Loading...
1964-06-29 Special CC MinutesSPECIAL MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA HELD MONDAY EVENING - - - - - - - - - - JUNE 29, 1964 The meeting convened at 7:30 o'clock p.m. with President Godfrey presiding. ROLL CALL: The roll was called and Councilmen Freeman, McCall, Rose and President Godfrey, (4), were noted present. Absent: Councilman La Croix, Jr., (1). 1. Receipt of the Notice and Agenda of this meeting had been acknowledged by each of the Councilmen and was on file. The purpose of the meeting was to conduct Public Hearings on three petitions for the reclassification of certain properties as desig- nated therein. Further, to introduce an ordinance relating to each case if it were so desired. HEARINGS: 2.7 The matter was called up concerning the petition filed by Dart Construction Co. Inc., to reclassify certain properties near the intersection of Mecartney Road and Island Drive from the "R -1 ", One- Family Residence District to the "R- 2 -PD ", Two - Family Residence- Planned Development District, and a certain area from the "R -1" District to the "C- 1 -PD ", Neighborhood Business - Planned Development District. The Clerk stated the Affidavit of Publication of the Notice of said Hearing was on file. Also, copies of the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Board at which this case had been considered had been sent to the Councilmen for their information. Further, the Planning Board had recommended approval of rezoning the larger section to the "R -2 -PD" District - but denial of the requested rezoning of the smaller parcel to the "C -1 -PD" District. Upon request, Mr. Donald Johnson, City Planning Director, reviewed the matter in detail. He pointed up that there had been no protest against the requested rezoning but there had been some questions from interested persons. Mr. Cunningham then stated the legal issues before the Council were whether the find- ings and recommendation of the Planning Board, in its advisory report based on Section 11 -175 of the Zoning Ordinance, should be approved, modified or disapproved. The President called upon the proponents and Mr. Larry Surano, 2607 - 109th Avenue, Oakland, stated he was the developer of the contemplated project and he would be glad to answer any questions. It was developed that the area was to be improved with condominium -type structures. Mr. Johnson stated the reason for the Board's recommended denial of the "C -1 -PD" rezoning was because the parcel was too small for satisfactory commercial development and there was no specific use in mind by the developer. Upon the call for opponents to the question, Mr. G. N. Pope, 1820 Bay Street, sub- mitted several questions which were answered by Mr. Surano in clarifying his type of development. Mr. Harry Conway, 1012 Azalea Drive, voiced his approval of the proposed residential improvement but also registered his objection to the requested commercial rezoning. The President then declared the Hearing closed. Councilman McCall moved the recom- mendation of the Planning Board be sustained and the area of 4.6 acres be reclassified as requested and the rezoning of the small parcel of .6 acre be denied. The motion was seconded by Councilman Rose and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: Councilman La Croix, (1). The matter was then referred to "Introduction of Ordinances ".. 3 The matter was next submitted pertaining to the petition filed by Baron Associates to reclassify certain properties at the northwesterly corner of Lincoln Avenue and Oak Street from the "R -6 ", Hotel Apartment District to the "C -M ", Commercial Manufac- turing District. The Clerk stated the Affidavit of Publication of the Notice of said Hearing was on file. The Councilmen had been sent copies of the minutes of the Planning Board meet- ing at which this case was considered. Further, the Planning Board had recommended approval of the requested rezoning. The President called upon Mr. Johnson, Planning Director, who explained the circum- stances and plans involved in this matter. Upon request, Mr. Cunningham stated the legal issues before the Counci the findings of the Planning Board, in its advisory report based upon of the Zoning Ordinance, should be approved, modified or disapproved. were whether ction 11 -175 In response to the President's call for proponents, Mr. George Kieffer of Baron Asso- ciates addressed the Council in explanation of the proposed use of the property in. question. He displayed a planned for construction o ale "mock -up" of the gasoline service station which was this site, when rezoned. The President inquired if there were any opponents to the question and there was no response. The Hearing was then declared closed. Councilman McCall moved the recommendation of the Board be upheld and the specified property be reclassified as requested. The motion was seconded by Councilman Freeman and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: Councilman La Croix, (1). The matter was referred to "Introduction of Ordinances ". At this point it was stated that, in view of the probable lengthy Hearing on the third matter listed on the agenda, and if there were no objections, the order of business would be revised and the meeting would proceed under the heading of "Intro - duction of Ordinances ". This was for the benefit of the petitioners in the first two Hearings, as it would complete the necessary action in these matters for this meeting. INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES: 4. Councilman Freeman introduced the following ordinance, after which it was 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 Zoning Ordinance No. 12 ?7, New Series." (Dart Construction Co., Inc. - Mecartney Road and Island Drive) 5. Councilman McCall introduced the following ordinance, after which it was 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 Zoning Ordinance No. 1277, New Series." (Baron Associates - Northwest corner Lincoln Avenue and Oak Street) The order of business then reverted back to "Hearings ". HEARINGS: 6. The matter was called up concerning the petition filed by Shore Line Properties, Inc., to reclassify certain properties on Bay Farm Island, as indicated, covering 723 acres of high and tidelands. The Clerk stated the Affidavit of Publication of the Notice of Hearing in this mat- ter was on file. Copies of the minutes of the Planning Board meeting at which this case was considered had been sent to the Councilmen for their information. The Board had recommended approval of the rezoning of the various sections of the area to the several classifications designated. Upon request, Mr. Johnson reviewed the matter, explaining the type of rezoning requested and that approved and recommended by the Board. He stated the Staff had made an extensive study of the developer's presentation and had submitted its report to the Councilmen. Mr. Johnson commended the developer for his well - thought -out and imaginative design of the use of the land and water areas. He reported that the one protest against this petition was from the Port of Oakland. Mr. Cunningham then stated the legal issues before the Council were whether or not the findings and recommendations of the Planning Hoard, in its advisory report based on Section 11 -175 of the Municipal Code, should be approved, modified or disapproved. Upon invitation of the President for the proponents to speak, Mr. James B. Davis, 2225 Ctis Drive, Attorney representing Shore Line Properties, Inc., addressed the Council in support of the requested rezoning. He explained the procedure followed to date in the preparation of the plans for the project - pointing up that the Company had worked closely with the Advisory Committee comprised of City Officials representing several phases of community interest and concern. Mr. Davis emphasized that the major feature of the proposed development was to be water orientation, as indicated on the map displayed for the enlightenment of all. He submitted pertinent facts and figures in explanation of the project plans. Mr. Davis then presented Mr. John W. Cone, Riches Research, Inc., Professional Plan- ning Consultant for Shore Line Properties, Inc., who, by reference to the map, described in great detail the plans and reasons for the several zoning classifica- tions needed for the entire development. He stated that the present thinking was to soundproof the apartment buildings which would be located in the "R -5" District, situated along the southwesterly section of the project. Mr. Calvin Jones of Jones, Thenn & Associates, Civil Engineers, next submitted an explanation covering the engineering technicalities involved in the filling operation. The President then called for any opponents to the question and Mr. Benjamin Nutter, Executive Director of the Port of Oakland, read a prepared statement - copies of which had been distributed to the Councilmen - and also spoke extemporaneously on the sub- ject. He emphasized that the "Port" did not oppose the development as a whole, but it was alarmed about that part of the desired rezoning which would permit the con- struction of apartments adjacent to the Jet runways at Metropolitan Oakland International Airport. Mr. Nutter stated the Port's concern was that people would find it virtually impossible to live in this particular area because of the noise levels as a result of the anticipated supersonic transport Jets. Mr. Nutter claimed the rezoning of the extreme southwest portion of the development to an "R -5" District where it was proposed that apartment structures be erected, would. an adverse effect upon the Airport. He suggested that if the Developer would give the "Port" protection from future claims for damages due to the creation of excessive amounts of sound from arriving and departing aircraft, it would have no legal basis on which to object to the rezoning. Mr. Nutter also pointed up that if these residences were completely soundproofed and if the Port of Oakland would thereby be released from any noise liability, this would certainly change its attitude considerably. Mr. Nutter then introduced Mr. Dwight Bishop of San Pedro, California, an engineer with Bolt-Beranek and Newman, Accoustical Consultants, who expounded at length about the technicalities of sound levels and the intolerable living conditions which would prevail in the apartment buildings in the section of the development in question. Mr. Clyde Barnett, Sacramento, California, Director of Aeronautics of the State of California, stated his Commission was responsible for approving or disapproving the establishment of airports, depending upon the criteria they met and maintained for public safety. He felt concern for the innocent, unsuspecting people who would eventually move into this area of the proposed development and inherit this noise problem. He also believed the sections of the proposed development which had been indicated for school and recreation sites were directly under certain take -off run- ways. Mr. Barnett spoke at great length about the potential hazards involved in this layout and claimed it was morally irresponsible to allow people to move into this area unknowingly. Mr. Harry B. Conway, Jr., 1012 Azalea Drive, questioned certain actions taken by the Port of Oakland in this matter. Mr. Nutter responded. Mrs. Edward Marquardt, 10800 Golf Links Road, Oakland, represented the Aircraft Pilots of Metropolitan Oakland, and stated the organization was opposed to the rezon- ing on the basis of the hazard to safety in this particular section as mentioned. A Mrs. Schute of Daly City also voiced her objection to the requested reclassification. She stated she also represented the Bay Area Council of the Ninety- Nines. Mr. Davis submitted his rebuttal to the statements made by Messrs. Nutter, Bishop and Barnett. Mr. Charles T. Travers of Utah Construction & Mining Co. reviewed the nego- tiations which had taken place some years ago in an exchange of properties between the Port of Oakland, the City of Alameda and "Utah ", for the expansion program of the Metropolitan Oakland - International Airport. Mr. Nutter stated that some of the information which had been brought out at this Hearing was a surprise to him. He said he thought that, with proper planning, the development could be accomplished - that the project could go ahead and be a great benefit to the community. Mr. Nutter reiterated his statement that if the apartment buildings in this specific section were soundproofed, the "Port" would not then voice an objection. There being no further speakers on the subject, the President declared said Hearing closed, and inquired the pleasure of the Council in this matter. Councilman Freeman submitted several questions to the City Attorney concerning the responsibility and control of the Reclamation District in connection with this pro- posed development. Mr. Cunningham replied that the various phases of the fill opera- tion would be set forth in an agreement. Councilman McCall moved the recommendation of the City Planning Board be adopted and the reclassification of the several portions of the area comprised of seven hundred twenty -three acres of high and tidelands be granted as specified. The motion was seconded by Councilman Rose. Speaking on the question, Councilman Rose inquired why the various reclassifications were to the "Planned Development" zones. Mr. Johnson replied that it was the belief of both the Planning Staff and the Board that the "PD" designation would give both the Developer and the City greater opportunity to maximize development potential at any given time. Recognizing that this land would probably take ten to fifteen years in development, it was felt that "PD" would provide a broader base of design oppor- tunity than straight zoning would. Councilman Rose also questioned the size of the proposed commercial sites. He pointed out he had indicated earlier in the planning stage with the Advisory Committee that he did not believe the shopping centers in this development should be competitive with either the South Shore or Park Street business locations. Mr. Davis answered that the number of acres for commercial use was arrived at by a professional planner with the specific idea of providing only that amount of land which was necessary to serve the community on Bay Farm Island itself. Mr. Davis stated the size indicated had been approved by Mr. Walter Monasch, Executive Director of the Redevelopment Agency, and Mr. Cone remarked that it was the same size as originally planned. The question was then put and the motion carried on the following vote. Ayes: Councilmen McCall, Rose and President Godfrey, (3). Noes: Councilman Freeman, (1). Absent: Councilman La Croix, (1). Councilman Freeman stated she "would like to qualify my reasons for voting 'No'. It is a beautiful plan. If I were assured that this is the way it would look - and if they would just once go to the State Lands Office. If there is no problem, I can't understand why they don't go - just to make me happy." Mr. Davis commented that they would go to the State Lands Commission Office concern- ing this matter and report to Councilman Freeman. The matter was then referred to "Introduction of Ordinances ". INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES: 7. Councilman Rose introduced the following ordinance, after which it was laid over under provision of law and the Charter: "Ordinance No. New Series An Ordinance Reclassifying, Rezoning or Detail Zoning Certain Property Within the City of Alameda by Amending Zoning Ordinance No. 1277, New Series." (Shore Line Properties, Inc. Bay Farm Island Areas as set forth) ADJOURNMENT: 8. There being no further business to come before the meeting, the Council adjourned. Respectfully submitted,