Loading...
1966-07-05 Regular CC MinutesREGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMDDA HELD TUESDAY EVENING JULY 5 1966 The meeting convened at 7;30 o'clock p.m. with President Godfrey presiding. The Pledge of Alle- giance was led by Councilman-Rose and was followed by an inspiring Invocation delivered by The Reverend Mr. Mervin Megill, Pastor, Immanuel Baptist Church. ROLL CALL: The roll was called and Councilmen Bartley, La Croix, Jr., McCall, Rose and President Godfrey, (5), were noted present. Absent: None. MINUTES: 1. The minutes of the regular meeting held June 21, and the'a6juurned regular meetVng held June 28, 1986, were approved as trenocribed. WRITTEN COKMUNICATIONS: From Mr. and Mrs.'Charles J. Hansen, 2857 Jackson Street, concerning whose responsibility it is to have broken windows replaced in homes adjacent to school playgrounds. The matter was referred to the Director of Recreation and Parks for investigation and appropriate administrative action. The Clerk was to acknowledge the letter and so inform the »Banoens''. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: 3� Mr. Frank Gottstein, 731 Haight Avenue, referred to the proposed widening of Eighth Street and stated that provision should have been made for this thoroughfare at the time of the fill operation by Utah Construction & Mining Company. He also protested against the continual traffic congestion at peak hours in Posey Tube and along Webster Street. v^ 4^ At this point, President Godfrey invited Councilman McCall to introduce the young man, Richard Davis, who had been chosen to go to Alameda's Sister City, Lidingo, Sweden. Be explained the procedure by which the choice had been made and stated that 'Rich" would be Alameda's ambassador. Be would live with a certain family in Lidingo and next summer a student from that city would come to visit Alameda under the same arrangemanta. He was greeted with hearty applause. His father, Arthur W. Davis, was also introduced. President Godfrey added his compliments and best wishes. | � 5. Mrs. Mabel Tatum, 105-A Singleton Avenue, addressed the Council at great length, reiterating all of the former arguments with regard to the City's responsibility toward working out proper housing for those fifteen families still to be removed from Estuary Housing Projeot, Mr. Eugene Drew, Chairman, District 2, Western Region of Congress of Racia l Equality, also spoke on behalf 'of said remaining Estuary families. Both President Godfrey and City Manager Weller emphasized that the City was working earnestly and con- stantly to resolve the many, many problems involved in this entire situation - but the solution would take time. 8. The matter was called up with regard to the Appeal from the decision of the Planning Board to deny the requested variance to allow certain balconies to project three feet beyond the permissible extension of two feet. The Appeal was filed by Mr. Jack Filinick covering his sixty-three-unit dwelling being constructed at 564 Central Avenue. HEARINGS: The Clerk stated the interested parties had been notified that this would be the time and place for said Hearing on the question. Upon request, Planning Director Johnson reviewed the circumstances involved in this issue. In answer to a question, Mr. Johnson stated the balconies caused no particular detriment in this case, yet he also felt there was no great need for them, either. Mr. Cunningham then recited that the legal issue before the Council was whether or not the action of the Planning Board taken under Section lI-161(d) and (e) of the Alameda Municipal Code should be affirmed, modified or reversed. Mr. Chester B. Caldecott, Attorney, appeared upon the call for proponents, to plead the Appellant's case. Be explained the history of Mr. Filinick'a development projects in Alameda which, he believed, provided extenuating circumstances for the "mistakes" made in this instance. He displayed drawings of the structure in the process of construction and emphasized the attractive improvements which would be added by the five-foot balconies, and urged the Council's favorable action. Upon inquiry for any opponents to speak on the subject, there was no response. The President then declared the Hearing closed. The Councilmen concurred in their thinking that the most serious aspect of this case was the fact that Mr. Filinick had proceeded with his construction before taking out his Building Permit and checking on the Zoning Ordinance regulations pertaining to the width of said balconies. However, it was felt the future tenants would be the ones penalized by such a narrow balcony as allowable and therefore, they 54 would favor the variance. Councilman Rose explained that he had previously indicated he would not again vote for such "after the fact" variances. Following some further discussion, Councilman McCall moved the action of the Planning Board be reversed and the Appeal be granted to allow the variance as requested. The motion was seconded by Councilman Bartley and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Councilmen Bartley, La Croix, McCall and President Godfrey, (4). Noes: Councilman Rose, (1). Absent: None. 7:" Continued from the last regular meeting, the Matter was next presented with regard to Resolution of Intention No. 6957 to Construct Improvements in Assessment District No. 65 -1, as proposed - and to Determine Public Convenience and Necessity for Said Improvements (East Alameda - Bay Farm Island Street Improvements). President Godfrey reviewed the procedure as outlined by the Legal Counsel and stated the continuance of the Hearing had been for the purpose of a meeting to clarify certain points questioned by the affected parties. He then called upon Mr. Hanna who explained that said meeting had been held and he had endeavored to answer all questions., The following again addressed the Council in protest against the proposed Assessment District forma- tion: Mr. Ted Kaufman, 1083 Peach Street; Mr. Robert De Celle, 276 Beach Road, spokesman for the Bay Farm Island Improvement League; Mr. Robert Popper, 925 Pearl Street; Mrs. Charles Clegg, 1009 Peach Street, also spoke on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Wayne C. Wallace, 1011 Peach Street; Mr. and Mrs. R. M. Smith, 1007 Peach Street; and Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Brown, 3233 Calhoun Street. A very lengthy and detailed question and answer period ensued, with every effort being made to explain all phases of the contemplated street improvements to the satisfaction of the property owners to be benefitted. It was developed that seventy -two per cent of the Pearl Street residents objected to said "District" and wished to be excluded from its formation. Also, 55.8 per cent of the Peach Street residents were in protest against such District creation and did not want to be included. These requests were made by Messrs. Popper and Kaufman, respectively, on behalf of their neighbors. There being no objections, the order of business was revised and the meeting continued under the heading of "Resolutions ". RESOLUTIONS: Councilman Bartley introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: "Resolution No. Resolution Finding and Determining That the Public Convenience and Necessity Require the Construction of Improvements in Assessment District No. 65 -1, City of Alameda, County of Alameda, State of California." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman McCall. Speaking on the question, it was explained that this resolution covered the entire District as com- prised of the several individual street areas. Further, a four - fifths vote was necessary for its adoption. The question was then put and the motion lost on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Councilmen Bartley, McCall and President Godfrey, (3). Noes: Councilmen La Croix and Rose, (2). Absent: None. The City Attorney stated that, in view of the lack of a four - fifths vote,the resolution was not adopted and the creation of Assessment District No. 65 -1 had been defeated. The meeting then reverted back to "Hearings" and continued thereunder. 8. The matter was then called up concerning the proposed amendments to Alameda Municipal Code, Zon- ing Ordinance Section, pertaining to rear yard coverage and placement of accessory buildings and patio covers. The Clerk stated there was on file the Affidavit of Publication of the Notice of Hearing in this mat- ter. Also, copies of the minutes of the Planning Board meeting at which this case had been considered had been sent to the Councilmen for their information. Mr. Johnson, Planning Director, reviewed the history of this study by the ?.Planning Board and, upon invitation, Mr. Cunningham, City Attorney, indicated the legal issue before the Council was whether the recommendation of the Board covering its own initiative action in its advisory report under Sec- tion 11- 170(c) of the Alameda Municipal Code should be approved, modified or disapproved. Upon inquiry of the President, there was none who desired to speak either as a proponent of or as an opponent to the question. Therefore, the Hearing was then declared closed. Councilman Rose moved the proposed amendments to the Alameda Municipal Code be approved as submitted by the Planning Board. The motion was seconded by Councilman Bartley and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. The matter was then referred to "Introduction of Ordinances ". REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS, ETCETERA: 91 From City Planning Board, signed by the Secretary, making inquiry about the Council's desire with regard to future planning studies on the part of the Board. The President commented there was a committee set up by the Chamber of Commerce to study the Park and Webster Street Districts or all business areas of the City, on which Councilman Bartley represented the Council. Councilman Bartley then remarked that the Board wanted to know if it should go ahead with certain "planning studies" - and he definitely believed it should because this was its function. He also asked that the City Clerk transcribe verbatim that portion of the Hearing which was held at the Council meeting of June 8, 1966, covering the discussion on the proposed rezoning on the Board's Own Motion of certain areas around Park 3treet, Councilman Bartley offered, also, to meet with the Planning Board, only upon its invitation, to discuss with the members his objections to the rezoning as it had been proposed. He felt, too, he had certain information which would be of interest to the Board and would also explain what the Chamber committee hoped to be able to do after completing its otudieu. Following some expression of the thoughts on the subject by the other Councilmen, Councilman Bartley stated he would withdraw his offer. The Clerk was instructed to prepare the verbatim excerpt of that certain portion of the Hearing referred to. lG. From City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to Gallagher & Burk, Inc., lowest and best bidder, for street improvement work in Assessment District No. 65-1 - and that the amounts levied against each property be adjusted accordingly. The President pointed out this contract would not now be awarded due to the defeat of the resolution which would have determined upon the formation of said District. Therefore, Councilman La Croix moved that all bids received on this project be rejected. The motion was seconded by Councilman Rose and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. v' ll. From City Manager, requesting authorization to negotiate in the open market to have certain dredg- ing performed on the drainage system of the Alameda Municipal Golf Course, as the more economical method of having this type of project done. Councilman Rose moved the request be granted and the City enter into negotiations for said dredging. Councilman La Croix seconded the motion which carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 12. From City Manager, concerning the restaurant concession at the Alameda Golf Course and recommend- ing the payments of the Concessionaire be amended to the schedule as indicated in his letter dated July 1, 1986, effective as of said date. The matter was referred to "Resolutions". 13Y From Recreation and Parks Commission, signed by Mr. Raymond P. Kronelly, Chairman, recommending contract be awarded to the low bidder, Mr. Max D. Schenk, for construction of a diving pool at the total cost of $56,200. - to complete the Alameda Swim Center as expeditiously as possible. Councilman La Croix moved the Commission's recommendation be adopted and the contract be awarded to the designated contractor for the specified project at the price quoted. Councilman Bartley seconded the motion which carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: 0ooa, Absent: None. 14. From City Manager, with regard to the policy of the Alameda County Board of Supervisors requiring each City Council to approve a map designating the street projects proposed to be financed by the Mayors' Formula Gas Tax Funds. Such a map had been drawn in conformity with the tentative budget for 1966-07 and a resolution had been prepared. The matter was then referred to "Resolutions". l5,~" From City Manager, recommending an extension of time be granted to October 3, 1966, in which to make delivery of the new Fire Engine Pumper. Councilman La Croix moved the recommendation be followed and the extension of time be granted to American LaFrance for said delivery. The motion was seconded by Councilman McCall and unanimously carried. INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES: 16. Councilman Rose introduced the following ordinance, after which it was laid over under provision of law and the Charter: "Ordinance No. New Series An Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Sections 11-134(p), ll-138(v), ll-1312(g), ll~1318(g), ll-l320(8), ll-l324(g), 11-14A6(b) and - 11-14&7(o) Thereof, Relating to Rear Yard Coverage, Accessory Building Placement and Patio Covers." UNFINISHED BUSINESS: 17, Councilman Rose referred to a memorandum he had written concerning the funds to be retained by the Public Utilities Board at the close of the current fiscal year. He mentioned Sec. 12-6 of the Charter by which provision the Board estimated its retentions and was required to transmit any excess of this amount to the General Fund before August 1, unless the City Council specifically authorized the Board to retain said sum. Prior to 1958, the Board requested said retention but in recent years the request had not been made. Councilman Rose felt the Board should specifically make the request to retain a given amount - this year the excess being in the sum of approximately ¢80,000. Councilman Rose moved that the Council authorize the Board of Public Utilities to retain this excess amount - said exact sum not being determined until after the audit had been completed. The motion was seconded by Councilman La Croix and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Councilmen La Croix, McCall and Rose, (3). Noes: Councilmen Bartley and President Godfrey, (2). Absent: None. v 18, Upon the request of the City Manager, Councilman La Croix moved the City Manager be authorized to negotiate an option for the purchase of the two parcels of land at the northeast corner of Park Street and Encinal Avenue, the proposed site for the new fire house, and to proceed to have appraisals made, at the approximate cost of $100. for the option to buy and $880~ for the appraisal fees and that Mr. Weller be authorized to execute said option on behalf of the City. The motion was seconded by Councilman Bartley and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 19 Councilman La Croix commented that he knew how long and hard President Godfrey had been working on the housing situation for the residents of the Estuary Project and he wanted to express the con- fidence of, the Council in the President's efforts. President Godfrey emphasized there were many, many facets to this entire situation and many problems to be resolved - all of which took time and continuous effort which the people affected could not appreciate. He explained the minute details involved, and stated he sincerely believed it would be accomplished. There was considerable discussion about how much "refurbishing" would be done on the units in the privately-owned section of the area for the housing of the remaining families in Estuary Project, RESOLUTIONS: 20. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman La Croix, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 6982 Approving Joint Powers Agreement Relating to Operations of East Bay Cooperative Library System (City of Alameda, City of Richmond, County of Alameda, County of Costra Costa), and Authorizing Execution Thereof." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Bartley and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 21. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Bartley, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 6983 Suspending Operation of Contract No. PW 11-65-30 for Failure of Contractor to Prosecute Work Thereunder -- Culvert Reconstruction at Sixth Street and Haight Avenue -- Clifford W. Greer." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Rose and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 22. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Bartley, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 6984 Authorizing Modification of Agreement between City and Golf Course Restaurant Concessionaire." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Rose and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 23. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman La Croix, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 6985 Approving Map Showing Locations of Proposed City Street Construction Work to be Performed with 1966-67 Fiscal Year Moneys Payable by County of Alameda Under 'Mayors' Formula', and Derived from State Highways Users Tax Fund." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Bartley and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 24. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Rose, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 6986 Adopting Specifications for Furnishing to the City of Alameda Top Sand for the Municipal Golf Course, Calling for Bids and Directing City Clerk to Advertise Same." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Bartley and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. The President then declared all of the foregoing resolutions adopted as indicated. ORDINANCES FOR PASSAGE: 25. "Ordinance No. 1532, New Series An Ordinance Amending Section 15-6210 of the Alameda Municipal Code, Relating to Rates for Collection of Garbage and Refuse." Councilman Bartley moved the ordinance be passed as aubmitted. The motion was seconded by Councilman La Croix and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. FILING: 26, Financial Statement - Bureau of Electricity, as of May 31, 1966 - Verified by Racklemou, Larzelere & McKenna. 27. Joint Powers Agreement - Between City of Alameda, City of Richmond, County of Alameda, County of \ . Contra Costa. • 28, Specifications No. MS 7-66-14 - Top Sand for Golf Course. BILLS: 29, Itemized Lists of Claims against the City of Alameda and the Departments thereof, in the total amounts of $111,888.37 and $2,114,00, were presented to the Council at this meeting. The Lists were accompanied by certifications from the City Manager that the Claims Shown were correct. Councilman McCall moved the bills as itemized in the Lists of Claims filed with the City Clerk on July 5, 1906, and presented to the Council at this meeting, be allowed and paid. The motion was seconded by Councilman La Croix and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. ADJOURNMENT: 30. There being no further business to come before the meeting, the Council adjourned - to assemble in adjourned regular session on Tuesday evening, July 12, 1966, at 7:30 o'clock, in the Council Chamber. Respectfully submitted,