Loading...
1987-05-05 Regular CC Minutes107 REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA MAY 5, 1987 The meeting convened at 7:35 p.m. (at the conclusion of the Closed Session to discuss the case of Spikes v. City of Alameda and the Worker's Compensation case of Sgt. Westmoreland; the meeting of the Housing Authority Commission and the Annual Meeting of the Community Improvement Commission) with President Diament presiding. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilmember Corica. Reverend Jack Huttinga gave the invocation. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Corica, Hanna, Lucas, Monsef, and President Dianent. Absent: None. MINUTES President Diament announced the minutes of April 28 would be considered at the next Council meeting. CONSENT CALENDAR By citizen request, Items No. 1-A and 1-H were removed from the Consent Calendar to the regular agenda. Councilmember Lucas moved for adoption of the Consent Calendar, with the exception of Item 1-A regarding Ballena Isle Marina's application for permit for dredging and land fill (See 87- ), and 1-H regarding the exchange of Marina Village parcels (See 87- ). Councilmember Monsef seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS *87-314 From Public Works Director recommending acceptance of work by Alameda Paving and Excavating for construction of Bridge View Isle storm drain reconstruction. Accepted. RESOLUTIONS *87-315 Resolution No. 11187 "Approving Parcel Map No. 5106 (2163 Central Avenue) and authorizing exception to the Subdivision Ordinance for undergrounding of utilities." Adopted. *87-316 Resolution No. 11188 "Awarding contract to Sanborn Map Company, Inc. for update and extension of existing Sanborn Master Property Map Book and appropriating Building Permit revenue of $45,000 from the General Fund Reserve." Adopted. 103 *87-317 Resolution No. 11189 "Appointing Engineers and Attorneys for Island City Landscaping and Lighting District 84-2." Adopted. INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES *87-318 Ordinance No. N.S. "Authorizing Quitclaim of unutilized City sewer easement to Alameda Marina Center Associates." Introduced. *87-319 Ordinance No. N.S. "Amending the Alameda Municipal Code to prohibit parking at various times and locations to facilitate street sweeping." Introduced. FINAL PASSAGE OF ORDINANCES *87-320 Ordinance No. 2334, N.S. "Amending Title XVII of the Alameda Municipal Code to establish "No U-Turn" for the intersection of Bridgeway Road and Island Drive." Adopted. *87-321 Ordinance No. 2335, N.S. "Establishing a fee schedule for applications to the Historical Advisory Commission." Adopted. *87-322 Ordinance No. 2336, N.S. "Amending Title XI of the Municipal Code by deleting Section 11-14Al2(e) relating to enclosed areas which qualify as required open space. (Applicant: City of Alameda)" Adopted. BILLS *87-323 A List of Claims, certified by the City Manager as correct, was approved in the amount of $2,021,885.49. ************* WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 87-324 From President, Alameda Fire Fighters Association, regarding Engine 5. Michael D'Orazi, Alameda Fire Fighters Association, stated the Association endorses Chief Quarante's long range solution to the Fire Department's staffing needs under his budget request for the next two fiscal years; and made a recommendation to alleviate present manpower shortage; recommended as minimum level of service, the following: 5 engine companies and 2 truck companies staffed with 1 fire officer, 1 apparatus operator and 1 fire fighter, and 2 ambulance companies staffed with 2 fire fighter Emergency Medical Technicians for a total of 25 personnel on duty daily. He added he realizes the City does not negotiate on minimum manpower, but what he is trying to accomplish is to maintain a constant level of service to assure minimum safety to the citizens and fire fighters of Alameda. President Diament noted that the end of the fiscal year is approaching and budget hearings will be held very soon. The City Manager noted budget hearings are anticipated in June. Councilmember Corica stated that he recognizes that the lack of manpower is due partly to the fact that ambulance service was taken on, it is doing a good job, and he believes this Council as well as incoming Council is probably going to be looking closely at funding for additional personnel; that if additional personnel is addressed, overtime pay should be reviewed also; and agreed that the matter should be reviewed at budget time. Councilmember Monsef made a motion to accept the communication; Councilmember Corica seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. HEARINGS 87-325 Consideration of proposed Negative Declaration and Rezoning, R-87-1, of a 2.24 acre site from C-2, Central Business District, to C-2-PD, Central Business Planned Development District. The subject site consists of the southwesterly corner of the intersection of Webster Street and Central Avenue, currently occupied by the Lucky Supermarket and Foster's Freeze buildings, and the southeasterly corner of the intersection occupied by a vacant commercial structure. Applicant: City of Alameda. The Planning Director explained the subject of the hearing. Councilmember Lucas stated a priest in the area had told her that a number of older people were concerned that they night not have a grocery store in the area that they could walk to and reach easily; and that perhaps future Council might note that. The public portion of the hearing was opened. On the call for proponents, there were none. On the call for opponents, there were none. The public portion of the hearing was closed. Councilmember Lucas commented that the item was initiated by persons in the Park-Webster complex and the C-2-PD zoning is what the residents have in mind; and moved that the negative declaration be considered at this time. Councilmember Monsef seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Councilmember Lucas made a motion that the negative declaration be approved. Councilmember Monsef seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 110 Councilmember Lucas moved that the related ordinance be taken out of order; Councilmember Hanna seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 87-326 Ordinance No. N.S. "Reclassifying and rezoning certain properties within the City of Alameda by amending Zoning Ordinance No. 1277, N.S. Applicant: City of Alameda, R-87-1, those properties located at the southwesterly corner of the intersection of Webster Street and Central Avenue, currently occupied by the Lucky Supermarket and Foster's Freeze buildings, and the southeasterly corner of the intersection occupied by a vacant commercial structure." Councilmember Hanna made a motion to introduce the ordinance; Councilmember Lucas seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 87-327 Consideration of proposed Negative Declaration, and Rezoning, R-87-2, of ten lots from R-2 Two Family Residence District to the R-1, One Family Residence District. The subject lots are located at the southerly terminus of Tarryton, Country and Amber Isles and north of the South Shore Beach and Tennis Club. Applicant: City of Alameda. The Planning Director addressed Council on the subject of the hearing. The public portion of the hearing was opened. On the call for proponents, there were none. On the call for opponents, there were none. The public portion of the hearing was closed. Councilmember Hanna stated this appears to be a double safety factor for the neighborhood to try to preclude a second unit on any of the subject lots, and made a motion to approve the Negative Declaration. Councilmember Lucas seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Councilmember Hanna made a motion to take the related ordinance out of order; Councilmember Monsef seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 87-328 Ordinance No. N.S. "Reclassifying and rezoning certain properties within the City of Alameda by amending Zoning Ordinance No. 1277, N.S.; Applicant: City of Alameda, R-87-2, those properties located at the southerly terminus of Tarryton, Country and Amber Isles and north of the South Shore Beach and Tennis Club." Councilmember Hanna made a motion to introduce the ordinance; Councilmember Lucas seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 87-329 Consideration of proposed amendment to the Municipal Code, adding Article 41 to Chapter 1 of Title XI thereof, relating to hazard prevention zones and associated Proposed Negative Declaration. The Planning Director explained the proposed amendment. The public portion of the hearing was opened. On the call for proponents, there were none. On the call for opponents, there were none. The public portion of the hearing was closed. Councilmember Monsef made a motion to accept the recommendation; Councilmember Corica seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Councilmember Lucas made a motion to take the related ordinance out of order. Councilmember Monsef seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 87-330 Ordinance No. N.S. "Amending the Municipal Code by adding Article 41 of Chapter 1 of Title XI thereof, relating to Hazard Prevention Zones." Councilmember Lucas made a motion to introduce the ordinance; Councilmember Monsef seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 87-331 Consideration of proposed amendment to Title XI, Chapter 2. Section 11-231 of the Alameda Municipal Code relating to the Design Review for specified improvements not needing Building Permits, including parking lots, storage sheds, recycling bins and vending booths visible from public rights-of-way. The Planning Director explained the proposed amendment to Title XI. Councilmember Corica stated he had no problem with the proposed amendment, except he would not like to see this become a step moving toward another Design Review Board. The Planning Board Director responded that the amendment would not change any of the procedures for review; that nothing in this ordinance would work toward re-establishment of that board. The public portion of the hearing was opened. On the call for proponents, there were none. On the call for opponents, there were none. The public portion of the hearing was closed. 112 Councilmember Hanna made a motion to approve the Negative Declaration. Councilmember Lucas seconded the notion, and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Councilmember Hanna made a motion to take the related ordinance out of order. Councilmember Lucas seconded the motion, and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 87-332 Ordinance No. N.S. t "Amending Section 11-231 of Chapter 2, Title XI of the Alameda Municipal Code, to require design review for certain improvements which do not require a building permit." Councilmember Hanna made a motion to introduce the ordinance; Councilmember Monsef seconded the motion. Councilmember Hanna inquired if there was any probability that the recycling bins would come back and be economically justified by whatever design might be applied. The Planning Director responded that there are many recycling bins being established in the City and the people locating them have been working with the City. Councilmember Hanna expressed concern about the trash being dumped along with the bottles. The motion was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. APPEALS 87-333 Consideration of appeal of Planning Board decision to deny Use Permit, UP-86-16, to allow the legalization of a second dwelling unit in a structure located at 720 Pacific Avenue in the C-2, Central Business District in accordance with Section 11-1335(c) of the Zoning Ordinance. Appellant: Luisa M. Gonzales. The Planning Director suggested Council take testimony for Items 7 and 8 (both appeal items) concurrently, due to their relative subject matter. Councilmember Hanna moved that it be done; Councilmember Lucas seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. The Planning Director noted the background of the matter including the Planning Board's decision. President Diament explained the procedure of the appeal. The City Attorney clarified the fact that no new evidence is admitted in these proceedings, because this is an appeal. William McCall, 1105 Mound Street, stated that he has observed that appellant has worked diligently on the property, does not believe parking a problem, and supports the variance. 113 James E. Allen, 66 Jack London Square, Oakland, representing appellant, addressed findings of Planning Board as stated in staff report to Council on the matter; stated there is usually available parking in the area; presented a petition of approximately 150 signatures of neighbors who support appellant; stated Mrs. Gonzales has compiled a list of clients regarding their transportation, and that very few drive their cars; presented the list to Council, and urged Council to uphold the appeal. Councilmember Corica noted it is a corner lot and therefore more parking is available for that reason. President Diament questioned whether there would need to be an agreement if the Liquor Barn lot were to be used. Councilmember Lucas stated that she does not like to have reliance on parking at the Liquor Barn because ownership and use of the Liquor Barn could change; that the same problem was encountered when the Post Office attempted use of a private parking area. Charles Millman, 2916 Bayview Drive, stated he did not believe parking is a problem, and Council should reward people who offer good services. Barbara Thomas, 1118 Paru Street, stated she believes Liquor Barn customers do not use all parking available and that off-street parking has not been required for certain establishments on Encinal Avenue. President Diament noted that variances have been granted for the barber shop and beauty salon and what is being discussed is the illegal unit and whether it should be approved regarding parking. Councilmember Lucas stated it appears to be a zoning problem and a neighbor has complained; noted that she had opposed the Encinal Avenue area decision referred to by a speaker; and the Liquor Barn does not need much space but it could if business grows. Councilmember Hanna commented that if Council legalizes illegal units, then there is no incentive to stop building illegal units, as it is known that illegal units place a higher value on property. Councilmember Hanna made a motion to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Board; Councilmember Lucas seconded the motion. Councilmember Corica stated that individuals who are working hard should be helped, and he supports the appeal. President Diament stated she agrees; regrets the fact that it was done illegally, but it is a unit for moderate or low income person added to the City housing and believes the number of parking spaces on the existing lot are adequate. Councilmember Hanna stated that the argument for low cost housing could be used on any of the illegal and possibly substandard units. 114 President Diament inquired if the unit was substandard, to which the Planning Director replied it had not been inspected because it was not built with benefit of permits etc. President Diament stated she would want to know it was up to standard; and City Attorney noted that it must be brought up to the Fire and Building Codes. Councilmember Lucas stated it was already known that there are two requirements that do not conform to the Building Code, namely: parking and open space, and asked confirmation from the Planning Director, who responded that was correct. Councilmember Monsef inquired how it is determined that the units are overutilized, and the Planning Director responded that the Planning Board considered the lack of parking spaces already existing and it indicated to them that the second dwelling unit would just intensify the problems; that parking spaces and backup space does not conform; and that there could be only four parking spaces in the rear of the property that would meet City standards. President Diament inquired if the variances would go with a change of ownership to which the Planning Director replied they would. Councilmember Monsef stated he did not like to make an exception to policy but in this case he would. The motion to uphold the Planning Board's decision did not carry, by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Hanna and Lucas - 2. Noes: Councilmembers Corica and Monsef and President Diament - 3. Absent: None. Councilmember Corica made a motion to support the appeal; Councilmember Monsef seconded the motion and it was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Corica and Monsef and President Diament - 3. Noes: Councilmembers Hanna and Lucas - 2. Absent: None. 87-334 Consideration of appeal of the Planning board decision to deny Variance, V-86-27, to allow the legalization of a second unit at 720 Pacific Avenue in the C-2, Central Business District providing four parking spaces where seven spaces are required by Section 11-14C5(b) of the Zoning Ordinance. Appellant: Luisa M. Gonzales. Councilmember Corica made a motion to support appeal; it was seconded by Councilmember Monsef, and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Corica, Monsef, and President Diament- 3. Noes: Councilmembers Hanna and Lucas- 2. Absent: None. The City Attorney commented that it should be made clear to applicants that they must comply with the Building and Fire Codes. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 87-335 From City Manager regarding Consultant's report on Emergency Medical Transport Program. Sebastian Wong, 1363 Versailles Avenue, stated that the sooner definitive care is given, the better off a person is; that paramedics could come with the Fire Department; that he keeps resources available to take care of his own family, and that the annual cost per taxpayer for an EMS unit is very small. Cecilia Granger, 215 Basinside Way, stated she appreciated the fact that Council supported the study; questioned if Doctor's report was objective as his fees were partially paid by Alameda Hospital; stated that the citizens of the City (over 80%), voted for paramedics; that the EMT defibrillator is controversial at this point and the EMTs are not trained or qualified to give the necessary followup cardiac drugs; and, that the Concerned Alameda Citzens for Pre-Hospital Care will continue to educate the public. Kim Purcell, 1819 San Jose Avenue, stated that defibrillator usage requires followup drugs, which if not used, can result in further shock to the body; explained in detail certain paramedic procedures; and that the AMA states ALS care must be given within 8 minutes. Councilmember Lucas inquired if the defibrillator would be an improvement to which Ms. Purcell replied it can help greatly if follow-up care is given. Councilmember Lucas commented that Highland would have to be used, to which Ms. Purcell responded that the matter comes up to bid and Alameda Hospital needs only to prove they can handle it. Denis Drew, M.D. 2070 Clinton Avenue, stated he teaches at Highland Hospital, stated he supports EMTD System, stated a paramedic in every Fire Station would be great, but the cost is high; believes there would probably be one paramedic for the whole island; that if every fire station were equipped, they could be anywhere on the island in 1 or 2 minutes; defibrillating patients in the first 2 to 3 minutes results in a high survival rate; that EMTD system could be far superior to any other system in this county; and that the City, once establishing the EMTD system, should start looking into the possibility of a paramedic rig for backup. Councilmember Corica stated he would rather get facts from a doctor than a paramedic; that Alameda response time is good, and that he has talked to citizens who are pleased. Councilmember Corica made a motion to accept the report and recommendation; Councilmember Monsef seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. President Diament mentioned that in the vote for paramedics, a County measure referred to earlier, she believes that some people thought it would be for paramedic service and did not realize that it would only be for administration; and added that Alameda would be under the control of Highland Hospital. 87-336 From City Manager transmitting recommendations from the City's Airport Consultant. Walter Gilfillan, Gilfillan & Associates, consultant came forward for questions by Council. President Diament inquired if he had support of people with whom he met, to which he responded he had not yet received a report. The City Manager noted that Mr. Gilfillan has outlined a series of recommendations based upon comments made by people in the public hearing; and the fundamental approach is to participate in the Part 150 Study project. Councilmember Monsef inquired if the use of Runway 29 instead of other runways for night flights had been considered, to which Mr. Gilfillan responded that there are a number of preferential possibilities for night time operations, describing some in detail. Ewart Wetherill, 28 Cove Road, Harbor Bay Isle Advisory Committee, expressed support of the report of Mr. Gilfillan; expressed his concern for cooperation of all organizations and groups, for community safety and noise control for all of Alameda. Barbara Tuleja, 22 Purcell Drive, Harbor Bay Isle Advisory Committee, applauded the City's position in hiring the consultant, and noted that petitions are being circulated in Harbor Bay to request the Port of Oakland, the Oakland Airport, and the FAA for more stringent safety and noise control measures. Bill Kane, 2615 Bayview Drive, submitted copies of Noise Abatement plans of Port of Oakland, stated numbers used for runways are magnetic directions; commented that what is offered to Port should be factually correct so that matters will be better not worse; and agreed that the 150 Study is the best way to approach the matter. He further stated that he heard Port reports on instrument flights; that 2a of the consultant's report is probably the best of the suggestions; that 2c in the report should not be presented to the Port because all that would do is to move problems from one place to another; and proceeded to address in detail, much of the consultant's report, agreeing with certain items and making suggestions regarding others. Mr. Kane advised the City to continue to have the Port fine offending pilots. Mr. Gilfillan stated that the most important thing is that the City now has a list and it is for review and comments; that it is important that FAA review the matter and he does appreciate suggestions and criticism; likes the 240 degree radial idea Mr. Kane suggested and it is the kind of thing that should be looked at; that 2i (on Page 8 of the report) addresses the SST and seems to be a major concern of some citizens; regarding 2j, it needs to be included because if there is a problem, then this will enable Federal funds to be appropriated. President Diament suggested Mr. Kane's suggestions be incorporated and Mr. Gilfillan agreed that would be a good idea. The City Manager noted that Mr. Kane, Mr. Gilfillan and Ms. Eichten-Alioto will be attending the Part 150 study and the suggestions will be presented at that time. Councilmember Lucas suggested Council's endorsement would strengthen Mr. Gilfillan's bargaining position. Councilmember Corica stated that it is necessary to get the strongest possible support, and that there should be an effort to get the Port of Oakland involved. Joann Eichten-Alioto, 3025 Thompson, CEASE, stated the organization is in favor of the study that Mr. Gilfillan has put together and also the Part 150 study; that most of the procedures are not mandatory but voluntary and they want to make the procedures mandatory; that night flights are not the only problem but there are problems 24 hours a day; that the helicopter overflights are a definite concern and that the City needs to put pressure on San Francisco because of their overflights. James Hackbarth, 3345 Washington Court, stated he and his neighbors described low-flying aircraft but had no numbers to identify the aircraft. Mr. Kane stated sometimes it is difficult but there is a tape made at the tower which is kept for two weeks, it is not easy to do and needs support of FAA, the plane and time should be described and the FAA can identify the persons. Councilmember Monsef made a motion to accept the report, approve recommendations and include comments or points made by Mr. Kane and Ms. Eichten-Alioto. Councilmember Corica seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 87-337 From Public Works Director on the Bayview Estates beach improvements relating to BCDC Permit. The Public Works Director explained the matter, noting that the Audubon Society has addressed a letter to Bay Area Conservation & Development Commission requesting that the area be kept as it is without a paved pathway, that any encroachment by homeowners with landscaping or fencing extensions of their own yards be removed and put back to its original state; City staff has reviewed it, it is close to what homeowners want, and recommends the compromise approach be supported by Council. 118 Charles Millman, 2916 Bayview Dr., lauded the Audubon Society for coming forward with the compromise solution, noted the wildlife in the area, commented he would like fishing restricted to Ravenscove area; stated the homeowners in the area have and will maintain the areas; City maintenance people make ruts and back vehicles into wildlife and plant area; he would not like to see the area totally turned over to the City; the observation deck put up by East Bay Regional Park District is illegal, and creosoted piles at waterline can be handled by children; and that he has the formula for the erosion prevention wall which was placed in the area. Sally Faulhaber, 1003 Fair Oaks Avenue, commented on the intrusion of fencing and landscaping by homeowners; that action should be taken to prevent a paved path; the proposal appears to be something that would be acceptable to the homeowners, and will improve public access without destroying the real value of the area to the people who want to go there. Leora Feeney, 1330 Eighth Street, Golden Gate Audubon Society, showed photographs of area to Council; stated Public Works Director has reviewed the shoreline with Josephine Bixler, who is agreeable to considerations for handicapped; expressed concern that BCDC has approached matter with such strength and believes City and homeowners should go before BCDC at the enforcement meeting on May 14 with a proposal sensitive to issues. Bill Kane, 2615 Bayview Drive, stated he appreciated cooperation of staff and thanked Mayor Diament, and Councilmembers Hanna and Lucas, who are leaving Council, for their interest and help; stated he is happy with Audubon Society's agreement that the shoreline should be kept as it is; stated that two 200-foot circular nodal points in the report would not be acceptable to the homeowners, noted inconsistencies in BCDC approach to the matter; and that, unless the BCDC accepts the engineer's report and allows the structures without the 8-foot pathway, homeowners are requesting that the City Council direct the City Attorney to proceed with an appeal within the 30 days of the Cease and Desist Order. Ed Dankworth, 1221 Porta Ballena, noted that the area is widely known among the bird-watching community as one of the best bird-watching areas in the Bay area and perhaps in the whole state; and is an Alameda resource that is comparable in certain circles to Alameda's Victorian heritage and should be saved. Joe King, 2810 Bayview Drive, stated homeowners were alarmed a couple of years ago at erosion, some neighbors had been measuring it at 3 feet per year, and one neighbor was about to lose backyard; that if the homeowners had not built the wall, during the last storm, part of their property would have been lost; wondered where BCDC and other conservation organizations were at that time; and noted inconsistencies in BCDC "logic". The City Manager commented that the proposed compromise provides an opening for resolution of a very difficult long-term problem; that if compromise cannot be made with BCDC, the homeowners will have an 119 even worse situation than now. The City Attorney stated that the BCDC staff is divided; that there is a chance that with the support of the Audubon Society that something more reasonable from BCDC may result. Councilmember Lucas stated that the problems with BCDC is frustrating; there has been a demand for public access by the East Bay Regional Park System and also by a State Senator who wants access all around the Bay; Mrs. Feeney's suggestion provides minimum access which protects the area, will probably solve the problem for the future, and Mrs. Feeney deserves Council's gratitude for pointing out this possible solution to the problem with BCDC and to preserve this asset for Alameda's future; and supports what the Public Works Director and Mrs. Feeney have worked out. President Diament agreed and stated that, with the Department of the Interior and the Fish and Wildlife Service giving support, the City has a better opportunity of accomplishment. Councilmember Monsef agreed also and stated that the compromise allows everyone to come out ahead and made a motion that the Council accept the report and recommendation of the Public Works Director. Councilmember Corica seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 87 -338 From City Manager regarding Ballena Isle Marina's Application for a permit to perform maintenance dredging and land fill. James Spitzer, 450E Cola Ballena, expressed appreciation to President Diament, Councilmembers Hanna and Lucas for their responsiveness, wished strength and wisdom to Mayor -elect Corica and the new Councilmembers -elect as well as Councilmember Monsef, and expressed concerns regarding the dredging and filling at Hotel /Convention Center site; and stated that the homeowners urge Council to deny the application to dredge and fill pending an up -to -date review by agencies, and arrange a Cease and Desist Order to stop the continued filling and grading of the hotel site. Ted Hall, 342 Santa Clara Avenue, stated pathways in the area are filled with boulders; that jagged boulders could injure children; that a removal process of what is there could be very expensive. Councilmember Monsef requested the Public Works Director respond to the speakers, to which the Public Works Director pointed out the area on a map; explained the procedure being followed for the spoils of the dredging, noting that the cleaned water would then be filtered back into the Bay. President Diament inquired about approval of the Army Engineers to which the Public Works Director responded that it was staff's understanding that there had been approval by both BCDC and U.S. Army Corps and staff has received a copy of a letter from BCDC giving approval. He added that the material on the bank was to be 120 used for erosion repair on the bank. Councilmember Monsef requested further detail regarding approval to which the Public Works Director replied that the drawings submitted to BCDC for approval were also submitted to the City Engineer for approval; and the material is in preparation for repair of damage done during the 1982-83 storms. Mr. Anderson, commented that they have a BCDC and U.S. Corp of Engineers permit to restore the bank to its original 1966 condition; do not intend to use the spoils of the dredging to further the hotel site but to dry out the materials and use it to build up the bank. Mr. Spitzer stated the drawings did not have a depiction of the settling pond, but showed only where the spoils were coming from and where they were going to. Councilmember Hanna stated that particular area has always been low and would take many years to dry out; that it is a logical place to put dredge materials. The Public Works Director noted that it is the same operation that the City utilized on the Doolittle site. President Diament commented she believes this is a practical way of replacing the area that was present in 1966. Councilmember Lucas made a motion to accept the recommendation; Councilmember Hanna seconded the motion. Councilmember Corica commented he was skeptical over the coincidental aspect, that the fill is on the hotel site. Councilmember Monsef stated he considers this to be a maintenance work which in no way is an indication of support of any plan that Marina Operators may have in mind. The motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Hanna, Lucas and Monsef, and President Diament - 4. Noes: Councilmember Corica - 1. Absent: None. RESOLUTIONS 87-339 Resolution No. 11190 "Declaring May 31, 1987 "Alameda Clean Beach Day." Adopted. Councilmember Monsef made a motion to adopt the resolution. Councilmember Lucas seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 87-340 Resolution No. "Adopting Statement of Community Development Objectives and Projected Use of Funds and authorizing execution of required Certifications and Grant Agreement." Adopted. The City Manager stated that staff was recommending the allocation of some $46,000 regarding the Family Service Agency, for purchase of a facility and is proposing one change in the statement, that the specific address of 746 Eagle be removed from the statement, and other than that, the recommendation is as submitted. Councilmember Corica stated he believed it was a good recommendation; that there has been an aim of Council to assist the Family Service Agency as strongly as possible, and that this is a way for Council to show that it means what it says. Smith Anderson, 1404 San Jose Avenue, Alameda Family Service Agency, expressed appreciation and consideration of their specific problems and for the positive solution to their dilemma. Councilmember Corica made a motion to take the matter out of order inasmuch as the City Manager had explained the new proposal, the procedure for the $46,000 and approve it, as amended by the City Manager. Councilmember Monsef asked clarification that it was not a motion regarding the whole package, to which Councilmember Corica responded that it was not. Councilmember Monsef seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Barbara Thomas, 1118 Paru Street, stated she had concerns about priorities of proposed expenditures including the $46,000; that over 25% of the budget is going to business; that only 5.9% of the budget is for child care; that curb cuts, wheelchair ramps, etc, is set out over many years instead of doing it all in one year and saving the administrative costs of going through the procedure several times. The Community Development Director stated that the format of presentation is misleading; that Federal law requires only 15% goes to services so it is grouped in that way; that there is a design for a new child-care facility; that regarding commercial revitalization, UDAG loan replacement proceeds will be recycled back; and more loan replacement funds will be realized this year. The City Manager noted that there is a federal limitation so the money is spread, i.e., if the curb cuts were all done in one year, some other project would have to be deleted. Councilmember Corica asked clarification if the curb cuts were done at one time, would it not be possible to get something else done, to which the City Manager replied that design work was involved and only a certain amount of design work was allowable. Councilmember Corica inquired if the child-care program was cut from last year, to which the Community Development Director replied that it was, but that funds were made available for a child-care facility at McKinley Park. Councilmember Corica stated that Council needs to review priorities and come back to the matter in two weeks. Councilmember Monsef inquired what direct services are, to which the Community Development Director replied it is service linked to a specific client or individual house, rather than being a project administration service. Councilmember Lucas noted a number of properties and stated there should be landscaping and maintenance of those properties, and requested the matter be followed up. Following discussion and questions of Council regarding housing rehabilitation and other matters within the report, Councilmember Hanna made a motion to adopt the resolution. Councilmember Monsef stated more time was needed for review. Councilmember Corica agreed and stated Council should come back to it in 2 weeks following review. Councilmember Monsef made a motion to delay action to the next Council meeting. Councilmember Corica seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Councilmember Hanna made a motion to extend the meeting, Councilmember Corica seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. FINAL PASSAGE OF ORDINANCES 87-341 Ordinance No. 2337 N.S. "Amending Ordinance No. 2096, N.S., relating to the Cable Television Franchise." Councilmember Lucas made a motion to adopt the ordinance; Councilmember Hanna seconded the motion and it was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Hanna, Lucas and President Diament - 3. Noes: Councilmembers Corica and Monsef 2. Absent: None. 87-342 Ordinance No. 2338, N.S. "Accepting 0.0464 of an acre parcel and granting two parcels totalling 0.0457 of an acre adjacent to the Alameda Marina Village lagoon." Barbara Thomas, 1118 Paru Street, expressed concern about the land exchange and questioned if this is a sale; and if so, a sale requires a 4/Sths vote. President Diament noted that this is an exchange of two pieces of land. The Public Works Director pointed to subject area on map and explained that the lagoon line needed adjustment and that the City has a slight gain in square footage. Councilmember Lucas made a motion to adopt the ordinance. 123 Councilmember Hanna seconded the motion. Following further detailed discussion, the motion was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Hanna, Lucas, Monsef and President Diament - 4. Noes: Councilmember Corica - 1. Absent: None. NEW BUSINESS 87-343 Councilmember Corica commented that Myron Jones, 1415/1417 Mound Street, had complained that there was difficulty in refinancing of their duplex property due to Measure A, and requested that the matter be placed on the next agenda. 87-344 Councilmember Corica stated that a letter from Mrs. Chofre said no notice was received regarding 1319 Pearl Street, and he requested a report on the matter. 87-345 Councilmember Monsef stated that the Bureau of Electricity's Centennial is not receiving appropriate publicity, and Council should advise the Board accordingly. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, GENERAL 87-346 John Barni, Jr. commented that he hoped the City could find an answer to the Bayview Drive issue; that the Ballena Isle Marina Application is, in fact, a land fill project; and that Council may wish to consider a Charter Review Committee. ADJOURNMENT President Diament adjourned the meeting at 11:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, DIANE B. FELSCH City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted 72 hours in advance, in accordance with the Brown Act.