1998-11-10 Special CC MinutesMINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY- -NOVEMBER 10, 1998- -6:30 P.M.
Mayor Appezzato convened the Special Meeting at 6:50 p.m.
Roll Call - Present:
Absent:
Councilmembers Daysog, DeWitt, Kerr,
Lucas and Mayor Appezzato - 5.
None.
The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:
(98-582) Public Employee Performance Evaluations; Titles: City
Manager, City Attorney and City Clerk.
(98-583) Conference with Labor Negotiator; Agency Negotiator:
Human Resources Director and Austris Rungis; Employee
Organizations: Alameda Police Officers Association -
APOA, International Association of Firefighters, Local
#689 - IAFF, United Public Employees Association #790
(Police Technicians) - SEIU, and Alameda Police Managers
Association - APMA.
Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened
and the Mayor announced that regarding Conference with Labor
Negotiator, Council gave instructions to the City's negotiator.
[Regarding Public Employee Performance Evaluations, no action was
taken.]
Adjournment
There being no further business, Mayor Appezzato adjourned the
Special Meeting at 7:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Di. e B. elsch, CMC
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Special Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 10, 1998
MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY- -NOVEMBER 10, 1998- -7:30 P.M.
Mayor Appezzato convened the Adjourned Regular Meeting at 7:45 p.m.
Councilmember Daysog led the Pledge of Allegiance. Pastor Samuel
Butler, Love Fellowship Church, gave the Invocation.
ROLL CALL - Present:
Absent:
Councilmembers Daysog, DeWitt, Kerr,
Lucas and Mayor Appezzato - 5.
None.
AGENDA CHANGES
None.
PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
(98-584) Mayor Appezzato announced that Veterans Day would be
celebrated on Wednesday, November 11th, at 11:00 a.m. in Veterans
Park; invited all those with the opportunity to attend.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember Daysog moved adoption of the Consent Calendar.
Vice Mayor 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.]
(*98-585) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings
held on October 20, 1998. Approved.
(*98-586) Recommendation to accept Quarterly Investment Report for
period ending September 30, 1998. Accepted.
(*98-587) Recommendation to accept Quarterly Financial Report for
period ending September 30, 1998. Accepted.
(*98-588) Recommendation to award Contract in the amount of
$939,857 to Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc., for
Main Street Pump Station Improvements, No. P.W. 06-98-16.
Accepted.
(*98-589) Recommendation to accept work of Steiny Electric for Park
Street Signal Coordination, Phase 2, No. P.W. 05-97-11. Accepted.
(*98-590) Recommendation to authorize execution of Memorandum of
Adjourned Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 10, 1998
Understanding with the Alameda Unified School District and Alameda
County Supervisor Wilma Chan regarding funding and staff support
for the Alameda Collaborative for Children, Youth and Families.
Accepted.
(*98-591) Resolution No. 13057, "Authorizing Destruction of Certain
City of Alameda Community Development Department Obsolete Records."
Adopted.
(*98-592) Ordinance Granting Consent for a Proposed Merger of AT&T
Corporation and Tele-communications, Inc., Parent of the Cable
Television Franchise Holder, United Cable Television of Alameda.
Introduced.
(*98-593) Ratified bills in the amount of $1,921,715.17.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(98-594) Public Hearing to consider a Negative Declaration (IS-97-
04), a Rezoning (R-97-06) from R-4 (Neighborhood Residential) to R-
5-PD (General Residential with a Planned Development Combining
Zoning District) on 1.2 acres at 1500 to 1518 Broadway Avenue and
2607 to 2615 Santa Clara Avenue, and from R-4 to R-4-PD (General
Residential with a Planned Development Combining Zoning District)
on 0.5 acre (approximately 25,000 square feet) at 2617 and 2619
Santa Clara Avenue, 2606 and 2610 St. Margaret Court and 2618 to
2622 Janis Circle, and a Development Agreement (DA-97-02) to retain
the uses and standards of the R-5/P-D zone for 25 years. The
Development Agreement pertains to the entire site being rezoned.
Applicant: Edward and Madlyn Murphy;
(98-594A) Resolution No. 13058, "Adopting Negative Declaration (IS-
97-04) and Finding of No Significant Impact for a Proposed Rezoning
of 1.2 Acres at the Northeast Corner of Broadway Avenue and Santa
Clara Avenue from R-4 (Neighborhood Residential) to R-5/P-D
(General Residential/Planned Development Combining Zoning District)
and Rezoning of an Additional Adjacent 0.5 Acres from R-4
(Neighborhood Residential) to R-4/P-D (Neighborhood
Residential/Planned Development Combining Zoning District) and a
Development Agreement (DA-97-02) to Retain the Uses and Standards
of R-5/P-D Zone for 25 Years." Adopted;
(98-594B) Ordinance Reclassifying and Rezoning 1500, 1506, 1514,
1516 and 1518 Broadway Avenue, and 2607, 2609, 2611, 2613 and 2615
Santa Clara Avenue from R-4 (Neighborhood Residential Zoning) to R-
5-PD (General Residential with a PD Planned Development Combining
Zoning District) and Reclassifying and Rezoning 2617 and 2619 Santa
Clara Avenue, 2618-2622 Janis Circle, and 2606 and 2610 St.
Margaret Court from R-4 (Neighborhood Residential) to R-4-PD
(Neighborhood Residential/Planned Development Combining Zoning
District). Introduced; and
Adjourned Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 10, 1998
(98-594C) Ordinance Adopting a Development Agreement between Edward
and Madlyn Murphy and the City of Alameda, DA-97-02, for 1.2 Acres
at the Northeast Corner of Broadway Avenue and Santa Clara Avenue
to Retain the Uses and Standards of the R-5/P-D Zone for 25 Years.
The Development Agreement Pertains to the Entire Site being
Rezoned. Introduced.
Mayor Appezzato opened the public portion of the Hearing.
Opponents
Michael Callan, Alameda; and
Cindy Marsh, Alameda.
There being no further speakers, Mayor Appezzato closed the public
portion of the Hearing.
Councilmember Lucas moved approval of the staff recommendations
[adoption of Resolution and introduction of two Ordinances].
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Mayor Appezzato stated the City has been in
intense discussion with the Murphys regarding this property for a
long time; that he would support the motion.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following
voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, DeWitt, Lucas and Mayor
Appezzato - 4. Noes: Councilmember Kerr - 1.
(98-595) Public Hearing to consider a Mitigated Negative
Declaration (IS-98-7) and Finding of No Significant Environmental
Impact and amendments to the Zoning Ordinance (ZTA-98-3) to
establish regulations and standards for establishing and operating
work/live studios as a commercial/industrial use in specified
manufacturing and industrial districts. The business owner would
be allowed to live in the work/live studio as an accessory use to
a business. Proposed regulations would require the majority of the
space to be reserved and regularly used for work activity. The
amendments propose to allow work/live studios in existing buildings
in the C-M (Commercial-Manufacturing), M-1 (Intermediate
Industrial), and M-2 (General Industrial) Districts that have been
converted to work/live studios. Applicant: City of Alameda; and
(98-595A) Resolution No. 13059, "Adopting a Negative Declaration
for Zoning Text Amendment, ZA-98-3, which Amends Alameda Municipal
Code to Adopt Regulations and Standards for Establishing and
Operating Work/Live Studios as a Commercial Use." Adopted; and
(98-595B) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal
Adjourned Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 10, 1998
Code by Amending Section 30-2 (Definitions), Subsection 30-4.10 (C-
M, Commercial Manufacturing District), Subsection 30-4.11 (M-1,
Intermediate Industrial Manufacturing District), Subsection 30-4.12
(M-2, General Industrial Manufacturing District), Subsection 30-7.6
(Schedule of Required Minimum Off-Street Parking Space), and by
Adding Section 30.15 (Work/Live Studios) of Chapter XXX
(Development Regulations).
Mayor Appezzato opened the public portion of the Hearing.
Proponents
Frank Matarrese, Economic Development Commission;
Bill Garvine, Executive Director, Chamber of Commerce;
Will Garfinkle, Alameda;
Ben Garfinkle, Alameda;
Bill Smith, Alameda;
Donald Lindsey, Alameda; and
Lee Harris, President, Planning Board.
Opponents
Charles Ward, Alameda;
Gerhard Degemann, Alameda; and
Ray Bolton, Alameda.
There being no further speakers, Mayor Appezzato closed the public
portion of the Hearing.
During the public portion of the Hearing the following various
comments were made by staff, President of the Planning Board, and
Mayor & Councilmembers:
The Planning Director stated not more than 400 sq. ft. could be
used for a dwelling, e.g. the size of a studio apartment; work/live
studios would be required to be a work area subordinate to the
business; people would be permitted to live where their business is
conducted; work- and living areas would be required to be
integrated and to function as one unit; spaces would not be
conducive to families; there would be no open space or outdoor
playing areas necessarily.
Mayor Appezzato commented the City would not be able to dictate the
size of families in work/live studios, to which the Planning
Director concurred.
Councilmember Daysog inquired whether a developer could have a
project with a series of 1,000 sq. ft. dwelling units within one
enclosed building.
The Planning Director responded it would be possible to take an
existing building and divide it into several work/live studios each
with 1,000 sq. ft. minimum; each building could contain several
Adjourned Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 10, 1998
units.
Mayor Appezzato stated the School District is concerned about the
number of children in work/live studios.
In response to concerns raised by Mayor Appezzato, Planning Board
President Harris stated the Ordinance was carefully drafted to make
sure Measure A was kept intact; if lifestyle lofts and San
Francisco-type arrangements were adopted, there would be concern;
the Ordinance devotes 70% of space to non-living [space]; if more
intense restrictions were included, the proposal would be less
viable; the City paid for consultant work and public study work
sessions were held; the Planning Board considered [all] the issues.
In regard to the matter of parking spaces, the Planning Director
stated the Draft Ordinance proposes a minimum of one and one-half
parking spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. work/live studio, and an
additional one half parking space for each 500 sq. ft. of studio
space; the Ordinance also provides a process for granting a Use
Permit , e.g. the City could reduce parking where it makes sense
[to do so].
Mayor Appezzato questioned how the matter of parking would be
addressed if there was a 20,000 sq. ft. building and 20 (twenty)
1,000 sq. ft. work/live units.
The Planning Director responded said matter would be subject to
Use Permit control.
(Conclusion of Comments during Public Portion of Hearing)
Councilmember Kerr stated that, for the most part, the proposal has
a great deal of merit; Measure A was passed to preserve Alamedas
heritage and to prevent overcrowding in Alameda; the work/live
Ordinance should be designed to do the same; many of the buildings
along the north waterfront have had years of history; some
[structures] like 1501 Buena Vista Avenue have brickwork which will
never be constructed again; the proposed Ordinance would encourage
preservation in the industrial areas; Measure A requires 2,000 sq.
feet of lot area per dwelling unit; said restriction should be
applied also to work/live studios; the number of work/live studios
on a lot should not exceed the number that result from dividing the
total lot area by 2,000; density limitations should not be reduced
by the proposed Ordinance [Kerrs Proposed Addition to Draft
Ordinance: [Section] 30-15.4(e) - The total number of work/live
studios on a lot shall not exceed the number (rounded down)
resulting from dividing the total lot area expressed in square feet
by 2000]. Councilmember Kerr further stated there are health
considerations; there should be inspections and certification of
non-toxic conditions before people are allowed to live in a
[work/live] building [Kerrs Proposed Change: Section 30.15.5(d) of
Adjourned Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 10, 1998
Proposed Ordinance shall be changed to add the words "or in a non
work/live unit in a building where work/live units are allowed"
after the work studio in the first line. The first two lines would
read:
PERMITTED WORK ACTIVITY: The work activity in a work/live studio or
in a non- work/live unit in a building where work/live units are
allowed. . .]
Councilmember Kerr further stated Alameda is a confined island and
[there was] no zoning for a long time; there are major differences
in zoning immediately adjacent to one another; many of the
neighborhoods were subdivided in the late 1800's with heavy
industrial use adjacent to traditional single-family dwelling
neighborhoods; the proposed Ordinance should be used to soften
those transitions:
[Kerrs] PROPOSED CHANGES/ADDITIONS: [Section] 30.15.1 (g): The
words "and will" in the second line should be replaced by "in order
to [Section] 30.15.1(h): Where adjacent lots are zoned
residential, the exterior design of structures converted to
work/live should be designed to increase compatibility with the
adjoining residential use when changes to the exterior are made.
Landscaping should be added on the sides of work/live lots which
are adjacent to residential zones, if space permits.
Councilmember Kerr remarked that she has also provided additions
to the building envelope for consideration:
[Kerrs Proposal: [Section] 30.15.5(k) ADDITIONS TO BUILDING
ENVELOPE: if the adjacent lots are all zoned commercial or
manufacturing at the time of conversion to work/live. .
If adjacent lots are zoned residential at the time of conversion to
work/live that no expansion and no increase in the building
footprint or the gross floor area will be allowed.]
Councilmember Kerr stated there would not be expansion to lot line
buildings if the adjacent lots were residential, which softens the
impact on adjacent residential lots; the proposal should apply only
to existing buildings on a trial basis and within a limited area
suggested by the Planning Board; if the 1.5 [parking] spaces per
1,000 square feet parking requirement cannot be met presently, she
would not support allowing an expansion of the footprint of the
building; that she will support the Ordinance with the
aforementioned changes.
Councilmember Lucas stated that she supports Councilmember Kerrs
proposal for a 2,000 sq. ft. minimum to comply with the second
Measure A (1991) and avoid extreme density, and the removal of
Adjourned Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 10, 1998
toxic hazards; and requested the Planning Director to address
Councilmember Kerrs aforementioned proposals.
The Planning Director stated Councilmember Kerr made a number of
good suggestions; that she [Planning Director] has one concern
regarding [Kerrs proposal]: a limitation on any expansion of a
building adjacent to residential [areas]; the intent of draft
proposal is to limit expansion to existing buildings; the
possibility for the need of certain additions, e.g. a stairwell,
entrance lobby, wet wall is recognized; a proposal not to allow any
kind of an addition would preclude any kind of adaptive reuse;
another concern regarding [Kerrs] proposal is the disallowance of
the addition of floor area; some of the very tall warehouses may
wish to insert--without a change to the building envelope-- a floor
as a loft or mezzanine. In regard to Councilmember Kerrs concern
about contamination of food, the Planning Director stated that not
all units will be prohibited from having an enclosed kitchen. The
Planning Director further stated that Councilmember Kerrs
specific wording for the design standard of compatibility with
adjacent residential uses, implies when a building is converted it
must have exterior changes to make it compatible; that it may be
desirable for many of the buildings to be left as they are, such
as the Del Monte Building. She would be happy to review the
wording if Council moves forward with [Kerr] suggestion and to make
it clear: only if a building is modified would exterior changes be
screened for compatibility with the industrial uses and adjacent
residential area(s).
Councilmember Kerr stated her proposal was intended for exterior
changes to a building; in addition, the Planning Director made a
very good point regarding some warehouses being three stories high;
it was not her intention to restrict the addition of floor area
within the same footprint; and the language should be changed to
reflect that [intent].
Councilmember Daysog stated that he had questions related to
Measure A; how would someone with a work/live space and business
license with no economic activity be viewed? As residential? What
is the potential for huge warehouse spaces readapting and creating
apartment units?
The Planning Director stated Councilmember Daysogs concern(s) is
an enforcement issue; commercial properties are inspected annually
by the Fire Department, and business licenses reviewed; design of
individual units would be required to be integrated to work against
a lifestyle loft approach; [an unauthorized use] would be a great
financial risk; banks are part of the enforcement mechanism; there
is no guarantee of unauthorized use of said areas; however, there
are tools for enforcement, e.g. inspections and design.
Councilmember Daysog inquired whether there had been any discussion
Adjourned Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 10, 1992
on developers desiring to create work/live studios outside of the
designated northern waterfront area.
The Planning Director responded that the City would only allow
adaptive reuse of existing buildings, an appropriate public policy
would be in place and a good governmental reason for said policy.
Vice Mayor DeWitt stated a couple of years ago he was approached by
members of the art community in Alameda; said members indicated
there is a demand for this type [work/live studios] of use and
requested that he represent them; Kay Young, local artist, wrote
a letter stating, in part, "part of Alamedas General Plan
encourages a large artistic cultural awareness overall and
specifically the encouragement of art studios along the northern
waterfront; before Alameda can become a leader in artistic
communities, which it has the potential to accomplish, it is
important to welcome the inclusion of housing for the very souls
who are artistic, challenging, connected and motivated to help
create a new living community in Alameda. You have no idea how
many times I have been contacted by current East Bay artists or by
newly arrived artists seeking this type of living opportunity...";
Kay Young believes Alameda will be put on the map by [approving]
the ordinance; the [proposed] use of the area is a good use and
better than the use of the existing warehouses; said warehouses
bring in traffic, noise and pollution; historic buildings would be
kept intact and the traffic reduced; the City has done everything
possible to make sure Measure A is not hindered; at the time
Measure A was being written, he fought for the rebuilding of some
of the housing project areas in the West End; Measure A was amended
so that Esperanza Village and Parrot Village could be developed;
the authors of Measure A kept their faith in him and he is going to
keep faith with Measure A also; that he is going to do everything
possible to ensure that Measure A stands; and that he supports the
proposed ordinance.
Mayor Appezzato stated live/work [studios] is a very romantic
concept and appears very viable, however, that he has some very
major concerns; the City should not rush in; the proposal should be
done right; Measure A is a part of the Charter and must not be
violated, including its spirit; comments about raising the square
footage requirement to 2,000 [sq. feet] could very well make
proposal not economically viable; Council should proceed carefully;
there is no developer banging on the door to create a work/live
studio; that he wants community consensus; the community must
understand that Measure A will not be dodged; the Economic
Development Commission [EDC] is requesting the Council to defer
matter for review purposes; and that he would like the matter
deferred to the EDC, and perhaps Planning Board, for review,
including the comments made; the available existing buildings
should be used; combinations considered must be consistent with
Measure A and also allow the Project to be viable; if the majority
Adjourned Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 10, 1998
t:3
of the Council this evening votes to go forward, he will get behind
it; however, he will not vote for the ordinance tonight because of
the concerns [raised] this evening; the EDC and community should
have another shot at the proposal.
Councilmember Kerr stated there is confusion that she is suggesting
to raise the minimum size of a work/live studio to 2,000 sq. feet,
which is not the case; the total number of work/live studios on a
given lot would be the total area of the lot expressed in square
feet divided by 2,000; e.g. a 4,000 sq. ft. lot with one studio of
3,000 [sq. ft.] and one studio of 1,000 [sq. ft.] would meet her
definition expressed [earlier]; and she accepts the Planning
Directors suggestions that (1) restrictions on floor area
expansion near residential zone would not apply if the footprint is
not expanded, and (2) the limitation on exterior changes would not
exist if changes were necessary to implement. the work/live studio.
Councilmember Daysog stated work/live studios synthesize a number
of issues, including economic development, job creation, housing
and Measure A; for that reason, the matter should move slowly;
community consensus should be created; and he supports the Mayors
suggestion to defer the issue.
Councilmember Lucas stated work/live studios are sensible; there is
a demand for said studios; once the ordinance is in place, many
applications may be received; that she likes Councilmember Kerrs
proposed changes; and the matter would come back to Council for
final passage.
Councilmember Lucas moved Council pass [introduce] the Ordinance
as proposed and include the changes by Councilmember Kerr and the
Planning Director.
Councilmember Kerr stated the State Code does not define work/live
studios as dwelling units and supersedes Alamedas Code; that she
believes there is a demand [for studios]; the buildings existing
uses would not be prohibited; said areas would not be required to
be work/live studios; one more use of the buildings would be
allowed; and the market would determine the highest and best use of
these buildings.
Mayor Appezzato stated one reason for work/live studios is to make
them economically viable.
The Assistant City Attorney stated Councilmember Kerrs amendments
are fairly substantive and in deference to the publics opportunity
to comment on the Ordinance, Council may wish to consider
reintroducing the Ordinance for its first reading at the very next
available Council Meeting.
Mayor Appezzato stated introduction would be considered at the
Adjourned Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 10, 1998
November 17th Council Meeting.
Councilmembers Lucas and Kerr agreed.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following
voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers DeWitt, Kerr and Lucas - 3. Noes:
Councilmember Daysog and Mayor Appezzato - 2. Abstentions - None.
Absent - None.
(98-596) Ordinance No. 2778, "Reclassifying and Rezoning Certain
Property within the City of Alameda from R-4-G (Neighborhood
Residential, Special Government Combining District) and M-2-G
(General Industrial, Special Government Combining District) to 0
(Open Space District) by Amending Zoning Ordinance No. 1277, N.S.,
for that City-Owned Strip of Land Along the East Side of Main
Street Between Atlantic Avenue and Singleton Avenue." Finally
passed.
Vice Mayor DeWitt moved final passage.
Councilmember Lucas seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
(98-597) Allen Derr, Alameda, thanked Matt Naclerio [Public Works
Director] for getting bus stops by Mastick Senior Center; thanked
Gerhard Degemann for pushing Measure B; read a poem in honor of
Veterans Day.
(98-598) Janice Dubiel, Alameda, stated on Shoreline Drive, she
witnessed a man brutally and savagely beating a woman inside a car;
there was a terrible struggle and the woman kicked out the front
windshield of the car; that she [Ms. Dubiel] provided the license
plate number to the police, who took a report; it seemed the woman
would have needed medical care; the police department informed her
no one caught up with the car in Alameda; she asked the officer
handling the case whether the license plate number was of
assistance, to which the officer responded in the affirmative and
stated they knew [car owner] as a transient with drug problems; the
officer also stated there were people who reported this incident on
the other side of the island after her call which means the beating
had continued all the way across the City; the officer said he
would try to locate the man [driving the car] in one more place;
when the officer said the man was a transient and used drugs, she
was not sure that was relevant; her question is: does being with
that man preclude this womans right to some type of real police
protection?; that she has concerns about police priority in
Alameda.
Mayor Appezzato suggested Ms. Dubiel speak to the City Manager and
Adjourned Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 10, 1998
-*S
City Attorney; stated they will give advice on how to fill out a
report; the City can take it from there and help her; and explained
the Council cannot discuss the matter tonight.
Councilmember Lucas requested the City Manager to provide an off-
agenda report regarding the incident.
(98-599) John Fee, Alameda, inquired why Marlene Davis has not
seen her truck; stated that he would like to see pressure put on
the Police Department; some officers have laughed at Mrs. Davis;
maybe a police commissioner could help the Mayor, Council and City
Manager; further stated he is interested in work/live studios and
raised various questions regarding same.
(98-600) Gerhard Degemann, Alameda, stated the credit for passing
Measure B should go to those who helped the campaign and the voters
of Alameda; at a candidates forum, a young lady said there was
nothing for her to do in Alameda to which the Mayor had responded
there are a lot of programs in Alameda: Park and Recreation, Boys
and Girls Club, Boy Scouts, swim team, soccer, and AUSD; there
should be an activity list for youths in Alameda compiling the
various organizations activities; if a student wanted to join
soccer, they could use the list to determine where to go; perhaps
the Social Service Human Relations Board would be a good place to
start; said list should be made available at all schools, City
Hall, and the Park & Recreation Department.
Mayor Appezzato request the City Manager to review the matter;
stated the Rotary Club publishes an annual book listing all
community groups.
Councilmember Kerr stated it sounds like it would be a good project
for the Youth Collaborative.
(98-601) Richard Neveln, Alameda, congratulated Mayor Appezzato
and Councilmember Daysog on their election victories; commented on
work/live spaces.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(98-602) Councilmember Daysog stated that he requested the City
Manager to provide Council with an update on the General Plan; the
General Plan has chapters on different aspects of the community;
the Economic Development Commission [EDC] is moving forward with
establishment of an economic strategic vision for Alameda; that he
recognizes the EDCs desire to have that vision included in the
General Plan; it is time to see the General Plan not as a technical
guide but as more elaborate, relating all the different parts of
Alameda to a larger whole; the points raised by Mr. Degemann
[paragraph no. 98-600] this evening regarding establishing a
document identifying issues for youth should be included in the
Adjourned Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 10, 1998
General Plan; a chapter on economic development or youth is not
required by state law, however, it is time to think comprehensively
of integrating all the different elements of our community.
(98 -603) Councilmember Daysog stated Cirque du Soleil wants to
perform at Jack London Square again; as a result of development in
Jack London Square, they are looking for parking space; requested
the City Managers Office to look into offering parking space at
Alameda Point and transporting people across the estuary by water
taxis if it is possible.
(98 -604) Mayor Appezzato stated there will be an open house at
Alameda Point on Saturday, November 14th from 10:00 a.m. to 2 :00
p.m.; encouraged all those interested to attend.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Appezzato adjourned the meeting at 9 :35 p.m. in memory of all
veterans who served our country.
Respectfully submitted,
Did e B.`elsch, CMC
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Adjourned Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 10, 1998