Loading...
1958-02-18 Regular CC MinutesREGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA HELD TUESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 18, 1958 The meeting convened at 7 :30 o'clock p.m. with President McCall presiding. The Pledge of Allegiance was lead by Councilman Freeman followed by a most inspiring Invocation delivered by The Reverend Dr. Robert D. Bulkley, Minister of the First Presbyterian Church. ROLL, CALL: The roll was called and Councilmen Collischonn, Freeman, Petersen, Schacht and President McCall, (5), were noted present. Absent: None. MINUTES: 1. The minutes of the regular meeting held February 4, 1958, were approved as transcribed. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: 2' From Alameda Chamber of Commerce, extending an invitation to the Council and other City Officials to tour the proposed beach sites in Alameda, together with the Alameda County Board of Supervisors, starting at 1:30 o'clock p.m. on Thursday, February 20. President McCall thanked the Chamber for its invitation and the City Clerk was asked to notify it that several of the Councilmen plan to join the tour. The com- munication was then ordered filed. 3 From Alameda Chamber of Commerce, transmitting a refund of $499.41 from the Christmas Decorations allocation - and expressing thanks to the Council for its support of this worthwhile project. It was pointed out the sum in question would be credited to the General Fund of the City. President McCall expressed thanks to the Chamber for its efficient job in this respect and the letter was ordered filed. 4. From the Parking Committee, Associated Students of Alameda High School, signed by Gregg Shephard, Director, requesting the removal of the two -hour parking zone in the block across from the School - or the exemption of students' automobiles from receiving citations by issuing "Student Stickers ". There being no objections, the matter was referred to the City Manager for discus- sion and investigation with the Chief of Police. 5. From the Home Improvement Council of the Greater Bay Area, signed by Mr. Dennis Garrehy, Executive Director, informing the Council of its four -point program to attain its objectives in the field of housing. It was stated the Council has been established because of the increasing emphasis on home improvement, remodeling and rehabilitation phases of Urban Renewal by the various communities throughout the Bay Area. In response to Councilman Freeman's request, the City Manager was instructed to obtain some information about this organization and report back to the Council. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS, ETCETERA: 6. the City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to Halbach Pipe Line Construction Co., low bidder, for the project of Installing a Sanitary Sewer on Willow Street, in the amount of $3,203.92. Councilman Collischonn moved the recommendation be adopted; that contract be awarded to the specified firm for the project in question at the price quoted and the bid bonds be returned to the unsuccessful bidders. The motion was seconded by Councilman Schacht and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 7. From the City Manager, reporting that the turfing of the unplanted area of Krusi Park can be done more economically by City forces, without contract, and recom- mending such be done at the estimated cost of $3,600. Councilman Freeman moved that, upon the finding by the City Council that the work can be done more economically by City forces, the City Manager's recommendation be approved and the turfing be so done at said estimated figure. The motion was seconded by Councilman Collischonn and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. V 8. From the City Planning Board, signed by Mr. A. Raymond Schoenfeld, Secretary, recommending the Amended Tentative Map of Tract No. 1898, South Shore Project, Unit No, 2, be approved, subject to certain conditions as set forth. Councilman Freeman stated she had several questions on the subject but inquired first if the City Attorney, City Engineer or Planning Director had any information to impart which the Council had not heard as yet. Mr. Hanna stated there is one item which should be of concern at this time. One of the baylets shows a minimum width of one hundred feet instead of the one hundred twenty -five feet as required by the previous Council. This was brought to his attention today and he called Mr. Calvin Jones, Engineer for Utah Construction Company, who has given him a letter which reads, "Our attention has been called to, the fact that the Tentative Map shows a distance of one hundred feet for the lagoon between Windemere Isle and Arlington Isle. This dimension should read one hundred twenty -five feet. The minimum dis- tance between fingers in Unit No. 2 is one hundred twenty -five feet." Mr. Hanna said he thought that, in the approval of the Tentative Map of Unit No. 2, the condition should be included that said baylet be one hundred twenty -five feet wide minimum. A lengthy discussion ensued with regard to many phases of the development as indi- cated on the Map. Councilman Freeman referred to the first lagoon in the location of Eighth Street, extended, and inquired if there had been a variance requested by Utah as the minimum width at this point is not one hundred twenty -five feet. Mr. Schoenfeld stated he could not recall this specific point but it could possibly be the subject was covered in the extensive meetings which were held on the matter prior to his being with the City. He did point out it is not at all possible, con- sidering the configuration of the Tract itself, to do much else at this point because of the slanting line. Councilman Freeman called attention to the following discrepancies of the Tentative Map insofar as the requirements set forth in the Subdivision Ordinance and the Utah Agreement are concerned: (1) The names and addresses of all the owners of record are not shown. (2)..The matter of the beach slope at a ratio of 20 to 1. President McCall interjected the comment that, for the protection of all concerned, it would be better to accept the Tentative Map, subject to the Council's approval, but excluding the slope of the beach until such time as another engineering study can be made to determine exactly what the best ratio of the beach slope should be. He felt the recent heavy rains, high tides and strong winds were giving this area a real "test run" and, later, the City might have the opportunity to call in the State Engineers to help. Councilman Freeman suggested that, inasmuch as the City is trying to get a State Beach -Park and the Commission of Beaches and Parks is very much concerned about ero- sion, the City Manager be asked to write to this Division to ascertain what the main- tenance costs would be for different beach slope ratios and how much erosion would be effected thereby, and how much more sand fill would have to be added if the State Beach -Park is established. Upon request, Mr. Hanna stated one of the City's tools is "time" - and certainly, the longer the City waits, the better opportunity it and the soils experts will have to judge what is going to take place. As far as his Departmental problems are concerned, a program has been set up to take measurements at Washington Park to - check on what is happening there and he expects to carry out these cross- sections over a very long period of time - perhaps ten years. He felt that if the State Division of Beaches and Parks has engineers who are competent in this field the City could possibly receive the benefit of their suggestions. Councilman Petersen referred to the election of May 24, 1955, at which time the people voted to make effective Ordinance No. 1148, New Series, which authorized the execution of an Agreement with Utah Construction Company. This was culminated on June 23, 1955, and set up certain work to be done in a specified manner. The Agree- ment stipulated conditions to be followed which went beyond the standards already established by the City, pertaining to the fill on the South Shore. He wondered if the provisions of the Agreement have any effect as far as current thinking is con- cerned. When specific conditions are set forth, are they not to be followed or are they to be superseded by other conditions :which arise later? Mr. Annibale replied the Fill Agreement certain does set out the ratio of 20 to 1 as the beach slope - there is no doubt or question of that. Mr. Weller added that, regardless of what slope is provided for in the Fill Agree- ment, he would most strongly urge the Council not to accept the beaches without the advice of some competent firm. He said there is no one on the City Staff who is qualified to state what the slope ratio should be. He said he thought the Council should bear in mind that the.Company is obligated, under the Fill Agreement, to maintain that beach, regardless...of slope, for a period of three years after it has been accepted by the City. For that reason, the longer the City can put off accept- ance of the beach, the better off it is, and more importantly, the better off the engineers will be, who are in a position to judge what the slope ought to be, because they will have had more time to determine what the forces have done. It will be very much to the benefit of the City to determine as accurately as possible that the slope is proper before the City agrees it is right and accepts the beaches. In response to Councilman Petersen's :question as to how the figure of 20 -to -1 was arrived at, President McCall said that, if he is not mistaken, at the time Dames & Moore was discussing this matter with the Council, Mr. Moore made the statement the 20 -to -1 slope would give the maximum protection. Councilman Schacht stated he thought this phase of the Tentative Map should be excluded at this time as he felt the City should have a nice beach and one large enough to protect the City. He said he assumed the Council at the time the Agreement was entered into, from the information available then, believed the 20 -to -1 slope guaranteed the best protection to the City. He concurred with Mr. Weller's state- ments that, as time passes, it will be easier to look back and judge how the original calculations have turned out, and also hts suggestion to wait so that the City will have a clearer picture from which to determine the precise slope. He inquired if it is possible to delete this portion of the Map from any approval - let it remain at 20 -to -1 and then when the proper time arrives it can be considered further. Mr. Annibale answered the Council can delete this portion for the purpose of study and determination at a later date. Councilman Freeman asserted the Fill Agreement states the three -year period runs from the time the fill is completed - not the term from when the City "accepts" it - and she felt this should be pinned down in the Tentative Map or in writing because the Fill Agreement does not state "from the date of acceptance" - it says from the "time the fill is completed" and it was completed a year ago. Mr. Annibale stated that, from a legal standpoint, the only logical time for the three -year guarantee to start would be when the City accepts the beach from the developer. As to the fill being completed, he said he did not think this is true as of this date and asked for corroboration from the City Engineer. Mr. Hanna replied there is still work to be done in the completion of the fill project. Councilman Freeman stated she really would like this point "tied down" because the Fill Agreement specifies "when the fill is completed ". She then continued enumerat- ing the Map discrepancies: (3) Six lots facing Otis Drive, on corners, which do, not have sixty -foot frontages. (4) The intake for the lagoon system is placed on City property and, as of today, Utah has not requested permission for this location. Referring to the Reclamation District, Councilman Freeman said it is responsible not only for the drainage and the lagoons but also for the retention of the beach for which it has set aside $158,000. for the three -year period of maintenance. She said she understands the contract has been assigned to South Shore Land Co. and inquired of the City Attorney if it is possible to do so - can it assign its responsibilities to a private concern and if so, would it not normally be done by bid. With regard to the Tentative Map in general, Councilman Freeman stated she could find nothing from the City Attorney to the effect that he had been given a copy of the Map to check for any deflections from the Agreement or stipulations as he had done before the Council approved the Tentative Map of Tract No. 1866. Again referring to the Map discrepancies: (5) The cut of the existing beaches which possibly was taken care of in the Map for Tract No. 1866, but it has never been tied down and the subdivider is to have a statement in the text indicating any variations from the normal beach level as it was prior to the time of the fill. She requested this be in writing either on the Map or by letter. (6) Landscaping is not mentioned in writing. (7) Westline Drive does not continue up, as per the Agreement, around the perimeter of the area to Portola Drive. (8) Lots Nos. 1 and 2, Block 1, show a twenty - three -foot frontage rather than the required fifty feet. At this point, Councilman Collischonn said he thought the Planning Director and City Engineer could answer some of those questions. He pointed out some of the answers are in the minutes of the Planning Board meeting of February 3. Upon request, Mr. Schoenfeld pointed out several of these matters had been thoroughly discussed by the Planning Board. With regard to the extension of Westline Drive, it was his opinion and that of a majority of the Board, to so extend it would be detri- mental to the neighborhood north of Portola Drive, because it would create a diversion of traffic from the subdivision over streets which were not built to take it. Eighth Street will have to be extended in some form or other to serve, at the minimum, Washington Park. Concerning those lots on corners,which have less than sixty -foot frontages - they were called to the Board's attention and were found to be perfectly satisfactory when it was explained that by shifting some of the lots down it was possible to effect great savings in the installation of the utilities which will run in the public walk- ways at the heads of those loops. The Board felt this was sufficient reason to grant an exception on these few lots. Concerning the "pie- shaped" lots mentioned as not having fifty -foot frontages, they do have fifty -foot frontages along the arc at the normal setback line which, in accordance with the proposed ordinance, is twenty feet from the front property line. With regard to landscaping, Mr. Schoenfeld stated he had suggested to the Planning Board and the subdivider that it would be to the interests of both the community and the developer to indicate on the Map a strip of ten feet on the street sides of the Shopping Center area for landscape treatment. The matter was never definitely resolved. This would be at the southeasterly corner of Otis and Westline Drives. Upon request, Mr. Charles T. Travers of Utah Construction Company said he had stated to the Planning Board his Company would be happy to consider appropriate landscaping in the Shopping Center area and he had no hesitancy in saying the minutes ought to show the Company thinks there should be some landscaping there. The only reservation, as he recalls, is that the Company did not want to commit itself to a specific type of thing as it might want to open the whole area up and have a colonial type village such as is established in Palo Alto, across from Stanford University Stadium - and the landscaping would then be in a different location of the commercial site. He said he did not know about this point - it is something to be studied by his plan- ners and he offered. to have them submit the plan to be worked out to mutual satis- faction. He felt that, at this time, it can be mutually agreed there will be some kind of landscaping - whatever is mutually acceptable, based on the type of develop- ment which will ultimately be constructed. President McCall stated the point is there is nothing in writing on the landscaping provision. The Planning Director has made his recommendation and probably has a certain development in mind, and wondered if Mr. Travers would indicate he was agreeable to the decisions reached by Mr. Schoenfeld and Mr. Jones, subject to a given design. Considerable discussion ensued on this phase of the Map. Councilman Freeman stated she realized there is some urgency in this matter but asked that it be laid over to next Tuesday in order that it can be handled properly since there are several points in question. Mr. Schoenfeld stated the subdivider has agreed to submit, at a later date, details of the development of the area indicated on the revised Tentative Map as multi- family. He suggested the subdivider add to that the further detail of how he will treat the commercial area with respect to the landscaping. Mr. Travers stated he thought this could be worked out and his Company could try to meet the objective of coming in with these plans at the same time. Councilman Freeman pointed out there are so many irregularities in the Tentative Map and she felt a week's time would allow corrections to be made. President McCall inquired if all of the adjustments and amendments could not be made before the Council accepts the Final Map, to which Mr. Annibale replied, "No, once the Council has accepted the Tentative Map, it has fairly well committed itself any amendments or adjustments should be made at this time." Councilman Petersen said he felt there were a number of questions which should be clarified and he thought a delay of a week would not hamper progress. Councilman Collischonn concurred, pointing up the fact that all questions should be organized for the adjourned regular meeting so a definite agreement could be reached at that time. Upon request, Mr. Schoenfeld stated that many of the questions raised here tonight had been raised and discussed by the Planning Board at its last two meetings. He said it was the understanding of the Board and of himself that the subdivider would include all of the recommendations of the Board that were agreed upon in those meet- ings in his Final Map - therefore, no insistence was made that they be shown in the Amended Tentative Map. Councilman Schacht stated he thought it is the duty of the Council to take care of this matter properly. He felt it is not complete at this time, and in view,of the City Attorney's remarks about its finality, the Council should have it done right. Mr. Annibale pointed out the Council has the absolute right to hold the matter over for ten days, and in the event the Council desires to hold it over further, it can be done, provided the subdivider will give his consent to the continuance. President McCall thereupon stated the Council would set next Tuesday evening as an adjourned regular meeting to further consider this matter. He requested the City Manager, City Attorney and the Planning Director to discuss any questions with Mr. Travers so everything can be in order by next Tuesday evening. Mr. Travers was also asked to be at the meeting. It was so ordered. Further discussion ensued to be sure all understood exactly what is to be desig- nated on the Map and definite commitments to be made. Councilman Freeman requested that Mr. Schoenfeld give a copy of the Map to Mr. Annibale so he c an check it to make sure nothing is being done contrary to the Agreement stipulations or ordinance. INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES: 9. Councilman Schacht introduced the following ordinance, after which it was laid over by provision of law and the Charter: "Ordinance No. New Series An Ordinance Amending Section 2 -115 of Title II, Chapter 1, Article 1, of the Alameda Municipal Code, Relating to Order of Business of the City Council." UNFINISHED BUSINESS: 10 Councilman Freeman referred to Mr. Weller's letter of January 23, 1958, in which he speaks of the proposed sale of Encinal Housing property, and inquired if there was any further information- on the matter. Mr. Weller stated there is nothing affirmative as yet but he has been in contact with Congressman Miller and with the San Francisco Office of the Public Housing Administration. He has been assured he will be notified as soon as anything definite develops. 11. Councilman Freeman also asked what the status of the United States Maritime School is and what the Council is planning to do, if anything, about it. She said she understood there is some further attempt to establish a school there, and she inquired what information there is on this. Mr. Weller replied there is nothing specific about the property - he is aware the Chamber of Commerce is proposing a program leading to the establishment of a temporary branch of the State College but he does not know how far this has progressed. He has nothing official on it. President McCall commented that each of the cities in Southern Alameda County is attempting to interest the =State Committee, which is inspecting various sites, in order to have the college located in its particular area. He said that, even after the site is chosen, it will probably be several years before the college could be built. It is believed the Maritime property should be used as a temporary location, and it is hoped to get full support in this respect. 12. Councilman Freeman referred to the motion carried at the last meeting to aban- don the requirement for flush curbs and wondered what effect it would have on the resolution on the agenda this evening establishing standard specifications, one of which is for flush curbs - and she wondered if the Council should rescind the motion so the Engineer's specifications will b e allowed to go unhindered. Mr. Annibale stated there is no reason for rescinding the previous action. If there is any conflict between the resolution and the previous motion, this resolution would govern, but it is his opinion there is no conflict. NEW BUSINESS: 13. Councilman Petersen requested consideration be given to amending Ordinance No. 1208, New Series, whereby some measure of latitude will be given to the City Manager and City Engineer to make decisions where the full subdivision process would work a hardship on the property owner concerned and a "Record of Survey" could be accepted. Upon request, Mr. Hanna stated the Subdivision Ordinance requires that any property which is to be divided into two or more parcels - or even adjacent parcels that are divided for the purpose of sale, present or future, must go through a subdivision provers - unless the street improvements are already in. This is mandatory. If street improvements are in, then the division of the land can be accomplished by means of a "Record of Survey" which is still somewhat difficult, but not nearly as difficult as the complete subdivision process. The present Subdivision Ordinance has been in effect for a little over a year and there is an occasional piece of prop - erty which is to be divided into, perhaps two lots, which abut on a street not im- proved and then, the property owner or divider has the opportunity of either immed- iately putting in the street improvements in front of his land and filing a Record of Survey or, going through the subdivision process. He said it is difficult and a real hardship on these particular owners. Under the first draft of the ordinance; which was submitted to the Council, there was some latitude for discretion, but dur- ing the work sessions, this provision was deleted and the complete subdivision pro- cess was made a requirement. Mr. Hanna stated there has now been some experience with the ordinance and he thought it is a real hardship to the property owner and, perhaps, a disadvantage to the City as a whole. He suggested the matter be considered by Mr. Weller and the Staff so that possibly the ordinance could be amended with new language to make it more suitable for the City's precise purpose. It was determined the City Manager, City Engineer and Planning Director would make a study and report on the situation at the next regular meeting to be held March 4. RESOLUTIONS: 14. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Schacht, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 5749 Authorizing the City Manager to Dispose of Personal Property of Less Than 431,000. in Value." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Collischonn and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 15. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Collischonn, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 5750 Adopting City En ineer's Standard Specifications for Construction of idewaik and Curb Returns at Inter- sections Within the City of Alameda." 4 The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Schacht. Councilman Freeman inquired if it would be possible to place the matter of flush crosswalks on the ballot in that the people in the area are so concerned. She felt this would determine the question once and for all. Councilman Collischonn pointed out the concern is for the present and future development of Alameda, especially with regard to the fact there will be,some day, a Chipman Housing development where low -cost housing will be the aim. Councilman Petersen stated it would be interesting to note the number of concessions which have been made by the Council in connection with the Fill Agreement and ordi- nance - and he felt this condition should.be watched closely in the future. He said the only comment he has to make further on flush curbs is that there is going to be a new city with lower standards in this respect, and an old city with higher standards. The question was then put and the motion carried by the following vote. Ayes: Councilmen Collischonn, Schacht and President McCall, (3). Noes: Councilmen Freeman and Petersen, (2). .Absent: None. Councilman Schacht stated his personal preference is still for flush curbs but on the basis of a realistic approach to this matter, personal preference must be put aside in favor of being practicable. He felt the Council had taken a forward step in its action on this question at the last meeting. President McCall thereupon declared the foregoing resolutions duly adopted and passed. ORDINANCES FOR PASSAGE: 16. "Ordinance No. 1261, New Series An Ordinance Amending Chapter 3, Title XIII, of the Alameda Municipal Code by Adding Thereto a New Section 13 -330 Relating to the Exemption of Established Churches and Religious Organizations from the Provisions of the Alameda Municipal Code Relating to the Obtaining of Solicitation Permits." Councilman Schacht moved the ordinance be adopted as read. The motion was seconded by Councilman Freeman and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. FILING :. 17. Financial Statement - Bureau of Electricity, as of December 31, 1957 - Verified by George A. Hackleman & Co. 18. Auditor's Financial Statement - City of Alameda, as of January 31, 1958 - Verified by George A. Hackleman & Co. BILLS: 19. An itemized List of Claims against the City of Alameda, and the Departments thereof, in the total amount of i.1.8,384.17, was submitted to the Council at this meeting. The list was accompanied by certification from the City Manager that the Claims shown were correct. Councilman Petersen. moved the bills as itemized in the List of Claims filed with the City Clerk on February 18, 1958, and presented to the Council at this time, be allowed and paid. The motion was seconded by Councilman Freeman and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. ADJOURNMENT: 20. There being no further business to come before the meeting, the Council adjourned - to assemble in adjourned regular session on Tuesday evening, Febru- ary 25, 1958, at 7:30 o'clock. Respectfully submitted,