Loading...
1971-10-05 Regular CC Minutes307 REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA HELD TUESDAY OCTOBER 5, 1971 The meeting convened at 7:30 o'clock p.m. with President La Croix presiding. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Fore and was followed by a most inspiring Invocation delivered by The Reverend Charles N. Nahnsen, Pastor of Immanuel Lutheran Church. ROLL CALL: The roll was called and Councilmen Fore, Levy, Longaker, McCall and President La Croix, Jr., (5), were noted present. Absent: None. MINUTES: 1. The minutes of the regular meeting held September 21, 1971, were approved as transcribed. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: 2. ; From Mr. Richard Avery, 914 Oak Street, pointing out October 24 would be UNITED NATIONS DAY and suggesting the City have an observance of the anniversary of the birth of this organization. President La Croix stated the Alameda Junior Chamber of Commerce had for years handled this observance with appropriate publicity and he had already forwarded information to the organization on the subject. 3. From KNOW -BAG (Know -Bay Area Government - Committee for Home Rule), signed by Mrs. Virginia Shaffer, Chairman, with regard to Assembly Bill 1057, on the Conservation and Development Agency of the Bay Area, setting forth the powers of the proposed regional body which would overrule the powers of cities and counties, and urging that the Council oppose the Bill. President La Croix commented that the Bill was quite controversial, dealing with the loss of home rule and promising many adverse effects on the community. Councilman McCall stated he had opposed this legislation since its inception. He said he would like to give credit to Mayor Jack Maltester of San Leandro, who had resigned from the Association of Bay Area Governments Executive Board because of the action of that organization on this subject. He moved the Council go on record as opposing Assembly Bill 1057 and so notify the Governor of the State of California. The motion was seconded by Councilman Longaker and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. It was directed that the letter be acknowledged, informing Mrs. Shaffer of the Council's action, and that Assemblyman Robert W. Crown also be advised in the matter. 4. " President La Croix congratulated Councilman McCall on his election to the Board of Directors of the League of California Cities at its conference in San Francisco the latter part of September and thanked him for accepting the office. Councilman McCall stated he was happy to have the opportunity to serve in this office and was proud that President La Croix was in line to serve as President of the Mayors' and Councilmen's Department of the League, having been elected to the office of First Vice President of the Department. He expressed the hope that President La Croix would also have the opportunity to serve on the League Board of Directors. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, AGENDA: 5. Mrs. Lee -Ann Lane, 1425 Union Street, requested that Senators Petris and Holmdahl be informed of the Council's action with regard to Assembly Bill 1057 and it was so directed. Mrs. Lane said she knew the new draft of the Planned Development ordinance revision was completed and due to be presented to the Council and if it should come up at this meeting she would like to speak on the subject. President La Croix informed her that the ordinance would not come up for consideration this evening. HEARINGS: 6. In the Matter of a Petition filed by Mr. Herbert A. Jackson to rezone from the "C -2 ", Central Business, to the "R- 6- H -50 ", Hotel Apartment District, Height Limit Fifty Feet, certain properties known as 2507, 2513 and 2515 Central Avenue. The Planning Board had recommended the application be denied. The Clerk stated there was on hand the Affidavit of Publication of the Notice that this would be the time and place for the Hearing on this subject and the minutes of the Planning Board meeting at which the petition was considered had been sent to the Councilmen. Mr. Donald Johnson, Planning Director, reviewed the action of the Board, as set forth in its letter of September 16, 1971, and called attention to the exhibit map indicating the subject properties which had been sent to the Councilmen. He said Mr. Jackson owned the properties at 2513 and 2515 Central Avenue, each about 40 by 210 feet and each developed with an older single - family structure in only poor or fair condition. He said Mr. Jackson had been requested by the staff to include in his application the property at 2507 Central Avenue in order to make the parcel a more contiguous and larger one. He said the parcel at 2507 Central Avenue was 60 by 140 feet, containing a single - family use with six rooming units. Mr. Johnson said the properties, totaling approximately 16,800 square feet, in the "R -5" zone would permit a sixteen -unit building while in the "R -6" zone it would allow thirty -three units. The applicant proposed, if the requested zone change was granted, to limit the height of the building to fifty feet and to develop a twenty -five unit apartment, plans for which were displayed on the wall for viewing. Mr. Johnson said the staff had approved the request, pointing out to the Board that the plan had definite merit and higher densities should be encouraged immediately adjacent to the central business district. It had also been pointed out that the proposed development would be compatible with existing uses in the vicinity. There had been two protestants at the Board Hearing, indicating "R -6" properties now existed in the City which were not used to their full potential and pointing out related traffic problems which would be created by more residential uses. City Attorney Cunningham explained the issue before the Council was whether the findings and recommenda- tion of the Planning Board, as outlined, and its advisory report based upon Section 11 -175 of the Muni- cipal Code, should be sustained, modified or overruled. On the call for proponents, Mr. Stanley D. Whitney, Attorney with the firm of Whitney, Hanson & Stone - house, came forward to represent Mr. Jackson. He commented on the buildings in the area and expressed the opinion that the development proposed by his client would be a tremendous improvement over the exist- ing dwellings. He said the applicant planned to construct twenty -five units instead of thirty -two apartments with a height limit of 100 feet, as previously presented to the Planning Board. Thirty -seven parking spaces would be provided. The proposal was to construct the building to be sold as condominium apartments. Mr. Whitney said he felt this was advantageous for the City as compared to rental apart- ments. The units would be sold for approximately $25,000 and the average area would be 950 square feet per unit plus two penthouses which would be somewhat larger. Mr. Whitney said he felt the proposed development spoke for itself, that it was a type of installation which would be desirable for the area and it might urge the Alameda Hotel to do something to make its outside appearance more attractive. On inquiry by President La Croix, Mr. Whitney said his client would not be interested in an "R -5" zoning as it would not permit him to construct twenty -five units. On inquiry by Councilman Levy, it was stated Mr. Jackson had an agreement to buy the third parcel at 2507 Central Avenue, contingent upon his obtaining the zone change to "R- 6- H -50 ". Mr. Johnson stipulated that this knowledge had not been available to the Board at its Hearing. Mr. Allen R. Johannes, Architect on the project, then addressed the Council. He said the proposed struc- ture had been studied carefully from the standpoint of what would fit most graciously on the property. He explained the architectural features of the proposed building and stated the setback requirements had been exceeded both in the front and rear yard areas with the feeling that a more attractive development would be the result. He said the type of unit proposed would have appeal for probably older persons without children. The size, he said, would actually be about 975 square feet and adequate for comfortable living. The condominium concept, he said, created a certain pride of ownership and this would provide the opportunity for people to buy without too great expense. President La Croix and Councilman Longaker expressed the opinion that the units would be somewhat small. The latter said he realized that, zoned as it was at present, various commercial uses could be construc- ted upon the properties, but he still felt that the proposed units should exceed 1,000 square feet. Councilman McCall quoted from the ordinance the types of business which would be permitted under the present zoning. There was discussion with regard to this point, setbacks, heights, and other aspects. Mr. John Barni, Jr., 1277 Bay Street, spoke in favor of the proposal. He said the attempt in this project was to provide a unit at approximately $25,000 which would sell readily, with all the amenities included for elderly owners. Mr. Jackson said the lower the units could be sold for, the faster they would move and the more success- ful the entire project would be, that a great deal of thought had been put into the project. He said reducing the number of units to sixteen in an "R -5" zone would necessitate raising the price about 50% and the demand was in a more modestly priced unit. Mrs. Lee -Ann Lane, 1425 Union Street, stated the presentation before the Board had been completely different from the one being heard. She suggested the matter be referred back to the Board for further consideration. President La Croix pointed out the question was one of density and the types of owner- ship were not germane to the density of the property. The Hearing was declared closed. President La Croix stated there had been attempts in the community to build properly- located units for senior citizens at a reasonable price and he would agree there were not sufficient of this type of accommodations in the City - possibly the Park Street area would be a proper location with shopping, transportation and other amenities for the elderly. He said he felt one of the things the Council must concern itself with was density, that he felt the request was too high and he would suggest that, should the Council not take action to rezone the property as requested, it might consider directing the Planning Board to give consideration to rezoning the property to "R -4" or "R -5 ", with the feeling that there was no longer a need for the commercial zoning. Councilman McCall said it was difficult to make a judgment when a different presentation was made than that submitted to the Planning Board. He pointed out neither Mr. Whitney nor Mr. Johannes had appeared before the Board and many new points had been submitted to the Council at this Hearing. He moved the petition be referred back to the Board for further consideration and recommendation to the Council. President La Croix disagreed and contended that the point under consideration was the density of the land and the zone change requested. The motion died for lack of a second. Councilman Fore moved the recommendation of the Planning Board be overruled and the subject parcels be rezoned from the "C -2" to the "R-6-H-50" District. After clarification of a point by Mr. Johnson, Councilman Levy seconded the motion. Following some further discussion on the subject, the question was put and the motion lost on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Councilmen Fore and Levy, (2). Noes: Councilmen Longaker, McCall and President La Croix, (3). Absent: None. There was discussion with regard to the suggestion, in view of the controversial nature of the parcels involved in the action, that the Planning Board be requested to consider, on its own motion, the possibi- lity of rezoning the properties to a more residential type of classification. Mr. Whitney suggested that the motion be set aside and the matter be referred back to the Board for further consideration. It was pointed out that a previous motion to that effect had died. He then requested that the matter be continued to the next meeting of the Council. On advice of the City Attorney, the request was denied. Councilman Longaker moved the Planning Board be requested to consider, on its own motion, the possibility of rezoning the properties in the area under discussion from the "C -2 ", Central Business, to the "R -4 ", Neighborhood Apartment, or the "R -5 ", General Apartment District. Councilman Levy seconded the motion which carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 7. �' In the Matter of a Petition to Install Street Lighting on Santa Clara Avenue from Third Street to Lincoln Avenue. The Clerk stated there were on hand the required Affidavits of Posting and of Mailing Notices in this matter. Upon request, City Engineer Hanna reported that some months ago a resident of the 200 -block of Santa Clara Avenue had inquired of his office how street lights could be obtained in the block. The procedure under Section 5870 of the Streets and Highways Code had been explained and petitions had been received bearing signatures representing the owners of more than 60% of the property frontage in the block. Mr. Hanna estimated five lights would be required at a total estimated cost of $750, or about seventy -one cents per front foot, with the costs per lot estimated at about $34 to approximately $50. Councilman Longaker remarked that the problem existed on Santa Clara Avenue beyond the area involved in the discussion, up to the intersection of Pacific Avenue and, should the residents in that area desire the same kind of lighting, they would have to follow the same procedure and become part of a separate assess- ment district. Councilman McCall commented that there were several sections of the City in which an assessment district would be required to have improved lighting for which other residents of the City had already paid their share. Mr. Cunningham stated the purpose of the Hearing was for the Council to hear and pass upon objections or protests of any affected property owner in the proposed district or other interested persons to the work proposed by the Superintendent of Streets in his Notice dated September 24, 1971. On the call for protestants, there was no response and the Hearing was declared closed. There being no objections, the meeting proceeded to "Resolutions ". RESOLUTIONS: 8. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Longaker, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7845 Overruling Objections to Notice to Perform Work in Santa Clara Avenue- - Third Street -- Lincoln Avenue Street Lighting Improvement District and Authorizing Superintendent of Streets to Cause Said Work to be Performed." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman McCall and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. The meeting reverted to the regular order of business. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: 9. t/ From the Mayor, Assistant City Manager and Auditor, submitting their report on the Count of Money held August 18, 1971, indicating the sum of $9,891,137.68 on deposit at that time. The report was noted and ordered filed. 10. /'From the Planning Board, signed by the Assistant Planning Director, recommending approval of Parcel Map No. 748, subject to the terms and conditions of the City Engineer's Report dated August 5, 1971. The Map had been filed by Jones - Tillson & Associates for Pan - Pacific Development Company to resubdivide two existing lots into different configurations at Ballena Boulevard and Cola Ballena. There being no objections, the order of business again proceeded to "Resolutions ". RESOLUTIONS: 11. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Longaker, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7846 Approving Parcel Map No. 748 for Division of Property Consisting of Lot 1, Lot 3, and Southeasterly Portion of Lot 2, Block 2, Tract 3011, and Permitting Recording Thereof (Jones - Tillson & Associates for Pan - Pacific Development Company)." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Levy and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Abstaining: President La Croix, (1). Absent: None. The meeting reverted to the regular order of business. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: 12. From the City Manager, reporting all work satisfactorily completed on the project of Installing Non - Vehicular Paving at Will C. Wood School, recommending it be accepted and the Notice of Completion be ordered filed. Councilman Longaker moved the recommendation be followed, that the work on the designated project be accepted and the Notice of Completion be filed. Councilman McCall seconded the motion which carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. NEW BUSINESS: 13. President La Croix stated he and Councilman McCall had received a communication from the City Attorney with regard to action taken in 1966 on the subject of the runways of the Oakland International Airport. He said he was quite concerned as to the powers, jurisdiction and goals of the Airport Land Use Planning Commission. He commented that he was glad Councilman McCall was a member of this Commis- sion and hoped he would serve to some extent as a protection to the City and hopefully to the entire County in this matter. President La Croix said the City was concerned with its future growth and development and with proper location and building of apartments and single - family dwellings in the community. Knowing of the proposed developments on Bay Farm Island and the bearing the growth of the Airport would have on that area, he raised the question whether, legally and properly, the City should consider imposing a "freeze" in building on all of Bay Farm Island in view of the powers and jurisdictions of the Commission and the fact that it had not actually set forth its controls on future construction in the City. He inquired of the City Attorney what the legal steps would be and how the City should proceed in establishing such a "freeze ", should it be determined through proper study and consideration that this action should be taken. Mr. Cunningham said he had done some initial research on the question and had discussed the matter in some detail with the Planning Director. He explained some of the legal aspects involved and said he would investigate the subject further. Mr. Johnson, on request, said the problems at this time were two -fold: (1) all the Commission had done to this time was to declare the entire City of Alameda under its influence, presenting the difficulty of separating one area from another; (2) regarding Building Permit "freezes ", there was a question how far the City could go in this respect and what kind of control was envisioned. Councilman McCall pointed out the Council would have the right to overrule the Commission by a four - to -one vote, regardless of what restrictions might be imposed upon the City. He said he could not see the advisability of a "freeze" unless all development in the City was included. On request, Mr. Weller stated he would agree wholeheartedly with the comments although there might be disagreement as to the method of proceeding on the question. He said the City was in an unusual situation where there might be a question as to its legal rights. What was under discussion was a moral obligation, rather than a legal responsibility of government. He went on to explain his thinking in the matter. After lengthy discussion and deliberation on this question, the position of the Council, and the action it should take, Councilman Longaker moved the City staff be requested to submit to the City Council a report on this entire problem with a reasonable proposal, any alternatives available, and recommenda- tions as to what action the Council should take in the matter. Councilman Fore seconded the motion, with the statement that he would not approve of a "freeze" which would help some people and not others and he would like better communications on matters of this sort. After brief further discussion in clarification of the motion, the question was put and the motion carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. BILLS: 14. An Itemized List of Claims against the City of Alameda and the Departments thereof, in the total amount of $45,413.15, was presented to the Council atthis meeting. The List was accompanied by certification from the City Manager that the Claims shown were correct. Councilman Levy moved the bills as itemized in the List of Claims filed with the City Clerk on October 5, 1971, and presented to the City Council at this meeting, be allowed and paid. The motion was seconded by Councilman Longaker and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 15. President La Croix, at this time, recognized and welcomed the students in the audience. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, GENERAL: 16.Mr. Robert Stahl, partner in the firm of Stahl - Wooldridge Construction Co., 2515 Santa Clara Avenue, addressed the Council. He said his firm was in the process of developing the motel at the corner of Central and Park Avenues. He had read in the newspaper that the Council was concerned about the project and he was surprised as none of the concern had been conveyed to him. He said he hoped to set the Council at ease as to the ultimate appearance of the building, that he would concede at the present time 311 it was very unattractive. He presented a rendering showing the proposed finished structure, and said he felt the building would be extremely attractive when completed. Mr. Stahl said the building when completed would be encased in riggers on 15 -foot centers which would give it dimension and scope, with a great deal of wrought iron work. He said he had serious reservations at this time as to the economic success of the project because of the criticism. He requested, if he was successful in producing a building which was satisfactory to the Council, that its members reverse their statements publicly and strongly to rectify the position he had found himself in at this time. Mr. Stahl said he felt a form of architectural review board would be advantageous. Councilman Longaker stated, in his remarks at the last meeting of the Council with regard to the structure, there had been no intention to harm Mr. Stahl or his firm in any way. Councilman McCall stated he had received many telephone calls expressing strong objections to the building. Councilman Levy said he would assure Mr. Stahl, should the building be as attractive as indicated, the Chamber of Commerce would give his firm 100% support. 17. Mr. F. A. Gottstein, 731 Haight Avenue, stated he had received an acknowledgement from the Division of Highways on his suggestion that motorcycles should be prohibited in the Posey and Webster Tubes, sug- gesting he contact his representative. He said he would not pursue the matter further as it would be picked up by others because the vehicles were a nuisance. He expressed the hope that the Legislature would double the license fees, which might serve to cut down the number in operation. 18. # Mr. Gottstein complained that parking meter standpipes on Haight Avenue near Webster Street had been bent and left standing crooked, which created a very unsightly condition. Mr. Hanna was requested to investigate this situation. 19. 1/ Mr. John M. Rozman, 3257 Fillmore Street, commented on a recent newspaper article suggesting a new Bay Farm Island Bridge parallel to the present structure. He requested that this matter be investigated carefully before any definite plans were made. President La Croix stated the City Engineer had presented this proposal to the State for consideration as to what it would do with regard to financing and construction of such a bridge, that the matter was tenta- tive at this time as to whether the best solution to the traffic problem would be a parallel bridge or a connection at Broadway. The attempt was to anticipate the ultimate development of Bay Farm Island and how the traffic would be moved between the Island and the main community of Alameda, with the least amount of disruption to the homeowners and taking the least possible amount of property. He said the City was nowhere near a final decision on the matter at this time. 20. Mr. James Flint, 1712 Webster Street, apologized for an error in his statement at the last meeting of the Council that there was a hole in Webster Street, that the location was at Santa Clara Avenue rather than at Lincoln Avenue FILING: 21. Financial and Operating Report - Bureau of Electricity, as of July 31, 1971 - Verified by George A. Hackleman. MEMORIAL RESOLUTIONS: 22.'j The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Levy, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7847 Resolution of the Council of the City of Alameda in Memoriam to Leon H. Ader, Former City Treasurer. IN A SPIRIT OF SORROW, the Council of the City of Alameda records the death of one of its former officials, LEON H. ADER. "WHEREAS, Mr. Ader was appointed Deputy City Treasurer on December 28, 1923, and subsequently, in the Municipal Election held March 10, 1925, successfully competed for the office of City Treasurer and served faithfully and competently in that capacity for the duration of his term expiring on April 16, 1929; and "WHEREAS, Mr. Ader was deeply interested in the systematic growth and development of the City, having later engaged in the real estate business in the City and having served as Undersheriff of the County of Alameda for a period of some years. "NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Alameda, in recogni- tion of the civic concern shown by this fine man through the years, does hereby express its sense of personal loss and its appreciation for his service to the City. "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution be spread in full upon the minutes of this meeting and a copy thereof be sent to the family of Mr. Ader in order to extend to its members a sincere expression of condolence in their bereavement. "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that when this meeting of the Council of the City of Alameda adjourns, it shall do so in respect to the memory of LEON H. ADER." 3:t2 The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman McCall and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. The President declared the foregoing resolutions adopted. The President requested that, in adjourning, all stand for a moment of silence in observance of the passing of Mr. Ader. 23. Councilman Fore moved the Council retire to an executive session for consideration of appointments to City Boards and Commissions. The motion was seconded by Councilman Longaker and carried unanimously. After a five-minute recess, the Council reconvened in the Conference Room, No. 303, for its deliberations. At the conclusion of the discussion, it was decided that no further action would be taken at this meeting and the City Attorney was requested to prepare the appropriate resolutions for later attention. ADJOURNMENT: 24. There being no further business to come before the meeting, the Council adjourned in respect to the memory of LEON H. ADER, former City Treasurer, to assemble in regular session on Tuesday, October 19, 1971, at 7:30 o'clock p.m. Respectfully submitted, City Clerk