Loading...
1996-01-16 MinutesMINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA CITY COUNCIL AND HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS JANUARY 16, 1996 The meeting convened at 6:45 p.m. with President Appezzato presiding. ROLL CALL - PRESENT: ABSENT: Councilmembers/Commissioners Arnerich, DeWitt, Lucas, Mannix and President Appezzato - 5. None. 3. (96-14) Adjournment to Closed Session to consider: CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR - Agency Negotiator: Personnel Director and Austris Rungis. Employee Organization(s): Alameda Management and Confidential Employees Association - MCEA; Appointed and Unrepresented Positions (City Manager, City Attorney, City Clerk, Assistant City Manager, Personnel Director and Chief of Police); International Association of Firefighters, Local #689 - IAFF; and Alameda Housing Authority Management and Confidential positions. 4. Announcement of Action Taken in Closed Session: Following Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and President Appezzato announced that Council gave instructions to City's negotiators and that no action was taken. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 7:20 p.m. spectfully submitted, a/1L, Ae-/a DANE B. FELSCH, CMC City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in advance in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting, Alameda City Council and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners January 16, 1996 7 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16, 1995 The meeting convened at 7:39 p.m., with Mayor Appezzato presiding. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Arnerich. Pastor Robert Broekema, First Christian Reformed Church, gave the invocation. ROLL CALL - PRESENT: ABSENT: Councilmembers Arnerich, DeWitt, Lucas, Vice Mayor Mannix and President Appezzato - 5. None. PROCLAMATIONS AND SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY None. CONSENT CALENDAR President Appezzato stated that Item 4-B (96-19) [Report from Public Works Director recommending adoption of plans and specifications and calling for bids for traffic signal installation at the intersection of Atlantic Avenue and West Campus Drive, No. P.W. 01-96-01] was pulled off the Consent Calendar for public discussion. Councilmember Lucas moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Vice Mayor Mannix seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk. 4-A. (*96-15) Minutes of the Regular Council Meetings of December 19, 1995, and January 2, 1996. Approved. 4-8. See Paragraph (96-19). 4-C. (*96-16) Report from Finance Director transmitting Investment Portfolio for period ending December 31, 1995. Accepted. 4-D. (*96-17) Resolution No 12729 "Authorizing the City Manager to Enter Into a Lease Agreement Between the City of Alameda, as Lessee, and Shito and Elko Sakai as Lessor, for Premises Located ar 625 Pacific Avenue to be Used as Temporary Fire Department Quarters." Adopted. 4-E. (*96-18) Bills, certified by the City Manager to be true and correct, were ratified in the sum .of $1,577,729.13. Ratified. Regular Meeting, Alameda City Council January 16, 1996 1 4-B. (96-19) Report from Public Works Director recommending adoption of plans and specifications and calling for bids for traffic signal installation at the intersection of Atlantic Avenue and West Campus Drive, No. P.W. 01-96-01. Accepted. Edwin Cooney, Mayor's Committee for the Disabled, expressed appreciation for the general access improvements which will assist the disabled. Councilman Arnerich moved acceptance of the report. Vice Mayor Mannix seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 5-A. (96-20) Public Hearing to Obtain Citizens' Comments on Performance and Housing and Community Development Needs. President Appezzato opened the public portion of the hearing. Howard Rosser, Director, West End Teen Program, gave an update on the West End Teen Program at Chipman Middle School; and expressed appreciation for support. Tanisha Niovs, West End Teen Program, commented on various activities in the program and benefits of same. Jim Schiller, Xanthos, West End Teen Program, stated that Xanthos administered the West End Teen Program; commented on various funded and non-funded programs and diligent efforts of volunteers; urged that Council attend a Program graduation; stated that the Program benefited kids who need it most; and that the Program was successful. Renee DuBois, Program Director, Four Bridges Creative Living Center, expressed appreciation for support; stated that Four Bridges was a mental health program for seriously and chronically mentally ill adults and those with emotional problems; and stated importance of program. Don Bergen, Alameda, spoke in support of the West End Teen Program, volunteer efforts, and individualism and self-reliance; commented on absentee landlords and social issues; and spoke in opposition to government funding and dependency on the government. Albert Brown, Alameda, spoke in support of the Four Bridges Creative Living Center. Camilla Spanjer, Alameda, spoke in support of the Four Bridges Creative Living Center. Regular Meeting, Alameda City Council January 16, 1996 2 Mary Rudge, Alameda, commented on loss of family- oriented stores on Webster Street which have contributed to the increase of fast -food [establishments], bars and liquor stores; stated that the Chamber of Commerce and City had not focused on an image for Webster Street that helps families; and suggested that development be aimed towards aesthetics and youthfulness. Shirley Cummins, Alameda, commented on observations made regarding other cities' business districts; suggested that the City beautify the business district to enhance the City and promote the business district; stated that infill practices in the City should not be allowed; commented on charitable requests and the inability of organizations and citizens to continue providing for the poor. President Appezzato closed the public portion of the hearing. Councilmember Lucas stated that she supported Four Bridges; that she did not want the undergrounding [project] in the West End to fall behind; that undergrounding provided safety and aesthetic aspects; and requested that the Community Development Department, in conjunction with the Bureau of Electricity, establish an assistance program for low- and moderate - income citizens [unable to afford undergrounding costs]. Vice Mayor Mannix requested that the Community Development Department determine if Block Grant- or HUD funding might be available towards the development of a youth center in conjunction with the Alameda Naval Air Station closure. Councilmember DeWitt stated that he attended a kick -off [ceremony] for a multicultural student relations program headed by Reverend Mike Yoshii and the Alamedans Who Care Organization; and requested that staff review said program and that consideration be given for same. Vice Mayor Mannix moved acceptance of the report. Councilman Arnerich seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 5 -B. (96 -21) Public Hearing to consider a Proposed Amendment to the Sign Ordinance (ZA -95 -2) for Alameda Auto Row on Park Street, to permit a larger maximum total sign area and maximum sign size, and a greater number of signs per business; and to establish regulations for exterior display walls, directional signs, freestanding sign placement, signs on separately located departments, and special events decorations; and Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Section 30 -6 (Sign Regulations) of Article I (Zoning Regular Meeting, Alameda City Council January 16, 1996 3 0 Districts and Regulations) of Chapter XXX (Development Regulations) and by Adding a New Subsection 30 -6.17 Special Requirements for Auto Row Signs). President Appezzato opened the public portion of the hearing. Neil Patrick Sweeney, Alameda, stated that he supported the proposed amendment. Bill Garvine, Executive Director, Alameda Chamber of Commerce, spoke in support of the proposal. William Ross, Island Auto Sales, Alameda, stated that he supported the amendment; however, suggested that single -pole signs be approved, architecturally, by the Planning Director. Don Roberts, Alameda, stated that the proposal would result in more visual pollution, and expressed concern regarding the City regulating auto dealers' special events and cost for enforcement. Ed Carroll, Winner Ford, Alameda, stated that he supported the amendment. President Appezzato closed the public portion of the hearing. In response to Councilmember Lucas' inquiry regarding Mr. Ross' suggestion regarding single -pole signs, the Planning Director stated that the Planning Board's intent was to give a sense of what would be an acceptable approach; and that more flexibility could be provided, but might lead to other concerns. Councilmember Lucas added that it would be very difficult to come up with guidelines for staff to follow. Councilmember DeWitt stated that Section 2 (d), Sub - paragraph 3 of the Ordinance, could be amended by deleting "single -pole signs are prohibited," and to allow the Planning Board to review any future innovations. Vice Mayor Mannix stated that he hoped there would be a self - policing effort by the auto dealers and the Park Street Business Association; and that goodwill would be expressed by the auto dealers by limiting the number of words on signs. Councilmember DeWitt inquired about the enforcement of the regulations. The Planning Director responded that sign enforcement was an issue because of staff constraints; however, having rules that the industry has stated were fairer, there should be greater compliance. Regular Meeting, Alameda City Council January 16, 1996 4 Councilman Arnerich discussed other communities' sign regulations; stated that the City is now working with the business community, and that he will support the ordinance. Councilmember Lucas moved introduction of the draft ordinance. Vice Mayor Mannix seconded the motion. Under discussion, the Planning Director stated that a phrase was left out of [Resolution No. PB- 95 -62, Attachment "A "] regarding freestanding signs; that the intent was to have freestanding signs not subject to a 75 -foot spacing requirement; that Attachment [ "A "] includes a sentence that specifically states they are exempt from that requirement; and that the sentence would be added back in for the second reading. The Planning Director further stated that the discussion regarding base treatment of freestanding signs could be deleted at this time; and that Council could direct the Planning Board to look at the issue on a City -wide basis. Councilmember Lucas stated that she would so amend her motion. In response to President Appezzato's inquiry regarding Chris Buckley's comments at the Planning Board regarding evaluation of aesthetics, the Planning Director stated that Mr. Buckley made the following three points: 1) that the 75- foot spacing requirement should be retained, 2) that the maximum height of freestanding signs be reduced from 12 feet to 8 feet, and 3) that the City should require at least two poles, and preferably a monument base on freestanding signs. The Planning Director further advised Council of the Planning Board's actions and discussion regarding Mr. Buckley's comments and freestanding signs. In response to President Appezzato's inquiry regarding Mr. Robert's comments regarding visual pollution, e.g. billboards, the Planning Director stated that the City does not permit roof - mounted signs nor off- premise signs; that the City was increasing the sign size from the maximum of 50 square feet to 150 square feet; that there was a maximum of 200 square feet of sign per business; and that two-square-feet signs for every linear square feet of either building, or frontage, was allowed. President Appezzato stated that the Auto Row Study called for more flexibility and consistency in regards to manufactures' signs; and that said Study was accepted by both the Planning Board and City Council. Councilmember Lucas stated that in regards to the guidelines, if single -pole bases were permitted, the City would have to require more than just a metal pole. Regular Meeting, Alameda City Council January 16, 1996 5 i2 The amended motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 5-C. (96-22) Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of the Planning Board's denial of Variance (V-95-17) and Use Permit (UP-95-32) for an as-built addition at 3363 Fernside Boulevard. Applicants/Appellants: Dieter and Helene Rabe; and Resolution Upholding the Planning Board's Denial of Variance, (V- 95-17) and Use Permit (UP-95-32), Relating to an As-Built Residential Addition at 3363 Fernside Boulevard. Councilmember Lucas stated she would abstain due to conflict of interest. President Appezzato opened the public portion of the hearing. Dieter Rabe, Applicant/Appellant, stated that previously the deck was the primary problem; that he resubmitted the application without the deck; and that he hoped it met with Council's approval. In response to Vice Mayor Mannix's inquiry regarding the deck, Mr. Rabe stated that the deck is gone. Paul Kruger, 3359 Fernside Boulevard, Alameda, spoke in support of recommendation to deny the applications; stated that if Council grants the applications, that the following conditions apply: 1) that the applicant have a survey performed and permanent property corners set by a licensed surveyor and a Record of Survey filed with the City of Alameda, 2) that all construction along the common lot line be brought up to current building codes, and 3) that the applicant place a deed restriction on their property prohibiting any additional structures, including porches and overhangs from extending further into the rear yard; that he intends to reconstruct buildings at the back of his property; and that if Council approves Mr. Rabe's variances, he, too, will be seeking equal variances in his application. President Appezzato closed the public portion of the hearing. In response to Vice Mayor Mannix's inquiry regarding Council's authority to require Mr. Rabe to adhere to Mr. Kruger's conditions, the City Attorney stated that generally the City Council does have the authority to impose conditions on granting a variance, providing Council make certain findings within the scope of the appeal and project; and that Council can always request conditions that are agreed to by the applicant, or the appellant, in this case. After reviewing Mr. Kruger's conditions, Mr. Rabe stated that conditions 1 and 2 have been done, and that he has a problem with condition 3 [that the applicant place a deed restriction on Regular Meeting, Alameda City Council Isumary 16, 1996 6 property prohibiting any additional structures including porches and overhangs from extending further into the rear yard] because he might want to come back at a later time. In response to Councilman Arnerich regarding Council's authority regarding Mr. Kruger's conditions, the Planning Director stated that said conditions were also submitted to the Planning Board; that the conditions were a part of the Planning Board's deliberations and discussions in taking action; that [Council could impose] a deed restriction but typically it would be a condition of the variance; that Mr. Rabe, or a future property owner, could always come back and seek an amendment to the variance which could amend the condition requiring the deed restriction; and that the City could change its mind in the future. The City Manager stated that if Council wishes to pursue the variance approval, he believes that conditions 1 and 2 are appropriate; that the property line boundaries should be marked not only on a temporary basis but should be permanent so that it could be referred to by both property owners in the future; and that the approval be subject to Mr. Kruger's conditions 1 and 2, and agreed to by the applicant. In response to President Appezzato's inquiry, the Planning Director stated that everything that the City has allowed in that area over the last 20 years has been an accessory structure. In response to President Appezzato's inquiry regarding what the Planning Board considered, the Planning Director stated that it chose to deny the project in total rather than looking at what lesser project they might be willing to support. President Appezzato stated that he was concerned with the following three statements made in the staff report and conclusions of the Planning Board: 1) that the Planning Board denied the use permit with the findings that the as-built, two-story addition was not compatible with adjacent houses and that it would adversely affect the neighboring property; 2) that since 1974, over 20 years, the City has not approved placement of dwelling units or additions to dwellings other than decks which encroach onto Tidal Canal Lands; and 3) that the Board, as in previous denials, expressed concern about the precedent of approving after-the-fact permits for illegal construction; and that he will support the Planning Board and uphold the Board's denial of the variance, but maybe could support it going back to the Planning Board [for further review]. Discussion was held regarding accessory structure variations. Vice Mayor Mannix stated that he has viewed the structure and that the structure appeared to fit into the accessory structure category and that it was not an extension of the primary dwelling. Regular Meeting, Alameda City Council January 16, 1996 7 14 Councilmember DeWitt expressed concerns regarding the matter; stated that the structure was added without the Planning Board's approval and that the violation caused the Rabe family to pay a penalty [fee]; that the added structure was inspected and up to Code; that the Rabe family has complied with what they can comply with as far as the City is concerned; and spoke in support of granting the appeal. Councilmember DeWitt moved adoption of a Resolution granting an appeal of the Planning Board's denial of Variance (V-95-17) and Use Permit (UP-95-32) relating to an as-built residential addition at 3363 Fernside Boulevard; and that the following conditions apply: 1) that the applicant have a survey performed and permanent property corners set by a licensed surveyor and a Record of Survey filed with the City of Alameda, and 2) that all construction along the common lot line be brought up to current building codes. Councilman Arnerich seconded the motion. The Planning Director stated that an important part of approving the Variance is also making findings that have to do with unique, special physical circumstances; that Council could vote to have the Resolution prepared consistent with said general approaches, or make a motion of intent and provide a Resolution at the next meeting; and that conditions would be, generally, that the project would have to be done in accordance with the plans filed by the Rabes, which have not yet been inspected. In response to President Appezzato's inquiry regarding bringing the matter back to Council, the City Manager stated that the existing Resolution is for upholding the Planning Board's denial; that Council could incorporate what the Planning Director stated tonight into a motion, by reference, and then vote on the Resolution as amended by the Planning Director, or bring matter back; that he suggests Council incorporate, by reference, the Planning Director's statements in a motion, and vote to uphold the variance, as requested by the applicant. The Planning Director stated that the kinds of conditions would be: construction in accordance with the plans; taking out building permits and complying within a year; the two conditions that Councilmember DeWitt indicated; and Council's consideration of requiring that it be constructed as a freestanding structure without changing the exterior walls. In response to Councilmember DeWitt's inquiry regarding the conditions, the Planning Director stated that Mr. Rabe has never submitted building plans; that the property has never been inspected; that Mr. Rabe would have to complete the rest of the process, which would be to provide proper construction drawings; that those plans would have to be approved in accordance with the Regular Meeting, Alameda City Council January 16, 1996 8 5 existing Building Code; that the property would have to be inspected to make sure it complies; and that she does not know if the structure complies to any of the Building Code requirements yet. The Planning Director further stated that she would still like for Council to consider whether or not to require it to be constructed so that the exterior wall is maintained as the exterior wall at the existing dwelling so that it is, basically, an accessory structure; that the exterior wall remain in place of the existing house which would prevent the Rabes from removing that interior wall and incorporating it into a living room, as an example. In response to Councilmember DeWitt's inquiry regarding the addition, the Planning Director stated that the Rabes have not yet removed the wall; that by approving the variance it then comes an interior change, and the Rabes could then incorporate it into their living room which would then make it problematic in the event that demolition was required. Vice Mayor Mannix clarified that the way it is built now is the way the Planning Director is stating it should remain; and that the Planning Director is requesting that it remain exactly as built now The Planning Director stated that the Resolution would be drafted with that additional condition. In response to Councilman Arnerich's inquiry regarding the cost to submit future plans, the Planning Director responded that the Rabes would have to pay for Building Permit Fees; and that the Rabes have not filed yet. Councilmember DeWitt's motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Arnerich, DeWitt and Vice Mayor Mannix - 3. Noes: President Appezzato - 1. Abstained: Councilmember Lucas - Council recessed at 9:08 p.m. and reconvened at 9:23 p.m. 5-D. (96-23) Report from Public Works Director recommending rejection of Douglas Parking Company's protest and authorization to award five-year contract for attendant lot operations in Municipal Lots A & C (Held over from the December 19, 1995 Council Meeting); and Regular Meeting, Alameda City Council January 16, 1996 9 16 Written Communication from Diane Coler - Dark, Alameda, recommending that the City Council award the Contract to Allright. David Douglas, Douglas Parking Company, expressed concerns; stated that Allright was not a locally based company; stated that the staff report provided incorrect information; that Douglas Parking Company's bid was $5 a month lower than Allright Parking, not $5 a year lower; requested specifics regarding Allright Parking's superior general experience, as noted in the staff report; questioned Allright Parking's five -year satisfactory track record; stated that the City's revenue has decreased over the years; stated that it was unusual for a contract to be awarded for five years; and suggested that the contract be awarded for a shorter period of time. Diane Coler -Dark, Alameda, spoke in support of staff's recommendation; and stated that Allright Parking has always been responsive to the business associations and City's needs, and that revenue is dependent upon how many automobiles use the lot and various conditions, e.g. weather, economy, disruptions in lot landscaping. Ken Moffett, Allright Parking, stated that Allright Parking was a local company; that every dime of revenue that is generated from Allright Parking's operation stays [local]; that 90% of supplies purchased for operation of lots is done in Alameda; stated that the lots were initially designed for people to come to Park Street and park their vehicles without having to be concerned about getting tickets; and stated that Allright Parking received an overwhelming satisfaction rating in their public survey, Councilmember Lucas stated that Allright Parking has proven themselves and have the support of the community; moved acceptance of the report and recommendation [that Council agree to rates of 75 cents /hour and $45 /month, and to continue to operate the lots in the existing manner; that Council reject Douglas Parking Company's protest; and that staff be authorized to award a 5-year contract to Allright Parking for parking attendant lot operations of Municipal Lots A & C]. In response to Councilman Arnerich's inquiry regarding guaranteed minimum revenue of $10,000, Mr. Moffett responded in the affirmative. Councilman Arnerich stated that he visited the parking lots and spoke with Allright Parking employees; and that people expressed satisfaction. President Appezzato stated that he will not support the award of contract to Allright Parking because the low bidder was Douglas Parking Company. Regular Meeting, Alameda City Council January 16, 1996 10 7 In response to Councilman Arnerich's comments regarding contract going out for bids, the City Manager stated that the [Notice to Bidders and Request For Qualifications] stated that there would be other things considered besides the lowest bid numbers; that the proposals would be reviewed in terms of other considerations; and that Council would be able to award the contract to someone who had other than the lowest [bidder] The motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Arnerich, DeWitt, Lucas and Vice Mayor Mannix - 4. Noes: President Appezzato - 1. Absent: None. 5 -E. (96 -24) Report from Executive Director of the Housing Authority regarding Franciscan Tenants Association's complaints. Leah Hess, Attorney representing the California Apartments Tenants Association, stated that they were pleased with the response from the City; requested that the City Attorney ensure that non - section 8 units be aggressively followed -up on by the Public Works Department; stated that the property owner has not done any work on the interior, so far; and requested that the issue be placed on the agenda every month, until the property is up to Alameda's standards. In response to President Appezzato's inquiry, the City Manager stated that periodic reports would be possible. Councilman Arnerich moved acceptance of the report. Vice Mayor Mannix seconded the motion. President Appezzato commended Council for reacting to undesirable housing conditions and taking action against said conditions. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote -5 5 -F. (96 -25) Report from Public Works Director on Odor at Crown Beach /Crab Cove Area. President Appezzato thanked representatives from the East Bay Regional Park District for their assistance and attendance at the Council meeting. Earl Peacock, Alameda, introduced Ann Rockwell, Manager of Crown Park, East Bay Regional Park District; and Roy Dawson, Head of Maintenance, East Bay Regional Park District, and thanked Laura Timothy of the Public Works Department for an outstanding job in conducting a round table meeting with representatives from various agencies. President Appezzato thanked Mr. Peacock for bringing the matter to Council's attention and assisting the City in solving the problem. Regular Meeting, Alameda City Council January 16, 1996 11 8 Councilmember Lucas moved acceptance of the report. Councilman Arnerich seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS. NON - AGENDA (Public Comment) 6 -A. (96 -26) Earl Peacock, Alameda, Grass Roots Committee for Fair Taxation, stated that the Committee had changed their position and withdrew objection to charging homeowners $2,120 for undergrounding of utilities; that the Committee requests the City Council to instruct the Bureau of Electricity to look into assisting the elderly, and suggested that the Bureau: 1) absorb cost for seniors, when necessary, 2) place a lien on the property, or 3) charge an extra $5 on the monthly utility bill. In response to President Appezzato, the City Manager stated that the matter would be addressed. Councilmember Lucas noted that the maximum for a single- family home is approximately $1,200. Councilmember DeWitt noted that Councilmember Lucas had recently requested that the Community Development Department look at ways to provide financial assistance. 6 -B. (96 -27) Don Bergen, Alameda, requested that the City acquire flag poles to commemorate American patriotic holidays and certain individuals, and submitted a letter as a Written Communication. 6 -C. (96 -28) Don Bergen, Alameda, discussed certain assaults he has personally witnessed, and submitted a letter as a Written Communication suggesting a teen curfew. 6 -D. (96 -29) Jules Garibaldi, Alameda, spoke on behalf of his father, Jules Garibaldi, Sr., Afro - American, who resides at 1815 Sherman Street, and Treeny Sandoval, Hispanic- American, who resided at 1813 Sherman Street and who is now deceased; stated that Mr. Sandoval petitioned the City for a permit to add on living space in his basement; that the City denied Mr. Sandoval's petition twice; that since Mr. Sandoval's death, the home was sold to a White- American, who immediately converted the basement into living space; that the basement recently caught fire and damaged it and his [neighboring] parents' home; that the Garibaldi's recently received a letter from the Public Works Department concerning rebuilding of their home, that nothing was added to the plans that was not already there [before the fire], however, the City states it creates a hazard; that the Garibaldi family would comply with Public Works Department's recommendation; that he has requested the City to reconsider; and requested =a fair and equal standing with the other owners in the neighborhood. Regular Meeting, Alameda City Council January 16, 1996 12 In response to President Appezzato, the City Manager stated that the matter would be investigated and that a report would be provided to Council. 6-E. (96-30) Neil Patrick Sweeney, Alameda, suggested that the City utilize volunteers as much as possible, and that the recent BRAG Town Forum had a very good turnout. 6-F. (96-31) Allen Derr, Alameda, congratulated the City and Public Works Director on the renovation of the school building to make a temporary City Hall; stated that the City Manager complied to the best of his ability to get the flags in the City at half mast on December 7th; that at the January 2, 1996, City Council Meeting, he suggested that the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code prohibiting camping in City parks be modified to allow individuals to bring their own barbecues to City parks; that at said Meeting, the City Attorney stated that she would do some rewording of the ordinance; that on January 12, 1996, he attempted to get a permit to utilize his own grill in Franklin Park; that he was informed that permits are only issued to reserve existing grills, unless a seven-day notice is provided, and that the party is with an organization similar to the Elks; that all the grills at Franklin Park are burned through; that three grills at Washington Park are in deplorable condition; and that he would like the ordinance reviewed one more time. The City Attorney stated that there are some existing rules prohibiting portable barbecues, and if the Council desires to reconsider the ordinance, it can be brought back to Council. Councilmember Lucas stated that Mr. Derr's point is that the grills should be safe; perhaps the procedure concerning exceptions needs to be worked out; and that an amendment was not necessary. The City Manager stated that a report will be provided to Council on the matter. Councilman Arnerich stated that all of the pits must be looked at by the City. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (Communications from Council) 7-A. (96-32) Vice Mayor Mannix stated that the Recreation Department should investigate the possibility of a cooperative effort with Alameda Naval Air Station and Alameda Reuse & Redevelopment Authority for a youth center, perhaps at NAS. 7-B. (96-33) Vice Mayor Mannix requested that the Council Meeting be adjourned in memory of retired'Police Officer Robert Carlson, who served from 1949 to 1979. Regular Meeting, Alameda City Council January 16, 1996 13 0 7 -C. (96 -34) Councilman Arnerich stated that he would appreciate the City crews cleaning up City Hall grounds. 7 -D. (96 -35) Councilman Arnerich announced that the City goes to Court on January 29, 1996, regarding the houseboat matter. ADJOURNMENT 8 -A. (96 -36) President Appezzato adjourned the meeting at 10 :06 p.m. in memory of former Police Officer Robert Carlson, who served from 1949 to 1979. Respectfully submitted, D E B. FELSCH, CMC City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in advance in accordance with the Brown Act. Regular Malin,' g, Alameda City Council January 16, 1996 14