Loading...
2005-06-21 Regular CC MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- -JUNE 21, 2005- -7:30 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the regular meeting at 8:05 p.m. Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent: None. AGENDA CHANGES None. PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS (05 -298) Proclamation recognizing Alameda Reads 20th Anniversary of formal literacy service to adults. Mayor Johnson read the proclamation and presented it to Jordona Elderts, Alameda Adult Literacy Program Director. Ms. Elderts thanked the Council for the proclamation. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] ( *05 -299) Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting held on June 1, 2005; and Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on June 7, 2005. Approved. ( *05 -300) Ratified bills in the amount of 2,944,635.27. ( *05 -301) Recommendation to award Contract for Legal Advertising for Fiscal Year 2005 -06. Accepted. ( *05 -302) Recommendation to amend the Construction Contract with Golden Bay Construction Inc. for the Webster Renaissance Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 1 June 21, 2005 Project, No. P.W. 07 -02 -07 in the amount of $50,000 using Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds for the purchase and installation of bus shelters. Accepted. ( *05 -303) Resolution No. 13854, "Recommending the Inclusion of Projects in the Alameda Countywide Bicycle Plan." Adopted. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (05 -304) Resolution No. 13855, "Appointing Peter W. Holmes as a Member of the Public Utilities Board." Adopted. (05 -304A) Resolution No. 13856, "Appointing John R. McCahan as a Member of the Public Utilities Board." Adopted. Councilmember Daysog moved adoption of the resolutions. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. The City Clerk administered the oath and presented certificates of appointment to the Public Utilities Board members. (05 -305) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code to Change the Name of the Public Art Advisory Committee to Public Art Commission, Transfer Reporting from Recreation and Park Commission to City Council, and Transfer Staffing from the Recreation and Park Department to the Planning and Building Department by Amending Subsections 30 -65.3 (Contribution Requirements), 30 -65.4 (Public Art), 30 -65.5 (Alameda Public Art Fund), 30 -65.7 (Public Art Advisory Committee), 30 -65.8 (Application and Approval Procedures for Placing Public Art on Private Property) 30 -65.10 (Guidelines for Approval), and 30 -65.11 (Appeal to the City Council) of Section 30 -65 (Public Art in New Commercial, Industrial, Residential and Municipal Construction). Introduced. Richard Neveln, Alameda, stated that changing the name of the Public Art Advisory Committee to the Public Art Commission would involve increased responsibility; suggested that the duties be reviewed. Vice Mayor Gilmore moved introduction of the ordinance. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 June 21, 2005 unanimous voice vote - 5. (05 -306) Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of the Historical Advisory Board's approval of a Landscaping Plan for planting two Coast Live Oak trees on the vacant property at 301 Spruce Street. The submittal of a Landscaping Plan, as part of new development proposals, was required by the Historical Advisory Board as a condition for the removal of one Coast Live Oak tree in 2001. The site is located at 301 Spruce Street within the R -4 Neighborhood Residential Zoning District. Applicant: Bill Wong for Hai Ky Lam. Appellant: Patrick Lynch and Jeanne Nader; and (05 -306A) Resolution No. Advisory Board's Approval Coast Live Oak Trees on Street." Adopted. 13857, "Upholding of a Landscaping Plan the Vacant Property the Historical for Planting Two at 301 Spruce Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the Hearing. Proponent (In Favor of Appeal): Patrick Lynch, Appellant. Opponents (Opposed to Appeal) : Joanne Lam, Applicant; Ivan Chiu, Bill Wong Engineering & Design; Christopher Bowen, Project Arborist. There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public portion of the Hearing. Councilmember Matarrese inquired what percentage of the composite sample came from the piles of fill versus the areas under the drip line of the tree, to which Mr. Bowen responded about half of the soil was from the piles. Councilmember Daysog noted that the Appellant stated that the laboratory scientist was not accredited; inquired to what extent the matter would be an issue. Mr. Bowen stated that the laboratory would supply the Title 22 limits which include heavy metals; the laboratory is reputable and is recommended in the arborist field. Councilmember Daysog inquired how to address the concern that the laboratory is not accredited to perform Title 22 soil testing. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 June 21, 2005 The Acting Planning Director stated that he had no knowledge of the issue; the Planning and Building Department was asked to test the soil to see if the soil was safe for the trees. Mayor Johnson inquired whether Title 22 related to safety for trees. Mr. Bowen responded that he was advised that Title 22 addressed toxicity of materials in the soil; he was asked to find out if the trees would be harmed by anything in the soil; the soil from the fill was tested as well as the soil around the trees. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether soil would be removed from the site during construction, to which the Acting Planning Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the pile of dumped soil would be removed, to which the Acting Planning Director responded that most of the pile would be redistributed, if not removed from the site. Councilmember deHaan stated that the soil should be analyzed for the health of the trees and to see if there was dumping of hazardous soil; there is a concern with mixing the soil. The Planner III stated that Title 22 specifically addresses environmental hazards and hazardous waste materials for the general environment. Councilmember Matarrese stated that a licensed arborist is looking at the health and protection of the trees; the Historic Advisory Board has a solution to mitigate the removal of trees; a composite soil sample has been collected that is appropriate for the future health of the trees; the laboratory's certification to determine whether the soil dumped was toxic is questionable; the owner should be responsible for taking the soil away if the levels exceed the same standards that are applied at Alameda Point for building residential units. Vice Mayor Gilmore noted that the Planner III stated that Title 22 covers hazardous waste in situations beyond agriculture; the report states that the mineral content of the soil does not exceed Title 22 limits. Councilmember Matarrese stated there is a question about whether Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 4 June 21, 2005 the correct method was used. Mayor Johnson stated the project could move forward with a condition of staff confirmation. Councilmember deHaan stated it is important to ensure that the dumped soil is analyzed and moved to the proper location and that the project should continue. Councilmember Daysog provided a brief background on the history of the trees at the site. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution with conditions to require appropriate analysis of the soil deposited to ensure it meets residential safety, to require the owner to remove the soil if levels exceed levels necessary for residential use, and that staff oversee the project. Councilmember deHaan requested an Off Agenda report on the matter. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (05 -307) Public Hearing to consider adoption of Resolution No. 13858, "Approving Engineer's Report, Confirming Diagram and Assessment and Ordering Levy of Assessments, Island City Landscaping and Lighting District 84 -2." Adopted. Councilmember Daysog moved adoption of the resolution. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (05 -308) Public Hearing to consider adoption of Resolution No. 13859, "Approving Engineer's Report, Confirming Diagram and Assessment and Ordering Levy of Assessments, Maintenance Assessment District 01 -01 (Marina Cove)." Adopted. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (05 -309) Public Hearing to consider adoption of Resolution No. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 5 June 21, 2005 13860, "Authorizing Collection of Delinquent Integrated Waste Management Accounts by Means of the Property Tax Bills." Adopted. Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the Hearing. Opponents: Nancy Schlegel, Alameda; Leo Beaulieu, Alameda; Pamela Jones, Alameda. There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public portion of the Hearing. Following Nancy Schlegel's comments, Mayor Johnson suggested that Ms. Schlegel discuss her garbage problem with the Acting City Manager. Councilmember deHaan stated that he was concerned that Ms. Schlegel's garbage problem had been on going for two years. Councilmember Matarrese stated that space allotted for recycling bins is the Home Owner Association's responsibility; the City can address the lack of response and communication between the contractor and the City. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether Ms. Schlegel received any notification. Ms. Schlegel responded that she has returned unopened statements and left messages but has not been called back. The Public Works Director stated notification is via the bill; a late notice is sent 45 days after a bill has not been paid; there have been eight notifications over two years based upon information provided by Alameda County Industries (ACI). Following speaker Leo Beaulieu, the Public Works Director stated the integrated waste management rate pays for all services; residents can use one or all of the services; there are no longer exemptions for green waste; the contract with ACI allows for vacation exemptions; it is necessary to call ahead of time to stop and start service. Mayor Johnson suggested that Mr. Beaulieu discuss the matter with the Public Works Director. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 6 June 21, 2005 The Public Works Director stated that the Council could make a motion to adopt the resolution and give staff two weeks to resolve the issues; if the issues are not resolved, a lien would be placed on the properties. The Acting City Manager requested that the two written communications presented to Council tonight be included with the speakers' requests for staff review. Councilmember deHaan stated better communication regarding the new contract requirements is needed; inquired whether collection through property taxes has been done before. The Public Works Director responded that collection of payment through property taxes has not been done in the seven years he has been with the City. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether it is the City's responsibility to determine how outstanding bills are resolved. The Public Works Director responded in the affirmative; stated that delinquent accounts would be included in the next rate review in a year and a half; any garbage fees that are not collected is passed on to the rate payers; rates would be increased because the City is required to compensate ACI for the service. Mayor Johnson stated that the problem is that everyone who pays their bill subsidizes those who do not. The Public Works Director stated that 23 residents [on the list included in the staff report] have paid. The Acting City Manager suggested that the Council adopt the Resolution with direction for staff to resolve issues of concern raised by residents tonight and provide a status on said claims within two weeks. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution, including the Acting City Manager's suggestion [to direct staff to resolve issues of concern and provide a status on said claims within two weeks]. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council % June 21, 2005 Under discussion, Councilmember deHaan stated that individuals appeared tonight or e- mailed the Council to contest their bill; inquired whether the Council would allow individuals who have not responded to contest their bills. The Acting City Manager responded that everyone had the right to either provide something in writing or come to the Hearing to respond; stated that he does not see any way for other individuals to be accommodated now. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (05 -310) Recommendation to authorize the Acting City Manager to execute extension of the Harbor Bay Maritime Ferry Operating Agreements for Alameda Harbor Bay Ferry Service (AHBFS) and adopt associated budget. The Acting City Manager stated that the Agreement is an extension of an existing Agreement with Harbor Bay Maritime (HBM) to operate the AHBFS between Bay Farm Island and San Francisco; the Agreement is complicated because a good deal of the funding comes through Regional Measure 1 Funds, which are administered by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) ; HBM must achieve 40% revenue through fare box collections in order to receive the funding through the City; the fare box collection has dropped in the past few years; collection was 230 last year, 31% the year before, and 32% the preceding year; MTC has notified the City that funding will no longer continue if the 40% revenue through fare box is not achieved; MTC has allowed the City an additional year; stated that the ferry was down for four months last year and the cost of fuel has practically doubled during the last two years. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether on board labor costs was a concern. The Acting City Manager stated that the City is not a party to negotiations between the Operator and the Union; the Union contacted the City regarding concern with a reduction in the work shift from eight hours to seven hours; eight -hour work shifts will be maintained per negotiations. The Ferry Services Manager stated that HBM and the Union have reached a contract agreement for the next year beginning July 1. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 8 June 21, 2005 Mayor Johnson inquired where the fuel was bought, to which the Ferry Services Manager responded that the fuel for the Alameda /Oakland Ferry is purchased through Blue and Gold Fleet, bought in bulk volume, and stored at Pier 39; AHBFS has a contract with a fuel provider and is fueled at Pier 48. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the fuel rates were comparable, to which the Ferry Services Manager responded there is a difference between 18 and 20 cents per gallon. Mayor Johnson inquired whether HBM could fuel at Pier 39, to which the Ferry Services Manager responded that there have been discussions with Blue and Gold Fleet regarding fueling at Pier 39; insurance requirements make the possibility difficult and costs would offset any benefit; there have been discussions with the WTA regarding bulk purchases. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether gas could be purchased ahead of time and locked in at lower prices, to which the Ferry Services Manager responded that HBM does not purchase ahead of time but that Blue and Gold Fleet does. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether purchasing gas ahead of time would be a possibility for HBM, to which the Ferry Services Manager responded there is a question of fuel storage capability; relocating to Alameda Point is being reviewed. Michael Torrey, Alameda, encouraged the Council to accept the staff recommendation. Scott Hennigh, Alameda, urged acceptance of the staff recommendation; stated eliminating the 7:30 p.m. run is short sighted and will decrease ridership; suggested capital reserve funds be used to cover the cost of the 7:30 p.m. run and that the Council consider a temporary reallocation of the Measure B Funds toward advertising costs. Mayor Johnson inquired whether there was any way to avoid eliminating the 7:30 p.m. run. The Acting City Manager responded there would be approximately 11 to 15 riders lost with the elimination of the 7:30 p.m. run; increased ridership through marketing efforts should result in breaking even; reducing what is set aside for capital reserves Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 9 June 21, 2005 is short sighted; reserves are needed for potential boat repair or replacement; stated that Measure B funds have been allocated appropriately according to ridership; MTC and WTA have been advised that the City will review the matter carefully for the next three months. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether there is a possibility of keeping the 7:30 p.m. run for a set period of time after the advertising to determine the effect on ridership. The Acting City Manger responded doing so would be expensive; adding expenses makes it more difficult to meet the 40% fare box ratio. Councilmember Daysog stated that more information is needed on the advertising strategy to properly evaluate the different scenarios. Councilmember Matarrese stated that he is concerned with cutting the 7:30 p.m. run; riders are lost and not recovered when services are down. Mayor Johnson inquired when the advertising would start, to which the Acting City Manager responded that some direct mail advertising has already started. The Ferry Services Manager stated a survey was conducted in May inquiring whether commute patterns would remain the same if a 50 cent each way fare increase was implemented and the 7:30 p.m. run was eliminated; 22 -23o riders indicated there would be a significant reduction in ferry usage; 50 to 60 riders per day would be needed to make up the loss in a worst case scenario; the survey indicates that the market potential exists in the primary market, which is the Harbor Bay and the Fernside Districts; tests on the secondary market, covering San Leandro and Oakland, are being conducted. The Acting City Manager stated retaining the 7:30 p.m. run is important; a three month trial would show whether increased ridership would make up for the $2,500 loss per month. Lorre Zuppan stated that she has not done an analysis of the 7:30 p.m. run; tracking the success of prior campaigns is difficult; if ridership is not increased, keeping the 7:30 p.m. run presents a risk. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 10 June 21, 2005 Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether having the 7:30 p.m. run would be better for marketing. Ms. Zuppan responded that added features attract users. Councilmember Matarrese stated that time is needed to allow the marketing to work and be assessed. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated there would be more people on the 7:30 p.m. run now if the run was a desired feature; missing the target would require putting in a lot of money or not meeting the 40% fare box requirement and losing the entire ferry operation. Councilmember Daysog inquired what the break even number of riders would be for the 7:30 p.m. run, to which Ms. Zuppan responded 22 riders. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Executive Director of the WTA had any thoughts on the matter. Steve Castleburry, WTA Chief Executive Officer, stated there is uncertainty in marketing; information obtained in surveys is highly unreliable. Mayor Johnson inquired whether there is any information on the impacts of cuts elsewhere. Mr. Castleburry responded that the City of Larkspur did not lose as many riders as anticipated; stated ferry ridership is up compared to other services. The Acting City Manager stated that part of the increased ferry ridership is because the economy is starting to get a little better; having the trial period in the summer might not be good because people are on vacation. Mayor Johnson inquired about lost ridership last summer. The Acting City Manager stated that last summer would not be a good comparison because the ferry was down for four months. The Public Works Director corrected the break even number of riders for the 7:30 p.m. run to 36. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 1 1 June 21, 2005 Councilmember deHaan stated taking one trip out per day is a major change. Steve Brimhall, President HBM, stated the capital reserve funds do not apply against the fare box; HBM is not in a funding position. The Ferry Services Manager stated that the City has an obligation to maintain ferryboats or pay back the grants used to acquire the boats. The Public Works Director suggested the recommendation might be to accept the three -month trial subject to MTC's approval and reaching an agreement with HBM. Mayor Johnson suggested conveying to MTC that the City does not want to lose more riders by cutting service and wants to do everything possible to maintain the level of service and increase the number of riders above the current level. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether there is any indication that the June fare box recovery is trending upwards, to which the Public Works Direction responded that he did not know. Councilmember Daysog inquired how eliminating the 7:30 p.m. run would impact ratios, to which the Acting City Manager responded by 1%. Councilmember Matarrese stated that he is in favor of presenting the proposal to MTC; eliminated services are never recovered. Councilmember Daysog concurred with Councilmember Matarrese. Councilmember Matarrese stated a month- and- a -half trial period would be fine if a three -month trial period were too long. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation with the exception of eliminating the 7:30 p.m. run contingent upon MTC allowing the City to preserve the 7:30 p.m. run for an approximate three -month trial period and agreement with HBM. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 June 21, 2005 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON- AGENDA (05 -311) The following speakers spoke in favor of the theatre /parking structure project: Pauline Kelley, Alameda, Debbie George, Alameda, Michael Britt, Alameda Eyes Optometry; Catherine Brewer, Alameda; Melody Marr, executive Director, Chamber of Commerce; Lorre Zuppan, Alameda; Kathy Leong, President, Chamber of Commerce; Mel Waldorf, Alameda; Robb Ratto, Park Street Business Association (PSBR) (submitted handout) ; Frank George, Alameda; Lars Hanson, PSBR; Kate Pryor, Alameda. The following speakers expressed concern with the theatre /parking structure project: Bill Woodle, Alameda; Jon Spangler, Alameda; Richland Tester, Alameda; Morgan, Alameda (submitted handout); Kevin Frederick, Alameda; Deborah Overfield, Alameda; Valerie Ruma, Alameda; Ani Dimusheva, Alameda; Steph Wades, Alameda. Following Jon Spangler's comments, Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the theatre would cost $25 million. The Acting City Manager responded that the parking structure and the theatre cost is $25 million. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the theatre cost was $9 million. The Development Services Manager responded that the historic theatre project cost is $9.6 million; $10.5 million is for the 352 space parking structure; the multi screen cinema is a combination of private and public dollars; $5.3 million has been raised privately by the developer; there is a contribution of $2.8 million in loans; the vertical features will be put into the new theatre for an additional $760,000; the total project cost is about $28 million with the developer's contribution. Councilmember Daysog requested an project costs. Councilmember deHaan stated an ec market study was performed in operations of movie theatres have prudent to review an updated market Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 13 June 21, 2005 Off Agenda Report specifying onomic feasibility study and 1997; inquired whether the changed; stated it would be study. Mayor Johnson noted the matter was not on the agenda and Council could not discuss the matter and could only ask questions. Following Kate Pryor's comments, Councilmember Matarrese requested a catalog on the website indicating where reports can be found regarding the theatre and parking structure; stated that the Planning Board has deferred the design review for both the parking structure and theatre. (05 -312) Will Richards, Alameda, stated that Alameda growth is inevitable; redevelopment projects should be reviewed on own merits. (05 -313) Michael John Torrey, Alameda, stated that June 25 through June 26 is the annual Amateur Radio Field Day. (05 -314) Richard Neveln, Alameda, stated there has been no planning for temporary bus stops during the Park Street and Webster Street construction. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (05 -315) Discussion of the proposed baseball stadium along Alameda and Oakland's shared estuary. Councilmember Daysog requested staff birddog the proposed baseball stadium; stated the matter could be bad or good; noted there is a shared interest in the estuary and the City of Alameda should be part of the planning. (05 -316) Consideration of Mayor's nominations for appointment to the Historical Advisory Board, Housing and Building Code Hearing and Appeals Board, Housing Commission, Library Board, Planning Board, and Social Service Human Relations Board. Mayor Johnson nominated Randal S. Miller for reappointment to the Historical Advisory Board; Edward Dependbrock for reappointment to the Housing and Building Code Hearing and Appeals Board [remaining appointment continued]; Nancy W. Gormley and Garnetta S. King for reappointment to the Housing Commission; Ruth K. Belikove and Alan D. Mitchell for reappointment to the Library Board; Rebecca L. Kohlstrand Parsons and Margaret McNamara for reappointment to the Planning Board; Stewart Chen, Karen Hollinger Jackson, and Cynthia Wasko Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 14 June 21, 2005 for reappointment to the Social Service Human Relations Board. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the regular meeting at 10:45 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The Agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 15 June 21, 2005