2008-10-07 Regular CC MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY- - OCTOBER 7, 2008- -7:30 P.M.
Mayor Johnson convened the Regular Meeting at 7:47 p.m.
ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore,
Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 5.
Absent: None.
AGENDA CHANGES
(08 -414) Mayor Johnson announced that the National Business
Women's Week proclamation [paragraph no. 08 -415]; Disability
Awareness Month proclamation [paragraph no. 08 -4161; and
Resolutions of Reappointment and Appointment [paragraph nos. 08-417
and 08 -15A] would be heard first.
PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
(08 -415) Proclamation declaring October 19 through 25, 2008 as
National Business Women's Week.
Mayor Johnson read and presented the proclamation to JoAnn
Ainsworth, President of Isle City Business and Professional Women.
Ms. Ainsworth thanked Council for the proclamation; presented a
basket of pink ribbons in recognition of Breast Cancer Awareness
Month.
(08 -416) Proclamation declaring October as Disability Awareness
Month.
Mayor Johnson read and presented the proclamation to Commission on
Disabilities Chair Jodie Moore, and Commissioner Robbie Krietz.
Ms. Moore thanked Council for the proclamation; invited Council to
attend a tree planning ceremony on November 8, 2008, at Lincoln
Park.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(08 -417) Resolution No. 14270, "Reappointing Harry Dahlberg as a
Member of the Economic Development Commission (Manufacturing /
Industrial Seat)." Adopted; and
(08 -417A) Resolution No. 14271, "Appointing Maggie Mei as a Member
of the Youth Advisory Commission." Adopted.
Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolutions.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 1
October 7, 2008
Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
The City Clerk administered the Oath of Office and presented Mr.
Dahlberg with a certificate of reappointment.
Mr. Dahlberg stated that he is honored to be reappointed to the
Economic Development Commission; stated the City has seen the
completion of a number of major development projects; the community
has a sense of excitement and the City's future is full of hope.
* **
Mayor Johnson called a recess at 8:02 p.m. and reconvened the
Regular City Council meeting at 11:18 p.m.
* **
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Johnson announced that the Minutes [paragraph no. 08 -418]
were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion.
Councilmember Matarrese 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.]
(08 -418) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings
held on September 16, 2008; the Special Joint City Council and
Public Utilities Board Meeting held on September 30, 2008; and the
Special City Council Meeting held on October 1, 2008.
Councilmember Gilmore stated that Page 14 should read "...two stores
each up to 60,000 square feet."
Councilmember Gilmore moved approval of the minutes with said
correction.
Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
( *08 -419) Ratified bills in the amount of $4,327,773.86.
( *08 -420) Recommendation to accept the Bayport Phase 2 public
backbone infrastructure, stormwater treatment pond improvements,
and authorize the City Clerk to record a Notice of Completion for
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 2
October 7, 2008
the improvements. Accepted.
( *08 -421) Recommendation to award Contract in the amount of
$234,598, including contingencies, to A -Plus Tree Service, for
pruning of City trees for Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2009, No.
P.W. 07- 08 -20. Accepted.
( *08 -422) Recommendation to award Contract in the amount of
$160,990, including contingencies, to Schaaf & Wheeler Consulting
Civil Engineers, for assessment of the City of Alameda Sewer Pump
Stations, No. P.W. 06- 08 -16. Accepted.
( *08 -423) Resolution No. 14272, "Readopting the City of Alameda's
Bicycle Master Plan." Adopted.
( *08 -424) Resolution No. 14273, "Supporting the FOCUS Priority
Development Area Application for Alameda Point." Adopted.
( *08 -425) Ordinance No. 2983, "Approving Master Plan Amendment,
PLN08 -0181, Adjusting Lot Sizes Within the Grand Marina Village
Master Plan." Finally passed.
( *08 -426) Ordinance No. 2984, "Amending Various Sections of the
Alameda Municipal Code Contained in Article I (Zoning Districts and
Regulations) of Chapter XXX (Development Regulations) to Prohibit
Single Retail Stores Larger than 90,000 Square Feet in Size that
Include More Than Ten - Percent Sales Floor Area Devoted to Non-
taxable Merchandise." Finally passed.
CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS
(08 -427) Update on budget status and discussion of potential cuts.
The City Manager provided a Power Point presentation.
Mayor Johnson stated the State budget is not balanced; the State
carried over a $15.5 billion shortfall.
The City Manager stated the State has a cash flow and projection
problem.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether having departments cut back an
additional 5% would be enough, to which the City Manager responded
a 5% cut is a starting point.
Mayor Johnson stated a 5% cut is very optimistic; the projected
$700,000 deficit for this year needs to be addressed.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 3
October 7, 2008
The City Manager stated that the budget would need to be reviewed
continually.
Mayor Johnson stated Council would be receiving recommendations on
contributions to Other Post Employee Benefits (OPEB) from the
Economic Sustainability Committee; the public needs to understand
that the City Manager will be proposing a package of cuts at the
next City Council meeting; Council would like to have public input
on the matter.
Councilmember Gilmore stated cities cannot run a deficit; a
balanced budget is needed; inquired whether the State can come back
after Proposition lA money in the 2009 -2010 budget cycle.
The City Manager responded the State could go after Proposition lA
money this year.
Councilmember deHaan stated the State could be looking at
transportation funding also.
Vice Mayor Tam stated the Governor could reopen the budget because
of credit market tightening and the State's inability to qualify
for a huge loan.
Councilmember deHaan stated the City projected an approximate $5
million shortfall when the last budget was passed; changes have
occurred; Council discussed the American Insurance Group's [AIG]
situation; inquired whether there are other areas of concern.
The City Manager stated that she asked the Chief Finance Director
and City Treasurer about the matter; the City Treasurer assured her
that the City is properly invested.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the budget includes any pay
raises.
The City Manager responded that the budget does not assume any pay
increases that have not been negotiated; stated property
reassessments will be monitored continually.
(08 -428) Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of continuing the
meeting past midnight.
Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 4
October 7, 2008
Councilmember Matarrese stated proposed cuts would be brought to
Council on October 21St; he would like Council to consider policies
because the depth of the cuts will depend on whether Measure P
passes.
The City Manager stated that the budget does not take into account
Measure P passing.
Councilmember Matarrese stated he would like to review ways to
change the structure of the City's service system to flatten the
organization so that top management has more responsibilities with
fewer people; some cities have a Director for public safety;
consolidating recreation programs and Library services should be
reviewed; professional services could be outsourced; Council should
look at concentric circles for prioritizing the most effective uses
of tax dollars to preserve health and safety and value in the City.
Mayor Johnson stated private organization funding should be
reviewed; the City is paying $50,000 [per year] to the Alameda
Museum; public money needs to be spent in areas where the public
gets the most benefit; the City Manager needs to provide Council
with different recommendations for OPEB funding; one budget
proposal could address the Economic Sustainability Committee
recommendation for $4.5 million.
Councilmember deHaan stated the City usually has a two -year budget;
recovery will be very slow; out years need to be discussed; the
City needs to live with a three or four year budget forecast.
Mayor Johnson stated the public needs to know that difficult cuts
will need to be made even if Measure P passes.
(08 -429) Public Hearing to consider an appeal of Planning Board
decision to certify the adequacy of the Alameda Towne Centre
Expansion Project Environmental Impact Report and to approve the
Sign Program, permitted hours of operation, and outdoor uses for
Planned Development Amendment PDA05 -0004 and Major Design Review
DR05 -0073;
(08 -429A) Resolution No. 14274, "Approving the Environmental Impact
Report and Upholding the Planning Board Decision." Adopted; and
(08 -429B) Resolution No. 14275, "Denying the Appeal of the August
11, 2008, Planning Board Decision to Approve the Hours of Operation
and Outdoor Uses for Planned Development Amendment PDA 05 -0004 and
Major Design Review DR05- 0073." Adopted.
The Supervising Planner gave a brief presentation.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 5
October 7, 2008
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the project was 545,000
square feet originally, to which the Supervising Planner responded
in the affirmative.
Councilmember deHaan stated the square footage increased by 112,000
square feet; Target would have increased the square footage by an
additional 49,000 square feet; inquired whether the square footage
was included in the Environmental Impact Report for Target.
The Supervising Planner responded the EIR specifically addressed
the change from 657,000 square feet up to 706,000 square feet and
included the 49,000 square feet; stated full build -out impacts have
been discussed.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the 49,000 square feet has
been approved.
The Supervising Planner responded the 49,000 square feet has not
been addressed to date; stated the matter is before the Planning
Board.
Councilmember deHaan stated a parking structure was discussed
during the Target era; inquired whether double deck parking was
discussed for the Mervyn's site.
The Supervising Planner responded the issue was discussed after
Target left; stated some of the square footage was shifted to
Mervyn's.
Councilmember deHaan inquired how the issue fits into tonight's
discussion.
The Supervising Planner responded that the most recent plan, which
includes Kohl's, proposes a shopping center for up to approximately
to 681,000 square feet which would require construction of a
parking structure.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether 680,000 square feet is the
breaking point [for a parking structure], to which the Supervising
Planner responded the breaking point would be before reaching
680,000 square feet.
Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the hearing.
Proponents (In favor of Appeal): Eugenie Thomson, Appellant; Brenda
Benner; Alameda; Joel Ramband, Alameda; Colin Stermer, Alameda;
Claire Risley, Alameda; Christine Healey, Alameda (submitted
handout); Holly Sellers, Alameda; Michael Radding, Alameda; Janet
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 6
October 7, 2008
Libby, Alameda; Kurt Libby, Alameda.
There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public
portion of the hearing.
Following Ms. Thomson's comments, Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether
Ms. Thomson is being compensated for her services, to which Ms.
Thomson responded she is providing pro bono services.
Vice Mayor Tam stated the Alameda Towne Center study projects
traffic levels up to 40 percent higher than projected in the EIR;
inquired whether Ms. Thomson thinks that a lower amount of traffic
should be assumed.
Ms. Thomson responded in the negative; stated that she was
referring to peer review by Dowling Associates which indicates that
the traffic study for future years is conservative because traffic
would be 40% higher in the a.m. and 50% higher in the p.m. than
what the Transportation Element amendment shows; the Transportation
Element numbers are the same as the 2004 counts.
Councilmember Gilmore requested clarification on 2003 traffic
counts versus 2005 traffic counts.
Ms. Thomson stated a combination of 2002 and 2005 traffic counts
were used for the 2006 draft EIR; the shopping center has been
dynamic and has been under construction since 2003; 2002 traffic
counts were used for all Otis Drive intersections and 2005 traffic
counts were used for all other locations; she received sales tax
information from Councilmember deHaan and the Finance Department
which illustrates that sales were down 20% in 2002 and 30% in 2005;
both years had low occupancy or low sales; occupancy should have
been checked and the base should have been increased because of
lack of activity.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether there would be a larger
delta of traffic if the baseline were artificially low.
Ms. Thomson responded the delta never changes; stated the delta is
due to the shopping center producing trips and other projects
[within the City] producing trips; counts are never done in areas
of high vacancy or poor sales; the shopping center was not doing
well in 2002.
Councilmember Gilmore stated the accurate baseline would have been
higher if the shopping center was doing well and built out; the
impact would be less; the delta would be less if the shopping
center is doing well as opposed to doing poorly; more traffic would
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 7
October 7, 2008
be generated if the shopping center is doing well, and the change
in traffic is less; higher impacts would be realized by starting
artificially low because there would be a bigger delta.
Ms. Thomson stated the delta is the increase; a 112,000 square foot
increase would generate 250 trips; the existing shopping center is
not operating at 545,000 square feet, but at 475,000 square feet or
450,000 square feet.
Vice Mayor Tam stated the adequacy of the EIR is being evaluated
tonight; an EIR reviews a base level and worst -case action level
and identifies impacts.
The Supervising Planner stated the sales tax table looks at
aggregated sales tax data for different sectors from 2003 and 2005;
there can only be one highest year; sales tax would be down for all
other years.
Peter Galloway, Omni- Means, stated shopping center activity is not
as robust as the 545,000 square feet would suggest; said
information was not available when counts were done; he feels that
Omni- Means' counts are fairly accurate; Omni -Means took the
existing base square footage to calculate trips and calculated
trips for the proposed square footage using shopping center rates;
driveway rates were not used because Omni -Means cannot account for
trips coming in and out of the Post Office or restaurants that are
not part of the shopping center; the Institute of Transportation
Engineers (ITE) shopping center rates were used after reviewing the
matter with the Public Works Department.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the full build out rate
was a calculation projected using the number of trips for shopping
centers based on square foot of retail shopping centers, to which
Mr. Galloway responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the number is theoretical
and remains the same whether the baseline is based on a
conservative projection of not being a fully occupied or robust
shopping center and is based on the square footage of the shopping
center using the same criteria to peg the top number, to which Mr.
Galloway responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether the two to one lane drop was
analyzed.
Mr. Galloway responded all calculations reflect correct lane
geometries; stated Highway Capacity Manual 2000 (HCM 2000)
methodology was used and is very sensitive to signal cycling and
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 8
October 7, 2008
lane designations.
Councilmember deHaan inquired how the occupied square footage is
taken into consideration.
Mr. Galloway responded the amount of occupied space is provided.
Councilmember deHaan inquired what is the amount of occupied space,
to which Mr. Galloway responded 545,000 square feet.
Vice Mayor Tam stated Omni- Means' traffic study was peer reviewed
by Dowling Associates; the traffic study looked at trips generated
for 545,000 square feet in addition to 706,650 full build out trip
generation; an impact comparison was made for the increased trip
generation; the peer review noted that projected intersection
traffic levels were up to 40% higher than expected; inquired
whether the increase was a result of projections made.
Mr. Galloway responded the Public Works Department wanted to use a
one -half percentage per year [increase] and added in the northern
waterfront plan trips.
Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether there would be less traffic in
reality in need of mitigation as a result of using a more
conservative estimate, to which Mr. Galloway responded in the
affirmative.
Councilmember deHaan inquired how incidental travel counts are
done.
Mr. Galloway responded incidental travel is difficult to calculate;
incidental travel is included in existing counts.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether information provided by Omni -Means
is within reasonable professional standards.
Mr. Galloway responded that the information is very reasonable and
has been reviewed numerous times by the Public Works Department and
Dowling Associates.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether [traffic count] research was
not performed to determine the baseline's validity, to which Mr.
Galloway responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired how the City's noise ordinance
relates to truck traffic; further inquired what methodology is used
to determine pollution levels.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 9
October 7, 2008
The Supervising Planner responded traffic noise is reviewed
cumulatively over a long period of time; stated a Code Enforcement
Officer measured shopping center noise levels from Ms. Healy's
balcony; levels did not come anywhere near passing City noise
standards; levels spiked when an AC Transit bus came by or a police
car sped down Otis Drive; neither situation would trigger a
significant impact; tonight's anecdotal comments cannot be
qualified.
Rebecca Gordon, Lamphier- Gregory, stated air quality is addressed
in the final EIR; air quality is a regional issue; the San
Francisco Air Quality Management District guidelines are used; the
guidelines have thresholds that address when a project might have a
significant impact under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA); the Alameda Towne Centre Project is below the threshold for
the District.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether specific air quality testing
would be used if a 250,000 square foot factory moved into a
neighborhood.
Ms. Gordon responded projections would be analyzed; stated factory
emission thresholds are lower than shopping center emissions; air
quality analysis would be performed if residences are next to an
existing factory because the factory is an emitter.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether there is a way to compare
past pollution levels to current levels.
Ms. Gordon responded the Air Quality Management District tracks
pollution over the years.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether there is a way to narrow the
comparison down to a specific area, to which Ms. Gordon responded
in the negative.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether there would be concern if the
shopping center were not utilizing all of the space.
Ms. Gordon responded the previous expansion project was reviewed in
a separate EIR and certified; stated additional impacts are being
reviewed; the impacts will become part of the cumulative scenario.
Councilmember deHaan stated that he is not sure how
underperformance is measured.
Ms. Gordon responded shopping center use goes go up and down;
changes occur; keeping analyses as conservative as possible leaves
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 10
October 7, 2008
some wiggle room.
Councilmember deHaan inquired how much wiggle room is put into a
study, to which Ms. Gordon responded 20% to 250.
Councilmember deHaan inquired what is the shopping center vacancy
rate.
The Supervising Planner responded the vacancy rate is irrelevant
because a conservative position has been taken which overstates the
impacts.
Randy Kyte, Harsch Investments, stated attempts have been made to
address neighbor concerns and subsequent conditions have been
added; mechanisms have been put in place to mitigate hours when
certain things can occur around the shopping center; Park Street
would be the only truck entrance; truck route analysis was staff's
responsibility; suggesting that all of the ills on Broadway are the
result of the shopping center is nonsensical.
Councilmember deHaan inquired what was the prior truck delivery
time.
The Supervising Planner responded 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. unless a
Use Permit allowed extended hours; stated Safeway and Walgreen's
have Use Permits; staff does not anticipate any additional Use
Permits in the future if Council approves extending hours to
midnight.
Councilmember Matarrese stated that the EIR has been certified; he
has no problem with signage; he is trying to figure out the
rationale of giving a blanket change of hours versus a Use Permit;
Use Permits provide a controlling mechanism; that he does not have
a problem with some businesses staying open until midnight; a Use
Permit should be required; that he sees the EIR information as a
snap shot in time; Council has a good idea of the impact; the
impact does not approve any expansion; there is a complete picture
of what the impacts would be with a 706,000 square foot shopping
center; measurements should be made on incremental occupancy of
some of the current, bigger projects; real time traffic counts
should be taken when Kohl's is up and running; observations need to
be taken when the gas station and Orchard Supply Hardware (OSH)
opens; speeding and idling issues need to be enforced.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired how enforcement is done for trucks
entering the correct driveway and idling for no more than five
minutes; further inquired who would enforce Use Permit non-
compliance.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 1 1
October 7, 2008
The Supervising Planner responded twenty -four hour security is on
site; the proposed condition puts the responsibility for monitoring
on the Applicant and security; security would be responsible for
alerting the shopping center management, then management would
bring the matter up with the tenant.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired who would be responsible for Use
Permit non - compliance and what would be the penalties.
The Supervising Planner responded the shopping center management;
stated individual Use Permits would need separate conditions; he is
not sure what the monitoring mechanism would be; the matter might
be complaint driven.
Councilmember Gilmore stated the City would have a bigger stick
with the Use Permit scenario because revoking a Use Permit would
seriously affect business; the proposed condition involves a
landlord - tenant relationship; a lessor might have an incentive to
keep the lessee in business as long as possible.
Vice Mayor Tam inquired how violations would be pinpointed if there
are multiple Use Permits.
The Supervising Planner responded enforcement would be difficult
unless trucks have identification.
Vice Mayor Tam inquired how the City would recoup enforcement
costs.
The Planning and Building Director responded Use Permit violations
do not have fees in place; stated Use Permit violations are
complaint bases.
Councilmember Matarrese stated very few businesses would need Use
Permits for twenty -four hour delivery.
The Supervising Planner stated most tenants are small businesses
and use UPS trucks or vans [for delivery].
Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether idling is governed by
State law.
The Supervising Planner responded in the affirmative; stated the
law was enacted to address diesel emissions.
Councilmember Matarrese stated the Police Department could issue
tickets for idling; that he likes the idea of having direct City
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 12
October 7, 2008
enforcement available for areas that could cause potential
problems.
Mike Corbitt, Harsch Investments, stated his main concern is to
allow Kohl's seasonal hours until 12:00 a.m.; restaurant hours are
also a concern.
Councilmember Gilmore stated conditions could be added regarding
restaurants staying open until midnight and extending Kohl's
seasonal hours.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether twenty -four hour deliveries
are being controlled.
Mr. Corbitt responded that he would need to ask the neighbors.
Councilmember deHaan inquired how long Mr. Corbitt has been with
the shopping center, to which Mr. Corbitt responded nine years.
Councilmember deHaan inquired how much traffic has increased.
Mr. Corbitt responded a good shopping center would produce more
traffic; stated parking capacity is good.
Councilmember deHaan inquired what is the vacancy rate.
Mr. Corbitt responded the shopping center is approximately 8Oo to
900 occupied.
Councilmember deHaan stated that occupancy is at 8Oo for 545,000
square feet.
Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the hours of operation
allowing restaurants to remain open until midnight and the Planning
Director to approve extending holiday hours for Kohl's; and
requiring Use Permits for extended hours beyond business hours.
[Adoption of Resolution No. 14275]
Mayor Johnson inquired whether a Use Permit would be required for
deliveries beyond existing hours, to which Councilmember Matarrese
responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether twenty -four hour deliveries
would require a Use Permit, to which Councilmember Matarrese
responded in the affirmative.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 13
October 7, 2008
Councilmember Gilmore moved approval of the sign program [included
in Resolution No. 14275].
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
The Supervising Planner inquired
hours included conditions, to
responded in the affirmative.
whether the motion to approve
which Councilmember Matarrese
Vice Mayor Tam requested a description of noticing concerns raised;
stated the City Manager provided an update stating that notice was
provided in the Alameda Journal, and notices were mailed to
residents within 500 feet.
Councilmember deHaan stated Council never quantified what the
noticing requirements would be when projects reach a certain
threshold.
The Planning and Building Director stated the Municipal Code has
certain noticing requirements; the Alameda Towne Centre project
requires notification to property owners and residents within 100
feet and advertising in the paper ten days before the hearing;
Council adopted a policy several years ago which expanded the
notification policy to a twenty day notice for hearings before the
Planning Board and Historical Advisory Board and a 300 foot radius
around the property; the notification process was expanded to 500
feet for Alameda Towne Centre.
Councilmember deHaan stated the traffic engineers discussed various
corridors that were areas of concern.
The Planning and Building Director stated staff published an ad in
the newspaper; notice was posted on the website as well.
Vice Mayor Tam stated that she has the sense that increased traffic
cannot be attributed to Alameda Towne Centre totally; the EIR
looked at the worse case scenario and impacts were identified; the
EIR does not grant approval to move forward with the expansion of
49,000 square feet.
Vice Mayor Tam moved adoption of the resolution approving the
Environmental Impact Report and upholding the Planning Board
decision. [Adoption of Resolution 142741
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, with direction for
staff to provide Council with real time data for Kohl's, the gas
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 14
October 7, 2008
station, and OSH occupancy.
Under discussion, Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether Councilmember
Matarrese is asking for monitoring requirements, to which
Councilmember Matarrese responded in the affirmative.
The Supervising Planner stated the gas station had its own
mitigated declaration with certain monitoring requirements; impacts
would not occur until cumulative conditions occur in 2020.
Councilmember Matarrese stated that he wants data collected once
the aforementioned occupancy occurs to test the projections before
the next step is taken.
The Supervising Planner stated current plans for Kohl's and OSH do
not increase the square footage of the shopping center; a
substantial change in the square footage would occur if the
Planning Board approves a second story expansion at Kohl's.
Councilmember Matarrese stated the issue would increase number of
cars and delivery trucks.
The Planning and Building Director stated Council could add the
monitoring as an additional mitigation measure when Kohl's, the gas
station, and OSH are occupied.
Councilmember deHaan stated that he would like to have monitoring
performed now and when Kohl's and OSH open for comparison purposes.
The Supervising Planner stated State law requires that the baseline
used is based on the date that the City released a notice of
preparation for the EIR.
Patricia Curtin, Harsch Development, stated the EIR certification
is an action stating that the EIR is adequate for the impacts of
706,000 square feet.
Mayor Johnson stated requesting a traffic baseline is separate from
the EIR.
Ms. Curtin inquired what is the point of monitoring; stated either
the EIR is adequate for 706,000 square feet or not.
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember deHaan stated the motion would
accept the EIR which would give Alameda Towne Centre an extra
49,000 square feet.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 15
October 7, 2008
Councilmember Matarrese stated the motion certifies the EIR and
potential impacts of the 49,000 square feet, and is not an
entitlement.
Vice Mayor Tam stated the motion discloses impacts in accordance
with CEQA.
The Assistant City Attorney inquired whether the motion is to adopt
the resolution denying the appeal of the August 11 Planning Board
decision to certify the adequacy of the Alameda Towne Centre
Project Environmental Impact Report, to which Vice Mayor Tam
responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember deHaan clarified that Harsch could go back to the
Planning Board and ask for the additional 49,000 square feet if the
EIR is accepted tonight and could ask to build a parking structure.
Mayor Johnson stated that the EIR discloses impacts and deals with
mitigation.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following
voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor
Johnson - 4. Noes: Councilmember deHaan - 1.
Councilmember Matarrese requested traffic counts once Kohl's, the
gas station, and OSH are occupied.
Councilmember deHaan stated a baseline should be done now.
Vice Mayor Tam stated that having Council and the community request
data and monitoring is appropriate; an EIR looks at a baseline snap
shot in time and action alternatives; two years from now a new
Council may have a new baseline and may request to use the 2010
baseline; baselines will have constant movement; receiving
information is good; it is important to have the integrity of the
EIR preserved.
Councilmember Matarrese stated the EIR is a projection; the number
of cars that run over the tubes in the street is more relevant.
Councilmember deHaan stated it is important to know where traffic
patterns are throughout the City.
Councilmember Matarrese stated some of the Broadway truck traffic
could come from Bay Farm Island; truck routes should be reviewed.
Vice Mayor Tam questioned who would pay for the monitoring.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 16
October 7, 2008
Mayor Johnson stated the matter [monitoring] could be put on a
future agenda.
Councilmember deHaan stated Mr. Galloway used occupancy data that
was provided to him; occupancy was not verified.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON- AGENDA
(08 -430) Susan Toth, Alameda Peace Network, submitted petition,
stated that Alameda Peace Network is in promotion of peace and
opposes the Iraq War; money is being taken away from education,
healthcare and infrastructure.
(08 -431) Carl Halpern, Alameda Peace Network, stated Alameda Peace
Network understands that the Council has taken a stand on the Iraq
War; the War has dropped below the radar screen because of the
fiscal crises; $12 billion a month is being spent on the War; the
$12 billion could have given the Governor the $7 billion requested
to run the State.
(08 -432) Pat Flores, Alameda Peace Network, stated the current
United Nations mandate for military presence in Iraq expires at the
end of 2008; the majority of Americans believe that the most
reasonable stimulus for the United States economy would be
withdrawal from Iraq; the important question is what do the people
in Iraq want; a recent poll found that nearly 600 of people in Iraq
favor an immediate withdrawal of US troops.
COUNCIL REFERRALS
(08 -433) Resolution No. 14276, "Supporting the Alameda County
Active Transportation Campaign." Adopted.
Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution.
Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(08 -434) Councilmember Gilmore requested that the Alameda Peace
Network matter come for Council discussion.
(08 -435) Vice Mayor Tam stated that she attended the League of
California Cities Conference; SB 375, roles of diversity caucuses,
and police and fire service levels were discussed.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 17
October 7, 2008
Councilmember Matarrese requested that Council be provided with a
list of the questions related to police and fire service levels.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the
Regular Meeting at 2:39 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 18
October 7, 2008