Loading...
1974-08-06 Regular CC MinutesREGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA HELD TUESDAY - - - - - - - - - - - - - AUGUST 6, 1974 The meeting convened at 7:30 o'clock p.m. with President La Croix presiding. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman McCall and was followed by Invocation delivered by the Reverend John H. Hamme, Pastor of St. Barnabas Catholic Church. ~ ^ -~ ROLL CALL: The roll was called and Councilmen Beckam, Corica, Hurwitz, McCall and President La Croix Jr,, (5), were noted present. Absent: None. ` MINUTES: 1. The minutes of the regular meetings held March 19, April 2, April 16, July 15, and special meeting held July 15, 1974, were approved as transcribed. 2. President La Croix expressed his gratitude to all those who had been so good to him and his family during the past two months while he had been recovering from injuries sustained in an auto- mobile accident. He especially thanked Vice Mayor Corica who had visited him almost daily through- out the entire time. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: 3. From 53 Registered Owners of Boats berthed at the Alameda Marina, petitioning the City to surface the boat trailer and parking lot adjacent to the boat launching ramp at the foot of Grand 5treet, The City Manager stated part of the problem was caused by persons using the parking lot as a race track and the Police Department would give the area special attention. Also, the Bureau of Electricity and Recreation Department were exploring the possibility utilizing poles laid flat in order to channelize the parking lot to avoid that type of usage. As As to a resurfacing of the parking lot, this item is included for consideration in the proposed Capital Improvement Program. Mr. Mario P. Bonicelli, 22340 Granger Avenue, Los Altos, spoke as a representative of the boat owners and set out the problems caused by the illegal use of the pa,-king lot by wheel spinning and motorcycle sliding. He particularly emphasized the extensive boat ' damage resulting from the dust, dirt particles and pebbles emanating from the parking lot and deposited on the boats. 4. From The Reverend Wilfred H. Hodakin, Rector of Christ Church Parish, urging the purchase of the Central Avenue Post Office Building for conversion and use by the Alameda Police Department. President La Croix reported this item was under active consideration by Council. The communica- tion was referred to the file. ' 5. From The Reverend Wilfred H. Hodgkin, Rector of Christ Church Parish, urging the City to proceed with the completion of arrangements for the building of the Northside Park. President La Croix stated the City Manager would make a presentation, within the next several meetings, on the progress of negotiations for the purchase of the site. The communication was re- ferred to the file. 6. From Mr. and Mrs. Robert W. Marshall, 912 Magnolia Drive, complaining of the operation the Isle City Gun Club. The President stated the matter had been referred to the Chief of Police by the City Manager. Councilman McCall said it was his belief the problems were created not only by members of the Gun Club but by persons who trespassed upon the area and were not being supervised. He commended the Hunter Safety program sponsored by the Club and their past cooperation in the protection and safety of persons living in the area. City Manager Goss stated complaints had been received in the past with respect to the operations of the Club and they had been cooperative in making physical changes in an effort to eliminate some of the nuisances created by the operation. He suggested that perhaps the Police Department could work with the Club in an attempt to solve the problem. Councilman McCall requested that those members of the Island City Gun Club in attendance at this meeting rise and approximately twelve gentlemen did so. He introduced Mr. Tom Caton, their President Mrs. Eleanor Tattersall, 1278 Weber Street, stated that she was opposed to the use of guns but felt that if the City were going to have a gUn club, then it should be run properly. She asked that the rules governing the use of guns, in particular the use of BB guns, be made known to the community as she had been unaware of the illegality of shooting a BB gun within the City limits only until a short time ago. Mrs. Robert W. Marshall presented a petition signed by eleven residents of the area supporting their stand in requesting removal of the ClUb. She enumerated the disadvantages of living in the immediate vicinity of a rifle range. Following discussion, the complaint was referred to the City Manager for report and recommendation. 7. From Mr. Joel W. Parker, Jr., 832 Ashbury Avenue, El Cerrito, regarding the labor union strike against the AC Transit District; and from AC Transit, signed by Mr. William J. Bettencourt, President of the Board of Directors, summarizing the AC Transit P0sitjOn regarding the strike called by the Amalgamated Transit Union. Councilman Hurwitz recommended the Council adopt a resolution asking the State Legislature to enact legislation requiring mandatory binding arbitration for publicly owned transit systems. The City Attorney was directed to prepare the requested resolution. 8. From Mr. Harry B. Conway, Jr,, 1012 Azalea Drive, concerning the diminishing water pressure on Bay Farm Island. The City Manager reported the Fire Chief had contacted the East Bay Municipal Utility District and a series of meetings had been undertaken between the District and the Port of Oakland with respect to an easement across the Port's property, and discussions were continuing. He said the District was also working on alternate ways and means to provide the water pressure and service necessary on Bay Farm Island; also the City Engineer had suggested that perhaps during the summer months, when water usage was at its peak, the Townhouse Associations be encouraged to water their areas at different periods of time to avoid peak water pressure problems. Councilman McCall stated it was his understanding a letter had been received from the EBMUD Engineers relative to the problem which also existed on the Port property at the Oakland Airport, the area of 98th Avenue and the industrial area of Hegenberger Road, and was not solely a problem of Bay Farm Island. He requested the City Manager to provide a status report on the efforts being made by EBMUD to provide a new water line to Bay Farm Island. Councilman Hurwitz recalled that the utility suppliers in the Environmental Impact Report concerning the Harbor Bay Isle development had assured the City they would be fully able to take care of the increased load. He requested a letter from the developers commenting on the current water problem as it related to their proposed development. The City Manager was directed to follow through with the above requests. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, AGENDA: 9. The following named persons requested to speak under the items indicated. Mrs. Inez Kapellas, 1128 College Avenue, "Hearings", Item N0, l, and "Unfinished Business", Item M0' 1; former Councilman James W. Fore, 1376 East Short Drive, "Resolutions", Item No. 4, dndY]ral Communications, General". HEARINGS: 10. In the Matter of the Reconsideration of Actions previously taken by the City of Alameda in approving Zone Change Application No. R-74-3 and Planned Development Application No. 74-1' (Harbor Bay Isle Associates) From the City Attorney, stating purpose and issues involved and outlining procedure. The Clerk stated there was on file the affidavit of Publication of the Notice that this would be the time and place for Hearing on the matter. The City Attorney reviewed, in full, his letter outlining procedure and enclosing eight material documents for information, and requested that all of the items be made a part of the public record Of the Hearing. He noted that on July 16" 1974, the Council had adopted a resolution setting the Public Hearing, and the reason for so doing had been because the Alameda County Airport Land Use Commission, by its Resolution No. 14, adopted June 12, 1974, and other actions, had disapproved of two prior City actions, namely, the PD Application No. 74-1 and the Zone Change Application No. R-74-3; that the ALUC, after being advised the actions appeared to be inconsistent with their alleged Interim Land Use Plan, had considered the matter and found the actions were inconsistent with their Plan and thereafter, on June 12, 1974, after a Public Hearing, by its Resolution N0' 14 determined both actions to be 'not in the best interest of the Metropolitan Oakland International Airport and the adjacent area," and "harmful'. Mr. Cunningham stated the State law contained in the Public Utilities Code required that if the ALUC determined the action or actions of a local agency would be "harmful", then the public agency (City of Alameda) would hold another Hearing to reconsider its prior favorable actions on both the Zone Change and the Planned Development applications and the determination as to whether or not the Council should overrule the determination of Resolution No. 14 of the ALUC. The President declared the Hearing opened and stated he would recognize those persons who wished to speak in favor of the decision as set forth by the ALUC. Mr. Ted Connolly, Chairman, Board of Directors of the Port of Oakland, said that although many things had been said in the past about difficulties which had developed between the Port and the City, he would like to go on record as expressing the Port's willingness to work and cooperate with the City. He introduced Mr. Tom Clark, Deputy Port Attorney. Mr. Clark, 66 Jack London Square, Oakland, requested the Council not to proceed to reconsider the decision of the City Planning Board, and alleged the reconsideration must be made, pursuant to State law, by the Planning Board. He expressed the objection of the Port of Oakland to such action by the Council. He stated that on April 15, 1974, the Planning Board had approved a preliminary Planned Development plan for the Village; on April 16, 1974, the Council had rezoned over 600 acres of Bay Farm Island to single-family residential use; that the land involved in the PD proposal was not land included in the rezoning approval. He related the ALUC, pursuant to Public Utilities Code § 21676, had determined on May 8, 1974, by resolution and without a single dissenting vote, that both actions, the PD approval and rezoning approval, were inconsistent with the ALUC's comprehensive land use plan for the Airport and its surrounding area, including Bay Farm Island. He detailed the steps taken and Hearings held in the development of their plan, which plan provided for a line of demarcation alongside of which residential development was determined to be detri- mental to the general welfare of future residential inhabitants. Mr. Clark reported that on June 12, 1974, the ALUC had held a further Hearing and had again determined each action of the City was not in the best interest of the Airport and surrounding area, and that each action was harmful, and had so notified President La Croix and the Chairman of the City Planning Board. Mr. Clark stated, according to statuatory language, each public agency notified was required to hold another Hearing to reconsider its action. He maintained the City Planning Board was the proper agency to reconsider its action taken on the Planned Development application and quoted from City Charter Sections 3-1, 14-1, 10-11, and Alameda Municipal Code Sections 11-1353, 11-1358.9 and 11-1358'9/c\, in support of his contention. Mr. Clark reviewed, at length, the Hearings held by the Council in connection with the Zone Change application and the written report of Attorney Gary Near, as Special Counsel for the City. He cited and quoted from numerous cases which he asserted upheld the Port's position and requested the Council to recommend to the Planning Board that no residential use be made of land south of the line of demarcation, as set out by the Port. Mr. Ted Connolly again addressed the Council and remarked on (1) aircraft noise as it affects Bay Farm Island; (2) recent actions by the ALUC; (3) proposed alternative development on Bay Farm Island; and (4) a review of the results of the recent attitude and opinion survey conducted within the City by the Port of Oakland. Mr. Connolly said the aircraft noise in the Bay Farm Island area, which was known to be a serious problem, would grow in the foreseeable future. He recalled that the City, in a joint petition with Utah International Inc. and the Alameda County Board of Supervisors, had had the Oakland Metropolitan International Airport designated as a noise problem. He said that despite that action and the Environmental Impact Report for the Harbor Bay Isle project, which contained information as to the extreme levels of noise gOYerning portions of Bay Farm Island, and despite the potentially damaging effect that noise would have on future residents, the Port had never felt certain that noise consideration played a major role in the City's recent decisions. He said they would accede there was an aircraft noise problem and the problem would grow worse, however they would acknowledge their responsibility to the public to take reasonable steps, within the options available to the Port of Oakland, to minimize noise impact on neighboring residents. He stated in their letter to the Council, dated January 18, 1974, various procedural and operational measures were outlined which were specifically designed to reduce noise levels, In addition, a Noise Abatement Task Force was created and had been working for approximately one year with the same goal in mind and progress had been made in the area of noise reduction. He said it was vital for the City Council and City Planning Board to consider present and projected noise impact in its land use planning deliberations. rr. Connolly Suggested the Council had an alternative. He said the ALUC had studied the issue and had said it was harmful for any development of residential quality to go beyond the line of demarratiOn, as established by the Port. He solicited the cooperation of the Council in not allowing any residential use to go beyond that line. He remarked that at one time the Port had set up a line of demarcation which was far beyond the present compromise and the affected area now consisted Of only approximately 280 acres. He suggested an industrial park or low-profile commercial project be developed in this area; that the developer agree to commence building to the north of the line of demarcation and either sell the 280 acres to the Port or develop it on some joint basis in an industrial use. Mr. Connolly urged the Council to accept the determination of the ALUC and rezone the area south Of the line of demarcation for an alternative use, such as he had SVgg25ted. He stated this solution would avoid committing land subject to serious noise impact to an incompatible use and creating unhealthy living standards for the community; that future residents would be protected from intol- erable noise levels, the Airport would be allowed to resume its regionally designated role as a major transportation and economic asset to the East Bay, and the developer would still be allowed to go ahead and develop his project. He said he felt this would be an acceptable solution' Mrs. Elizabeth Wood, 3305 Fir Avenue, said she and her neighbors in the Islondio and Garden Isle Townhouses did not want more traffic congestion, higher taxes, loss of job revenue from the Oaklard Airport or loss of its use by small aircraft and small jets. She asserted that each complaint of aircraft noise which had been reported to the Airport tower had been taker care of quickly and she, personally, had never been disturbed by aircraft noise. The President stated he would ut this Lime recognize those persons who wished to speak in favor of an override of the Alameda County Airport Land Use Commission decision. Attorney Allen Littman spoke on behalf of Harbor Bay Isle Associates. He stated that out of deference to the record in this case, he would ask that the entire administrative record of all of the proceedings before the Council and before the City of Alameda in connection with the development of Bay Farm Island be deemed properly part of this record. It was so ordered. Mr. Littman stated that with respect to the argument of the Port of Oakland that the Planning Board was the agency to reconsider its action taken on the Planned Development application and exercise the four-fifths override, the applicable statute read, "the public agency proposing the action or regulation, however, may overrule the Commission after such hearing by a four-fifths vote Of its governing body." He said, in his 0piniOO, the "governing body" of the City was without question the City Council and not the Planning Board. Mr. Littman remarked that the present 4,000 residents of Bay Form Island lived closer to the Oakland Airport than the residential development proposed by his client. He stated that if there was no noise problem with respect to Bay Farm Island as it exists already, any objections by the Port of Oakland to the development proposed by his client were senseless. He said, if it was the intention of the Port of Oakland to increase the noise, it would harm the present 4,000 residents more than any of the residents who would live in the new development. Mr. Littman said that for twenty-five years Bay Farm Island had been designated for residential development. He referred to and read from correspondence addressed to the City Manager and/or City Council from the Port Manager on July 23, 1953 and February 7, 1955, confirming this statement. He said that on June 29, 1964, Mr. Ben Nutter, Executive Director of the Port of Oakland, appeared before the Council in connection with the rezoning of Bay Farm Island and stated he wished to make very clear the fact the Port did not oppose the development, as a whole. . . and that his objection covered the "R-5" area where high density residences were proposed to be developed, which was the area immediately adjacent to Runway 29. Mr. Littman reviewed the Port of Oakland plan to expand from 2,226,494 passengers in 1973 to 25,000,000 in 1985. He noted they had recently received the Draft Environmental Impact Report published and prepared "in house" by the Port of Oakland with respect to the expansion of the Terminal facilities. He said that proposal was to expand the facility to permit 4,000,000 passengers per year to pass through Oakland. He quoted from the draft EIR, at page 56, which stated the 4°000,000 rate was not projected for any specific year. . . it could be assumed this traffic level would be achieved some time between the present and 1980. . . precisely when Oakland would achieve 4,000,000 passengers was a question subject to speculation. At page 48, he quoted, "the increase in passengers expected to result from this project will result in increased traffic, air pollution, noise pollution, and possibly water pollution", et cetera. Mr. Littman cited figures which indicated the passenger increase was actually only 2.7% per year and if it should continue at that rate, it would be the turn of the century before the Oakland Airport passed the 4,000,000 mark. Mr. Littman concluded his remarks by suggesting the Council override the determination of the Alameda County Airport Land Use C0mmiSsiOD, Mr. Robert E. DeCelle, President of the Bay Farm Island Improvement League, stated he had lived on Bay Form Island since 1950. He said that in all of the ALUC and other Commission hearings and meetings which he had attended, the Airport had maintained it was in the area first. He refuted this statement and remarked the first homes were built there in the early 1900'3, there was a subdivision development in 1924, and the Airport was dedicated in 1927 for the North Field. He protested the right of any agency, other than the City Council, to decide what would be done with Alameda land. Mrs. Inez Kapellas expressed her disapproval of the actions of the Port of Oakland. She forcefully objected to any attempt by the Port, or other agency, to dictate to the City of Alameda concerning the development of its community. She suggested the Port of Oakland establish a buffer zone on its own property at the Oakland Metropolitan Airport, rather than encroach upon the lands of Bay Farm Island. The President declared the Hearing closed and asked for the comments of the Council. He stated he believed very strongly the only action which the Council could and should take would be one to override the action of the Alameda County Airport Land Use Commission. He said he felt that the Council must not only protect the rights of the residents of Bay Farm Island and the east end of Alameda, but must also protect the planning rights of the community as administered by its governing body, the City Council. Councilman Corica read aloud a letter which he had sent to the ALUC at the time that agency had requested input from the public, prior to its decision. He said that after serious consideration, and based on recent happenings wherein the developer had made concessions in reducing the density of the first village by approximately 200 to 300 units, he had come to the conclusion the City could best control Harbor Bay Isle. Councilman Hurwitz stated he had been elected to the City Council because of his promise to control density and it was tempting to use almost any device possible to regulate it. However, he said this had nothing to do with the issue before the Council. He stated that at the time he had made the motion to rezone the property to "R-l", he was well aware of the Airport's stand, the 65 CNEL line and the rulings of the ALUC. He said he felt it was only right the Oakland Airport should operate in considering Alameda, and did not feel anything had been said or done which would change the zoning as it now existed. Councilman Beckam said he was pleased to hear Mr. CODn0]]y's expression of cooperation and commended Mr. Clark for his excellent presentation on behalf of the Port of Oakland. He questioned, in the event the City should rely on the position stated by Mr. Clark and find later those opinions were wrong, would the Port agree today to indemnify the City against any lawsuit, because of that opinion, tomorrow. He said he doubted this would be the case. He commented on the present and projected noise problems should the Oakland Airport expand its operations. He said he too, believed in the `)(:,)�� v/ City's right to self-government without the assistance of other agencies; that the ALUC recognized the existing land uses in the residential area known as the "uplands" and the proposed 711 resi- dential units under consideration were beyond and further away from the Airport runway than the "uplands". Councilman Beckam stated that by its Resolution Nn' 14, adopted June 12, 1874, the Alameda County Airport Land Use Commission determined that the prior two actions of the City in effecting Zone Change No. R-74-3, and in approving Planned Development No. 74-1, were against the best interests Of the Oakland Airport and its adjacent area and were "harmful". That the City Council had, this evening, held another hearing to reconsider these two actions, as required by State law (Section 21575, Public Utilities Code), and had considered all the prior evidence, documents, reports and materials in the record, bearing on them. That based upon that record, and upon all the matters submitted at this hearing, and upon the City Council having fully reconsidered its prior actions, he moved that the City of Alameda override the said determination of the Airport Land Use Commission. The motion was seconded by Councilman Hurwitz and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. A ten-minute recess was called, at which time President La Croix, Jr' stated he would not be in attendance for the remainder of this evening's meeting, on the advice of his physician. Upon reconvening, the meeting continued with the regular order of business with Vice President Corica presiding. HEARINGS: 11. In the Matter of Consideration Of the Capital Improvement Program, 1974-70. Vice President Corica stated consideration of this item would be held over to a Special Meeting, the date of which had not yet been set. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: 12. From the Auditor-Assessor requesting cancellation and refund of real and personal property taxes erroneously levied. Councilman Hurwitz moved acceptance of the report. The motion was seconded by Councilman McCall and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President La Croix, Jr., (1). 13. From the City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to Tamal Construction Company, sole bidder, for the project of Lincoln Park, Phase 2, Baseball Infield, at the estimated price of $78,180 and an additional sum of $1,843 be budgeted in the Capital Outlay Fund for the project. Councilman Beckam moved the contract be awarded to Tamal Construction Co. for the specified project at the price estimated, and an additional sum of $1,843 be budgeted in the Capital Outlay Fund for the project. The motion was seconded by Councilman Hurwitz and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President La Croix, Jr., (1). 14. From the City Manager transmitting report on proposed Marine Advisory Board. Mr. Goss stated the report contained a review of some of the things the City had done in the recent past in terms of certain improvements along the shoreline, and of suggestions made by representatives of the aqua business community. He said the short-term suggestions essentially related to promotional activities and the long-term recommendations dealt with long-range planning. He commented that it would be desirable to have a further exchange of information in order to identify some of the goals and possible solutions to problems and get a better idea as to the responsibilities of the various bodies involved. Councilman Hurwitz requested this exchange of information not be limited to just the aqua business community and staff. He said he would like to see an interim committee formed to come up with ideas as to what could be done to promote the waterfront, to include interested citizens as well as aqua businessmen and the City staff. Vice President Corica noted a trip had been scheduled for August 9, in order that the City Council and staff members might view the waterfront areas. Mr. Brit Johnson, 850 Portola Drive, President of the Alameda Chamber of Commerce, referred to the study and report made to the Council by the Aqua Business Committee. He said he felt strongly a Marine Advisory Board should be established to make suggestions within a six-month period as to possible uses of the land. Following discussion, the City Manager was directed to set up a meeting with representatives of the aqua business community and the Chamber of Commerce and submit a report. 15. From the City Manager regarding the Alameda Chamber of Commerce contract for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1975. Mr. Charles Tillman, 2415 Roosevelt Drive, requested a copy of the annual report of the Chamber for the past year. The City Manager stated he would mail a copy of the report to Mr. Tillman. Mr. Joseph Sullivan, 3221 Liberty Avenue, questioned the expenditure of taxpayer money by the Chamber in endorsing measures, projects and proposed taxes which did not have the approval of a majority Of the residents of the community. Former Councilman James W. Fore recommended that a Port Commission be established. He suggested the Chamber of Commerce contact the President of EnCjnul Terminals and outline their proposal for development of the waterfront. Councilman Hurwitz moved acceptance of the report. The motion was seconded by Councilman McCall and carried or the following roll call vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President La Croix, Jr., (1). UNFINISHED BUSINESS: 15. Councilman Hurwitz moved consideration of the resolution authorizing agreement with Urban Management Consultants of San Francisco, Inc. for preparation of the City's Goals Development Pro- ject be taken from the table. The motion was seconded by Councilman Beckam and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President La Croix, Jr', (1). There being no objection, the meeting proceeded to "Resolutions". RESOLUTIONS: 17. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Hurwitz, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 8244 Authorizing Agreement with Urban Management Consultants of San Francisco, Inc. for Preparation of City's Goals Development Project." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman McCall. Vice President Corica stated he was now in receipt of the proposal and had reviewed it. He asked if the Housing Element study would be included in the project. Mr. Peter Briggs, of Urban Management Consultants, stated their proposal did not include the actual preparation of the Housing Element which would be done by the City Planning staff concurrently or shortly following the termination of the Goals Study. The City Manager reported the information gained by the Goals Study would be absolutely necessary toward preparation of the Housing Element, principally the requirement for citizen input. Councilman Beckam answered the questions of Mrs. Inez Kapellas. At the conclusion of discussion, the question was put and the motion carried on the following roll Call vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President La Croix, Jr., (1). The meeting returned to the regular order of business. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: 18. Continued from the regular meetings of June 18, and July 16, 1974, from Mr. Jacob Levitan, Attorney, requesting a permit be issued to East Bay Sanitary, Inc., to haul refuse from the North and East Housing Areas of the Naval Air Station. The Clerk reported a letter had been received this date from Mr. Levitan withdrawing the application of his client. It was so ordered. RESOLUTIONS: 19' The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Hurwitz, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 8245" Ordering Cancellation and Refund of Real and Personal Property Taxes Erroneously Levied and Collected." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman McCall and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President La Croix, Jr." (1). 20. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Hurwitz, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 8246 Approving and Supporting County-Wide Automated 971 Emergency Telephone Service." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman McCall and carried On the following roll call vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President La Croix, Jr., (1). 21. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Hurwitz, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 8247 Adopting Specifications, Special Provisions and Plans for the Repair and Resurfacing of M2cartDey Road from Tahiti Lane to County Road, Calling for Bids and Directing City Clerk to Advertise Same," The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman McCall and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President La Croix, Jr., (1). 22. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Hurwitz, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 8248 Authorizing Execution of Contract with Alameda Chamber of Commerce for Advertising for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1975, and Appropriating Therefor the Sum of 528,200.00, or As Much Thereof as May be Required." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded hv CCuncilmao Beckam, and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President La Croix, Jr., (1). 23. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Hurwitz, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 8249 Authorizing Execution of Amendment to Lease Between City and Southern Pacific Transportation Company." The motion to adopt said resOlJtion wL1� vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President La Croix, Jr., (1). 24. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Beckam, who moved its adoption: "Resolution Mn. 8250 Urging Adoption of Assembly Bill N0, 3523, As It Pertains to Airport Safety Regulations." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Hurwitz and carried on the Fol7oq r',i! r|/` vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President La Croix, Jr'" (1). The Vice President declared the foregoing Resolutions adopted. ORDINANCES FOR PASSAGE: 25. "Ordinance No. 1723, New Series An Ordinance Reclassifying and Rezoning Certain Property Within the City of Alameda by Amending Zoning Ordinance No. 1277, N.5." ("R-4-G" to "C-l" - 1930 Main Street) Councilman Hurwitz moved the ordinance be passed as submitted. The motion was seconded by Councilman Beckam and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President La Croix, Jr., (1). 26. "Ordinance No. 1724~ New Series Authorizing Lease of Real Property to Robert E. Hannon (80' x 100/ North End of Webster Street)." Councilman Beckam moved the ordinance be passed as submitted. The motion was seconded by Councilman Hurwitz and on roll call carried by the fVllwing vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President La Croix, Jr. , (1). 27. "Ordinance No' 1725, New Series Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Section 2-116 Thereof, Relating to Order of Business of City Council." Councilman Hurwitz moved the ordinance be passed as submitted. The motion was seconded by Councilman McCall and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President La Croix, Jr. , (1). 28. "Ordinance No. 1726, New Series Authorizing Quitclaim to Portion of Vacated Alleyway to Paul W. Nelson and Mary J. Nelson, His Wife (U' x 34' - Buena Vista Avenue between Paru Street and Hibbard Street)." Councilman Beckam moved the ordinance be passed as submitted. The motion was seconded by Councilman Hurwitz and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President La Croix, Jr., (1). 29. "Ordinance No. 1727, New Series An Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Sections 17-351 and 17-352 Thereof, Relating to Extended Parking of Vehicles." Councilman Hurwitz moved the ordinance be passed as submitted. The motion was seconded by Councilman Beckam and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President La Croix, Jr., (1). BILLS: 30. An itemized List of Claims against the City of Alameda and the Departments thereof, in the total amount of S122,719.40 was presented to the Council at this meeting. The List was accompanied by certification from the Assistant City Manager that the claims shown were correct. Councilman Hurwitz moved the bills as itemized in the List of Claims filed with the City Clerk on August 6, 1974, and presented to the City Council at this meeting be allowed and paid. The motion was seconded by Councilman McCall and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: President La Croix, Jr., (1). FILING: 31. Specification No. PW 8-74-10 - Repair and Resurfacing of Mecartney Road from Tahiti Lane to County Road. 32. Agreement - Between City and Alameda Chamber of Commerce - for community promotion during fiscal year 1974-75' 35. Amendment to Lease - Between City and Southern Pacific Transportation Company. 34. Financial and Operating Report - Bureau of Electricity as of May 31, 1874 - Verified by George A. Hackleman. ADJOURNMENT: 35. There being no further business to come LefOre the meeting, the Council adjourned, to assemble in regular session on Tuesday, August 20, 1974, at 7:30 o'clock p.m. Respectfully submitted, City Clerk