Loading...
2003-03-04 Regular CC MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY - - MARCH 4, 2003 - - 7:30 P.M. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, DeWitt, Kerr, Matarrese and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent: None. AGENDA CHANGES None. PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS (03 -080) Presentation by Thomas Hacker Associates on the Design of the New Main Library. Thomas Hacker gave a presentation on the design of the New Main Library. Councilmember Kerr inquired whether seating would be available in the fiction area, to which Casey Jergens with Thomas Hacker Associates responded fiction books can be read in the front reading area. Mayor Johnson inquired whether there would be refinements to the exterior of the building. Mr. Hacker responded bay windows would be added on the Lincoln Avenue side to unify the facade of Lincoln Avenue and Oak Street. Mayor Johnson inquired the type of material used on the Oak Street facade, to which Mr. Hacker responded pre -cast concrete; stated due to seismic concerns, brick might be added to the Oak Street side. Mayor Johnson inquired where the entrance would be located, to which Mr. Hacker responded there are entrances on all three sides of the arcade [on Oak Street]. Mayor Johnson inquired whether drawings of the interior would be provided at a later time, to which Mr. Hacker responded in the affirmative. Janelle Spatz, Alameda Architectural Preservation Society (RAPS), requested that the Library Building Team (LBT) meetings be open to the public; stated RAPS presented ideas to the LBT on February 19, 2002; the exterior of the building needs additional work. Regular Meeting 1 Alameda City Council March 4, 2003 Mayor Johnson stated Council has requested presentations to allow public comment; the LBT makes recommendations to the City Council; public comments may be forwarded directly to the Council. Councilmember DeWitt inquired whether RAPS ideas have been considered, to which Ms. Spatz responded in the affirmative. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Johnson announced that the recommendation to approve Consultant Services Agreement with Thomas Hacker Architects, Inc. [paragraph No. 03 -082] was removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Councilmember DeWitt moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] ( *03 -081) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on February 18, 2003. Approved. (03 -082) Recommendation to approve Consultant Services Agreement with Thomas Hacker Architects, Inc. for Design of New Main Library, No. P.W. 01- 03 -01. Andrew Gaber, Alameda, inquired why a local firm was not selected; stated residents are paying for the library bonds. The City Manager responded the selection process was competitive; stated Council approved the Request for Proposals (RFP); the Library Building Team (LBT) and Library Board recommended Thomas Hacker's conceptual design; the LBT and Library Board considered Thomas Hacker Architects the best design firm to continue with the original conceptual plan; there were many opportunities for the community to be involved in the selection. Andrew Gaber stated the process for selecting an architect for the conceptual design was not open to the public; the City did not reexamine the architects before selecting the architect. Marilyn Ezzy Ashcraft, Library Building Team, stated the RFP for the conceptual design was published nation -wide; some firms were eliminated because the firm specialized in renovating historic Regular Meeting 2 Alameda City Council March 4, 2003 buildings; Thomas Hacker Associates specializes in libraries; Thomas Hacker Associates submitted the best design quality for Alameda; the interior designer is Smwm Architecture, located in San Francisco. Mayor Johnson stated the members of the Library Building Team (LBT) are members of the community; thanked LBT Members for their hard work. Councilmember Kerr moved approval of the staff recommendation. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ( *03 -083) Recommendation to approve amendment to Consultant Agreement with Kvichak Marine Industries for Express II Conversion Project (No. P.W. 08- 01 -22) and Appropriate $35,000 in Additional Funds. Accepted. ( *03 -084) Resolution No 13561, "Amending the Alameda City Employees Association (ACEA) Salary Schedule by establishing a Salary Range for the Position of Accounting Technician." Adopted. ( *03 -085) Resolution No 13562, "Finding that the Use of Taxes Allocated from the West End Community Improvement Project for the Purpose of Increasing, Improving and Preserving the Community's Supply of Low- and Moderate - Income Housing Outside the Project Area will be of Benefit to the Project." Adopted. ( *03 -086) Ratified bills in the amount of $974,983.12 REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (03 -087) Resolution No. 13563, "Authorizing and Directing the Sale of Not To Exceed $10,600,000 Aggregate Principal Amount of City of Alameda, California General Obligation Bonds, Series 2003, and Levying an Ad Valorem Tax with Respect Thereto; Authorizing the Publication of Official Notice of Sale; Approving the Form of and Authorizing the Execution and Delivery of a Paying Agent Agreement and a Preliminary Official Statement; Authorizing Execution and Delivery of an Official Statement; Authorizing Payment of Costs of Issuance and Authorizing Necessary Actions in Connection Therewith." Adopted. The Finance Director gave a brief presentation. The City Manager stated Standard & Poor's rates the Bonds AA; Moody's rates the Bonds A +; Moody's assessment states the City's debt burden is moderate with direct debt of only 0.40 of 1000 of Regular Meeting 3 Alameda City Council March 4, 2003 assessed valuation. Councilmember Matarrese inquired how grant funds would be dispersed; stated grant funds are provided on a reimbursement basis; inquired whether the State is reimbursing for 650 of the project cost. The Finance Director responded the reimbursement is up to 650 of qualified expenditures. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the City would fund the project and bill the State. The Finance Director responded the bonds are issued to provide funding for contractors as the project advances; the City expends the funds and then requests reimbursement from the State. Vice Mayor Daysog inquired how the Bond Team was selected. The City Attorney responded the City published an RFP for a qualified panel of Bond Counsel; the Bond Counsel used in the past is Chip Eady with Nixon Peabody LLP. Vice Mayor Daysog inquired when Nixon Peabody LLP was selected as the Bond Counsel, to which the City Attorney responded six to nine months ago. Vice Mayor Daysog inquired whether Nixon Peabody went through an RFP process. The City Attorney responded Chip Eady was selected based upon an RFP qualification for a particular panel for a particular type of Bond Service; Mr. Eady provides general Bond Counsel Services for the City. Vice Mayor Daysog requested staff to provide an off - agenda report explaining the Bond Team selection process; inquired about the competitive sale of bonds on March 25. Emily Wagner, Financial Advisor, E. Wagner & Associate, Inc., responded the official notice of sale and the bid form are published electronically to approximately 400 -500 firms nationwide; stated on March 25, firms will be given the opportunity to submit a bid for the purchase of the bonds; there is no discount on general obligation bonds sold in California by municipalities; a firm will be chosen based on the lowest total interest cost to the City; six to ten bids are anticipated. Regular Meeting 4 Alameda City Council March 4, 2003 Vice Mayor Daysog inquired whether a finance house would purchase the bonds. Ms. Wagner responded finance houses would buy the bonds in the primary market and sell to individuals in the secondary market; some bidders could be Wall Street firms. Vice Mayor Daysog inquired whether said firms are the underwriters, to which Ms. Wagner responded in the affirmative. Ms. Wagner noted that municipalities are required to competitively bid General Obligation Bonds in California. Vice Mayor Daysog inquired what might make one underwriter a better choice over another, to which Ms. Wagner responded evaluation is based on total interest cost to the City; stated the underwriter has to follow the guidelines laid out in the official notice of sale and put up a good faith deposit. Mayor Johnson inquired what are the estimated interest costs, to which E. Wagner responded a low 5.10% rate is expected. Vice Mayor Daysog moved adoption of resolution. Councilmember Kerr seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (03 -088) Public Hearing to consider an appeal of the Planning Board's Denial of Use Permit UP02 -0031 to extend the hours of operation for Fuel Sales in exchange for reduced Auto Repair hours at the Gas Station located at 1310 Central Avenue; and (03 -088A) Resolution No. 13564, "Upholding the Planning Board's Denial of Use Permit UP02 -0031 to extend the hours of operation for Fuel Sales in exchange for reduced Auto Repair hours at the Gas Station located at 1310 Central Avenue." Adopted. Mayor Johnson opened the Public Hearing. The Planner I gave a brief oral report. Proponents: (In favor of Appeal) Harvey Stein, Attorney for Applicant /Appellant; Bob Drake, Alameda; Eileen D. Reese, Alameda; Al Vierra, Oakland; James D. Shanafelt, Alameda; Jeff Fuller, Alameda; Lawrence P. Haney, Alameda; Leroy Gallegos, Alameda; Donna McCaskey, Alameda; Jacqueline Zadik, Alameda; John Strang, Alameda; Kame Richards, Alameda; Brett Hayes, Alameda; Leland Traiman, Alameda; Douglas Haines, Alameda; Michael Regular Meeting 5 Alameda City Council March 4, 2003 Gorman, Alameda; Hadi Monsef, Alameda; Zack Bedford, Alameda; Del Blaylock, Greater Alameda Business Association; Bill Smith, Alameda. Opponents: (Not in favor of Appeal) Rena Rickles, Attorney for Neighbors; Philip Gravem, Alameda; Tim Underwood, Alameda; Donna Gravem, Alameda; Gordon Newell, Alameda; Carlos Olson, Alameda; Leroy Kinzel, Alameda; Richard Noordyk, Alameda; Rose Ryan, Alameda; Don Patterson, Alameda; Charles Sarno, Alameda; Janelle Spatz, Alameda; Randall Miller, Alameda; John McCabe, Alameda. There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public portion of the Hearing. Vice Mayor Daysog inquired whether accident data is available from 1974 to 1992, to which the Planner I responded records do not indicate any accidents at the Gas Station during that time. Vice Mayor Daysog inquired whether safety issues in 1974 differed from 1992 due to the changed hours. The Planner I responded fuel sales hours had to be restricted as a condition of the Use Permit reinstating automobile repair in 1992; Alameda Municipal Code (AMC) Section 30 -20.2 states that a Use Permit can be approved for non - conforming uses if it is determined that it is a use of the same or more restrictive classification. Vice Mayor Daysog inquired whether data was gathered regarding safety concerns. The Planner I responded the issue under consideration is whether the non - conforming use is being expanded; there were no major issues regarding safety or environmental impact. Mayor Johnson requested AMC Section 30 -20.2 be explained to the public. The Planner I stated AMC Section 30 -20.2 states: a Use Permit can only be approved for non - conforming uses if it is determined that it is a use of the same or more restrictive classification. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the gas station gave up fuel sales hours for auto repair hours in 1992, to which the Planner I responded in the affirmative. Councilmember DeWitt inquired why the property was never zoned residential. Regular Meeting 6 Alameda City Council March 4, 2003 The Planner I responded when the property was rezoned in 1974 to R- 4 Residential the Gas Station became a legal non - conforming use and continued as a legal non - conforming use; stated the use continued from 1974 to present. Councilmember DeWitt inquired whether ownership has changed since 1974, to which the Planner I responded in the affirmative. Mayor Johnson requested staff to explain the regulations on discontinued use. The Planner I responded if a non - conforming use ceases for one year, then the use cannot be reestablished; stated the non- conforming use for the property has not ceased for a one -year period. Councilmember DeWitt inquired whether the property is good residential property. The Planning and Building Director responded the property is on an irregularly shaped parcel; stated the property has the infrastructure in place for a service station; the property is located in a very prominent intersection surrounded by busy streets; many factors impede converting the parcel to residential. Councilmember DeWitt stated the property should be permanently zoned residential or commercial; residents should not be subjected to more noise, smoke, or traffic than in other residential areas; the matter should be permanently resolved. Mayor Johnson stated the property is currently zoned R -4; the use was in existence before the Zoning Ordinance went into effect, which makes the gas station an existing non - conforming use. The Planning and Building Director stated Council is considering an Appeal to amend the Use Permit to change the hours for the non- conforming use; there is not a request to change the zoning of the property from residential to commercial. Mayor Johnson inquired whether a long -term solution could be found. The Planning and Building Director responded the Municipal Code is structured to allow for reapplication of a Use Permit Appeal after one year; stated the property owner has the right of due process to have requests reconsidered periodically; Council could consider increasing the one -year time period or request the Applicant to agree to give up future rights to request changes for a certain Regular Meeting 7 Alameda City Council March 4, 2003 period of time in exchange for reaching a compromise. Mayor Johnson inquired whether a decrease in auto repair hours and an increase in fuel sales hours would be considered an expansion of the use, to which the Planning and Building Director responded in the negative. Councilmember Matarrese stated the Use Permit goes with the property, not the owner; decisions regarding existing non- conforming uses must uphold the AMC. Councilmember Kerr stated non - conforming uses are not allowed to expand; on a triangular parcel at the intersection of Fernside Boulevard and High Street, there was once a gas station; new owners have constructed a house on the property. Harvey Stein, Attorney for the Applicant /Appellant, stated that his client would agree to forfeit Saturday repair hours in exchange for increasing fuel sale hours. Vice Mayor Daysog inquired whether repair hours would increase during the week, to which Mr. Stein responded in the negative. Councilmember DeWitt inquired what the fuel sales hours were in 1974. Rena Rickles, Attorney for Neighbors, responded the hours in 1974 were 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., with no auto repair service; stated the hours were changed to 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. when auto repair service was added; the offer from the Appellant intensifies the use; the offer increases fifteen to nineteen hours of fuel sales in exchange for eliminating seven hours of auto repair; the auto repair facility does not close at the required time; earlier morning hours pose a safety hazard to school children; gasoline delivery will increase; the owners are not meeting current conditions. Mayor Johnson suggested changing the hours pending a six -month review; suggested the two parties mediate and reach a compromise. Vice Mayor Daysog stated the offer is a good starting point; the City is responsible for enforcing permits; inquired what mechanisms are in place to monitor zoning issues. The City Attorney responded an ordinance being considered for introduction tonight [paragraph no. 03 -090] which provides for an administrative citation process. Regular Meeting 8 Alameda City Council March 4, 2003 The City Attorney noted that the Planning and Building Director's suggestion [Applicant agreeing to not requested changes for a specific time period] would requires the applicant to volunteer to forfeit future rights; Council cannot force the Applicant to forfeit future rights. Mr. Stein stated that his clients would make that representation and agree to the compromise if Council grants the Appeal. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the agreement would be binding on different owners, to which the City Attorney responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Kerr stated the current hours and uses represent a previous compromise approved by the City Council; the issue would return to Council; repair facilities in residential neighborhoods create parking and congestion problems. Mr. Stein stated the owners understand that the hours cannot be expanded beyond the current request; the owners are exercising their right to Appeal the Use Permit; if the Appeal is denied, the owners will reapply next year. Mayor Johnson stated the neighborhood would benefit from exchanging repair service hours for gasoline sale hours; records indicate auto repairs hours have more of an impact on the neighborhood than fuel sale hours. Mr. Stein responded the owners have never asked to extend the auto repair hours. Ms. Rickles stated the problem is that the owners are continuing repair after 6:00 p.m.; there is no one to report the violation to at 6:00 p.m.; neighbors are not receiving an appropriate response from Code Compliance; the owners are not complying with the conditions of the existing Use Permit; cars are parked in the neighborhood; the auto repair service stays open after hours; the Use Permit is not being enforced. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution upholding the Planning Board's Denial of Use Permit UP02 -0031 to extend the hours of operation for Fuel Sales in exchange for reduced Auto Repair hours at the Gas Station located at 1310 Central Avenue. Councilmember Kerr seconded the motion. Under discussion, Vice Mayor Daysog requested staff to improve Code Compliance for these types of issues. Regular Meeting 9 Alameda City Council March 4, 2003 Councilmember Kerr stated neighbors should not be burdened with keeping a log of activity at the Gas Station. Mayor Johnson inquired whether both parties would consider the offer with a six -month review. Mr. Stein responded that his client would agree to make an offer consistent with Mayor Johnson's proposal; stated if the City Council grants the request to extend the gas hours for giving up Saturday operation of the repair facility, the Applicant will agree not to seek further modification of the Use Permit for a minimum period of five years and will agree that the impact can be subject to review at six months. Vice Mayor Daysog noted staff would improve the Code violation processes within six months. Ms. Rickles stated the compromised offer is exactly what the Planning Board denied; there is a mandatory review of the Use Permit in 2004. Councilmember DeWitt inquired what were the hours of operation in 1974, to which the Planner I responded the hours were from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. with no auto repair service in 1974. Councilmember DeWitt inquired whether the hours were changed to 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday in 1992, to which the Planner I responded in the affirmative. Councilmember DeWitt stated that he would support a compromise that would not allow the station to be open before 8:00 a.m. or after 7:00 p.m. with a five -year waiting period to request Use Permit modification; he would not support the station being open from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Mayor Johnson inquired whether Council is required to vote on the motion, prior to making another motion. The City Attorney responded Robert's Rules of Order are not binding on the Council and can be used as advisory; Robert's Rules have a procedure for a substitute motion; a substitute motion, with a second, can be voted upon first. Ms. Rickles stated the recommendation provides far more hours than the business had in 1974 when the rezoning was imposed; there was no repair in 1974. Mr. Stein clarified that the station would close at 4:00 p.m. on Regular Meeting 10 Alameda City Council March 4, 2003 Saturdays. Councilmember DeWitt stated the neighbors feel a compromise is not acceptable; that he would support the neighborhood. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers DeWitt, Kerr and Matarrese - 3; Noes: Vice Mayor Daysog and Mayor Johnson - 2. Mayor Johnson called a recess at 10:52 p.m. and reconvened the Regular Meeting at 11:03 p.m. (03 -089) Public Hearing to consider reclassifying and rezoning certain properties within the City of Alameda by amending zoning ordinance No. 1277, N.S., from Commercial Corridor (C -C) Community Commercial to (R -2) Two Family Residence, (R -4) Neighborhood Residential and (R -5) General Residential of selected properties adjoining both the east and west of Webster Street; and (03 -089A) Introduction of Ordinance Reclassifying and Rezoning Certain Properties within the City of Alameda by Amending Zoning Ordinance No. 1277, N.S., for Selected Properties Near Webster Street. Introduced. Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the Hearing. Proponents: Christopher Buckley, Alameda Architectural Preservation Society. Mayor Johnson continued the public portion of the Hearing to March 18, 2003. Vice Mayor Daysog thanked Rob Siltanen for bringing the matter to Council; stated properties will benefit from having the correct residential zoning designation. Vice Mayor Daysog moved introduction of the Ordinance. Councilmember DeWitt seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Kerr stated staff did a great job; the matter was long overdue. On the call for the questions, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Regular Meeting 1 1 Alameda City Council March 4, 2003 (03 -090) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Chapter XIII (Building and Housing) by Repealing Article I (Uniform Codes relating to Building, Housing and Technical Codes) in Its Entirety and Adding a New Article I (Uniform Codes relating to Building, Housing and Technical Codes) to Adopt the 1997 Edition of the Uniform Administrative Code, the 2001 Edition of the California Building Code, the 2001 Edition of the California Code for Building Conservation, the 2001 California Electrical Code, the 2001 California Plumbing Code, the 2001 California Mechanical Code, the 1997 Uniform Housing Code, and the 1997 Edition of the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings, and Approving Certain Amendments Thereto; and by Amending Section 13.21.6 (Interim Review) of Chapter VII (Historical Preservation); and by Amending Chapter XV (Fire Prevention) by Repealing Section 15 -1 in Its Entirety and by Adding a New Section 15 -1 to Adopt the 2001 Edition of the California Fire Code and Approving Certain Amendments Thereto; and by Amending Section 1 -7 (Administrative Citations) in Chapter I (General). Introduced. Dan Chaix, Alameda, stated that he is in favor of increasing the powers of Code Enforcement staff; staff does a great job and is compassionate; giving staff more control will improve resolving Code complaints. Christopher Buckley, Alameda Architectural Preservation Society (RAPS), stated RAPS urges Council to adopt the ordinance, supports introducing administrative citation procedures, and supports the historic preservation amendments. Don Patterson, Alameda, stated rather than having a hearing process, Council should authorize staff to cite violations with tickets; a staff of two people in Code Compliance is not sufficient; the workload only allows health and safety issues to be addressed. Councilmember Kerr stated that she has concerns about the impact the ordinance will have on elderly owners on a fixed income; historic preservation requires distinctive historical features be maintained which might be difficult for an elderly person; requested clarification on the administrative citation process. The Building Official stated the [citation] process would be used when staff cannot gain compliance through a first and second notice; citations would not be the first avenue to gain compliance; staff meets with the owner to verify the compliant, provides an opportunity to resolve the complaint, and failure to comply would result in a citation. Regular Meeting 12 Alameda City Council March 4, 2003 In response to Councilmember Kerr's inquiry whether a new ticket could be issued every day, the Building stated a citation could be issued every day; the ordinance addresses issuing three citations within a three -year period for the same offense; eventually, the matter would be forwarded to the City Attorney for litigation. Councilmember Kerr inquired whether unpaid citations would be collected as a lien against the property, to which the Building Official responded citations could be collected as liens. Councilmember Kerr stated the process should be made more efficient; issues that become problematic should be addressed by Council; currently, there is no appeal [to Council] from the Housing and Building Code Hearing and Appeals Board; a person should be able to appeal the Board's decision and should not be cut off at an administrative level; further stated the City Council can only judge an appeal from the Historic Advisory Board (HAB) based upon economic value; the scope of HAB appeal's should be expanded; revising the appeals process for both Boards would solve the problem for indigent seniors who may require a greater amount of time to fix or sell their property; there should be an avenue of compassion; a comprehensive list of requirements are being added to historic structures; people should not lose their homes because they cannot comply. Mayor Johnson stated the discussion of appeals at the previous Council meeting raised the issues of a consistent appeal procedure throughout the City [boards and commissions]; staff is addressing the issue. The City Attorney stated Public Works staff is working on the Transportation Commission appeal process. The City Manager stated the scope could be expanded to review the appeals process [for all boards and commissions]. Mayor Johnson stated the entire appeals process should be reviewed; there should be a more consistent appeal procedure throughout the City; requested a report on boards and commissions that differ from the standard appeal process. The City Manager stated a report would be provided on the appeal process; staff will indicate the reason certain boards do not have an appeal process. Councilmember Kerr stated people should have the right to appeal to their elected officials; she would like to direct staff review the system for appealing decisions of the Appeals Board and HAB if Regular Meeting 13 Alameda City Council March 4, 2003 Council concurs. The City Manager responded staff would do so. Councilmember Kerr inquired whether her suggestion was acceptable with the rest of the Council, to which Council responded in the affirmative. Mayor Johnson stated an Off Agenda Report would be provided; issues raised in the report can be placed on future agendas. In response to Vice Mayor Daysog's inquiry about making businesses comply with laws, the Building Official stated staff could issue administrative citations on any violation of the Municipal Code; an administrative citation could be issued if a business [violated a use permit and] worked past hours permitted. Mayor Johnson inquired how structures with long- existing violations would be treated. The Building Official responded that staff could issue administrative citations for any section of the Administrative Code, except traffic. Mayor Johnson stated there are aluminum windows in the Carnegie Building; the City needs to be careful that staff does not drive around the City issuing citations to people who have had aluminum windows for 50 years. Councilmember Kerr stated storage areas are only allowed one light and one outlet; inquired whether storage areas include garages. The Building Official responded in the negative; stated storage areas include attics and raised basements; when people receive permits for renovating attics or basements which do not have proper ceiling height or exits, the space can easily become habitable space if a number of lights and outlets are installed. Councilmember Kerr stated people using a basement for a repair shop would want good lighting and outlets for using electrical equipment. The Building Official stated if the basement meets habitable conditions, such as the ceiling height requirement, the City would issue a permit to allow the shop. Councilmember Kerr inquired whether someone would need to meet ceiling height requirements to have a sewing area in the basement, to which the Building Official responded in the affirmative. Regular Meeting 14 Alameda City Council March 4, 2003 Councilmember Kerr stated that currently, the City issues a one - year permit; if work is not completed, the applicant can request a one -year extension; Council adopted said regulation because some people were taking ten to fifteen years to complete projects; if work is being completed, the ordinance allows permits to be renewed every six months, which is State law; suggested the current Code [one -year time limit] be retained; further stated a person living in a designated historic building must prevent all character elements against decay and deterioration; the HAB is being given the right to inspect and investigate any building which might meet one or more criteria for historic monument designation; inquired whether the HAB would have the right to demand entry and inspect a historical building. The Supervising Planner responded said regulation is existing language which permits the HAB to look at properties, not necessarily enter, to determine whether the property is eligible to be designated a City monument. Councilmember Kerr inquired whether the HAB could enter the property on demand, to which the Supervising Planner responded in the negative; stated the regulation has been in effect since 1974 during which time no one has ever demanded entry. Councilmember Kerr inquired whether window replacement for a building on the Historic List would have to be reviewed by the HAB. The Supervising Planner responded in the negative; stated review would be required only if the building is a City monument; City monuments have a higher level of scrutiny than buildings on the Historic Building Study List. Councilmember Kerr stated that she has concerns about expanding the Historic List from 4,000 to 10,000 structures; keeping track of 10,000 homes seems harder for staff; automatically placing homes built before 1942 on the Historic List is simple; however, owners might object to their homes being placed on the List; new buyers might not know their homes are on the List; inquired whether the City could require sellers and real estate agents to require disclosure [of homes on the list] when a house is sold, which would clear up the notification problem. The Supervising Planner stated the intent is not to expand the Historic Building Study List; the intent is to change the method for triggering interim review; the Historic Building Study List would remain unchanged. Regular Meeting 15 Alameda City Council March 4, 2003 Councilmember Kerr inquired whether demolition of buildings constructed prior to 1942 would have to be reviewed by the HAB, to which the Supervising Planner responded in the affirmative; stated the language is proposed to protect buildings which were missed when the Study List was established. Councilmember Kerr stated the City is putting a regulatory burden on an additional 6,000 homes; suggested the AAPS provide volunteers to determine whether structures were missed on the List; an additional 6,000 homes should not have to go though the HAB in the event their house burns down; that she would like Council to consider said recommendation. Mayor Johnson stated one intention of picking a year, rather than individual houses, is to clearly let people know whether their house would be included; although other methods which could be used, picking a year is a reasonable method; further stated the City should have a consistent appeal process; that she would like staff to address how the City will determine that buildings are not in compliance, other than health and safety issues; changes have been made on many old structures that are not in compliance with the Code; she is concerned about people who have owned their home for 50 years being cited for numerous Code violations; a homeowner should not be required to replace all their windows if an inspector sees aluminum sliders. Councilmember Kerr concurred that the matter needs to be addressed; stated there are many buildings which do not comply with current Code; people may not have records or know the history of their buildings. Mayor Johnson stated Council could comment and the matter could be brought back at a future meeting after staff makes revisions incorporating Council's comments. Vice Mayor Daysog inquired whether staff could respond to the issues raised if Council introduced the ordinance. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the changes were substantive enough to require that the matter be brought back. The City Attorney stated the process of introduction of an ordinance is to address issues; if Council provides specific direction to staff, changes can be accommodated for final passage of the ordinance; if the motion includes specific changes, the ordinance would be revised for final passage. Mayor Johnson inquired whether Council could vote tonight on Regular Meeting 16 Alameda City Council March 4, 2003 changes that will be brought back for final passage. The City Manager responded in the affirmative; stated staff needs specific direction; there have been a broad range of comments. Vice Mayor Daysog inquired whether the motion could be made to introduce the ordinance with the changes requested by Mayor Johnson and Councilmember Kerr; requested Councilmembers to summarize specific changes. Councilmember Kerr stated that her revision would be to find a method to protect people who reside in older buildings from being cited all the time for construction prior to the Code provisions. Mayor Johnson stated that her concern is that old buildings will end up with citations for non - compliance; there should be a way to address the issue and not make homeowners spend $50,000 to meet Code. Councilmember DeWitt stated issues, such as the appeal procedures, might take longer than two weeks to resolve; inquired whether Council should leave items out and only approve part of the ordinance. The City Attorney stated Mayor Johnson and Councilmember Kerr are addressing administrative process; the ordinance does not have to establish the administrative process; as part of the final passage, Council could approve an administrative process on how the particular Code section will be interpreted; for example, Council could direct that Code Enforcement Officers should not initiate a citation unless there are health and safety concerns or if there is a complaint; as Code Enforcement begins enforcing regulations, Council could make amendments [to the administrative process] by motion, rather than waiting for first and second reading of an ordinance and thirty days for adoption. Councilmember Matarrese stated that he was planning to recommend something similar; on the Federal level, the Code of Federal Regulations is accompanied by inspection procedures which provide the regulatory agencies direction on how to apply and interpret the Code; that he would suggest procedures in response to concerns raised. Mayor Johnson stated that the procedures would address her request for a protocol for inspections. Vice Mayor Daysog moved introduction of the ordinance with incorporating [administrative] procedures. Regular Meeting 17 Alameda City Council March 4, 2003 Councilmember Kerr inquired whether Council supports amending the historical preservation to add buildings to the Historic Study List rather than designate the cutoff year of 1942. Vice Mayor Daysog stated that he concurs with Mayor Johnson's comments supporting establishing a year. Councilmember Kerr stated Section 13 -21.5 gives the HAB six months to make a decision; inquired whether the HAB should have six months to decide the fate of someone's home. The Supervising Planner stated State law gives all boards six months for discretionary permits; however, it does not mean the board will take six months to decide. Councilmember DeWitt seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (03- 091) Ordinance No. 2891, "Amending Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Subsection 8 -8.1 (Angled Parking) of Section 8 -8 (General Parking Regulations) of Chapter VIII (Traffic Motor Vehicles and Alternative Transportation Modes), to Permit the Establishment of Angle Parking and Authorize Angle Parking where it Currently Exists and Subsection 12 -12.1 (Established) of Section 12 -12 (Parking Meter Zones) of Chapter XII (Parking Lots and Parking Meters), to Establish Parking Meter Zones." Finally passed. Vice Mayor Daysog moved final passage of the ordinance. Councilmember DeWitt seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Kerr stated that she would vote against the ordinance due to her opinions on diagonal parking expressed at the previous Council meeting. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, DeWitt, Matarrese and Mayor Johnson - 4. Noes: Councilmember Kerr - 1. (03 -092) Ordinance No. 2892, "Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Adding Section 30 -65 (Public Art in New Commercial, Industrial, Residential and Municipal Construction) to Chapter XXX (Development Regulations) Relating to Public Art." Finally passed. Councilmember Kerr moved final passage of the ordinance. Vice Mayor Daysog seconded the motion. Regular Meeting 18 Alameda City Council March 4, 2003 Under discussion, Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether a single- family home construction project involving more than 500 of a house and exceeding $250,000 would be required to contribute to the public art fund. The Recreation and Parks Direction responded the ordinance does not apply to single- family homes; the ordinance only applies to residential developments of five units and more. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON- AGENDA None. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (03 -093) Selection of Councilmember alternate for the AC Transit Inter- Agency Liaison Committee. Held over. (03 -094) Consideration of placing a Resolution on March 18, 2003 Council Agenda supporting an approach to the Iraq situation that is sanctioned by the United Nations. Mayor Johnson suggested that Council consider the matter since speakers waited a long time; that she requested the matter be placed on the agenda based on a petition signed by a number of people. Councilmember DeWitt stated that he supports placing the matter on a future agenda. Councilmember Kerr stated that she has strong feelings about the war; however, she has reservations about placing items on the agenda that are outside the jurisdiction of the Council. Richard Bangert, Alameda, stated that he supports placing a resolution on the next Council agenda; people might think foreign policy should be decided in Washington D.C.; however, foreign policy should be administered in Washington D.C. and everyone should comment on the formulation of the foreign policy; a town meeting is a forum for citizens to make comments; the ramifications of war are appropriate for the City to discuss. Carl Halpern, Alameda, stated there is no question more fundamental in a democracy than the decision to go to war; as the nation is poised to go to war, there is a deafening lack of debate taking place in the halls of congress; in the absence of debate, many Regular Meeting 19 Alameda City Council March 4, 2003 citizen actions are taking place, many in Alameda; the war will have a great impact on the community and is already having an impact on the budget of the City; more than 90 cities across the nation have adopted resolutions; complimented Mayor Johnson for raising the issue. Barbara Kahn, Alameda, submitted a petition to Council; stated 124 other cities have addressed the issue as of February 28; that she sent Mayor Johnson examples of resolutions adopted by other cities; there has not been an organized effort in the City; the impact on the community is huge; reservists in Alameda might be activated; urged Council to allow the issue to be discussed. Gretchen Lipow, Alameda, stated that she teaches government at Island High School; her students are scared, do not want to go to war and support the United Nations (UN); the UN was formed after World War II to bring countries together to resolve disputes; urged Council to consider a resolution in the spirit of working with the UN. Noel Folsom, Alameda, thanked Mayor Johnson for bringing the issue forward; stated millions of people are demonstrating all over the world; that he supports UN action; the United States cannot act unilaterally; the UN will work; 50 years ago he was part of an UN army that stopped aggression in a country. Jim Oddie, Alameda, stated if Alamedans or their brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers, sons or daughters are in harm's way, it impacts everyone; thanked Mayor Johnson for raising the issue. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of continuing the Meeting past 12:00 midnight. Councilmember Kerr seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Mr. Oddie further stated although decisions are being made in Washington D.C., everyone will feel the impact; Alamedans should have a say in the matter. Councilmember Kerr stated that she supports bottom up government; inquired whether the Council Chambers could accommodate the number of people who will attend the meeting or whether a special meeting should be held in a larger venue. From the audience, the Public Speakers indicated there would be Regular Meeting 2 0 Alameda City Council March 4, 2003 many people in attendance. The City Manager stated a special meeting could be scheduled to address the issue; staff would look into a larger venue on a date designated by Council. Councilmember Kerr stated that she supports the idea [of holding a special meeting at a larger venue]. Mayor Johnson inquired whether a vote was necessary or whether Council should simply provide direction. The City Manager responded a vote is not needed; Council could provide direction and staff would follow up. Councilmember Kerr moved that Council provide direction to investigate a larger venue. There was no objection to Councilmember Kerr's motion. The City Manager stated staff would attempt to schedule the meeting within the next two weeks. Councilmember DeWitt suggested the meeting be scheduled sooner than two weeks; stated plans are already being made to go to war. Mayor Johnson stated Council should give general direction to the City Manager to find a forum and schedule the meeting as soon as possible. Vice Mayor Daysog stated that he reviewed the resolutions forwarded by Barbara Kahn; as staff prepares the resolution, he suggests the following general themes be included: 1) be pro- United States; there has been some concern about the agendas of the national organizations pushing the matter; 2) reference to extending hope and prayers for the troops and their families; 3) that there are some limits to working with the United Nations, but the United States should strive to work with the United Nations; and 4) the City will rally around the nation should fighting break out. (03 -095) Councilmember Kerr stated AC Transit is in fiscal crisis, took over light rail service, and dropped neighborhood routes, which puts people in cars. (03 -096) Mayor Johnson stated AC Transit is interested in taking over Alameda Ferry Services; requested staff to review the possibility of AC Transit opposing the Water Transit Authority's Ferry System legislation. Regular Meeting 21 Alameda City Council March 4, 2003 (03 -097) Mayor Johnson requested staff to develop a strategy for protecting against the possibility of losing tax increment in redevelopment areas. (03 -098) Vice Mayor Daysog requested the Golf Commission to consider providing golf benefits to regional representatives living in Alameda, such as the East Bay Regional Park representative. (03 -099) Vice Mayor Daysog stated Senator Perata requested Council to endorse his proposal for diaper disposal recycling. (03 -100) Vice Mayor Daysog requested staff to provide information to the Alameda Unified School District on special rates offered for renting City facilities, such as the O'Club. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the regular meeting on Wednesday March 5, 2003 at 12:14 a.m. Respectfully Submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Regular Meeting 22 Alameda City Council March 4, 2003