1979-05-22 Special CC MinutesSPECIAL MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA
HELD TUESDAY MAY 22, 1979
Convened at 8:45 o'clock p.m. with President Corica presiding.
ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmen Diament, Sherratt, Stone, Tillman, and President
Corica, (5). Absent: None.
Note: The proceedings of City Council meetings are taped in their entirety. Tapes
are on file in the Office of the City Clerk,
HEARINGS:.
79-363 In the Matters of an Environmental Impact Report prepared in connection with
the Combined Land Use Plan, and the Combined Land Use Plan.
The Clerk reported the Affidavit of Publication of the required Notice of Hearings
was on file.
Following a brief discussion of the format of the final draft of the EIR for the
Combined Land Use Plan, President Corica declared the hearing opened.
Mr, Fred Scullin, 1120 Chestnut St., referred to page 175 of the first draft concern-
ing transportation and traffic circulation. He stated he saw nothing referring to
the traffic which would be generated onto the main island by Bay Farm Island projects.
He questioned allowable uses in a Light Industrial Zone and said he thought the
description on page 80 was too vague. He also stated the map did not show City Line
Road as a four-lane road although the text did and suggested a change in the map.
Mr. Joseph Sullivan, 3221 Liberty Avenue, questioned the accessibility of public
accessways and walkways. He noted the Plan did not refer to those on Fernside Boule-
vard or East Shore Drive, and suggested that all public accessways bear name signs
identifying them for public use. He complained that the accessways on Fernside
Boulevard and East Shore Drive were fenced, some with chains and locks, barring their
use by the public.
Mrs. Lester Peterson, 1328 East Shore Drive, described vandalism and other problems
experienced prior to fencing the accessway adjoining their property, and stated the
city had suggested the fence be put up. She noted correspondence with the then
City Manager Weller prior to 1970, at which time it had been suggested they purchase
the property from the city for $2,500. Mrs. Peterson alleged the property was
nothing more than an easement to a pump at the water's edge and had never been used
as a walkway.
Mr. Paul Gutleben, 2844 San Jose Avenue, requested that all public accessways be
opened up and objected to their closure. Planning Director Patterson noted the
subject was addressed on page 74, item 9, of the amendment to CLUP.
Mr, James Boyd, 1312 East Shore Drive, President of the East Shore Homeowners Assn.,
reported the general problem of encroachments on public accessways and walkways
along East Shore Drive had existed for a long ti0e. He alleged homeowners had been
paying considerable taxes for the privilege. He asked that the matter be resolved
once and for all, and referred to previous correspondence with the city on the
subject. Councilman Tillman stated that he, too, would like to see the matter
finalized.
Mrs. Leora Feeney, 1330 8th Street, representing Save Our Shoreline, stated their
organization favored the opening of all public accessways throughout the city.
On question, Planning Director Patterson reported the Planning Board was initiating
a zone change for open space from the Bay Farm Island Bridge toward the High Street
Bridge and the public hearing before the Board would be held on June 18, 1979.
Mr. Russell Sisung, 221 Santa Clara Avenue, commented on page 75 of CLUP referring
to the protection of residential uses from traffic. He recommended that in evaluating
the plan that traffic be a primary consideration and suggested two -way streets as
much as possible and no four -lane streets. Concerning pages 83 and 84 which presented
figures on zoning and land use issues, he suggested the city be rezoned to bring it
in line with Measure A.
Mr. Eldon Beck, Planning Consultant to Harbor Bay Isle Associates, reviewed his
written objections concerning the language of page 61, Expanding Housing Opportunities;
page 70, Changes in the Zoning Ordinance; page 178, Land use recommendations, Industrial
areas; and pages 182 -183, eastern extension of Catalina. He noted a detailed critique
of the draft CLUP had been prepared by Harbor Bay Isle Associates and submitted to
the Planning Board, however the majority of the comments had not been incorporated in
the revised draft. Planning staff members responded.
Mr. Beck reported that Harbor Bay Isle Associates intended to submit an application
for an amendment to the General Plan in the form of a specific Harbor Bay Isle project
area plan. This, he stated, would provide the city with an accurate document. City
Attorney Stroud asked if this meant that rather than have Harbor Bay Isle planning
done through CLUP, that the plan state in effect that a specific plan would be done
for Harbor Bay Isle. Mr. Beck stated this was their intent. Mr. Stroud asked if the
developer would be willing to have its future development held up until the specific
plan could be approved. Mr. James Davis, Attorney representing Harbor Bay Isle
Associates, stated they planned on filing their Village V plan concurrently with the
specific plan.
Assistant Planning Director Minnie Ruth noted the Council would be basing its approval
or disapproval of the plan on the approved recommendations of the Planning Board, and
these were up to date; that there had been insufficient staff time to change the
document to include all of the background information.
Mr. Greg Silva, 3446 Oleander Avenue, stated he was concerned with the projected
Catalina proposal. He suggested no changes be made without further study and the
circulations presented in the original Combined Land Use Plan be upheld.
Mr. Leon Corcos, 3125 Bayo Vista, asked that consideration be given to re- evaluating
the zoning in the area of Buena Vista and Webster, specifically the Alameda Belt Line
property. He noted that in 1973 he had applied for rezoning of his portion of the
particular area, however this was still being held in abeyance awaiting final
disposition of the railroad property. He said it was his opinion a portion of the
land properly belonged in a commercial zone.
Mr. Robert Brewer, 2045 Buena Vista Avenue, referred to pages 75 -76 of the revised
draft, paragraphs 3(d) and 5, entitled Protecting Residential Uses from Traffic. He
stated he believed there was a conflict between the two goals stated in that they
might invite neighborhood disputes concerning the elimination of street parking spaces.
He suggested there be no widening of streets within residential neighborhoods. He
also commented on page 78, Railroads, and noted the Alameda Belt Line currently had
no written agreement with the city although they continued in their operations.
Mrs. Selina Faulhaber, 1003 Fairoaks, questioned what was meant by "private transit"
on page 77, Car Pools and Alternative Transportation Systems, paragraph 4. Mrs. Ruth
explained this might possibly involve a shuttle or jitney service supported by local
shopping centers and larger employers. Mrs. Faulhaber objected to the deletion of
the Housing Task Force's recommendation to the Housing Element, page 8, and further
objected to the wording of recommendation #4, page 62, which stated "the number of
publicly supported low and moderate-cost housing units in the city should occur
in the same percentage of total housing stock as that supplied by other East Bay
cities," as being too vague.
Mr. Gary Abrahamson, 1339 Grove Street, stated his concern was that there was no
mention in the plan of some type of traffic extension from the area at the foot of
Broadway to the new Bay Farm Island landffll. He stated previous documents had
shown a proposed bridge, which he would recommend.
Mrs. Leora Feeney suggested widening of the Bay Farm Island Bridge in place of build-
ing another bridge. She noted the plan proposed working toward a crossing of San
Leandro Bay.
Mrs. Elizabeth Rogers, 1261 Weber, requested that the Council act upon a recommendation
in the plan concerning the Naval Air Station, that contingency plans be developed for
the use of the property should it ever be surplussed by the federal government. She
noted the Port of Oakland had completed a Land Use Plan for the area.
Mr. Michael Gorman, 1318 Clinton, Member of the Planning Board, recommended the final
document considered for approval contain all of the changes, and the final printing
be in some form other than double-page. He stated he did not agree there was a
present need to identify Catalina as an extension and recommended the open space
policy and public access to the water on the Fernside-East Shore issue be stressed
in the plan, however the details on how the issue was solved should not be delineated.
He suggested the concerns expressed by Mr. Beck be handled when the particular project
was under consideration.
Ms. Joan Narahara, 106 Garden Road, Planning Board President, reported the main
concerns expressed at Planning Board hearings on the plan had dealt with traffic and
parking. She stated their effort had been to adopt a document the city could live
with.
Councilman Tillman moved the final plan document be printed in single-page, loose-leaf
style. The motion was seconded by Councilman Sherratt and carried by unanimous voice
vote.
The meeting was adjourned at 71:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
' ~
� �` ^--
. '' � '� `�'�
City Clerk