Loading...
1963-02-19 Regular CC MinutesREGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMED& HELD TUCSDAY,EV8NING, FEBRUARY 19, 1963_ The meeting convened at 7:30 o'clock p.m. with President Collischonn presiding. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Rose and an inspiring Invocation was then delivered by The Reverend Mr. Robert Adams, Assistant Rector of Christ Episcopal Church. ROLL CALL: The roll was called and Councilmen Godfrey, McCall, Rose, Schacht and President Collischonn, (5), were noted present. Absent: None. MINUTES: 1. The minutes of the regular meeting held February 5, 1963, were approved as transcribed. _� 2^- At this time, the President welcomed Mr, Carl Payne, Principal of Porter School, and a number of his eighth grade students who were studying American History and Civics, who were in attendance at this meeting. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: / v 3. From Mr. Randolph Keim, 1007 Grand Street, and Mr. and Mrs. W. B. McCaffity, 1000 Grand Street, requesting that the stop signs on San Jose Avenue, facing Grand Street, be equipped with flashing lights to help avoid future accidents at this intersection. The communication was referred to the City Manager to have the matter reviewed by the Advisory Traf- fic Committee. There being no objections, the order of business was revised and the meeting proceeded under the heading of "Reports of Officers, Boards, Etcetera". REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS, ETCETERA: ^�~ 4/ From City Planning Board, signed by the Secretary, concerning its review of the matter of gasoline service stations being allowed in certain, portions of Fire Zone No. 1. Upon request, Mr. Weller explained there had been a misunderstanding in the handling of this directive to the Planning Board and the question of Fire Zone regulations did not enter into the study but, rather, the possibility that certain land uses now permitted in the "C-2" Central Business District were not compatible with the basic idea of said zone. Therefore, the question for the Board's study concerned the allowance of gasoline service stations and, perhaps, other uses, in the "C-2" District. Hr. Weller was instructed to make this clarification to the City Planning Board. Mr. Weller pointed out, also, that there was presently on file with the Building Inspector an appli- cation for a Building Permit for the construction of a service station at the northwest corner of Lincoln Avenue and Webster Street. Since there was now no restriction against such use in Fire Zone No. 1 and such use was permitted in the "C-2" District, he felt there was no legal barrier to the issuance of a Building Permit. 5K From City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to Ransome Company, low bidder, for the project of Resurfacing Eighth, Sherman and Concordia Streets, Pacific and Clinton Avenues and Palace Court, at the total cost of $20,039. Councilman Schacht moved the recommendation be adopted and the contract be awarded to the designated Company for the specified project at the price quoted. The motion was seconded by Councilman McCall and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. The meeting then reverted to the regular order of business. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: '/ O. Mr. Frank Gottstein, 731 Haight Avenue, deplored the inadequacy of the size of the Council Chamber and the poor public address system wben such facilities are needed for the accommodation and benefit of a large audience. 8r. Gottstein spoke in praise of the new Posey Tube but thought the Council should take some action to improve the traffic pattern of the approach routes to alleviate the congestion during the peak hours. The City Manager was asked to have the City Engineer investigate the situation and report on the mat- ter at the next meeting. 7. Y The matter was called up concerning the petition from Utah Construction & Mining Co. to rezone certain portions of Unit II, Tract No. 1898, South Shore - as specifically described therein. The petition had been transmitted to the City Council from the City Planning Board without recommendation. The Clerk read in full.eeveral letters, as follows: (l) From Utah Construction & Mining Co., sub- mitting information with regard to its plans and the procedure it expected to follow in carrying out said plans, if the rezoning was approved. (2) From 8r, Joseph B. Garrett, 416 Yorkshire Road, urging the adoption of the request to rezone the portions of the area as submitted. (3) From Alameda Home 56 ���� Owners Association, signed by Mr. Robert 0. Lippi, President, and South Shore Isle Home Owners Asso- ciation, signed by Mr. D. L. C6riamau, President. (4).From Mr. C. E. Snyder, 1219 Bay Street. The latter two letters were in opposition to the requested rezoning. The Clerk also stated there was on file the Affidavit of Publication of the Notice of Hearing on this matter and all pertinent data in conjunction therewith. The President called upon Mr. Schoenfeld, Planning Director, who presented the factual circumstances involved in the situation. Upon request, Mr. Way, Acting City Attorney, stated that the single legal issue before the Council was whether or not conditions in the area under consideration had changed sufficiently to warrant an amendment to the zoning which was attached in 1958. The Council, in rendering its decision, should base its reasons for making a change or leaving the area as it now exists on the grounds of general community welfare. The President then outlined the procedure under which the Hearing would be conducted and then called upon the proponents of the question. Mr. Charles I. Travers, Manager of South Shore Land Office, represented Utah Construction & Mining Co.` and explained in detail the plans submitted with the petition, which were on display for the information of all interested parties. He pointed up the several advantages and improvements shown on this plan in comparison with the existing plan originally filed. The following also spoke in favor of the requested rezoning: Mr. Joseph Garrett, 416 Yorkshire Road; Mrs. Irene Moresi, 119 Santa Clara Avenue; Mr. Samuel W. Hall, Attorney, representing Messrs. Russell and Joseph Bruzzone; Messrs. Marcel Marquis, 910 Pacific Avenue; George C. Lorbeer, 1932 Otis Drive; Vincent Vinnela, President of South Shore Merchants Council; Donald Joseph, 1829 Yale Drive; Robert Stahl, 450 Park Street; Sam Tasoulas, 1901 Sandcreek Way. | The opponents to the matter were then given the floor and the following addressed the Council: Mr. Herman D. Ruth, Planning Consultant, 2409 Telegraph Avenue, Berkeley, stated he had been engaged to represent the Alameda Home Owners Associa tion and the South Shore Isle Home Owners Association; �r, G. N. Pope, 1820 Bay Street; Dr. Norman Johnson, 1714 Clinton Avenue; Mr. Wesley Forden, 1448 Page Street; Mrs. Grace Hartley, 3302 Liberty Avenue; Mr. Edward McGrorey, 1822 Moreland Drive; Miss Deatra Rankl, 154 Fountain Street; Dr. Alice Challen, 2601 LaJollm Drive; Mr. Robert Minton, 820 Grand Street; Mr. Don Bruzzone, 133 Santa Clara Avenue; Mr. Richard Bartulioi, 405 Greenbrier Road; and Mr. Jack Barry, 1409 San Antonio Avenue. All were adamant in their contention that there was sufficient area already zoned for multiple-family development and the remainder of this tract should contain single-family residences, as set forth in the existing map. Further, the density would not then be intzeased disproportionately. | ! Ihe President then declared the Hearing closed and stated the matter was before the City Council for . its discussion. Councilman McCall spoke at length in favor of granting the requested rezoning as submitted on the plan filed with the petition, pointing up the improvements designed therein as com- pared with the map formerly presented. He felt the proposed development would be beneficial to the City as a whole. Councilman Rose stated he was in favor of this particular plan in comparison with the existing one but felt there should be certain guarantees set forth to afford the City control of the development accordingly. Councilman Godfrey concurred that the presently filed map lacked imagination and it certainly could be improved and because of this feeling the Council had indicated its willingness to review the entire situation. He said, however, he had the impression the Council was not willing to review any subdivision map unless there were guarantees given and he believed that if the requested rezoning were approved at this time the City's existing guarantees would be mbrnQated. Upon the President's request for a clarification of this point, Mr, Way stated he could not agree that the existing subdivision map and agreement would be abolished by the rezoning action. He said the effect of the change in zoning would be to grant the developer leave to file his new subdivision maps. If this were not done within a reasonable length of time, the Council could, of course, after going through the proper proceedings, change the zoning again to anything justifiable. Therefore, the proposed rezoning action would not rescind the contract or have any legal effect on the current subdivision map. That could only be done by later action - by filing a new subdivision map which ^ would have to be approved by the Planning Board and the Council. Mr. Way said he felt quite certain that one of the conditions the Council might impose in approving any Tentative Map would be that the | developer agree to again enter into a contract to install the improvements pursuant to the map itself. | There was a great deal of discussion of the question in general and it was developed that the one point in particular on which the Council would like a definite commitment from Mr. Travers was what financial share "Utah" would bear in the future construction of the thoroughfare connection between the south shore area and the City proper. Mr. Travers said he would not state exactly what percentage of this cost his company would assume but indicated it would be a negotiable matter at the appropriate time in the processing of the Tentative and Final Maps and whatever agreement was to be entered into in conjunction therewith. Councilman Schacht stated he had made many inquiries from interested people throughout the community | on this issue and he felt there was no new evidence which assured him there were benefits to be derived by the City in the requested rezoning. Be said he had found overwhelming opposition to any increase of density through additional multiple-family development in Unit II. Councilman Godfrey then moved that the Council deny the petition on the grounds that the requested rezoning was not beneficial to the City of Alameda. The motion was seconded by Councilman Schacht and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Councilmen Godfrey, Rose and Schacht, (3). Noes: Councilman McCall and President Collischonn, (2). Absent: None. RESOLUTIONS: g The following resolution was introduced by Councilman McCall, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 6442 Resolution Honoring the University of California Crew." The motion to adopt said reaolution was seconded by Councilman Schacht and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 9. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Schacht, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 6443 Resolution of the Council of the City of Alameda Establishing Election Precincts, Designating Polling Places Therefor and Naming Officers of Election for Each Precinct for the General Municipal Election to be Held on Tuesday, March 12, 1963." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Godfrey and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 10. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Godfrey, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 6444 Adopting Specifications, Special Provisions and Plans for Reconstruction and Widening of Sherman Street from Buena Vista Avenue to the Segregation Line, Calling for Bids and Directing City Clerk to Advertise Same." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman McCall and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. The President then declared the foregoing resolutions adopted. ORDINANCES FOR PASSAGE: ' lI. "Ordinance No. 1416, New Series An Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Subsection (9) of Section 14-213 Thereof, and by Adding Subsection (2) to Section 14-214, Relating to Fire Zones (South Shore)." (Tract No. 1866, Unit No. 1, and Tract No. 1986, Unit 0o, 3) Councilman Godfrey moved the ordinance be adopted as submitted. The motion was seconded by Council- man Schacht and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 12. "Ordinance No. 1417, New Series An Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Adding Subdivision (31) to Section 17-333 Thereof, Relating to All Time No Parking." (West side Central Avenue from south line of Pacific Avenue to 887 feet southerly therefrom) Councilman Godfrey moved the ordinance he adopted as submitted. The motion was seconded by Council- man Schacht and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None, Absent: None. 13, "Ordinance No. 1418, New Series An Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Adding Subdivision 3 to Section 17-344.1 Thereof, Relating to 24-Minute Parking Limit." (8landin& Avenue, vicinity of Everett Street) Councilman Godfrey moved the ordinance be adopted as submitted. The motion was seconded by Council- man Schacht and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None, Absent: None. 14. "Ordinance No. 1419, New Series An Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Repealing Subdivision (39) of Section 17-432 (Stop Intersection) and Adding Subdivision (10) to Section 17-461 (Yield) Thereof -- San Antonio Avenue and Ninth Street." Councilman Godfrey moved the ordinance be adopted as submitted. The motion was seconded by Councilman Schacht and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. FILING: 15. Financial Statement - Bureau of Electricity, as of December 31, 1962 - Verified by Backlemun & Lorzelere. 16^ Specifications, Special Provisions and Plans No. PW 2-63-3 - Reconstruction and Widening of Sherman Street from Buena Vista Avenue to the Segregation Line. BILLS: 17. An itemized List.of Claims against the City of Alameda and the Departments thereof, in the total amount of $37,564.77, 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 Schacht moved the bills as itemized in the List of Claims filed with the City Clerk on February 19, 1963, and presented to the Council at this meeting, be allowed and paid. The motion was seconded by Councilman Godfrey and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. ADJOURNMENT: 18. There being no further business to come before the meeting, the Council adjourned - to assemble in regular session on Tuesday evening, March 5, 1963, at 7:30 o'clock. Respectfully submitted,