Loading...
1999-07-06 CIC Minutes Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission July 6, 1999 1 MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY- -JULY 6, 1999- -7:25 P.M. Chair Appezzato convened the Special Meeting at 8:08 p.m. Commissioner DeWitt led the Pledge of Allegiance. Pastor Samuel Butler, Love Fellowship Church, gave the Invocation. ROLL CALL - Present: Commissioners Daysog, DeWitt, Johnson, Kerr and Mayor Appezzato - 5. Absent: None. MINUTES (99-24) Minutes of the Annual Community Improvement Commission Meeting of June 15, 1999. Approved. Commissioner Daysog moved approval of the Minutes. Commissioner DeWitt seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. CONSENT CALENDAR Commissioner Johnson approval of the Consent Calendar. Commissioner DeWitt seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number] (*99-25) Recommendation to approve the Community Improvement Commission Budget for FY 1999-2000. Accepted. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (99-26) Recommendation to proceed with, and allocate funding for, the Downtown Visioning Process. Frank Matarrese, Chair, Economic Development Commission (EDC), stated EDC held a number of well-attended meetings on the development of Park Street; EDC’s recommendation is for the visioning process to be made official and include a time frame to allow extensive public Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission July 6, 1999 2 input on the matter of Park Street as the City’s downtown; public opinion and interest should be honored; the Strategic Plan process will allow integration of the Visioning process and both should work in concert; the Commission wants a plan that is usable. Chair Appezzato stated a strategy for Alameda as a whole was being considered long before the Trammell Crow issue; the City must be thought of as a whole, with attention to Park Street; Park Street is critical, as is Webster Street; each and every part of Alameda is critical to the City’s future; the support of all the Business Associations, the Chamber of Commerce and shoppers is necessary; everyone must benefit, including the community at large; that he looks forward to where EDC is going with the 28-member Committee [Economic Development Strategic Plan Task Force]; he believes the Committee will not let the City Council get in its way when reporting back with good ideas and a consensus of the community. Chair Matarrese stated the EDC does not want Park Street visioning to happen in a vacuum; said visioning should happen in concert with a Strategic Plan that covers the whole City; there will be public discussion on the matter; and Council will be provided with a set of facts. Councilmember Kerr stated everyone should be encouraged to express their point of view on what is best for the City. Mel Barron, Alameda, stated the project is a great idea, but a lousy location; Park Street should be enlarged to three or four lanes in each direction; staff should consider stretching out Park Street, from Lincoln Avenue out to the Bridge, to utilize six to seven acres of land. Mayor Appezzato noted the City will not condemn any buildings on Park Street, or anywhere else. Linda Bradford, Alameda, stated there should be a clear differentiation between revitalization and redevelopment; condemnation [of property] can be detrimental to people’s ideas of investing in Alameda; that she supports bringing Alameda up to date and having a vital downtown; the rest of Alameda should not be forgotten; and the process should be community driven. Chair Appezzato stated all of Alameda is included [in the process]; members of the Task Force are from all over the City. Chair Appezzato further stated part of redevelopment law provides Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission July 6, 1999 3 for condemnation; condemnation [process] is seldom used; and the condemnation of up to eighteen properties [on Park Street] was never an issue for the City. Commissioner Daysog stated it is possible to do physical revitalization and enhance the small town character while also attracting shoppers; the City of San Mateo’s downtown is a clean, vibrant area with a lot of public investments that are strategically used; the stores are of the small town variety and locally owned; there are many other model cities to study; development does not mean displacement; everyone will agree to a cleaner, nicer environment; fundamental question is what can be done to make it cleaner; and the following months should allow for solving all deficiencies. Jerome Feitelberg, Alameda, stated the visioning process should be fair, e.g. impartial committee members and no hidden agendas. Chair Appezzato stated condemnation will not happen; the City has many challenges ahead of it; and everyone must work together. Cary Dictor, Alameda, stated most Alamedans have a sensitive spot in their hearts for Park Street; Park Street draws a lot of interest and should receive special attention; Park Street should better serve the needs of the citizens. Sally Rudloff, Alameda, referred to a 535-signature “Petition To Move Forward with Responsible Revitalization of Park Street” submitted to the City; stated the process should start with the Park Street core. Frank George, commercial property owner and landlord of 1419 Park Street, stated for righteousness to prevail, Park Street landlords, merchants, biased and non-biased residents, Park Street Business Association, Chamber of Commerce, City Council and the Strategic Task Force, must believe it is more important to do right than to be popular; leaders should stand for what is right and lead the City to achieve it; good government ensures the rights of all the people on an equal basis as revitalization, not elimination; John Leavitt’s five step plan, which involves Historic Park Street property owners, a visioning process, and a steering committee, should be accepted; landlords and merchants are the experts; everyone should push in the same direction and become team players; visioning process should be for the store owners and landlords who are willing to spend money heavily. Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission July 6, 1999 4 Chair Appezzato announced the West Alameda Business Association’s three-day seminar at Alameda Point on the Main Street Project. Esha Nagel, Alameda, local business owner near Park Street, stated that she is grateful Alameda is a small community where most businesses are locally owned; agreed with Vice Chair Daysog’s comments regarding the City of San Mateo; and stated that she is looking forward to the possibility of keeping Alameda a small town, revitalized. Eunice Pauline Kelley, Pauline’s Antiques, Park Street, stated the businesses on Park Street have managed to endure very successfully for many years; said businesses have survived in spite of the City not helping by limiting how many beauty shops, restaurants, etc. can be on one block; the business license office should oversee said matter, as was done in the past; the City is not enforcing the Sign Ordinance or Litter Ordinance; the Park Street Merchants’ Association negotiated an Agreement with the City to enforce such Ordinances as recently as one year ago; it was desired the walking beat man [officer] would be responsible for enforcement, however, said officer refused to follow through; Park Street merchants might get a lot more done if the City would work with them; there are properties for sale on Park Street which have been available for a long time; the City now allows merchants to recruit businesses; one and one half years ago, merchants were advised not to recruit because of the City recruiter. Mark Irons, Alameda, questioned whether the Task Force process would include public workshops. Frank Matarrese stated there would be a series of public meetings, as well as periodic updates. Chair Appezzato stated meeting notices should be placed in both newspapers, Alameda Times Star and Alameda Journal. Mr. Irons further stated spending $50,000 specifically for Park Street does not guarantee an actionable outcome, noted parking mitigation is important, and commented on the America Architecture Institute’s video entitled: “Back from the Brink.” Commissioner Daysog stated there should be a laundry list of items to be budgeted at the end of the Park Street visioning process. Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission July 6, 1999 5 Patti Sellman, Alameda, stated there are significant gaps in the retail market place in Alameda; Menlo Park and San Mateo have a gourmet grocery store and other anchor stores; retail gaps in Alameda should be studied and citizens polled on shopping patterns. Chair Appezzato stated that he encouraged Trader Joe’s Inc. to come to Alameda a year ago; Adronico’s Market was contacted also; Old Navy and other retailers are considering coming to Alameda; and the City will continue [to try to attract outside retailers]. Elise Colson, Alameda, stated there should be a consistent look on Park Street; concerns are: 1) he who screams the loudest, gets attention before others, and 2) being upstaged by people who have bigger clout than the people who have put their effort into Park Street businesses; ultimate goal should be similar standards and support for merchants. Chair Appezzato stated Park Street should be revitalized in a way similar to the Silver Building, retaining the look of the past; it will be up to everyone to reach a consensus. Ms. Colson stated maintenance after revitalization occurs is another concern. Chair Appezzato stated Alameda is not a very wealthy community; retail is no longer the major producer of revenue; and there are priorities, e.g. sewer repairs. Lisa Oyen, Alameda, Park Street Merchant and Alameda resident, stated that she is glad the matter of condemnation is not a consideration; cosmetic changes [to businesses] are great; the proposed changes are exciting; and more foot traffic on Park Street is desirable. Pattianne Parker, Alameda, stated a downtown visioning process is what is really being discussed, including cultural advantages such as City Hall, a potential [Main] Library, Kofman Auditorium, and Adelphian Center for the Arts; focus should not be narrowed to only retail and Park Street. Commissioner Daysog stated development does not necessarily mean displacement; investments can be made on public infrastructure; process should be phased: cleanup first, City Hall enforcement of regulations, and where to make investments; further stated there have been unwise public investments on Park Street, e.g. planters and brick crosswalks; a strategy needs to be established on how money Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission July 6, 1999 6 spent links with businesses; Public Works, Economic Development and Park Street businesses need to be brought together; once a physical basis of revitalization is established, the City can focus on growth and the types of business which should be drawn into the area; the process will not happen overnight; the strengths of Park Street should be used and improved; people want to see a greater mix of shops with local merchants and chains, e.g. Banana Republic and Bebe; the most prudent way to reach the goal is to work with what the City has; Fourth Street in Berkeley has significant investments in the public infrastructure, is inviting, has locally-owned stores and could serve as a model for the City of Alameda; models should be clear, e.g. Rockridge, San Mateo, Walnut Creek; that he would like to start with the San Mateo model and grow from there. Commissioner Kerr stated Alameda is fortunate to have two downtown districts; some cities do not have downtown areas, e.g. El Cerrito; in Alameda, buildings are historical and have interesting facades; College Avenue [in Oakland and Berkeley] does not have chains, but has great vitality; there is a wonderful market with different types of food; that she would like to see something similar come to Alameda; Park Street property owners and merchants should be listened to; they are the experts and have knowledge about what it will take to develop Park Street; the City has a great asset and she is pleased the City is taking a strong step forward in revitalizing the existing asset. Commissioner DeWitt moved approval of the staff recommendation [authorization of staff resources and funding necessary to complete a Visioning Process for Downtown separate from, but in concert with, the Economic Development Strategic Plan process] with the provision that merchants and owners be involved with the visioning process. Commissioner Johnson seconded the motion. Under discussion, Commissioner Johnson stated there has been positive feedback this evening; more positive input will come from the process; attention has been focused on the issue; the City can move forward together; the City would like input from the entire community. Chair Appezzato announced there will be a “California Main Street” meeting on creating world class retailers, new infrastructure banking, and step-by-step development guidelines; stated Alameda is a wonderful place to live; listed accomplishments of the City. Commissioner Daysog inquired whether Commissioners DeWitt and Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission July 6, 1999 7 Johnson would entertain an amendment to the motion: itemization of the cost for physical improvements as well as suggested service, e.g. improving person who monitors signage. Chair Appezzato requested Commissioner Daysog to clarify his request. Commissioner Daysog stated the downtown visioning process will: 1) indicate the business which should be attracted, 2) be a road map of what it takes to improve civic quality, and 3) identify certain physical features which need to be improved; that he would like to include the cost of physical improvements to integrate costs with the City’s next Budget. The Executive Director responded recommendations will be made as part of the visioning process; however, recommendations will not contain the type of specificity Commissioner Daysog is requesting; specific cost might be part of a second stage. Commissioner Daysog stated that he is encouraging specificity; for $60,000, there should be specifics. Commissioner Johnson inquired whether Commissioner Daysog was requesting a way to prioritize, to which Commissioner Daysog responded in the affirmative; stated there should be a sense of the scope of change people want and are ready to commit to. Chair Appezzato stated the visioning process might be inhibited by requesting a price tag be placed on everything. John Wheeler, Alameda, stated Commissioner Daysog’s request would shut down the dreaming process; when something is being designed, attaching dollars cuts down the ability to dream and is counter-productive; the first stage is to put together a wish list; then the most important items can be determined. Commissioner Daysog stated the City has to be ready to make a commitment; there have been studies of Park Street and ideas of how and where improvements should be made. Commissioner Johnson stated the process should ensure revitalization goes forward; the Park Street Business Association has plans from the 1950s, 1970s, and 1980s; the City wants a Plan designed with implementation in mind; a dollar figure is not needed. Commissioner Daysog stated the process should be clear that there Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission July 6, 1999 8 will be an implementation phase after the design phase. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA None. COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS None. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Appezzato adjourned the Special Meeting at 9:33 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Diane B. Felsch, CMC Secretary, Community Improvement Commission The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.