Loading...
1971-11-16 Regular CC MinutesREGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA HELD TUESDAY NOVEMBER 16, 1971 The meeting convened at 7:30 o'clock p.m. with President La Croix presiding. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Levy and was followed by a most inspiring Invocation delivered by The Reverend Father Joseph Mi, Assistant Pastor of St. Joseph's 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 November 2, 1971, were approved as transcribed. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: 2. ;, °`' From the Golden Gate Massage Association, signed by Mrs. Catherine Willis, with regard to the proposed Massage Establishment Ordinance. President La Croix commented that the ordinance was under study by the City Manager, the City Attorney and the Police Chief. It was directed that the communication be acknowledged and referred to the file on the subject. 3. , From Mrs. Dolores Wood, 3210 Thompson Avenue, expressing appreciation on behalf of the homeowners on Thompson Avenue between High Street and Fernside Boulevard for the Council's reaffirmation of "Christmas Tree Lane ". President La Croix said it was rewarding to make a group of citizens happy and possibly the Council would be in attendance at the official lighting of the trees sometime in December. The communication was ordered filed. {,r 4. From the Democratic Caucus of Alameda, signed by Mr. Don Perata, Interim Chairman, urging the City Council to take the initiative in meeting the needs for low -cost units for elderly persons. It was directed that the letter be referred to the Planning Department for perusal by the Planning Board in its study of the highest and best use of the Bureau of Electricity property at 920 Park Street, which the Housing Authority had proposed be used for low -cost housing for senior citizens. Councilman McCall pointed out the statement by Mr. Perata that the Housing Authority records indicated a long waiting list for low -cost housing in the studio and one - bedroom range. Following his request, City Attorney Cunningham was asked to obtain for report to the Council a full list of those waiting for these units, with addresses. 5. y / From Mr. John Barni, Jr., requesting the opportunity to speak to the Council concerning under - grounding of utilities in connection with Parcel Map No. 791, for division of the property at 1337 Sherman Street. The matter was referred to the recommendation of the Planning Board with regard to this Parcel Map, later in the meeting. 6. i' From the Alameda Unified School District, signed by Dr. G. R. McConnell, Superintendent, with regard to improvement of Brush Street adjacent to Woodstock School. President La Croix stated this matter was under study and the residents of the area were being contacted by the City Engineer with regard to entering into an assessment district to accomplish the improvement. At the suggestion of Councilman McCall, it was requested of the City Manager's office that a letter be drafted to Dr. McConnell, for signature by the President, explaining the assessment district regulations and the method of proceeding in this matter. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: 7. Fr From the Planning Board, signed by the Secretary, recommending approval of the Tentative Map for the subdivision known as Tract 3365, subject to the conditions noted. The Map covered a proposed condominium subdivision at 3215 Briggs Avenue for D. B. Bitner Co., Inc. It was stated there was a question concerning the payment to the City of a fee under Section 11 -327 of the Municipal Code (Subdivision Ordinance) providing for dedication of recreation areas or payment of fees in lieu thereof. On request, City Engineer Hanna explained that in accordance with the tables and charts provided in Ordinance No. 1627, New Series, on the subject, this property should contribute the amount of $2,050 and the question had arisen as to whether or not condominiums were included within the City's ordinance. He said it was his belief that this was the case. City Attorney Cunningham explained that Section 11 -323 of the Municipal Code covering land dedication for park and recreational purposes in subdivisions stated the Article in question "shall apply to all subdi- visions as that phrase is defined in Section 11500 and following of the Business and Professions Code of California "; Section 115351 of that Code expressly and specifically provides in part that a subdivision, 3 °5 as used throughout the division, includes a condominium project containing five or more condominiums. He said, further, that Section 11004.5c defined some subdivided lands and subdivisions in the Subdivision Map Act as including any condominium projects. He therefore argued that, while the actual land was not being subdivided and parceled, it was clear that the State law governing in this case applied to the divisions of space above a single parcel and the City ordinance, Section 11 -329, provided that at the time of the Tentative Map approval, with which the Council was faced in this instance, the Council should determine whether dedication or payment in lieu was required. In this case only fees could be required and, under the section, the same should be deposited with the City Treasurer prior to approval of the Final Map. Therefore, while the particular project might be excepted from the requirement, the Council could not say that no fees were required in any event as the law provided otherwise, in his opinion. Councilman Levy inquired as to the disposition of fees required in these instances. Mr. Cunningham explained that the land and fees received under the Article in question must be used only for the purpose of providing or maintaining park and recreational facilities which the City would determine would serve the subdivision for which it had been received and the location of the land and the amount of fees for should'bear °a' reasonable relationship to the use of the park and recreational facilities by the future inhabitants of the subdivision. Councilman McCall expressed the opinion that a grid should be set up throughout the City so that rules would be set down as to the area to receive monies from any particular subdivision. Mr. Cunningham stated this had been considered in drafting the ordinance but it had been felt that, in view of the particulars of the ordinance and the careful delineation of density units versus subdivided units, putting in a hard and fast geographic area might have the opposite effect from that desired, that is, to prevent benefit to the persons within the subdivision which has paid the money since it might appear feasible to the Planning or the Recreation Department to improve another recreation area not within the specific grid and the hands of the City Departments might be tied by the regulations. It likewise might prevent the establishment of small or passive parks in the vicinity of a number of condominiums which might be established with the money. There was some discussion with regard to setting up these funds. Councilman McCall expressed the opinion that the amount of $2,050 set forth in the City Engineer's Report for payment in lieu of the dedication of land in this instance was somewhat high for six units. Mr. Cunningham stated a specific formula was set forth in the ordinance. He explained the powers of the City Council under the ordinance, and pointed out the Council could make exceptions, but it should not say that a condominium was not a subdivision within the meaning of the ordinance. Mr. Donald B. Bitner addressed the Council. He contended that his proposed development was not a subdivi- sion, and suggested that a representative of a title company explain to the Council the meaning of a condominium before a decision was made on the matter. Councilman McCall said he was concerned that all developers, large and small, would be treated fairly and suggested that the matter under discussion be continued in order that the City Attorney might review it and submit to the Council a full recommendation. Mr. Cunningham explained somewhat the specifics developed in connection with this aspect of the ordinance. He said he would prefer that the request for further information be directed to the Planning Director, who had more expertise on the subject. Councilman Longaker moved the recommendation of the Planning Board be adopted, that the Tentative Map for the subdivision known as Tract 3365 be approved, subject to the terms and conditions of the City Engineer's Report dated October 22, 1971. Councilman Fore seconded the motion, in order to place the matter on the floor. Speaking on the question, Councilman Levy suggested that in fairness to Mr. Bitner the matter be continued to the next regular meeting of the Council so that other facts might be brought out. He said he felt it was possible the Council would decide that the amount involved was somewhat excessive, and any action by the Council would be precedent - setting. President La Croix expressed disapproval of tampering with ordinances brought before the Council during the last two or three years which had teeth in them for proper control of development in the community. Upon inquiry by Councilman McCall, Mr. John J. Barni, who was in the audience, said he felt the ordinance had received adequate publication and the people in the real estate business and members of the Alameda Real Estate Board were aware of its restrictions. Councilman Fore said he felt Councilman Levy had a good point in suggesting that the matter be continued. The question was then put and the motion carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Councilmen Fore, Longaker and President La Croix, (3). Noes: Councilmen Levy and McCall, (2). Absent: None. 8.,/ From the Planning Board, signed by the Assistant Secretary, recommending approval of the Tentative Map for the subdivision known as Tract 3373, subject to the terms and conditions of the City Engineer's Report dated November 4, 1971, and specific exceptions as noted. This covered a 42 -unit condominium project on Ballena Boulevard and Cola Ballena for Lindsey, Gallagher & Willett, Developers. The specific exceptions requested by the developers and on which the Board had recommended approval were as follows: (1) Ingress and egress by means of an easement over Roadway "A "; (2) Lots of less than 5,000 square feet in area be approved; (3) That credit for private open space be allowed in lieu of dedication or payment of a fee for such open space. Mr. Hanna, on question, stated he could see no reason for not allowing the ingress and egress by means of an easement over Roadway "A ", and that he would approve of lots of less than 5,000 square feet in area. He said, pertaining to the third exception that credit for private open space could be allowed in lieu of dedication or payment of a fee for such open space, he had reservations as to the adequacy of the use of the land. He said he felt some serious consideration should be given to the exact facilities to be placed on the land and that they would be used. Mr. Donald Lindsey of Lindsey, Gallagher & Willett addressed the Council. He explained that the center area of the proposed subdivision would be in excess of 20,000 square feet and he understood this would comply with the requirements of the ordinance under which they would be allowed a credit for open space. He said this would contain a swimming pool, a number of trees and extensive landscaping. He said he understood the ordinance specifically stated the credit would be allowed for the private enjoyment of the owners of the Tract and was not to be intended for public use. He commented that improving this area would be quite expensive and it would be a nice feature of the development. Mr. Lindsey said his company would insure that, the land would be kept open as a recreation area in any way the City Attorney would advise. After some discussion on the subject, Mr. Lindsey requested that the matter be continued to the next meeting of the Council in order that he might present additional data on the proposal. Councilman Longaker moved the matter of the Tentative Map for said subdivision be continued to the next regular meeting of the Council on December 7, 1971, for submission of complete information thereon. Councilman Levy seconded the motion. Mr. Bitner objected and requested that his matter be continued for further consideration. It was pointed out that the Council had already taken action on the Tentative Map for his subdivision. Speaking on the question, Councilman McCall raised questions on the lot sizes to be approved. He said he would like to have this figured on the basis of the Subdivision Ordinance, using 5,000 square feet on interior lots and 6,000 square feet on corner lots, as these would be the areas on which the developer would be credited. It was requested that the City Attorney inform the Council on this point. The question was then put and the motion carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Councilmen Levy, Longaker and President La Croix, (3). Noes: Councilmen Fore and McCall, (2). Absent: None. Mr. Lindsey was requested to present for discussion by the Council at its next meeting all data on the proposed development. At the suggestion of Mr. Cunningham, he was also requested to have on hand the written agreement and the proposed homeowners' covenants which would be recorded in this connection. Mr. Bitner requested the opportunity to again address the Council and said he was of the opinion that the Subdivision Ordinance needed some revision. It was suggested that he meet with the Planning Board and Director with regard to this subject. 9. From the Planning Board, signed by the Assistant Secretary, recommending rezoning from the "R -1 ", One - Family Residence, to the "R- 1 -PD ", One- Family Residence, Planned Development District, a certain 7.23 -acre site located westerly of the Bay Farm Island Bridge and southerly of Otis Drive, contingent upon approval of the Planned Development plan. The Hearing on this petition was set for the next regular meeting of the Council on December 7, 1971. Mr. Donald Gregory, licensed Real Estate Broker representing Knuppe Development Co., the petitioners in the matter, said, in reply to a question by Councilman Longaker, that Mr. Knuppe was the developer of many condominiums in Castro Valley, Lafayette, et cetera. 10.E> From the Acting City Manager, recommending the contract be awarded to Grand Chrysler Plymouth, Inc., low bidder, for furnishing ten Sedans for the Police Department at the price of $28,534.34. Councilman Levy moved the recommendation be adopted, that the contract be awarded to the designated company for furnishing ten Sedans for the Police Department at the price quoted. Councilman McCall seconded the motion which carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 11. '' From the Planning Board, signed by the Secretary, recommending approval of Parcel Map No. 791, subject to terms and conditions of the City Engineer's Report dated October 22, 1971, and specific excep- tion to allow two lots of 43 -foot frontage each. This covered division of property at 1337 Sherman Street by Mr. John J. Barni. Following his request, Mr. John Barni, Jr., addressed the Council on the subject of the undergrounding of utilities on this project. He said the plan was to split the lot of 86 feet frontage and approxi- mately 12,000 square feet of area, creating two lots of 43 feet in width, one lot to have approximately 7,000 square feet and the other just over 5,000 square feet. Mr. Barni said the developer requested exception to the requirement for underground utilities for the reason that the property had utility poles at either corner, there were numerous utility lines in the neighborhood and in some locations there were telephone lines extending over the property to service other homes in the vicinity, which would not be underground unless the company chose to remove them. Mr. Barni said the Planning Director had informed the Board that underground utilities would cost no more than 1% of the lot value. The developer felt this was extremely conservative and the cost would be something more like 5% of the lot value. He said the developer found it extremely difficult to develop the property into single - family lots and put in underground utilities; he felt that overhead utilities could be installed without any more distraction than the present homes in the area and that nothing would be accomplished by requiring underground utilities in view of the facilities already existing in the area. He said it was not the intention at the present time to custom build on the parcels but to sell the lots for single - family homes. The City Attorney reported the developer had signed the contract for public improvements in connection with the project; however, the faithful performance bond had not yet been submitted. He said he under- stood, in the event the Council approved the parcel division, Mr. Barni would be in a position to submit the bond at this meeting. ', He emphasized that the Parcel Map should not be approved in the absence of the bond. 3°7 Mr. John J. Barni, 1364 East Shore Drive, stated the bond in question had been ordered and it was expected to be delivered to his office the following day. On a question by Councilman Longaker, it was stated that no other properties in the vicinity of the lot in question had underground utilities. Councilman Fore moved the undergrounding of utilities not be required in this connection and the Parcel Map be approved, subject to the posting of the required bond. Councilman Levy seconded the motion which carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. The matter was referred to "Resolutions ". 12. From the Acting City Manager, requesting authorization be given to purchase in the open market nine Mobile Radios for the Fire Department, under provisions of Section 3 -15 of the City Charter. It was stated the item was included in the fiscal year budget. Councilman McCall moved the request be granted to purchase in the open market nine Mobile Radios for the specified Department. Councilman Fore seconded the motion which carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. NEW BUSINESS: 13. Councilman McCall remarked that the members of the Council had received information on the impending retirement of Mr. Alan S. Hart, District Engineer in District 4 of the State Division of Highways. He suggested that a resolution be prepared for action by the City Council at its next meeting, expressing appreciation for the excellent work performed by Mr. Hart during his many years with the Division. The Clerk was requested to prepare the resolution. 14. VI President La Croix spoke of the occasion the previous Friday morning when several Alameda Police Officers had been on duty at the sailing of the CORAL SEA from the Naval Air Station and persons objecting to the return of the ship to Vietnam had been present. He said there had been a passive demonstration with no incidents and he had been extremely proud of the outstanding way in which the Officers had conducted themselved. He requested that Mr. Goss, Assistant City Manager, convey his message to the Police Chief and to the members of the Department. Mr. Goss added his words of commendation, stating the coverage of the demonstration had been very well planned, the Officers had performed in an excellent manner, the situation was well under control and the demonstrators had had an opportunity to make their thoughts known in a peaceful way. RESOLUTIONS: 15. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Longaker, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7857 Authorizing One Year Extension of Golf Course Concessionaire Agreement." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Fore and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. Councilman McCall said he had noticed recently that the ceiling of the restaurant, the tile and lighting were in need of improvement. Mr. Goss was requested to investigate this matter through the Recreation Department. 16. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Fore, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7858 Adopting Specifications, Special Provisions and Plans for Sanitary Sewer Installations in Central Avenue from Fourth Street to Webster Street, Calling for Bids and Directing City Clerk to Advertise Same." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Levy and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 17. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Longaker, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7859 Adopting Specifications for Furnishing to the City of Alameda One (1) New Latest Model Street Sweeper for the Street Department, Calling for Bids and Directing City Clerk to Advertise Same." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Levy and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 18. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman McCall, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7860 Authorizing City Manager to Sell Obsolete Fire Department Equipment." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Longaker and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. On question, Mr. Goss explained that the items would be bid for by cities who had existing Gamewell Fire Systems and found it to their advantage to buy surplus rather than new equipment. He said it was anti- cipated that all of the equipment could be sold. 19. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Levy, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7861 Amending Salary Resolution No. 7806 by Creating One Additional Position of Assistant Civil Engineer and Deleting One Position of Junior Civil Engineer." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Fore and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 20. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Longaker, who emphasized the previous action by the Council eliminating the requirement for underground utilities in connection with this property division, and moved the resolution be adopted: "Resolution No. 7862 Authorizing Execution of Agreement for Construction and Completion of Improvements in Connection with Parcel Map No. 791 and Approving Faithful Performance Bond as to Sufficiency (Division of Property at 1337 Sherman Street, Alameda, California, - John J. Barni)." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Fore and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 21. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman McCall, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7863 Approving Parcel Map No. 791 for Division of Property at 1337 Sherman Street, Alameda, California, and Permitting Recording Thereof (John J. Barni). The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Levy and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. The President declared the foregoing resolutions adopted. INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES: 22. Councilman McCall moved the following ordinance be introduced, after which it would be laid over under provision of law and the Charter: "Ordinance' No. New Series Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Section 2 -312 Thereof, Relating to Membership of Recreation Commission." The motion was seconded by Councilman Levy and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. ORDINANCES FOR PASSAGE: 23. "Ordinance No. 1654, New Series Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Sections 2 -541 and 2 -547 Thereof, and Adding Sections 2 -549 and 2 -549.1 Thereto, Relating to Vacation and Sick Leave Entitlement of Certain Classes of Employees." Councilman McCall moved the ordinance be passed as submitted. The motion was seconded by Councilman Longaker and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. BILLS: 24. An itemized List of Claims against the City of Alameda and the Departments thereof, in the total amount of $61,347.43, was presented to the Council at this 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 Novem- ber 16, 1971, and presented to the City Council at this meeting, be allowed and paid. The motion was seconded by Councilman McCall and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, GENERAL: 25. Councilman Longaker inquired of Mr. Hanna if the City was properly prepared for the wet weather insofar as the area at the north end of Nason Street was concerned. Mr. Hanna reported a pump had been added and some improvements had been made in the electrical equipment, and he had every expectation of having as little trouble as possible. 26. Mr. Barni, Jr., 1277 Bay Street, inquired if the City had adequate sewers to accommodate anticipated future development. Mr. Hanna said this matter was always taken into account in consideration of large improvements. He said he felt, generally, that the City did not have a problem, that the Del Monte area would be sewered separately directly into the five -foot East Bay Municipal Utility District interceptor located in Alameda. The other areas of the City had been almost completely improved and there did not seem to be a significant problem in terms of capacity. He said Bay Farm Island was a different matter as a separate piece of land with a good existing pump and pipe facilities but, at the same time, it would not handle all of the population forecast for that area so an additional system would be required, of which the City and the developer were well aware. 27. ` Mr. Frank Gottstein, 731 Haight Avenue, commented on a letter in a recent edition of the Alameda Times -Star with regard to the amount of crime in the City. He said he was surprised the matter had not come up and received comment by the Councilmen. He recommended if more policemen were needed that they be added to the force. Mr. Goss, on request, said the annual report of the Police Department indicated that Alameda had one of the lowest crime rates in terms of major crimes in the County, that the new Police Chief had been attempt- ing during the last year to provide a reorganization within the Department to make sure that the existing personnel was used in the most effective way possible, such as the institution of the use of civilian personnel as Police Aides to do some of the station -type and clerical work to provide the opportunity for sworn officers to spend more time in the field itself. He said he felt improvements were being made in the Department and the City was proud of the crime rate as compared to other cities, although the attempt was always to improve upon the record. 28. ' Mr. Gottstein said that many years ago gutters were made of large rocks cemented together, whereas nowadays gutters were covered with bitumin. He said Lincoln and Santa Clara Avenues had cement gutters where the rain water pipes could drain, whereas in the 700 -block of Haight Avenue there were probably a dozen drains into the gutter which caused pollution as the pipes were flat and did not have sufficient elevation to drain properly. 29. '` Mr. Gottstein complained that on the excavation in connection with the condominium development at the south end of Ninth Street heavy equipment had broken the sidewalk adjacent to his property and it had not been repaired. FILING: 30. Financial Report - City of Alameda, as of September 30, 1971 - Verified by George A. Hackleman. 31. Financial and Operating Report - Bureau of Electricity, as of September 30, 1971 - Verified by George A. Hackleman. 32. Specifications No. PW 11 -71 -18 - Sanitary Sewer Installations in Central Avenue from Fourth Street to Webster Street. 33. Specifications No. MSP 11 -71 -9 - One New Latest Model Street Sweeper for Street Department. 34. Agreement - Between John J. Barni and City - re Parcel Map No. 791. ADJOURNMENT: 35. There being no further business to come before the meeting, the Council adjourned, to assemble in regular session on Tuesday, December 7, 1971, at 7:30 o'clock p.m. Respectfully submitted, f City Clerk i