1972-06-06 Regular CC MinutesREGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA
HELD TUESDAY JUNE 6, 1972
The meeting convened at 7:30 o'clock p.m. with President La Croix presiding. The Pledge of
Allegiance was led by Councilman McCall and was followed by a most inspiring Invocation delivered by
The Reverend Charles N. Nahnsen, Pastor of the Immanuel Lutheran Church.
ROLL CALL:
The roll was called and Councilmen Fore, Levy, Longaker, McCall and President La Croix, Jr., (5),
were noted present. Absent: None.
MINUTES:
1. The minutes of the regular meeting held May 16, 1972, were approved as transcribed.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
2. From Bay Farm Island Reclamation District No. 2105, signed by Mr. Bruce T. Mitchell, Secretary,
requesting that Messrs. Dennis G. Pagones and August Wiemken be appointed as Trustees of the District.
The matter was referred to "Resolutions ".
3. v` From Peralta Colleges, signed by Mr. Clement A. Long, Secretary to the Board of Trustees, submitting
its Resolution 71/72 -82 encouraging the City to initiate Charter amendments to enable Municipal Elections
to coincide with District Elections.
President La Croix pointed out the Charter Amendment Advisory Committee had recommended that this question
be pursued and the Joint Committee for Revision of the Elections Code, with Senator Mervyn Dymally as
Chairman, had been informed of the Council's position favoring consolidation of local government elections.
Upon request, City Attorney Cunningham said he realized the problem faced by the Junior College District
in not wishing to consolidate with the individual cities for various reasons; on the other hand, there
were three Charter cities which had different election dates and there were other problems involved con-
cerning the entire State. He said the problem was not a simple matter of changing the Charter as this
would probably not solve the District's situation and it would complicate the City's procedures considerably.
It was decided to inform the Peralta District of the City's action and request that it contact Senator
Dymally in support of the position of the City as previously indicated to his Committee.
4. '/ From Mr. V. W. Dennen, 1926 Everett Street, with regard to the new flea market in the City, urging
that the City welcome this recently established business.
After reading of the communication by the Clerk, President La Croix stated the City had made no attempt
to discourage the operation of the new business but had merely pointed out the State and City regulations
to which it must conform.
Mr. Warner R. Bussen, 1842 Elm Street, requested the opportunity to speak on the subject. He said he had
owned his home for many years and questioned establishment of a second business of this type in the City,
at a location so near the Park Street business district.
5. From the Alameda County Admission Day Celebration Committee, signed by Mr. Richard F. McCarthy,
requesting $100 be appropriated toward the expense of the official 1972 celebration to be held in the
City of San Mateo.
The matter was referred to the Alameda Chamber of Commerce for attention.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, AGENDA:
6. Mr. Charles Tillman, 2415 Roosevelt Drive, requested that no decision be made on the matter of the
Golf Course operation before members of the audience were given the opportunity to present their views on
the subject.
REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
7. ` From the Auditor and Assessor, requesting cancellation and refund of taxes erroneously levied and
collected from North American Rockwell in the amount of $597.24.
Councilman Longaker moved the report be accepted. Councilman Levy seconded the motion which carried on
the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. The matter was then referred
to "Resolutions ".
8. ( From Planning Board, signed by the Secretary, recommending approval of the Tentative Map for the
subdivision known as Tract 3411, subject to terms and conditions of the City Engineer's Report dated
May 30, 1972, with specific exception to Sections 11 -319, 11 -3113 and 11 -3123, and declining to submit a
recommendation concerning Section 11 -321 relating to the land dedication requirement. This covered a
7.2 -acre parcel southerly of Otis Drive at High Street proposed for development by Knuppe Development
Company.
4
The Clerk stated a communication had been received from Davis, Craig & Bartalini, Attorneys for the
developer, signed by Mr. H. Theodore Craig III, requesting that specific credit be allowed for two
areas of 45,000 square feet of recreational land, as set forth on the Tentative Map, stating they
were far in excess of the required 14,380 square feet.
Upon question, City Engineer Hanna said he understood the Bayview Estates Homeowners Association would
prefer not to have the traffic circulation plan proposed by the developer but it was his belief that
High Street and Bayview Drive should be connected with a standard four - legged intersection at High
Street and Otis Drive. He said the City had been attempting to have lights installed at the corner
for some time but the State Division of Highways had indicated the corner did not warrant such controls;
however, he felt the institution of one more leg and the additional traffic using it would bring the
intersection to a point of meeting the State requirements and the installation would be approved, the
cost to be split between the State and the City. He said he believed the traffic coming off the Bay
Farm Island Bridge could be properly controlled. To a further question, he said the proposal had been
reviewed and it met the requirements of the Engineering Department.
The request of the developer's attorneys that the subdivider be given credit for the areas of recrea-
tional land was discussed. Upon request by Councilman Levy, Mr. Donald Johnson, Planning Director,
explained with the aid of an exhibit the specific triangular- shaped areas comprising the 45,000 square
feet of recreational open space, one containing the community swimming pool, deck and courtyard, on
which the developer made a proper contention for private open space. He deferred to the developer the
question of utilization of the open space.
Mr. H. James Knuppe, 4343 East Castro Valley Boulevard, Castro Valley, the developer, addressed the
Council. He explained that the Company had been required to apply to the Bay Conservation and Develop-
ment Commission for approval of the public access provisions. He pointed out the site, an old sub-
division started by Mr. Michael Hester some years ago, had an existing fishing wall and a small cove
which he planned to tie into the development. He said BCDC had required twenty- five -foot access ways
be provided for the public and there was public access in connection with the recreation areas. He
said the design would be similar to a New England fishing village and large trees would be brought in.
In reply to questioning, he said there would be walking paths which could be used also by bicycles
and benches would be provided along the perimeter.
Mr. Cunningham pointed out the standards required for credit for open space under Municipal Code
Section 11- 328(b) that the private ownership and maintenance of the open space is adequately provided
for by written agreement and (c) that the use of the private open space is restricted for park and
recreational purposes by validly recorded covenants running with the land in favor of future owners
of the property within the tract and which cannot be defeated or eliminated without the consent of the
City Council. He inquired whether these agreements were in existence and, if so, if copies would be
furnished to the City.
Mr. Craig, Attorney for the developer, said there was no question with regard to complying with the
requirement for a written agreement, the covenants and restrictions to be prepared would provide for
covenants running with the land without question as this was part of the normal homeowners' type of
arrangement, to be taken care of by his office.
Councilman McCall questioned the decision of the Planning Board in declining to make a recommendation
on this point, finding that any requirement for this controversial Section should be made by the City
Council.
President La Croix said he could only suggest the reason for the failure of the Board to take action
on the Section was that the Ordinance had been referred to the staff for study and evaluation so that
a new ordinance might be created covering all aspects of open space. Mr. Johnson, on request, said
this was generally the attitude of the Board on the matter.
Councilman McCall said he felt a strong recommendation from the Board was appropriate in this case and
he would have liked to have one. He suggested, if the trend was for the Board to pass these matters
to the Council without recommendation, that the pertinent Sections of the Code be disallowed in future.
He said he was not opposed to the proposed development but he would disagree that credit should be
allowed for certain areas which had been indicated.
Councilman Longaker pointed out he had dissented on a previous action as he had felt the Ordinance was
still in effect and it should be applied equally to all applicants.
There was discussion for clarification of the areas on which credit was requested with Mr. Knuppe
providing explanation.
Councilman Fore moved the recommendation of the Planning Board be adopted, that the Tentative Map for
said Tract 3411 be approved, subject to the requirements of Alameda Municipal Code Section 11- 328(b)
and (c) as set forth by the City Attorney, the terms and conditions of the City Engineer's Report dated
May 30, 1972, that specific exception be granted to Municipal Code Sections 11 -319 concerning lot width
and area, 11 -3113 concerning location of sidewalks, 11 -3123 regarding shore perimeter protection; and
that credit be allowed for open space as indicated with relation to the requirement for dedication of
recreational land or payment of fee in lieu thereof under Section 11 -321. Councilman Levy seconded
the motion which carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
The City Attorney pointed out that when the Council allowed credit for private open space the developer
was not required to nor was he in any sense opening that recreational land to the public; the only
public access involved in this case was that required by the Bay Conservation and Development Commission.
In subdivision developments where credit was sought for private space in lieu of the dedication of land
or payment of a fee, that was in no sense a dedication of land for public use.
9. From Planning Board, signed by the Secretary, transmitting its Resolution No. 795 recommending
that an economic impact study be made on proposed future development in the City.
President La Croix said Mrs. Ina Ratto, member of the Board, who wished to speak to the Council with
reference to the Resolution was serving on an Election Precinct Board and had requested that the matter
be held until she could reach the meeting.
The matter was therefore referred to "New Business".
10. V/From the City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to Alameda Times-Star for publication of
legal advertising during fiscal year 1972-73 at the prices of $3.80 per column inch for the first insertion
and $3.35 for subsequent insertions.
Councilman Levy moved the recommendation be accepted and the contract be awarded to the Times-Star for
publication of legal advertising during the ensuing fiscal year at the prices quoted. The motion was
seconded by Councilman Longaker and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None.
Absent,: None.
11. ¥ From the City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to California Rock & Gravel Company, low
bidder, for furnishing the 1972-1973 fiscal year requirements of Class "B" Portland Cement Concrete Transit
Mix at a price of $16.71 per cubic yard.
Councilman Longaker moved the recommendation be approved, that the contract be awarded to the designated
Company for furnishing Transit Mix requirements for the next fiscal year at the price quoted. The motion
was seconded by Councilman Fore and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None.
Absent: None.
12. From the City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to BEPCO, Inc., low bidder, for the project
of Minor Street Patching with Asphalt Concrete during fiscal year 1972-73 at the unit prices quoted.
Councilman Levy moved the recommendation be adopted, that the contract be awarded to the named contractor
for the specified project at the prices quoted. The motion was seconded by Councilman McCall and carried
on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
13.V From the City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to George J. Jardin, sole bidder, for the
project of Repairing Sidewalk, Driveway, Curb and Gutter during fiscal year 1972-73 at the estimated total
price of $8,075.
Councilman Longaker moved the recommendation be accepted, that the contract be awarded to the designated
contractor for the named project at the price quoted. The motion was seconded by Councilman McCall and
carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
14. .7 From the City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to Vermont Engineers, low bidder, for the
project of Installing House Laterals during fiscal year 1972-73 at the estimated amount of $13,875.50.
Councilman Levy moved the recommendation be approved, that the contract be awarded to the specified Company
for the designated project at the price quoted. The motion was seconded by Councilman McCall and carried
on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
154 From the Acting City Manager, reporting all work satisfactorily completed on the project of Resur-
facing Various Streets, recommending it be accepted and the Notice of Completion be ordered filed.
Councilman McCall moved the recommendation be followed, that all work on the designated project be
accepted as satisfactorily completed and the Notice of Completion be filed. The motion was seconded by
Councilman Longaker and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent:
None
16. From the City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to Diamond Janitorial Service & Supply, Inc.,
low bidder, for Janitorial Service for the City Hall and Library for fiscal years 1972-73 and 1973-74, at
a price of $17,144.40.
City Manager Weller said he felt the specifications should have permitted division of the bid; however, in
fairness to the people who had bid in good faith with the understanding the proposal would cover both City
Hall and Library facilities, the award should be made to this firm, which had been investigated and found
to have an excellent performance record. He said there was a provision for reopening the matter at the
end of the first year and in the event the performance was not satisfactory a change could then be made.
Councilman Levy moved the recommendation be accepted, that the contract be awarded to the designated firm
for performing the specified service, at the price quoted. Councilman McCall seconded the motion which
carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
17. From the City Manager, submitting the Recommended Budget for fiscal year 1972-1973.
After some discussion, it was requested that the City Manager make his annual presentation of the Budget
at the next regular meeting of the Council on Tuesday, June 20, 1972.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
18. 'f Called up for discussion was the matter of operation of the Municipal Golf Courses. President
La Croix explained this item had been placed on the agenda for this meeting, on the night of the State
Primary Election, for the reason that it had been agreed that as soon as the Council had before it all
available information from the Recreation and Planning Departments and the City Manager's office, it
would move as expeditiously as possible to discuss the issue and make such findings and decisions as
seemed advisable.
President La Croix called for discussion on the possible leasing of the Golf Courses or retaining the
Courses and making necessary changes to correct the existing problems as expeditiously as possible
through proper planning. He requested that discussion be confined to the issue and to important and
valid facts related to it. He said he felt the Council had pursued an honest and appropriate course
of action since the joint meeting held with the Recreation Commission on this subject approximately a
year and a half ago and had lived up to its commitments set at that meeting, that the Recreation
Commission and Director had done an excellent job.
Mr. Tillman, 2415 Roosevelt Drive, requested that his letter of April 6, 1972, suggesting that the
South Course be rebuilt by City crews be read into the record for consideration in connection with the
subject under discussion. He suggested that the findings of the Council be presented for the edifica-
tion of the audience.
President La Croix said he felt the City should not turn its Golf Courses over to a leasing agent to
run them, as proposed by the Beachcomber people, for a period of twenty -six years. He said he felt the
City was in a position to correct the existing deficiencies and, should it decide to go along with the
retention program, any corrections to be undertaken should be done under the control and direction of,
and as a result of a study by, a bona fide golf course architect, and any work should be done by people
under the control of a golf course developer and not by the Golf Course crews. He said he felt some
of the problems which had been experienced on the Second Course had been the result of actions pursued
in previous years which had produced a course less effective than what might have been built if it
had been developed by a golf course architect.
Councilman Longaker said, with regard to the proposed lease, he felt it was an appetizing thought to
realize that, instead of being a debtor year after year, $24,000 would come into the City coffers the
first year during rehabilitation of the Course and from that point on the amount would increase accord-
ingly. He said Beachcomber Golf had indicated its desire to come into Alameda and take over the Courses
with the idea that it would spend between $500,000 and $700,000 in improving the facility and he could
not see why the idea was not an attractive one.
Councilman McCall said he felt he had made it clear in the first discussion on the proposal that he
would be vigorously opposed to leasing the Courses. He called attention to copies of an article on the
Beachcomber organization which had been sent to the Councilmen and said he would not be in favor of
considering it as a lessor.
There was discussion with regard to the proposal. Councilman Longaker said he felt it might be worth-
while to investigate the leasing method of operation and the financial solvency of the Beachcomber firm
or any other interested firm.
At the suggestion of the President and over the strong objection of Mr. Tillman, Councilman McCall
moved the City Council not consider leasing the Golf Courses under any condition. Councilman Fore
seconded the motion.
Speaking on the question, Councilman Levy said he felt private operation might have a lot of benefits
the City would enjoy but that the Council had an obligation to the City employees and if the City could,
by changing the method of operation, come close to the results to be attained by a private company,
that would be the logical step. He said he wanted to be satisfied that could be done.
President La Croix explained that, of the present twenty or twenty -one employees, with normal attrition
there would be seventeen or nineteen within a short time. He said it was not the intention of the
Council to do away with any position presently held by City employees on the Golf Courses and he felt
this was the direction the Council would pursue if it should move toward retention of the Courses and
rehabilitation of the area.
Mr. Joseph M. Sullivan, 3221 Liberty Avenue, said he had understood that before a final vote was taken
there would be discussion by the audience and after a vote was taken there would be no point in discus-
sion by the people as the action would have been taken.
After it was determined that no one in the audience wished to speak in favor of leasing the Golf Courses,
the question was put and the motion carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Four. Noes:
Councilman Longaker, (1). Absent: None.
President La Croix recommended as a course of action at this point that the City Manager be directed to
hire a golf course architect to work with the staff of the Recreation Department and other City Depart-
ments in determining proper design and projected development, primarily, of the South Course; in
looking toward the rehabilitation of the Driving Range; to make recommendations to the Council for a
future course of action as to necessary changes; what lands should, if necessary, be sold to accomplish
the cost of the program and at all times be concerned that any moneys derived from sale of the lands
would go to the needs of properly refurbishing the Municipal Golf Courses; if there should be moneys in
excess of those required they be moved into other areas of the General Fund for recreation. He said he
felt these were directions which the Council should pursue, that it should be recognized some changes
might have to be made in operation and control and the fee structure might require alteration.
The Councilmen expressed a desire to hear the comments of interested people in the audience on the
subject.
Mr. Tillman said he was happy that the action of the Council left only one alternative to discuss. He
expressed the opinion that the taxpayer should be considered in the deliberations and that he should
have the right to vote on the question which would result, he felt, in an affirmative vote.
Mr. C. J. Corica, 1000 Post Street, spoke at length on the Courses and recommended that (1) no land be
sold, (2) the South Course be rebuilt by the Golf Course crew on a piecemeal basis, (3) the Driving
Range be paved and mats be installed, (4) management be brought back to the Golf Courses with a qualified
4 7
professional in charge, (5) a Golf Commission be formed with a membership of dedicated golfers to assist
the Golf Course Manager. He said he felt these actions would solve the problems.
Mr. Charles F. Carroll, 3216 Fir Avenue, said he was a Cost Analyst by profession and he wanted to make
the point that he felt there was sufficient acreage for two championship courses, one well-oriented and
profitable driving range, commenting that Galbraith Course had had a net profit of $16,000 per year on
its facility, and possibly, if it should be so desired, consideration should be given to leasing a combi-
nation restaurant-pro shop, similar to Walnut Creek Municipal Golf Course.
Mr. Frank Corker, 3027 Marina Drive, said he was a senior citizen playing the South Course three days each
week, and he very much appreciated the action taken by the Council this evening.
Mr. Jerry Healy, 229 Santa Clara Avenue, President of the Alameda Junior Chamber of Commerce, said the
Board of Directors of the organization at its meeting of May 29 had discussed this issue. He expressed
the hope that no land would be sold at a loss of recreational space for any member of the community.
Mr. Frank Gottstein, 731 Haight Avenue, expressed the opinion that the matter should have been put on the
election ballot.
Mr. Leon Corcos, 3125 Bayo Vista Avenue, suggested there was possible revenue in allowing the garbage
company to dump on some of the Golf Course land, at the same time providing additional dumping area.
President La Croix said he would hesitate to use garbage-filled land for golf course construction in view
of the past experiences of the City in this respect.
Mr. Will Crocket, 40 Arbor Drive, Piedmont, said he had lived in Alameda for fifty years, had been an
enthusiastic member of the early golfing fraternity in the City and had maintained an interest in the sport
locally. He commented on certain economic aspects of the issue, and suggested that any sale of land
purchased under the Golf Course bond issue would not keep faith with such men as the late Mr. Edwin Agnew,
who had negotiated purchase of the land for as little as $700 per acre.
President La Croix asked the pleasure of the Council. Councilman McCall remarked on the memorandum from
the City Manager to the Council dated March 30, 1972, concerning the study of the Recreation Commission
Committee in which thirteen qualified golf course architects had been screened. He moved that, in accord-
ance with the Commission's recommendation, Mr. Robert Dean Putman of Fresno be employed as the architect
and consultant to work with the City staff and the Recreation Commission to come up with recommendations
for remodeling of the South Course, the cost to be determined by the City Manager's office in view of the
lapse of time since the quotation had been received from Mr. Putman, that some type of meeting be held by
the Commission to review the recommendations and the matter be pursued with awarding of a contract to be
recommended by the Commission. Councilman Fore seconded the motion.
Upon request, Mr. Weller said he understood the contract would provide for all services as indicated by
the Commission, with the understanding that it could be cut off at any point.
The question was then put and the motion carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None.
Absent: None.
At this time a ten-minute recess was called. Upon reconvening, the meeting proceeded with the regular
order of business.
19. The matter was brought up with reference to a communication from Bay View Development Co., signed
by Mr. E. A. Falaschi, requesting that the matter of its petition to rezone from the "R-1" and the "R-2-PD"
Districts to the "C-1-PD" District certain property at the northwest corner of Mecartney and County Roads
be "removed from the Table".
Mr. Johnson, Planning Director, suggested that this matter be continued for the reason that the Bay Farm
Island development plan as proposed by Harbor Bay Isle and Associates would be presented to the public
the next evening at a special meeting of the Planning Board at Alameda High School Auditorium. He recom-
mended that the matter remain "on the Table" for at least another two weeks pending public review of the
proposal on the Bay Farm Island development, in which the subject property was indirectly involved.
There being no objections, it was directed that the matter be continued "on the Table" until properly
removed.
NEW BUSINESS:
20. As had been previously stated, the matter of the Planning Board's Resolution No. 795 with regard to
an economic impact study on proposed future development in the City, was brought up again at this time
Mrs. Ina Ratto, member of the Board, said she had requested the opportunity to present the Resolution to
the Council because she felt the following questions would arise and should be answered: (1) Is the
question of impact studies rightfully addressed by the Planning Board? (2) Are economic impact studies
or cost revenue studies a valid approach to urban planning? (3) Who should pay for such studies? (4)
How much time will a study take and does City staff have the time?
Mrs. Ratto stated at the League of California Planning Conference in San Jose in February one of the forms
presented to the Commissioners asked what was the real reason and purpose of the planning commission and
prominent speakers had recommended utilizing resource people, economists, environmentalists, sociologists
and seismologists, pointing out that one of the things planning commissions could do was to close the
community with potential impact. She said she had found. subsequently that some cities had written into
their charters a provision that their planning body might request impact studies.
Mrs. Ratto reviewed the questions and the subject generally. She said she had verified with consultants
that the amount of time required to make a study was predicated on the amount of money which could be
428
allotted to the endeavor, that there was no question but that the staff could perform the service but
there were several elements to the General Plan which were mandated to be in the Plan by January 1,
1973, the most far- reaching of which was the housing element, which it was predicted would take four
years to complete. She said, in summary, it would be unrealistic to say that the suggested method of
impact study had resulted in completely resolving all important problems of other communities concerned
with developments, although there was experience and knowledge being gathered daily which would help
to achieve the desired goal with a minimum of unpleasant side effects. She said all members of the
Planning Board had not endorsed every facet of the Resolution without reservations, although they did
endorse it in principle. She urged that the Council consider carefully the unanimous recommendation
of the Board members present at its last meeting and to especially consider the request for review by
a third independent source to better articulate the community's needs.
President La Croix said he agreed with many of the comments made by Mrs. Ratto with regard to various
types of studies. With regard to her suggestion for an independent study, he said he was in favor of
gathering all possible information, not only because of the Bay Farm Island development, but on the
Del Monte, Ballena Bay and other programs. He said he had had conversations with the developer of
the Bay Farm Island project in the last few days and had been informed such a study would be welcomed
and was already being made by the developer, including all of the aspects set forth in the Resolution.
He said he had spoken with the Superintendent of Schools and informed him the Council would like very
much to have input from the School District as to its situation with regard to density and single -
family dwellings as opposed to condominium and townhouse development. Dr. McConnell had assured him
that once the District's study was completed it would be available for public consumption and for use
by the Council and the Planning Board.
President LaCroix suggested that the studies which were presently under way be used by the City for
evaluation by the staff and that this be done in every instance of major development in the City. The
staff would then diligently peruse the reports and make recommendations for changes to the specific
bodies involved before any action would be taken. He said he felt in this way the City would be getting
everything requested in the Resolution.
There was a long discussion on the subject. Councilman McCall questioned the need for the requested
study, pointing out economic impact studies had been made by qualified people in connection with the
General Plan. He inquired of the City Attorney if the City Council had the right to request from all
future developers their own economic feasibility studies as a prerequisite to accepting any preliminary
p1
an.
Mr. Cunningham said the City might request, but not demand under the present regulations, such studies
and he felt large developers would comply. He pointed out that the title and substance of the Resolu-
tion were somewhat at variance with the discussion, that the principal item sought was the economic
study of the impact on the City tax structure and the school tax structure of potential new develop-
ments on Bay Farm Island; throughout the document it appeared that the economical implications on those
two bases of tax was what was sought. In listening to Mrs. Ratto and to Mr. Johnson, he said, it
appeared that much more was desired. He said the Council had the power to hire any consultants it
might need to conduct studies in whatever areas might be determined necessary or desirable.
To a question by Councilman McCall as to whether this was a reasonable request, President La Croix
said he felt the position of the City Council should be to respond to the needs of the community first
and, with all deference, to the developer secondly.
Mr. Weller said these types of studies were not functions of the Planning staff as they cut across the
boundaries of expertise of many kinds of people, that the Planning staff might be the focal point but
should not be put in the position of passing judgment on them. He commended Mrs. Ratto and the Plan-
ning Board for raising the question and the developer for anticipating this kind of question without
direction and employing competent and reputable firms to make the studies. He said the heart of the
subject, as indicated in the Resolution, was the economic impact study and that the others tended to
be more nearly factual, that it would make no sense to have two economic impact consultants as inevitably
the conclusions would not be exactly the same. He said the staff would propose to review the facts,
assumptions and conclusions made by the consultant to determine if they were unreasonable; if they were
found to be within the limits of reason the City would be wasting money to hire someone else to come up
with a slightly different report as the conclusion would almost inevitably be the same or very nearly
the same. He said inasmuch as reputable consultants had been hired this would be satisfactory to him
until it was possible to see the results of the studies. If it was found there was something wrong that
would be the time to hire someone else to check them or to challenge the conclusions but he saw no point
in prejudging or assuming that the reports would be false.
Mr. Weller said he would hope there was no implication that everything would have to wait on the develop-
ment of a conclusion by Dr. McConnell's school study committee, as the conclusions of the economic impact
study would not be affected by the kinds of considerations under study by the school committee. He said
if the City was persuaded that the information on hand indicated the economic balance was proper the
developer or the City should not be held up waiting for something else which was not germane to the
issue.
President La Croix called attention to the last paragraph of the Resolution and said he understood the
studies being made by the developer would be in the hands of the Planning Board and certainly the Council
before any action would have been taken. He said the school study was expected to be ready by June 27,
at which time the District would be prepared to address itself to the question.
Mr. James B. Davis, Attorney for Harbor Bay Isle Associates, said all of the studies under discussion
would be presented to the Planning Board and to the Council at the time of the presentation commencing
the following evening. He said his client was concerned only with regard to a possible extensive delay
in the matter, that he would not object to any necessary studies being made and the time necessary to
complete them.
409
President La Croix said it was not known at this time whether or not there would be a delay, that the
concern of the Council was for the entire community. The only study which might be in conflict he felt
would be that coming from the Alameda Unified School District.
Mr. Weller said he did not know if there was a final report but it was part of the economic impact study
and considerable attention had been paid to the question of School District economics as the question of
assessed valuation was of much more concern to. the District than it was to the City.
Mr. Davis said his client's municipal economics consultants, Wainwright & Ramsey, had considered the
school question at great length in their report, had worked with Dr. McConnell and his consultants and had
submitted their draft report to the District, that Dr. McConnell had indicated he was not winning to
respond as the City had already done to the preliminary drafts of many of the studies. He said his client
would like to have the input of the School District but had no control over this situation, and if the
Council should determine that final decision would have to await this report the developer would have to
abide by that fact. He said his client did not contest the fact that the City staff, the Planning Board
and the Council should take all the time necessary to review the reports and if it should be the deter-
mination that there was not adequate expertise to do so his client would agree to have someone else review
the matter, although he believed the City staff had the expertise to review the reports. His question of
delay had concerned the possibility of trying to start the entire procedure over again which he believed
was the purpose of the Planning Board Resolution and this would set the program off completely.
Councilman Longaker said he would assume that the reason an answer had not been received from Dr. McConnell
was that the Board of Education had not officially adopted any plan and he would assume the Superintendent
was therefore not in a position to release a statement on the matter.
There was some discussion with regard to the calendar of presentations of the proposed development plans.
Upon request, Mr. Davis named the consultants employed by Harbor Bay Isle Associates.
On request, Mrs. Ratto said in requesting an "impartial" study the intent had been only to obtain an
objective approach from a third party. President La Croix expressed the opinion that the staff provided
the third party. Mrs. Ratto said as a lay person she was not in a position to evaluate the expertise of
the staff nor of the people doing the studies although she felt she could evaluate the difference between
two opinions. She said she was under the impression that at the State level there were government agencies
which were preparing facilities for cities to have these studies done, that the studies might be required
in the future because cities had not lived up to their obligations.
Mr. Jack Dickson, 911 Grand Street, asked to speak and said he understood the proposal was to provide an
evaluation of alternative methods of development, that it would be possible to determine impact of various
models over an ongoing period of years.
President La Croix read from the Resolution seven elements to be included in the study and said in the
development of vital concern most of these elements would be used, from what he understood. He said the
Del Monte development would also have to cover these elements and pointed out the General Plan had
included most of these aspects, and it was supposed to carry the City through to 1990.
Councilman McCall said the Council had not heard a presentation from the developer, he had his reservations
relative to the economic feasibility studies being made and he felt the staff was competent and could do
this. He said he felt the developer should be given the opportunity to first come in and make his presenta-
tion and if there was anything wrong after review by the staff this would be the time to go back to the
developer and say it was not acceptable. However, he said, he felt when developers were willing to come
into the community as a general rule an economic feasibility study would have been made based on the
existing zoning. He said, rather than to carry this matter further, he would move that consideration of
the Planning Board's Resolution No. 795 be tabled. The motion was seconded by Councilman Fore and on roll
call carried unanimously.
21. Councilman McCall said he had found in his polling place on this date there was no pencil or pen in
the event one wished to write in a vote. He said he had received telephone inquiries as to the reason
these were not provided.
Mrs. Ratto said she, as an Inspector, had found no specific directive to the Election officers with regard
to leaving pencils in the polling booth, and it had been reasoned that people might use the pencil instead
of the electronic marker.
Councilman McCall suggested that the Registrar of Voters be requested to notify people in this matter,
in the event they might wish to write in a vote, and Mr. Cunningham suggested the Clerk be instructed to
note this point in connection with Municipal Elections.
RESOLUTIONS:
22. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Levy, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 7931
Appointing Dennis G. Pagones and August Wiemken to Board of Trustees
of Bay Farm Island Reclamation District No. 2105."
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.
23. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Longaker, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 7932
Ordering Cancellation and Refund of Personal Property Taxes Erroneously
Levied and Collected."
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.
24. V The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Longaker, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 7933
Authorizing Execution of Agreement with URS Research Company for Space -
Needs Study and Report."
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.
25. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Levy, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 7934
Authorizing the Execution of a Contract with Brink's, Incorporated, for
Their Services Relating to Parking Meter Collections, for the Fiscal
Year 1972 - 1973."
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.
26. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Levy, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 7935
Requesting Payment by the Fiscal Agent of the Amount Held in the Off- Street
Parking Surplus Revenue Fund to the General Fund of the City of Alameda."
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman McCall and carried on the following
roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
27. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Longaker, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 7936
Providing for the Amount Per Diem for Officers and Employees of the City
of Alameda for Traveling Expenses."
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.
28. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Fore, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 7937
Adopting Specifications, Special Provisions and Plans for Widening of Third
Street from Brush Street to Atlantic Avenue, 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.
29. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Longaker, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 7938
Approving Final Map of Condominium Subdivision Known as Tract 3390 (2137 Otis
Drive - Gordon M. Clancy and Mary Ann Clancy)."
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.
ORDINANCES FOR PASSAGE:
30. "Ordinance No. 1668,
New Series
An Ordinance Reclassifying and Rezoning Certain Property Within the City of
Alameda by Amending Zoning Ordinance No. 1277, New Series." (2415 Webster
Street - M -2 -G to M -2 District)."
Councilman McCall moved the ordinance be passed as submitted. The motion was seconded by Councilman
Levy and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
31. "Ordinance No. 1669,
New Series
An Ordinance Amending Certain Portions of the Alameda Municipal Code
Relating to Traffic Regulations."
Councilman Longaker moved the ordinance be passed as submitted. The motion was seconded by Councilman
McCall and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
BILLS:
32. An itemized List of Claims against the City of Alameda and the Departments thereof, in the total
amount of $247,926.25, was presented to the Council at this meeting.
The List was accompanied by certification from the Acting 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 June 6,
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:
33.V Mr. Raymond P. Kranelly, 1150 Admiralty Lane, Chairman of the Recreation Commission, commended the
Council on its forthright action in coming to grips with the controversial topic of the Golf Courses.
He said the Commission and the Recreation Department staff had been given the direction it needed and
the project would be ongoing as soon as the City Manager had resolved the matter of the contract with the
architect. He expressed his appreciation for the action.
FILING:
34. Agreement - Between City and URS Research Company - re Space - Planning Study.
35. Contract - Between Brink's Incorporated, and City - for parking meter collections during fiscal
year 1972 -73.
36. Specifications No. PW 6 -72 -13 - Widening of Third Street from Brush Street to Atlantic Avenue.
37. Amended Final Map on Tract 3390, 2137 Otis Drive - Clancy.
38. Recommended Budget - City of Alameda - for Fiscal Year ending June 30, 1973.
ADJOURNMENT:
39. There being no further business to come before the meeting, the Council adjourned, to assemble in
regular session on Tuesday, June 20, 1972, at 7:30 o'clock p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
City Clerk