1988-07-19 Regular CC Minutes207
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA
HELD TUESDAY JULY 19, 1988
The meeting convened at 7:41 p.m. (at the conclusion of the Closed
Session to discuss appointment of a City Manager, and threatened
litigation, and the Community Improvement Commission Meeting) with
President Corica presiding. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by
Councilmember Thomas. Rev. Jack Huttinga gave the invocation.
ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Camicia, Haugner, Monsef,
Thomas, and President Corica - 5.
Absent: None.
MINUTES
Councilmember Haugner made a motion to approve the minutes of the
Regular Council Meetings of June 21, 1988 and July 5, 1988, and
Special Council Meeting of June 28, 1988. Councilmember Monsef
seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
88-457 Presentation by the Mayor of the July, 1988, Employee
Excellence Award.
President Corica commented on the performance of Judy Martin, a
City telephone operator, and presented the Employee Excellence
Award to her.
88-458 Proclamation commending Jernon Matosich for services
rendered as a Councilmember Assistant.
Councilmember Camicia commented on Ms. Matosich's service through
the Internship Program in his office, and presented the
proclamation to her.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember Haugner made a motion to approve the Consent
Calendar. Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion and it was
carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk.
REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
*88-459 From Finance Director on City's Investment Portfolio as of
June 30, 1988. Accepted.
*88-460 From Public Works Director recommending the setting of a
hearing date to consider Sewer Service Fee amendments. Accepted.
*88-461 From Public Works Director recommending acceptance of work
by Gallagher & Burk, Inc. for Island Drive east side improvements,
P.W. No. 4-87-8. Accepted.
July 19, 1988
208
*88-462 From Public Works Director recommending acceptance of work
by Gallagher & Burk, Inc. for Constitution Way, Phase IIIA, P.W.
No. 3-86-5. Accepted.
*88-463 From Public Works Director recommending acceptance of work
by Jardin Pipeline, Inc. for San Antonio Avenue sanitary sewer
replacement, P.W. No. 10-87-23. Accepted.
RESOLUTIONS
*88-464 Resolution No. 11524 "Awarding contract to Gallagher &
Burk, Inc. for repair and resurfacing of certain streets, Phase
10, P.W. No. 2-88-5, and authorizing execution thereof." Adopted.
*88-465 Resolution No. 11525 "Awarding contract to Monterey
Mechanical Co. for Bridgeway Pump Station expansion, P.W. No.
1-87-1, and authorizing execution thereof." Adopted.
FINAL PASSAGE OF ORDINANCES
*88-466 Ordinance No. 2395, N. S. "Amending Title II of the
Alameda Municipal Code defining Written Communications to include
Oral Communications." Adopted.
BILLS
*88-467 A List of Claims, certified by the Interim City Manager as
correct, was approved in the amount of $1,431,672.24.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
88-468 From Mr. James Payton, 2007 Clinton Avenue, regarding
Municipal Fire Departments and Departments of Public Safety.
President Corica stated Mr. Payton suggested consolidating the
Police and Fire Departments, and perhaps this communication should
be addressed when Council considers the report [study] on the Fire
Department.
Councilmember Camicia made a motion to accept the communication.
Councilmember Monsef seconded the motion and it was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
88-469 From Mr. Norman W. Lynds, President, Island City Gun Club,
420 Maitland Drive, regarding a proposed project for the gun club
site.
Mr. Lynds reviewed the background of the Gun Club, its growth;
the taking of acreage, and its closure, by the City; its
seven-year negotiation with Harbor Bay Isle (HBI) for property
utilization; the safety zone, occupancy and density restrictions;
the $2,000,000 proposal to provide road improvement, indoor range
facility, recreation vehicle storage in the four and one-half acre
safety zone where buildings cannot be erected, and mini-storage
July 19, 1988
209
units; stated he believes the program will be of benefit to the
City; and requested Council authorize the City to meet with the
Gun Club and HBI to negotiate and proceed with the project.
Councilmember Camicia moved that be done.
Councilmember Thomas stated the Gun Club pays the City $1.00 a year
for the property, has 11 years remaining on the lease, and then
some of the policies of leasing properties for $1.00 will need to
change; the lease should then be bid; the lease is
non-assignable; if it is used for an RV park, it cannot supplement
HBI's requirement that they provide acreage on their land; she
cannot favor a $2,000,000 bonus to a special interest; other
projects need the revenue that can be received from that acreage;
City should categorize all the property it owns, and put them out
at market rates, and she will oppose this recommendation.
Councilmember Haugner seconded the motion.
Councilmember Camicia stated his motion is simply to get people
together to talk about the issue.
Councilmember Thomas stated there is no reason for the developer to
step in and negotiate with a lessee.
Councilmember Monsef stated he would like to hear some comments
from the Interim City Manager.
The Interim City Manager stated there has been no time to review
the entire matter and present a comprehensive report to Council,
therefore the recommendation is to simply come back with a more
complete report.
Councilmember Haugner stated she would not object if the developer
wanted to have some input, but does agree Council needs more
information out of courtesy to the Gun Club and interest for the
City.
President Corica stated he would support the recommendation that
Council authorize staff to meet and discuss the matter, but he
would want to amend the recommendation so that staff could look the
matter over without discussion with the principals.
Councilmember Haugner withdrew her second.
Councilmember Thomas stated she does not want Harbor Bay Isle's
input on this lease or any other City lease.
Councilmember Camicia stated the Gun Club has been vacant a long
time and he would like to get something done about it.
Councilmember Haugner made a motion that Council request the staff
to return to Council with a report and recommendation regarding the
situation of the Gun Club, but that does not preclude that there
can be some separate information provided to Council, but not in
the report from staff.
July 19, 1988
210
The Interim City Manager proposed that Staff be authorized to
review this matter further and prepare a report and recommendation
based upon that finding.
Councilmember Haugner so moved, and Councilmember Camicia seconded
the motion.
Councilmember Thomas stated she would like the report to include a
review of this lease, the rates of return of all other City
property, and noted some guidelines need to be established for what
the City expects of its lessees; and requested the Finance
Director clarify the tax base increase on improvements on City
property, and submit same in the report.
Councilmember Haugner stated she would like everything included in
the report, e.g., noise, all questions noted, remarks from the
Recreation Department, etc.
The motion was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
88-470 From Bradford Randolph, 3503 Springlake Drive, San Leandro,
concerning alcoholic beverages on the beach at South Shore.
Councilmember Monsef made a motion that the City Council maintain
its existing policies on the South Shore Beach. Councilmember
Thomas seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
88-471 From Stanford Shane, 470 D Cola Ballena, regarding Council
sitting as both Judge and Jury.
Mr. Shane complained about the Alameda Municipal Code Section
under which real estate brokers, agents and salesmen were required
to obtain an Alameda business license, and the efforts of the City
staff to collect the unpaid tax.
Councilmember Thomas inquired of the Finance Director if other
agents are having this problem, to which the Finance Director
replied there are 27 other realtors served for refusal to pay; and
the Court has found that Mr. Shane has violated the Municipal
Code.
Councilmember Monsef made a motion to accept the communication.
Councilmember Thomas seconded the motion and it was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
HEARINGS
88-472 Consideration of extension of Interim Ordinance No. 2390,
N.S., prohibiting and suspending issuance of Building Permits for
construction on certain properties located on the westerly side of
Park Avenue between Encinal Avenue and Central Avenue, that are
inconsistent with proposed zoning.
President Corica explained the procedure of the hearing.
July 19, 1988
211
The Planning Director explained the background of the matter.
The public portion of the Hearing was opened.
On the call for proponents, the following spoke:
Al Scott, 2418 Marti Rae Court.
Gene Bertram Getz, 2618 San Jose Avenue.
Geraldine Brehm, 1159 Broadway Street.
On the call for opponents, there were none.
The public portion of the hearing was closed.
Councilmember Camicia moved the recommendation.
Councilmember Monsef seconded the motion and it was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
Councilmember Haugner made a motion to take the related ordinance
out of order. Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion which was
carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
88-473 Ordinance No. 2396, N.S. "Extending Interim Ordinance No.
2390, N.S. prohibiting and suspending issuance of building permits
for construction on certain properties located on the westerly side
of Park Avenue between Encinal Avenue and Central Avenue, that are
inconsistent with proposed zoning." Adopted.
Councilmember Haugner made a motion to introduce and pass the
ordinance. Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion which was
carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
APPEALS
88-474 Consideration of Appeal of Planning Board approval of
Planned Development Amendment, PDA-88-5 and Use Permit UP-88-13 for
the Chevron Service Station located at 2340 Otis Drive, within a
C-2-PD, Central Business, Planned Development District. Applicant:
Majors Engineering Inc. for Chevron USA, Inc. Appellant: Majors
Engineering, Inc.
President Corica stated information was received that probably
cannot be addressed at this time under the appeal, because it will
take additional time, it was not part of the original evidence, and
for it to be included, the matter must go back to the Planning
Board to review and make recommendation.
Wayne Weber, 2340 Otis Drive, stated accidents have not been caused
by driveways at Chevron; and requested the matter be continued so
that Majors Engineering may present their report.
Councilmember Thomas made a motion to remand the matter back to the
Planning Board, pending a [traffic analysis] report from Majors
Engineering. Councilmember Haugner seconded the motion and it was
July 19, 1988
212
carried by unanimous voice vote 5.
88-475 Consideration of Appeal of Planning Board denial of Use
Permit, UP-88-5, to erect an off-premise directional sign in the
median island on Atlantic Avenue westerly of Webster Street as
required in Zoning Ordinance Section 11-14B9.5. Applicant:
Alameda Naval Air Station. Appellant: Vice Mayor Barbara Thomas.
Councilmember Thomas stated she appealed the matter because she
believes there should be a sign and when a negative decision is
made by the Planning Board, there cannot be re-application for a
Use Permit for a period of one year; and rather than turning the
matter down, it would have been better for the Planning Board to
continue to work with the Navy on a directional sign.
Lieut. Commander Robert Steiner, Naval Air Station (NAS),
representing Captain Pickett, stated the Navy is proposing a
simple, straightforward street sign like the one it had there for
many years before being torn down for street construction.
Councilmember Camicia suggested the Navy and the staff continue to
work together to resolve the matter.
The Planning Director stated the Planning Board is not opposed to a
Navy sign, but wants an attractive, efficient sign, were concerned
the steel posts were not aesthetically pleasing and looked
temporary, believed the appearance of the sign did not justify its
location and someone other than an engineer should give input on
the design; the Navy submitted several variations on the sign but
requested reconsideration of the original proposal.
President Corica stated this is a sign for directional purposes,
some modifications may be made, but otherwise Council should go
ahead with the matter.
The Planning Director suggested, if Council approves the sign,
perhaps Council could give consideration to one of the alternative
designs for mounting the sign proposed by the Navy.
Fred Scullin, 1120 Chestnut Street, stated the Navy should have an
opportunity to apply for a variance.
President Corica stated he has no problem with a sign like the one
that was there for a long time; and it must be high enough to be
seen.
Councilmember Camicia suggested the matter be continued two weeks
to have the Navy, staff, and Planning Board reach a solution.
Councilmember Thomas stated the Planning Board had that option in
June, the ordinance does not provide for denial on the basis of
design; the Zoning Administrator made a good decision; and moved
to grant the Appeal, allow the Navy to build the sign, and delete
the two conditions (that the sign be lowered and be mounted on
concrete posts) placed by the Zoning Administrator.
July 19, 1988
Councilmember Monsef seconded the motion.
To Councilmember Camicia's inquiry if the sign is allowed by
ordinance, the Planning Director replied it is; and the Planning
Board has requested the staff work with Caltrans to obtain advance
signing to instruct drivers to move into the right lane for NAS.
President Corica clarified that the sign is smaller than the former
one.
Following further discussion regarding the design, Councilmember
Camicia stated he believed two more weeks could be used to work on
a better design.
Councilmember Haugner stated she would vote for the sign because it
is needed, and perhaps it can be made more attractive later.
The motion was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:
Councilmembers Haugner, Monsef, Thomas and President Corica - 4.
Noes: Councilmember Camicia 1. Absent: None.
REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
88-476 From Planning Director regarding consideration by the
Planning Board of City Council referral of proposed General Plan
update and Moratorium on building.
Lawrence Kiose, Berliner, Cohen & Biagini, 99 Almaden Blvd., Suite
400, San Jose, CA 95113, Attorney for A-M Homes, stated his client
objects to the moratorium; a letter has been submitted detailing
objections including the fact that his projects are well underway,
and therefore have protection; and believes the project should be
excluded from the moratorium if one is put into effect.
To questioning by Councilmember Thomas, Mr. Kiose replied the
development is an approved project, time for challenge is long
past, and the moratorium would place a burden if imposed.
James Stonehouse, 2990 Northwood Drive, Concerned Citizens of
Alameda (CCA), stated the CCA members, at a recent meeting,
considered the issue of a building moratorium in detail and
unanimously voted to oppose it; the membership is concerned about
the effect of a moratorium throughout the City as it affects jobs,
churches, schools, fire station, etc.
Fred Scullin, 1120 Chestnut Street, stated no one wants a
moratorium but when matters reach a certain stage, drastic measures
become necessary.
Diane Coler-Dark, 2857 Jackson Street, stated regarding procedure,
that the Planning Board did not study the impact of a moratorium
but gave their personal opinion.
Councilmember Thomas stated she did not receive substantial facts
in the report; there are inadequacies in the General Plan; and
reiterated that her plan is for a moratorium that will allow the
July 19, 1988
214
building of all public improvements and some development; and
would like to draft something with the City Attorney and bring it
back before Council.
President Corica stated perhaps Council should have provided more
instruction to the Planning Board; and it might be a good idea to
send it back to the Planning Board with some concerns Council has;
perhaps Planning Board did not know Council's concerns e.g., that
public buildings were supposed to be exempt; and requested
Council's opinion on giving input to the Planning Board for review.
Councilmember Monsef stated that he does not believe Council was
specific in sending the matter back to the Planning Board.
President Corica stated he does not believe that only Councilmember
Thomas should be preparing a draft, he would like the entire
Council to become involved in the procedure.
Councilmember Monsef stated Councilmember Thomas can outline what
she wants and then other Councilmembers can add to it.
Councilmember Thomas stated the point of referring the matter to
the Planning Board was because they are the experts on the General
Plan, the moratorium was designed to halt things which are not
consistent with our General Plan or which simply have not been
addressed in our General Plan, e.g., conservation at Harbor Bay;
and it is not what she wants but what the General Plan dictates.
President Corica stated he does not just want one person writing a
moratorium; he wants the input of Council.
Councilmember Thomas stated the City Attorney could write the
draft.
President Corica replied, if the City Attorney is to prepare the
draft, then all Councilmembers should talk to the City Attorney,
one at a time, and let him know the individual concerns.
Councilmember Haugner stated she believes there is much information
from the Planning Board and she will be happy to share it.
President Corica stated one of his concerns is that he does not
want the Pope Street site, schools, or the Fire Station [proposed
Bay Farm Island station] to be affected, and should be exempt from
a moratorium.
Councilmember Camicia stated he agreed with President Corica that
it is probably Council's fault that the report has not come back
from the Planning Board differently; believes the Board did a good
job summing up the issue and exploring options and pitfalls;
perhaps it is the answer that is not acceptable; if Councilmembers
want a moratorium, it should be expressed just what kind of a
moratorium is wanted, who it affects, who it helps and who it
hurts; it should be done quickly as there is a lot of community
concern and confusion; and a clear message should be given.
July 19, 1988
215
?resident Corica suggested clrleo :=rgoId 1 kTit j!CiZygtgercOTac ohinharadd=
concerns of all of Council.
Councilmember Camicia inquired what is the basic foundation.
Councilmember Thomas stated everyone should meet with the City
Attorney individually and let him proceed.
Councilmember Monsef made a motion to accept the report.
Councilmember Thomas seconded the motion and it was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
RESOLUTIONS
88-477 Resolution No. "Authorizing execution of an agreement
with Blayney-Dyett for planning services for General Plan revisions
project." Continued.
Councilmember Thomas inquired why Council did not get proposals to
review.
Councilmember Haugner noted a panel of six people was established
consisting of staff and President and Vice-President of the
Planning Board to review the proposals.
The Planning Director stated other cities were contacted and a pool
of prospective consultants developed; Statements of Qualifications
were sent to each of the 16 consultants; seven responded;
Requests for Proposals were sent to the seven; four replied; all
were interviewed by the panel and the panel's unanimous selection
was Blayney-Dyett; there was no intention to exclude Council but
traditionally Council has not become directly involved in reviewing
all proposals and making a selection on proposals of this type,
therefore a formal procedure was arranged including the officers of
the Planning Board; the firm has an excellent reputation and has
done a number of General Plans throughout the Bay Area.
Councilmember Thomas questioned how it will address the Housing
Element.
The Planning Director stated the Housing Element was specifically
excluded from the proposals as it is presently under renewal;
staff has been working with the State for some time; and the rest
of the Elements will take into consideration the Housing Element
when it is adopted.
President Corica questioned how long it will be before the Housing
Element is done; to which the Planning Director replied it depends
upon the City's ability to persuade the State staff to consider
that the City's Housing Element as proposed, is acceptable to them;
as they believe low-income housing can only be produced by
high-density multiple development; it is ultimately up to Council
to adopt the Housing Element, the State review is advisory only at
this point, but is beneficial to have State agreement that it
conforms to State goals and policies for housing development.
July 19, 1988
216
Following a brief discussion on the time involved to complete the
General Plan, Councilmember Haugner made a motion to adopt the
resolution.
The motion failed for lack of a second.
Councilmember Thomas stated she would need to read the proposals
and would vote no.
Councilmember Monsef made a motion to defer the action for two
weeks. Councilmember Thomas seconded the motion and it was carried
by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Camicia,
Monsef, Thomas and President Corica - 4. Noes: Councilmember
Haugner 1. Absent: None.
88-478 Resolution No. 11526 "Appropriating funds from the Gas Tax
Fund for the development of the Alameda County Transportation
Plan." Adopted.
Councilmember Camicia made a motion to adopt the resolution.
Councilmember Monsef seconded the motion and it was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
88-479 Resolution No. 11527 "Authorizing open market purchase and
installation of a well pump for the Golf Course and appropriating
moneys from the Golf Course Enterprise Account to fund said
project." Adopted.
Councilmember Camicia made a motion to adopt the resolution.
Councilmember Monsef seconded the motion and it was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES
88-480 Ordinance No. N.S. "Amending the Alameda Municipal
Code by amending Title XVIII, Chapter 3, Section 18-311 thereof
relating to defacement of public buildings and other property."
Councilmember Haugner made a motion to introduce the ordinance and
Councilmember Monsef seconded the motion.
Councilmember Thomas noted many people have their curbs painted.
President Corica stated an out-of-town company was painting numbers
on curbs without approval and charging residents.
The Public Works Director stated there is no problem when there is
an Alameda business license and policies of the Public Works
Department are followed.
The motion was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:
Councilmembers Camicia, Haugner, Monsef and President Corica - 4.
Noes: Councilmember Thomas - 1. Absent: None.
July 19, 1988
217
88-481 Councilmember Haugner commented that the item regarding the
Alameda County Transportation Plan (See 88-477) recommended that
there be a Council representative selected to serve and perhaps
that should be addressed.
Councilmember Camicia made a motion Rita Haugner be appointed.
Councilmember Monsef stated the Mayor historically has the
privilege of making the appointment and he would like to retain
that policy.
NEW BUSINESS
88-482 Consideration of nomination for appointment to the Public
Utilities Board.
President Corica nominated Robert Bitten for the position.
Councilmember Thomas seconded the nomination and it was carried by
consensus of Council.
88-483 Consideration of nomination for appointment to the
Historical Advisory Commission.
President Corica nominated Robert Nichol for the position.
Councilmember Camicia seconded the nomination and it was carried by
consensus of Council.
88-484 Councilmember Haugner commented that the East Bay Municipal
Utility District presentation, previously requested, should be done
within the next four weeks.
88-485 Councilmember Haugner commented on the use of barricades
during recent weeks and requested information regarding 1)
feasibility of parking stickers for residents, and 2) Noise
Ordinance application for boom boxes.
Councilmember Thomas noted a Grand Street barricade was not manned
during the weekend.
88-486 Councilmember Haugner commented on the October League of
California Meeting and the rescheduling of the October 18 Council
Meeting.
88-487 Councilmember Thomas requested a report on the cost of
Planning Department application processing, e.g., filing fees and
administrative charges.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, GENERAL
88-488 David McIntyre, 1000 Paru Street, discussed rebuilding of
residential homes in commercial areas. Following Council and staff
discussion regarding Mr. Maclntyre's concerns, the Planning
Director commented Mr. Maclntyre should pursue rezoning of the
property in question.
July 19, 1988
218
88-489 Fred Scullin, 1120 Chestnut Street, commented on staff's
preparation of recommendations and findings.
ADJOURNMENT
President Corica adjourned the meeting in memory of the crew
members of a mine-sweeping helicopter [part of the U.S. Navy
Helicopter Mine Countermeasure Squadron 15, stationed at Naval Air
Station, Alameda], which exploded over the Pacific Ocean; and
commented on the sacrifice of the men involved.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:34 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
DIANE B. FELSCH, CMC
City Clerk
The agenda for the meeting was posted 72 hours in advance in
accordance with the Brown Act.
July 19, 1988