Loading...
1962-06-06 Regular CC MinutesREGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA HELD WEDNESDAY EVENING, JUNE 6, 1962 The meeting convened at 7:30 o'clock p.m, .with President Colliachonn presiding. The pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Godfrey and was followed by an inspiring Invocation delivered by The Reverend Mr. Haywood Cross, Pastor of First Christian Church. ROLL CALL: The roll was called and Councilmen Godfrey, McCall, Rose, Schacht and President Collischonn, (5), were noted present. Absent: None. MINUTES: I. ^ The minutes of tbe.regular meeting held May 15, 1962, were approved as transcribed. TTEN COMMUNICATIONS: 2.v/ From Southern Pacific Company, signed by Mr. F. D. Magruder, Tax Commissioner, requesting a refund of City taxes for the perind,frnm March 17, 1959, to June 30, 1962, in the sum of $$49.94. The matter was referred to the Acting City Attorney for study and report. � 3. From Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, signed by Mr. William J. Bettencourt, President, Board of Directors, informing the Council of the inauguration of a Sunday and holiday pass, at a special fare for unlimited riding, effective July 1, 1962, for a trial period of three months. The City Clerk was asked to acknowledge the letter, expressing the Council's appreciation of this service, in addition to the redUced fares to young people which had been effected last fall. Also, the District was to be asked for a report on the results of this experience. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: 4? Mr. Frank Gottstein, 721 Haight Avenue, referred to a newspaper article concerning the possible relocation of the Branch Library to the South Shore and he voiced his objection to any such action. HEARINGS: 5^ The matter was called up with regard to the Petition from the South Shore Land Co. for the reclassi- fication of a portion of Unit II, South Shore - situated westerly of Grand Street and southerly of Otis Drive. The Clerk stated there was on file the Affidavit of Publication of the Notice of this Hearing. Also, copies of the minutes of the City Planning Board meeting at which this petition had been considered had been sent to the Councilmen for their information. The recommendation from the City Planning Board was as follows: "That the Council accept the rezoning as requested with the exceptions that the 8-5-B75 area have a `PD' put on it, and the proposed R-5-H35 area be reclassified to R-2 - and, further, that the Planning Board thinks it most desirable to pro- vide a direct connection to Eighth Street". Also on file was a letter from the Alameda Chamber of Commerce, signed by Mr. Lee H. Cavanaugh, Sr., President, transmitting five itemized recommendations for rezoning specific sections within the area involved. The Clerk stated, too, there were on file many letters, cards and petitions in protest against the proposed rezoning, copies of which had been sent to the Councilmen and had been posted on the Bulletin Board. The President read a prepared statement covering the procedure which would be followed during the course of the Hearing, and asked the Council's pleasure in following these rules of conduct. Councilman Schacht moved the Council accept the procedure as outlined. The motion was seconded by Councilman Rose and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. Upon request, Mr. Schoenfeld, Planning Director, by reference to three large, colored maps on display, explained the zoning of the area in question - as existing, as requested by the Petitioner and as recommended by the Planning Board, respectively. Mr. Way, Acting City Attorney, was then called upon to define the issue before the Council. He stated the Council's decision should be based on the determination of whether or not the current or prospective conditions, not only in the South Shore area but in the community as a whole, dictated or warranted a change in the existing zoning, considering the public necessity, convenience and general welfare. The proponents of the question were then called for and the following spoke: Mr. Charles I. Travers, Vice President of South Shore Land Co.; Mr. Donald Hawley of Globe Properties, Inc., Beverly Hills, ! � a developer; Mr. Sidney Drmonin and Mr. Richard Dorman of Richard Dorman & Associates, Architects, | � who had designed and prepared the scale model and drawings showing the proposed development of the multi-family area in its entirety, which were on display for the information of all concerned. Mr. Harold McGinnis of South Shore Land Co. assisted in the presentation. These gentlemen explained the plans for the proposed development in detail. The President next called upon the opponents to the question and the following acted as spokesmen for the many groups and organizations represented; Mr. Norman Jachens, 1349 Weber Street, who filed with the City Clerk several petitions containing the signatures of 5,050 residents in opposition to any rezoning of the area involved, and who also read a letter on the subject, dated June 4, 1962, from the "Citizens to Support the Master Plan", and distributed copies to the City Council and the Clerk for the files. Other speakers were: Mr. Don Bruzzone, 133 Santa Clara Avenue, representing the views of the Alameda Junior Chamber of Commerce; Mr. 8. L. Chrisman, 421 Kitty Hawk Road, on behalf of the South Shore Isle Home Owners Association; Mr. J. Herbert Anderson, 1200 Bay Street, in representation of the Alameda Home Owners Association; Mrs. Thomas C. Darby, 424 Yorkshire Road, President of Donald D. Lum Parent-Teachers Association; Mr. Joseph B. Garrett, 418'Yorkabire Road; Dr. John Parker, 735 Palmera Court; and Mr. John Weidler, 2014 Clinton Avenue. All stressed their desire that the area should be in the D-1 District for the development of single- family residences, as originally contemplated in the Master Plan. Further, it was brought out that proportionately more multi-family construction would overcrowd school and recreational facilities much sooner. During the rebuttal period the following proponents spoke: Mr. C. Phillip Nutzman, 3265 Adams Street, representing the Board of Directors of the Alameda Chamber of Commerce; Mr. Charles I. Travers, who offered certain compromises in the zoning from the original request. The following opponents then addressed the Council: Mr. Richard Bartalini, 405 Greenbriar Road; Mrs. John Roberts, 1721 Pearl' Street; Mrs. James Wiley, 1232 St. Charles Street. In summation, Mr. Travers spoke on behalf of the proponents and Messrs. Bartalini and Weidler spoke in opposition. The President asked if any of the Councilmen had any questions to submit to any of the speakers. There being no response, the President then declared the Hearing closed. During the discussion of the subject which followed, the Council indicated its b elief that no one would desire to build a single-family home on Shore Line Drive and thus, it was reasonable, and should be acceptable, to expect the construction of multi-family, high-rise apartments along and within some distance north of Shore Line Drive. The re-alignment of Otis Drive as shown on the plan was considered an improvement aesthetically. However, it was agreed that the plan as presently pro- posed was unacceptable in its entirety, but some modification thereof which would be more acceptable to a greater percentage of the people of Alameda was certainly in order. The opinion was expressed that there should be a larger percentage of the area retained for single-family development than was shown on the plan in question. Upon the advice of Mr. Way that some action should be taken on the recommendation of the City Plan- ning Board, Councilman Godfrey moved the recommendations of the City Planning Board on this parti- cular proposal be disapproved. The motion was seconded by Councilman Schacht. Speaking on the question, a discussion was had in an attempt to amend the motion to include acceptance of the zoning north of Otis Drive and the re-alignment of said thoroughfare in order to clear these two items from further consideration in view of the Council's approval of them. However, it was also felt the Petitioner should be given some indication of how much multi-family zoning would be acceptable and what portions of the area in order that he might be guided thereby in submitting revised plans. In response to questions, Messrs. Way and Weller explained the steps which the Council could take to effect certain acceptable changes in the plan presently proposed. Mr. Travers inquired if it was possible for the Council to come to a decision at this meeting on what it was willing to grant with respect to the rezoning of the area north of Shore Line Drive, specifi- cally the number of feet north of Shore Line Drive along Grand Street and in a line directly west from that point to the existing R-5-PD area. If such could be done he would know exactly how it affected the plan presented and would have the opportunity to discuss it with his people and come to some solution. He emphasized the point that he would prefer to have it settled at this meeting rather than start through the whole rezoning procedure again with some other type of plan. Following further discussion, Councilman Schacht withdrew his second and therefore the motion died. The Council agreed that, through discussion, the Petitioner was entitled to know just what the Council would be willing to accept in the rezoning of certain portions of this area. Councilman McCall then submitted his suggestions for rezoning certain sections, as demonstrated by use of the large map dis- played. He felt the first tier of lots on the south side of Otis Drive, from Grand Street to Larchmont Isle, should be retained in the 8-1 District, next- possibly a transitional zone of 8-2 and then to allow the area southerly thereof to Shore Line Drive to be for apartment house develop- ment, encompassing about twenty-one acres in the latter zone. Councilman Schacht next presented his ideas on the subject, pointing out he felt there should be more of the area retained for single-family construction. He suggested only fifteen acres be rezoned to multi-family use which, together with the 17.6 acres already zoned for apartments, allows a total of 32.6 acres for such development, and that the balance be R-l. After more discussion, Mr. Way stated it was his opinion that if the changes suggested were adopted in the form of a motion, no ordinance could be introduced under the present petition to put this zoning into effect. The only step the Petitioner could take would be to file a new petition for rezoning which would then follow the usual procedure. It was agreed the Council had indicated to South Shore Land Co. insofar as possible the type of zoning in certain portions of the area involved which would be acceptable. Councilman Godfrey then moved the recommendations of the City Planning Board on the petition submitted by South Shore Land Co. be disapproved. The motion was seconded by Councilman Schacht and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: Councilman McCall, (1). Absent: None. 4,7 REPORTS OF OFFICERS BOARDS, ETCETERA: 8.~ From Vice Mayor, City Manager and City Auditor, submitting their report On the Count of oney held May 16, 1962 - which shows the sum of $4,980,211.81 in the City Treasury at that Lime. The report was noted and ordered filed. 7. From Advisory Golf Commission, signed by Mr. Elliot Peterson, Secretary, concerning the request submitted by Mrs. George M. Verge to the Council at its last meeting for a reduced nine-hole golf rate. The Commission recommended the fee schedule remain unchanged. The Clerk was instructed to so inform Mrs. Verge. � 8� From Alameda Recreation Commission, signed by Mr. Terry Y. LaCroix, Chairman, with regard to the need for additional rest room facilities. on Shore Line Drive. . . Following some discussion, the matter was referred back to the Commission for further study of all details involved and the submission of a report. 9. q From City Manager, submitting the Recommended Budget for fiscal year 1962-63. The Budget was referred to the file for detailed presentation and discussion at the next meeting. 18, From City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to the Alameda Times-Star for legal advertis- ing during 1962-63. Councilman Schacht moved the recommendation be approved and the contract be awarded accordingly. The motion was seconded by Councilman Godfrey and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: 'None. llY From City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to Rhodes & Jamieson, Ltd., sole bidder, for furnishing Portland Cement Concrete Transit Mix during 1962-63 at the price of $13.25 per cubic yard. Councilman Rose moved the recommendation be adopted and the, contract be awarded to the designated firm for furnishing this material at the price quoted. The motion was seconded by Councilman Schacht and carried on the following roll cal 1 vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 1/ l2^ From City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to Alameda-Contra Costa County Trucking Company, low bidder, for furnishing Quarry Waste at the price of S1.15 per ton during 1982-63. Councilman Schacht moved the recommendation be accepted and contract be awarded to said company for furnishing this item 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. l]. From City Manager, recommending contract he awarded to L. J. Lorenzetti, low bidder, for the project of Repairing Sidewalk, Driveway, Curb eo6'CutLer during 1962-63, at the total cost of $5,782. Councilman Schacht moved the recommendation be followed and contract be-awarded to the designated party 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. - . . l4. / From City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to Meg Engineers, low bidder, for the pro- ject of Minor Street Patching during 1962-63, at the total cost of $4,934.80. Councilman Schacht moved the recommendation beadopted and contract be awarded to said firm for the specified project at the price_quoced. The motion was seconded by Councilman McCall and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes:' Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 15. ‘i From City Manager, recommending contract be awarded for the project of Installing House Laterals during 1902-63, as follows: To McGuire and Hester for the South Shore area and to Meg Engineers for the City proper, at the respective low-bid priceaof $2,573. and $9,935.25. Councilman Schacht moved the recommendation be accepted and contracts be awarded accordingly at the prices quoted. The motion was seconded by Councilman McCall and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. lO. From City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to West Coast Machinery, Inc., for-furnishing one Motor Scooter for the Police Department, at the total cost of $1,132.32, the lowest and best bid. Councilman Schacht moved the recommendation be approved and contract be awarded to the designated firm for furnishing this vehicle at the price quoted. The motion was seconded by Councilman McCall and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: 'Noue, l7: From City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to Richfield Oil Corporation, low bidder, for furnishing Premium and Non-Premium Gasoline during 1962-63, at the prices quoted. Councilmen Schacht moved the recommendation be adopted and contract be awarded in accordance therewith. The motion was seconded by Councilman McCall and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: 184 The following three matters were laid over to the next meeting of the Council: Recommendations of the Civil Service Board concerning the reclassification and salary study; Requested rate increase for garbage collections and Consideration of the Report from the Youth Activities Committee. RESOLUTIONS: 19. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Schacht, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 6359 Resolution of the Council of the City of Alameda Adopting Specifications, Special Provisions and Plans for Installation of a Storm Sewer on Page Street from Taylor Avenue to South of Washington Park, Calling for Bids and Directing City Clerk to Advertise Same." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Rose and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 20. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Rose, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 6360 Resolution of the Council of the City of Alameda Adopting Specifications, Special Provisions and Plans for Resurfacing on Otis Drive at 8ound,Street and at Pearl Street, Calling for Bids and Directing City Clerk to Advertise The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Schacht and on roll call carried by the. folloqiog vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 21. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman McCall, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 6361 Resolution of the Council of the City of Alameda in Appreciation and Commendation of Walter I. Dahl for His Service to the City of Alameda." 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. The President then declared all.of the foregoing resolutions duly adopted. ORDINANCES FOR PASSAGE: 22. "Ordinance, No. 1405, New Series An Ordinance Amending Ordinance No. 642, New Series, (Civil Service Ordinance) by Adding Thereto Section 5.1, Relating to the Reclassification of Personnel." Councilman Schacht moved, the ordinonce'he adopted uo'oubmitted^ The motion was seconded by Councilman Rose and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. FILING: 23. Specifications, Special Provisions and Plans No. PW 6-62-12 - Installation of Stem Sewer on Page Street from Taylor Avenue to South of Washington Purk, 24. Specifications, Special Provisions and Plans No. PW 6-62-13 - Resurfacing Otis Drive at Mound Street and at Pearl Street. 25. Reoommeuded'Dudget for 1962-63. BILLS: 26. An itemized List of Claims against the City of Alameda and the Departments thereof, in the total amount of $91,604.25, was presented to the Council at this meeting. The List was accompanied by certification from the City Manager that all the Claims shown were correct. Councilman Schacht moved the bills as itemized in the List of Claims filed with the City Clerk on June 6, 1902, and presented to the Council at this meeting, be allowed and paid. The motion was seconded by Councilman McCall and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. � 27. At this point, Councilman Godfrey welcomed President Collischonn back from his recent business trip on bebalf^of the City and complimented him upon his conduct of the lengthy Hearing held this evening. Councilman Godfrey also deplored the amount of abuse the members of the City Planning Board have taken during the past several weeks as a result of their action on the petition from South Shore Land Co. to rezone certain portions of the area on the South Shore. He felt it was terrible and he moved that the Council extend to the Board its thanks and a vote of confidence for the excellent work it has done in this respect. The motion was seconded by Councilman McCall and unanimously carried. 28. Councilman McCall called attention to the Annual Flag Day Ceremony to be held Thursday evening, June 14, 1962, at 7:30 o'clock. He cited the line of march for the parade which will terminate at the Elks Club Building, where an appropriate program will be presented. Councilman McCall urged all to plan to attend. ADJOURNMENT: 29. There being no further business to come before the meeting, the Council adjourned - co assemble in regular session on Tuesday evening, June 19, 1902, at 7:30 o'clock. Respectfully sub ^~`