2000-05-16 Regular CC MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY- -MAY 16, 2000- -7:30 P.M.
Mayor Appezzato convened the Regular Meeting at 7:46 p.m.
ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, DeWitt, Johnson,
Kerr and Mayor Appezzato - 5.
Absent: None.
AGENDA CHANGES
None.
PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
(00 -236) Proclamation declaring the week of May 14 as "National
Preservation Week" in the City of Alameda.
Richard Neveln, Alameda, commented on historic preservation in
Alameda, including the former Alameda Naval Air Station Building
365.
Mayor Appezzato read the Proclamation and presented it to the
Planning Director.
(00 -237) Proclamation declaring Alameda to be a "Relay for Life
Community" on June 10 and 11, 2000.
Mayor Appezzato read the Proclamation and presented it to Steve
Cohen, AT &T, and Nancy Wonder, former Event Chair.
(00 -238) Frank Matarrese, Chair, Economic Development Commission,
gave a brief overview of the Economic Development Strategic Plan
and Downtown Visioning Processes.
(00 -239) Mayor Appezzato announced that he would be out of town
for the next five days and Vice Mayor Daysog would be acting Mayor.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Appezzato announced that the recommendation authorizing the
Mayor to send letters in support and opposition of various Bills
[paragraph no. 00 -241]; the recommendation authorizing the Mayor to
send a letter to AC Transit [paragraph no. 00 -2421; the
recommendation authorizing the Mayor to send a letter to the
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council Meeting
May, 16 2000 1
Association of Bay Area Governments [paragraph no. 00 -243]; and the
recommendation to allocate funds and award contract to Pacific
Transit Management Corporation [paragraph no. 00 -245] were removed
from the Consent Calender for discussion.
Councilmember Johnson moved approval of the remainder of the
Consent Calender.
Councilmember Kerr seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote -5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an
asterisk preceding the paragraph number.]
( *00 -240) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings
held on May 2, 2000. Approved.
(00 -241) Recommendation to authorize the Mayor to send letters in
opposition to Assembly Bill 83 (Cities: License Fees), Assembly
Bill 1784 (Internet Tax Moratorium), Assembly Bill 2188 (Sales and
Use Tax Exemptions: Internet Purchases), Senate Bill 1377 (Sales
and Use Tax Exemptions: Internet Purchases), and Assembly Joint
Resolution No. 41 (Electronic Commerce); and in support of Assembly
Bill 1806 (Freeze on Growth of Property Tax Shift), Assembly Bill
2412 (Sales and Use Taxes), and Senate Bill 1637 (Freeze on Growth
of Property Tax Shift).
Len Grzanka, Alameda, stated the City Council is urging the
legislature to tax the Internet; out of one side of its mouth,
Council encourages high -tech companies and wants said companies to
move to Alameda; however, out of the other side of its mouth,
Council is telling the Legislature to tax high -tech companies and
consumers who purchase items on the Internet; questioned whether
taxes promote high -tech and Internet commerce.
Richard Neveln, Alameda, stated taxing the internet seems similar
to the California's creation of the inventory tax; some money was
provided to the State and cities, however, many businesses were
driven to Nevada; that he opposes taxing the Internet; Internet
businesses should be encouraged to come to the City of Alameda and
State of California.
Vice Mayor Daysog stated the Internet is driving the global
economy; in the 1960's, the Defense Department and universities
used public funds to create the Internet; the businesses on
Internet should give back a little.
Councilmember Kerr stated the Internet sales tax does not tax
companies, it taxes consumers; cities are beginning to lose sales
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council Meeting
May, 16 2000 2
tax money; if more commerce occurs on the Internet without sales
tax, less money will come to the City; one Bill is the freeze on
the shift of property tax; most voters thought Proposition 13 was
to control property taxes growth and did not realize it transferred
control of property tax distribution to the State; as a result, the
City only retains 260 of the property tax collected; the League of
California Cities is trying to freeze the amount [of property tax]
the State receives; Alameda is losing $3 Million per year due to
the property tax shift.
Mayor Appezzato stated most Governors, counties and Mayors support
the issues under consideration; retail businesses probably support
[internet sales tax], because fairness is being sought; retail
businesses have to pay sales taxes; items purchased on the Internet
should pay the same sales tax as stores.
Councilmember Johnson moved approval of the staff recommendation.
Councilmember Kerr seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Johnson stated there are surpluses
at the federal- and State levels, however, the local level is
struggling to fund operations; cities need to preserve taxes; there
is a sense of unfair competition when people can purchase items
over the Internet without paying sales tax.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
(00 -242) Recommendation to authorize the Mayor to send a letter to
AC Transit in support of the Proposed Permanent Extension of Route
50 into Alameda Point.
Richard Neveln, Alameda, stated Alameda Point is developing;
extension of line 50 to Alameda Point is significant; Alameda will
benefit from bus extension.
In response to Councilmember Kerr's inquiry regarding directing a
bus route along Santa Clara Avenue, the Deputy Public Works
Director stated the final proposal has the bus route travel along
Lincoln and Pacific Avenues; the matter has been resolved.
Councilmember Johnson moved approval of the staff recommendation.
Councilmember DeWitt seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council Meeting
May, 16 2000 3
(00 -243) Recommendation to authorize the Mayor to send a letter in
support of the Association of Bay Area Governments' [ABAG's]
revision to the Regional Housing Needs Determination allocation
formula.
Richard Neveln, Alameda, stated working class housing is needed in
the City of Alameda; ABAG's recommendation should be followed.
Councilmember Kerr stated people of all incomes should not have to
commute to Alameda to work; the City should take responsibility for
all income levels.
Councilmember DeWitt stated the City is urging ABAG to develop an
accurate formula to provide a realistic assignment of housing to
each community.
Councilmember DeWitt moved approval of the staff recommendation.
Councilmember Kerr seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Mayor Appezzato stated the City is requesting
ABAG to treat Alameda fairly and take into account geographical
limitations, e.g. the City is an island, Naval Base closure,
population, and jobs created.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
( *00 -244) Recommendation to authorize amendment to Contract between
the California Department of Boating and Waterways and the City of
Alameda for purchase of one (1) Police Patrol Boat and Trailer.
Accepted.
(00 -245) Recommendation to allocate funds and award Contract in
the amount of $64,500 to Pacific Transit Management Corporation for
Development of a Long Range Transit Plan.
Richard Neveln, Alameda, stated hiring a consultant to support the
activities of the Public Transit Committee is important to
developing a Public Transit Element for the City's [General] Plan.
Vice Mayor Daysog inquired how the long range transit plan will
grow out of the Public Transit Committee.
The Deputy Public Works Director responded the Committee will
oversee the consultant's work scope; stated the steps are: 1)
gather data on existing system; 2) develop data on where the City
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council Meeting
May, 16 2000 4
sees itself in 15- to 20 years; and 3) evaluate the systems and
report back to the Committee with ideas for review, e.g. additional
services needed; there will be several workshops; the final product
will be included in the General Plan update.
Vice Mayor Daysog inquired what the highlights will be, to which
the Deputy Public Works Director responded there will be: 1) a
proposal for bus services in Alameda with key linkage to BART,
ferry services, and major intermodal transportation, e.g. AmTrack
Station, U.C. Berkeley; and 2) possibly an Electric vehicle
program.
Councilmember DeWitt stated the Public Transit Committee was
established in June 1999; the Committee's mission was to identify
and resolve transit issues and develop a long range transit plan;
there are serious challenges for the City, unless transit and
traffic are handled better; funds are being requested because the
Committee could not develop a plan and study is needed; problems in
transportation need to be addressed.
Councilmember Kerr stated Alameda is located in an urban area and
depends upon public transit; the City should capitalize on the
decent transit environment in the East Bay.
Councilmember Johnson stated the Public Transit Committee has made
progress; if the City is too quiet, it will be ignored.
Councilmember Johnson moved approval of the staff recommendation.
Councilmember DeWitt seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote -5.
( *00 -246) Recommendation to authorize the City Manager to award
Contract in the amount of $2,244,557 to Granite Construction
Company for the Main Street Improvements and Greenway Project, No.
P.W. 05- 98 -09. Accepted.
( *00 -247) Recommendation to authorize the City Manager to award
Contract in the amount of $185,900 to P & P Construction, Inc., for
the Fiscal Year 1999 -2000 Repair of Portland Cement Concrete
Sidewalk, Curb, Gutter and Driveway, No. P.W. 01- 00 -02. Accepted.
( *00 -248) Resolution No. 13210, "Authorizing Filing of Application
for the National Historic Preservation Fund Subgrant Program."
Adopted.
( *00 -249) Resolution No. 13211, "Delaying Congressional Action on
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council Meeting
May, 16 2000 5
Internet Tax Moratorium." Adopted.
( *00 -250) Resolution No. 13212, "Ordering the Vacation of a Portion
of Parcel G Easement and Acceptance of New Electrical Easements
within Parcel 2, Parcel Map No. 2542." Adopted.
( *00 -251) Resolution No. 13213, "Preliminarily Approving Annual
Report Declaring Intention to Order Levy and Collection of
Assessments and Providing for Notice of July 18, 2000 Hearing
Thereof - Island City Landscaping and Lighting District 84 -2."
Adopted.
( *00 -252) Resolution No. 13214, "Resolution of Intention to Levy an
Annual Assessment on the Alameda Business Improvement Area of the
City of Alameda for FY 2000 -01; to Modify the Benefit Areas; to
Decrease the Boundary; and to Set a Public Hearing for Each Action
for June 6, 2000." Adopted.
( *00 -253) Ratified bills in the amount of $ 1,890,096.80.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(00 -254) Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of the Planning
Board decision denying Major Design Review, DR -99 -109 for the
construction of a Wienerschnitzel fast food restaurant and a
secondary commercial building, Use Permit, UP- 99 -45, to allow a
drive - through window and outdoor dining, and Variance, V- 00 -04, to
permit one driveway to be 22 -feet wide where 20 -feet is the maximum
permitted driveway width. The site is located at 1700 Webster
Street, within the C -M, Commercial Manufacturing Zoning District.
Applicant /Appellant: John Ng for Bayview Investment Group, Inc.;
and
(00 -254A) Adoption of Resolution Denying the Appeal of John Ng for
Bayview Investment Group, Inc. and Upholding the Planning Board's
Denial of Major Design Review, DR -99 -109, for the Construction of a
Wienerschnitzel Restaurant and a Secondary Commercial Building,
Denying Use Permit, UP- 99 -45, for Unenclosed Dining and a Drive -
Through Window, and Denying Variance, V- 00 -04, to Permit One
Driveway in Excess of Twenty -Feet in Width, at 1700 Webster Street.
NOT ADOPTED.
(00 -254B) Resolution No. 13215, "Approving the Appeal of John Ng
for Bayview Investment Group, Inc., and Overturning the Planning
Board's: Denial of Major Design Review, DR -00 -109, for the
Construction of a Wienerschnitzel Restaurant and a Secondary
Commercial Building, Denial of Use Permit, 99 -45, for Unenclosed
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council Meeting
May, 16 2000 6
Dining and a Drive - Through Window, and Denial of Variance, to
Permit One Driveway in Excess of Twenty Feet in Width, at 1700
Webster Street." Adopted.
Mayor Appezzato opened the public portion of the Hearing.
Proponents (In favor of project):
Ernest Ramirez, Project Architect, Keystone Company;
Stephen Abrams, Traffic Engineer, Abrams Associates;
Angela Flindt, Alameda;
Matina Chiu, Alameda;
Elbin Chiu, Bayview Investment Group;
Tru Co Chung, Alameda;
Leslie Cass and Gail Howell, Double Rainbow;
Sis Larkin, Alameda;
John Chop, Alameda;
Chung Chan, Alameda;
Dennis Hui, Alameda;
Proponents (In favor of project):
Wendy Yang, Alameda;
Amy Chiu, Alameda;
Kimberley Wong, Alameda;
Albert Tsui, Alameda;
Alice Teo, Alameda;
Deborah Hui, Alameda;
Sam Chan, Alameda;
Sheila Atkins, Alameda;
Sam Koka, Alameda;
Carl Searway, Oakland;
Len Grzanka, Alameda;
Rena Rickles, Bayview Investment Group.
Opponents (Not in favor of project):
Michael Dugan, Elders Inn;
Jim Sweeney, Alameda;
Kent Rosenblum, West Alameda Business Association (WABA).
Following the Project Traffic Engineer's comments, Councilmember
DeWitt inquired whether the proposed gate above the drive - through
would effect drivers' sight.
Stephen Abrams, Project Traffic Engineer, responded in the
affirmative; stated the architect will have to slightly modify the
gate to ensure sufficient sight distance.
Mr. Ramirez, Project Architect, stated the gate will be placed at
the proper location based on the stopping point of the drive-
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council Meeting
May, 16 2000 7
through.
Vice Mayor Daysog inquired whether there was discussion on the
building's articulation, e.g. awnings, to which Mr. Ramirez
responded the design criteria provided by WABA were used to create
the street frontage; specific detail, such as awnings, could be
considered.
In response to Councilmember Kerr's inquiry whether the parking lot
would meet the requirement of one tree per four parking spaces, Mr.
Ramirez stated the Applicant will meet or exceed the requirements.
Following Rena Rickles' comments, Councilmember Johnson inquired
whether the project could go forward without the drive - through, to
which Ms. Rickles responded in the negative and stated it would not
succeed.
There being no further speakers, Mayor Appezzato closed the public
portion of the Hearing.
Councilmember DeWitt inquired why staff does not support the drive -
through.
The Development Review Manager responded staff's recommendation not
to support the drive - through was based upon General Plan policies
and WABA's visioning process; staff did not identify the project as
creating a significant traffic circulation problem; the circulation
issues regarding the drive - through were raised because cars would
exit across a sidewalk which should be pedestrian oriented.
Councilmember Kerr stated there have been changes in the project
over time; the patio will attract pedestrians; the plain facade
will allow flexibility in the future; the building could undergo a
change of use; the structure would be able to accommodate changes
on Webster Street and could end up retail; Double Rainbow is well
regarded; the immediate neighbors support the project.
Vice Mayor Daysog stated the Applicants have worked hard and have
successfully designed the building; surrounding uses will benefit;
the project should be encouraged; the flexible nature of the
project is important.
Councilmember Johnson stated the project will be an attractive
addition to Webster Street; WABA supports the project except for
the drive - through; the drive - through can easily be converted to a
non - drive - through facility; the project will bring people to
Webster Street.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council Meeting
May, 16 2000 8
Councilmember Johnson moved approval of the project.
Councilmember DeWitt stated the project is transitional; the drive -
through is as attractive as possible.
Councilmember DeWitt seconded the motion.
Under discussion, the Development Review Manager stated a
Resolution approving the project was provided to Council, however,
there are several conditions which need to be revised based on the
discussion tonight.
Mayor Appezzato stated there is a gas station 60 feet away from the
proposed project; the business will fold if Alamedans do not
support the project; entrepreneurs should not be turned down; that
he will support the motion and the second; requested the
Development Review Manager to clarify conditions.
The Development Review Manager stated the Resolution approves the
land use for a drive - through restaurant and a commercial building
on the corner; the Conditions [of the Resolution] should be amended
as follows: 1) page 6, Condition l.a should be modified to
reference the May 12, 2000 letter from the Applicant regarding the
type of sound device proposed to control the level of noise from
the speaker box at the drive - through; 2) page 7, Condition c.3, add
reference should be added to the minimum standard of one tree per
four [parking] spaces; and 3) page 7, Condition d, should be
revised to state: "the facade shall be minimized and /or adjusted;"
also, page 7, Condition 3, reads: "the hours of operation for all
uses on this site shall be limited to the hours from 7:00 a.m. to
10:00 p.m. seven days a week;" the applicant requested the drive -
through be opened until 1:00 a.m.; the matter should be clarified
with the Applicant.
Vice Mayor Daysog inquired about the addition of awnings.
The Development Review Manager stated page 7, Condition c, a
reference could be added about inclusion of awnings along the front
elevation.
Mayor Appezzato requested the Applicant to respond to modified
Conditions.
On behalf of the Applicant, Rena Rickles stated the Applicant
accepts the tree addition [page 7, Condition c.3] and facade change
[page 7, Condition c]; however, there is a problem, with the hour
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council Meeting
May, 16 2000 9
limitation [page 7, Condition 3]; people often go to have ice cream
after the theater or school performances which end at 10:00 p.m.;
the original hours requested could be subject to Council review in
six months, if there are problems.
Mayor Appezzato inquired what hours other drive - through restaurants
are open, to which Mr. Ng, the Applicant, responded Jack in the Box
is 24- hours; Burger King is open until 1:00 a.m.
Ms. Rickles stated there was a proposal to increase the building
size from 1199 to 1350 to allow the Double Rainbow to have a more
substantial presence and have a cafe; requested the size change be
included.
The Planning Director responded Condition l.b provides four
remedies for the proposed project not meeting parking requirements
[in order to accommodate larger building]: 1) reduction of building
size, 2) a Variance, 3) payment of in -lieu fees, or 4)
reconfiguration of parking.
Ms. Rickles stated the Applicant would opt for in -lieu fees;
inquired whether the matter could be resolved tonight.
The Planning Director responded the matter has not been noticed;
and requires a public hearing; stated the City has not received an
application for in -lieu fees.
Ms. Rickles requested page 8, Condition 6 [cooking exhaust order
reduction scrubber], should be changed to industrial, state- of -the-
art or only require approval from the County Health Department, not
the Planning Director.
Ms. Rickles inquired whether hours of operation could be determined
by Council tonight.
Councilmember Johnson stated that she does not have a problem with
revising the hours to match similar facilities on Webster Street;
that she would amend her motion; inquired whether the Applicant
would accept 1:00 a.m.
Ms. Rickles responded in the affirmative.
Mayor Appezzato inquired how many of the issues could be legally
resolved tonight, to which the City Attorney responded the issues
are limited by the Council's discretion and patience each item
could be reviewed with testimony from staff.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council Meeting
May, 16 2000 10
Councilmember Johnson stated that she would amend her motion to
include page 6, Condition l.a, referencing the letter from the
Applicant; inquired whether there was objection from the Applicant.
Ms. Rickles responded that the Applicants did not object.
Councilmember Johnson inquired whether there was objection to page
7, Item c.3, proposed amendment regarding trees, to which Ms.
Rickles responded in the negative.
Councilmember Johnson inquired whether the language on [page 7]
Condition 3.d "or adjusted" was acceptable.
Ms. Rickles responded there was no problem with said amendment.
In response to Councilmembers Johnson's inquiry regarding [desired]
hours of operation, Ms. Rickles stated 7:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m.
Mayor Appezzato inquired whether the Applicant wanted the odor
matter [Page 8, Condition 6] to be revised.
Ms. Rickles requested to strike the language: "the matter be
satisfactory to the Planning Director ", and only require
conformance with the County Health Department's requirements.
Mayor Appezzato inquired whether staff would approve said change.
The Planning Director responded the change would not necessarily
provide state -of- the -art [odor removal] with respect to scrubbing
odors from the fastfood restaurant exhaust; County Health
regulations provide a great deal of protection, but do not require
state -of- the -art for odor removal.
Ms. Rickles stated the Applicant will provide state -of- the -art,
however, the concern is that approval from the Planning Department
will take a long time.
The City Attorney clarified the state -of- the -art condition is
proposed [by staff].
Ms. Rickles stated the Applicant would accept the condition as is.
Ms. Rickles inquired whether the square footage could be resolved.
The Planning Director stated Ms. Rickles is requesting the building
size be addressed without addressing the deficiency in parking;
said deficiency requires one of four remedies outlined in the
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council Meeting
May, 16 2000 1 1
conditions of approval [condition l.b].
The City Attorney stated the Applicant is requesting approval of a
reduced number of [parking] spaces, less than required by the
[Alameda Municipal] Code, which creates a need for a remedy;
Council is approving two less parking spaces; the Applicant can
choose one of four remedies which do not require Council action.
Councilmember Johnson inquired whether the remedy of in -lieu fees
must return to the Planning Board, to which the Planning Director
responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember DeWitt inquired whether the Applicant would be
precluded from starting construction while addressing the in -lieu
fee matter.
The Planning Director stated the Applicant could proceed knowing
that the project is a certainty; building demolition and site
preparation could begin; it would not be prudent to start
construction or issue drawings because the smaller footprint would
have to be used until the matter is resolved.
Mr. Ramirez, Project Architect, stated that he thought in -lieu fees
could be paid without requiring Planning Board approval.
The City Attorney stated the Alameda Municipal Code requires that
the matter go through the Planning Board process.
Mr. Ramirez stated the Applicant would accept the options.
Mayor Appezzato inquired whether the motion and all amendments were
acceptable.
Councilmember DeWitt seconded the motion, including amendments.
Under discussion, Councilmember Kerr inquired whether the
amendments included the awnings, to which Councilmember Johnson
responded in the affirmative.
Vice Mayor Daysog inquired whether Planning staff would review the
awnings.
Councilmember Johnson stated she would amend her motion to include
awnings, subject to the approval of the Planning Director.
Councilmember DeWitt seconded the amended motion, which carried by
the following voice vote - 5.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council Meeting
May, 16 2000 12
Mayor Appezzato called a recess at 10:26 p.m. and reconvened the
Regular Council Meeting at 10:45 p.m.
(00 -255) Public Hearing to consider a proposed Rezoning of the
property at 43 County Road from R -1, One Family Residence District
to R -1 -PD, One Family, Planned Development Combining District.
Applicant: Mark Wommack for Alan Lau; and
(00 -255A) Introduction of Ordinance Reclassifying and Rezoning a
Certain Property within the City of Alameda from R -1 (One Family
Residence District) to R -1 -PD (One Family, Planned Development
Combining District) Located at 43 County Road. Introduced.
Mayor Appezzato opened the public portion of the Hearing.
Proponent:
Mark Wommack, Project Architect, Architectural Edge.
Opponent:
Dom Dicolen, Alameda.
There being no further speakers, Mayor Appezzato closed the public
portion of the Hearing.
Mayor Appezzato inquired whether Variances for parking were
required for the project, to which the Development Review Manager
responded each residence will have a two car garage and four
additional guest parking spaces will be provided.
In response to Vice Mayor Daysog's inquiry on how many rooms the
two -story dwelling units would contain, the Development Review
Manager stated each has four bedrooms.
Vice Mayor Daysog inquired whether the lots would be sold
separately, to which the Development Review Manager responded in
the affirmative.
Vice Mayor Daysog stated if an inclusionary ordinance were in place
for developments of five or more units, one of the units would be
required to be set aside as affordable; inquired whether setting
aside a unit was discussed [with developer].
The Planning Director responded the City has chosen to address
affordable housing issues by focusing on commercial development,
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council Meeting
May, 16 2000 13
which generates the jobs creating demand for housing; in the late
1980's the City adopted affordable housing responsibilities which
attach an inclusionary fee or housing fee to commercial
development; the City has not looked at placing an inclusionary or
affordable requirement on residential development.
Vice Mayor Daysog stated the idea is gaining momentum; the question
is whether the matter was explored with the property owner.
The Planning Director responded in the negative.
Councilmember Kerr stated Heritage Bay has a problem with residents
using guest parking spaces; the Bruzzone development has two car
garages with short driveways and narrow streets; people park in the
driveways hanging out into the sidewalk and street; with people
parking on the street and in the driveways hanging out into the
street, a fire truck could not get through, which is a safety
hazard; it is not unusual to expect more than two cars per family;
inquired whether there is room for an additional parking space.
The Development Review Manager stated a Condition imposed by the
Planning Board was that the home on lot 2 be relocated; there would
be space available to accommodate an extra parking space if Council
so desires.
Councilmember DeWitt stated the Planning Board reviewed the matter;
parking is a problem in most parts of the City; parking permits
might be a solution; property owners should address parking; that
he supports the Planning Board's recommendation.
Mayor Appezzato stated Homeowners Associations have recourse to
people abusing the Planned Development [parking].
Councilmember DeWitt moved approval of the staff recommendation.
Councilmember Johnson seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Johnson stated the lot sizes are
larger than most Planned Development lot sizes; many homes in
Alameda only have one off - street parking place.
Mayor Appezzato inquired whether the motion could be amended to add
encouraging the creation of an additional parking space, if
possible.
Councilmember DeWitt agreed to amend the motion; stated if there is
a method of providing more parking and the owner is willing to
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council Meeting
May, 16 2000 14
pursue the matter, it would be fine.
Vice Mayor Daysog stated literature on different affordable housing
programs in Alameda should be provided to the developer of the
site.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
(00 -256) Public Hearing to consider extension of an Interim
Urgency Ordinance: Ordinance No. 2831, "Extending a Moratorium on
Certain Permitted and Conditionally Permitted Uses in C -2 and C -M
Zoning Districts within the Park Street and Webster Street Business
Areas." Adopted.
Mayor Appezzato opened the public portion of the Hearing.
Opponents:
Todd Paradis, ARCO Products Company; and
Carl Searway, Oakland.
There being no further speakers, Mayor Appezzato closed the public
portion of the Hearing.
Councilmember Kerr moved adoption of the Interim Urgency Ordinance.
Councilmember DeWitt seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember DeWitt stated Mr. Searway indicated
that he was not noticed about the matter; this is the second time
the matter is before Council; requested staff to address matter.
The Planning Director stated the Ordinance is extension of a
moratorium; there was extensive notification provided when the
matter was previously before Council; extensive noticing was not
completed because when the Council considered the matter, it was
clear an extension would be considered within 45 days.
In response to Councilmember DeWitt's inquiry regarding the length
of the extension, the Planning Director stated the moratorium would
be extended to January 2001; new classifications within the C -2 and
C -M Zoning Districts should be presented to Council this fall.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
(00 -257) Transmittal of Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Priority
Determination Report dated April 24, 2000.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council Meeting
May, 16 2000 15
In response to Mayor Appezzato's inquiry whether CIPs would be
considered next month, the City Manager stated staff will present
CIPs at Budget Work Sessions.
Councilmember Kerr stated the Carnegie [building] CIP was funded in
1996, however, it was not looked at closely until recently;
emergency issues, e.g. health and safety, should be prioritized;
however, there should be a point system for age; most people
believe CIPs are first in, first out; when the matter returns to
Council, there should be a method to ensure projects do not fall
between the cracks due to continually being rated lower than other
projects; there should be a way to ensure all CIPs move along; said
matter should be discussed at the Budget Hearings.
Mayor Appezzato stated Councilmembers are the decision makers.
Councilmember Kerr stated Council makes funding decisions; even if
Council approves funding, projects might not be built for many
years, e.g. the Carnegie was funded in 1996 and was only recently
examined for feasibility and cost; other projects are moving
slowly; projects funded by previous Councils need to be kept
moving.
Councilmember Johnson stated the priority selection presented by
the Public Works Director is a good way to weigh CIPs, rather than
a random system; age could be a factor; however, items on the list
for a long time might not be a top priority.
Councilmember Kerr stated that she was addressing projects which
have been funded and need to be constructed; when the system
effectively overrides past Council's decisions, it overrides
Council's policies; the system should not prevent any project from
ever being completed.
The City Manager stated staff would review the matter during the
Budget Hearings; due to the lateness of the hour, tonight the
discussion is not particularly appropriate; that he had indicated
to Councilmember Kerr why the process has changed; the process
respects all the community's interests.
Councilmember DeWitt moved acceptance of the staff report and that
the matter be addressed at the Budget Work Sessions.
Councilmember Johnson seconded the motion which carried by the
following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, DeWitt, Johnson,
and Mayor Appezzato - 4. No: Councilmember Kerr - 1.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council Meeting
May, 16 2000 16
Councilmember Kerr stated that she was opposed because direction to
consider the age of a project should be provided to staff.
(00 -258) Written Communication from the Law Offices of Daniel F.
Reidy, on behalf of Harbor Bay and Covance Research Products, Inc.,
recommending an Alameda Municipal Code Amendment to allow Research
Laboratories to use pigs for research purposes.
Len Grzanka, Alameda, stated that he opposes animal cruelty,
however, the appropriate change to the Animal Control Ordinance, to
allow biotechnology to operate in Alameda, is in order; one of his
close friends will receive a heart valve from a pig; when he was on
the committee which revised the Animal Control Ordinance a few
years ago, he argued against the pig restrictions to allow people
to own potbellied Asian pigs; the Humane Society and Animal Control
fought him because it was difficult to get rid of a 300 pound pig
left at the shelter; if the Ordinance is revised for biotech
companies, individuals should also be permitted to own potbellied
pigs as pets; changing the law will show the biotech industry that
Alameda is a viable alternative to Emeryville; some biotech
companies in Alameda conduct test on live animals and might leave
if the Council tightens rules on Animal research; further stated
San Francisco and Contra Costa's Codes have better barking
ordinances; currently, anyone can file a barking dog complaint as a
way to harass a neighbor; San Francisco and Contra Costa require
two unrelated persons living in different households within 300
feet of the barking dog's house to request a citation; submitted a
copy of San Francisco's law.
Bill Garvine, Alameda Power & Telecom (AP &T), stated AP &T has been
working to rebuild revenue since Base closure and works with the
City's Economic Development Division to pursue economic development
activities which will generate significant replacement load growth;
Harbor Bay Business Park would generate the most significant amount
of load growth and telecommunications revenue in the shortest
amount of time; therefore, AP &T supports development projects at
Harbor Bay Business Park; further stated that on a personal note,
he injured his left eye and through a remarkable procedure, learned
at a facility similar to Covance, his vision was completely
restored.
Dr. Penelope Collins, Covance Research Products, stated Covance
Research Products has a state of the art research facility which
will support the advancement of minimally invasive approaches to
treatment of disease using leading technologies and comparative
medicine and will employ approximately 75 people; Covance is
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council Meeting
May, 16 2000 17
certified by all regulatory agencies in the bio- medical field and
complies with all rules and regulations regarding humane care and
use of animals in research; amendment of Section 7 -1 of the Animal
Control Ordinance is requested to allow for removal of the limit of
the number of swine; a positive decision will allow the project to
move forward.
Councilmember Kerr inquired whether Covance experiments on dogs and
cats, to which Dr. Collins responded in the affirmative.
Paula McCloskey, Chamber of Commerce, stated the Chamber of
Commerce supports amendment to the Ordinance.
Dion Griffin, Member, Harbor Bay Architectural Review Committee,
stated the design plans for the Covance facility conform to design
guidelines for Harbor Bay.
Dan Reidy, Attorney representing Covance Research Products and
Harbor Bay Business Park, stated the Ordinance was aimed to cut
down agricultural uses near homes, not limit research; an exception
should be added to the [Municipal] Code to keep from ruling out
scientific experiments; if the Code amendment is not made, Covance
cannot be located in Alameda.
Vice Mayor Daysog moved acceptance of Mr. Reidy's recommendation
that the Municipal Code be amended to allow use of pigs for
research.
Councilmember Johnson seconded the motion, which carried by the
following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, DeWitt, Johnson,
and Mayor Appezzato - 4. No: Councilmember Kerr - 1.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON- AGENDA
None.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(00 -259) Mayor Appezzato stated that he has been in discussions
with Jim Franz of the Alameda Point Collaborative; Mr. Franz
indicates that in a year, there may be sufficient space to house
the Multi - Cultural Center; the [rent] cost could be less, which
will allow the Multi - Cultural Center to have funds for programs;
requested staff explore the opportunity.
The City Manager responded that he has requested the Community
Development Manager and Alameda Point Business and Special Projects
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council Meeting
May, 16 2000 18
Manager to explore the possibility [of Multi - Cultural Center
relocation].
(00 -260) Councilmember Johnson stated removal of the parking
meters by the Washington Park tennis courts should be reviewed;
inquired why there are meters; stated parking is not allowed on
Westline Drive and is a problem for the neighborhood.
The City Manager stated a follow -up report would be provided.
(00 -261) Councilmember Kerr stated staff has completed the design
for the Westline Drive walkway along upper and lower Washington
Park; the intersection at 8th and Central Avenue has blocked
pedestrian access; there is not a prohibition or an accident
history at said intersection; staff should review changing the
intersection to a more direct pedestrian, button - controlled
intersection because once the walkway is in, pedestrian activity
will increase.
(00 -262) Councilmember Kerr stated that she worked at a Bike -to-
Work Day energizer station; a biker /bus advocate and she discussed
that AC Transit bus stops are not painted red; the matter was
discussed at the Police Academy Forum and possibly by the Public
Transit Committee; the biker /bus advocate could try to organize a
committee to paint the curbs; inquired whether red paint could be
supplied if the City had free labor.
The City Manager stated the City purchases 50- gallon barrels of
paint; paint could be supplied.
(00 -263) Councilmember Kerr inquired the status of the stop sign
at Central Avenue and Willow Street; stated stop signs were
approved by the Transportation Advisory Committee; residents would
like the signs to be installed.
(00 -264) Councilmember Kerr requested the Fire Department to
review the Bruzzone Project; stated at times, a fire truck would
not be able get through due to the way people park.
(00 -265) Vice Mayor Daysog stated the Planning Director indicated
the affordable housing fee on commercial developments has not been
adjusted for inflation since it was first instituted; requested a
report on what the adjusted- for - inflation figure would be,
including general inflation and real estate inflation, and
comparison of the adjusted -rate figure versus the figure on the
books.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council Meeting
May, 16 2000 19
The City Manager stated the comprehensive fee schedule is reviewed
annually.
(00 -266) Councilmember DeWitt stated the shopping center located
near the Fruitvale Bridge is practically empty; inquired whether
information is available to the public regarding the area.
The City Manager stated the matter is scheduled to be discussed in
a Closed Session on June 6 or June 20, 2000.
ADJOURNMENT
(00 -267) There being no further business, Mayor Appezzato
adjourned the Regular Meeting at 11:47 p.m. in honor of Ed
Trevethan, former Golf Commissioner.
Respectfully submitted,
Diane B. Felsch, CMC
City Clerk
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council Meeting
May, 16 2000 2 0
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council Meeting
May, 16 2000 2 1