Loading...
1986-04-01 Regular CC Minutes80 REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA HELD TUESDAY APRIL 1, 1986 At the conclusion of a pre-Council meeting, President Diament ordered an Executive Session to discuss the cases of Martin v. City of Alameda and O'Riley v. City of Alameda, pursuant to Subsection (a) of the legal counsel section of the Brown Act, and the Worker's Compensation claim of M. Reynolds. The meeting convened at 7:48 p.m. (at the conclusion of the Housing Authority meeting) with President Diament presiding. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilmember Lucas. Reverend John Foley, Court Street United Methodist Church gave the Invocation. ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Corica, Hanna, Lucas, Monsef and President Diament - 5. Absent: None. MINUTES Councilmember Hanna made a motion to approve the minutes of the Regular Council meetings of March 4 and March 18, 1986. Councilmember Monsef seconded the motion and it was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Corica, Hanna, Lucas, Monsef, and President Diament -4. Noes: None. Absent: None. (Councilmember Lucas abstained from voting on the minutes for March 18th, as she was not present at the meeting.) CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Lucas moved for adoption of the Consent Calendar, and Councilmember Corica seconded the motion. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk (*). *86-166 From Chairman of the Historical Advisory Commission regarding continuing progress on Masonic Temple. Accepted. *86-167 From Public Works Director recommending the acceptance of improvements and release of bond for Tract 3841 (Sandpiper Cove). Accepted. *86-168 From Public Works Director recommending the acceptance of work by Ambo Concrete for the construction of Wheelchair Ramps at various locations, Phase 4, P.W. No. 11-85-35. Accepted. *86-169 From Public Works Director and Fire Chief on the status of State-mandated Fire Safety and Exit Program, Title 24, Article 7 of the California Administrative Code. Accepted. 81 RESOLUTIONS *86-170 Resolution No. 10860 "Affirming Council support of Sierra Club San Francisco Bay Chapter Bicycling Section "1986 Kodak Liberty Ride Festival" as a civic event celebrating the restoration of the Statue of Liberty." Adopted. *86-171 Resolution No. 10861 "Adopting plans and specifications and calling for bids for the repair and resurfacing of certain streets, Phase 6, P.W. No. 2-86-2, and directing City Clerk to advertise same." Adopted. *86-172 Resolution No. 10862 "Authorizing execution of agreement with Jon D. Chinn and Brian D. Chinn regarding house removal from Spruce Street right-of-way." Adopted. *86-173 Resolution No. 10863 "Adopting Plans and Specifications and calling for bids for the construction of Spruce Street east of Third Street, P.W. No. 7-85-20, and directing City Clerk to advertise same." Adopted. BILLS *86-174 A List of Claims, certified by the City Manager as correct, was approved in the amount of $1,526,583.24. RETURN TO REGULAR AGENDA 86-175 Resolution No. "Authorizing execution of agreement with Kimbell, McKenna and von Kaschnitz for financial auditing services." President Diament announced that the resolution would be continued to the next Council meeting. The City Attorney stated that the Clerk at the Superior Court had misplaced the file at the time of the Court hearing regarding this matter on Monday, March 31, 1986, so, rather than causing the necessity of the Judge providing a restraining order, he [the City Attorney] agreed to have the resolution put over to the next meeting (provided the Judge heard it at the next scheduled time which the Judge agreed to do.) Councilmember Monsef stated that he would go on the record opposing the recommendation; that he believed that Council should act on it and did not see any reason why it should be continued to the next meeting. President Diament stated that she would note the objection but added that it was the consensus of the rest of the Council that it should be removed. 82 Councilmember Corica commented that he agreed with Mr. Monsef but did not want to create a problem with the case for the City Attorney. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 86-176 From Alton R. Williams, 1155 Shevlin Drive, El Cerrito, suggesting a unified fireworks display on the 4th of July. Mr. Williams presented two letters to the council concerning the suggested fireworks display. Councilmember Corica commented that the City of Alameda has a Fourth of July parade; that he cannot think of a better place than Alcatraz for a fireworks display because it could easily be seen and was an area that should not cause problems of policing. President Diament stated that a report from staff on the matter would be helpful. Councilmember Hanna made a motion to accept the communication. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Lucas and was carried by a unanimous voice vote - 5. 86-177 From State Senator Daniel E. Boatwright requesting Council's support of Senate Constitutional Amendment 9. (parole process) Councilmember Corica commented that he could not see how anyone could be in disagreement with someone that is trying to keep convicted murderers off the streets. He then made a motion to support and endorse Senate Consitutional Amendment 9, to accept the communication, and to direct staff to transmit a letter of support to Assemblyman Elihu Harris and members of the Assembly Public Safety Committee. Councilmember Monsef seconded the motion and it was carried by a unanimous voice vote - 5. 86-178 From Marilyn Oliver, representative to Bayside Cities America's Cup, proposing the City of Alameda underwrite the cost of purchase of T-shirts. President Diament noted that she had introduced the matter under New Business at the March 18 meeting. Mrs. Oliver addressed the Council, requesting their support. Councilmember Corica asked for affirmation that the amount would be reimbursed, to which Mrs. Oliver replied that it would be. Councilmember Monsef made a motion to accept the communication and support the event as suggested. Councilmember Hanna seconded the motion and it was carried by voice vote - 5. 83 HEARINGS 86-179 Hearing regarding consideration of override of Alameda County Airport Land Use Commission Policy Plan which would prohibit construction of residential buildings in an approximately 1.5 acre northerly portion of property included in Tentative Tract Map 5527, Lighthouse Cove, located southerly of Oleander Avenue at Melrose Avenue. The Planning Director reviewed the material before Council. President Diament opened the public portion of the hearing. On the call for proponents, the following persons spoke: Gregory Silva, 3446 Oleander Avenue; Seyfi Taghavi, 89 Davis Road, Orinda, CA 94563 PRC Engineering; Michael Engle, 4655 Old Ironsides Drive, Santa Clara, CA., Pulte Home Corporation; Timothy M. Quinn, 89 Davis Road, Orinda PRC Engineering; James A. Stonehouse, 512 Westline Drive, Alameda, Attorney for Pulte Home Corporation; Rich Sherratt, 3212 Fiji Lane, Alameda. On the call for opponents, the following persons spoke: Barbara Thomas, 1118 Paru Street; Ron Lappa, 1011 Tahiti Lane, Coalition of Alameda Neighborhoods; Walter S. Moeller, 406 Channing Way, President, Alameda Alliance of Homeowners; Fred J. Scullin, 1120 Chestnut Street; Florence McConnell, 1102 Bismarck Street;, Miles L. Weber, 5 Cove Road. President Diament closed the public portion of the hearing. Councilmember Lucas asked if there is a common area in the proposed development, to which the Planning Director answered in the affirmative, noting that it is called Lot B and is equivalent to about two lots and is an open space area for the use of the residents. Councilmember Lucas then asked if it would be feasible to move that common area into the safety zone and move houses onto Lot B. The Planning Director answered that it could be done and would represent approximately two of the houses in teLms of equivalent area, leaving six houses that might be lost. Councilmember Lucas asked what steps the developer would have to go through (if Council agreed), to which the Planning Director responded that the most complete way would be to go back through the Planning Board and have the Planned Development, that was approved for the site, amended to show those changes and the elimination of the six residences from the area. They might, at 84 that time consider redesigning the remainder of the project to pick up some of those additional six units as well. Councilmember Hanna asked if duplexes would be permitted to which the Planning Director responded that it was zoned for free standing single-family homes but could possibly be rezoned. Councilmember Hanna noted that there are 1310 homes already within the safety zone and the present proposal is for a total of only eight homes; that the Council in 1984 voted unanimously for the override for the 44 homes on Heritage Farms; that State law provides that the Council may override the ALUC; that the proposal meets the Airport Safety Element easily; that he cannot visualize being fair to that area by refusing 8 homes when all the other areas have been allowed to build. Councilmember Lucas stated that she believed Councilmember Hanna raised a valid concern; that she was one who voted for the Heritage override, but that 1985's record of aircraft safety has been the worst in history and the public has this time shown its concern. Councilmember Lucas further stated that there may be a way to go by relocation of the common area. Councilmember Monsef noted that the issues of (1) liability of the City of Alameda and (2) whether we need a new EIR for this project, were raised at the previous Council meeting. He asked that the City Attorney clarify. The City Attorney stated: that the Government Code states specifically that cities are not liable for issuing or failing to issue permits. The procedure is to make, or not make, a set of findings. If a set of findings is made that this plan conforms to the purposes of the Airport Act, then it is possible to override. This is not a political or discretionary decision; it is required that there be a finding of facts. The set of facts is also a protection for the City against liability. There can be no negligence to do something permitted by law. If the facts are correct, there is no liability. As to the question regarding the EIR, the City Attorney commented that the Planning Director was probably in a better position to respond to that than he. Councilmember Corica noted that, although nine homes with thirteen people per acre were discussed, there would probably be 23 persons or more; that he did not believe there would be any reduction of flights, particularly with the expansion of the Business Park; that it was not necessary to repeat past mistakes. Councilmember Hanna made a motion to override the Airport Land Use Commission Policy Plan. Following further discussion about possible rearrangement of the area, Councilmember Lucas inquired if the override does not pass, could the Council amend the Tentative Map at this time. Upon affirmative response from the Planning Director, Councilmember Lucas noted that a second was needed for Councilmember Hanna's motion to override the Airport Land Use Commission Policy Plan. There was no second to the motion and, therefore, the motion failed. 85 Councilmember Corica made a motion that the Council not override the Airport Land Use Commission. President Diament noted that it was not necessary due to failure of the motion to override. The City Attorney noted that it takes four affirmative votes to do anything, therefore a negative vote is not required. RESOLUTION 86 -180 Resolution No. "Overriding Alameda County Airport Land Use Commission Policy Plan as it relates to Tentative Map for Tract 5527, Lighthouse Cove. This resolution was not adopted. HEARING 86 -181 Hearing regarding consideration of Tentative Map Tract 5527 for Lighthouse Cove to create 46 lots varying in size from 3200 to 4000 square feet on a 5.6 acre parcel between Oleander Avenue and the Harbor Bay Business Park. Applicant: Pulte Home Corporation. In answer to Councilmember Hanna's request for clarification, the City Attorney noted that there are occasions where the Council makes some minor amendments to the tentative map; the Planning Director determines whether those are material or not. If the amendments are not, then they do not require an amendment to the Planned Development. If the final development part of the Planned Development has not been made yet, then it could be conformed to the Map. Councilmember Hanna made a motion that the tentative map be approved subject to the eight homes not being constructed in the safety zone and that at least two, possibly three, might be constructed in what is now the common area and a safety zone area be developed as a common area. Councilmember Lucas seconded the motion. President Diament announced that the Council would hear from the public before voting on the motion. On the call for proponents, the following persons spoke: Tim Quinn, PRC Engineering, requested that, as a condition of the tentative map, that some adjustments be allowed to accomodate the potential of 3 units within the area outside of the safety zone. The City Attorney stated that the Council does not have the jurisdiction to amend the Planned Development, and therefore that part could not be done. He further stated that, since there would be a final map sent out (if the current motion passes), it would be adequate to set out the parameters for the new lots and allow the engineering people to work out the locations. 86 Michael Engle, 3266 Old Ironsides Drive, Santa Clara, Pulte Home Corporation, stated that, due to the fact that the override was not approved, they would proceed with the project along the suggested lines. James A. Stonehouse, 512 Westline Drive, Attorney for Pulte Home Corporation, stated that when the original project, which was 37 units was approved by the City Council, it did not include a portion of the land which is now included in this project (approximately one acre) which was not within the CNEL lines at that time. The lines have changed and that property is now useable and it was not part of the original project. Richard Sherrat, 3212 Fiji Lane clarified his statements previously presented. Fred Scullin, 1120 Chestnut, commented that, now that the amendment has been proposed, he supports the Council action. On the call for opponents, none responded. President Diament called for the public portion of the hearing to be closed. Councilmember Hanna made a motion to take the resolution regarding the tentative map out of order. Councilmember Lucas seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. RESOLUTION 86-182 Resolution No.10864 "Approving Tentative Map for Tract 5527, a subdivision of approximately 5.6 acres on Bay Farm Island, finding said Tentative Map consistent with the City's General Plan and determining that discharge of waste into sewer system will not violate regional water quality control regulations. (Lighthouse Cove, Pulte Home Corporation, subdivider.) Councilmember Hanna made a motion to adopt the Resolution with the conditions submitted and recommended by the Planning Board and with an additional condition that construction of homes in Safety Zone B be prohibited, and that adjustments be made in the remainder of the property to the maximum extent of forty lots. Councilmember Lucas seconded the motion and it was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Hanna, Lucas, Monsef and President Diament - 4. Noes: Councilmember Corica - 1. Absent: None. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 86-183 From City Manager's Traffic Advisory Committee regarding deletion of Buena Vista Avenue, from Grand Street to Tilden Way, as a truck route. 87 Dorothy Madsen, 2226 1/2 Buena Vista Avenue, voiced her concerns regarding the truck traffic on Buena Vista Avenue, noting that it is a residential street, that it is difficult to sleep at night because of the truck traffic, and that the residents would like the truck traffic route to be moved to Clement Avenue. Andre V. Reynier, 2251 Buena Vista Avenue, requested the Council to provide relief regarding the truck traffic on Park Street and noise problems for the residential area of Buena Vista Avenue. President Diament noted that there was a large sum of money involved in the plan regarding the proposed change in the truck traffic route and commented that the immediate relief would be the move of traffic over to Clement Avenue. The Public Works Director pointed out areas on the map, noting proposed changes. He described turning radius problems for the heavy trucks and proposed solutions, which would require the need for purchase of property in the turn areas. Discussion followed regarding truck routes including bridge and freeway access. Councilmember Lucas asked about the possibility of a ban against night traffic. The City Attorney noted that some provision had to be made for traffic; that one city tried, was sued and lost the suit. Councilmember Lucas asked if a ban on the basis of health due to lack of ability of residents to sleep might be possible, to which the City Attorney replied that if there were an appropriate alternate route, there should be no problem. Councilmember Lucas asked if there were a possibility of State or Federal Funds for such a project, to which the Public Works Director responded that gas tax funding would be appropriate but is already being used elsewhere and that he knew of no grants available. Councilmember Hanna commented that he believed that there should be a public hearing to learn facts that are not currently evident. Councilmember Corica noted that extending Clement Avenue to Tilden Way would be the better alternative. Councilmember Lucas made a motion that the City Attorney investigate the possibility of an ordinance banning truck traffic on Buena Vista between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. Councilmember Monsef seconded the motion and it was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Corica, Lucas, Monsef and President Diament - 4. Noes: Councilmember Hanna - 1. Absent: None. Councilmember Hanna stated that he voted no because he believed the matter should not be entered into without a hearing. The City Attorney noted that there would be six weeks for hearing of the matter. 00 86-184 From Public Works Director recommending the acceptance of landscaping for Harbor Bay Parkway widening. Councilmember Hanna made a motion to accept the report and recommendation. Councilmember Corica seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. RESOLUTIONS 86-185 Resolution No. 10865 "Determining unpaid assessments and providing for issuance of bonds (second sale), Harbor Bay Business Park Assessment District 84-4." Councilmember Lucas made a motion to adopt the resolution. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Monsef and the motion was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 86-186 Resolution No. 10866 "Awarding sale of bonds (second sale), Harbor Bay Business Park, Assessment District 84-4. Fred Scullin, 1120 Chestnut Street, addressed the Council regarding Resolutions No. 10865 and 10866 and inquired why certain improvements were included that were not within the assessment area. The Public Works Director responded that the assessment provides for some off-site improvements but that approximately 90% is within the area. Councilmember Hanna made a motion to adopt the resolution. It was seconded by Councilmember Monsef and carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 86-187 Resolution No. 10867 "Awarding contract to Cagwin & Dorward for construction of Marina Village Parkway and Independence Drive landscape improvements, Assessment District 84-3, P.W. No. 4-85-16." Councilmember Monsef made a motion to adopt the resolution. It was seconded by Councilmember Hanna and carried by a unanimous voice vote - 5. 86-188 Resolution No. 10868 "Declaring April 26, 1986, as Arbor Day in the City of Alameda." Councilmember Lucas made a motion to adopt the resolution. It was seconded by Councilmember Hanna and carried by a unanimous voice vote - 5. INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES 86-189 Ordinance No. "Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by adding Chapter 15 to Title III thereof establishing a user fee of one percent of construction valuation for street maintenance and improvement." President Diament stated that this matter is to be held over to the next agenda. 89 86 -190 Ordinance No. "Amending Measure "A" enabling ordinance relating to rebuilding of destroyed structures." Councilmember Corica commented that perhaps there should be a modification of the ordinance which would simply state that the structures are to be rebuilt (1) not to exceed the same size as the units destroyed or (2) to be rebuilt to the same size and configuration or less. The City Attorney commented on the Planning Board's concerns regarding exemption from the Zoning Ordinance. Councilmember Corica stated his concern was the possibility of more units being constructed, and he did not want to see the structure going higher. Councilmember Lucas asked for confirmation that the version of the ordinance before Council permitted additional parking spaces, to which the City Attorney affirmed that it did. Barbara Thomas, 1118 Paru Street suggested Council consider keeping the ordinance in context with the fact that there are only a few pieces of property that have been destroyed. The City Attorney commented that if there were a question about the language of the ordinance, it should be noted that it has been written and rewritten to finally read that all requirements of the zoning ordinance must be met except the density ordinance and then the last sentence adds that you must meet the zoning ordinance wherever it doesn't force you to build fewer units of a smaller size. Councilmember Lucas stated that this version of the ordinance allows for improvement of structures, and made a motion to introduce the ordinance. Councilmember Corica seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. FINAL PASSAGE OF ORDINANCE 86 -191 Final Passage of Ordinance No. 2276 "Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by adding Chapter 8 to Title II thereof relating to local preference in awarding bids for goods and services." Councilmember Corica noted that he has a problem with the findings that are required with regard to refusal of a local bid. Councilmember Lucas made a motion for final passage of the ordinance. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Corica and was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. NEW BUSINESS 86 -192 Councilmember Lucas expressed concern regarding the increase of violent crimes in the Webster Street area, and also stated that she had received numerous complaints regarding noise after 2:00 a.m. in the vicinity of Johnnie's Bar. 90 ADJOURNMENT At 11:05 p.m., President Diament announced adjournment to Executive Session to discuss personnel matters. Respectfully submitted, (l Diane B. Felsch City Clerk