Loading...
1957-04-09 Regular CC MinutesADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA HELD TUESDAY EVENING, APRIL 9, - - - - - - - 1957 The meeting convened at 7:30 o'clock P.m. with President K The Pledge of Allegiance was lead by Councilman Moresi. elly presiding. ROLL CALL: The roll was called and Councilmen Haag, Hove, McCal], Moresi and President Kranelly, (5), were noted present. Absent: None. MITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: 1. From County of Alameda Veterans Affairs Commission, signed by Mr. John B. Engberg, General Chairman, enclosing copy of proposed budget for the 1957 Veterans Day Observance - Alameda's share boin 2200 - and informing tne Council concerning the Commission's program in this respect. President Kranelly commented this is an annual event in which the City participates and the requested contribution from Alameda is the same as last year. Councilman Hove moved the sum of !3200. be appropriated for the purpose as steted. The motion was seconded. by Councilman Moresi and on roll call carried by the fol- lowing vote. Ayes: Five, Noes: None. Absent: None. P. From County of Alameda Board of Supervisors, signed by Mr. Harold Schulze, Deputy County Clerk, notifying the Council that the hour of 2:00 o'clock p.m., on Thursoay, April 11, 1957, in the meeting room oC the Board at the Court House, Oakland, has been fixed as the time for considering the consolidation of the func- tions of the Alameda Judicial District with those of the Oakland-Piedmont Judicial District. It was requested that a representative of the City of Alameda be present to express the City's views on the proposal. President Kranelly stated he assumed the City will be represented at this meeting - and the City Attorney stated he intended to be present to indicate Alameda's need for a Judicial Court in the City. Councilman Novo stated he is certainly in favor of retaining the Municipal Court. Councilman Moresi felt a resolution to this effect should be adopted oy the Council at this meeting. Councilman Moresi moved the City Attorney be instructed to prepare a resolution, for adoption later in the meeting, urging that a Municipal Court be maintained in the City of Alameda. The motion was seconded by Councilman McCall and unanimously carried. 3. From Bay Farm Island Improvement League, signed by Mr. Albert Gonzales, Presi- dent, endorsing a suggestion that consideration be given to the appointment of a- resident of Bay Farm Island as a member of the City Planning Board. President Kranelly acknowledged the letter with thanks and it w as then referred to the file. 1,11 From Naval Officers Realty Corporation, signed by Mr. John L. Griffin, Presi- dent, informing the Council it has purchased en eight and one-half acres site, between Atlantic and Pacific Avenues, for the construction of a shopping center, subject to obtaining a fifty-foot entrance over the Alameda Belt Line tracks which would be designated a "public grade crossing" by the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California. It was stated such a designation must come as a result of a formal application from the City of Alameda and Lt as requested that the City con- sider making such application. Upon request, Mr. Froerer explained there is a particular form in which the applica- tion must be made and, at present, there is certain information needed from the Naval Officers Realty Corporation. He said the proper application will be prepared for action by the Council at its next r egulear meeting. Mr. Griffin, 569 Geary Street, San Francisco, stated the necessary drawings are now being made for brie City's Enginerring Department ,• From Mrs. Katherine H. Bridge, 92A Broadway, concerning the drainage problem being created by the fill o the subdivision known as Tract No. 1d60, located ot the end of Pearl Street - and requesting the Council to take some ofricial action to assure the property owners in this vicinity that said drainage will be taken care of before the Fall of 1957, even if further work on the subdivision is delayed. _resident Kranelly asked the City Manager what will be the status of the erainage situation in this area, in view of the fact the development of Tract No. 1860 has been d elayecl for the present. Mr. Froerer replied the fill on t'Lle, subdivis ion site has been placed there by Utah arid if the improvements as set out In Li-le 1ont.Juivo Map of Tract Wo. 1350 are not completed, it will be necessary for Utah to remove the fill which would obstruct the fiow of water. He said there is no action roeuired by 6 the Council - the matter will be riots as in the case of all other drains the City inspects. The City Manager was instructed to write to Mrs. Wide informing her of the facts in connection with this situation. 6: From Squadron No. 87, Alameda C ouncil of Boy Scouts, signed by Fred Miller, Leader, extending an invitation to the City Council to attend its Court of Honor to be held April 13, 1957, at the Marine Training Center et 0:00 o'clock p.m. President Krariolly thanked the Council of Boy Scouts for its invitation and stated he felt quite sure those members of the Council who can attend will be happy to do so. 7Y From the Tenth A nnual AD prenticeship Completion Ceremony, signed by Mr. J. A. Stinson, Finance Chairman and Treasurer, addressed to the Mayor, asking the City's sanport through a financial contribution of "..;100., or whatever such deemed fitting, to aid in fostering continued interest and the recognition of yoan citizens' endea- vors in learning a craft and increasing the skilled productivity capacity in the community. President Kranelly said he felt this is a general solicitation and it is outside the City's jurisdiction for the expenditure of such funds. Mr. Froerer stated he did not recall this group having made an appeal for financial support before - but it is an annual event which. the Mayor and other City officials have been invited to attend. He said Councilman McCall has represented the City on some occasions. Councilman Moresi suggested the Council follow the usual procedure and refer the reauest to the Chamber of Commerce for its consideration. The City Manager was, therefore, requested to refer the communication to the Chamber. e• A letter was read, dated April 9, 197, signed by thirty-four property owners on Roosevelt Drive, Regent Street and Park Avenue, unanimously opposing the suggest- ion to extend Roosevelt Drive westerly to meet the future extension of Park Street, pointing up the fact Roosevelt Drive is, and always will be, a minor residential street only two blocks long and thirty feet wide - it is permanently dead-ended at the East and fed by only two minor dead-end residential streets - and such extension would cause it to become a major means of egress and ingress to Utah's shopping cen- ter, thus creating a situation where a minor residential street wonld be taking care of a major traffic load. It was agreed the petition should be acknowledged and it was then referred to the file on the Tentative Map. 9. From Miss Loma Petersen, 1213 St. Charles Street, dated April 9, 1957, stating for the record the offer made by her Mother and herself to the Alameda City Council and the Alameda Planning Board on several occasions, as follows: "We will give unconditional easements to the City of Alameda over all or any port of our tidelands on the South Shore of Alameda at the foot of St. Charles Street provided they remain under a considerable depth of water". The reason g iven for making the offer is to insure a larger lagoon in this vicinity which would provide pleasing and beautiful vistas not only for the present homes on lower Bay, St. Charles and Hawthorne Streets, but also for a large number of lots in the newly developed area belon to Utah Construction Company. It was stated it seems to them it would be fair and just for the City Council to require Utah to restore this turning basin before the Council approves the Company's Tentative Subdivision Map. The communication was referred to the file on the Tentative Map. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: 10. Mr. William Cooper, 2614 Otis Drive, inquired as to the CounciUs decision con- cerning the closing of Pearl Street. The City Attorney stated a resolution has been prepared, and is on the agenda, which sets up the effective date for the abandonment of Pearl Street at such time as street improvements adjacent thereto have been installed. 11. Mr. Robert DeCelle, 276 Beach Road, stated a number of residents on this street were present for the purpose of determining the status of the matter of the formation of an Assessment District for said street improvements. President Kranelly stated he understands this matter is to come up at the next regu- lar meeting - and upon inquiry, the City Manager stated that if the City is able to make the revision and estirnotes of costs for Beach Road only, it will be on the agenda for the Council meeting of April 16. Mr. De Celle asked that the residents be notified if it is going to be ready for the agenda at that ti,(1e, and he was assured such would be done. 12. At this point, Mr. Stanley D. Whitney, President of the Alameda Chamb( Dr of Com- merce, addressed the Council in praise of Councilmen Hove and Moresi. He stated all realize these two members have served the City with great industry and sincerity. Many problems have come before the Council during their terms of office and decisions 138 have required courage and great study tonpet the challenge, nevertheless these two Councilmen did not shrink from their duty as they saw it - they met the decision head on and came to a final result. We know their devotion to duty and performance of duty was exercised and the representatives of the Chamber of Commerce and all Alameda citizens want to express their thanks and appreciation for such devotion and as a token thereof, Mr. Whitney presented a Community Service Award plaque to each, as a memento of his service. Both Councilmen Hove and Moresi responded with thanks for this recognition. They agreed they had worked hard but had considered it a privilege to serve the citizens of Alameda as Councilmen and were glad to have had this experience. President Kranelly thanked the Chamber of Commerce for its thoughtfulness in present- ing these plaques. HEARINGS: 13. With regard to the proposed closing of the South end of Pearl Street, the City Attorney stated there are resolutions on the agenda in connection with this subject. The matter was thereupon referred to "Resolutions". REPORTS OF COMMITTEES: 14. From the City Manager, recommending title insurance in the value of 8931L0200, be secured on the 51.9 acres of land which has been filled in Washington Park, at the estimated premium cost of 82,266. A report entitled, "Title Insurance-Washington Park Fill Area" accompanied the letter, indicating the total investment in the land is $398,863, Councilman McCall moved the City Manager's recommendation be adopted and title insur- ance in the amount of 8'934,200. be secured to cover the fill-area. The motion was seconded by Councilman Haag and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 15. From the City Manager, requesting authorization to dispose of old mattresses formerly used by the Fire Department. Councilman Haag moved the City Manager's request be granted and he be authorized to dispose of said material. The motion was seconded by Councilman Hove and unanimously carried. 16. From the City Manager, recommending Fire Captain Warren Aspinall attend the meeting of Fire Inspectors' Section of California Fire Chiefs' Association in Ukiah on April 18, 1957, that A5. be appropriated for this purpose and a City car be used for transportation. Councilman Hove moved the City Manager's recommendation be accepted; that Captain Aspinall be authorized to attend the designated meeting, be appropriated to defray his expenses and he be allowed to use a City car for transportation. Theaption was seconded by Councilman Moresi and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. j 17. From the City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to O. C. Jones & Sons, low bidder, for Construction of a Road and Parking Lot to serve the New Municipal Golf Course, at the price of 827,210.30. Councilman Moresi moved the City Manager's recommendation be followed; that contract be awarded to the designated firm for the specified project at the price quoted and the bid checks or bonds be returned to the unsuccessful bidders. The motion was seconded by Councilman McCall and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None, Absent: None. 18. From the Mayor, nominating the following to the office of member of the City Planning Board for the terms indicated: Messrs. Francis G. MacGinnis, John M. Bridge and Dallace W. Ogilvie to serve to June 30, 1960; Miss Mildred S. Meyers and Mr. Thomas P. Bolger to serve to June 30, 1959; Messrs. Truman A. Miller and Jerry J. Holst to serve to June 30, 1958. The matter was referred to "Resolutions". 19. From the Advisory Health Board, recommending the Alameda City Health Department be assisted by a Local Action Committee in developing and expanding the State Polio Vaccine Program to achieve immunization of the backlog of the population under the age of forty before the next poliomyelitis season. The following names were sub- mitted for consideration as members of the Committee: Mesdames C. R. Bartalini, Henry Maritzen, Ralph Metz, Charles Molenkamp, W. H. Haslam, William S. Crean, E. R. Sanders, Miss Priscilla Lack and Messrs. Stewart Barber, Hart Smith, Clarence Bascom, Everett Fisher, Don Geisert, Marvin Hockabout, the Reverend Mr. Franklin Scott and Drs. Lester Johnson and E. H. McBride. It was stated it is imperative that immediate action be taken in these appointments as there is considerable work for the Committee to do in a short period of time to achieve the objective of the program. President Kranelly said he would recommend Dr. Lester Johnson be appointed Chairman of the Committee. Councilman McCall thereupon moved the recommendation as outlined 139 by the Advisory Health Board be approved and the citizens named in the letter be appointed as members of a Local Action Committee, with Dr. Lester Johnson being named as Chairman. The motion was seconded by Councilman Haag and unanimously carried. The City Manager stated the Board and each Committee appointee will be notified accordingly. 20. From the City Planning Board, recommending approval of the Tentative Map on Unit No. 1 of the subdivision to be known as Tract No. 1866, proposed to be developed by Utah Construction Company on the South Shore fill-area, between Park and Grand Streets - subject to modifications as follows: (1) As stated in the City Enerineer's Report, as amended in the Summary of Decisions, (7) As set by the Board and contained in the sketches submitted to the Board at its meeting, of April b, 197, which include the sketch in conjunction with Sheet No. 7 (East Central Lagoon) and (3) As contained in the City Planning Department Report, as amended at the meeting of April 8, 197. Councilman Haag said he iou1d like to hear the City Engineer's opinion on the subject. Mr. Hanna stated the motion made by the Planning Board does meet with his approval, except there are a few points which should be brought to the attention of the Council and some which were intended by the Planning Board to be brought to the Council's attention. with decisions on these certain points, the Tentative Map and the Lagoons, as such, will be satisfactory. President Kranelly stated the Councilmen have received conies of the "Summary of Amended Decisions of City Planning Board regarding City Engineer's Report on Tract No. 1866." Before reviewing the "Summary", however, Mr. Hanna explained that the purpose of the City Engineer's Eeport is tomake P comparison with the Subdivision Ordinance, and as a result of tiat ordinance, also a comparison with any other "guide lines" pre- viously established, such as the Master Plan, the Fill Agreement, the Gotaas Report, the motion by the Council on the approval of the Lagoon System and the Preliminary Plan which was presented to the Planning Board, the latter which has no official status but which does indicate by the Subdivider what is contemplated. All a re studied so every feature can be considered and properly evaluated. He stated many problems which are brought forth in the report aro not necessarily engineering matters - in other words, one wouldnot need technical exuerience to pass judgment on them. He stated the Engineer's Report is essentially satisfactory to him, as modified by the Planning Board and as specified in the Summary - the Summary brings out essentially the debatable points. Mr. Hanna thereupon read the entire list of items contained in the Summary, making explanatory comments as he deemed it necessary. A lengthy discussion ensued on several phases of the Tentative Map various comments and questions on specific points being as follows: ‘Councilman Haag inquired if the parkin. for the shopping center is still at the ratio of four to one - to which Mr. Venable, Aesiscant Planning Director, replied in the affirmative. Councilman Moresi asked Lhe City Attorney what about any recourse if the sp-Jroval is made based on the thinking of the Preliminary Shopping Center Map, and then the Tenta- tive an is appnoved. Mr. Annibale answered that the only matters which L Council can apnrove are those contained in the Tentative Map, as filed. Councilman McCall asked about he steps at the end of Oak Street and the sea wall running between Oak and Laurel Streets - to which the City Engineer replied this area would be dry land. Councilman Moresi stated the Council had discussed about two months ago the matter of silt which has accumulated along' the south side of the Island and asked if the area is going to be cleared of the silt. Yr. Hanna stated the Fill Agreement calls for completion of the fill two and one-half years from the start of the project and for the maintenance of the beaches for a period of three years after completion of the fill. He pointed out the Council would have to establish the date on which the fill is completed - and the removal of excess material could be included as part of the project. Mr. Annibale stated the "beaches", as such, would not be part of the Tentative Map. It was pointed out the outfall from the Laoon System is in San Leandro Channel, Councilman McCall asked about clearing out the silt in connection with the Bay Farm Island fill project and the City Engineer stated he did not believe Utah is planning to remove the silt. He said he did not agree the silt should be left, as the level of San Leandro Channel has been raised over the past two years as a result of Utahls operations. Councilman McCall questioned how people are eventually going to get under Bay Farm Island Bridge into San Leandro Bay with their pleasure boats. He felt the Corps of Army Engineers could make a report on this situation for the benefit of the people of Alameda. Section 11-3121(b) 13 - Concerning requirement that Developer guarantee physical dimensions, contours, underwater slopes and elevations, etcetera, for period cf one year - Mr. Froerer stated this is not a sufficient length of time for the guarantee to be in effect - a period of one year is not long enough to determine if there are any defects etnd the guarantee period should be extended to three years. with regard to the twenty-to-one slope, under "Fill Agreement, Paragraph 8(a)(1)" President Kranelly asked if a deviation from this would be detrimental to the beach and the City Engineer stated it would merely bring the water closer to the road. Mr. Froorer pointed out there is a perimeter boulevard in the Master Plan which lies southerly from the fill-area and the State Beach-Park would be constructed southerly therefrom. Consequently, it would have no effect upon the State Beach-Park. The portion of the beach which lies westerly from the beach boulevard at Eighth. Street to the westerly line of Washington Park probably could be accepted by the State Divi- sion of Beaches and Parks in the condition it is at the present time. There is a stretch of about 1,14_00 feet which was inspected by Mr. J. R. Knowland in this respect. He believes the result would be that maybe a portion oE' that area which will be acceptable to the State Division of Beaches and Parks and the State Park Commission probably will not accept the line of beach from the point previously designated to San Leandro Channel until the fill has been made. Councilman McCall asked when the City would have a parkway boulevard and when the State would put in a roadway with a beach of twenty-to-one slope. Mr. Froerer replied the Master Plan for freeways and major streets in Alameda is based on the perimeter road. There is no definite determination, to date, if and when the Southern Crossing will be constructed. In any event, in the plan for the community, whether or not it becomes a Southern Crossing, it will have to be built to integrate traffic. The beach will lie along the southerly perimeter and the southerly prolongation of Eighth Street. During the interim, pending decision onwhen this boulevard will be built, the State, of course, will not assume the maintenance costs or take over that beach and it will resolve itself for City responsibility. The City is endeavoring to con- fine beach activities, at least those which require supervision, within the limits of Washington Park. He pointed out that, from the use which has been given that beach to date, the people seem to desire to use the westerly slope which lies within the property of the United States Maritime School. With regard to the Gotaas Report Comparison, President Kranelly commented it was con- tained in the Council's original motion that Utah must comply with all recommendations of the Gotaas and Chaney Reports. Concerning the Fill Agreement, Paragraph 9(b)W, Councilman Haag referred to the subject of neighborhood shopping centers and stated that, if his memory served him correctly, such centers were to be possibilities rather than probabilities. He did not think the Fill Agreement provided that it be obligatory upon Utah to establish them - it was agreed that if they were required they could be constructed. Mr. Venable stated the site on Grand Street proposed for a shopping center is not included within th e Tentative Map under discussion. Councilman McCall inquired what the situation is with regard to the proposed extension of Roosevelt Drive westerly. Mr. Venable stated probably the highest and best use of the property in this area is for first class residential and the only w ay to develop that type of use is to bring Roosevelt Drive to Park Street, extended. He said that to jump Park Street to a commercial district is objectionable and it is the Planning Department's recommendation that Roosevelt Drive be extended. In the Comparison of the Tentative Map and Lagoons with Council Approval, Councilman Hove asked what is the effect of the motion at the adjourned regular meeting of the Council, held September 25, 19c-)6, with respect to approval of the general Lagoon System in connection with the approval of the Tentative lqap. Does that approval of the Tentative Map supersede, or nullify in anyway, the several conditions under which the Lagoons were approved: Mr. Annibale stated the conditions of September 25, 1956, would be superseded or changed only insofar as the recommendations of the Planning Board are in conflict therewith. Councilman Hove asked if those conditions could be attached to and made a part of the approval of the Tentative Map and the City Attorney stated he would definitely recom- mend that such be done. Councilman Hove also asked what is the exacts tatus of the Fill Agreement if and when this Tentative Map is approved - will any conditions in the Fill Agreement be changed by approval of the Tentative Map and Mr. Annibale replied the only changes therein which would be affected are the exercise of-those powers which would be inconsistent with the approval of the Tentative Map. Council- man Hove then asked if the conditions of the Fill Agreement can be attached to the Tentative Map, to which Mr. Annibale answered, "Yes, insofar as they are not incon- sistent therewith". Mr. Travers was asked if, in the event of an agreement being reached between the Soils Engineer and the City Engineer and if Utah still disagrees with their decisions and uses its right to appeal to the Council and if the Council upholds the Engineers, would he then feel himself bound by the decision of the Council and he replied that if there is e legal point involved and if Utah's legal rights are infringed upon, he could not commit Utah to waiving its legal rights. Referring back to Section 11-3121(b)(1), concerning the size of the plateaus, and (2) with regard to the depth of water thereon: Nr. Hanna stated the plateaus should be a minimum of five feet wide - and there should be twelve inches of water on them. He explained there were possibly ten or twenty typical situations at the most and when those are encountered, the plateaus could be reduced so they would be esthetic as well as being assured of sufficient water depth. 41 Mr. Travers said Utah has always been agreeable to leaving anything to a decision by the City Engineer and the Soils Engineer - however, in this case, an insistencev,as made by the City Engineer that the language "agreeable to him" should be used. The specific point involved inethe lagoon excavating had to do with narrowing the plateau widths. He said any material. deposited by the fill operations would be removed and the beach area would be restored. • He remarked that the Soils Engineer had ruled twenty-five feet for the plateau width, but the City Engineer had taken exception to this. Utah will let Mr. Moore of Dames L Moore go ahead and ascertain if the twenty- -ive can be reduced in order to maintain a six-foot depth of water. There are only four places on the entire sea wall where there is a plus elevation (above water) at all times and the depth of water will never be any less than high tide in Alameda. President Kranelly pointed out Utah would have the right of appeal to the Council in the event of any unreasonable decision. He asked why the Council has to make a deci- sion now, if the minimum should be established by the City G1Ly 1nrneop and the Soils Engineer. Councilman McCall asked Mr. Travers what the minimum depth. is along the sea wall and Mr. Travers answered approximately one to to feet right at the base of the sea wall and•there is water showing along the entire length of the South Shore. He pointed out Utah has agreed to reduce the plateau at the new walls to five faet, but Utah can- not take the responsibility of undermining the old sea walls. Mr. Hanna agreed nothing should be done that would damage the sea walls of private properties - the soil should be cut back only as is consistent with their structural stability. He said he had found along the existing sea wall there is much less lineal footage of dry ground than was at first contemplated and he felt there is no real pro- blem along the sea wall on the North shore of the Lagoons. Mr. Travers pointed out many matters contained in the Cit y Engineer's Report had been resolved at Staff meetings and Planning Board meetings and there are only a few points on which agreement could not be reached and. which. require Council consideration and determination, as follows: depth of wall, depth of water at sea wall, sand blanket at bottom. of Lagoons, the existing barriers, of those to be placed at the street ends and the matter of Roosevelt Drive. With regard to the latter, Mr. Travers said he would submit it to the City Council for its decision and Utah will go along with what- ever is decided. - but he pointed out it would be a very had mistake to extend Roosevelt Drive into Park Street, which will be 84 feet wide to accommodate traffic in and out of the proposed.. shopping center. He explained the locations of several businesses in the "center" and urged that the Council give Utah certain latitude in planning these sites and also that Utah be included as a party to any discussions. President Kranelly asked how the various points brought out can be tied down and the ' City Attorney stated that if Utah would agree to be bound. by the decision of the Coun- cil that would take care of the problem - and the only other suggestion he could make is that the City Engineer submit definite and specific recommendations. When asked if he Would abide by the decisions of the Council, Mr. Travers stated. this 1s a difficult question to answer outright - if he agreed, he would wipe out the right of his Company to appeal. He said he thought the Council's decisions would be fair and reasonable and on that basis, he would accept them - but if they were to be arbitrary or unreasonable, his Company would have to fight them and he could not give away Utah's rights in this respect. With regard to any modifications which are not agreeable at the present time, Coun- cilman Hove asked the City Attorney if it would be possible to delete them for future consideration - for instance, the question of Roosevelt Drive - could that decision be left open and the Tentative Map be approved without making specific approval of that particular point? The City Attorney answered in the negative. Mr. Travers asked the City Attorney if the Tentative Map could be approved witn the specific condition that Utah will agree to abide by the Council's subsequent decision on Roosevelt Drive - and Mr. Annibale replied in the affirmative. MT. Travers there- i upon agreed this was acceptable to Utah. The petition signed by thirty-four residents on Roosevelt Drive, protesting against its proposed extension was pointed up. With regard. to the barriers at the ends of streets - Mr. Froerer stated there are many precedents in the City of Alameda for this situation - and in all cases, the City has provided the barricades and he felt it is the City's responsibility to do so. Concerning the requirement for the Developer to guarantee physical dimensions, etcetera, for af)eriod of three years instead of one year - it was brought out the Planning Board's decision was that Utah would maintain the Lagoons for one year - Utah had protested against a longer period because one year's guarantee is the usual practice. President Kranelly pointed out the City Manager had recommended a longer period. of guarantee - and Councilman Hove stated the Council had stood quite firmly on its „ thinking that a period of three years is necessary. Councilman Haag concurred. Mr. Travers asked that the record show the Planning Board Bad approved Utah's request for a maintenance period of one year. Mr. Hanna replied that he has nothinr . before him on which he can make a study until the Tentative Nap is filed. President Kranelly remarked the record will also show the Council has amended the Planning Board's decisions before. Concerning Section 11-3121(b) ], Councilman Hove asked Mr. Travers if the words, "Utah's Engineer, Soi]s Engineer, City Engineer and City ieanager, by mutual agree- ment, and if there is still disagreement, the matter will go to the Council and Utah will abide by its decision" were added, would that be acceptable. Mr. Travers said he was extremely hesitant to waive Utah's right of recourse. He suggested that if the words, "reasonable and fair" or "not unreasonable and not arbitrary" were In- cluded in connection with the Council's decision, that would be all right with him. Councilman Hove asked the City Attorney if there was any objection to this suggestion and Mr. Annibale said it still left the situation wide open. He felt a definite recommendation should be made in order to oin down the point, or "the decision of the Council will be final". After some further discussion, Councilman Moresi stated that by including the "City Manager, City Engineer, Soils En-ineer and Utah's Engineer" they certainly should be able to work out any problem so it would be fair to the Subdivider and she could see no objection to outting in the words, "fair and reasonable" or "not unreasonable and not arbitrary". Councilman Haag concurred. It was so agreed on this oaragraph. Withreg rd to Section 11-3121(b) 2 - depth of water over plateaus: bound by the decision of the Council. Utah is definitely Councilman Haag thereupon moved the recommendation of the Planning Board be approved with respect to the Tentative Map of Tract No. 1e66, subject to the modifications set out in the Board's letter of April 9, 1957, to the City Council - those modifica- tions to be further modified as follows: Referring to "Summary of Amended Decisions of City Planning Board Regarding City Engineer's Report on Tract No. 1866" - (1) Page 2, Section 11-3121(b) 1: This item is modified tor ead, after the words "new walls", "the dimensions of the plateaus of the oldwalls to be determined by the Soils Engineer, Utah's Engineer, the City Manager and the City Engineer - and in the event of disagreement between these parties, Utah has the right of appeal to the City Coun- cil, and Utah shall accept the Council's decision unless said decision is unreason- able or arbitrary"; (2) Section 11-3121(b) 2: This item ismodified to read, after the words "sea walls", "Soils Engineer, Utah's Engineer, City Engineer and the City Manager will determine this problem - and, in the event there is disagreement, Utah shall have the right of appeal to the City Council and Utah agrees that the decision of the Council on this matter shall be final, with no further right of appeal"; (3) Section 11-3121(b) 8: The following words shall be deleted from this item, "but determination to be left to the Council as toresnonsibility for providing such rail- ings at ends of existing public streets or areas"; (L) Section 11-3121(b) 9: The following words shall be deleted from this paragraph, "City Engineer feels any native soil which can be removed without endangering existing walls or other facilities should be removed. The Soils Engineer is to consult with the City Engineer after his study of this problem"; (5) Page 3, Section 11-3121(b) 13: Correct the third line to read, "... for a period of three years" instead of "for a period of one year (6) As a further condition, it is agreed by the Subdivider that the determination of the status of Roosevelt Drive, i. e., shall it be dead-end or shall it join Park Street, shall be made by the City Council at a later date and the Subdivider agrees to accept the decision of the Council with no right of appeal; (7) Face a - re Motion of Approval of Lagoons: Item 2 to be deleted; (8) Subject to the further condition that on matters not inconsistent with the Report and modifications of the Planning Board, as amended by the respective City Officers and the City Council, the conditions which were attached to the approval of the Lagoon System and the widths thereof as set out in the Minutes of the Council Meeting of September 25, 1956, shall be adhered to; (9) Subject, further, to allterms, conditions and covenants con- tained in that certain Fill Agreement executed by and between Utah Construction Com- pany and the City of Alameda dated June 23, 1955, as is not inconsistent with the recommendations of the City Planning Board as modified by the City Council. The motion was seconded by Councilman Hove and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None, with regard to the second portion of the letter from the Planning Board, recommending the approval of the general Lagoon design, configuration, control structures and appurtenances, with the exception of the Lagoon cross sections, all as shown on the drawing entitled, "Lagoon Plan " dated March 13, 1957, and designated "Sheet No. 1 of 1", as prepared by Calvin Jones - subject to two overlays filed with the Tentative Map. The letter from Miss Loma Petersen was referred to and, upon the inquiry of the Presi- dent, she said she would settle for a lagoon width of two hundred feet from the tip of the finger to the sea wall. President Krane172y then asked the City Attorney if the matter would be one outside the decision of the Council and between private pro- perty owners and the Reclamation District, in the event the Council saw fit to accept the recommendation of the Planning Board and approve the general Lagoon System. Mr. Annibale agreed this would be so. Councilman Hove thennpved the recommendation of the Planning Board be approved and adopted, subject to the same conditions as attached to the Tentative Map insofar as applicable. The motion was seconded by Councilman Moresi and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 21. From Miss Mildred S. Meyers, 2021 Alameda Avenue, submitting her resignation as a member of the City Planning Board, effective immediately, and requesting the letter be made a part of the minutes, a s follows: In December, 1956, about the time the Alameda City Council reorganized the Alameda Planning Board, Mayor Kranelly wrote me expressing the Council's appreciation of my work and of my contribution to the City of Alameda during some eleven years on the Board, saying:, in view of the changes that have recently taken place on the Planning Commission, 1 feel the wisdom of your experience and your counsel is going to be needed more than ever before'. "Because of this statement, and the insistence of many Alamedans, I remained on the reorganized Board; hoping that with my architectural training, planning experience, and with my sincere interest in the very best for Ala- meda and for Alamedans as a whole, I could continue this contribution to my city. "However, certain decisions and policies have now been made which I can- not conscientiously accept or subscribe to, as being in the best interest of the city and its citizens as a whole. I need not Fo into these, as I've expressed myself repeatedly in Planning Board and in Council meetings. "With the best of my ability, I have earnestly studied and tried to see all sides of each problem as presented, and have listened at length with an open mind as opinions have been expressed. I believe constructive dif- ferences of opinion, amicably resolved, are important in planning deciscns. We cannot always completely agree. 'However, during the past months, unjust criticism of che Planning Board and of individual Board members, together with bitter words belittling mem- bers opinions have been directed at the Board. This has created a situation which is distasteful, disappointing and wholly undignified. A Food Planning Board cannot do its best work or function properly in such an unhealthy atmosphere. "Under these circumstances, I cannot continue as a member of the Alameda Planning Board and I hereby tender my resignation to take effect immediately. I respectfully request that this letter of resignation in total be read in public meeting tonight of the Alameda City Council and be made a part of the minutes thereof. Yours truly, Mildred S. Meyers (Signed)" Councilman Moresi stated Miss Meyers had contributed a great deal to the Planning Board and to the City through her technical experience and she moved her resignation be accepted withre7ret - and a letter be written by the Mayor expressing appreciation for her service year after year. The motion was seconded by Councilman LcCall and unanimously carried. RESOLUTIONS: 22. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman McCall who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 5586 Resolution Setting the Effective Date of Order of the Council of the City of Alameda Vacating a Portion of Pearl Street in the City of Alameda as Set Forth in Resolution No. 5587 of the Council of the City of Alameda." rhe motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Haag and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: Nene, 23. The following resolution -Jae Introduced by Councilman Haag, whc moved its adoption: Resolution No. 5567 Ordering the Vacation of a Portion of Pearl Street, in the City of Alameda." The motion to dopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Hove and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 21. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Hove, whoupved its adoption: "Resolution No. 5588 Amending Resolution No. 5_565, Which Related to Positions and Salaries by Inserting an Effective Date Therefor." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Moresi and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 25. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Moresi "Resolution No. 5589 Appointing Members of the City Planning Board Pursuant to Amendment of the Charter of the City of Alameda." The Clerk remarked the resolution, as prepared, contains the name of Miss Mildred S. Meyers - and the City Attorney stated the motion to adopt same could provide for the deletion of Miss Noyers1 name. Councilman Moresi thereupon moved the resolution be adopted with the name of Miss Mildred S. Meyers being stricken from the list of appointees. The motion was seconded by Councilman McCall and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five, Noes: None. Absent: None. 26. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman McCall, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 5590 Adopting Specifications Special Provisions and Plans for Furnishing and Planting Trees and Shrubs in the New Municipal Golf Course, Calling for Bids and Directing City Clerk to Advertise Same." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Haag and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 27. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Haag, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 5591 Resolution of the Council of the City of Alameda Urging That the Request to Consolidate the Alameda Judicial District and the Oakland-Piedmont Judi- cial District be Denied." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Hove and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. The President thereupon declared all of the foregoing resolutions duly adopted and passed. 28. Specifications No. PV 4-57-10 - For Furnishing and Planting Trees and Shrubs at the New Municipal Golf Course. 29. At this point, Mr. Travers expressed his thanks to the City Manager and to the members of the Engineering Department for all of their work in connection with the Tentative Map presented to the Council at this meeting. He stated he deeply appre- ciates their cooperation. 4 30. Prior to adjournment, President Kranelly said that, in addition to the plaudits expressed by Mr. Whitney, he wanted to say the time he has spent working with. Coun- cilmen Hove and Moresi on the City Council has been a most enjoyable experience. He felt it is going to be difficult to find two people who are willing to work as hard as these two have worked for the best interests of the City. He referred especially to the great amount of time put in by Councilman Moresi in research on matters for the benefit of the Council. He emphasized the City should be very grateful for all of their work. A D jOUR NMENT : 31. There being no further business to come before the meeting, the Council adjourned - to assemble in regular session on Tuesday evening, April 16, 197, 7:30 o'clock. Respectfully submitted,