1963-09-17 Regular CC MinutesREGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA
HELD TUESDAY EVENING, SEPTEMBER 17, 1963
The meeting convened at 7'30 o'clock p.m. with President Godfrey presiding. The Pledge_ot
Allegiance was led by Councilman La Croix and was followed by an inspiring Invocation delivered by
The Reverend Mr. Glen Paden, Pastor, Central Baptist Church.
ROLL CALL*
The roll was called and Councilmen Freeman, La Croix, Jr,, McCall, Rose and President Godfrey,
(5), were noted present. Absent: None.
MINUTES:
1. The minutes of the regular meeting held September 3, 1963, were approved as transcribed.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
2.` The 'Clerk stated she had received just this date five letters and one telegram which, ordinarily,
could not be presented to the City Council at this meeting due to their late arrival - and that was
why they were not listed on the agenda. However, the subject of all of the letters pertained to an
item already on the agenda under "Reports" and could, therefore, be considered in connection L6ere-
*ith. Copies of the communications had been made, they had been posted on the Bulletin Board and
given to the Councilmen for their information. All of the letters were in protest against the con-
cept of the proposed development of Unit IV, South Shore, as filed by Shore Line Properties, Inc.
under its Tentative Map for Tract No. 2537, and submitted by the City Planning Board.
The communications were from the following: Dr. Paul H. Cronenwett, 1729 Cornell Drive; Robert A.
and Nancy L. McCord, 925 Broadway; Earl N. Tucker, 27I6 Otis Drive; Byron Mandel, 899 Broadway;
Kenneth Phinney, 902 Broadway; John C. and Angela Osorio, 2712 Otis Drive,
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:
3.k?
.' Mr. G. N. Pope, 1820 Bay Street, voiced his objections to the proposed development of Unit IV,
South Shore, as presented by Shore Line Properties, Inc.
4. Master Edward Branson, 1419 Cottage Street, asked that signs be placed on this one-block street
to read, "Slow - Children at Play".
The President stated his request would be referred to the Traffic Advisory Committee for study and
he would be informed about its action.
5.' Mr. Frank Gottstein, 721 Haight Avenue, reported that a large truck had been stalled in the
Posey Tube this morning, which caused considerable traffic congestion due to the fact there was no
traffic officer in attendance to clear the Tube as quickly as possible in the event of such emergencies.
Mr. Gottstein referred to the flooding in the Webster Street area during last winter and inquired if
the storm sewers had been cleaned out to obviate this condition during the coming wincer. Be also
spoke of the lagoon in the locality of Ninth Street and asked if the accumulation of material had
been removed to the proper elevation.
City Engineer Hanna replied that, in view of the recent construction work on the Posey Tube, the
north side storm sewer had been dragged so it would be clear to take care of the winter storm
waters. Also, the lagoon area in question had been checked, the amount of sediment was insignifi-
cant and he felt it was in satisfactory condition.
HEARINGS:
6. ' Continued from the last meeting was the Hearing in the matter of the requested reclassification
of property known as 1618 Fourth Street from the °D-io, One-Family Residence District, to the "R-4",
Neighborhood Apartment District. The petition was filed by Mr. George W. Thomsen.
The Clerk stated Mr. Thomsen, Petitioner, Mr. Harry Adams, Realtor representative, and Mr. Thomas
Ferro, Attorney, had been notified that the Hearing on the question had been continued to this time
and place.
Mr. Robert Venable, Associate Planner, again reviewed the circumstances involved in this matter and
presented the factual data entailed. Be stated the Planning Board had recommended the reclassifi-
cation, as requested.
Mr. Cunningham, City Attorney, stated the issue before the Council was whether or not the considera-
tions of the Planning Board as to the effect of the proposed amendment on the Master Plan, the
community's general welfare and the equity of the proposed amendment, should be approved, modified
or disapproved.
Upon the call for proponents, Mr. Adams addressed the Council on behalf of Mr. Thomsen, who was out
of the State. He explained that the existing old dwelling would be demolished and a six-unit apart-
ment house erected. Be pointed out there would be sufficient off-street parking provided and no
variances would be needed in the proper construction of the building.
Mr. Frank Saxe, Jr., Building Contractor for Mr. Thomsen, emphasized that the demolition of the old
house presently on the lot would have to be accomplished in order to build the six-unit structure
planned.
146
The President then called for the opponents to the question and the following registered their objec-
tions: Mr. Emilio Richard, 1034 Fourth Street; Mr. Henry Loretz, I615 Fourth Street; Mr.'Gerald
Coggin, 1620 Fourth Street; Mrs. James Codino, 1600 Fourth Street; Mrs. William Watson, 409 Lincoln
Avenue. All seemed to be principally concerned that the tenants would probably not drive to the rear
of this deep lot to park their cars, and would thus increase the parking problem on the street.
Further, the question of fire protection was raised in view of the deep, narrow lot, plus the actual
appearance of a two-story structure on such a narrow lot in a block of one-story, one-family homes.
Mr. Adams remarked that there was ample turning radius in the rear for the parking and ingress and
egress of the automobiles involved.
There being no further proponents or opponents who desired to speak, the President declared the
Hearing closed.
Following a question and answer period on the subject by the Council, Councilman Freeman moved the
recommendation of the Planning Board not be approved and the requested reclassification be denied.
The motion was seconded by Councilman La Croix and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes:
Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS, ETCETERA:
v, '
/, From the Mayor, City Manager and City Auditor, submitting their report on the Count of Money
bald August 21, 1963 - showing the sum of $4,838,262.04 in the City Treasury at that time.
The report was noted and ordered filed.
O\/ From the City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to Gallagher & Burk, Inc., low bidder,
for the project of McKinley Park Improvements, at the total cost of $5,228.
Councilman Rose moved the recommendation be adopted; that contract be awarded to the designated
firm for the specified project at the price quoted. The motion was seconded by Councilman La Croix
and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
� .
9. From the City Planning Board, signed by the Acting Secretary, requesting an extension of time
of thirty days from September 16, 1963, for the continued Hearing in the matter of rezoning certain
properties in the Pacific Marina, as requested by G. C. and D. M. 0ichandros.
Councilman Freeman moved the request be granted and a thirty-day extension of time be allowed for
the purpose stated. The motion was seconded by Councilman McCall and carried on the following roll
call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
lO. From the City Planning Board, signed by the Acting Secretary, recommending approval of Tentative
Map of Tract No. 2537, Unit IV, South Shore Project, subject to compliance with requirements of the
City Engineer's Report dated September 10, 1963, or any subsequent modification, and conditionally
upon an amendment to the Fill Agreement.
11. ,FrVm the City Attorney, submitting information concerning the proposed modification of the Fill
Agreement.
With reference to the matter of the Tentative Map for Tract No. 2537, the Clerk read a telegram from
Dr. and Mrs. Michael Wachtel, 1081 Sherman Street, which had been delivered during the meeting,
expressing their opposition to the proposed development of Unit IV.
At this Lime, the President stated he had asked the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance for intro-
duction, authorizing a modification of the Fill Agreement, should such he needed. He, therefore,
asked the Clerk to add this item to the proper order of business for consideration by the Council
later in the meeting.
Mrs. Inez Kapellas, I128 College Avenue, expressed her strong objection to the proposed development
of Unit IV because of the high density it would establish in this area.
Mr. James B. Davis, Attorney, 2225 Otis Drive, with offices in the Bank of America Building, repre-
sented Shore Line Properties, Inc- Mr. Davis asked the Council to adopt the recommendation of the
Planning Board and approve the Tentative Map_for Tract No. 2537.
With permission of the President, Mr. Davis called upon the following representatives of several
organizations who indicated their endorsement of the development as contemplated: Mr. C. Phillip
Nutomun, General Manager, Alameda Chamber of Commerce; Mr. Raymond P. KranelIy, Chairman, Community
Development Committee of the "Chamber"; Mr. C. Richard Bartalini, 405 Greenbrier Road, Board of
Directors of Alameda Junior Chamber of Commerce; Mr. Norman Stenberg, South Shore Isle Home Owners
Association.
Mr. Davis reviewed in detail the concept of the proposed subdivision and emphasized that this type
of development would assure quality construction within a reasonable price range. He pointed out
that the reason for the requested reduction in lot sizes was because of the high cost of filled land
and of quality construction. Mr. Davis also mentioned the necessary modification of the Fill Agree-
ment to allow the termination of Shore Line Drive at Broadway and the creation of a street through
the proposed subdivision, rather than along the southern boundary.
In conclusion of his presentation, Mr. Davis stated the following members of their Staff were in
attendance and would be available to answer any questions: Messrs. Calvin Jonas, Civil Engineer;
David Johnson, Architect; William Moore of Danes and Moore, Consulting Soils Mechanics; Dr. J. W.
Johnson, Consulting Soils Engineer; as well as Mr. Donald Hawley, President of the Corporation,
Upon invitation of the President, the following spoke in opposition to the proposed development:
Messrs. Donald Bruzzone, 133 Santa Clara Avenue; Mr. Donald Moore, 915 Broadway; Dr. &lice'Challen"
2601 La Jolla Drive. The-points emphasized were the establishment of a precedent in allowing small
lot sizes, the greater amount of traffic into the area due to the higher density created by.this
subdivision and the over-crowded appearance of the truct.
In response to a question, Mr. Johnson, Architect, remarked that the size of the homes varied from
1123 to 1592 square feet for the one and two-story structures, respectively. There would be six
basic architectural styles. The side yards would comply with the requirements of the Zoning Ordi-
nance. The front yard setbacks would vary from twenty to thirty feet and the rear yard or patio
setbacks on the lagoon and on the beach side would vary from twenty to thirty-five feet.
Councilman La Croix also questioned the establishment of a precedent and mentioned ,the two as yet
undeveloped tracts immediately to the east of this proposed subdivision. Be felt the developers
thereof might conceivably confront the Planning Board and the Council with similar requests.
Councilman Freeman mentioned that, according to the report from the City Attorney, the Fill Agreement
in its present form precluded such development. She felt another matter also precluded such improve-
ments and this was the public works plan and contract of Reclamation District No. 2087 in the
original dredging and filling of the area, which called for the beach retention by a mud dike and a
road. She contended the contract had not been completed.
Councilman Freeman referred to and read excerpts from numerous memoranda and letters from former
City Attorney Frank Annibale, Utah Construction Co. and the City. Further, she read excerpts from
the minutes of certain meetings of the Board of Trustees of the Reclamation District and referred
to the 1959 report from Dames and Moore.
A lengthy and detailed discussion ensued concerning the legal and engineering technicalities involved
in certain previous actions. Mr. Davis stated there would be no problem were the Fill Agreement
modified as suggested by his client and the interested parties sign an agreement accepting such
modification.
Mr. Cunningham, City Attorney, clarified certain points relating to the particular contract in ques-
tion and the modification of the Fill Agreement.
Mr. John James, Attorney, Trustee of the Reclamation District, stated there had been a meeting of
the Board this afternoon, at which time this matter had been fully considered and the officers had
been authorized to sign the proposed modification of the Fill Agreement between the City and "Utah",
as requested by Shore Line Properties, Inc. He remarked that whatever was to be done with regard
to the retention device would have to meet the requirements-and approval of the City Engineer.
Upon request, Mr. William Moore of Dames and Moore, Soils Mechanics, referred to his report of^1959
and subsequent reports and stated they had found the sand beach would make an adequate retention
device for the fill area as it operated at present and that, at the extreme easterly end, it would
also function satisfactorily.
In response to questions, Mr. Hanna replied that the reports of Dames and Moore and Dr. J. R.
Johnson were unequivocal and very satisfactory. It was his professional opinion that the present
beach slope was proper retention for the entire area.
Councilman Freeman then moved that the recommendation of the Planning Board not be accepted and the
Tentative Map for Tract No. 2537 be disapproved under provisions of Sec, 11-14&4 and 3ec, 11-131
of the "B-l", One-Family Residence District regulations, of the Zoning Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Councilman La Croix and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Councilmen
Freeman, La Croix and Rose, (3). Noes: Councilmen McCall and President Godfrey, (2). Absent:
None.
RESOLUTIONS:
12. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Freeman, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 6516
Resolution Transferring Sum of $2,617,73 from Washington Park Fill Bond
Fund (616) to Capital Outlay Fund (408)."
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman La Croix and on roll call carried by
the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
13. The following resolution was introduced. hy Councilman Freeman, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 6517
Resolution of the Council of the City of Alameda Increasing Amount of
Certain Petty Cash Fund. (Police Department)."
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman La Croix and on roll call carried by
the ollowing vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
/
v
14^ The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Freeman, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 6518
Designating 'Poggi Street' as the Name of Proposed New Street Which Will
Connect Westerly End of Buena Vista Avenue with Atlantic Avenue."
145
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman La Croix and on roll call carried by
the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
l}. r The following resolution was introduced by Councilman McCall, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 6519
Resolution of Preliminary Determination That Public Convenience and
Necessity Require That Special Assessment, Proceedings be DudezJ:uken in
Garden Road Assessment District in the City of Alameda, County of
Alameda, State of California, and Setting a Time and Place for Hearing
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Freeman and on roll call carried by
the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
16. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Freeman, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No, 6520
Resolution Ordering Plans and Specifications." (Be Garden Road Assessment
District)
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman La Croix and on roll call carried by
the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
17. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman McCall, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 6521
Resolution Adopting Plans and Specifications." (Re Garden Road Assessment
District)
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Rose and on roll call carried by the
following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
18. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Freeman, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 6522
Resolution of Intention - In the Matter of the Improvement of Garden Road,
Between County Road and Mecartney Road in the City of Alameda."
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman La Croix and on roll call carried by
the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
19. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Rose, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 6523
Resolution of Intention to Approve an Amendment to the Contract Between
the Board of Administration of the State Employees' Retirement System
and the City Council of the City of Alameda."
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman McCall and on roll call carried by
the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
20.v'The
"Resolution No. 6524
Resolution (OASDI 40D) Requesting Authorization for the City of Alameda
to Divide its Retirement System to Provide for OASDI (Social Security)
Coverage."
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman McCall and on roll call carried by
the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
21./'The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Rose, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 6525
Resolution of the Council of the City of Alameda Authorizing Execution
of Contract with the Firm of Coates, Herfurth and England, Consulting
Actuaries, to Determine the Approximate: Contribution Which Would be
Required in the Event the City's Contract with the State Employees'
Retirement System is Amended to Include OASDI Coverage."
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman McCall and on roll call carried by
the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
22, The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Rose, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 6526
Resolution of the Council of the City of Alameda Authorizing Execution
of Contract with Alameda Chamber of Commerce for Advertising for the
Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1964, and Appropriating $20,675.00 for
Such Purposes."
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman McCall and on roll call carried by
the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
The President then declared all of the foregoing resolutions adopted.
23. At this point, the President stated he would like to refer back to "Reports". He spoke of
the communication from the City Attorney submitting information concerning the possible modifica-
tion of the Fill Agreement. Be also called attention to his request that the City Attorney prepare
an ordinance for introduction to effect certain modifications if the Council should so desire.
President Godfrey felt some decision should be made by the Council as to whether or not it wished
to authorize such action.
Upon request, Mr. Cunningham outlined the provisions of the proposed ordinance which, in effect,
would give the City the option at some later time within the next three years to allow a different
type of retention and a different type of road arrangement.
Following some discussion, the President asked that the City Attorney prepare such an ordinance,
send copies to the Councilmen for their study and have it listed on the agenda for the next meeting
of the Council on October 1, 1962, for consideration.
FILING:
24. Contract - Between City and Coates, 8ertortb and England, Consulting Actuaries, re State
Employees' Retirement System.
25. Contract - Between City and Alameda Chamber of Commerce, for Advertising, 1963-1964,
26. Specifications, Special Provisions and Plans No. PW 8-63-17 - Garden Road Assessment Dis-
trict No. 63-1.
BILLS:
27. An itemized List of Claims against the City of Alameda and the Departments thereof, in the
total amount of $29,115.34, was presented to the Council at this meeting.
The List was accompanied by certification from the City Manager that the Claims shown were correct.
Councilman McCall moved the bills as itemized in the List of Claims filed with the City Clerk on
September 17, 1963, and presented to the Council at this meeting, be allowed and paid. The motion
was seconded by Councilman Rose and on roll cull' carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five.
Noes: None. Absent: None.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
_
2u/ . At this time the meeting was referred back to "Unfinished Business" and Councilman La Croix
expressed his appreciation for the prompt action of the City Engineer's Department in having a
sign placed at the southerly end of Grand Street at Otis Drive, indicating trucks were not
allowed thereon.
29. Councilman Freeman referred to the matter of lighting Bay Farm Island Bridge and was informed
that the City Engineer was currently working with the staff of the State Division of Highways and
the City was awaiting some reaction from the California Highway Commission after its receipt of
the factual data presented by Mr. Hanna.
ADJOURNMENT:
30. There being no further business to come before the meeting, the Council adjourned - to assemble
in regular session on Tuesday evening, October 1, 1963, at 7:30 o'clock.
Respectfully submit ed,