Loading...
1997-04-15 Special CIC Minutes257 MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING OF COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION HELD TUESDAY, APRIL 15, 1997, 7:25 P.M. The meeting was convened at 8:04 p.m., with Chair Appezzato presiding. Commissioner Daysog led the Pledge of Allegiance. Reverend Greg Thomas, Calvary Christian Church, gave the invocation. ROLL CALL - PRESENT: ABSENT: MINUTES Commissioners Daysog, Kerr, Lucas, DeWitt and Chair Appezzato - 5. None. (97-08) Minutes of the Special Community Improvement Commission Meeting of April 1, 1997. Commissioner Lucas moved approval of the Minutes. Commissioner DeWitt seconded the motion which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. CONSENT CALENDAR (97-09) Status report from Community Development Director on East Housing. Commissioner Kerr expressed displeasure regarding notification of developers to include planning for the East Housing along with their planning for the corridor, Fleet Industrial Supply Center, [FISC], as requested at the January 21, 1997 CIC Meeting, as she believes that notice on March 13th for the April 4th deadline was not adequate and did not clearly express the Commission's opinion; and she believes this is interference with the Commission's ability to set policy. Chair Appezzato noted that he believes interference is a rather strong word; and opened the floor for comment. The Assistant Executive Director stated when Commissioner Kerr brought this matter to his attention, staff obtained a copy of the draft minutes of the January 21st meeting, a letter was sent out to the other two developers, and he does not believe there was any intent to interfere with the direction of the Commission. Commissioner Lucas stated she had also assumed that the bidders would be notified immediately; she hopes in the future if the staff is confused, they ask questions; she believes there is no reason to delay notification. Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission April 15, 1997 Chair Appezzato inquired if the developers voiced a concern. The Assistant Executive Director stated he has not heard of any concern, and none has been brought to his attention by staff. Chair Appezzato stated if there is confusion in the future, come back and let the Commission know. Chair Appezzato stated he thought he had made it clear that the FISC property is a separate closure process from the Naval Air Station and he does not believe this Council/Commission or anyone should interfere with those two closure processes; joining the two may be somewhat difficult and the guidance was clear that the developers could include East Housing as an adjunct; East Housing was done as an adjunct and on a voluntary basis; those two issues should not be confused; however, the developers should have been notified. The Executive Director stated he would claim responsibility for the matter; it was not his understanding at the time that a delay in notification would create a problem. Chair Appezzato stated if any of the Developers indicate they were not informed with adequate notice, let the Commission know and come back with a recommendation. Commissioner DeWitt stated, since this matter must be reagendized, following Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority review, the staff report should be accepted, and he so moved. Commissioner Lucas seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Commissioners Daysog, DeWitt, Lucas and Chair Appezzato - 4, Noes: Commissioner Kerr - 1, Absent: None. REGULAR AGENDA (97-10) Report from Assistant Executive Director recommending authorization for Commissioner Kerr to attend the California Redevelopment Association Conference in Monterey on April 24 and April 25, 1997. Commissioner Lucas moved approval. Commissioner DeWitt seconded the motion which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (97-11) Report from Community Development Director recommending approval of the proposed CIC Budget Revision for Fiscal Year 1996- 97, including initiation of Streetscape Projects for Webster and Park Streets. Commissioner DeWitt moved acceptance of the staff recommendation. Commissioner Lucas seconded the motion. Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission April 15, 1997 2 9 In response to Commissioner Lucas, the Community Development Director stated that the sum of $243,000 is set aside funding for Affordable Housing Development; and that the Community Improvement Commission will approve expenditure when authorizing a project. Commissioner Lucas stated she would like an idea of how much funding would be available for low and moderate income home ownership program. The Community Development Director responded $700,000 initially. Commissioner Lucas stated newspaper racks at the corner of Lincoln and Webster are a disgrace and should be cared for immediately. The Assistant Executive Director stated the matter has been brought to the attention of Public Works. The Public Works Director stated there is an obligation to notify the newspapers, to correct the situation; the City will take care of the matter as promptly as possible within the legal framework. Commissioner Lucas stated Mayor Brown in San Francisco found a French company to donate free newspaper racks for a Mayors' Conference; she would like to know the price of the French racks and whether Community Development funds could be used for that purpose. Chair Appezzato requested various samples of designs or models be obtained for a selection, and information concerning cost and control of the racks, can be brought back to the Commission, as that is not the only corner where newspaper racks are in disrepair. Chair Appezzato requested an explanation of the Streetscape Project. The Community Development Director responded that the Economic Development Commission [EDC) instituted a process to involve citizens, business associations, and Chamber of Commerce, in the development of the Redevelopment Agency's budget; the Park and Webster Street Merchants Associations came to the EDC and stated their highest priority, which they hoped could happen at mid-year, was provision of funds for streetscape improvements, and based on that desire, staff looked into it and believe there are very good reasons to begin project now; the Public Works Department has done a great deal of work on traffic and pedestrian safety analysis on Park Street; staff is stopped now because of the implications of their findings; staff would like funding to determine whether there are other ways to achieve the same result and the impacts of the safety analysis on Park Street; also to look at some of the recommendations in the Auto Row Study; if there is money left to assist the Merchants Associations on their conceptual design streetscape initiatives below Lincoln, so they can have an overall Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission April 15, 1997 260 framework and as money becomes available, their specific improvements could provide an overall framework. The Community Development Director further stated regarding Webster Street, that money has been carried forward to finance an analysis of bulb-outs and other street improvements previously approved; tax sharing with Alameda Marina Village changes substantially in 2003; and the City will have more money available that could be devoted to implementing improvements in the Webster Street area. Commissioner Lucas stated that she noticed that the Public Works Department is applying for a pedestrian bike grant from the Park Street Bridge to the Oakland Embarcadero, and questioned 1) how this would tie together, 2) whether there are any plans for pedestrian bike safety, and 3) if Public Works could apply for a grant for the Alameda portion from Park Street. The Public Works Director stated that the item on the agenda tonight is TDA funds; the City is typically limited to a $50,000 project in the north planning area; if there is a joint project with, for example, Oakland, as this one is, another $50,000 can be made available; so the items tonight are the maximum within a particular fiscal year--one in the City and one joint project with Oakland--and in the future, those sources of funds are available for almost any pedestrian- or bicycle-oriented project. Commissioner Lucas stated perhaps that can be tried for next year. Commissioner Daysog referred to particular sections of the report and inquired what the connection is between the item presented by the City, and the item presented by WABA: is it to suggest that dollars will be available on a line-item basis for other things identified in WABA's plan, such as the shuttle service; and inquired what the mechanisms were to follow through. The Community Development Director stated WABA was anxious to attach their plan to show the Commission the activities it would generate in the short term and would compliment streetscape improvements funding; all of the items will be put together in a budget document and brought back to the Commission for consideration. On the call for the question, the motion was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (97-12) Report from Community Development Director recommending review and approval of proposed design criteria for the Disposition and Development Agreement for the Webster and Atlantic Project. Ed Clark, Alameda, stated he does not think the Commission wants a strip mall at the City entrance to be its legacy; architecture of Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission April 15, 1997 the project leaves much to be desired; much more can be done with the tenant mix; and he encouraged the Commission to have the courage to stand up to the developer and not lose the opportunity. Sandy Stier, Alameda, stated she is a West End resident, suggests the Commission rethink the proposal of the development; stated the design criteria does not respond to issues of a gateway unless people accept a gateway to mediocrity; the development should'be quality development that brings more money to Alameda; suggested natural foods, bakeries, art store, an Italian Deli; and challenged the Commission to revisit the project. Tina Woods, Alameda, stated she is a coach to a swim team in town; takes a personal interest in the community and was asked by someone to suggest some other company to go in as anchor; she called Larry Crenshaw, site developer for Nature Company, who said he could not initiate a new site in Alameda at this time because of a merger; she gave the information to Mr. Browman; also, Central Market location was suggested. Gloria Reilly, Alameda, Independence Plaza, stated that the new project's proposed night lighting will affect her; there is concern that young people will be hanging out 24 hours a day; and she noted that there is odor in that area. Clare Shannon, Alameda, Independence Plaza [IP], stated the IP is a quiet residential community, however, bringing in Walgreen's would not keep it that way. Don Bergen, Alameda, stated he believes in the free enterprise system but he is disturbed by the way this complicated plan is being pushed through, the three adjacent parcels should be sold on the open market, and Walgreen's or whomever, or one or all should then come before Council for approval or disapproval, what is being done now is not fair to other store owners in the area; the money should be followed, and that is the bottom line. Jerry Fiedelberg, stated he is a pharmacist, a long-time resident and owns Alameda Drug; is against the development because it is a cookie-cutter design and will not enhance Alameda, the revenue from Walgreen's will be taken from other local pharmacies and there will be no net gain in revenue; noted stores that have gone since prior developments came to the area; and suggests the Commission start thinking about what to do with the other store sites. William McCall, Sr., Alameda, stated he thinks there is conflict of interest; the City has one share of the stock of the Alameda Belt Line and the City Manager sits on its Board; City Manager also sits on Public Utilities Board for the Bureau of Electricity as stated in the Charter; and as City Manager, negotiates the projects; he [McCall] went to see Mr. Koppel, Alameda Belt Line, who will go to Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission April 15, 1997 2 6 2 their corporate attorney to see if there is a problem; the City should meet with the Belt Line to see that this can continue legally and that there is no conflict of interest; and he only mentions it because he thinks the Commission should know this, and he does not want someone suing the City; also, he believes this is a bad project for Webster Street; he was in Long's in Marina Village, they need customers and a competitor is being brought in; and he would like to retain the stores already here. Darryl Browman, Alameda, Browman Development Co., stated they welcome the design criteria, are sensitive to the fact this is a gateway project; welcomes the fact that the criteria is before everyone; noted it is a combination of input from WABA, the Planning Department, Economic Development Ad Hoc Subcommittee, which includes members of Chamber, and that they appreciate the input, and he will be glad to answer any questions. Commissioner Kerr stated that, because she was asked what she liked and did not like in architecture in this project and one person who asked was Mr. Browman, she went around the Bay Area and took many photos; she wants to comment because some issues are raised in the Agreement; one is compatibility of architecture with either Webster Street or Independence Plaza; she took pictures to illustrate that these are not compatible with either one; one shows Walgreen's, San Leandro, and [one photo] Raley's stucco supermarket strip mall, San Pablo, which to her, bears a strong resemblance to the proposed development and does not match anything; she likes Marina Shopping Center as a whole, but the buildings are not attractive, and Long's on Park Street, with art deco, is not compatible to Victorian architecture that shows in the photo's background; another photo shows a 24-hour drive-through pharmacy at Walgreen's, San Leandro which is immediately adjacent to a large apartment house, noted photos including Tiburon's compatible architecture, Oakland • downtown revitalization architectural compatibility as well as very strict sign control, Benecia's window treatment and attractive eating areas, Larkspur's brick pavement; she noted most stores and drugstores "garbaging up" their architecture with vending machines and ads; and addressed sign control, the use of very attractive signs, and monument signs; and stated she has particular concerns about Development Agreement as it refers to a tenant, Walgreen's, by name rather than addressing design criteria in general. Chair Appezzato stated it is obvious Commissioner Kerr objects to the design, and he inquired that if the design is acceptable, would the project be acceptable to her. Commissioner Kerr replied it would depend strongly upon the use of the buildings; she cannot see 24-hour operations next to a residential area; and there are some issues like that. Commissioner Lucas thanked Commissioner Kerr for the work she has Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission April 15, 1997 done and finds it impressive and helpful, pointing out potential that Alameda architecture offers, and she hopes it can be made available to anyone interested; the business community might be interested in this comparison; another issue is that it is desirable to have businesses pedestrian-friendly; autos should be out of sight and entrances easily accessible to people on foot or on bicycles; and a problem with Walgreen's is that it is a drive- through project; Alameda has the South Shore Shopping Center and Harsh Development is making an effort to improve that Shopping Center but she does not think any more Shopping Centers or malls are needed; in these guidelines, she does not want to see any drive-through facilities, it must be pedestrian-oriented. Commissioner Daysog stated he is still in favor of this project; we have to look at all the prospectives, and we cannot reduce the issue to simple catchy phrases like "strip mall;" for clearly, the matter presented tonight by Commissioner Kerr demonstrates it is not a mutually exclusive debate, that, in fact, a project can be designed well and do what is good for the community; thanked Commissioner Kerr for taking the time and energy to take the photos and project design criteria in pictures that are not as apparent in words in the report prepared by the Community Development Department; he believes that as the City redevelops Webster Street and all of West Alameda including NAS, this proposed development must be put in that context; the senior vice president of Trader Joe's called him and asked what happened with the development plan; the point he was getting at was what kind of community this is, how receptive we are to businesses; he does not want to reduce any issue to stock names like "strip malls" as these are complex issues of a debate in its fullest complexities; Commissioner Kerr has brought forth some photos which demonstrate that other cities in the East Bay are able to have this kind of development and design them well; he hopes the design elements will be reviewed and in some way incorporate the implied or explicit suggestions in the pictures provided; perhaps it would be wise to recommend two Councilmembers/Commissioners to serve as liaison with the developer and with the City and as liaison to the Council/Commission; perhaps there should be a subcommittee so that the Commission is empowered and responsible for the design not only of this area, but all of Webster Street, and we do not nip in the bud the revitalization of the area. Commissioner DeWitt stated he remembers about two years ago when this proposal was first introduced to the Commission, how happy he, Commissioner Lucas and all of the Commissioners were; how very happy they were that someone was interested in developing a site at the entrance of the City where nothing had been done for forty or fifty years; and after November of this year, no one will be able to do anything with the old building because of the seismic requirements, so we were all happy; he is still happy there is someone interested; one person suggested going out on the private Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission April 15, 1997 264 market to put the place up for sale and see what happens; it takes more than that because there are three or more property owners and negotiations must be made with each of the owners; so it took a lot of work to get the land under one title and there are still easements running under the land; tonight there are fourteen items addressed as design criteria, for the development agreement, which describe the type of building, walls, architecture, pedestrian amenities, parking criteria, utilities, landscaping, exterior lighting, signs, drive-through, and corner features, and greenway; a lot of beautiful things about what this development should be and should look like; and if the architect and developer follow the fourteen items, it should be a very beautiful site; he is still a little perplexed as to what needs to be done to change the development to make it look right; there have been four different City organizations that, for the last year, have been drawing pictures of what they want; so many people are involved and he is wondering how Commissioners Lucas's and Kerr's comments can be injected into the design; he does not know what is needed to make the project look right; he hopes that some good examples can be presented to the architect and make the project area beautiful; he would like to propose one item: red brick treatment on the crosswalks; it is off the project site and may be a City problem; the sidewalks and crosswalks should be very attractive and he proposes something be done to the crosswalks on Atlantic Avenue. Commissioner DeWitt further stated that if Commissioners Lucas and Kerr could somehow make their desires known to the architect, perhaps a building can be produced that is beautiful and meets all the criteria; this is an opportunity and we should make it the most beautiful and best opportunity possible. Commissioner Kerr stated that there is a reference to the electric vehicle quarter or electric train; that on March 18th, she requested the issue from the Area Wide Strategy Report, be put on the agenda; and that she is making the request again. Chair Appezzato stated that will be done. Chair Appezzato stated that, under Discussion Analysis of the Staff Report, the design criteria for the project was drafted from Elements of the City of Alameda General Plan, the Area Wide Strategy Report, the Zoning Code and Study of the Architectural Characteristics of Webster Street; the Community Development Director had several conversations with Berkeley's design review planner who negotiated three Walgreen developments; the draft criteria was then submitted to West Alameda Business Association [WABA) and WABA's comments were incorporated; the criteria was then reviewed and revised by the Planning Department, the Economic Development Committee Ad Hoc Working Group which included representatives of WABA, Chamber of Commerce, and Housing Commission; and other actions were taken concerning the design of Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission April 15, 1997 265 this project; a lot of study went into design; in November 1995, the CIC unanimously voted to go forward and Walgreen's was named as the anchor tenant; the developer, with that impetus, spent $80,000 to $100,000; a prior Council did award-winning Marina Village, then Independence Plaza and the prior Council did the housing project at the Drive-in Site; there has been development from the Tube down Webster Street; if we are going to have difficulty in raising taxes, Council should get busy and find a way to raise the revenue to pay for the services to operate the City, and economic development is one way; if Council does not go forward, the area may remain blighted for a long time; a number of Independence Plaza residents signed a petition in support of the project; twenty-two merchants on Webster Street signed a petition in support of it, Planning Board and EDC unanimously supported it; Chamber of Commerce, WABA and GABA support it; he also will support it; and requested a motion in support of the Project. Commissioner DeWitt moved to accept the design criteria with the addition that crosswalks be given brick treatment; and he is open to any amendments. Commissioner Daysog seconded the motion. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Commissioners DeWitt, Daysog and Chair Appezzato - 3. Noes: Commissioners Kerr and Lucas - 2. Absent: None. Abstentions: None. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (Public Comment) (97-13) Tina Woods, Alameda stated that she does not believe the Commission allowed the community to have a voice in the matter. COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS (Communication from Commissioners) None. ADJOURNMENT Chair Appezzato adjourned the meeting at 9:26 p.m. spectfully submitted, D ANE B, FELSCH, CMC Secretary The agenda for this meeting was posted in advance in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission April 15, 1997