1991-02-05 Regular CC Minutes17
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA
FEBRUARY 5, 1991
The meeting convened at 7:47 p.m., (at the conclusion of the Alameda
Public Improvement Corporation Annual Meeting) with President Corica
presiding. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilmember
Camicia. Reverend William Harrison gave the invocation.
ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Arnerich, Camicia, Thomas,
Withrow and President Corica - 5.
Absent: None.
ANNOUNCEMENT BY MAYOR OF CLOSED SESSION ACTION(S).
Mayor Corica announced that, prior to the regular meeting, Council
adjourned to Closed Session and took the following action:
91 -043 Significant Exposure to Litigation, pursuant to Subsection (b)
of Government Code Section 54956.9 of the Brown Act: discussed the
matter and no action was taken.
91 -044 Labor Relations, pursuant to Subsection (a) of Government Code
Section 54957.6 of the Brown Act: gave further instructions to
City's negotiators.
CONSENT CALENDAR
President Corica announced that ( *91 -047) report regarding
procurement of Alameda -BART shuttle vehicles, has been removed from
the agenda by the City Manager.
At the request of Councilmember Thomas, (91 -075) introduction of
ordinance regarding contract with California Public Employees
Retirement System, and (91 -076) Bills, were removed from the Consent
Calendar to the regular agenda; and at the request of Councilmember
Withrow (91 -072) report regarding execution of agreements for Cypress
Corridor Transportation Management Plan, was removed from the Consent
Calendar to the regular agenda.
Councilmember Camicia moved approval of the remainder of the Consent
Calendar. Councilmember Withrow seconded the motion which was
carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Exception: ( *91 -047) Not
heard.]
Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk.
REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
*91 -045 From City Manager regarding Alameda Food Bank Agreement.
Accepted.
*91 -046 From Public Works Director recommending authorization to
request proposals for the Alameda - Oakland Ferry Services. Accepted.
February 5, 1991
18
*91-047 From Public Works Director requesting authorization to reject,
all bids and to negotiate on the open market for the procurement of
Alameda-BART shuttle vehicles. Removed from agenda.
*91-048 From Finance Director transmitting Quarterly Financial Report
for period ending December 31, 1990. Accepted.
*91-049 From Finance Director transmitting Investment Report for
period ending December 31, 1990. Accepted.
*91-050 From Recreation and Parks Director recommending allocation of
$13,009 from the Dwelling Unit Tax Account for providing chain link
fence to enclose the "Doc" Harrington Soccer Field. Accepted.
RESOLUTIONS
*91-051 Resolution No. 12064 "Establishing Election Precincts,
Designating Polling Places therefor and naming officers of Election
for each Precinct for Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, March
5, 1991." Adopted.
*91-052 Resolution No. 12065 "Authorizing the City of Alameda to use
fingerprint information to access summary criminal history
information according to Penal Code Sections 11105(b)(10) and
13300(b)(10)." Adopted.
*91-053 Resolution No. 12066 "Approving Parcel Map No. 6041 (2057
and 2059 Alameda Avenue) and granting an exception from Section
11-3118.1 of the Subdivision Ordinance requiring undergrounding of
utilities, and approving Initial Study IS-90-12." Adopted.
*91-054 Resolution No. 12067 "Authorizing supplemental pay and
benefits payments for employees called to active military duty during
the current military crisis." Adopted.
FINAL PASSAGE OF ORDINANCES
*91-055 Ordinance No. 2524, N.S. "Amending the Alameda Municipal
Code by amending Section 17-432 of Title XVII thereof to provide for
the installation of two-way stop signs at six locations in the East
End of Alameda, and repealing Subsection (31) of Section 17-461 of
Title XVII thereof." Adopted.
*91-056 Ordinance No. 2525, N.S. "Amending the Alameda Municipal
Code by amending Section 17-432 of Title XVII thereof to provide for
the installation of a four-way stop sign at the intersection of
Gibbons Drive and Santa Clara Avenue." Adopted.
*91-057 Ordinance No. 2526, N.S. "Amending the Alameda Municipal
Code by amending Section 17-344.1 of Title XVII thereof to remove
24-minutes parking restriction at 1117 Park Street." Adopted.
February 5, 1991
19
MINUTES
Councilman Arnerich moved acceptance of the Minutes of the Regular
Council Meeting of January 15, 1991, and the Special Meeting of
January 8, 1991. Councilmember Withrow seconded the motion which was
carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
91-058 Proclamation designating week of February 10 - 16, 1991, as
Vocational Education Week.
Mayor Corica read the proclamation and presented a framed copy of the
proclamation to Connie King, Career Specialist/Marketing Instructor
of Alameda Unified School District. Ms. King expressed appreciation
on behalf of the District, and noted accomplishments achieved through
the vocational program.
HEARINGS
91-059 Consideration of citizens' comments on housing and community
development needs.
President Corica explained the procedure of the hearing.
The Community Development Director reviewed the background of the
matter.
The public portion of the hearing was opened.
The following persons submitted comments:
Matthew Duncan, 1311 Court Street, Vice-President, Social Service
Human Relations Board, noted mental illness, alcohol and substance
abuse place exceptional demands on service providers and need
increased attention; education, employment and child care service
needs to accommodate increased multi-cultural population; outlined
community needs; and encouraged City to continue funding housing and
human services programs to meet needs of City's low- and
moderate-income multi-cultural population.
JoEllen Spencer-Perry, BANANAS Child Care, 6501 Telegraph Avenue,
Oakland, stated, last year, funding for the Bananas program was
reduced; described program and services provided; and noted the
needs.
Lawrence Van Hook, 457 Buena Vista, #302, Isle of Patmos Church,
recommended that some of the funds be used for an outreach program
for teenagers who have not been able to assimilate themselves into
the mainstream programs.
Councilmember Thomas stated she asked some time ago, that staff look
into a shuttle system with respect to child care centers and
providers who do not have the means to transport children to and from
February 5, 1991
20
school; for low and moderate income, and some working, parents;
sliding scale could be used, perhaps BANANAS could be queried or
whether or not they have provided such service in any °the-
community; she would support efforts to restore vouchers.
Councilmember Camicia supported the shuttle program proposal.
Herb Severns, P.O. Box 2543, stated when his children were growing
up, there was a great deal of cooperative babysitting, etc., and
wondered if optimum use is being made of churches and cooperative
groups.
President Corica closed the public portion of the hearing.
Councilman Arnerich moved the recommendation [to accept public
comments and Council identify additional needs] with added comments
made by Councilmembers. Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion
which was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
91-060 Consideration of adoption of the Draft General Plan and
Certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report.
President Corica explained the procedure of the hearing.
The Planning Director reviewed the background of the matter.
The public portion of the hearing was opened.
On the call for proponents and opponents, the following persons
spoke.
Ed Murphy, 2618 Janis Circle, stated his focus is on the portions of
the General Plan which incorporate the provisions of Measure A which
are on the ballot for the March 5, 1991, Municipal Election;
believes Council will be open to charges that Council has prejudiced
the voters to vote for the Measure because Council will have already
incorporated the provisions into the General Plan; and requested
Council not put provisions in the General Plan now, that citizens are
to vote on at the March Election.
Ronald Basarich, 3215 Phoenix Lane, requested Council defer adoption
of the General Plan, as it is his opinion the Plan does not meet the
greater expectations of the community, e.g., the Airport Environs
Element, traffic environmental concerns, traffic circulation
patterns; and the obligation should rest with the new Council.
The public portion of the hearing was closed.
Councilmember Camicia stated citizens have expressed they want the
66th Avenue crossing; questioned if Finding No. 2 in Planning Board
Resolution No. 2153 would cause Council a problem in pursuing the
66th Avenue Connector.
The City Attorney stated the Plan simply identifies the potential
impact and acknowledges the project is outside the City limits.
February 5, 1991
21
Councilmember Withrow called attention to the fact that the General
Plan is a living document, and the Planning Director added the
document is amendable up to four times a year with no limit on the
extent of the amendment.
In response to Councilmember Withrow and Councilman Arnerich's
questions regarding any problems in connection with Mr. Murphy's
comments, the City Attorney commented the Courts are beginning to
rule that an initiative must be consistent with the General Plan,
therefore the General Plan should be adopted now and then a
consistent initiative adopted; and noted Section 4 [Measure A, March
5, 1991], provides for amendments to the General Plan "as are
necessary," which means "if necessary," in case it is not consistent;
if Measure A passes on March 5, 1991, the Planning Department will be
reviewing the General Plan to determine whether or not it is
consistent.
Councilman Arnerich stated, as Council representative to the Alameda
County Transportation Commission, that the 66th Avenue overpass, or
tunnel, is Number One priority for the City of Alameda.
President Corica stated the concern is whether it is to be
underground or not, and the East Bay Regional Park District has
concerns about having an overpass, so the way the connector is to be
constructed is the most important aspect.
Councilman Arnerich added funding is a problem and because of that,
the project could take ten to twenty years to accomplish.
Councilmember Camicia requested staff provide a strategy for pursuing
the Crossing and agendize for Council's consideration after the March
Municipal Election.
Councilmember Thomas expressed various concerns regarding the Draft
General Plan: Page 33, Section 2.7.b, Guiding Policies: Offices,
noted approval of offices are precluded in residential areas on the
General Plan Diagram, and inquired how that would be addressed, to
which the Planning Director stated there would be a careful rezoning
of certain areas. Councilmember Thomas stated the City should allow
some owner-occupied commercial uses in residential areas with Use
Permits, and other exceptions as set forth by appropriate regulatory
agencies or bodies, and requested that be looked at.
President Corica suggested the possibility of sending notices with
utility bills to be sure everyone in a particular area that is to be
rezoned, receives adequate notice.
Councilmember Thomas referred to Page 38, Guiding Policies: Federal
Government Facilities, 2.9.a, which supports the continued operation
of the Alameda Naval Air Station at its 1990 level, and stated
concern that is too stringent; the details of the basis for the
level should be set forth (whether determined by type of employees,
workload, type of carriers based); and the level should be framed in
terms of mitigation the City requires if the levels are exceeded.
Councilmember Thomas, regarding Page 34, Business Parks and
February 5, 1991
22
Industrial Areas, Harbor Bay Business Park, expressed concerr
regarding safety impacts due to highrise buildings, and concern abou-
the proposed expansion of the airport.
To Councilman Arnerich's question regarding how many highrises there
will be and if they will be a problem with aircraft, the City Manager
noted the development plan is already approved for the project, the
General Plan will not have any affect on what has been approved.
Councilmember Thomas stated she would like assurance by consultant
and staff that the highrises are not going to create additional noise
and safety impact from air on residents of the City.
Councilmember Withrow stated it would be a good idea if Council could
speak to the specifics about what really is called for in the
settlement agreement, and what the developer has been authorized to
build.
The City Manager responded staff could look at the development plan
and bring back a report which discusses the approvals of the Airport
Land Use Commission, and the most current planning effort the
developers would like to bring before the City when they get ready to
build those structures.
Councilmember Thomas noted a 25 foot tower can be built on top of the
buildings and that would be impacted by aircraft, and she is
concerned about the safety of the citizens and pilots, and about
noise.
Councilmember Camicia stated there are a number of alternatives
proposed, however the most serious threat to Alameda is the [runway]
that aims directly over schools, e.g., Earhart, Edison, St.
Phillips'; and he knows of no permutation of runways that puts the
City in more jeopardy than the existing runways.
President Corica inquired what the height limit is; and stated this
is a time for Council to say it does not want certain things done,
and if it is necessary to work on the Settlement Agreement, so be it,
but at least, put it [Council's conclusions) in the General Plan.
In response to Councilmember Camicia, the City Manager stated the
Planning Board recommends certification of the EIR, and adoption of
the General Plan; and staff has taken note of Councilmembers'
questions and comments, and will report back.
Councilmember Camicia moved the related resolution regarding the
certification of the Final EIR be taken out of order. Councilmember
Thomas seconded the motion which was carried by unanimous voice vote
- 5.
91-061 Resolution 12068 "Certifying the Final Environmental Impact
Report pertaining to Proposed General Plan Revision." Adopted.
Ron Basarich, 3215 Phoenix Lane, stated significant environmental
impact from noise exists from traffic problems not adequately
February 5, 1991
23
addressed in the EIR with respect to future expansions and changes
within the City; additional traffic and pollutants caused by
changing of business environment in the West End has not been
addressed; the greatest hazard comes from aircraft making approaches
in certain weather conditions from west to east and when they make a
turn over a highrise building the aircraft will be in an impact zone;
therefore, he does not believe the General Plan or EIR have taken in
these considerations sufficiently to be approved.
To Councilman Arnerich's question if the issues have been addressed,
the City Manager replied the matter was not addressed because the
approval of the Harbor Bay Business Park is done and therefore it is
not reviewed in the General Plan.
Councilmember Thomas stated she does not disagree that this should
not be in the General Plan but the safety concerns are not
specifically addressed so the EIR cannot be adopted.
Councilmember Camicia stated when he came on the Planning Board in
1979, the Board spent considerable time discussing Tract 4500 which
is the land under discussion, and heard from federal officials and
agencies, Port of Oakland officials, the Airport Land Use Commission
and many consultants. The matter was addressed at that time, and
that is why it is not addressed now.
Councilmember Thomas stated she believes the inadequacies have been
pointed out; she is not saying Council can legally deny HBI their
entitlements but Council must adequately address impacts, safety of
citizens and noise.
Councilmember Camicia moved adoption. Councilman Arnerich seconded
the motion, which was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:
Councilmembers Arnerich, Camicia, Withrow and President Corica - 4.
Noes: Councilmember Thomas - 1. Absent: None.
91-062 Resolution 12069 "Adopting the Revised General Plan Elements,
with the exception of the Housing Element." Adopted.
Councilmember Camicia moved adoption. Councilmember Withrow seconded
the motion which was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:
Councilmembers Arnerich, Camicia, Withrow and President Corica - 4.
Noes: Councilmember Thomas - 1. Absent: None.
REPORTS AND RECOMMEDATIONS
91-063 From President, Public Utilities Board, requesting City
Council return earnings remitted to the City.
President Corica stated the $700,000 is requested to be returned to
the Bureau of Electricity for capital improvement.
Councilmember Withrow moved approval. Councilman Arnerich seconded
the motion.
Councilmember Camicia inquired if the money is for improving seismic
February 5, 1991
24
stability, to which the City Manager responded three major areas are
involved: seismic retrofitting of the building, the HVAC system doeE
not work, the roof is also a major problem, and some workflow changeE
must be made; the estimated cost of the project is close to
$2,000,000.
Councilman Arnerich inquired if this is a one-time-only occurrence,
and the City Manager responded it is, and that the Bureau is asking
for $700,000 back, leaving the City with a million dollars above and
beyond the $2,000,000 which they already transferred to the City.
The motion to approve was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
91-064 From Chair, Golf Commission, reviewing status of Golf Complex
Security Program.
Councilman Arnerich inquired how soon the security program can be
implemented, and the Golf Operations Manager responded the plans are
implemented now with the exception of a hooded bag rack; and
additional security measure is being reviewed and will be brought
before Council with a further recommendation.
To Councilman Arnerich's query if the concessionaires will contribute
funds to the security system, the Golf Operations Manager replied
that will be requested although they have no obligation to provide
financial assistance under contract, however it is to the
concessionaires' benefit and they may cooperate.
Councilmember Camicia moved acceptance. Councilman Arnerich seconded
the motion which was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
91-065 From Chair, Recreation Commission, recommending that the name
of the Lincoln Park Recreation Center be changed to the Lucile
Harrison Recreation Center.
Donald Sherratt, 74 Basinside Way, stated the Recreation Commission
is finishing the renovation of Lincoln Park and unnanimously
recommended the renaming of the Recreation Center to Lucile Harrison
Recreation Center.
President Corica commented on the many years of dedication Lucile
Harrison has given to the City and stated the recommendation is most
appropriate.
Councilman Arnerich moved to accept the recommendation.
Councilmember Withrow seconded the motion which was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
91-066 From City Manager regarding transfer of funds back into
outside counsel budget.
Councilmember Camicia stated he had been informed the City Manager
can authorize adjustments, at any point Council determines the City
has a problem with the Port and needs to go to [outside counsel], so
there is no need to go forward with this matter tonight and he moved
the recommendation to leave [budget considerations] as they are.
February 5, 1991
2
Councilmember Withrow seconded the motion which was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
91-067 From City Manager regarding display of American flags on City
property.
Patty Jarrat, 807 Haight Avenue, West Alameda Business Association
(WABA), stated at WABA's last general meeting, businessmen from WABA
voted on hanging flags and yellow ribbons from utility poles;
Alameda has many men and women in the Persian Gulf and this is one
way to show support, and the City should go ahead with displays.
Gerhard Degemann, 19 Sandpiper Place, stated the meeting was opened
with a salute to the flag, the flag is a symbol of peace, it flies
over the White House, State Capital, courthouses, City Hall, Police
Building, schools, polling places, etc. and he would like the City
to go on record that the American flag can be displayed by
businessmen and the police officers also.
President Corica commented the City has shown many times, a closeness
to the military; has a lot of detachments in the Persian Gulf; he
agrees strongly with the two speakers and would like to go a step
further and have the City crew display the flags as on the Fourth of
July, and remain on Webster and Park Streets until the end of the
conflict; if the merchants want to place yellow ribbons that will be
fine; and agrees with Police and Fire Departments that, if they want
to place flags on the trucks, other vehicles and their uniforms, they
may; he would like a motion to permit that, and show support for
those in the Persian Gulf.
Councilmember Withrow moved that the policy statement made by
President Corica be placed in effect. Councilmember Camicia seconded
the motion which was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
91-068 From City Manager regarding residential Curbside Recycling
Agreement. (Continued from January 15, 1991, Council Meeting.)
President Corica stated he would abstain as he has a son-in-law who
works for the Oakland Scavenger Company.
Vice Mayor Arnerich took his seat to Chair the matter.
Don Roberts, 880 Portola Avenue, Vice-Chair, Solid Waste
Management Recycling Committee, stated the Committee met with Waste
Management Inc., (WMI) [of which Oakland Scavenger is a subsidiary]
and negotiated an agreement on all the items before it with one
exception, the Committee wanted language placed in the termination
clause of the contract to allow the City to terminate the contract if
WMI does not accomplish 70% participation rate and at least 10% of
all residential waste recycled each year.
Doug Linney, 617 Baywood Road, Solid Waste Management Recycling
Committee, stated the termination clause is a key provision about
which the Committee feels very strongly; the Committee requests the
clause be put back into the contract and that the City hold WMI
February 5, 1991
26
accountable for performance standards of 70% participation rate in
the curbside recycling and 10% reduction in waste, otherwise have the
ability to find another contractor who can guarantee those rates.
Pat Colburn, 934 MacArthur Boulevard, Oakland, stated she does not
believe achieving rates noted by previous speakers is difficult if
adequate education is provided, and hopes Council includes a
termination clause tied to the rates, or limitation of term of
contract to three years so City may insure the best service for its
citizens.
Vice Mayor Arnerich stated he is not sure 70% is a realistic rate
because, within the the first three years, rates are about 40 or 50
percent, which can be substantiated by some cities, e.g., Santa Rosa.
Councilmember Thomas stated the steps the City is going through now,
including those required under AB939, to analyze waste stream will
reveal how much can be expected from curbside residential recycling,
and that appears to be a very small portion of the City's waste
stream; a significant portion is commercial and industrial; 70% can
be discussed but if residential is only 5% of the waste stream, there
is no way to reduce by 10%, so [determining the percentage] is
premature; until the City has commercial recycling, little can be
done; the significant part that must be addressed is composting,
which should begin within the next two years, if AB939 goals are to
be met.
Vice Mayor Arnerich stated he believed the City Manager, at one
point, noted the [participation rate] was not included in the Request
for Proposal.
The City Manager stated he does not believe the Request for Proposal
addressed the issue, the City is looking at 25% reduction by 1995, is
trying to reduce the amount of waste going to the disposal site; one
way is through recycling, another is composting and a very large
portion is commercial; agrees with Councilmember Thomas that if 100%
reduction [in residential] could be met, that would still not meet
the goal if commercial is not changing; he would like to see the
clause in the contract but the contractor would not agree and if the
contractor will not sign, there will be no recycling program, and the
process must be started over again at the beginning.
To Vice Mayor Arnerich's question about a realistic date for starting
the program, and the length of the contract, the City Manager replied
it would probably take about 4+ months (June, 1991) to order
equipment, schedule routes, hire new employees, etc., and the
contract term is five years.
Councilmember Withrow stated for clarification, that the 10% figure
coming from the Committee is 10% of the residential and noted it may
confuse listeners; Council has talked about not reaching the 10%
because the commercial was so high but that has no bearing because it
is not a part of the subject.
To Councilmember Withrow's question if the Committee's research found
that WMI has achieved 70% in most of their East Bay operations, the
February 5, 1991
27
Management Analyst responded that based on her research, she has not
_ talked with anyone who is serviced by Oakland Scavenger in terms of
curbside recycling program that has not reached at least 70%, and
that includes San Jose, Newark and Fremont.
Councilmember Withrow inquired if, as a staff advisor to Council, the
Management Analyst would consider 70% to be a reasonable figure for
performance criteria, and the Management Analyst replied that would
be.
Councilmember Withrow inquired if Oakland Scavenger, at the end of
one year, is determined by the Council to be non-performing in
meeting the standards Council is looking for, how difficult would it
be to terminate the contract.
Under discussion of Council and City Attorney regarding details
concerning requirements and termination, the City Attorney commented
that Oakland Scavenger (OS) has a year to achieve 70% participation,
if OS does not, then it must double the money for education, and the
City and OS are to redraft the program, if that does not provide the
performance, then termination can occur.
Councilmember Withrow stated the City and Council are boxed into a
corner to take a deficient contract with a company that is not going
to be held accountable to perform and he feels it is important for
the citizens to know what Council is walking them into.
Adam Davis, Recycling Coordinator for Oakland Scavenger, 2000
Embarcadero, Oakland, stated 1) the 70% participation rate was
attached to a specific guarantee that if OS did not achieve the rate,
the education budget would be doubled with no additional charge to
the rate payer; 2) the paragraph inserted in the contract is
cooperative in nature and states if the goal is not reached, both
parties will sit down and determine how to reach it, not that the
contract will be terminated. What is being purchased is the
opportunity to recycle, OS will be at every household in the City
every week, and if OS does not do that, then the contract can be
teiiuinated.
Councilmember Camicia suggested a new committee somewhat along the
lines of the Cable Television Oversight Committee, composed of City
and Waste Management members, be structured to monitor progress,
report problems, and make recommendations.
Councilmember Thomas stated she would nominate Councilmember Withrow
to be on the Rate Review Committee, so that performance can be tied
to rate increases.
Gerhard Degemann, 19 Sandpiper Place, stated a proposal went out for
recycling and the Committee was interested that the cancellation
clause be included in the contract, and asked what the right time is
for including the cancellation clause.
The City Manager stated the Request for Proposal is the place to put
the clause along with the percentage; the cancellation was not part
of the Request for Proposal and is not what was bid on.
Febrylary 5, 1991
28
Councilmember Thomas stated the City will receive no benefit for its
programs if the programs are not on line soon; there are concerns
dealing with monopolies but the way to deal with the situation is
through the pocketbook.
Councilmember Camicia stated the process has been long, he believes
the company is a good one, the City has an opportunity to be
environmentally conscious and the process should be started.
Councilman Arnerich agreed; stated he does not believe WMI would
purchase necessary equipment and not do the work in a first-rate
manner; and if they do not, then management level will sit down and
see what can be done.
Councilmember Thomas moved adoption of recommendation [to enter into
agreement and adopt ordinance to discourage theft of recyclable
materials]. Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion which was
carried by the following voice votes: Ayes: Councilmembers Camicia,
Thomas and Vice Mayor Arnerich - 3. Noes: Councilmember Withrow -
1. Absent: None. Abstentions: Mayor Corica - 1.
91-069 Ordinance No. , N.S. "Amending the Alameda Municipal
Code by Adding Section 15-6214 through 15-6219 to Article 2, Chapter
6 of Title XV thereof, establishing requirements for a Recycling
Program for curbside residential recycling and prohibiting
unauthorized collection of recyclable materials, and amending
Subsection (Y), Article 1, Chapter 5, Title I (Violations
Identified). (Continued from January 15, 1991, Council Meeting)
Vice Mayor Arnerich noted this ordinance states that when recyclables
are put out on the curbside, the only people allowed to pick up the
materials is WMI.
Councilmember Camicia moved introduction. Councilmember Thomas
seconded the motion which was carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Camicia, Thomas, Withrow, and Vice Mayor
Arnerich - 4. Noes: None. Absent: None, Abstentions: Mayor
Corica - 1 [Because his son-in-law works for Oakland Scavenger].
* * * * *
Mayor Corica returned to the dais to chair the rest of the meeting.
* * * * *
91-070 From City Manager regarding Bay Vision 2020.
Councilman Arnerich requested a City staff member attend the League
of Women Voters-sponsored meeting on Saturday, February 9th, in
Oakland, and report back to Council.
President Corica stated he believes there may be some problem
concerning whether or not the City wants to become involved and have
a regional government that would take away local control.
Councilmember Camicia commented that, in the report, the Bay Vision
2020 Commission (BV2020) review of regional governance is like a Bill
in Sacramento which would create regional governance, so if there is
February 5, 1991
concern, this is a good time to become involved.
Councilmember Withrow stated the Commission's vision in the Bay Area
by the year 2020 is to actively increase the density of housing.
President Corica stated a good example is Association of Bay Area
Governments (ABAG) which makes a determination of how many units of
low-cost housing the City should have, so Council should get
involved.
Councilmember Withrow moved acceptance of the report. Councilman
Arnerich seconded the motion.
Paul Ballan, 3125 College, Berkeley, stated the purpose of ABAG and
BV2020 is also to look at transportation issues and the coordinations
between the advancements in BART and AC Transit throughout the Bay
Area, so there are some positive gains for the City.
The City Manager noted the Project Consultant from BV2020 staff
present at the meeting to answer any questions.
The motion to accept the report was carried by unanimous voice vote -
5.
91-071 From Public Works Director regarding proposed mitigation
program to reduce seismic hazards in unreinforced masonry buildings
(SB-547).
President Corica stated one recommendation to be considered is
putting two Councilmembers on a Sub-Committee and there are only two
Councilmembers who are certain to be present following the Municipal
Election, Councilmembers Withrow and Arnerich.
Councilmember Thomas so moved. Councilmember Camicia seconded the
motion which was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
Phillip M. Sherry, 16 Tullamore Place, submitted a tape to Council
for review that he had made of a Nova special program on the 1989
earthquake, aired on Channel KQED, noting the damaged cities are very
much like Alameda and revealed to him what the City faces with its
unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings; and people will suffer
financially but the work must be done.
Herbert Von Coldnitz, 233 Brighton Court, stated his qualifications
as an engineer specializing in seismic design provisions; stated
SB547 is for protection of lives in a damaging earthquake; the City
of Santa Cruz debated about upgrading URM buildings and buildings
collapsed in the Loma Prieta earthquake; requested Council not
procrastinate and gamble with lives and the City's financial future.
Scott Brady, 1231 Park Avenue, stated demolition, as proposed, should
be only a last resort and other options fully explored; if primary
issue is safety, it should be public knowledge that buildings are
URM; regarding incentives, the City should encourage the State, and
the City should look for, provision of some funding mechanism and
low-cost loans to do the work.
February 5, 1991
30
Dolores Staudinraus, 611 Washington Street, stated she owns a URN
building, introduced and gave background and qualifications of Mr.
John Kariotis, consultant, structural engineer, who specializes in
seismic modification of URM buildings.
Mr. Kariotis, Pasadena, stated an ordinance adopted last September,
published by Seismic Safety Commission deals specifically with URM
buildings, reviewed roots of the ordinance, the Los Angeles ordinance
upon which he had worked; reviewed results of Loma Prieta, El
Centro, Los Angeles earthquakes with respect to damage to buildings
and life safety; noted, to reduce public safety, a wall adjacent to
the sidewalk or above the roof of another building must never be
ignored; stated, in El Centro, a very strong quake had only three
incidents, because building walls had been anchored and parapets
braced following a previous earthquake; suggested taking excerpts
from present documents and tailoring to fit Alameda's needs and
financial ability.
At Councilmember Withrow's request, Mr. Kariotis described the
difference between the proposed ordinance and the generic ordinance
referred to by Mr. Kariotis; noted the generic ordinance deals
strictly with the URM bearing wall building which has constitued the
majority of the life-safety threats and deaths in California; and
the ordinance gives specific analyses, substantially different forces
and capacities of material which came from dynamic testing, etc.
Councilmember Withrow inquired if the City had a tailored generic
ordinance along the lines Mr. Kariotis described, and overlaid that
on Alameda's current situation, would the City's problems be
substantially minimized and would the cost of investment be reduced,
on a generalized basis, in achieving safety.
Mr. Kariotis replied it would, using El Centro as an illustration of
life safety, and discussed the cost in retrofitting for life safety.
To Councilmember Arnerich's question regarding the timeframe involved
in this issue, Mr. Kariotis replied two to ten years.
Councilmember Thomas noted the City's General Plan indicated parts of
the City were subjected to liquifaction and sand boils during the
earthquake; and commented other types of vulnerable construction
e.g., tilt-top slab, soft-story wood frame construction, etc., in
Alameda have not been identified, and requested a comparison.
Mr. Kariotis responded Alameda URMS, principally occupying two main
areas of Alameda, are built on stable soils and is one reason there
was less damage in Alameda than in Oakland; the soils are a very
important consideration; how threats are viewed is a political
consideration; he rates the URM bearing wall as #1, infill frame
building is #2, tilt-up building #3, and concrete building soft-story
built in the 1950s and 1960s as #4 or perhaps #3.
Councilmember Camicia requested the generic ordinance be
characterized as life safety or full retrofit.
February 5, 1991
31
Mr. Kariotis stated it is a full retrofit because it was patterned
after the Los Angeles ordinance and is a full earthquake hazard
reduction.
John Leavitt, 1612 San Antonio, Alameda Property Owners Association,
stated the Association strongly supports the mitigation program and
encourages Council to move ahead quickly to arrive at a reasonable
ordinance; urges Council to support a program that would require
anchoring walls to roofs and floors, and supporting the parapets;
believes remaining issues can be resolved quickly and endorses the
appointment of the two Councilmembers.
* * * *
Councilman Arnerich moved the meeting be extended past 11:00 p.m.
Councilmember Withrow seconded the motion which was carried by the
following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Arnerich, Camicia,
Withrow and President Corica - 4. Noes: Councilmember Thomas - 1.
Absent: None.
Niall Leahy, Alameda, stated no tenants can afford a total retrofit
building and property owners would be bankrupted; and requested
life-safety retrofit and owners will anchor walls and brace parapets.
Wil Garfinkle, 2938 Northwood Drive, addressed financial impact of
the ordinance, noting life-safety retrofit would cost him $192,000,
amortized over 20 years would be $495,000, and loan payments cannot
be passed on to tenants who have leases.
Lisa Gregersen, 1325 Park Street, stated it would cost $471,000 to
retrofit her building, she is told the Masonic Building could fall on
her building, has been advised to tear her building down and does not
know what to do.
Fred Delanoy, 126 Weymouth Court, stated full retrofit requirements
would bring financial catastrophe; is disappointed Public Works
Director can no long discuss matter with Propery Owners Association;
and Council should not enact ordinance not financially feasible.
Clayton Guyton, 457 Buena Vista, #302, stated he would like to know
if he is walking into a structurally sound building; a decal or
display should notify persons walking into a building so people will
have a choice.
James Thompson, 3231 Calhoun Street, stated the property owners and
staff were moving ahead until a newspaper article accused the group
of violating the Brown Act, that killed negotiations because the
group cannot meet with the Public Works Director; basically the
group want to emphasize the life-safety issue and proceed with that.
Martha Beazley, 2318 Central Avenue, stated the cost of moving her
business, as tenant of her own building, would be prohibitive, and
any tenant out of a building for very long, would not survive.
To Councilmember Withrow's question regarding the increment in safety
factor between life-safety retrofit and full retrofit, John Leavitt
replied the incremental increase is very small, about a half percent,
February 5, 1991
2
but is substantial in terms of building preservation; it has been
said life-safety is for the populace and retrofit is for the owner.
Councilman Arnerich moved to accept the report with the stipulation
that the two persons appointed meet with the Property Owners
Association. Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion.
Councilmember Thomas stated what she has learned from Mr. Kariotis
indicates Council may need to rethink the entire ordinance and make
it unique to Alameda; soil is as much a factor as URM; the
Committee may need to go back to the beginning, and questioned if
the inventory of the URNS have been corrected.
Mr. Leavitt replied staff has corrected the list, owners requested
reviews, and a substantial number of buildings have been removed.
Councilmember Thomas stated the Committee should note Ms.
Gregersen's comment about an adjacent building that could topple on
her building, and perhaps review how ordinances in other cities
addressed the matter.
The City Attorney stated Council could clarify there is no URM
Committee, that there is no group of citizens that are directed to
meet with the Council Sub-Committee, that Council has a Sub-Committee
of two people that can meet together or with whomever they choose to
meet on an ad hoc basis.
Councilmember Withrow so moved. Councilman Arnerich seconded ths
motion which was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
91-072 From Public Works Director recommending authorization to
execute agreements for Cypress Corridor Transportation Management
Plan contracts for the purpose of providing funding to improve ferry
terminal support facilities, Alameda/Oakland ferry marketing, and
Alameda BART shuttle vehicle purchase and operations.
To Councilmember Withrow's question for confirmation that the
contracts would not be a cost to the City's General Fund, the City
Manager confirmed the cost would come from Measure B Funds.
Councilmember Withrow moved acceptance. Councilmember Camicia
seconded the motion which was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES
91-073 Ordinance No. N.S. "Authorizing execution of Second
Amendment to Tidelands Lease with Alameda Gateway, Ltd." Introduced.
Councilmember Camicia moved introduction. Councilmember Withrow
seconded the motion which was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
91-074 Ordinance No. N.S. "Amending the Alameda Municipal
Code by Amending Section 17-375 of Article 7, Chapter 3, Title XVII,
requiring Cash Box payment of vehicle use in attendant parking lots
February 5, 1991
33
during normal hours of operation but exiting after hours."
Introduced.
Councilmember Camicia moved introduction. Councilmember Withrow
seconded the motion which was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
91-075 Ordinance, No. , N.S. "Authorizing Amendment to Contract
between the Board of Administration of the California Public
Employees' Retirement System and the City Council of the City of
Alameda." Introduced.
Councilmember Thomas stated ordinances should not be introduced on
the Consent Calendar but should be placed on the regular agenda for
opportunity for discussion.
Councilmember Camicia moved introduction of the ordinance.
Councilmember Withrow seconded the motion which was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
BILLS
91-076 Ratification of Bills.
Councilmember Withrow moved ratification of the Bills, certified by
the City Manager to be correct, in the amount of $2,602,255.38.
Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion which was was carried by
the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Arnerich, Camicia,
Withrow and President Corica - 4. Noes: Councilmember Thomas - 1.
Absent: None.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
91-077 Councilmember Thomas requested the Cable Television Utility
Users Tax matter be agendized for the next Council Meeting, if
possible.
91-078 Councilmember Thomas stated she would like to receive a report
on the transfer tax information provided by Harbor Bay Isle
Associates in response to a request by the City's former Finance
Director, the County tax collectors' comments, and, if the City is
not catching the transfer tax and concomitant appraisal, what the
problems are and what can be done to collect the tax in the future.
91-079 Councilmember Thomas stated she would like a staff report on
the Consent Calendar of the next Council Meeting Agenda providing the
appropriate sections of an earlier Environmental Impact Report that
addressed the height of the buildings in the Harbor Bay Business Park
in the northwesterly corner.
91-080 Councilmember Camicia requested staff to investigate, in the
near future, whether parking allowances could be made for residents
with parking meters directly in front of their homes.
President Corica suggested perhaps the Traffic Advisory Committee
could look at the matter.
February 5, 1991
34
NEW BUSINESS
91-081 Councilmember Thomas described a recent bomb threat incident
at a local school recently; and suggested a City policy for
evacuation of public buildings should be given consideration, and a
need to make sure the City will not be liable.
91-082 Councilmember Thomas stated the City is facing fiscal
shortfalls, and she has a concern regarding the amount of time the
City's top managers are spending away from the City at various
functions in addition to benefits, e.g., vacation, sick leave,
holidays and administrative leave; that she would like a report
prepared so Council can set a policy whereby Managers are not gone
from City Hall for more than ten working days a year.
91-083 Councilmember Withrow stated he has a concern raised by
citizens, that perpetrators of crime in the City are not being
severely dealt with, or dealt with in a judicious fashion, and
requested the City Manager and City Attorney to prepare a report
identifying felons over the last two years who have committed
felonies within the City, and the disposition of those cases.
President Corica noted that he is particularly interested in the 1983
Rob Davey case.
91-084 Consideration of nomination for appointment to Golf
Commission.
President Corica nominated R. E. Stone as Member of the Golf
Commission.
Councilmember Camicia seconded the nomination which was approved by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
91-085 Consideration of nomination for appointment to Pension Board.
President Corica stated he would like to continue the matter to the
next Council Meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
91-086 President Corica adjourned the meeting at 11:50 p.m. with a
moment of silence for the troops in Persian Gulf and of prayer for
their safety.
Respectfully submitted,
45-
DIANE B. FELSCH, CMC
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in advance in accordance with
the Brown Act.
February 5, 1991