1973-05-01 Regular CC Minutes98
RIGULAR MEETING Q THE CCAUCIL OF THE CITY OF ALKEDA
EMKII; TUESDAY - - - e - - - - - - - - - - - MAY 1g 19r3
Q=EN COI MUNIGATIGaS:
2. / Fran Miss Chris Doherty, 1329 Webster Street, representative of group of students at
Encinal High School, asking permission to nake presentation.
The City Manager was asked to inform hr. Osborn that the Council would be interested in receiving,
for informational purposes, any additional written material on the subject which might be available.
4® ,"Fran Shaw & Lunt, Realtors, signed by Mr. John Barni, Jr., requesting waiver of Residential
Dwelling Unit Tax on property owned by hr. F. J. Price at 1435 Bay Street.
hr. Barni, 1277 EAy Street, stated this request covered the second portion of an original two-lot
development® The first permit did not require payment of the it tax and they were now applying
for the second pernmrait. The first was granted prior to the adoption of the ordinance establishing
a Residential Dwelling Unit Tax, and they were asking for an exception to the ordinance on the
second permit.
After discussion, Councilman Beckam, moved the waiver be denied. Councilman Corica seconded the
motion which carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent; None.
5. /Fran 1&s. Robert E. Berges, 974 Post Street, concerning enforcement of the leash law.
Councilman Corica suggested the City Attorney draw up a letter for the Poundmaster to send to
owners of offending dogs, with another letter to be sent for a second offense; that on the third
offense, the Po seer be given authority to pick up the dog and/or collect a $20 fine or issue
a citation. He quoted from Ordinance No. 11722 New Series, setting out a fine of $5 for violation,
and said he thought the amount of fine should be increased.
Fran It. Hadi Monsef, 933 Shore Line Drive, regarding interpretation of Charter Amendment.
7* \ // From Comunty of Alameda deter Day Commission, requesting appropriation of sum of '$250 as
City's share of cost of 1..973 Veterans Day Observance.
Councilman McCall moved the matter be referred to the Alameda Chanter of Commerce for attention.
The motion was seconded by Councilman Hurwitz and carried on the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Five. Noes: None® Absent: None.
ORAL C01,21UNICATIONS. AGENDA:
As a conclusion,, Iir. Costello offered the following recommendations. (1) An expanded ride-along
program where more students might participate. (2) Police-Cormiunil5y seminars. (3) Establish-
ment of a Human Relations Coimiission ie,-thin the City government. (4) Removal of officer from beat
when he appears to be in a "ruty'. (5) lin alternative to the present method of time-consixming
report writing. (6) A new Police Station to relieve the overcrowded conditions.
President la Croix thanked 11r. Costello for his presentation and commended Chief of Police
Richard Young and City Manager Zeller on the excellence of the Department. He said there was an
on-going space study into the need for a new City Hall to house all departments. He further
complimented I-Ir. Don Perata for the fine work he has done with the students in the" x Government
classes.
9. The folloiring, persons expressed their desire to speak under the items specified:
MMIMM
Mr. Johnson said the Planning staff continued to believe that beauty parlors and barber shops are
essentially similar to other professional uses -Which are Permitted -*Ln the said zones. However, the
Planning Board felt this proposed expansion of use opportunity would only dilute the existing
zoning ordinance and the matter, being a proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance., 1'ras now referred
to the City Council for Hearing and consideration.
City Attorney Cunningham stated the issue before the Couti.ci-1 was whether or not the findings and
recommendation of the Flaruiing Board should be approved, modified or disapproved.
On the call for opponents to the position taken by the Planning Board', IvL-s. Rorm, Kidd, 1429 Wainut
Street., stated she had applied for a Use Permit to operate a beauty shop in the premises located at
2162 Santa Clara Avenue, being a residence converted into two single family dwellings with one
fronting on IrIalnut Street and the other fronting on Santa Clara Avenue. She explained her intention
to convert one roon, to a beauty shop operation limited to 45 elderly patrons.
on
accepted.seconded
Mrs. Inez Kapellas asked that consideration of condominium conversions be held in abeyance until
proper guidelines are secured.
A ten-minute recess was called. Upon reconvening, the meeting proceeded with the regular order of
business.
17. On the hatter of Interpretation of Implementation of recent Charter Lnendment, Article )9,Vl.
Report from City Attorney, submitting first draft of proposed Measure A Ordinance.
City Attorney Cunningham stated he had prepared a working draft of the ordinance for consideration,
pursuant to the direction of the Council given at the meeting of April 17, 1973. He explained in
detail, section by section, the proposed ordinance. He called particular attention to Section
11-424, Permits or Entitlements Issued;; Applications Therefor Pending. He said this was in
effect zoning "saving" clause which would protect the City against claims of retroactive
restrictions.
Mr. Cunningham invited Council attention to Article 3 of the proposed ordinance, which mould allow
a multiple dwelling unit, as prohibited by Measure A. and as defined in the ordinance, to be built
provided the plan was found by the Planning Board to serve the purposes of the Planned Development
regulations. He asked for direction from the Council on this specific item.
The President brought up the subject of the now" existing apartment dwellings and townhouses in the
City in the event they were destroyed beyond 70%, and suggested a protection clause enabling those
dwellings to be rebuilt not to exceed the present density.
Councilman Corica stated at no time did the proponents of Measure A intend to say that anythi
destroyed by fire, or otherwise, would not be able to be rebuilt; that it was not the intent
Measure A to be considered a punitive action, the proponents were concerned with density. 11
Mrs. Inez Kapellas, Chairman of the Committee of Concerned Citizens, spoke cc the position paper
previously presented, commenting that it protected multiple dwellings in the community prior to the
passage of the Charter Amendment. She objected to the provisions of Article 3, Planned Developments,
of the proposed ordinance, stating the intent of the Committee was to control the amount of multiple
dwellings which were being built and would cause an overabundance of density. She alleged that
Planned Development, as set out, would remove the effectiveness of the Charter ibuendnient.
President La Croix replied the Council had already considered the question of replacement and
concurred that a section would be added to the ordinance protecting the townhouse dwellers, as
well as the apartments and multiple units, in the eveiylb of demolition by fire., or otherwise.
That in the case of an existing dwelling in the City of Alameda, destroyed 7 0 or more, the owner
would be allowed to rebuild, as it was originally, conforming to the underlying zoning.
The members of the Council indicated their agreement with the President ts remarks.
11r. John Barni, Jr., asked if the properties on Central Avenue, which had been destroyed by the
airplane crash of February 7, would be permitted to be rebuilt to the density allowable prior to
the passage of Heasure A, as they were vacant lots on the date of the election.
The President explained the owners would have the right to develop multiple units on those particu.:-
lar properties conforming to the underlying zoning, as long as they were not a non-conforming use,
as in the case of the Tahoe Apartments.
Mrs. Deatra Giannini, 1031 is Bonita, stated that even though she was an owner of a townhouse in
Casitas Alameda, she did not consider her home to be a detached single family unit.
hr. Charles Haak, 1859 Ninth Street, asked, if an apartment house owner would also be given the
privilege to rebuild® He was refirred to previous discussion on the subject.
forcommentsfrom
1C)3
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Eurwitz and carried on the
following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
22. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Beckam, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 8058
Adopting Specifications, Special Provisions and Plans
for Minor Street Patching with Asphalt Concrete, Repair
of Portland Cement Concrete Sidewalk, Driveway, Curb
and Gutter, and Installation of House Laterals, for
the Fiscal Year ending d 20, 1974, Calling for Bids
and Directing City Cleil to Advertise Same.''
The motion to adopt said resolizLion, was seconded by Councilman McCall and carried on the
following roll call vote. Ayes: Five, Noes: None. Absent: None.
23. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman heCall, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. a059
Adopting Specifications for Furnishing to the City of
Alameda Class "B" Portland Cement Concrete Transit Fix
for Fiscal Year 1973-1974, Calling for Bids and Direc-
ting City Clerk to Advertise Same.''
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Beckam and carried on the
following roll call vote. Ayes: Five® Noes: None. Absent: None.
24. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman hurtwTi:tz,, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 806C1
Accepting Alameda County OrdinanceRegulatin
ing
Construction, Repair, Reconstruction, Destruction
or Abandonment of 11ater 11elis, and Concurring in
County Administration and Enforcem;ent Thereof in
City of klameda.11
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman KcCall and carried on the
following roll call vote: Ayes: Five. Noes; None. Absent: None.
25. The following resolution iras introduced by Councilman 111cCall, who naved it; adoption:
"Resolution No. 8061
Authorizing Execution of Agreement Transferring Police
Identification Personnel to Cotuity of Alwieda and Pro-
viding Centralized Identification Bureau Services to City.
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Corica and carried on the
following roll call vote: Ayes: Five. Noes; None. Absent: None.
26. Co c" moved the following ordinance be introduced'. after 1,11iich it ITould be laid
over under provision of law and the Charter:
"Ordinance
New Series
The motion was seconded by Councilman Cori ca and carried on the following roll call vote.
Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
27. "Ordinance No. 16910
New Series
An Ordinance Auending Certain Portions of the
Alameda hunicipal Code Relating to Tieffic
Renlation.11
Counci-lu--aan 11eCall roved the ordinance be -,�,,assed as sulxiiitted. The motion, 4,,,as seconded bly
Councilman lluxnritz and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None.
4bsont: None.
w
ORAL C01IMNIC.ATIUNS, G12,11MAL:
Resolution of the Council of the City of -Alameda in
Memoriam to the Honorable Frederick 11'. Vain Sicklen
**********
ECITYOFALAMEDA
was 7:
tx,r.,(5)were
and Ccun lmen ca,H tz,Ca 11 and
to 1 of a quorum,C1 adjourn
heldThursday,17,1973,at 7:30 o'clock
Council its regularng 1d May 11
toanadjourned
in accordance
ular
ins
to
of
submi
DeputyCiC1e