1988-06-07 Regular CC Minutes160
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA
HELD TUESDAY JUNE 7, 1988
The meeting convened at 7:35 p.m. (at the conclusion of the meeting
of the Housing Authority Commission) with President Corica presiding.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilmember Monsef. Reverend
Martell Twitchell gave the invocation.
ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Camicia, Haugner, Monsef,
Thomas and President Corica - 5.
Absent: None.
88-337 From Chairman, Executive Strategy Committee, regarding Phase
II of Strategic Planning Process.
President Corica announced that the Chairman of the Executive
Strategy Committee requested the report be held over to the next
Council Meeting.
MINUTES
Councilmember Camicia made a motion to approve the minutes of the
Regular Council Meeting of May 17, 1988. Councilmember Haugner
seconded the notion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
CONSENT CALENDAR
At the request of Councilmember Haugner, Item No. 1-B, regarding
Comprehensive Service Plan for AC Transit, was removed from the
Consent Calendar to the Regular Agenda (See 88-358), President
Corica announced he would abstain on Item No. 1-K, regarding
collection of garbage (See *88-347) as he has a relative working for
the Oakland Scavenger Company. Councilmember Monsef made a motion to
approve the Consent Calendar with the exception of Item No. 1-B.
Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion and it was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5, with one abstention on Number 1-K
(*88-347).
Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk.
REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
*88-338 From Public Works Director recommending acceptance of the
work by Jack Moore & Sons for Marina Village Assessment District
Landscape Improvements, 84-3, Project No. 5, Atlantic Avenue
(Portion), No. P.W. 8-86-32. Approved.
*88-339 From Public Works Director recommending a 5-year Street
Maintenance Plan. Approved.
June 7, 1988
161
*88-340 From Public Works Director recommending acceptance of the
work by Vomar Products, Inc. for fabrication and installation of
street directories at various locations on Park Street and Webster
Street, No. P.W. 7-86-22. Approved.
*88-341 From Public Works Director recommending planned expenditures
of the 1986 Measure B Funds. Approved.
*88-342 From Public Works Director regarding implementation of Senate
Bill 547, Strengthening of Unreinforced Masonry Buildings. Approved.
RESOLUTIONS
*88-343 Resolution No. 11475 "Adopting plans and specifications and
calling for bids for Bridgeway Pump Station Expansion, No. P.W.
1-87-1, and directing City Clerk to advertise same." Adopted.
*88-344 Resolution No. 11476 "Awarding contract to Gallagher & Burk,
Inc., for construction of Catalina Avenue widening and North Loop
Road, No. P.W. 2-88-3, and authorizing execution thereof."
Adopted.
*88-345 Resolution No. 11477 "Approving the Application for Grant
Funds under the Community Parklands Act of 1986 for renovation of the
Lincoln Park patio area." Adopted.
*88-346 Resolution No. 11478 "Adopting plans and specifications and
calling for bids for roof repairs at the Mastick Senior Center, No.
P.W. 3-88-7, and directing City Clerk to advertise same." Adopted.
FINAL PASSAGE OF ORDINANCES
*88-347 Ordinance No. 2388 N.S. "Amending the Alameda Municipal
Code by amending Section 15-6210 thereof relating to rates for
collection of garbage and refuse and prescribing method of
collection." Adopted. [With one abstention: President Corica]
*88-348 Ordinance No. 2389, N.S. "Amending the Alameda Municipal
Code by adding Chapter 8 to Title XI thereof relating to water
conservation." Adopted.
BILLS
*88-349 A List of Claims, certified by the Interim City Manager as
correct, was approved in the amount of $3,081,917.59.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
88-350 From Fred Scullin, 1120 Chestnut Street, four communications
suggesting formulation of certain policies for administration and
execution by the City Manager.
Mr. Scullin stated the reason he requested the policies was for
clarification and for understanding of the position of City Manager
by the residents, and a policy that represents the consensus of the
Council could be helpful to the City Manager for review.
June 7, 1988
162
Councilmember Monsef stated the City Charter outlines the
responsibilities of the City Manager.
Councilmember Camicia made a motion to accept the communication.
Councilmember Haugner seconded the motion and it was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
HEARINGS
88-351 Consideration of approval of Engineer's Report for Island City
Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District 84-2, confirmation of
diagram and assessment, and order of levy of assessments.
President Corica explained the procedure of the hearing.
The Public Works Director explained the subject of the hearing.
On the call for proponents, there were none.
On the call for opponents, the following spoke:
Raymond Casaudoumecq, 1141 Harbor Bay Parkway, Executive Director,
Harbor Bay Business Park Association.
The public portion of the hearing was closed.
Councilmember Monsef made a motion to accept the recommendation and
take the related resolution out of order. Councilmember Thomas
seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
88-352 Resolution No. 11479 "Approving Engineer's Report, confirming
Diagram and Assessment and Ordering Levy of Assessments, Island City
Landscaping & Lighting District 84-2." Adopted.
Councilmember Monsef made a motion to adopt the resolution.
Councilmember Thomas seconded the motion and it was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
88-353 Consideration of proposed Negative Declaration IS-88-7 and
Rezoning R-88-2 from R-5, General Residential District, to R-5-PD
General Residential Planned Development District, the property
located on the southeast corner of Lincoln Avenue and Chestnut
Street. Applicant: Patsy Chan.
President Corica explained the procedure of the hearing.
The Planning Director explained the background of the matter.
The public portion of the hearing was opened.
On the call for proponents, there were none.
On the call for opponents, the following spoke:
Fred Scullin, 1120 Chestnut Street.
June 7, 1988
163
Comments on the matter were made by John Scott Graham, 1728 Tregloan
Court.
The public portion of the hearing was closed.
President Corica inquired, if Council does not allow a Planned
Development [PD], could the developer build ten single-family homes
on the property.
The Planning Director replied that the property is zoned R-5 and it
would be possible to have at least four regular sized lots on that
property; possibly two duplexes could be built on each lot so they
might be able to get as many as 16 units on the property depending on
the design, etc.; the project before the Planning Board was for ten
units, the Board indicated they would prefer something less dense and
requested the applicant reconsider the design and bring back
something else, so possibly even under the existing zoning, if they
only build one duplex on each lot, that would be eight units; but
they could get more than that on it even with their regular zoning.
President Corica inquired if a representative of the developer is
present to indicate whether or not the developer is serious about
reducing the number of units.
Will Harrison, consultant to applicant, stated the Planning Board was
supportive of the concept but wanted less than 10 units, and the
matter is on the Planning Board agenda for next Monday with five
studies with the majority of studies showing eight units only.
President Corica suggested it might be wise to wait to see what
happens at the Planning Board meeting.
Councilmember Camicia stated that Council can work with the developer
or the developer will have the potential of legally having as many as
16 units.
To Councilmember Monsef's inquiry regarding Planned Development, the
!lanning Director responded that a PD gives the City more control
over the design of a project.
The Council discussed density, architecture and procedure regarding
the project.
Councilmember Thomas stated she is not comfortable about rezoning,
except to R-2.
Mr. Harrison commented the developer was looking for an indication
of Council's wishes and believes Council is asking for a plan before
taking action.
Councilmember Thomas stated it would satisfy her if the developer
returned with eight units that had clearance without obstruction,
provision for parking, and was approved by the Planning Board.
Councilmember Haugner stated an attractive plan for eight units
June 7, 1988
164
would have her vote.
Councilmember Thomas made a motion to continue the matter until after
the Planning Board has completed its review. Councilmember Haugner
seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
APPEALS
88-354 Appeal of Planning Board decision to approve a Negative
Declaration, IS-88-6, for Design Review application DR-88-9, for an
8,200 square foot addition in two floors, plus completion of 6,000
square feet of existing shell space at Alameda Hospital. Applicant:
Alameda Hospital. Appellant: Patrick J. Maloney.
Mr. Maloney distributed information, regarding State records
concerning the Hospital, to the Council, and reiterated his concerns
about the necessity of an Environmental Impact Report.
Sam Young, 530 Queen's Road, attorney for Alameda Hospital, stated
that the Planning Board addressed many of Mr. Maloney's concerns,
and that the Hospital does not have a phased project.
Richard Adams, 2070 Clinton, Planning Construction Consultant for
Alameda Hospital, commented he is present only to answer any
technical questions Council might have about the project.
Following a brief discussion on the limitation of jurisdiction of
Council to Design Review, and procedure regarding an Environmental
Impact Report, Councilmember Monsef stated he sees nothing to reflect
that the decision of the Planning Board is not supported by the
record, and moved to uphold the decision of the Board. Councilmember
Haugner seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
88-355 From Chairman, Historical Advisory Commission, regarding
research on Historical Grant Funding opportunities.
David Plummer, 1401 High Street, Historical Advisory Commission,
commented on the grants the Commission has worked for and received
for the benefit of the City; noted many opportunities for grants
have been lost due to lack of staff time to assist in the matter;
and investment in staff time could result in substantial funding.
Diane Coler-Dark, 2857 Jackson Street, stated she would like City
assistance and guidelines regarding earthquake-proofing of older
buildings, particularly in light of recent State mandates, and since
Park Street is on the register, it might qualify for funding.
Councilmember Thomas inquired if CDBG funding is a possibility.
The Interim City Manager stated there are some limitations on CDBG
funds and perhaps eligibility issues, but it can be investigated.
Councilmember Camicia commented perhaps Council could look at the
June 7, 1988
165
subject further when discussing the budget at the June 15 Budget Work
Session.
Councilmember Haugner made a motion to accept the report and
recommendation. Councilmember Thomas seconded the motion and it was
carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
88-356 From Chairman, Historical Advisory Commission, regarding
preservation of City Historical documents.
Councilmember Monsef made a motion to accept the recommendation.
Councilmember Thomas inquired what is happening to some of the more
prominent historical documents.
The City Clerk responded that at this time they are being housed in
the vault until there are funds to perhaps hire an archivist; but
more important is the endeavor of the Clerk's office to find a
climate-controlled space to preserve the valuable historic documents.
Councilmember Thomas inquired what the Alameda Museum does, to which
Mr. Plummer responded the Museum at this point does not have
facilities for climate control; a $75,000 wing is being added and
and may or may not include such facilities; and, as a member of the
Building Oversight Committee, he will broach the matter of climate
control with the architect at the next meeting.
Councilmember Haugner mentioned the housing of the Assessor's records
that are over 100 years old.
The City Clerk commented the report states that there is concern
regarding City historic documents for microfilming before
destruction; and stated there will be no destruction of historical
documents.
Councilmember Haugner seconded the motion and it was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
88-357 From Public Works Director regarding feasibility of a
Municipal Shuttle Bus System.
Gerhard Degemann, 19 Sandpiper Place, stated the City budget is
tight; transportation systems are not profitable; this City has no
funds for a bus system, hiring drivers, mechanics, etc.; and
suggested getting more information from other cities on what they do.
Councilmember Haugner stated perhaps funds may be available from
BART, something must be done for Alameda citizens to provide
transportation connections to workplaces; and would like the matter
explored further.
Councilmember Camicia stated he requested the matter be investigated;
it makes sense to explore opportunities; on a long-term basis, a
feasibility plan should be developed including availability of
funding; and this may be a service to provide for senior citizens.
June 7, 1988
President Corica agreed if funding could be found this may become
reality; and to further investigation of feasibility study.
Councilmember Monsef stated he likes the concept, believes BART has
an obligation to Alameda, there is no coordination of operation of AC
Transit and BART, Council should approach BART Directors and request
a service, but does not believe Alameda should provide a bus service
because it is costly.
Councilmember Haugner stated that the City cannot do it right now;
does not believe BART will assist at this time; but the matter
should be followed up.
Councilmember Camicia made a motion to accept the recommendation.
Councilmember Haugner seconded the motion.
Councilmember Thomas stated she does not know if BART will assist in
providing shuttles; AC Transit should do the linking and shuttles,
perhaps the City can have input into AC Transit routes; and would
like to see the results of the AC Transit Comprehensive Service Plan.
The motion was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
88-358 From Public Works Director regarding Comprehensive Service
Plan for AC Transit. Approved.
Councilmember Haugner commented on John Woodbury's appointment to the
AC Transit Board; noted Alice Creason, former Mayor of Piedmont,
represents Alameda and stated she will try to get a meeting held in
Alameda; and there is a meeting for the Alameda area on June 16.
Councilmember Haugner moved acceptance of the report and
recommendation. Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion and it was
carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
RESOLUTIONS
88-359 Resolution No. 11480 "Awarding contract to Tel-Plus
Communications, Inc. for a Municipal Telecommunication System and
authorizing execution thereof." Adopted.
President Corica announced that there was a request by Pacific Bell
to continue the matter.
The Interim City Manager noted there are representatives present from
a number of companies.
Rick Wilson, 4464A Willow Road, Pleasanton, Tel-Plus Communications,
stated he is in favor of the recommendation, and is present to answer
questions regarding concerns or any policies of Tel-Plus.
Steve Argyres, No. 2 Bryant Street, San Francisco, 94105, noted
Tel-Plus is a wholly owned subsidiary of Siemens, and stated
qualifications of the company and of the system.
Jim Lawson, Fujitsu Business Communications, 31387 Medallion,
June 7, 1988
167
Hayward, stated Fujitsu submitted a bid about $50,000 less than
Tel-Plus, has been selected by many cities and the Alameda Unified
School District, believes technical differences are minor, and that
the award should be given the lowest responsible vendor in this case.
Howard Brunn, 1025 Pearl Street, Tel-Plus Communications, noted a
great deal of time has been spent by the City's committee and
consultant evaluating all of the companies and considerations, and
requested the award be given Tel-Plus.
Michael Hickerson, Fujitsu Business Communications, 31387 Medallion
Drive, Hayward, noted the system chosen does not represent a
substantial savings but the Fujitsu system does even in its initial
purchase price; Fujitsu is a worldwide company with 1000 employees
in the Bay Area, was chosen by the Alameda Unified School District,
and requested the bid be awarded the lowest responsive bidder.
Bob Butler, Harris Lanier Corporation, 1355 Willow Way, Concord,
94520, stated the Harris system is about $32,000 less than that of
Tel-Plus; believes they have a superior switch; named colleges,
hospitals and cities in which the switch has been installed; stated
Harris was lowest bidder on the first bid; and $32,000 less on the
second bid; and believes the company at the least, should be able to
meet with committee members to explain the advantages of a Harris
Digital Switch and address the service and dispatch facilities, and
that the bid might be awarded to Harris Lanier Corporation.
Betty Bruckner, 1057 San Antonio, Area Manager for Pacific Bell,
recommended the resolution be rejected to allow the City to take
advantage of new specialized contracting for Centrex; the City of
Oakland took advantage of a similar proposal, rejecting a resolution,
and benefited by a 20% reduction in overall rate; Pacific Bell
serves the majority of business customers in California and requests
rejection of the resolution.
Councilmember Monsef noted the consultant services will cost more if
the process is delayed;. believes features noted in the report
reflect there are more services and maintenance persons available in
the one chosen; does not believe Council should prolong the time for
study or decision, and made a motion to accept the recommendation.
Councilmember Thomas inquired if Westin Engineering is present to
comment, to which the Westin Engineering consultant responded that
Pacific Bell is still not competitive.
Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion which was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES
88-360 Ordinance No. N.S. "Reclassifying and rezoning of a
certain property within the City of Alameda by amending Zoning
Ordinance No. 1277, New Series; Applicant: Patsy Chan, R-88-2;
the property located on the southeast corner of Chestnut Street and
Lincoln Avenue." Held over.
June 7, 1988
168
88-361 Ordinance No. 2390 N.S. "Interim Ordinance prohibiting and
suspending issuance of building permits for construction on certain
properties located on the westerly side of Park Avenue between
Encinal Avenue and Central Avenue, that are inconsistent with
proposed zoning." Introduced and adopted.
* Jean Wolslegel, 1907 Central Avenue #B, Citizens Against the Hotel,
submitting petitions protesting Hotel plans for Park Avenue.
Ms. Wolslegel stated there are 300 names on petitions already
submitted; submitted further petitions protesting the Hotel plans;
and requested downzoning.
Al Scott, 2418 Marti Rae Court, stated the original reason for
rezoning to commercial a number of years ago has long since ceased to
exist; zoning should be put back the way it was before; it is a
Heritage area and should be retained as a residential area.
Anne Pimental, 1248 Regent Street, stated another hotel would bring
in more people and create more traffic, and there is not enough
parking available.
Tena Kilroy, 1342 Regent, stated most people on Regent Street have
families, are trying to make it a real neighborhood and hotels or
other businesses would not help the situation but would create more
noise and parking problems.
Sam Young, 530 Queens Road, attorney representing Donald Lindsey, et
al., property owners, stated a hotel in the general sense would not
be good for the area but the proposed structure would be about the
size of a large house, 4000 square feet, with an elevation lower than
surrounding houses, ample parking in the rear and only ten rooms; a
moratorium is not needed as the owner will delay seeking a building
permit to allow time for public input and until the Council and the
Planning Board are happy with what he proposes; the owner has done
excellent work in Alameda and proposes a high quality building for
high quality personnel coming into Alameda, and has offered to meet
with concerned citizens.
Rick Fenstermaker, 1713 Versailles, Gallagher and Lindsey, stated he
is involved in the project and wants high quality, is willing to work
out an alternative plan and work together with the people.
Gary Fenstermaker, 3264 Thompson Avenue, Gallagher and Lindsey,
stated he is also a co-developer with his brother and Don Lindsey and
believes differences can be ironed out if they can meet with people
at committee level and the Planning Board, and they can arrive at a
project that will be suitable for everyone.
Naomi Hatkin, 1217 Park Avenue, Historical Advisory Commission,
stated she participated in the Park Avenue Heritage Report; zoning
is created to protect and elevate the character, social and economic
stability of a neighborhood and does not believe having the blocks
zoned commercial will contribute to that; and urged downzoning the
lots to a residential use.
June 7, 1988
169
Del Blaylock, 1903 Encinal Avenue, President, Greater Alameda
Business Association, stated he is more concerned about the rezoning
than the hotel because the owners are talking about a positive good
looking structure, but he believes it is wrong to change zoning just
because someone is upset.
Jesse Trask, 1553 Mozart, Alameda Victorian Preservation Society,
stated the Society opposes the building of the hotel because 1) the
area is a Heritage area, 2) it is primarily residential and 3) the
Victorian buildings at 1341 and 1345 Park Avenue are the oldest
buildings in the Heritage area; and requested Council downzone the
property to prevent any future projects in that area.
Dennis Hennessee, 1371 Pearl Street, stated Lindsey projects in
Alameda have always been outstanding; understands citizens' feeling
but rights of the citizen to build on his own property in the current
C-2 zone should be protected, and is in favor of the project.
Susan Soria, 1345 Park Avenue, stated she moved here for residential
neighborhood and would appreciate consideration of downzoning the
property.
John Barni, 1380 East Shore Drive, agreed with Sam Young and
Fenstermakers; stated project would bring funds into the City, ten
rooms would bring no drain on traffic or on schools; believes
Lindsey projects have enhanced neighborhoods; and is not in favor at
any time of downzoning anyone's property.
Gene Getz, 2618 San Jose Avenue, states the neighborhood was
residential when he purchased his home on Park Avenue many years ago,
was later zoned to commercial, parking is difficult, and property
should be zoned back to the way it was originally.
Susan Martin, 838 Laurel Street, read excerpts from letters by Eric
Cross, Don Kane, and Joey Winters, realtors, which expressed concern
for preservation but opposition for change of zoning which, it is
believed, violates property owners' rights.
Sue Hesketh, 1311 Grove, read letters from John Crittenden and Don
Patterson, who expressed that it would be wrong to stop the project
as it is in conformance with the current zoning; and the project
takes into consideration the neighborhood's style of architecture.
Edward J. Murphy, 2618 Janis Circle, stated this is a matter of spot
downzoning which is proper only when it is in the general welfare for
all citizens of Alameda; that people who have purchased in the
subject area should have known the property was C-2, and spot
downzoning is not appropriate in this instance.
Thomas L. Smith, 1317 Regent Street, stated he believes the property
should be downzoned because it will detract from Victorian houses on
the block; parking is a problem; and questioned its conformance to
Measure A.
Catherine Pagano, 1318 Park Avenue, stated she has lived in the area
38 years, and a hotel would degrade the neighborhood.
June 7, 1988
170
Christopher Hanson, 2424 Central Avenue, stated he is neither an
opponent nor proponent; a property owner wants to build an allowable
structure on his own property which is properly zoned and requires no
variances, and is opposed by neighbors who don't like the proposed
building, and suggested it might satisfy both parties by putting the
building on the rear of the lot.
Ann Hulen, 2314 Central Avenue, Chamber of Commerce, stated the
property was purchased for specific purposes, and suggested Council
stop spot downzoning.
President Corica stated in 1973 the whole City was downzoned by
Measure C; and the whole City should have been downzoned to R-2.
Darlene Banda, P.O. Box 1089, stated she is concerned regarding a
procedural matter, that she finds it offensive that letters are
allowed to be read from people who do not attend, and letters should
be submitted in the usual manner.
Councilmember Thomas stated Zoning Ordinance needs to be redone; a
valid General Plan would avoid problems; a hotel must have an
on-premise staff 24 hours a day; definitions need to be redone; a
bed and breakfast might be acceptable but not a hotel; believes this
is circumvention of Measure A; believes the whole project should be
reviewed, and would like to see the owner work out something like a
bed and breakfast.
Councilmember Haugner noted Alameda bed-and-breakfasts have been
required to have a house on the Study List and be an "n" designation;
would have no objection to the 10-room structure, but has a problem
because this is a Heritage area, and cannot see any compromise with
building in front of the two current structures; the developers have
not done anything wrong; Mr. Lindsey builds quality structures, but
she is in favor of the downzoning because it is in the Heritage area.
President Corica stated Council respects Don Lindsey and what he has
done in Alameda; believes it is quite close to a Measure A
situation; there may be some other building that will not disturb
the neighbors; perhaps the property owner and neighbors can meet and
find something agreeable; but a 10-unit hotel on that street bothers
him.
Councilmember Monsef agreed; stated he made a commitment not to
impose upon any neighborhood anything they do not wish to have; must
conform to Measure A; agrees Mr. Lindsey has done an excellent job
for the City; the issue is whether to suspend issuing building
permits as requested by a unanimous Planning Board until such time as
the issue is being addressed by the Board; Council should do that;
this is not downzoning at the moment but allowing an opportunity to
go through the process of planning and come back before Council.
Councilmember Monsef moved introduction and passage of the ordinance.
Councilmember Thomas seconded the motion and it was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
June 7, 1988
171
88-362 Ordinance No. ( N.S. "Amending Title XVII of the Alameda
Municipal Code to establish a two-hour meter zone in front of 2424
Lincoln Avenue." Introduced.
Councilmember Haugner made a motion to introduce the ordinance.
Councilmember Camicia seconded the notion and it was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
88-363 Ordinance No. N.S. "Amending Title XVII of the Alameda
Municipal Code to establish a one-hour meter zone on the north side
of Pacific Avenue west of Webster Street." Introduced.
Councilmember Camicia made a motion to introduce the ordinance.
Councilmember Haugner seconded the motion and it was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
FINAL PASSAGE OF ORDINANCES
88-364 Ordinance No. 2391, N.S. "Amending the Alameda Municipal
Code by amending certain sections of Article 6, of Title XVII thereof
relating to the hours of enforced operation and the rates for
on-street parking meters." Adopted.
Diane Coler-Dark, 2857 Jackson Street, Park Street Business
Association, stated it is understood the meter rates will be doubled;
and the Park Street and Webster Street Business Associations request
Council earmark the additional revenue for expanded facilities.
Ann Hulen, Chamber of Commerce, 2314 Central Avenue, stated there is
still a concern for expanding the hours and initiating the increase
in rates at the same time; and is concerned also that business is
being lost to other shopping areas.
john Barni, 1380 East Shore Drive, stated the doubling of parking
meter fees is hard to take after having meter free parking; and he
believes it will be detrimental to Park Street businesses.
Councilmember Haugner stated it is the doubling of fees that bothers
her; San Leandro has a downtown similiar to Alameda and has only 25
cent meters, and she believes doubling fees is unfair to people.
Councilmember Camicia made a motion to adopt the ordinance.
Councilmember Thomas seconded the motion and it was carried by the
following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Camicia, Monsef, Thomas
and President Corica 4. Noes: Councilmember Haugner 1. Absent:
None.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
88-365 Councilmember Monsef inquired when the Fire Department Study
will be completed, to which the Interim City Manager responded on or
about June 17th.
June 7, 1988
172
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, GENERAL
88-366 Roy Donovan, 1825 Shoreline Drive, Disturbed Citizens of
Alameda, expressed his opinion on the homeporting of the U.S.S.
Missouri commenting it may add to Alameda's problems.
Councilmember Thomas made a motion that, because it is after 11:00
p.m., the meeting be extended for another ten minutes. Councilmember
Monsef seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote
- 5.
88-367 Edward J. Murphy, 2618 Janis Circle, defined R-2 zoning, for
purpose of clarification.
88-368 Gerhard Degemann, 19 Sandpiper Place, remarked that the
microphone system was not performing satisfactorily, and a City Flag
should be displayed in the Council Chamber.
President Corica stated Council would give that some consideration.
88-369 John Barni, Sr., 1380 East Shore Drive, requested a faucet,
City garbage can, for City property located next to 1380 East Shore
Drive, so that neighbors can water the City property and place
garbage in a City can, and noted that the box bush has not been
trimmed for any years.
88-370 Councilmember Camicia questioned when Council is going to
formally sit down to review and interview the finalists for the City
Manager's position.
President Corica stated that would be one of the matters to be
discussed at the Closed Session under personnel matters.
ADJOURNMENT
President Corica announced that Council would
Session to consider personnel matters and the
City of Alameda, Berry v. City of Alameda,
Alameda, and HBI v. City of Alameda, pursuant
the legal counsel section of the Brown Act.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:10 p.m.
adjourn to a Closed
cases of Seavers v.
Wilkes v. City of
to Subsection (a) of
Respectfully submitted,
8
DIANE B. FELSCH, CMC
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted 72 hours in advance,
accordance with the Brown Act.
June 7, 1988
in