Loading...
1969-04-15 Regular CC Minutes;3 REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA HELD '"UESDAY EVENING - - _ _ _ _ APRIL 15, 1969 The meeting convened at 8:00 o'clock p.m. with President McCall presiding. The Pledge of Alleriance was led by Councilman La Croix and was followed by an inspiring Invocation delivered by The Reverend Dr. Frances ". Thompson, Minister of the First Conrregational Church, ROLL CALL: • The roll was called and Councilmen Fore, La Croix, Jr., Levy and President McCall, (4) were noted present. Absent: Councilman Isaacs, (1). MINUTES: 1. The minutes of the regular meeting held April 1, and the adjourned regular meeting held April 8, 1969, were approved as transcribed. ORGANIZA'ION OF TIE COUNCIL: 2.,' At this time, Councilman-elect Longaker was invited to take his seat with the other members of the Council. The City Clerk, on request, administered the Oath of Office to the following Councilmen-elect: James W. Fore, Gustave Levy, Malcolm M. Longaker and William M. McCall. President McCall announced that, in accordance with provisions of Section 3-7(a) of the City Charter, nominations were open for the office of Mayor of the City of Alameda and President of the City Council. Councilman Levy, commending highly the gentleman he proposed for his ability and his long record of service and accomplishment for the City, submitted in nomination the name of Councilman Terry La Croix, Jr. There were no further nominations and President McCall asked that a unanimous vote be riven to Councilman La Croix. The roll was called, re- sulting in the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. Terry La Croix, Jr., was declared Mayor of the City of Alameda and President of the City Council. President La Croix assumed the Chair. He acknowledged with anpreciation the kind ex- pression of confidence which made it possible for him to serve as Mayor and to do a job which he felt most certainly must be done in the years ahead. He commended former Mayor McCall for his outstanding performance in presiding over the Council during the past two years and prior to that time for two terms. He pledged he would do his utmost, with his colleagues, to guide the City in the years to come. President La Croix then called for nominations for the office of Vice-President of the Council. Councilman Longaker placed in nomination the name of Councilman Gustave Levy for the office. Councilman McCall in turn submitted for nomination the name of Councilman James W. Fore. The question was put on Councilman Levy as the first nominated, resulting, in the follow- ing roll call vote. Ayes: Councilmen Levy, Longaker and President La Croix, (3). Noes: Councilman Fore and McCall (2). Absent,: None. Councilman Gustave Levy was declared uice-President of the Council of the City of Alameda. Vice-President Levy acknowledged with thanks the honor bestowed upon him and expressed his confidence that the Council would work as a rood team during the coming, two years. The City Clerk then administered the Oath of Office to the newly-elected President and Vice-President of the Council of the City of Alameda. ROLL CALL: The roll was then called and Councilmen Fore, Levy, Longaker, McCall and President La Croix, Jr., (5), were noted present, as the newly-organized Council. Absent: None. Councilman Longaker, as the newest member of the Council, introduced his charming wife, Marcia. Councilman Levy introduced is lovely wife, Betty, and his son, Steve. Councilman Fore presented his lovely wife, Helen, and his son, Louis. Councilman McCall presented his vivacious wife, Georgia. President La Croix then presented his father and his new wife, Mr. and Mrs. Terry La Croix, Sr., his lovely wife, Pat, and his daughters - Connie, Cindy, Kim, Sharon and Kerrie. Little Becky, he said, was at home with a baby sitter. sident La Croix also introduced and welcomed Mrs. Shirley H. Tennier, retired City Clerk, and Mr. William S. Godfrey, former Mayor of the City of Alameda. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: Mr. Craig commented it was his understanding that the taxes on the underwater property were less because it was submerged so this was an advantage for Mr. Boersma. As far as the rear yard require- ments were concerned, he stated they were established for specific purposes - aesthetics, free space between buildings, fire access and safety. An incidental question to the basic issue was that of the projection over the lagoon, not at issue in this Hearing. Mr. Craig remarked on the statements with regard to what the Board deemed a trade-off of the ten-foot variance against further extension of the building over the lagoon. The builder was in a position to build as far out over the lagoon as he wished because he owned the land and he had stated if he was not granted the variance this was what he would do. Mr. Craig pointed out there were other legal actions which could be taken if the builder should proceed in this manner. Mr. Craig cannented on the action of a former Council in establishing a policy of maintaining one-hundred foot widths in the lagoons, which he felt should govern somewhat a decision by the present Council in this matter. C- Mr. Craig urged that the action of the Planning Board be reversed, and that the Council immediately i have the Staff proceed to study the subject of projections over the lagoons. Mr. Russell R. Reed, 1812-A Clinton Avenue, also an Appellant, then presented his case. He reviewed his contention that there was no justification for a claim of hardship and there was no valid reason for the encroachment. The variance requested was definitely adverse to his interests as well as to those of the other neighbors in the area. He expressed the opinion that the case should be dismissed, and the variance refused. He repeated his plea that Mr. Boersma intended to overbuild the property to suit his plans, and showed a lack of concern for circumventing the restrictions of the Zoning Ordinance and the devaluating effect of his proposal on Mr. Reed's property. He commented that no taxes are paid on underwater property, according to his investigation. He said he had found the neighbors on the west side of Union Street, directly across from the proposed project, heartily opposed the plans. Mr. Reed also called attention to the action of the City Council at a meeting held September 25, 1956, when widths of the lagoons were adopted, and the minimum widths were specified to be 100 feet. Mr. John Barni, Jr., 1825 Clinton Avenue, expressed the hope that the City would finds the means to control situations of this nature in the future. Mr. Raymond Britton, 645 Water View Isle, stated he purchased his property in 1964 and he did not know at that tine that the parcel across the lagoon was zoned "R-4". It was at the time Dr. Oliver was constructing his home on the west side of Union Street on the lagoon and he had been prohibited by the City Council from building a multiple-dwelling structure. This had been one of the factors considered by Mr. Britton in purchasing his home. It was pointed out that the Oliver property was zoned "R-1". Mr. Sidney Dowling, Sr., 644 Water View Isle, found little wrong with the proposed project but he felt it should not overhang the lagoon in any way whatsoever. He urged that the City take the necessary L. steps to protect the waterway, which was being heavily used for recreational purposes. . , On the cal] for opponents, M. Stanley Boersma, 1901 Central Avenue, appeared. He expressed the opinion that building on a lot with fifty-five per cent of its area under water obviously presented a hardship. He stated he had approached the problem from several different directions - one, with an extensive overhang over the lagoon. This he felt was not to his best interest because it would certainly detract from the lagoon at the location, but more, he felt this would be a burden on the people facing the lagoon on both sides. He therefore felt it would be far better to attempt to limit the amount of overhang and possibly use a portion of the rear yard which in most apartment houses was not used anyway, other than for open air. Mr. Boersma said he had requested a variance of ten feet because the side yard setback on the north side would be ten feet and the request did not seem to be unreasonable. With regard to the claim that he wanted to overbuild the site, Mr. Boersma pointed out fourteen units was the number allowed by the ordinance. He answered other claims by Mr. Reed with regard to parking in the rear yard and taxes. Mr. Boersma said he felt after the Hearing before the Council on the Appeal filed against the variance previously granted to him, that he had been given a mandate to redesign his building within the framework of the ordinance and not to have to ask again for a variance. An alternate building had been designed which woul d be practically and economically feasible, of fourteen units, hanging out over the lagoon for a distance of thirty-five feet. He said he was prepared to go ahead with this project. He felt this was not the answer but it was almost the only alternative to his design on the site in question. He had discussed the matter with some members of the Alameda West Lagoon Home Owners Association and . , delivered a copy of his plans to them for study. He had disagreed with their recannendations and felt i 1 . they would be far happier with a building projecting twelve feet over the lagoon than one thirty-five feet out. He pointed out the Oliver residence projected fifteen feet and the Tucker home twelve feet over the lagoon. He claimed that the only parties to be affected if the variance of ten feet were allowed to stand would be Mr. de la Torre on the northerly side and Mr. Reed, to a minor degree. Mr. Reed's best view, he commented, was not in the direction of his property but toward the lagoon. He humbly requested that the Council allow the variance to stand. Councilman Levy asked, if the building were to proceed with the overhang of twelve feet, how high above the water level the bottom part of it would be. Mr. Boersma replied this distance would be six feet. He had discussed the matter with the City Engineer and this had been felt to be adequate. Mr. Boersma pointed out the depth of the lagoons at the edge was very shallow so boats could not possibly come within six or eight feet of the shore. Mr. Boersma, on question by Councilman McCall, stated he did not plan to have any further encroachment into the lagoon than the proposed twelve feet. Mr. Hanna, on inquiry, stated twenty-five feet is the distance allowed for docks, etcetera, to project into the lagoon area on the north shore, by City ordinance. On rebuttal, Mr. Robert Pryor, 1814 Clinton Avenue, stated a precedent might be set as there were seven or eight other pieces of property along the same side of Union Street which could all make similar requests. Mr. Leo Dorfman, 649 Water View Isle, pointed out the Oliver and Tucker homes were much farther recessed than Mr. Boersmats property. Mr. Reed felt it was a mistake to consider the matter of a trade -off as it was not at issue - the only question for consideration was whether the variance was justified. He added there was no commitment that the neighbors in the area would not take advantage of the precedent indicated and build out into the water as far as they could. The Hearing was then declared closed. Councilman McCall moved the Appeals be denied and the ruling of the Planning Board be upheld. The motion was seconded by Councilman Fore and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Councilmen Fore, Levy, Longaker and McCall, (4). Noes: President La Croix, (1). Absent: None. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: 6. �'r From the Planning Board, signed by Mr. Jerry J. Holst, President, recommending the City Council take under advisement acquisition of a small parcel of land in the neighborhood southerly of the Maitland Drive-Mecartney Road intersection, to be dedicated to recreational purposes. Councilman McCall moved this matter be referred to the Recreation Department with the understanding that it be taken into consideration in its study by the Commission of the whole recreation plan for Bay Farm Island. Councilman Longaker seconded the motion, stating he was very concerned about recreation on Bay Farm Island and he wanted to be sure that when the Utah property was developed the plan therefor world include adequate facilities for open air spaces for parks. He felt the Recreation Commission should have the responsibility of making a full study of this matter when the Utah plan was available so the City would know just what areas would be provided for this purpose. After some discussion, the question was put and the motion carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. Mrs. Ina Ratto, who had requested the opportunity to speak on this subject, stated she would withhold comment until the location and size had been established. 7./ From the Planning Board, signed by the Secretary, recommending approval of Parcel Map No. J)4, subject to terms and conditions of the City Engineer1s report dated March 21, 1969. The Map was filed by Bates and Bailey for Grand of California, Inc., to divide property at 1446 Webster Street. The matter was referred to "Resolutions". 8. v From the City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to Good Chevrolet, low bidder, for furnishing five Sedans for the Police Department, at a net cost of 39,183.28. Councilman McCall moved the recommendation be adopted, and the contract be awarded to the specified Company for furnishing the vehicles for the Police Department at the price quoted. The motion was seconded by Councilman Levy and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 9. ✓ From the City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to Gallagher & Burk, Inc., low bidder, for the project of Resurfacing and Repair of Various Streets, at a cost of 519, 114. Councilman Levy moved the recommendation be accepted, and the contract be awarded to the designated firm for the specified project at the price quoted. The motion was seconded by Councilman McCall and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 10./ From the City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to Gallagher & Burk, Inc., low bidder, for the project of Resurfacing Lincoln Avenue from Park Street to Everett Street and Everett Street from Lincoln Avenue to Noble Avenue, at a cost of $3,086.80. Councilman Fore moved the recommendation be approved, and the contract be awarded to the designated Company for the project named at the price quoted. The motion was seconded by Councilman McCall and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 11/ From the Planning Board, signed by the Secretary, recommending rezoning from the "R -2", Two - Family Residence District, to the "R -4", Neighborhood Apartment District, certain properties in the north side of Lincoln Avenue between St. Charles and Chapin Streets and at 1612 Chapin Street and 1611 St. Charles Street. This matter was set for Hearing at the regular meeting of the Council on Tuesday evening, June 3, 1969. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: 12:7 Councilman McCall inquired if there had been any word from the East Bay Regional Park District as to its responsibility for maintaining the South Shore Beach, and whether they desired the City to clean it up and police it and bill the "District". 4 0 3 City Manager Weller, on request, stated the "'District" had indicated in a recent letter that the Board was having difficulty in financing the staff necessary to do the kind of job it wished to do and the attempt would be made to correct the situation in conjunction with next year's budget. Mr. Weller was requested to again bring this situation to the attention of the Board of Directors of the East Bay Regional Park District, outlining again the conditions existing in the area under discussion, and asking again that action be taken to correct the problem. 13./ President La Croix brought up the matter of the ordinance by which the Council, on its own motion, proposed to add a new "0" zone, creating an open space zoning district and setting regulations therefor. City Attorney Cunningham distributed to the members of the Council copies of the document, and then explained its purpose was to regulate the lagoon encroachment problem. Councilman McCall objected to proceeding in any way, such as referring this matter to the Planning Board, until the Council had had more time to study it. After some discussion, Councilman Longaker expressed the opinion that the intent of the ordinance was the matter the Council was concerned with at the moment. He felt there would be ample time to go over the legal ramifications without holding up its progress. He therefore moved it be referred to the Planning Board for the required public hearing, findings and recommendations to the Council. Council- man Levy seconded the motion which carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: Councilman McCall, (1). Absent: None. 14.' Councilman Levy inquired if anything further had been done on the fishing pier in the west end of the City, which had been requested from the Wildlife Conservation Board of the State of California. Councilman McCall stated there had been correspondence and discussions with Mr. Ray Nesbit, the Executive Officer of the Wildlife Conservation Board, and word had been received that if the City of Alameda wished to proceed in a specific direction, this could be accomplished. He stated there was money in the Tideland Trust Fund which could legally be used for this purpose and the Federal Govern- ment was now involved because the City is in an urban area. He described the location preferred by the State Board, at the old Maritime Training School, where the Neptune Beach pumps were located. Mr. Cunningham enlarged on certain obstacles which must be overcome in this matter, involving the State agencies concerned. It was requested of the City Manager that a summary of this question be submitted to the Council and then, if the Council decided to pursue it further, perhaps a representative group could be sent to Sacramento to consult with the proper people. NEW BUSINESS: 15./ President La Croix commented there was a large hole in the southwest corner of the fence at the Grand Street Bridge. He requested this situation be referred to the proper parties, for attention. City Engineer Hanna agreed to take care of the matter. RESOLUTIONS: 16. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Levy, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7469 Authorizing Execution of Agreement for Construction and Completion of Improvements in Connection with Parcel Map No. 444 and Approving Cash Deposit as to Sufficiency in "Lieu of Surety Performance Bond (1446 Webster Street -- Brown, Garfinkle and Krantzman)." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman McCall and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 17. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Levy, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7470 Approving Parcel Map No. 444 for Division of Property at 1446 Webster Street, Alameda, California, and Permitting Recording Thereof (Brown, Garfinkle and Krantzman)." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman McCall and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 18.1 The following resolution was introduced by Councilman McCall, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7471 Authorizing the Attorney General of California to Conduct Legal Proceedings (Asphaltic Petroleum Products)." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Fore and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. Lf 19.v- The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Fore, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7472 Adopting Specifications, Special Provisions and Plans for Pavement Repair and Resurfacing of Park Street from San Jose Avenue to Otis Drive, Calling for Bids and Directing City Clerk to Advertise Same." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Levy and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 20.. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman McCall, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7473 Adopting Specifications, Special Provisions and Plans for Installation of House Laterals, Repair of Portland Cement Concrete Sidewalk, Driveway, Curb and Gutter, Minor Street Patching with Asphalt Concrete, for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1970, Calling for Bids and Direct- ing City Clerk to Advertise Same." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Levy and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 21.7 The following resolution was introduced by Councilman McCall, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7474 Adopting Specifications for Furnishing to the City of Alameda for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1970, Class 1BI Portland Cement Concrete Transit Mix, Calling for Bids and Directing City Clerk to Advertise Same." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Levy and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 22. "Resolution No. Implementing Meyers -Minas -Brown Act by Establishing Procedures for Administration of Employer-Employee Relations Between City and its Employee Organizations, and for Resolving Matters Affecting Employment." 2 • "Resolution No. Adopting Rules and Regulations to Carry Out Provisions of Employer- , Employee Relations Resolution." Councilman Levy moved action on these two resolutions be laid over to the meeting of May 20, 1969, to permit the City Manager to discuss their contents with the various employee associations. The motion was seconded by Councilman Fore and unanimously carried. BILLS: 24. v An itemized List of Claims against the City of Alameda and the Departments thereof, in the total amount of 158,897.33, 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 May 6, 1969, and presented to the City Council at this meeting, be allowed and paid. The motion was seconded by Councilman McCall and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, GENERAL: 25./ Mr. William S. Godfrey, Chairman of the Housing Authority of the City of Alameda, reported that there were approximately forty Navy families turning over each month in both projects. The recreational area had been completed and they were now waiting for the lines to be put in by the Recreation Department. He thanked former Mayor and Councilman McCall for his efforts in getting the Southern Pacific Company public relations people involved in getting this fine facility, not only for the Projects, but also for the general public. They had discussed with Mr. Mainland, Recreation Director, the possibility of having a Recreation Aide stationed there if the point was reached where there were competitive sports and they wished to join other leagues in the City. It was understood the Housing Authority would pay for the Aide. Mr. Godfrey submitted a letter from the "Authority", signed by Mr. Richard D. Marquardt, Executive Director, outlining in detail its plans with regard to the summer youth work program. The letter was presented to the City Clerk, with copy of a communication from Mr. John Hoobyar, Coordinator of Vocational Education of the Alameda Unified School District, on the subject. The plan was to line up sixteen young people who would not normally have summer jobs, fourteen, fifteen and sixteen years old, who would undoubtedly be going to summer school, to take part in a project of painting the Western Project. President La Croix expressed the appreciation of the Council to the members of the Housing Authority for their efforts. He also commented that there would be an organizational meeting this Thursday at 8:00 o'clock a.m. in the office of the Chamber of Commerce, through the efforts of merchants, the School Department, the Chamber and other entities, to see what could be done for youth employment during the summer months. Councilman Longaker remarked that the Federal money which had previously been furnished for this program was not available this year, so it behooved the local people to get behind this program. Mr. Godfrey also reported on the leasing program under Section 23. As of May 1 there were forty-four units under lease scattered throughout Alameda, and twenty-four under negotiation. They were progress- ing slowly but well and it was very gratifying. 26./ Mr. Frank A. Gottstein, 731 Haight Avenue, expressed his disapproval of building a fishing pier when the money could be put to better use correcting the congestion going and coming through the Tubes. 27. President La Croix, at this time, introduced and welcomed Councilman Levyts wife, Betty, and his cousin, Mrs. Gail Van Amburg. FILING: 28. Agreement - Between Max M. Brown, Sam Garfinkle and Irving Krantzman and City - re Improvements in connection with Parcel Map No. 444. 29. Financial Report - City of Alameda, as of March 31, 1969 - Verified by Hackleman, Larzelere, McKenna & von Kaschnitz. 30. Financial Report - Bureau of Electricity, as of March 31, 1969 - Verified by Hackleman, Larzelere, McKenna & von Kaschnitz. 31. Specifications No. PW 5-69-10 - Pavement Repair and Resurfacing of Park Street from San Jose Avenue to Otis Drive. 32. Specifications No. PK 5-69-11 - Installation of House Laterals for Fiscal Year 1969-1970. 33. Specifications No. PK 5-69-12 - Repair of Portland Cement Concrete Sidewalk, Driveway, Curb and Gutter for Fiscal Year 1969-1970. 34. Specifications No. PK 5-69-13 - Minor Street Patching with Asphalt Concrete for Fiscal Year 1969-1970. 35. Specifications No. MB 5-69-3 - Class "B" Transit Mix for Fiscal Year 1969-1970. 36./ Councilman McCall asked that the meeting be adjourned in respect to Mr. Joseph Rodrigues, who had passed away at twenty-six years of age, and a letter of condolence be sent to his family. The President requested that all rise in a moment of silence in observance of the passing of Mr. Rodrigues. ADJOURNMENT: 37. There being no further business to come before the meeting, the Council adjourned in respect to the memory of Mr. JOSEPH RODRIGUES - to assemble in regular session on Tuesday evening, May 20, 1969, at 7:30 otclock. Respectfully submitted, City Clerk ,(1