1972-01-18 Regular CC Minutes3 5
REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA
HELD TUESDAY JANUARY 18, 1972
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 Leonard Deakins, Pastor of the Church of the Nazarene.
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 January 4, 1972, were approved as transcribed.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
2. From Mrs. Lee -Ann Lane, 1425 Union Street, on the subject of additional off - street parking facilities,
suggesting that the people should not be asked to finance additional facilities and that the answer was
not more parking space but another method of moving people to reduce traffic congestion.
President La Croix stated this matter would be considered under "Unfinished Business" and Mrs. Lane would
be given the opportunity to speak at that time, if she so desired.
3. V From Mr. Robert E. Hannon, requesting an extension of time of two years for completion of improve-
ments in connection with Parcel Map No. 318, for division of property on the east side of Webster Street
at the Estuary.
President La Croix noted that this was the second request for a time extension on this project. Upon
inquiry, City Engineer Hanna said he had no objection to granting the current request, that the improve-
ments involved sidewalk, a driveway and drainage.
Councilman McCall moved the time extension of two years be granted, as requested, for completion of the
public improvements in connection with the designated Parcel Map. Councilman Longaker seconded the motion
which carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
4.From Mr. Vern W. Dennen, 1926 Everett Street, requesting that the alignment of Blanding Avenue at
the exit from the Fruitvale Bridge be corrected.
President La Croix commented that it had been determined in previous discussion, after report by the City
Engineer in response to a previous request by Mr. Dennen, that no action should be taken with regard to
the matter at this time.
On request, Mr. Hanna explained that Mr. Dennen resided near the problem area and was apparently offended
by the fact that vehicles drove on the wrong side of the street. He said he disliked the practice also
but the problem was largely that this was an industrial area, railroad trains left their cars on the street,
sometimes for extended periods, and the trucks of the Cal Rock and Loop Lumber Companies constantly crossed
the street transversely in such a way as to keep the street dirty. He said the natural alignment coming
off of Tilden Way was to come down the south side or wrong way on Blanding Avenue and, with the presence
of railroad cars, it was almost the only thing to be done. The traffic was light, there were no accidents
and there seemed to be no significant problem.
Mr. Hanna said he had tried to point out to Mr. Dennen that the effort required for a correction would be
tremendous and the benefits were not worth the effort at this time. He said it was indicated that the
whole area might change in the future and, if this should prove true, the situation would change and it
would almost naturally correct itself.
In reply to a question by Councilman Fore, Mr. Hanna said it might be advisable to consider this situation
upon completion of the Fruitvale Bridge if traffic should increase substantially as a result. He was
requested to keep the Council informed of any changes in the condition.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, AGENDA:
5. Mr. Frank Ratto, 1053 Island Drive, requested the opportunity to speak on Item No. 2 under "Reports
and Recommendations ", concerning the recommendations of the Charter Amendment Advisory Committee.
6. Mr. John Mitcheom, 1319 High Street, asked that he be permitted to comment on Item No. 7 under
"Reports and Recommendations ", concerning the Recreation Commission's communication with regard to land
dedication and in lieu fees, if he should so desire.
7. Mr. Frank Gottstein, 731 Haight Avenue, requested the opportunity to address the Council on the
subject of Item No. 2 under "Resolutions ".
HEARINGS:
8. In the Matter of the Proposed Adoption of the Uniform Building Code, 1970 Edition, with certain
amendments, additions and deletions.
The Clerk stated there was on hand the Affidavit of Publication of the Notices that this would be the time
and place for the Hearing on this matter.
346
There had been received from Mrs. Lee -Ann Lane a communication submitting certain questions with regard
to the proposed adoption of the 1970 Edition of the Building Code.
City Attorney Cunningham stated the matter came before the City Council by virtue of its Resolution
No. 7873, adopted at the regular meeting held January 4, 1972. It was proposed by the Building Depart-
ment to update the 1964 standards, currently in use, by adoption of the 1970 Edition of Volume I of
the copyrighted Uniform Building Code, along with the appendix chapters noted in the Resolution and
Volume IV concerning "Dangerous Buildings ".
Mr. Cunningham said the issue before the Council was whether the new standards were in the public
interest and therefore should be adopted by final passage of the Ordinance, putting them into effect as
the amended Building Code of the City of Alameda.
Mr. Baird Heffron, Chief Building Inspector, was present to provide any information the Councilmen might
desire.
Councilman McCall called attention to a communication from Mr. Walter Dahl, Chief of the Department of
Housing and Community Development, on the subject of factory -built housing, stating the Department
would issue insignia for this type of housing meeting the standards established by the Commission of
Housing and Community Development and indicating the housing was deemed to comply with all local ordi-
nances which would otherwise govern the manufacture of such units. He inquired as to the City's position
in this respect.
Mr. Heffron said he was not familiar with the details of what the State had used as criteria but it was
his understanding that the City would have to abide by what the State approved as, in effect, meeting
the City Code. He said the City would be responsible for the siting of the unit, connecting the
utilities and drainage, et cetera, but the unit itself would not have to meet the City Code.
Upon inquiry, Mr. Cunningham said the State had entered the field of approval of factory -built houses.
He quoted from the Health and Safety Code, which had established the Commission and its right to inspect
and approve factory -built housing, and the restrictions on that power. In addition to the enforcement
and the inspection of the installation of factory -built housing, he said, installation must be in
accordance with all of the local zoning and other rules, setbacks, clearances, et cetera, so while it
did not take out of the City's hands some of the inspection and control of the construction of this type
of housing, he believed a substantial part of the control was still with the City and, if it could be
assumed that the State would follow the statutory direction, the factory housing must be built, as near
as practicable, in accordance with the Uniform Housing, Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes, two of
which were being considered in this Hearing.
To another inquiry by Councilman McCall, Mr. Cunningham stated factory -built housing was different from
house trailers and mobile homes and was defined in the Code as meaning a residential building, dwelling
unit or an individual dwelling room or combinations of rooms which are either wholly manufactured or in
substantial part manufactured at an off -site location to be wholly or partially assembled on the site
in accordance with the regulations. Hence, if the dwelling unit was assembled in accordance with the
standards set forth in the law and the rules and regulations of the Department of Housing and Community
Development it would be substantially off -site constructed housing of the kind which adhered to those
standards and placed on a suitably zoned residential lot. He said, in his view, this would not be a
house trailer or mobile home type trailer.
Councilman Levy raised questions with regard to State and City inspection of this type of housing. Mr.
Cunningham said if the State applied the insignia on factory -built housing it would be deemed to comply
with local ordinances, with respect to manufacture, and the State Commission might request local
agencies, by contract, to take over the inspection.
Questions were also raised with regard to the use of plastic pipe in construction. Mr. Cunningham
stated this item would be included in the Uniform Plumbing Code, updating of which was in the process
also.
President La Croix read from a memorandum by Mr. Heffron dated January 14, 1972, in reply to the
questions submitted by Mrs. Lane with regard to earthquakes and sound proofing controls. Mr. Heffron
suggested the City might support the International Conference of Building Officials in upgrading the
earthquake standards by adopting pertinent sections of forthcoming editions of the Uniform Building
Code, which he said would contain significant changes on this subject. He said he was wholly in favor
of adopting the 1970 Edition at this time.
The Hearing was declared closed. There being no objections, the order of business proceeded to "Ordi-
nances for Passage ".
ORDINANCES FOR PASSAGE:
9. v "Ordinance No. 1659,
New Series
An Ordinance Adopting by Reference the Uniform Building Code, Volume I,
1970 Edition, Copyright 1970 by International Conference of Building Officials,
with Amendments, Additions and Deletions Thereof, as the Primary Code; and
Volume I Appendix, Chapter 49, Volume I Appendix, Chapter 57, and Volume IV,
'Dangerous Buildings', of Said Uniform Building Code, Each Referred to in Said
Primary Code, as the Secondary Code; Regulating the Erection, Construction,
Enlargement, Alteration, Repair, Moving, Removal, Conversion, Demolition,
Occupancy, Equipment, Use, Height, Areas, and Maintenance of Buildings or
Structures in the City of Alameda; Providing for the Issuance of Permits and
Collection of Fees Therefor; Declaring and Establishing a Fire District;
Providing Penalties for Violation Thereof, and Repealing Ordinance No. 1510,
New Series, and All Other Ordinances and Portions of Ordinances in Conflict
Herewith."
347
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.
President La Croix expressed appreciation to the Department Heads involved in the preparation of the
ordinance.
The meeting returned to the regular order of business.
REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
10. From Mrs. B. J. Alexander, submitting her resignation as a member of the Social Service Board.
Councilman McCall moved the resignation be accepted with regret. The motion was seconded by Councilman
Levy which on roll call carried unanimously.
11.1/ From the Charter Amendment Advisory Committee, signed by Mr. William S. Godfrey, Chairman, sub-
mitting its recommendations.
Also received in this connection were communications from Mrs. Lee -Ann Lane, (1) presenting a minority
report on the question of "districting" in the City and (2) submitting her thinking on the proposed change
providing for a Director of Finance.
President La Croix suggested the reports be accepted with thanks and the items submitted be discussed at
the next regular meeting of the Council on Tuesday, February 1.
Mr. Frank Ratto, who had requested the opportunity to speak, questioned the fact that the Committee,
composed largely of members who had served in the capacity previously, was proposing changes which had
been submitted to the electorate on previous occasions and had been defeated. He wondered at the purpose
of having the group study these matters again.
President La Croix stated the Council was in hopes if the items recommended by,the Committee were placed
on the ballot they would be adopted by the voters and the government of the City of Alameda would thereby
be improved.
Mr. Ratto was requested to present his arguments at the time the recommendations would be considered by
the Council at its next meeting.
Councilman Longaker moved the reports be accepted and action thereon be deferred until the next regular
meeting on February 1. Councilman Levy seconded the motion.
Councilman McCall suggested that in accepting the reports appreciation be expressed to the Committee for
the long hours of study and deliberation expended on the subject of revising the Charter. He said the
members were well known, respected people in the community who the Council had felt would do a good job
and it was realized that a great deal of time and thought had been put into the study. He pointed out
that each member of the Council had items which he wished to discuss further with the City Manager and
the City Attorney and with other members of the Council.
Councilman Longaker said it was his intention in making the motion that the thanks of the Council would
be expressed to the members of the Committee. He apologized for the oversight and said he would accept
an amendment to the motion to this effect. The amendment was satisfactory to Councilman Levy also, the
question was put and the motion, as amended, carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five.
Noes: None. Absent: None.
President La Croix requested that Mr. Godfrey be present at the meeting on February 1. He thanked Mrs.
Lane for her efforts as a member of the Committee and expressed the hope that she also could be present
for the discussion.
12. From Acting City Manager, reporting all work satisfactorily completed on the project of Installing
Tennis Court Lighting at Krusi Park, recommending it be accepted and the Notice of Completion be ordered
filed.
Councilman Levy moved the recommendation be approved, that the work on said project be accepted as satis-
factorily completed and the Notice of Completion be filed. Councilman Longaker seconded the motion which
carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
13.E From the City Manager, recommending public improvements in connection with the condominium subdivi-
sion known as Tract No. 3189 covering a portion of the Ballena Bay development be accepted and the bond
be released.
Councilman McCall moved the recommendation be adopted, that the improvements in connection with the
designated subdivision be accepted and the bond be released. Councilman Longaker seconded the motion
which carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
14. v'i rom the City Manager, recommending public improvements in connection with Parcel Map No. 654 be
accepted and the performance bond be released. This Map covered division of property at the southeast
corner of Fountain Street and Otis Drive.
Councilman Fore moved the recommendation be followed, that the public improvements in connection with said
Parcel Map be accepted and the performance bond be released. Councilman McCall seconded the motion which
carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
//
15.x`- From the Planning Board, signed by the Secretary, recommending approval of the Tentative Map for
the subdivision known as Tract No. 3378, subject to terms and conditions of the City Engineer's Report
348
dated January 6, 1972, and certain additional condition as noted. This covered the condominium sub-
division of Doric Development Company at Shore Line Drive and Willow Street.
Councilman McCall moved the recommendation be accepted and the Tentative Map for said subdivision be
approved, subject to the terms and conditions of the City Engineer's Report dated January 6, 1972,
and the exterior lighting on the two private streets at the northerly and easterly boundaries of the
development be left open for further approval following detail submission by the developer. Council-
man Levy seconded the motion.
On the question, President La Croix commented that this subdivision was another in which the question
of land dedication was involved and the Recreation Commission had, in a communication on the agenda,
raised certain questions in this regard. He pointed out that there would be an increase of population
in the area of the development and a spill -over would undoubtedly result in increased use of the park
and recreation facilities.
Upon request, Mr. Donald Johnson, Planning Director, explained the Planning Board had deferred making
a recommendation for land dedication in connection with this Tentative Map; the substitution of
private open space for public dedication was permitted in the Ordinance and the Board could permit the
dedication or substitution under certain formula with which the Council was familiar. He said the
question had been raised as to whether or not this had been the intent of the Ordinance and, further,
whether this was a satisfactory solution toward providing recreational space of one type or another,
which question was open, depending upon interpretation.
Mr. Johnson stated the developer involved in the subdivision under discussion satisfied the substitution
requirement almost on a one- per -one basis, 31,000 square feet being required and 31,682 square feet
being provided. The calculation was determined by the Planning Department and it did not quantify all
of the open space. This presented certain difficulties as to what open space was suitable for recreation
area, particularly when trying to quantify a substitution. He said he felt the intent of the Ordinance
had been to satisfy open space needs one way or another and suggested the Ordinance appeared to be
imperfect; for instance, it did not make any particular allowance for a subdivision in which there
would be residential units as yet unknown.
On inquiry, Mr. Hanna explained the procedure in examining Tentative Maps and stated input was custom-
arily received on these matters from the Recreation Commission and the Recreation Department.
Councilman McCall remarked that at the time the South Shore development was in progress, dedication of
land for park and school sites had been required, and the City owned several parcels in that area.
He expressed the opinion that developers purchasing land from the original subdivider and developer
of that area had paid their penalties already.
On request, Mr. Cunningham stated the inequities mentioned by Councilman McCall were certainly present;
on the other hand, long before any city had the power by virtue of the State law to exact money or
•land for open space the Ordinance was not in effect and there were special arrangements by contract by
which the area obtained substantial open space, some of which was in use and some not in use.
It was agreed that this was a subject for concern and consideration. There were numerous questions
which had been raised; for instance, with regard to apartment houses versus condominiums and the
inequities existing in that respect.
The question was then put and the motion carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes:
None. Absent: None.
16. From the Recreation Commission, signed by the Secretary, with regard to Ordinance No. 1627, New
Series, covering land dedication and in lieu fees, questioning whether the intent of the Ordinance was
being satisfied and whether the park and recreational needs in the City were being recognized. The
Commission recommended that study be given to amendment of the Ordinance or to other methods of develop-
ing funds for park and recreational facilities to serve the additional population generated by new
construction in the community.
President La Croix suggested that the report be accepted and, in view of the earlier discussion,
further information be requested from the concerned City Departments through the City Manager's office.
Mr. Weller said the staff had had under consideration for some time a review of a number of objections
and reservations in connection with Ordinance No. 1627, New Series. He pointed out that the judgment
of the Planning Board and the Recreation Commission would vary with reference, for instance, to the
subdivision previously discussed, according to the interest of each and he did not feel that the
position of the Commission, as presented in its letter, was necessarily indicative of the fact that the
Ordinance was faulty. He suggested the area in which the Ordinance might be amended would be to bring
it to as objective a point as possible so that the direction of the various public agencies would not
have so much impact on the decision.
There was some additional discussion on the matter. Mr. Weller expressed the opinion that in an over-
whelming number of cases the Ordinance would provide for the payment of money rather than dedication
of land as the majority of the developments would be too small and it would make no sense to require
a tenth of an acre or something similar. The money would then be accumulated in a special fund and
eventually a five -or ten -acre parcel could be considered. He said he would assume that a developer
would provide as much open space as necessary to make his product salable and, irrespective of what
he would do on the basis of his own judgment, he still would pay so much per unit.
Councilman McCall requested that an inventory be made of all properties in the City for parks and
recreation on a per capita basis.
Mr. Weller said he would be glad to comply although the per capita relationship would not be significant.
He expressed agreement with Councilman McCall's contention that by any standards there was a great deal
349
more public recreational space available in the South Shore area than in any other part of the community.
It was agreed that an inventory of acres would provide sufficient information.
Mr. Cunningham stated he had received many comments from people about the Ordinance, some of whom were
realtors, and he had received suggestions from the Recreation Commission and the Recreation Director,
who looked for an expansion; however, others expressed the opposite opinion, that the Ordinance was
asking too much in certain cases, and the position of people whose business it was to deal in property
should be taken into consideration in further study of the Ordinance.
Mr. John Mitcheom, who had requested the opportunity to speak, said he was pleased to hear the comments
of the Council with regard to this problem. He expressed the thinking that more and more restrictions
were placed on the small developer and emphasized that economics controlled the majority of developments
and the more restrictions placed on the developer the more difficult it would be to keep the price at a
reasonable figure. He requested that the position of the small developer be given consideration in the
study of the Ordinance.
Mr. Weller said, if it was to be assumed that the City's regulations would be reasonable in the sense of
public interest and in the process of development housing would be provided which would not at the same
time provide open space, park lands, school properties, et cetera, it would seem the City had an obligation
to stop that kind of development. He said he felt the discussion did not concern economics but rather
whether it was possible to develop in an atmosphere which would permit the people who would subsequently
live on that development to live properly; if that was not possible, the development should go somewhere
else.
Mr. Mitcheom raised the question of whether this rule would be applied to a five, six or ten unit apart-
ment building. It was stated the Ordinance as presently written did not so provide; whether this was
proper was a question which was under consideration.
Mr. Ron Cowan, 2981 Northwood Drive, President of Doric Development Company, said he understood the Tenta-
tive Map for his Company's subdivision known as Tract No. 3378 had been approved and he inquired as to
its status concerning land dedication or in lieu fees.
President La Croix stated this question would be considered in connection with the Final Map for the sub-
division. Mr. Cowan said the Company intended to commence construction on its project in the next few
weeks and to put the units on the market, and it was not possible to price these dwellings unless the
costs were known. He respectfully requested that a decision be made on the question of dedication or fees
long before the time of filing their Final Map.
There was some discussion with regard to the time element involved in adopting an amendment to the present
Ordinance. Mr. Weller said he felt it would be necessary for the Council to make its decision on the
basis of the present Ordinance as an absolute minimum of six weeks' time would be entailed in passage of
an amendment. He suggested the staff could offer the Council additional advice on the question and it
might be possible on that basis for the Council to make its determination at its meeting of February 1 but,
as said, it would have to be on the basis of the present Ordinance.
President La Croix, with the approval of the other members of the Council, requested that the Council be
furnished by the involved City Departments with additional information pertinent to the specific develop-
ment as needed, so that it might take action on the question at its next meeting in deference to the
developer.
Mr. Cowan requested that he be permitted to show a rendering of the proposal which he felt would be of
value to the Council in its deliberations on this matter. He then indicated on the drawing the legal
required setbacks under the Building Code, the open areas for use of residents of the development, stating
there were 32,272 square feet in the perimeter of the development over and above the approximate 30,000
square feet of setback area and an additional 32,000 square feet within the walkways, pointing out the
walkways and other areas, which were open and green, for common usage. He stated the area would contain
various forms of recreation and expressed the opinion that the residents of the development would, because
of what was provided within the area, have less need of City provided recreation. He contended that with
95,000 square feet of open area dedicated to public use and recreation, not counting the additional square
footage of interior recreational facilities, the Company met the requirements of the Ordinance. He
qualified the use of the word "public" as referring to "public" use by the people within the particular
community under discussion, not the public at large, pointing out the areas did not include private patios
of the individual units.
President La Croix pointed out there were City Departments which had special interests and it would have
to be determined whether these special interests were proper. He said he was looking for a recommendation
from the Planning and the Recreation staff that Mr. Cowan's statements were valid and it would be permis-
sible to accept the indicated square footage in lieu of moneys.
Mr. Cowan expressed the opinion that boiling the question down to dollars and cents would create a problem
and no consideration would be given for the private recreational facilities which the developer would
provide. It was pointed out that this was a matter for consideration with the entire City in mind and
not only the South Shore area.
Mr. Weller commented that developments similar to that under discussion, with provision of open space and
recreational atmosphere for the purchasers of their own units, could be extended indefinitely and the City
would wind up with each developer having provided what he considered adequate recreational facilities for
his own particular group of tenants and there would be nothing left over. He said he felt that somewhere
along the line there would have to be a general public type of recreational facility and this was one of
the dilemmas needing to be resolved in consideration of the Ordinance under discussion.
Mr. Cowan expressed the opinion that the State Land Dedication Act for subdivisions was never meant to
apply to vertical subdivisions but to land subdivisions.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
17. /Brought up at this time was the matter of the request by the Alameda Chamber of Commerce that
necessary steps be taken to create additional off - street parking.
On invitation to speak, Mr. Johnson, Planning Director, reviewed the actions of the Ad Hoc Parking
Committee appointed in 1964 by the then Mayor, William S. Godfrey, composed of Park Street merchants,
members of the City staff, and Councilmen McCall and Rose, with City Attorney Cunningham and himself
as staff advisers.
Mr. Johnson said it had been concluded that because of the limits imposed upon additional off - street
parking by the Off- Street Parking Bonds there was no way to publicly finance additional off- street
parking in the City. He said many alternates had been explored but at no time had the Committee
anticipated that the City would be providing off - street parking out of General Fund money nor that
proper costs related to parking should come out of anything other than parking meter revenue. He said
it had been felt at one time that perhaps parking meters could be abolished and this would lend some
assistance in ameliorating the parking situation in the business areas. Upon investigation it had
been found this was impossible, for several reasons. It had also been found that there was no parti-
cular benefit to the City in removing meters as they did accomplish the ancillary purpose of providing
parking turnover and parking control, which was desirable. He said the Committee had attempted for
almost eight years to secure some kind of parking. Alternates had not been explored as they were not
available.
The Committee had determined that the present bonds must run to maturity and now had elected to pursue
the matter only because the bonds would mature within a year or so. Hopefully, in view of this fact
and, hopefully, the possibility that some form of commitment could be made by the City to use parking
meter revenue, however small, over a period of time it was hoped the City could go forward with some
type of off- street parking program even though it might be necessary to accumulate revenues over a
period of years.
Mr. John F. Hanson, Jr., Attorney with the firm of Whitney, Hanson & Stonehouse, said he did not wish
to go into the matter in great detail as it had been well covered at the last meeting of the Council.
He said, however, there were present this evening several members of the Committee and also Presidents
of the various Merchants' Associations. He respectfully requested that a consultant be employed,
that the outstanding bonds be retired as soon as possible and that the moneys collected in the interim
be held in a parking meter fund.
To a question by Councilman McCall as to the disbursement of these funds and how they would be divided
between the business areas, Mr. Hanson stated the merchants were simply asking that the fund be held
and that a consultant be employed to advise how to solve the problem.
Councilman McCall asked if the consultant would be questioned on the manner in which he would have the
program established to be able to put in the meters, whether it would be done on the basis of parti-
cipation by the merchants or by benefit to the areas affected, such as an assessment district, and
whether the City was expected to provide off- street parking for the merchants, as in the absence of
merchants' participation he felt there was no point in hiring a consultant. Mr. Hanson said he felt
the merchants had shown their willingness to participate and he repeated all that was desired now
was a consultant to tell them what was needed.
Mr. Weller stated there was not sufficient money in the parking meter fund at the present time to
retire the bonds although he felt there would be sufficient at the end of the fiscal year.
Mr. John W. Kane, 3214 Phoenix Lane, stated the parking meters along Park Street and in the off - street
lots all needed painting, the heads on several were out of order and there were many deficiencies with
relation to their appearance, maintenance and upkeep and the problem involved not only the parking lots
but all elements of parking in the City. He said that after a feasibility study had been made, if it
should be determined that a certain assessment should be made to take care of the needs he, for one,
would be willing to participate. He said he felt the experience factor between Park Street and South
Shore business districts should be brought out; the assessment against each merchant in the South Shore
Center participating in the maintenance was an excessive sum. He said he felt that other factors
should be included in the study such as widening Park Street, with its horizontal parking, by two feet
on each side, assessment for the parking meters and ''° beautification of the area. He requested that the
Council take action to employ a consultant to make the necessary study and the costs be paid by the
City
Mr. Weller said he felt that such a study should be made and that the particular area which should be
considered initially was a professional judgment as to how much additional off - street parking would
be desirable to meet the problem, on Park Street or Webster Street or South Shore, or wherever the
problem might exist. He said the magnitude of the problem in terms of the number of spaces to be
involved would obviously have a great bearing on the alternative methods of financing the project.
To a question by President La Croix as to who would make the decision on the consultant to be hired,
Mr. Johnson stated if some form of bond financing should prove necessary, there was only one recognized
consultant in the State, Dr. D. Jackson Faustman of Sacramento, whose recommendation on any parking
project was tantamount to approval by bond counsel. Mr. Johnson said Dr. Faustman was the only man in
the world to hold a Doctor's degree in parking engineering. He said he had contacted Dr. Faustman,
who had provided a preliminary prospectus of his duties and his fees and, even though he was in this
privileged position, his fees were not high. He said he would recommend without equivocation that
Dr. Faustman be employed.
Councilman Longaker moved a Consultant Traffic Engineer be employed at a sum not to exceed $7,500 for
the purpose of attempting to determine the parking needs, et cetera, of the entire City, not only the
Park Street area but Webster Street and other areas the Engineer might feel were germane to the
problem. Councilman Levy suggested the motion be amended to provide that the moneys for the purpose be
obtained from the parking meter funds. The amendment was satisfactory to Councilman Longaker and
Councilman Levy seconded the motion as amended.
Councilman McCall said he was in favor of the proposal but he wished to know the direction the consultant
was to take, whether he was correct in understanding that a thorough study was to be made of the parking
needs, with no consideration of bonding, financing, et cetera.
Mr. Johnson said it could be understood that the study would be a preliminary one. The Committee was
well aware of this and it might be entirely possible that Dr. Faustman's recommendation would be that the
City needed no additional parking facilities and the Committee had entertained this possibility. If it
should prove that a district should be formed this would be a matter of a subsequent consultant contract,
the cost to be borne by the district.
The question was then put and the motion as amended carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five.
Noes: None. Absent: None.
NEW BUSINESS:
18. President La Croix at this time recognized Mr. Raymond D. Martin, Auditor and Assessor, who had
been away from his desk due to having had surgery. He welcomed Mr. Martin and his wife, Dell.
RESOLUTIONS:
19.E }``i The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Levy, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 7875
Authorizing Execution of Agreement with the Pacific Telephone and Telegraph
Company for Furnishing and Maintenance to City of Private Line Time -
Recording Equipment."
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Longaker.
Councilman McCall stated he would abstain from voting on this matter.
On request, Mr. Weller explained that an eight -track recording device had been authorized for purchase by
the Police Department in conjunction with monitoring incoming and outgoing calls. In this connection,
there was a requirement for periodic timing tape to determine the exact time a call was received or trans-
mitted. This involved equipment which was owned by the Telephone Company on which they required a
contract for lease or rental. The cost was not excessive, he said.
The question was put and the motion carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None.
Abstaining: Councilman McCall, (1). Absent: None.
20.v/ following resolution was introduced by Councilman McCall, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 7876
Declaring Intention to Vacate Portions of a Sanitary Sewer Easement and a
Storm Sewer Easement, Fixing Date for Hearing Thereon, and Ordering Publica-
tion and Posting of Notice (In Tract 3270, Portola Avenue -Ninth Street)."
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Longaker.
Mr. Frank Gottstein, who had requested the privilege of speaking, inquired as to the purpose of this
resolution, and asked if permission was being asked after the sewer had been moved and the buildings
constructed.
Mr. Hanna explained that, in order to construct the buildings at their locations, the sewers had had to
be moved, and in order to do this new easements had been obtained. The old easements had not been released
until everything had been completed and the City was now prepared to do so.
Mr. Gottstein complained that the matter should have come up prior to the building. Mr. Hanna stated the
matter had been considered at the Tentative Map stage.
The question was put and the motion carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None.
Absent: None.
2l.V The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Longaker, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 7877
Resolution of the Council of the City of Alameda in Appreciation and
Commendation of C. Richard Bartalini for His Service to the City."
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.
The President declared the foregoing resolutions adopted.
352
ORDINANCES FOR PASSAGE:
22. "Ordinance No. 1660,
New Series
An Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Subsection (3)
of Section 14 -212 Thereof, Relating to Fire Zone No. 1."
Councilman Longaker moved the ordinance be passed as submitted. The motion was seconded by Council-
man McCall and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
BILLS:
23. An itemized List of Claims against the City of Alameda and the Departments thereof, in the total
amount of $62,798.07, 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
January 18, 1972, 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:
24. VI/Mr. Gottstein, in connection with the discussion of the parking lot problem, remarked that some
of the parking meters were in very poor condition and suggested that some of the money in the parking
meter fund be expended for a steel reinforcing rod to be inserted in the pipe, to then be filled with
concrete to straighten the bent and damaged equipment.
Mr. Gottstein also complained that he felt the factory -built houses were cheap and he was not in favor
of them.
Mr. Gottstein stated Councilmen Levy and Longaker had inspected the fence on the condominium development
at Portola Avenue and Ninth Street, about which he had complained at the last meeting, having been
appointed by President La Croix to do so. He said the trench was not as long as it appeared, it was
twenty feet long and the fence was six feet four inches high at that point. He said he had done consi-
derable filling at the location and if he had known what would be constructed it would have been neces-
sary to have the fence at least two feet lower. He reviewed the action of the Planning Board on the
matter, and requested that the twenty feet of fence which was six feet four inches high be removed.
Councilman Levy, on request, stated, after inspecting the property and hearing Mr. Gottstein's explana-
tion, he felt the latter might legally insist upon having the twenty -foot length of fence reduced by
four inches. He said he felt this would be to Mr. Gottstein's advantage as he could appreciate that
he had been deprived of some view. However, he said he felt if Mr. Gottstein was to level off his lot
the property would be enhanced.
Mr. Gottstein said he did not wish to fill the land to help the developer but would have liked the
fence to be three feet high. He complained further on the activities of the developers of the property
and said he would be satisfied if the law were observed and the fence would be six feet high.
President La Croix expressed the opinion that this matter had received a great deal of attention and
it had been found that the fence was legal and the manner in which it was allowed to be constructed was
proper.
FILING:
25. Agreement - Between Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company and City - for Furnishing and
Maintenance of Private Line Time - Recording Equipment.
26. President La Croix commented on an article in the newspaper that there was no need to attend
meetings of the Board of Education and the City Council as all of the actions were duly publicized in
the newspaper and full information could be obtained therein. He said he was happy at the number of
people who continually turn out for meetings of the Council and listen to its deliberations, challenge
them or agree with them. He said this was the people's government and he hoped they would fill the
Council Chamber from time to time. He thanked all for being present.
ADJOURNMENT:
27. There being no further business to come before the meeting, the Council adjourned, to assemble
in regular session on Tuesday, February 1, 1972, at 7:30 o'clock p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
City Clerk
e