Code.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry about soil contamination, the Assistant\nCommunity Development Director stated the soil is regulated by the Navy, not Council.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether there will be any home ownership\nopportunities.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded home ownership will be\nthrough Habitat for Humanity.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry about lead paint, the Assistant\nCommunity Development Director stated everything has to be brought up to Code.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the units will be subject to rent control.\nThe Community Development Director responded the existing units will be covered by\nthe rent stabilization ordinance.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Carmel Partners would be able to opt out of Costa-\nHawkins due to the units being older than 1995, to which the Community Development\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-01-02", "page": 6, "text": "Director responded in the affirmative; stated covenants will be a part of the deed and\nthe owners will have to comply.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether transportation fees will be collected.\nThe Community Development Director responded in the negative; stated the\ndevelopment is not new, so there is no ability to charge a Transportation Demand\nManagement (TDM) fee.\nGreg Pasquali, Carmel Partners, gave a Power Point presentation.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Carmel Partners has contemplated\nmaking some of the units available for purchase.\nMr. Pasquali responded the process would be too costly.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the financing is in place, to which Mr. Pasquali\nresponded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether Carmel Partners will return to request more\nmoney.\nMr. Pasquali responded in the negative.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry about labor peace, Mr. Pasquali\nstated Carmel Partners has their own in house general contractor; Carmel Partners bids\nto union and non-union to obtain the most qualified workers on the job.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Carmel Partners is opposed to ensuring\nthe workers are being paid to their classifications.\nMr. Pasquali responded that he can look into the process with the Housing Authority.\nMayor Spencer inquired why the MOU is 10 years.\nMr. Pasquali responded to ensure the build out of the properties.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry about the timeline, Mr. Pasquali stated in\napproximately one year, Carmel Partners would like to have the property ready for\nresidents to move in.\nMayor Spencer inquired when the road extensions will occur.\nMr. Pasquali responded Carmel Partners would like to build the road extensions as\nquickly as possible and is working with the Housing Authority and Habitat for Humanity.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-01-02", "page": 7, "text": "The City Manager stated the Housing Authority would like to build the roads as quickly\nas possible.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Carmel Partners is agreeable to move quickly, to\nwhich Mr. Pasquali responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Council is being asked to approve the draft MOU.\nThe City Manager responded staff is requesting clear direction from Council.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether a 10 year MOU term is unusually long.\nThe City Manager responded the terms were decided based on when staff believes all\nthe terms of the MOU can be completed; stated the project is dependent on the Housing\nAuthority building housing and Habitat for Humanity's funding.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the MOU is only between Carmel\nPartners and the City.\nThe City Manager responded in the affirmative, stated there are a number of items that\nlink the three entities together.\nThe Director of Housing and Community Development gave a Power Point\npresentation.\nMayor Spencer inquired why the Housing Authority is presenting if the organization is\nnot a part of the MOU.\nThe City Attorney responded the Housing Authority is involved as a third party\nbeneficiary.\nMayor Spencer stated the Housing Authority should not negotiate the terms of the\nMOU; the negotiations are more appropriate coming from staff.\nThe City Manager stated the Housing Authority is involved in the conveyance of land\ndependent on Council decision.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the ask is to remove the G overlay\nThe City Manager responded for the public and transparency, the partnership is\nbetween the City which triggers the Housing Authority and Habitat for Humanity; stated\nif the presentation only discussed Carmel Partners the other impacts and partnerships\nwould be missed.\nMayor Spencer stated the Housing Authority should not be making recommendations\nregarding traffic flow; the MOU is between the City and Carmel Partners.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-01-02", "page": 8, "text": "The City Manager stated the staff perspective is that there are connections between the\nHousing Authority, the City and Carmel Partners.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the presentation can succinctly focus on\nwhat the Housing Authority is trying to deliver and holds relative to the MOU.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the Housing Authority was represented\nin the meetings that have taken place between Carmel Partners and the City.\nThe City Manager responded the Housing Authority was represented in most of the\nmeetings.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated Council is not negotiating; Council will provide\ndirection to the City Manager to negotiate.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the Housing Authority will speak directly to the grid\nlayout of the streets.\nThe Housing Authority Director responded that she will discuss the removal of the G\noverlay, expanding opportunities for affordable housing, and how the infrastructure\ngreatly impacts the feasibility of the housing; continued the presentation.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the current MOU being presented to Council contains\nthe terms of modification on Mosley Avenue that the Housing Authority is requesting in\nits letter.\nThe Community Development Director responded in the negative; stated said term can\nbe added to the MOU.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether staff is requesting Council to add a specific date to the\nMOU.\nThe Community Development Director responded in the negative; stated staff is\nrequesting Council to authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute the MOU;\nthe date can be addressed as part of finalizing the MOU.\nMayor Spencer requested clarification on the Housing Authority letter.\nThe Community Development Director stated there are two alternatives for Mosley\nAvenue; staff is still negotiating, but would like direction from Council on the matter.\nStated that she supports the production of more housing in Alameda; urged Council to\nremove the G overlay; she does not support removing the cap: Katherine Mertz,\nAlameda.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-01-02", "page": 9, "text": "Stated Alameda needs housing for seniors: Janet Bailey, Alameda.\nUrged Council to support the project: Matt Regan, Bay Area Council.\nStated Alameda Citizen Task Force supports keeping the cap and 15 units per acre:\nPaul Foreman, Alameda Citizens Task Force.\nStated that she supports the 15 units per acre and the project proposed by Carmel\nPartners: Dorothy Freeman, Alameda.\nStated that he supports the proposed project; listed the benefits of infill development:\nSam Hare Steig, Center for Creative Land Recycling.\nStated that he does not support the cap due to the need for housing: Doug Biggs,\nAlameda Point Collaborative (APC).\nStated the project will provide hope for many people in Alameda; urged Council to give\nthe infrastructure improvements a priority to fast-track the construction of affordable\nhousing: Michelle McGarraugh, APC.\nStated that he supports removing the G overlay; urged Council to support the cap: Mark\nVis, Alameda.\nUrged Council to support the project and build more housing: Denise Trepanier,\nAlameda.\nUrged Council to not remove the cap: Courtney Shepard, Alameda.\nExpressed concern with the completion of the roads to address traffic for the neighbors\nin the area with the new development: Kathryn S\u00e1enz Duke, APC.\nUrged Council to support the project and build more affordable housing in Alameda:\nJohn McCahan, Housing Authority Board of Commissioners.\nUrged Council to not impose a cap and allow for more affordable housing in Alameda:\nDoyle Saylor, Renewed Hope.\nStated that she is opposed to the cap: Lynette Lee, Renewed Hope.\nUrged Council to support the project to address the housing issue in Alameda: Liz\nVerela, Building Futures with Women and Children.\nUrged Council to remove the G overlay; stated that she does not support the cap: Laura\nThomas, Renewed Hope.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-01-02", "page": 10, "text": "Urged Council to support the project: Michael John Torrey, Alameda.\nStated the road should be designed correctly for bicyclists; urged Council to consider a\nprotected bike lane: Brian McGuire, Bike Walk Alameda.\nUrged Council to support the project and remove the cap to allow for more housing:\nJohn Spangler, Alameda.\n***\nMayor Spencer called a recess at 9:34 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:40 p.m.\n***\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested information regarding SB35 and Senate Bill\n166 (SB166).\nThe Assistant City Attorney stated SB166 does not apply to Charter cities; SB35 allows\ncertain projects to qualify for streamlined approval, ministerial approval, without CEQA\nreview in certain instances.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the 435 cap was disclosed to Carmel Partners from\nthe U.S. Navy, to which the Assistant Community Development Director responded in\nthe affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether removing the cap will increase the number of units on\nthe property.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-01-02", "page": 11, "text": "The Assistant Community Development Director responded the cap is distributed evenly\nby acreage, which would yield approximately 220 units; removing the cap would double\nthe amount of units the developer could build to approximately 440 units.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the property Carmel Partners purchased from the U.S.\nNavy stated 435 units.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether removing the cap would modify the terms which\nCarmel Partners bid on, to which the Assistant Community Development Director\nresponded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer requested clarification on what the developer bid on.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the developer bid on 15 of\nthe 30 acres, while knowing the entire 30 acres is limited to 435 units.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the extension of Mitchell Road was delineated in the\npurchase.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded in the negative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether staff included which roads the City wants extended.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the reuse amendment did\nnot make Mitchell Road extension a responsibility of North Housing.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the extension is a new term after the bid.\nThe Community Development Director responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the terms of the bid from the U.S. Navy included input\nfrom City staff.\nThe Community Development Director responded the goals and objectives in the\namended Reuse Plan were approved by the City Council; stated the amended reuse\nplan was a part of the disclosure documents for all the developers bidding on the\nproperty.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the Mitchell Avenue extension is included.\nThe Community Development Director responded Mitchell alignment is in the General\nPlan and is not subject to the auction; stated the land is not owned by the U.S. Navy.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-01-02", "page": 12, "text": "Mayor Spencer inquired whether bike lanes have been disclosed.\nThe Community Development Director responded the cross sections can accommodate\nbike, parking and traffic lanes and have already been designed.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the bike lanes were disclosed to the developer when\nthey bid on the property, to which the Community Development Director responded in\nthe affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the request is different than the MOU proposal.\nThe Community Development Director responded the cross section was disclosed as\npart of the due diligence documents; stated Carmel Properties has agreed to pay for the\nMitchell Avenue and Mosley Avenue extensions as part of the MOU.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether staff is satisfied that the language in the MOU requires\nbike lanes, to which the Community Development Director responded in the affirmative.\nThe City Manager stated that she understood the request to have a cycle track on one\nside of the road.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether a copy of what the developer bid on with the U.S.\nNavy is not included in the staff report or attachments, to which the Community\nDevelopment Director responded the bid is not included; stated Carmel Partners is open\nto discussing the different types of bike lanes.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the discussion would go to the Transportation\nCommission.\nThe Community Development Director responded the discussion would follow the\nstandard process.\nVice Mayor Vella stated that she does not like the idea of finite dates; she would like to\nmeet different benchmarks to allow for flexibility; she would like to see the project move\nforward without bureaucratic road blocks to build affordable housing and another\nestuary crossing; she would like to review removing the cap.\nThe City Manager stated the Council can decide to increase or remove the cap on the\naffordable housing or have the cap by acreage.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether Council could set the cap at 15 units per acre for the\nCarmel Partners properties.\nThe City Manager responded in the affirmative.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-01-02", "page": 13, "text": "The Assistant Community Development Director responded different properties can\nhave different zoning caps.\nThe City Attorney stated the details would need to be worked out depending on\nCouncil's prerogative.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired how the dollar amount is determined in the MOU\nlanguage subparagraph 3 on page 1: Carmel shall provide a fixed payment\n\"\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the language means the\nCity is requesting the money in the event Carmel cannot build the roads; the blanks are\nbecause the City has to estimate the cost of building the roads.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the language should be clearer.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the language \" .Carmel will work\ncooperatively with the City\" includes sufficient specificity so that each party knows its\nobligations.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated the MOU would be\nclearer.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the language regarding the dollar\namount for the storm drain can be clearer.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the City is having\nconsultants create the cost estimates.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the City, in any way, vetted Carmel\nPartners' claim that the project will net $100,000 annually to the General Fund.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the City is comfortable with\nthe claim after reviewing it; stated if the Council would like the claim peer reviewed, staff\ncan do so.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Carmel Partners can return and want to build market\nrate housing without the cap or sell the property to someone without a cap.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded removing the cap benefits\nthe Housing Authority; Carmel's plans are to rehabilitate 146 units; stated lifting the cap\nprovides value to the land.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the Housing Authority is limited to building affordable\nhousing or can build market rate housing.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-01-02", "page": 14, "text": "The Assistant Community Development Director responded the zoning does not prevent\nthe Housing Authority from building market rate housing.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the Housing Authority could come back with a\nproposal to build market rate housing and, without a cap, there would be no idea what\nthe maximum number could be.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded removing the cap means\nthe maximum density for the Housing Authority is 30 units per acre plus a density bonus\nof up to 35%; even with no density bonus, the minimum would still be 15% affordable.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the MOU is to determine whether Carmel Partners\nwould like to purchase the property and do the rehabilitation.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the normal process when a property owner wants to\nrehabilitate units would include the City looking at rezoning the property or adjacent\nparcels.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded in the negative; stated the\nonly reason the property needs rezoning is because it used to be federal ownership.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the City would be looking to remove the cap if a\nproperty owner was looking to rehabilitate 435 units.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded in the negative; stated the\nland moving from federal to private requires the G overlay removed.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether a property owner would appear before Council to\nchange the number of units if they would like to remove the cap in the future.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated it\nis a zoning amendment.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether there is a process to do so, to which the Assistant\nCommunity Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated the cap is\nimbedded in the G overlay; removing the G overlay will remove the cap unless there is a\nsubsequent action to re-impose the cap.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the normal process for public participation in a zoning\nchange begins with the Planning Board.\nThe Community Development Director responded staff followed the standard process to\nchange the zoning.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-01-02", "page": 15, "text": "Councilmember Oddie stated it is Council's responsibility to protect the tenants of the\nCity; he supports the project; he agrees with no fixed date for the street expansion.\n(18-007) Mayor Spencer stated a motion is needed to consider the remaining items: the\nreferrals.\nVice Mayor Vella moved approval of hearing the tobacco [paragraph no 18-009 and\nrent fee [paragraph no 18-010] items.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is prepared to vote\nagainst the motion because Council will have to add more meetings throughout the\nyear.\nMayor Spencer stated that she supports the motion since speakers have been sitting in\nthe audience the entire meeting.\nThe City Clerk requested clarification, stated the bike item [paragraph no 18-011 has\nspeakers, not the rent fee item.\nVice Mayor Vella Clarified motion to hear the tobacco and the bike items.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion.\nOn the call for the question, the motion failed by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmembers Oddie, Vella and Spencer - 3. Noes: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft\nand Matarrese - 2.\n***\nMayor Spencer called a recess at 10:30 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 10:32 p.m.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated direction should be given to staff to put a milestone\nand timeframe around the delivery of the infrastructure and the roads that are needed\nby the Housing Authority to complete the affordable housing; that he disagrees with the\npoint that keeping 15 units per acre means the City is saying no to housing; it is proper\nplanning; the Housing Authority can ask for a zoning change; he sees no problem in\nkeeping the first reading of the ordinance with the 15 unit per acre restriction within the\nMF zoning for the two parcels.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of directing the City Manager to negotiate\nan MOU incorporating the comments that were made by the Council with an emphasis\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-01-02", "page": 16, "text": "on making the feasibility of the Housing Authority projects number one, adopting the\nalternative language in the text section in the staff report and having the first reading of\nthe ordinance.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she concurs with Councilmember Matarrese;\ninquired whether removing the G overlay and the cap would change the item from a first\nreading and require the matter to come back.\nThe City Attorney responded in the negative; stated the first reading could be now, as\nlong as the language is agreed upon tonight.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether there is a legal reason to keep the cap.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded there is no legal issue with\nremoving the cap.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is fine with removing the cap as a friendly\namendment to the motion.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's request is\nto remove the alternative text; stated his motion is to accept the staff's alternative text\namendment and approve the ordinance as written; declined the friendly amendment.\nMayor Spencer seconded the motion; stated it is appropriate to honor the offer and bid\nand not change any of the terms.\nOn the call for the question, the motion failed by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmember Matarrese and Mayor Spencer - 2. Noes: Councilmembers Ezzy\nAshcraft, Oddie and Vella - 3.\nVice Mayor Vella moved approval of the MOU and the ordinance removing the\nlanguage adding the cap.\nMayor Spencer requested a friendly amendment to bifurcate the two motions.\nVice Mayor Vella accepted the friendly amendment.\nThe Assistant City Attorney read language to ensure everyone is clear; stated: in the\ntitle, delete the words: \"Alameda Municipal Code Section 30-4.23 multiple family\nresidential combining district and replace with \"deleting; the section would read\n\"Deleting Section 30-4.17.c\" and read on as currently drafted; Section 1 would be\ndeleted in its entirety; Section 2 would be renumbered to Section 1 and would read:\n\"Section 30-4.17 Subsection C shall be deleted in its entirety\" and the remainder of the\nsentence would be deleted; said changes would remove the G overlay and remove the\ncap.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-01-02", "page": 17, "text": "Councilmember Oddie inquired whether Section 3 becomes Section 2 and Section 4\nbecomes Section 3 and so forth, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded in the\naffirmative; stated all remaining sections would be numbered accordingly.\nVice Mayor Vella moved introduction of the ordinance with the language as read by the\nAssistant City Attorney.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by the following\nvoice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Oddie and Vella - 3. Noes:\nCouncilmember Matarrese and Spencer - 2.\nVice Mayor Vella moved approval of the MOU with the direction from Council, primarily\naround setting up a roadmap for achieving milestones.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the comments included ensuring the matter proceeds\nand not change the terms.\nThe City Attorney responded the motion is to authorize the City Manager to negotiate\nand execute consistent with the terms that are before Council as modified by the\ndirection from Council.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\n(18-008) Update on Tracking of Council Direction through the Referral Process. Not\nheard.\nThe City Manager proposed scheduling a special meeting on a regular week night for\nthe Council to not have a facilitated goal setting, but to have a more focused Council\nmeeting to set priorities and discuss the resources needed for each of the Council\ndirected items.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the facilitator was helpful; he would like to agendize the\nmatter and discuss it.\nMayor Spencer stated that she would prefer to not have the matter facilitated; she\nbelieves Council communicates well and the matter can be done in less time; she\nconcerned with slowing down the process.\nVice Mayor Vella stated that she enjoyed the facilitator last time.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she also believed the facilitator was useful\nlast time.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-01-02", "page": 18, "text": "The City Manager stated that she is trying to find a solution to do the referral goal\nsetting annually.\nCouncil briefly discussed whether the matter could be discussed.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nCatherine Pauling, Alameda Renter's Coalition (ARC), expressed concerns over\nCouncilmembers saying the rental crisis is over; stated Ordinance 3148 has not\nstabilized the rental market and there is a rental crisis.\nEric Strimling, ARC, stated Council needs to do something about evictions.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\n(18-009) Consider Directing Staff to Draft an Ordinance Requiring the Licensure of\nTobacco Retailers, Including a Ban on the Sale of Menthol Cigarettes and Other\nFlavored Tobacco and Enacting an Annual Fee. Not heard. (Councilmembers\nMatarrese and Oddie)\n(18-010) Consider Directing Staff to: 1) Determine Whether Council Can Enact an\nOrdinance to Pass Through a Portion of the Housing Program (Rent) Fee to Tenants; 2)\nClarify the City's Collection Efforts for Landlords who do not Pay the Fee by December\n31, 2017; and 3) Clarify that the Fee May be Passed Through as Part of a Rent\nIncrease. Not heard. (Mayor Spencer and Vice Mayor Vella)\n(18-011) Consider Directing Staff to Provide Information on the Citywide Dockless Bike\nSharing Program and Return to Council with Additional Safety Requirements. Not\nheard. (Mayor Spencer and Vice Mayor Vella)\n(18-012) Consider Banning Motorized Commercial Vehicles, Including Robotic\nCommercial Vehicles, from Sidewalks and Commercial Drone Aircraft Used for\nDeliveries. Not heard. (Councilmember Matarrese)\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(18-013) Consideration of Mayor's Nominations to the Commission on Disability and\nHousing Authority Board of Commissioners. Not heard.\n(18-014) December 2017 Stopwaste Topic Brief on Food Waste. [Informational Only]\n(Councilmember Oddie)\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 10:58 p.m.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-01-02", "page": 19, "text": "Respectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-01-02.pdf"}