Loading...
1958-12-02 Regular CC Minutes177 REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL Off' THE CITY OF ALAMEDA HELD TUESDAY EVENING, ,DECEMBER 2, 1958 The meeting convened at 7:30 o'clock p.m. with Vice President Petersen presiding. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Freeman, followed by the Invocation delivered by The Reverend Mr. Frank P. Randall, Minister of the First Congregational Church. ROLL CALL: The roll was called and Councilmen Collischonn, Freeman, Schacht and Vice Presi- dent Petersen, (4), were noted present. Absent: President McCall, (1). MINUTES: 1. The minutes of the regular meeting held November 18, 1958, were approved as transcribed. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 2' From the Alameda County Mosquito Abatement District, requesting appointment of a City representative to the Board of Trustees of the District for the two -year term commencing January 2, 1959. It was stated there are many problems in which engineer- ing advice is needed and Mr. Hanna, City Engineer, the present Alameda representative, has been able to greatly assist the District with its varied operations. The matter was referred to "Resolutions ". 3. From Bay Farm Island Improvement League, signed by Mrs. Alice S. Gronner, Secre- tary, commending Mr. Weller for his proposed recommendation that ten cents per round of golf be put aside for a Golf Course Improvement Fund. The hope was expressed that his recommendation will be approved and steps will be taken to maintain and improve the appearance of the Golf Course and its fringe areas, particularly the unsightly condition at the end of Beach Road. The communication was noted and referred to the subject listed on the agenda under "Reports of Officers, Boards, Etcetera ". ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: 4`' Mr. Sumner Graham addressed the Council as a representative of the East Bay Chapter of the National Safety Council. He stated the organization is proud and pleased to present to the City a Traffic Award Plaque, and the City can be justly proud of this evidence of real and honest effort in behalf of traffic safety. These awards are given serious consideration by men who are dedicated to the cause of reduc- ing traffic accidents. He commended all of the Departments of the City government whose efforts have made this award possible. Vice President Petersen accepted the Plaque, stating the Council is proud of the employees and citizens of Alameda who have done their best to accomplish this result and the City is very appreciative of the honor of being recognized for its high s Land- ing among cities of comparable size throughout the United States. 5. Mr. Frank Gottstein, 731 Haight Avenue, spoke of the "bootleg" construction which has gone on and is going on in the City, whereby many large old one - family dwellings have been converted into several apartments - and he stated he was glad to note the Council has been urged to take steps against builders who are willfully violating City ordinances in this respect. He suggested such contractors be heavily penalized in order to eliminate their starting any building without taking out the necessary permit. HEARINGS: 6. Continued from the last meeting was the matter of the reclassification of the " Shumaker" property located on the east side of Willow Street, south of Clinton Avenue - from the "R -3PD" District to the "A -P" District. The Clerk read a letter from Paul R. Shumaker, M. D., requesting further continuation of the Hearing. It being ascertained there were no protestants present, Councilman Collischonn moved the Hearing be continued to the meeting of December 16, 1958. The motion was seconded by Councilman Schacht and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President McCall, (1). 7. The matter was called up concerning the reclassification of property located at the north end of Pearl Street, known as 2008 Pearl Street, owned by Powell Bros., Inc., from the "ML ", Limited Industrial (Manufacturing) District, to the "M -2 ", General Industrial (Manufacturing) District. The rezoning has been recommended by the City Planning Board. The Clerk stated there was on file the Affidavit of Publication of the Notice of Hear- ing and the summary of the matter from the Planning Board. Mr. Hanson stated the Hearing is being held pursuant to provisions of the Alameda Municipal Code - Sections 11 -171 through 11 -176, both inclusive. He then suggested that Mr. Schoenfeld, Planning Director, present an explanation of the situation lead- ing to the recommendation of the Planning Board. Mr. Schoenfeld stated the property in question was zoned "ML" District, following out the direction given by the Outline Master Plan, which proposed this approach to the City for light industrial use so as to keep down the possible nuisance types of industries which might be found in a Heavy Industrial District. The matter was brought before the Planning Board by the petitioners,who operate a cement - mixing plant and building materials yard at this location - and have done so for many, many years. The Planning Board gave consideration to the application and, as a result of the evidence presented, has recommended this area be rezoned to "M -2 ", General Industrial District. He said it is, in general, the belief of both the Planning staff and the Board that the property is being used for this purpose and will pro- bably be so used for a number of years to come and, therefore, this would be the proper zoning for the property involved. Mr. Hanson inquired if anyone wished to speak in favor of the contemplated rezoning - and Mr. Enrico Dell'Osso, Attorney for Powell Bros., Inc., responded with the state- ment that this business has been in operation for fifty years in this location. He pointed out the property abuts the Tidal Canal and it is in the midst of a heavy industrial section of the City. The requested rezoning would permit the Company to continue in its same business operation. He also added that the Company is very conscious of the surroundings and it has already entered into a program of beautifi- cation of its property - the warehouses have been painted and a row of trees is to be planted along the right -of -way to screen the area from, nearby residences. Mr. Hanson then asked if there were any present who desired toregister opposition to the proposed rezoning - and, there being no response, the Hearing was declared closed. Councilman Collischonn remarked that he felt Mr. Powell should be well aware of his obligation to beautify the area. He said that what has been done so f ar is a step, . in the right direction and he would like to see further improvement as has been indi- cated by Mr. Dell'Osso, and he expressed the hope Mr. Powell would continue with this program. In reply to Vice President Petersen's question, Mr. Schoenfeld explained this property was zoned "H" Heavy Industrial District under the former Zoning Ordinance,which is comparable to the "M -2" District now proposed. Councilman Freeman moved the recommendation of the Planning Board be sustained and the property of Powell Bros., Inc., be reclassified from "ML" District to "M -2" Dis- trict. The motion was seconded by Councilman Schacht and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President McCall, (1). The matter was then referred to "Introduction of Ordinances ". REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS, ETCETERA: 8 From the City Manager, reporting all work satisfactorily completed on the project of Constructing Temporary Storm Drainage. to Serve Washington Park Fill Area - recom- mending it be accepted and the Notice of Completion be ordered filed. Councilman Schacht moved the recommendation be adopted; that the work on said project be accepted and the Notice of Completion be filed. The motion was seconded by Coun- cilman Collischonn and unanimously carried. 9. From the City Manager, concerning diagonal parking and installation of meters, along the south side of Shoreline Drive, as suggested by the Recreation Commission. Mr. Weller recommended against the implementation of this program, pointing up that heavy public use of the beach area is highly seasonal - diagonal parking would sub- stantially restrict the free movement of traffic during periods of peak use and thereby increase the hazard to both vehicles and pedestrians - off - street parking is available at the Shopping Center and it is extremely doubtful if parking meters would return sufficient revenue even to amortize their cost. He stated the Chief of Police, Planning Director and City Engineer concurred in this conclusion. Councilman Freeman moved the City Manager's recommendation be approved and said park- ing program not be implemented. The motion was seconded by Councilman Schacht and unanimously carried. 1Q. From the Planning Board, signed by Mr. Schoenfeld, Secretary, submitting copy of its Resolution No. 36, " - -- Urging That the Alameda City Council Endorse in Prin- ciple Certain Legislative Changes to Increase the Responsibility, Powers and Taxing Limits of the East Bay Regional Park District." In response to Councilman Collischonn's request, Mr. Schoenfeld stated the reason this matter comes before the Council is because the people represented on the East, Bay Metropolitan Planning Council, which is composed of members of the Planning Boards and Commissions in the East Bay area, have felt increasing concern in the last few years over the fact that the regional recreation needs were being slighted. There appeared to be no over- riding agency adequately concerned with this problem. The matter has been under study for a number of months - a questionnaire was cir- culated among the communities of the East Bay - getting an inventory of the recreation facilities which were available - and it has been indicated quite clearly, from an analysis of this survey, that there is a dearth of regional recreational facilities. Because the planning people are only too aware of the future population growth in the area, and the impact it will have in the additional needs it will generate, they are anxious that something be done at this time to alleviate the problem. It is the belief of this organization which, Mr. Schoenfeld said, he feels is supported by most of the planning profession on this side of the Bay, that some agency, preferably one which is already established, be delegated to do the job. It has been stated that the East Bay Regional Park District has shown but slight inclination to do it, principally because it does not have the mandate from the people to proceed with the job and because it would take legislative action in Sacramento and support from the communities in the East Bay for it to take the leadership, it tends to hold back . and wait for somebody to push it into the job. He pointed out that the "Park District" is operating with a five cent levy which, in the opinion of its manager, is insuf- ficient to carry on any larger program than is presently being conducted. Therefore, it was the thought of the "Planning Council ", and generally subscribed to by profes- sional planners, that the thing which should be done and which should be supported by the communities of the East Bay, is to urge that legislation be adopted which would increase the scope of the activity of the Park District and also its taxing power so it can have the funds to do the job assigned to it. Thus, it will be pos- sible to take care of such regional recreational facilities as open park lands, hills, beaches along the shores of any of the lakes or of San Francisco Bay. Mr. Schoenfeld stated it is increasingly the belief of professional recreation people, as well as planners, that these facilities need to be undertaken by an over -all agency. Councilman Freeman asked if this agency would be under the Alameda County Board of Supervisors particularly or if it would include Contra Costa County also. Mr. Schoenfeld replied that the Park District operates in both Alameda and Contra Costa Counties. With regard to the levy, Mr. Schoenfeld stated no figure has been arrived at - it is a point the legislative representatives of the East Bay cities would want to debate and agree upon before appearing in Sacramento to present the matter. He explained further that its status would be comparable to the East Bay Municipal Utility District, being a Board set up by the Legislature to perform a given task within a certain area, which in this case is to provide regional recreation. Councilman Collischonn said possibly Contra Costa County is worse off than Alameda County County as far as regional recreational facilities are concerned - and he felt it is just another opportunity for some group to use more taxpayers' money. He stated the Council should think very carefully before approving such recommendation by profes- sional planners. He felt taxes are going beyond any reasonable point and will continue to go up. He stated he is in favor of recreation and believes there are fine facilities in the Regional Park District in Oakland and that Alameda County is quite well taken care of. He said he would want to give long consideration to the matter before allowing another agency a taxing right. Mr. Schoenfeld said he would subscribe to the feeling that the cities ought not to give unlimited taxing powers to this District but he felt it can be demonstrated that it is severely limited in what it can do now with only the five cent levy which was set, as he recalls, in 1934, and in view of the rise in costs since then, the District has had to reduce its program in order to keep within that amount. He said he thinks all of the communities will have ample opportunity to ask those in favor of the legislation to state clearly just what they propose to do, what additional activities they contemplate the District to take on and what the District's program would be so that all vitally interested communities would know just what the money is to be used for. Councilman Schacht stated the resolution of the Planning Board and the Planning Council is one of "principle" - some undertaking should be started to ascertain the feasibility of increasing the recreational facilities. He said he is certainly not advocating that the City give the District carte blanche in this matter, but he felt this would be an endorsement in principle only. If the Council is dissatisfied with the amount of tax limit which might be set or if it is found later there are features of the program with which the Council is not in sympathy, there would then be nothing to bind it from withdrawing its support. The Council could actively oppose the setup if the situation was one in which it wanted no part. He felt the regional public recreational facilities are greatly limited at this time in proportion to the popula- tion increase. He cited the overcrowded condition of Tilden Park on weekends, as an example. He said he believes the Council should support this matter in principle now and after details are presented then further action can be taken later. Councilman Freeman suggested the matter be referred to the Committee of the Whole to allow further study before action is taken - and inquired if there is any urgency in the situation. Mr. Schoenfeld stated such a delay would lessen the effectiveness of the Council's action because the Legislature meets shortly after the first of the year and it is in the interests of this program to have the majority of the East Bay cities in support of any such move to improve the existing legislation so the District can do the job that lies ahead. Councilman Collischonn concurred with Councilman Freeman's suggestion. Councilman Schacht stated he felt the Council is worried too much with details at this stage - first consideration should be given to the possible expansion and improvement of the recreational facilities within the District. The State Legislature will be the Body which implements the current legislation which now exists by raising the taxing limits and other powers. He reiterated the question now is 'endorsing in principle" and later, if the measure is found unsatisfactory, the Council simply does not support it. He pointed out these matters have to be submitted to the Legislature in proper form promptly or they do not have a chance to reach "committee ", and he felt a delay would be unfortunate. Following some further discussion, Councilman Schacht moved the Council endorse the proposal in principle. The motion died for lack of a second. Councilman Freeman then asked that the matter be presented at the next meeting of the Council for action. It was so ordered. A discussion ensued as to when this matter might be considered prior to the next .Council meeting and it was determined it would be brought up in the scheduled joint meeting of the Council and Recreation Commission to be held Tuesday, December 9. 11. From the Planning Board, signed by Mr. Schoenfeld, Secretary, urging the City Council to take suitable action against builders and contractors who willfully dis- regard sections of the Municipal Code relating to licensing and the Building Code and Zoning Ordinance regulations. Councilman Schacht stated the matter should be referred to the City Manager, who might have some suggestions for the enforcement of the City ordinances - the City has these regulations and it is expected they will be complied with. Mr. Weller said the only part of this question which might properly come before the Council would be that if an administrative investigation indicated there should be an amendment to any existing ordinance. For instance, if some current requirement of an ordinance cannot be enforced, then a recommendation should be made that the ordinance be modified. There being no objections, the matter was referred to the City Manager. J 12. From the City Manager, under date of November 25, 1958, submitting a detailed report . on expenditure and revenue figures relating to the Golf Course for the first four months of this fiscal year and recommending the basis on which Golf Course funds should be handled in the future - that the revenue from all golf sources first be used to finance direct operations, bond service and debt retirement and from the balance would be allocated to the Golf Course Improvement Reserve the sum of ten cents per round, based on figures for the preceding year, starting with fiscal 1959- 60. Further, that no express provision be made for return of the 846,000. presum- ably advanced by the General Fund to supplement Bond Income, but suggesting the General Fund retain all 1958-59 golf revenues in excess of the department's budget needs and the capital costs for the driving range. Other details with regard to finances and operational procedures were also given. Councilman Collischonn moved the Council approve the recommendations of the City Manager for the future handling of Golf Course funds. The motion was seconded by Councilman Schacht. Speaking on the question, Councilman Freeman stated that inasmuch as the operations are not entirely satisfactory, and should be studied periodically, - and also the Advisory Golf Commission is studying the most needed improvements - she would like to inquire just how it is going to be determined exactly what funds are needed and what projects have priority. Mr. Weller suggested the Golf Commission be required by the Council to prepare a long -range Capital Improvement program. This should be referred to the Council for approval and any funds expended from the Improvement Reserve ought to be cleared by the Council. No such funds would be expended prior to proper authorization from the Council. His recommendation in this respect is that the "Fund" be established, because some of the improvements which ought to be made to the Golf Course cannot be made from current revenues of any one year and there would have to be some carry- over balances. He said he certainly believes the City Council properly ought to have final control over the expenditure of funds. Councilman Collischonn stated that, with the consent of his second, he would amend his motion to include the requirement by the Council that the Advisory Golf Commis- sion set up and submit a Budget Plan for a five -year period to cover its improvements, and no expenditures will be made without Council authorization. The amendment was accepted by Councilman Schacht. Vice President Petersen referred to a bulletin from the Alameda Golf Club and stated there is apparently a feeling among its supporters that the Alameda Municipal Golf Course is a private corporation. He disputed this and emphasized that the earnings of this public agency go to support the City of Alameda as well a s its own enter- prise. He pointed out the people voted for the Bond Issue in the amount of 700,000., which sum has been exceeded in expenditures by the amount of $46,000. He said he, personally, believes the Council should discuss this particular item at greater length before acting on the matter at this meeting. Councilman Collischonn stated he felt the City Manager has made an excellent study of this situation - it shows sound thinking - and he did not see any reason for delay in this matter. He said the Council must not forget the City has a facility it must maintain - there is a big investment involved. The motion before the Council clearly limits the authority of the Golf Commission and he thought it is in proper order. Vice President Petersen contended the Golf Course still owes the General Fund money. Mr. Weller remarked there have been some years when the General Fund has received more from Golf Course revenues than it properly should have. Therefore, it is difficult to say whether the General Fund is "short or over" on its rightful income from the Golf Course. After some further discourse, Vice President Petersen reiterated he would like to talk over the matter more fully. Mr. Weller stated he thinks that if there are going to be any improvements made at the Golf Course - and he would agree there ought to be - they are not going to be made until there is some reasonable assurance there will be a regular source of improvement funds available. This has not been the case in the past and it would never be the case until some fund of this kind is set up. The question was then put and the motion as amended was carried by the following roll call vote. Ayes: Councilmen Collischonn, Freeman and Schacht, (3). Noes: Vice President Petersen, (1). Absent: President McCall, (1). 13'. From the Recreation Commission, signed by Mr. Terry LaCroix, Chairman, submitting "Proposed Public Beach Rules for Washington Park and South Shore" - and recommending the adoption thereof. Councilman Freeman moved the recommendation of the Recreation Commission be denied. She said there were several items listed which should be discussed by the Council and the City Attorney. Upon inquiry, Mr. Hanson said he had read the "Rules" and they are principally a matter of policy and if the Council wished to adopt them, he would want to draft them in another form. There was no second to the motion and, therefore, it died. Councilman Schacht said that, inasmuch as the Council is planning to meet with the Commission on December 9, some of the rules could be discussed at that time. Mr. Weller explained that in this case, some of the measures involved would be of interest to several Department Heads and he suggested the matter be referred to him with instructions that it be cleared with other administrative officers and then referred, finally, to the joint session with the Commission. There being no objections, it was so ordered. 14. From the Recreation Commission, signed by Mr. Terry LaCroix, Chairman, submitting a sample "Beach Refreshment Concession Contract ", and recommending it serve as a basis for negotiations with Mr. Pete Alexander, present concessionaire in the parks and on the beaches. Councilman Freeman requested this matter also be referred to the City Manager for sub- sequent discussion with the Recreation Commission at the meeting of December 9. There being no objections, it was so ordered. 15. From the Planning Board, signed by Mr. Schoenfeld, Secretary, recommending approval of Record of Survey Map covering property known as 2000, 2006 and 2008 Santa Clara Avenue, owned by Commander C. A. Chapman. Mr. Schoenfeld displayed a drawing of the property involved and explained that one lot will front on Chestnut Street and the other on Santa Clara Avenue. Councilman Collischonn moved the Board's recommendation be accepted and the Record of Survey Map be approved as submitted. The motion was seconded by Councilman Schacht and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President McCall, (1). 16.E From the Planning Board, signed by Mr. Schoenfeld, Secretary, informing the Council it was the consensus of the Board that the "Workable Program" is vital to the orderly future growth of a dynamic community and commended its broader implications to the Council for serious consideration and adoption. Vice President Petersen stated it would be appropriate to refer this communication to "New Business ", at which time the subject is coming up for consideration. It was so ordered. INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES: 17. Councilman Collischonn introduced the following ordinance, after which it was laid over under provision of law and the Charter: "Ordinance No. New Series An Ordinance Authorizing the Exchange of Real Property Between the City of Alameda and Bay View Development Corporation." (Fernside Boulevard and Encinal Avenue) 18. Councilman Freeman introduced the following ordinance, after which it was laid over under provision of law and the Charter: "Ordinance No. New Series An Ordinance Reclassifying and Rezoning Certain Property Within the City of Alameda by Amending Zoning Ordinance No. 1277, New Series." (Powell Bros., Inc. - 2008 Pearl Street) UNFINISHED BUSINESS: 19. Councilman Freeman stated she had asked the City Attorney if he would check and ascertain if the City could accept a map contrary to the Reclamation District. At that time, it was the City Engineer's opinion that the waterways were approximately the same. She said she is concerned about the laws of the Water Resources Board with regard to how a Reclamation District is established and, when maps are submitted, if they are final. She said that, since the District is within the City of Alameda, she understands the Council would act in the same capacity as a Board of Supervisors and every time there is a change of plans, etcetera, they would come before the Coun- cil, so that when action is to be taken the Councilmen would have the proper plans and know exactly what has been set up as the District. She asked Mr. Hanson to check this matter. Councilman Freeman also asked that up -to -date maps be furnished and any plans for the east end, which the District contemplates changing, be submitted before the Tentative Man is presented. 20. Vice President Petersen inquired if any definite determination has been made concerning the installation of stop signs at Clinton Avenue and Willow Street. He said he believes a stop sign is needed now due to the bus route and the flow of traffic into and out of the South Shore. Mr. Weller stated the Chief of Police has been working with Key System on this situa- tion and he would check with him to ascertain his thinking. V 21. Vice President Petersen referred to the joint meeting of the Council and the Pub- lic Utilities Board held November 13, 1958, and inquired why the Press had not been notified that such meeting was to take place. Mr. Weller answered that the meeting was held on the same night, at the same time and place as the Board's meetings have always been held. The Press is aware of this schedule and he did not believe the City is obligated to call its attention to the fact that something in particular is coming up on the agenda. He pointed out the Board's meetings are public, the same as the Council meetings. During the course of further discussion on the subject, Councilmen Collischonn and Schacht concurred with the City Manager's remarks. Vice President Petersen contended the Press deserved the privilege of being invited to said meeting. NEW BUSINESS: 22. The matter was called up with regard., to consideration of the "Workable Program for Urban Renewal ". Councilman Collischonn stated the members of the Council will recall that when he had requested data to be compiled on this "Program" by the City Manager it was with the one purpose in mind that it would implement the development of the property formerly occupied by Chipman Housing Project. This land has now been cleared, it is lying idle and is producing little or no taxes or revenue for the City. He said it must be clearly understood that this project is not "Urban Renewal" or "Urban Redevelop- ment". It is the employment of private capital in developing housing in Alameda generally, and in the West End specifically. If there are any ideas this would go into a full scale Urban Renewal Program, he said, they should be dispelled now. That type of development should, perhaps, be decided by the electorate and not by the Council. He pointed out he had read the Workable Program very carefully and has discussed it with the City Manager and he is convinced that to adopt it will, in no way, add expense to the operation of the City of Alameda - but will provide a means whereby private enterprise will be able to construct garden -type apartments which are badly needed on this site in the West End. Councilman Freeman asked why a Workable Program is necessary if private capital is to be used and Councilman Collischonn replied that the financing is obtained on the same basis as a Federal Housing Administration loan. A private bank makes the loan to an individual and it is guaranteed by the Federal Government. To accomplish this, Councilman Freeman said she thought the City would have to follow the provisions of Section 221 of the Housing Act of 1954, under which the Workable Program is comprised of seven points - one of which is citizen participation and she did not recall that item being met. It was developed that a Citizens Advisory Com- mittee on Local Housing was appointed by the Alameda Chamber of Commerce upon request of the Mayor, in December, 1956, which would give evidence of public participation. Councilman Freeman, however, stated this was set up to implement Urban Renewal. Councilman Collischonn said he could not understand why there should be objections to making it easy for private enterprise to obtain private funds through a guaranteed bank loan to construct housing which is so badly needed. Councilman Freeman stated the objection is that Section 221 is a part of the Urban Renewal law and even though the City wants only this specific project developed, there would be a Federal Agency involved with the setting up of an autonomous group to operate it. Councilman Collischonn pointed out that would not be required under the Workable Program. He emphasized that the City's sole purpose is to develop the "Chipman" property and it does not have to go a step beyond that. Upon request, Mr. Weller explained that the Workable Program, it is true, is a require- ment both for privately financed Section 221 Housing and for formal Urban Renewal Projects. This is just a happenstance - it can be used for either or both. He stated this same question was raised at a meeting last April when the Workable Program was first being discussed - and Mr. Justin Herman, Regional Administrator of the Hous- ing and Home Finance Agency, had made answer in a letter dated April 3, 1958, the last paragraph of which Mr. Weller read, - " - -- the community must satisfy the objec- tives of its Workable Program in order to qualify for Section 221 Housing. If the community is able to satisfy these objectives through the use of its Charter powers and a systematic program of Code enforcement, the City need not necessarily involve itself in all other aspects of Urban Renewal." Mr. Weller stated this would seem to him that it would be entirely at the option of the City whether or not it would want to undertake any formal Urban Redevelopment Project. In response to Vice President Petersen's questions, Mr. Weller explained that what the City does, in essence, is bring its Codes up to date, carry out the requirements of its Master Plan, Zoning Ordinance, etcetera. In the process of formalizing that kind of program, the City makes it possible for private capital to get special considera- tion in the form of an "FHA" loan, with private capital. This does not mean the City has to become involved in a formal Urban Renewal -Urban Redevelopment Program with the Federal Agency or a semi - autonomous or autonomous agency, the right of condemnation and all other ramifications which would go with it. That would be something quite apart from what is contemplated in the Chipman development. Councilman Freeman then asked Mr. Weller to read the portion of the letter mentioned above, relating to "SEC. 101(c) ", which was done. He said it seemed to him the bur- den of this section is that if the City wishes to seek Federal assistance - and as he understands it, Alameda does not - then this section applies. If the City is not making application for Federal funds, he could not see where it would apply. He said he believes the City would be working under the general private capital provisions of Section 221. In response to Vice President Petersen's question, Mr. Weller answered that the require- ment of Section 221, before this particular type of private financing guarantee is available, is that the local community adopt a Workable Program which is satisfactory to the Federal Agency. Councilman Collischonn reiterated the Council, if the City wanted to go into a formal Urban Redevelopment Project, would have to set up an autonomous or semi - autonomous group to be known as the Urban Renewal Agency for the City of Alameda. Those members would be appointed by the City Council and, of course, with the Workable Program, that much of the program would be implemented. However, he said he is sure it is not the intention of this Council at this time, or in. the foreseeable future, to get into a full scale Urban Redevelopment Program. Councilman Freeman contended the seven points of the Workable Program still have to be met. Mr. Weller explained the situation further by citing comparisons between the procedures involved in the improvement of merely one parcel of property by private capital and a formal Urban Renewal -Urban Redevelopment Agency kind of program - pointing up that they are very different kinds of projects but they both require the existence of the same Workable Program. Councilman Freeman asked the City Manager if it would be possible to have Mr. Herman write a letter, informing the Council of these facts as explained by him. She s aid if he can definitely state this is a matter where the City can develop vacant land by making it possible for private enterprise to borrow money from the Federal Govern- ment for such a project, she would be in favor of it. Otherwise, she would not - because she had understood the Council was to set up the Agency and she did not feel the people had participated in this particular phase of the project. She stated the Council is responsible to the people and if there has to be citizen participation, the Council should choose the citizens to participate. She pointed out there is nothing in writing which states this is not an Urban Renewal Redevelopment. Mr. Weller said he thinks the letter does so state -but if there is this degree of misunderstanding on the part of the Council, he could get in touch with Mr. Herman and have him s et forth the explanation more clearly. Councilman. Schacht suggested that, in view of the questions, raised and also due to the Mayor's absence, the matter be laid over to the next meeting and he requested that some further clarification be obtained from Mr. Herman prior to that time. Following considerably more discussion, Councilman Schacht moved the matter be placed on the agenda for the next meeting and the City Manager be instructed to attempt to procure clarification of the situation for the benefit of the Council. The motion was seconded by Councilman Collischonn and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President McCall, (1). RESOLUTIONS: 2`. 3 The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Schacht, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 5868 Authorizing Execution of Supplemental Agreement (Amending Original Agreement) by and Between the City of Alameda and the Southern Pacific Company, Relating to Retirement, Relocation, Removal and Installation of Railroad Tracks on Tilden Way." R4 The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Collischonn and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: Presi- dent McCall, (1). 24.. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Freeman, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 5869 Resolution Authorizing City Manager to Sign for Surplus Property." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Schacht and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President McCall, (1). 25. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Collischonn, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 5870 Resolution of Intention to Order the Vacation of a Portion of Pearl Street, in the City of Alameda." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Schacht and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President McCall, (1). 26'i The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Schacht, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 5871 Appointing City of Alameda Representative on Board of Trustees of the Alameda County Mosquito Abatement District." (Mark J. Hanna) The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Collischonn and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President McCall, (1). Vice President Petersen thereupon declared all of the foregoing resolutions duly adopted and passed. ORDINANCES FOR PASSAGE: 27. "Ordinance No. 1288, New Series An Ordinance Reclassifying and Rezoning Certain Property Within the City of Alameda by Amending Zoning Ordinance No. 1277, New Series." (Jaber property - Flower Lane) Councilman Collischonn moved the ordinance be adopted as submitted. The motion was seconded by Councilman Schacht and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President McCall, (1). FILING: 28. Supplemental Agreement - Between City of Alameda and Southern Pacific Company. BILLS: 29. An itemized List of Claims against the City of Alameda and the Departments thereof,. in the amount of $27,005.20, 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 Freeman moved the bills as itemized in the List of Claims filed with the City Clerk on December 2, 1958, and presented to the Council at this time, be allowed and paid. The motion was seconded by Councilman Collischonn and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President McCall, (1). ADJOURNMENT: 30. There being no further business to come before the meeting, the Council adjourned - to assemble in regular session on Tuesday evening, December 16, 1958, at 7:30 o'clock. Respectfully submitted,