1972-05-02 Regular CC Minuteszh
REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA
HELD TUESDAY MAY 2, 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
Rabbi Gunther Gates of Temple Israel.
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 April 18, 1972, were approved as transcribed.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
2. _`` From Mrs. Alvina Routt, 1372 Pearl Street, in opposition to the shopping center proposed by Bay
View Development Company at the northwest corner of Mecartney and County Roads.
The communication was acknowledged and referred to the file on the subject of the rezoning petition
filed by Bay View on this parcel.
3. x From Mr. John W. Kane, 3214 Phoenix Lane, with regard to the shopping center proposed for the
corner of Mecartney and County Roads.
This letter was also to be acknowledged and referred to the file on the subject of the rezoning
petition.
4. « From Mr. William P. Stier, 1623 Moreland Drive, reiterating that Eighth Street should not be
widened and no bridge approach should be allowed in Alameda.
President La Croix said he had spoken with Mr. Stier with regard to his letter and the gentleman had
been more concerned with respect to the Southern Crossing issue than with the proposed Eighth Street
project.
5. i, From Mr. Richard L. Galyen, an Appeal from the decision of the Planning Board to deny his appli-
cation to allow live entertainment at 1710 Lincoln Avenue.
The Hearing on this Appeal was set for the next regular meeting of the Council on May 16, 1972.
Councilman McCall asked that the Police Department be requested, through the City Manager's office, to
submit to the Council a report on this situation and any incidents in the area involving the Depart-
ment, also whether it would recommend granting the permit.
The City Manager was directed to follow through on the request.
6. From Mr. Eugene Fassiotto, 1317 Ninth Street, requesting the opportunity to speak to the City
Council concerning a resolution on the subject of the Vietnam War.
President La Croix pointed out the Council was on record by its Resolution No. 7624, adopted May 19,
1970, expressing concern over the recent extension of the War and urging withdrawal of American forces
from the Southeast Asia area at the earliest possible date.
The President then recognized Mr. Fassiotto, who read a prepared statement expressing opposition to
further bombardment in the Southeast Asia war theater and encouraging the Council to take a position
against the Indochina War and to so inform the public by all forms of communication available.
7. °` At this time, Mr. John Dos Santos, 457 Haight Avenue, was recognized for a presentation on the
same subject. He asked that the Council adopt a resolution on behalf of the people of the community
denouncing President Nixon's re- escalation of the war during the past few weeks and requesting that
the bombardment of the people of Southeast Asia be stopped. He urged that the Council voice disap-
proval of the policy on behalf of the people of the City and act on their behalf and the residents
of the entire country in showing this position.
President La Croix said he recognized the concern of these young people with the issue, which was also
the concern of everyone present. He remarked that the first presentation was similar to one being made
throughout the State by college students and in many instances adults, with slight change in the
wording to include facts pertinent to the City of Alameda. He pointed out again that the Council had
been on record for two years in this regard and if it was so agreed by other members of the Council
he saw no reason to change its position at this time. This was acceptable to the other Councilmen.
HEARINGS:
8. V f In the Matter of Installation of Curbs and Driveway along the Fourth Street frontage of property
known as 1515 Fourth Street.
There was on file in the City Clerk's office the Affidavit of Posting of the required Notice in connec-
tion with the subject.
47
On request, City Engineer Hanna reported this matter related to two items of street improvement which
had never been made to City standards. The sidewalk, he said, had been constructed but it contained
hazards. He said his Department had endeavored to contact the property owner with regard to the condi-
tion without success and, in order to bring the matter to a conclusion, the State law provided the
standards to be met and the process of notifying the property owner of a public hearing before the City
Council at which protests were permitted. The City Council would then decide whether or not the work
was necessary. If it was so decided the property owner would have sixty days from the time of notifica-
tion to have the work done and if the improvements were not in place at the expiration of that time the
Superintendent of Streets would then be required to proceed with the work. After the costs were known
there would be a second hearing before the Council and the owner would have the opportunity again of
protesting or making suggestions in the matter. After the second hearing, if the Council agreed that the
costs were proper, the owner would have five days' time in which to make payment. If not paid at that
time, the cost would become a lien against the property.
City Attorney Cunningham stated these proceedings were taken under the State Improvement Act of 1911.
He said the issue before the Council was to pass upon any objections or protests which might be raised
by an interested property owner. If there should be any protests deemed valid, they might be upheld or
overruled by a four - fifths vote.
On the call for protests on the statements of the City Engineer, there was no response.
Upon advice of the City Attorney, the City Engineer was directed to proceed in accordance with the State
Act on this situation.
REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
9. From the Planning Board, signed by Mr. Ronald Matheson, President, reporting on the status of its
study of design problems in the City.
President La Croix recalled that the City Council had in two joint meetings charged the Planning Board
and staff with certain goals concerning sign control and architectural design control, and there had been
a Mayor's committee on historic and architectural preservation. He said he had recently discussed with
the Board President the progress on the studies. He complimented the Board and requested that it move
with all expediency on the issues of sign control and architectural /design control. He pointed out the
study on historic /architectural preservation was moving ahead and members of the community would be
appointed to serve on committees to help guide these functions. He said he felt strongly that the
direction the Board had taken with the guidance of the staff was of much concern to the Council and, hope-
fully, a sign control ordinance would soon be before the Council for consideration and adoption.
Mr. Cunningham said the sign control ordinance was in rough draft form for review by the staff and it
would go before the Board for consideration very soon. He said members of the industry had expressed
great objection to the proposed ordinance but he hoped to have something valid for submission to the
Council in the near future.
Councilman McCall said he would like to have the views of the City Attorney on Category (b) - Architec-
tural /Design Control and the committee governing it over and above the City Council.
Mr. Cunningham said he would hope the Council would have the ultimate authority and likewise if an advisory
or control board were to be established it would consist of people with some expertise in the field of
architecture and design and the effort would be successful. Obviously, he said, it would be left up to
the Council whether it wanted control over that board, that the staff would not want to substitute its
judgment for that of other persons who might be on the control board.
Councilman McCall raised the question of whether it was within the purview of the Council to appoint
these boards and committees.
Mr. Cunningham said he was of the impression that the intent had been to have a citizens' group advise as
to specific problems of the nature, standards, and criteria which might go into an architectural standards
control ordinance. He said he believed it was not intended that the Planning Board would appoint a
committee to decide specific problems arising after the ordinance was in effect - it was attempting to
take some of the burden from the Council in developing these study committees. He said he would make known
these inquiries to the Board.
Councilman McCall inquired if building permits for all future construction in the City would be affected.
President La Croix said he had raised this question with President Matheson and it had been pointed out
that the Council had charged the Board with gathering information, putting studies together and coming up
with recommendations to the Council for acceptance or rejection. He said he did not feel the Board was
usurping the power of the Council by asking for input by citizens; this was a common practice in many
communities and he welcomed the practice. He suggested, if Councilman McCall felt very strongly that this
should not be done, that he might wish to pursue the question with the City Manager and the City Attorney
to determine their recommendation and he would be happy to receive the request.
Councilman Longaker said he felt the problem would be highlighted when the architectural /design control
category was encountered.
Councilman Levy moved the report be accepted and the Board be congratulated upon its progress in the direc-
tion in which it had moved. Councilman Longaker seconded the motion which carried on the following roll
call vote. Ayes: Three. Noes: Councilmen Fore and McCall, (2). Absent: None.
Councilman McCall explained he had voted against the motion because he did not feel he had given anyone
authority to appoint committees for him nor was there any action by the Council by motion so to do. He
said he wanted all citizens to be involved, not just a committee.
40
President La Croix said he would request that the Council be informed by the City Manager and the
City Attorney as to the intent of the Board.
Councilman Fore explained he had voted No on the motion as the Council did not have the facts as to
the part it would take as the elected representatives of the people of the City.
10. From the Planning Board, signed by the Secretary, recommending rezoning from the "M -2 -G ",
General Industrial- Government, to the "M -2 ", General Industrial District, certain property known as
2415 Webster Street.
The Hearing on this petition was set for the next regular meeting of the Council on May 16, 1972.
11.' °' From the City Attorney, recommending the City join in an amicus curiae brief in connection with
the case of Klopping vs. the City of Whittier, and requesting authorization to proceed.
Mr. Cunningham explained a case had been decided by the District Court of Appeals in which the issue
had been whether there could be liability on behalf of a city which was the condemning authority when
it states it is going to take property in the future and then there is a depreciation in the value of
the property between the time of the statement and the act. He said the law and the precedent was
that there was no liability for that diminution of value but the court had announced if this rule was
unfair a change must come from the State Supreme Court; if the rule were changed this would impose a
greater financial burden on any condemnor and the City of Alameda did at times take property in eminent
domain. He said the State Division of Highways had solicited various cities throughout the State to
join with the City of Whittier in an appeal brief to the State Supreme Court which had granted a
hearing from the lower court decision and it desired to use the City's name in an amicus curiae or
"friend of the court" brief at no expense to the City. He pointed out if the decision in the District
Court of Appeals were reversed the City would have some financial problems and in view of these facts
he recommended that the City join the Division of Highways in the brief.
After brief further discussion for clarification, Councilman Longaker moved the recommendation of the
City Attorney be accepted and he be authorized to proceed as requested. Councilman McCall seconded
the motion which on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
12. `` From the City Manager, submitting the request of Shorepoint Associates for a further time exten-
sion of one year for completion of public improvements in connection with the subdivision known as
Tract 3069 at Westline and Shore Line Drives, and for reduction in the bond and acceptance of the
work done to date.
City Manager Weller pointed out the staff had no objection to the time extension or to reduction of
the bond but, in view of the fact that additional maintenance might have to be performed on the
improvements not yet finished prior to the time all improvements had been finished, it recommended
that the improvements not be accepted until all work had been completed.
Councilman McCall moved the time extension of one year from April 14, 1972, be granted for completion
of public improvements in connection with this subdivision and that the bond be reduced to the amount
of $2,558. The motion was seconded by Councilman Levy and carried on the following roll call vote.
Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
'
13. From the City Manager, recommending a time extension of four months be granted for completion
of public improvements in connection with the subdivision known as Tract 3258, Islandia No. 2.
Upon request, Mr. Hanna explained the reason for the request was that more time was being consumed in
building the homes and matching up the street improvements than originally anticipated; however, the
developer had a well - organized company and the work was satisfactory so there was no disadvantage to
the tenants, neighborhood or the City in granting the extension.
Councilman Levy moved the requested time extension of four months from April 27, 1972, be granted
for completion of the public improvements in connection with this subdivision. Councilman Longaker
seconded the motion which carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent:
None.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
14. Brought up for consideration was the matter of the petition filed by Mr. John Mitcheom on behalf
of Mr. Lino Lorenzetti for rezoning from the "C -1 ", Neighborhood Business, to the "R -4 ", Neighborhood
Apartment District, the property known as 1547 Sherman Street.
President La Croix recalled that the matter had been continued in order that the Council might have
satisfaction that the improvements on the property would be brought up to Code and certain conditions
would be extensively improved for the betterment of the area.
Mr. Mitcheom, upon invitation to speak, stated it had been mentioned in the original request for re-
zoning that his client intended to improve the property and, inasmuch as the Council had not seen its
way clear to go along with the proposal, he requested permission to withdraw the petition.
President La Croix thanked Mr. Mitcheom for his expeditious handling of the matter and stated the
subject of the petition to rezone would be deemed closed.
Councilman McCall requested that the City Engineer make a complete review of the property and submit
to the Council a report relative to possible condemnation proceedings.
Mr. Hanna said he felt the City would not be in a position to condemn the property, that there were
some conditions which should be improved such as a missing pipe cap on the back of the property should
409
be replaced, plumbing deficiencies on one of the parcels should be corrected and two of the four
properties still did not have garbage service. Mr. Hanna said he had not been inside the buildings but
could request permission to enter to investigate if deficiencies existed on the inside and proceed from
that point.
Upon question, Mr. Mitcheom stated he felt the subject had been previously discussed, that the tenants
had been informed the garbage must be cleaned up and they must apply for garbage service, and he was
under the impression this had been done. He said he felt it was not up to the owner to continually have
to pay for this service, that it was the tenant's responsibility.
President La Croix commented on a similar situation some time previously when the Fire Department had
been informed of the conditions and it had gone directly to the property owner with instructions to
correct the deficiencies or the property would be shut down, and within twenty -four hours the condition
had been corrected. He expressed the opinion that Mr. Mitcheom, as the property manager, or the property
owner had the responsibility to the community and the residents of the area to maintain the property
properly, that Councilman McCall had raised a valid question and the City Engineer had stated there were
deficiencies under the Code which should be corrected.
Mr. Mitcheom stated this would be done and the garbage problem had been rectified.
Councilman McCall pointed out that the County Health Department also had a responsibility in situations
of this kind.
Mr. Mitcheom was requested to proceed with all expediency to correct the deficiencies on the subject
property.
15.K Councilman Longaker said he had noted a truck parked on Otis Drive peddling fruits and vegetables
and requested information on the legality of such operations.
President La Croix explained that peddlers' permits were issued from time to time to private entrepreneurs
for this type of operation.
Upon request, Mr. Cunningham stated in general City ordinances prohibited the sale of any merchandise
from trucks except fresh fruit and vegetables and confectionery items. He said a person who operates a
"moving store" is not permitted under the ordinance as presently written to make sales from a parked
position but must keep moving his truck from place to place. He said the ordinance seemed to work
pretty well except that there was a sort of public acceptance of this type of operation and somehow it
generated a non - enforcement of the pertinent sections of the Code.
Mr. Weller stated the individual involved had been advised that the City would not be in a position to
issue him a permit as the operation was illegal. He said the City offices were not inclined to harass
people unnecessarily but he had indicated that the truck should not be parked on Otis Drive and had
offered suggestions for a parking spot as an alternative to rental or lease of privately -owned property
but the person involved had not seen fit to follow. He said he felt the man clearly understood his
position legally and, since there had now been a complaint, unless the Council felt otherwise he would
suggest to the Police Department that the gentleman be advised he must get off the street or he would be
cited. He said he disliked to interfere in a situation which was essentially short -term and seasonal
and not disturbing to anyone but if anyone was bothered by the operation, there was no question but that
the operation was illegal and the operator would be so advised.
16. Councilman Longaker said he would appreciate a report on the status of the Civic Center Complex
study and the Golf Course problem.
Mr. Weller said the organizations the staff would recommend to conduct the space requirement study had
been narrowed to two and prospectively to one. Of the two firms under consideration, one appeared to be
better equipped to submit what the City desired and the Planning Director had been requested to check
out some of the past clients of this Company to be sure its performance had been satisfactory. He anti-
cipated there would be a recommendation before the Council possibly at the meeting of June 6.
Mr. Weller said, so far as he was aware, the Council had received all information with regard to the
Golf Course problem and he was in the process of preparing for submission additional information which
he felt was largely repetitious but this would also be forthcoming within the next week or ten days.
President La Croix said after review of the information by the Council, the time for discussion of the
issue would be announced in ample time for any of the public who so desired to be present at the meeting.
17. Councilman McCall brought up the subject of the proposed boat ramp behind Encinal High School. He
said he had noticed the construction proceeding in the area and that the public right -of -way had been
used. He said he would like to know the final treatment of the street extension on School District
property and wondered if the street and parking lot could be graded and if, by agreement with the City,
people who wished might use the area on a temporary basis until such time as plans were approved for
the boat ramp.
It was directed that the City Engineer, through the City Manager's office, request from the Alameda
Unified School District a report on its intent for the use of the property and the possibility of general
public use in the interim before it would proceed on any particular development.
18. President La Croix commented that the Recreation Director had reported two sanitary depots were in
operation at the north end of Grand Street in connection with the boat ramp. This was in response to a
request by Mr. John J. Williamson that such facilities be provided.
NEW BBUSINESS:
19. President La Croix raised the question of Senate Bill 938 authored by Senator Walsh to establish
minimum speed limits of thirty -five miles per hour on all State highways except in certain enumerated
situations. He said he had requested,through the City Manager, that the Police Chief study the Bill
and Chief Young had recommended that, with respect to the peculiar situation in Alameda, opposition
be indicated to Senator Walsh's Bill as presently written. He said he and the City Manager concurred
and he requested, if the Council concurred, that it adopt a motion in opposition to the Bill.
Councilman McCall moved the Council go on record in opposition to Senate Bill 938. Councilman Levy
seconded the motion which on roll call carried unanimously.
The City Manager was requested to draft a letter with the valid points set forth by Chief Young
included, for forwarding to Senator Walsh.
RESOLUTIONS:
20. "Resolution No.
Approving Federal -Aid Urban Highway System (State Route 61 Connection)."
It was stated this resolution had been withdrawn.
21. "Resolution No. 7915
Authorizing Execution of Agreement with Jean H. Sharp, M.D., for Medical
Services."
It was explained that with the retirement of Dr. Arthur Guerra after many years of greatly appreciated
service, it was proposed to appoint Dr. Sharp to fill the office of City Physician until such a time
as a permanent appointment could be made.
On question by Councilman Longaker, Mr. Weller explained that in terms of the Charter requirements
for a City Physician there were really no essential duties involved which could not be provided in
some other way but the position was still included in the City Charter and presumably should be filled.°
He said he felt there was no .question but that the logical place for the City Physician to be head-
quartered and to function was at the Emergency Ward at Alameda Hospital. He said he had discussed
the matter with the Hospital Administrator over a period of at least a year and seemingly they had
been close to agreement but other factors had interfered with reaching a conclusion. He said it
seemed relatively simple, that a doctor would be designated as the Chief Physician at the Emergency
facility and that same individual would assume the additional title of City Physician.
Councilman Longaker moved the resolution be adopted, expressing the hope that within a reasonable
length of time consideration could be given to resolving the problem in another way. 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.
Councilman McCall suggested that an appropriate resolution of appreciation and commendation of Dr.
Guerra for his service to the community be prepared for action by the Council at its next regular
meeting. It was so ordered.
22. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman McCall, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 7916
Declaring Intention to Obligate Fiscal Year 1971 -72 and 1972 -73 TOPICS
Allocations and Assigning Fiscal Year 1971 -72 TOPICS Allocations to
County of Alameda."
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 McCall, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 7917
Rejecting Claim of Richard Fraige Against City."
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Fore and carried on the following roll
call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
24. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman McCall, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 7918
Authorizing Mayor to Execute Application for Grant from California Council
on Criminal Justice to Acquire Video Training and Surveillance Equipment,
Agreeing to Provide Matching Funds Therefor, and Designating City Manager
to Execute Contract."
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 McCall, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 7919
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 Fore and carried on the following roll
call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
26. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Longaker, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 7920
Rejecting Claim of Robert Harrell Against City."
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.
The President declared the foregoing resolutions adopted.
ORDINANCES FOR PASSAGE:
27.E "Ordinance No. 1667,
New Series
Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Section 14 -4115 Thereof,
Relating to the Regulation of Gasoline, Benzine, and Flammable Liquid
Dispensing Devices."
Captain Richard Quarante of the Fire Department distributed a statement of facts relative to the subject
for information of the Councilmen. He said an application had been received to conduct a dual -type
service station at 1628 Webster Street, a combined operation where one attendant served both the full
service and the self - service islands. The Fire Department had denied the request on the basis that the
applicant failed to come up to the appropriate safety requirements relating to dual -type operations and
the applicant, to his knowledge, was at the present time operating this type of installation without
official approval by the Department.
Captain Quarante explained the Fire Department had requested the proposed amendment to provide new
regulations to safeguard life and property for the new concept of combined operations. He said the
Department had regulations spelling out in detail operation of a wholly self - service operation and had
no trouble with stations dispensing gasoline by qualified attendants only. He said it was felt the dual
type of operation under discussion should be designated in an ordinance in order for the City to control
it. Captain Quarante said fire departments throughout the western states were concerned with the problem
at the present time and the City of Alameda was one of the leaders attempting to solve it. He emphasized
that the intent of the proposed amendment was not to discriminate against anyone or to provide unreason-
able standards but to provide minimum safety standards for an operation which was not presently covered
with a middle -of- the -road position. He said the main objection by opponents seemed to be that they felt
they could not have a separate attendant for the self- service island. The Fire Department was convinced
that if an operator was busy with another patron he could not have full control of the self - service
operation.
President La Croix complimented Captain Quarante on his very informative presentation and comprehensive
report on the subject. He then asked for any comments from the Council.
Councilman Fore pointed out that the station in question had received many warnings but continued to
operate in violation.
Mr. Russ Aubry, 1317 Bellfair Drive, Pinole, operator of the service station under discussion, was invited
to make a presentation on the subject. He first apologized to the City Attorney, stating a letter had
been addressed to his office in Oakland which he had not received previous to his appearing at the last
meeting of the Council. He said the main point of the letter was that the interpretation of the Fire
Marshal at that time was that the station was in violation as it did not have a separate individual in
control of the self - service operation. He said he had not been satisfied, in discussing the matter with
the City Attorney's office, that he was in violation of the Code and he would continue his operation
until the effective date of the ordinance, if it should be adopted.
Mr. Aubry said he was a representative of the Phillips Petroleum Company, working on a salary and managing
nine service stations, that he and his employer were concerned with safety and all operators in the
service stations were trained to perform all services offered by the stations. He said he understood
the City was proud of being a fore - runner in approving of self - service stations and congratulated the City
for allowing this type of operation. Mr. Aubry explained his Company's pumps would not operate until
turned on by the attendant and he felt this was a far superior method as compared to operation from an
office. He said the only point to which his Company objected was that a separate attendant was required
to attend the self- service island. It was felt this would create a problem with customers and the whole
concept of self- service was for savings to the customer. He enumerated many cities and states in which
this type of service was permitted and in which his Company had approved permits and expressed the opinion
that this was the kind of service desired. He said their stations were operated by qualified persons at
all times, but during early morning hours and late at night there would not normally be two attendants;
the proposed ordinance might necessitate closing down one or the other of the operations. He said he
felt this would be a disservice to the customer.
To a question by Councilman Levy, Mr. Aubry said in their operations in other cities the extra attendant
was not required.
In reply to a question by Councilman Fore with regard to safety, Mr. Aubry commented on an article in
the Wall Street Journal issue of April 4, 1972, that National Fire Underwriters' statistics showed
self- service stations were fully as safe as conventional service stations.
President La Croix said he felt inclined to agree with the recommendations of the Fire Department,
having seen the evidence of its work and concern in the past and the reasons for the protective
measures had always been rather self- evident to him.
Captain Quarante said, with regard to Mr. Aubry's statements, the proposed ordinance spelled out in
detail the provision that the self- service facility would have to be activated by an attendant. He
said he personally felt a station should operate either way, full service or self- service, but the
Department was attempting to be reasonable in permitting the dual operation with the safety require-
ments.
To an inquiry by Councilman Longaker, Mr. Quarante stated two self- service stations were presently
operating in the City in addition to Simas Bros., which had agreed to dispense by the attendant on
complaint of the Department. He explained the method of operation practiced by each station.
Councilman Levy moved the ordinance be passed as submitted. The motion was seconded by Councilman
McCall.
Mr. Weller asked to intervene and said he felt there was a certain amount of merit on both sides, that
he strongly supported the position of the Fire Department in this case and believed the present ordi-
nance covered the situation but there was obviously a difference of opinion and the proposed amendment
was largely to clarify the difference. He said the gasoline companies had been in the forefront in
promoting safety in the dispensing of dangerous fuel and there should not be any implication that
any gasoline company would knowingly operate in a dangerous manner but he did feel that prospectively
the kind of dual operation suggested by Mr. Aubry was dangerous and he suggested the ordinance should
be adopted simply because in the absence of a clarifying ordinance there could be a rather dangerous
operation. However, he said, there should also be an understanding that the Fire Department and the
City organization generally was perfectly willing to work with any responsible spokesman for the
industry to work out something that might make better sense and come back with further amendments to
the ordinance. He said in his personal opinion the automatic cutoff on the nozzle was not the answer
as the operator might activate the nozzle and then become occupied with another operation and not
pay attention to what was happening.
Councilman McCall inquired of the City Attorney if the proposed ordinance could in any way be called
discriminatory in a court.
Mr. Cunningham said it could not be foretold what a court would decide, that he and Mr. Aubry had
discussed this aspect also and, in his view and in his best judgment, the proposed amendment would
not discriminate against dual service as it would impose the same regulations upon all those who
wished to engage in dual service.
Councilman Fore inquired if there would be the same type of inspection in other self - service stations
in the City as had been performed at the station in question.
Captain Quarante stated this would be true, that the Fire Department inspection records were open for
public view.
The question was then put and the motion carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes:
None. Absent: None.
BILLS:
28. An itemized List of Claims against the City of Alameda and the Departments thereof, in the total
amount of $81,211.45, was presented to the Council at this meeting.
The List was accompanied by certification from the City Manager that the Claims shown were correct.
Councilman Levy moved the bills as itemized in the List of Claims filed with the City Clerk on May 2,
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:
29.Mrs. Inez Kapellas, 1128 College Avenue, inquired whether the City had considered making an
economic study as to whether further multiple dwellings would be feasible for the taxpayers of the
community.
President La Croix stated this question had been asked some time ago in connection with a study in Palo
Alto at that time and all of the pertinent facts had been before the Council and possibly could be made
available. He said the City of Alameda had not entered into such a study.
Mrs. Kapellas suggested that an article in the evening paper would give a good idea of a study to make -
on sewers, pointing out the City of Pleasanton was being sued for $36,000,000 because of the alleged
inadequacy of its sewer system due to multiple dwellings. She claimed the City did not have sufficient
serers for its present development and still more multiple dwellings were proposed.
President La Croix assured Mrs. Kapellas that the City had sufficient sewers for the development
progressing in the City.
413
30. Mrs. Kapellas suggested an air conditioning system should be installed in the Council Chamber.
31. °' Mrs. Kapellas inquired as to the emergency facilities at the Alameda Hospital, for which the City
had contracted, stating she had knowledge of a patient who was charged $100 for only the use of the
emergency room, and asked if this was a combination City- County operation.
President La Croix explained that the City and the Hospital had entered into agreement for the emergency
service.
Councilman McCall suggested that Mrs. Kapellas might inspect the agreement, which was a public document,
noting that the City paid only the uncollectibles, both for the ambulance and for the treatment.
Mrs. Kapellas complained that the facility was not fully equipped as an A -1 full - fledged emergency station.
32.''-r'" Mrs. Blanche Cervelli, 542 Taylor Avenue, said she would have to disagree with Mrs. Kapellas as she
and her family had used the emergency facility many times and she was very grateful for its existence.
33./ Mr. James Ferguson, 1539 Sherman Street, also praised the emergency facility as he and his family
had received excellent attention there. 34. Mr. Ferguson complained that a continuous automobile repair service was conducted in the 1500 block
of Sherman Street and inquired if anything could be done to correct the situation and also about the cars
which were left parked for long periods.
Mr. Ferguson also called attention to the apartment dwelling in his neighborhood and requested that the
City Departments investigate the conditions at that location, pointing out if the area was to be developed
as some of the residents wished to make it, the buildings in question should not be permitted to continue
to deteriorate as they were at present, as the surrounding dwellings were thus depreciating in value.
He said he would appreciate having something done about the situation.
President La Croix requested that the City Manager investigate the complaint.
35. ` Mrs. Lillian Deuschle, 711 Taylor Avenue, complained that a new bar was being constructed on Webster
Street and the neighbors did not want it to be allowed. She claimed many objectionable incidents had
occurred in connection with the establishment.
President La Croix requested that the City Manager investigate this situation also.
Mr. Weller suggested that Mrs. Deuschle contact the State Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, either by
letter or telephone call, with regard to this problem. He said it was his recollection that the Board
would then be required to set up a public hearing before a license could be approved for issuance or
transfer. This would provide the opportunity to report the incidents which had taken place and which
could be foreseen in the event of a transfer. He said the City would check the matter of City permits
involved.
President La Croix said he would also follow up on the matter.
36. Mr. Frank Gottstein, 731 Haight Avenue, passed a photograph, for viewing by the Councilmen, indicating
the gutter in the street in front of his home, claiming the gutters drained back into the catchbasin
rather than the reserve, and complaining that the gutter was not properly constructed and should be
corrected as it caused pollution. He said he would like the Councilmen to comment on his complaint.
FILING:
37. Agreement - Between City and Jean H. Sharp, M.D. - for Medical Services.
38. Specifications No. PW 5 -72 -10 - Widening of Third Street from Brush Street to Atlantic Avenue.
ADJOURNMENT:
39. There being no further business to come before the meeting, the Council adjourned, to assemble in
regular session on Tuesday, May 16, 1972, at 7:30 o'clock p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
City Clerk