Loading...
1972-05-16 Regular CC Minutes4 REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA HELD TUESDAY MAY 16, 1972 The meeting convened at 7:30 o'clock p.m. with President La Croix presiding. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Fore and was followed by an inspiring Invocation delivered by The Reverend Raymond Currie, Acting Pastor of the First Presbyterian 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 2, 1972, were approved as transcribed. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: 2. V From Mr. Jeff Foster, 1221 Santa Clara Avenue, with regard to the Vietnam War, urging that the Council not support the hostilities. President La Croix pointed out the Council had heard statements on the subject by interested young people at its last meeting and called attention to Resolution No. 7624, adopted May 19, 1970, express- ing concern over the extension of the war and urging withdrawal of American forces from the Southeast Asia area at the earliest possible date. He read a statement for the consideration of all in view of the concern with conditions in the nation and the incident on the previous day when Governor George Wallace of Alabama had been shot and seriously wounded during an election campaign appearance in Laurel, Maryland. He expressed the thought that comments of individuals to and about one another in opposition to a particular position should be resolved and people should turn to some greater in their deliberations and give thought to man and his God. The communication was to be acknowledged and filed. 3. ` From the WAY Biblical Research Center, signed by Mr. Kevin Porter, inviting the members of the Council to attend its meetings on Sunday evenings at 7:00 o'clock at Lum School. It was suggested that any member of the Council who was interested accept the invitation to attend these meetings. It was directed that the communication be acknowledged and filed. 4. ' From Mrs. Robert Ibarolle, 425 Camden Road, on the subject of the proposed new City Hall, point- ing out the need for new school buildings in the City and urging that the issue be tabled until after the school bond election in March, 1973. President La Croix expressed the opinion that this communication was in advance of any decision- making to be undertaken by the Council, which was in the position at this time of merely finding reasons for possible construction of a new City Hall as it was believed there would be a need for such expansion in the future. He pointed out the report on the agenda requesting approval of a contract for a space study on the future needs of City Hall, the Alameda Unified School District and the Main Library. He emphasized that the Council had made no commitment on this question and it did not stand in opposition to the passage of any bond issues for construction of new schools, that any action to be taken with regard to new City facilities would be considerably in the future. The letter was referred to the file on the subject. f 5. 7 From Mr. Kevin Tabor, 317 Harbor Light Road, requesting the opportunity to make a presentation to the Council concerning the establishment of a recycling center. President La Croix said a later communication had been received from Mr. Tabor stating he was not prepared to make a presentation at this meeting and requesting that he be permitted to do so at the meeting of June 6. The President requested that Councilmen Fore and Levy serve on a committee to meet with a representative of the City Manager's office and the City Engineer to set up an afternoon meeting for the presentation to evaluate the proposal for the benefit of the community, and that a report be submitted to the Council on the committee's findings. This was acceptable and it was requested that the City Manager communicate with Mr. Tabor to set up a time for the meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, AGENDA: 6. `` Mr. Porter of the WAY Biblical Research Center addressed the Council with regard to the work of the Center and issued a personal invitation to the members of the Council and those in the audience to attend its meetings. 7. '7 Mr. Frank Gottstein, 731 Haight Avenue, requested that the letter from Mrs. Ibarolle be read in full. After reading of the communication by the Clerk, President La Croix reiterated that the Council had not in any way decided a new City Hall would be constructed, that City moneys would be spent which would increase taxes, nor that there would be a bond issue to finance the proposed project. He said if a new Hall was constructed its purpose would be to facilitate the work efforts and enhance the ability of the employees to perform a better job through proper housing. He said he could attest to the over- crowded conditions and the need for growth of the City Hall environment for proper service to the community in the years ahead was a very vital one. 4 ^1 Mr. Gottstein said he would assume it could be taken for granted that a new City Hall was wanted in view of the recommendation that funds be allocated for the space study in that connection. He said several years ago there had been a similar proposal and he had opposed it because he was not satisfied that a new City Hall was needed as the present structure was a wonderful strong building, although it might need some alterations. He said he had suggested some of the City departments be moved to the old Webb Avenue Fire Station, a short distance from the City Hall, which could have been altered to accommodate several offices. He also expressed the opinion that the question should have been put before the voters on the election ballot, that the Council should not take the matter into its hands and spend the people's money without first submitting the question to the electorate. President La Croix explained that the old Fire Station was in very poor condition and was not at all suitable for the needs of the community, that it could not have been brought up to Code requirements without prohibitive cost. He added that before any decision would be made as to whether the City would build a City Hall, a cultural complex or a community center, there would be hearings in the Council Chamber on the issue and it would be a long time in the future before the Council would be in that position. 8. ( Mr. Gottstein expressed the opinion that crimes such as the shooting of Governor Wallace had taken place because politicians were not playing fair with the young men of the country who were being sacrificed in service in the Vietnam War. Referring back to Mrs. Ibarolle's letter, Councilman McCall called attention to the statement that schools, by law, must be replaced and requested a clarification by the City Attorney. Mr. Cunningham stated the subject had come up several years ago and he had written an opinion for Council- man McCall and the other members of the Council. He said it was his recollection the Act had been passed because it had become apparent that school trustees were personally liable for injuries caused by earth- quakes and the law was a successful effort to eliminate this personal liability of members of the Board of Education. Nevertheless, he said, if the school bonds to correct non - complying school structures did not pass then there would be no "law" requiring the building of those structures anyway, and there were several alternatives which had been discussed. HEARINGS: 9.� In the Matter of Resolution No. 7911 Declaring the Intention to Order the Vacation of a Portion of Harrison Avenue (the northerly terminus of Broadway). The Clerk stated there were on hand the Affidavits of Publication and of Posting of the required Notices in the matter. On request, City Engineer Hanna stated this Hearing involved a very small area thirty feet wide by eighty feet long which inadvertently had never been vacated for public thoroughfare purposes. He said the matter had recently come to the attention of the City as there was a new interest in the area; in order to clear the title it had been suggested to the possible developer that he request the vacation of the small piece which had no public significance in terms of thoroughfare and it was loaded with easements in the form of utilities, storm drains, et cetera, which would be reserved by the proposed resolution. The City Attorney said the purpose of the Hearing was to hear any testimony or evidence from any interested persons as to the convenience and necessity of the proposed street vacation and to determine whether or not the portion of the street was unnecessary for present or prospective street purposes and, if not, whether public interest required its vacation. On the call for proponents of the issue, there was no response, nor was there any reply to the call for opponents. The Hearing was declared closed and, there being no objections, the meeting proceeded to "Resolutions ". RESOLUTIONS: 10 The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Levy, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7921 Finding and Determining a Certain Portion of Harrison Avenue, a Public Street in the City of Alameda, is Unnecessary for Present or Prospective Public Street Purposes; Ordering Vacation Thereof Subject to Reservation of Permanent Easement and Right -of -Way Therein as Described in Resolution of Intention No. 7911 Heretofore Adopted on April 18, 1972; and Directing City Clerk to Cause Certified Copy of This Resolution to be Recorded." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Fore. Speaking on the question, Councilman McCall confirmed that the City Engineer was fully in accord with the proposed abandonment. The question was put and the motion carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. The meeting returned to the regular order of business. HEARINGS: 11. In the Matter of a Petition filed by Mariner Square and Associates to rezone from the "M -2 -G ", General Industrial - Government, to the "M -2 ", General Industrial District, certain property known as 2415 Webster Street. The Planning Board had recommended the rezoning be granted. The Clerk stated there was on hand the Affidavit of Publication that this would be the time and place for the Hearing in the matter and the minutes of the Planning Board meeting at which the petition was considered had been sent to the Councilmen. On request, Mr. Donald Johnson, Planning Director, explained the action of the Board as set forth in its letter dated April 27, 1972, that the property, slightly less than four acres in area at the northerly extremity of Webster Street, had formerly been owned by Tidewater Oil Company, now known as Phillips 66. He said the property had lain unoccupied since being closed by the former owner and had recently been acquired by Mariner Square and Associates which proposed to redevelop the parcel with a small craft marina center using a number of novel ideas. Mr. Johnson said he was at a loss to know why the property had been zoned with the "G" overlay signifying government ownership and the present owners desired to remove this classification as it might hinder reuse of the property with respect to financing. He said the matter was non - controversial, the staff had recommended the rezoning be allowed and there had been no opposition indicated at the Board Hearing. Councilman McCall pointed out the State had advertised for sale other parcels zoned "M -2 -G" in the same area and suggested that the zoning on these be changed at the same time. Mr. Johnson explained that no application had been filed for such change and this would depend upon the wishes of future owners. The City Attorney expressed agreement. Mr. Cunningham stated the issue before the Council was whether the findings and recommendation of the Planning Board, as submitted in its advisory report, should be approved, modified or disapproved. On the call for proponents, there was no response, nor on the call for opponents. The Hearing was declared closed. There being no objections, the meeting proceeded to "Introduction of Ordinances ". INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES: 12. Councilman Longaker moved the following ordinance be introduced, after which it would be laid over under provision of law and the Charter: "Ordinance No. New Series An Ordinance Reclassifying and Rezoning Certain Property Within the City of Alameda by Amending Ordinance No. 1277, New Series." (Mariner Square and Associates - 2415 Webster Street) The motion was seconded by Councilman McCall and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. The meeting returned to the regular order of business. HEARINGS: 13./ In the Matter of an Appeal filed by Mr. Richard Galyen from the decision of the Planning Board to deny a variance to allow live entertainment at 1710 Lincoln Avenue. The Clerk stated the interested parties had been informed that this would be the time and place for the Hearing on this matter and the minutes of the Planning Board meeting at which the application was considered had been sent to the Councilmen. Mr. Johnson explained the property involved in this application was in the "C -1" District. The live entertainment was a small combo or band which had been operating on the premises on Saturday nights for some time. This had come to the attention of the Department approximately a year ago on a noise complaint. At the direction of the Planning Department staff, the applicant had filed a variance request to allow the entertainment. At the Board Hearings on the subject, people in the audience had objected to the request, claiming the tavern created a nuisance in the area, and it had been pointed out the tavern was permitted in a "C -1" District and the live entertainment was the only issue. Mr. Johnson said the Board had continued the Hearings on the matter from time to time at the request of the applicant, who was proceeding with certain soundproofing construction in the building. Mr. Galyen had stipulated at the Hearing that the exterior had been soundproofed and he would like the Board to consider his request on the basis of the then completed improvements. He said the staff had recommended a three -month temporary approval to provide a trial period to determine if the exterior soundproofing would be adequate. He pointed out that mechanical music devices were permitted in a tavern in the "C -1" zone. The motion of the Board that the request be approved for a ninety -day trial period had failed on a split vote of three ayes and three noes, with one member absent. Mr. Johnson pointed out copies of a report from Police Chief Young had been sent to the Councilmen. This indicated that no substantial increase was anticipated in police problems at the location in question if the premises were adequately soundproofed. He distributed to the members of the Council copies of a petition, signed by fifteen residents of the area, in opposition to the live entertainment at the subject property. To a question by President La Croix as to whether "live entertainment" concerned only the performance of music using musical instruments or if the term involved also dancing and other activities of that nature, Mr. Johnson explained the ordinance did not specify but simply stated that in "C -1" zones taverns were permitted without live entertainment and in "C -2" zones they were permitted with live entertainment. He said he had additional exhibits showing soundproofing, plot layout, et cetera, if the Council was interested in seeing them. 4 .7 Mr. Cunningham said he noted Mr. Galyen had indicated he was appealing from the defeat of the motion at the Board Hearing for a ninety -day trial. He explained this was a major variance under Ordinance No. 1635, New Series, recently enacted, and Section 11- 161(d) permitted granting a variance if four condi- tions were met and all of these were present. The Appeal, he said, came to the Council pursuant to Section 11- 161(f) requiring the applicant to state specifically wherein it was claimed there had been an error or abuse of discretion by the Board or wherein its decision was not supported by the evidence in the record. He said this placed the burden more on the applicant to show an abuse of discretion. If this showing was not made denial of the Appeal was required. On the other hand, if he did make the showing called for the issue was whether the four conditions set forth in Section 11- 161(d) were present. On the call for proponents, Mr. Galyen addressed the Council. He said he did not have the answer to what live entertainment entailed, but what he was after was good dancing music for the enjoyment of his patrons. He said he had had a combo since 1968 in his tavern, which was one of the oldest in the City. He said he felt there was no place in the City where the general public other than military personnel could dance for enjoyment. He said some of the members of the Council had visited the establishment, which he felt was somewhat unique, and the particular portion of the business involved in the issue under consideration was separate from the bar and was served strictly by cocktail waitresses. He said his patrons felt they should have the live music at the tavern which they had enjoyed over the years and they disliked to be deprived of it. He said his primary mission was fighting for what he felt the people were entitled to. On question by President La Croix, Mr. Galyen said he had at no time advocated any type of live entertain- ment in the establishment other than music, and it was proposed to continue to employ the same group which had been supplying the music in the past. Mr. Frank Gottstein inquired, if this Appeal were granted, whether this would mean live music would be permitted all over the City. President La Croix explained that granting the Appeal could set a precedent and any similar operator would be entitled to operate a similar establishment. Mr. Gottstein said he had brought up the point because when the Red Lamp had been in operation across the street from his home he had been unable to sleep at night because of the piano playing and if this, were to be permitted in taverns in his neighborhood he would be disturbed. On the call for opponents, Mr. Joe Quintero, 1714 Pacific Avenue, came forward. He said his complaint concerned the activities of people leaving the tavern, that parking was bad and there was a great deal of noise at the closing hours. He said he did not wish to deprive anyone of conducting a business but operations of this type could become a nuisance. He called attention to the petition which had been presented to the Planning Board, copies of which Mr. Johnson had distributed to the Council, expressing opposition to live music at the premises under discussion. The Hearing was declared closed. In reply to questions, Mr. Johnson stated there was a risk of setting a precedent by granting the variance, that the applicant did not meet the parking requirements, although this matter was not at issue and the business enjoyed a non - conforming status the same as other busi- nesses in the immediate area from off - street parking provisions. He said he did not view the parking as a major problem but as a nuisance factor. Councilman McCall inquired as to the number of similar establishments in the City and whether they were in violation of the Municipal Code. Mr. Johnson explained the live music would be a violation in the "C -1" zone. Councilman McCall said he had received telephone calls from residents of the area objecting to the place. He expressed the opinion that the tavern in question had always been a fine place to visit but it was not suitable for dancing. He said he felt the matter should be investigated as apparently some people had been under the impression that the operation was legally permissible. Councilman McCall moved the Appeal be denied and the action of the Planning Board be upheld. Councilman Longaker seconded the motion. On the question, Councilman Fore pointed out the matter of parking had not been mentioned in the memo- randum from the Planning Director nor in the petition. He commented that the memorandum from the Police Chief indicated the tavern was a nicely- operated establishment. He said he had visited and inspected the place thoroughly and found it had been improved considerably since he had attended an affair there two years previously. He expressed the opinion that any establishment using music devices would cause as much noise as that emanating from the tavern under discussion. Councilman Levy expressed the opinion that the memorandum from the Police Chief was a strong statement in support of the operation and he felt if the premises were insulated as described there would not be a noise nuisance factor and the applicant should receive consideration. The question was then put and the motion carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Councilmen Longaker, McCall and President La Croix, (3). Noes: Councilmen Fore and Levy, (2). Absent: None. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: 14. \ From the City Manager, recommending that the firm of URS Research Company be employed to conduct a study of space - planning, as an essential step toward replacement of the City Hall, at a fixed cost of $8,720., and requesting authorization to prepare the contract. Councilman Longaker moved the recommendation be accepted, that the URS Research Company be employed to conduct the specified study at a cost of $8,720. Councilman Fore seconded the motion. Speaking on the question, Councilman McCall expressed the hope that, after spending $146,000 for a Plan and then turning down the Southern Crossing, the same thing would not happen to the proposal for a new City Hall. The question was put and the motion carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 15. v. From the City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to Cal -State Electric Company, low bidder, for the project of Installation of Ball Field Lighting at Woodstock Park, at an estimated price of $17,444. Councilman Levy moved the recommendation be approved, that the contract be awarded to the designated company for the specified 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. 16.v From the City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to Sibbald Construction, low bidder, for the project of Installing a Picnic Area in Woodstock Park at an estimated price of $7,789. Councilman Levy moved the recommendation be adopted, that the contract be awarded to the specified contractor for the designated project at the price quoted. Councilman Longaker seconded the motion which carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. Mr. Steve Blake, 644 Taylor Avenue, asked to be permitted to speak and said there were creative young men in the City who would like to construct such an area. President La Croix suggested he contact the Recreation Director on the subject. 17.4,,`` From the City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to East Bay Excavating Company, Inc., low bidder, for the project of Reconstructing Broadway from Encinal Avenue to Blanding Avenue, at an estimated price of $133,651.45. Councilman Fore moved the recommendation be accepted, that the contract be awarded to the designated firm for the specified project at the price quoted. Councilman Longaker seconded the motion. On question, Mr. Hanna stated work usually proceeded within about three weeks after the contract had been awarded. He said the utility companies would have completed their work and trucks would be directed to use Park Street to Encinal Avenue while a part of the street was under construction and as the portion from Encinal Avenue to Buena Vista Avenue was completed they could switch over to Buena Vista. He said it was desired to keep the trucks off Broadway until it was completed so that the sub base would not be damaged by the wheel loads. The question was put and the motion carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 18.7 President La Croix said, for the benefit of Mr. A. T. Wiemken, Manager of the Alameda office of the Pacific as & Electric Company, who was in the audience, that a resident of Broadway called him quite regularly with complaints and also with accolades. He said the gentleman had commented on the manner in which the Pacific Gas & Electric Company had recently completed its project in that area and he had never found anyone so interested in doing a clean and expeditious job. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: 19. /President La Croix stated all evidence was on hand with regard to the possible refurbishment of the Golf Courses and he recommended, with the consent of other members of the Council, that the matter be on the agenda for the Council meeting of June 6. He said, as people who had appeared before the Council' on the subject had been informed, opportunity would be afforded for discussion on the question. This was agreeable and it was so ordered. NEW BUSINESS: 20.V Councilman McCall called attention to a memorandum from the City Engineer to the City Manager dated May 4, 1972, regarding proposed amendments to Regulation No. 2 of the Bay Area Air Pollution Control District, a communication from the City of San Mateo opposing the Regulation and another from the City of Palo Alto in support of the amendments. He said after reading Mr. Hanna's memorandum and noting the direction taken by Mr. Herbert Crowle, Alameda County Director of Public Works, and others, he would suggest the City Council go on record as opposing Regulation No. 2 as now proposed. Mr. Hanna, on request, explained that a public hearing was scheduled before the District on May 19 in regard to the amendment of Regulation No. 2 prohibiting open burning, et cetera. He said the amendment was very extensive in what the District wished to control - every process, every activity and every material that would give off anything which would go into the atmosphere would after four years require a permit and quite a number of activities had been listed for immediate control. He said there seemed to be no limit to the processes, et cetera, to be controlled after four years, which he felt was a wonderful objective but the point had not been reached where it was necessary to go so far, that the present state of the air and its so- called pollution did not deserve the degree of attention indicated by the proposed amendment. He expressed the opinion if the population density should increase three- fold in certain areas and the present -day use of synthetics and refined sophisticated processes expand it might very well be that everything would have to come under control but, in his mind, there had not been sufficient proof that the public health and welfare was threatened or damaged to a degree requiring such control. To a question by President La Croix as to whether the Bay Area Air Pollution Control Board would be the regulatory agency charged with enforcement, Mr. Hanna expressed the thought that there would be an effort to use building inspection forces, plumbing inspectors, et cetera, to spread the work load. It was pointed out that this Regulation would control activities in the Bay Area while Proposition 9, on the State Primary Election ballot on June 6, would extend statewide. Mr. Weller expressed the opinion that, to some extent, Regulation No. 2 would go further than the State proposition as it would provide for an excessive amount of subjective judgment on the part of the Air Pollution Control District. He said he would agree with the City Engineer that the end product would be desirable but the question was whether, in the process of trying to meet a desirable goal, the City was prepared to give to an independent, non - elected district board the authority to control everything happening in the district. He said he could donceive that the Board's actions would be subject to review by the courts as to whether or not they were unreasonable but it was obvious that the District would have great power. He said he was not saying that the District would exercise the degree of authority allowed but the language in the regulation as now proposed was broad enough to so permit. On request for comment, Mr. Cunningham said he viewed the Regulation as exempting all presently existing uses for a period of four years in which no permit would be required. He said the argument that local agencies would be required to enforce a District or State operation had been made before but it was not the responsibility of the City to do so. He said he viewed the regulations, especially in view of the four -year exemption period and later the exemption of all dwelling units under four, as being entirely reasonable and needed, that where problems were real and important some drastic remedy was required. Mr. Weller repeated his statements emphasizing that the proposed degree of prospective control should not be given to a non - elected, single - purpose district board, an authority which was superior to the authority of the cities and counties and to all elected agencies within the area under its control. He said he had no objection to the ultimate goal the District wanted to obtain and he subscribed to it but the drafts- manship and the extent to which authority had been granted was excessive and at some point there would have to be local control by the City Council or the Board of Supervisors, agencies formed under the State Constitution, and enactment of a statute giving over- riding authority over that of the Constitutional agencies was wrong. A lengthy discussion continued and consideration was given to the proper action to be taken by the Council. Councilman McCall said he felt the District was moving too fast and suggested the City Engineer be request- ed to appear at the Hearing on May 19 or the Council submit a letter acknowledging the work of the District and requesting that action be held off until the City could receive additional information. He inquired as to the City Engineer's thinking on this point. Mr. Hanna said he would be willing and very happy to appear at the public hearing of the District to learn the thinking of others and to present the opinions of the Council and his own regarding the extent of the District's interest. President La Croix suggested that in the best interest of the community Mr. Hanna attend the Hearing and submit his thinking as the City Engineer, if he should so desire. He said he personally felt he could not vote on the question this evening, that he felt inclined to agree with the statements of the City Attorney concerning a need for control and the fact that the controls would not be exercised for four years, that this would seem to allow time to gear up and prepare for the restriction. Councilman Longaker questioned the fairness of asking that the City Engineer appear without some direction from the Council. After further discussion, Councilman McCall moved the City Engineer be requested to appear at the Hearing on May 19, 1972, to convey to the Bay Area Air Pollution Control District the appre- ciation of the Council for its work to date and to express the thinking of the Council that the recom- mendations of the District were going further than they properly should at this time, that the question should be worked out with the cities and counties and the elected officials before such severe action is taken. Councilman McCall said Mr. Hanna was aware of his thinking and he would hope the issue would be coordinated with other professionals with whom Mr. Hanna was associated to come up with something which would be palatable to the District and at the same time put over the point. Councilman Longaker seconded the motion. After further clarifying discussion, the question was put and the motion carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: President La Croix, (1). Absent: None. 21. / Councilman McCall brought up the matter of Proposition 9 to which the League of California Cities had expressed opposition, as had many other agencies. He moved the City Council take a position of opposition to this Proposition. Councilman Levy seconded the motion which carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: Councilman Longaker, (1). Absent: None. Councilman Longaker explained he had voted against the motion because he felt he was not sufficiently informed on the subject. RESOLUTIONS: 22. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman McCall, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7922 Approving Final Map of Condominium Subdivision Known as Tract 3378, Authorizing Execution of Agreement for Construction of Public Improvements Therein, and Approving Faithful Performance Bond as to Sufficiency (Northeasterly Corner of Shore Line Drive and Willow Street - Doric Development, Inc., Subdividers)." 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. 23. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Levy, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7923 Calling for Bids for Legal Advertising for the City of Alameda 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. 24. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Fore, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7924 Adopting Specifications, Special Provisions and Plans for Janitorial Service for the City Hall and Libraries, Calling for Bids and Directing City Clerk to Advertise Same." 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. 25. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Longaker, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7925 Adopting Specifications for Furnishing to the City of Alameda Class 'B' Portland Cement Concrete Transit Mix for Fiscal Year 1972 -73, Calling for Bids and Directing City Clerk to Advertise Same." 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. 26. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Fore, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7926 Adopting Specifications, Special Provisions and Plans for Minor Street Patching with Asphalt Concrete, Repair of Portland Cement Concrete Sidewalk, Driveway, Curb and Gutter, Installation of House Laterals, for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1973, Calling for Bids and Directing City Clerk to Advertise Same." 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. 7927 Rescinding Resolution No. 7919 Relating to Adoption of Specifications, Special Provisions and Plans for Widening Third Street." 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. 28. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Longaker, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7928 Affirming and Adopting Amendments to Highway Users Tax Fund Budget." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Fore and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. Councilman McCall said he had it on good authority that the City might have been able to get the property in the vicinity of the Posey Tube, for which funds had been allocated recently, without cost or at least on a negotiated purchase. He said the avenue was still open and there was a possibility, so long as the area was to be used for the City purposes and the City would take over operation and maintenance, that additional surplus lands being offered for sale by the State in the area of the Tubes could be made available to the City at a very reasonable price or at a negotiated figure. He requested that the City Manager and the City Engineer be instructed to pursue the matter with the League of California Cities staff and State Department of Public Works personnel. It was requested that the matter be investigated accordingly. 29. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman McCall, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7929 Resolution of the Council of the City of Alameda in Appreciation and Commendation of Dr. Arthur Guerra for His Service to the City." 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. INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES: 30. Councilman Levy moved the following ordinance be introduced, after which it would be laid over under provision of law and the Charter: "Ordinance No. New Series An Ordinance Amending Certain Portions of the Alameda Municipal Code Relating to Traffic Regulations." The motion was seconded by Councilman Longaker and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. It was suggested that the Naval Air Station and Todd Shipyards Corporation be notified of the provisions of this ordinance. BILLS: 31. An itemized List of Claims against the City of Alameda and the Departments thereof, in the total amount of $73,472.82, 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 May 16, 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: 32. ' ''Mr. James R. Seward, 2210 Santa Clara Avenue, brought up the matter of the revised Bicycle Ordinance and said he had a list of two pages of incidents, minutes apart on dates from May 11 to May 15, when bicycles had been ridden on the sidewalks in the Park Street business district and on May 12 at 3:20 p.m. when two men were riding bicycles on the sidewalk between Clinton Avenue and Otis Drive. He inquired why the ordinance was not being enforced by the Police Department. President La Croix pointed out the ordinance was adopted on April 18, 1972, and the thirty -day referendum period had not yet passed, that the Police Department had stated it would supervise enforcement and do everything it could to correct infractions. Mr. Seward inquired if it was legal for a bicycle rider to carry a child on the back of the bicycle. Mr. Cunningham stated he was of the opinion that there was no prohibition against this activity. Incident- ally, he remarked, there had recently been fifteen citations issued for bicycle riding on sidewalks, under the old ordinance. The Councilmen commented they had noted a decline in bicycle riding on sidewalks in the City in recent weeks. 33.v Mr. Frank Gottstein complained again that pollution was created by blocking up drains to the gutters in front of his home on Haight Avenue, that this was a violation of the Plumbing Code. 34. 1 ` Mr. James McClure, 2811 Yosemite Avenue, said he had noticed on Oak Street between Santa Clara and Lincoln Avenues there were twelve parking meters missing, and inquired as to the reason. Mr. Hanna explained that there were not sufficient meters to supply the requirements and the attempt was to move them to where there would be a better return. 35. Mr. McClure said he had attended the Hearings before the Planning Board on the application of Mr. Richard Galyen for a variance to allow live entertainment at his tavern at 1710 Lincoln Avenue and the greatest problem seemed to be the question of what live entertainment was. He suggested that this be clarified in the Ordinance. FILING: 36. Specifications No. PW 3 -72 -6 - Janitorial Service for City Hall and Libraries for 1972 -73 and 1973 -74. 37. Specifications No. MS 5 -72 -1 - Class "B" Portland Cement Concrete Transit Mix for Fiscal Year 1972 -73. 38. Specifications No. PW 5 -72 -9 - Minor Street Patching, 1972 -73. 39. Specifications No. PW 5 -72 -11 - Repair of Sidewalk, Driveway, Curb and Gutter, 1972 -73. 40. Specifications No. PW 5 -72 -12 - Installation of House Laterals, 1972 -73. 41. Agreement - Between Doric Development, Inc. and City - re Tract No. 3378. 42. Financial and Operating Reports - Bureau of Electricity as of February 29, 1972 and March 31, 1972 - Verified by George A. Hackleman. MEMORIAL RESOLUTIONS: 43. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Longaker, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7930 Resolution of the Council of the City of Alameda in Memoriam to David C. Henderson, Police Officer "WITH DEEP SORROW, the Council of the City of Alameda records the death of one of its dedicated and faithful employees, DAVID C. HENDERSON, whose sudden and untimely passing has greatly shocked and saddened his associates and fellow workers. "WHEREAS, Mr. Henderson had been employed by the City of Alameda on October 17, 1955, as a Police Officer; and "WHEREAS, Officer Henderson had been diligent and conscientious in the performance of his duties, and had dependably carried out special assignments involving various acti- vities of the Police Department and been particularly interested in the welfare of children, having been instrumental in the founding and active in the execution of the program of the Police League for the youthful baseball enthusiasts of the City and a participant in the "Officer Bill" program instituted in 1971 to convey to grade school children an awareness of the functions of the Department, the Police Officer, safety procedures, and in general their responsibilities as good citizens. "NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Alameda does hereby acknowledge with appreciation the excellent service rendered by this reliable and loyal employee during his years of City employ and expresses its sense of personal loss in his demise. "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution be spread in full upon the minutes of this meeting and a copy thereof be sent to the family of Officer Henderson to extend to its members sincere sympathy in their bereavement. "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that when this meeting of the Council of the City of Alameda adjourns, it shall do so in respect to the memory of DAVID C. HENDERSON." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Levy and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. The President declared the foregoing resolutions adopted. 44. Councilman McCall suggested that in adjourning this meeting in respect to the memory of Officer Henderson, a silent tribute also be offered for the speedy recovery of The Honorable George Wallace, Governor of the State of Alabama. President La Croix eulogized Officer Henderson as an excellent and popular employee and requested that all stand for a moment of silence in observance of his passing and in prayer for the complete and early recovery of Governor Wallace. 45. Councilman Levy moved the Council retire to an executive session in the Conference Room, No. 303, for discussion of personnel matters. The motion was seconded by Councilman Longaker and carried unanimously. At the conclusion of the deliberations, it was determined that no further action would be taken at this meeting. ADJOURNMENT: 46. There being no further business to come before the meeting, the Council adjourned in respect to the memory of DAVID C. HENDERSON and in a spirit of prayer for the recovery of The Honorable GEORGE WALLACE, to assemble in regular session on Tuesday, June 6, 1972, at 7:30 o'clock p.m. Respectfully submitted, (:6, City Clerk