Loading...
1940-04-02 Regular CC MinutesREGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA HELD TUESDAY EVENING APRIL 2 - - - - - - - - 1 40 The meeting convened at 8:00 o'clock P. M. with President Weichhart presiding. ROLL CALL: 1. The roll was called and Councilmen Carrington, Godfrey, Maurer, Morris and President Weichhart, (5), were noted present. Absent: None. MINUTES: 2. The minutes of the regular meeting of March 19, 1940 and the adjourned regular meeting of March 28, 1940 were approved as transcribed. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: 3. From Robert Evans, 1337 Park Street, protesting the frequency of bus stops on Santa Clara Avenue between Park and Webster Streets. There being no objections, the communication was ordered filed. 4. From W. G. Ashcroft, member of the Aeolian Yacht Club, recommending that the establishment of a municipal yacht harbor and aquatic park be again considered by the Council, stating various reasons for the City being benefited by such an enter- prise. Mr. Ashcroft suggests an appropriate site would be south of Neptune Beach. There being no objections and as this matter is already under consideration, the com- munication was referred to the Committee of the Whole. r 5. From the Kiwanis Club of Alameda, notifying the Council that at a regular meet- ing of the Club's Board of Directors, a resolution was adopted that the Kiwanis Club of Alameda go on record as protesting the contemplated change on the part of the telephone company of the prefix "Alameda" to "Lakehurst" upon the telephone company's adoption of the dial system in this City. Mayor Weichhart stated if there were no objections, this communication would be filed. Councilman Morris stated he believed in recognition of this letter of protest from the Kiwanis Club, that the Council should go on record as being unanimously opposed to this change of prefix and should forward a communication of protest to the tele- phone company. Councilman Morris stated he would put this statement as a motion. At this point, the City Manager suggested that a representative of the telephone com- pany be requested to appear before the Council to explain the matter in detail. Councilman Carrington stated he had talked with Mr. Marshall and Mr. Angwin of the telephone company regarding the proposed change of prefix and believes there are defi- nite reasons why the telephone company must of necessity make this change. He believes the representatives of the telephone company would be very glad to appear before the Council to give the facts which are behind this change of prefix. Councilman Morris reiterated he believed the Council should take steps to protest the change of prefix. He then stated he would change his motion that a meeting be held between the Council and telephone officials to have this matter explained, giving rea- sons for having the name of the exchange changed from "Alameda" to "Lakehurst ". The motion was seconded by Councilman Carrington and on roll call carried by the following vote. Councilmen Carrington, Godfrey, Maurer, Morris and President Weichhart, (5). Noes: None. Absent: None. 6. From the East Bay Youth Council of Oakland, extending an invitation to attend a "Youth Hearing" to take place in the auditorium of the Oakland Technical High School on April 4, 1940 at 8 :00 o'clock P. M. Mayor Weichhart urged as many as possibly can to attend this meeting. There being no objections, the communication was ordered filed. 7. From Mrs. Carol Hamilton, petitioner for the reclassification of property known as 1270 Weber Street from Residential District, Class 1, to Residential District, Class 1 3/4, requesting the Council to reverse the recommendation of the City Planning Board regarding the re- zoning of this property, the Board having, at its meeting of March 13, 1940 and at a joint meeting of that Body and the members of the City Council held March 27, 1940, unanimously recommended the denial of this petition. There being no objec- tions, the communication was referred to "Reports of Committees ". 8. From Mrs. Ann B. McKee, requesting the City Council to reverse the recommendation of the City Planning Board to deny her reclassification of property at the southeast and northwest corners of High Street and Central Avenue, from Residential District to Business District to permit the construction of retail stores. There being no objec- tions, this communication was referred to "Reports of Committees ". ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: v 9. The City Manager informed the Council that several months ago he had received re- quests from numerous employees of the City to investigate the possibility of establish- ing a hospital, surgical and medical insurance system. A committee was appointed, con- sisting of J. P. Clark, Earl Hilton, Glen Baxter and Charles R. Lohmeyer, to make an investigation. The committee recommends the adoption of a plan as set up by the California Western States Life Insurance Company. Membership in this plan will be arbitrary on the part of any employee. In order to put this system into operation, it will be necessary for the Council to pass a resolution authorizing the auditor to deduct the necessary monthly payments from employees' salaries and send the amount on to the insurance company. It was the City Manager's recommendation that the Council authorize the City Attorney to draw up this resolution which will authorize the required deductions and present the resolution to the Council for adoption at a later meeting. Councilman Morris moved that the recommendation of the City Manager be adopted, seconded by Council- man Carrington and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Councilmen Carring- ton, Godfrey, Maurer, Morris and President Weichhart, (5). Noes: None. Absent: None. 10. The City Manager informed the Council that the survey of improvement of Webster Street had been completed and any possible traffic problems would be taken up with the State Highway Department which is cooperating toward working out a satisfactory solution. The City Manager will report later on what progress has been made. 1. Councilman Morris asked the City Manager what the status is at the present time re- garding the proposed tube survey and was told the report has been completed, is now being printed and will be ready for distribution the latter part of next week. 12. Mr. Frank Gottstein addressed the Council regarding drainage on Webster Street, and transportation in general. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES: 13. From the City Planning Board, affirming its original recommendation to deny the re- classification of property known as 1270 Weber Street as petitioned by Mrs. Carol Hamilton and Miss Frances Chipman, from Residential District, Class 1 to Residential District, Class 1 3/4. This matter had been referred back to the City Planning Board for rehearing . at the regular meeting of the Council held March 19, 1940 and a joint meeting held be- tween the members of the Council, sitting as Committee of the Whole and the Planning Board at the Board's regular meeting of March 27, 1940. Councilman Godfrey stated, as much as he disliked to take this action on account of the great deal of intelligent work and effort which has been put forth by the Planning Board on this question, he has come to the conclusion that it would be to the best interest of the City in general if this reclassification were allowed and he made a motion that the property be re -zoned from Residential District, Class 1, to Residential District, Class 1 3/4. The motion was seconded by Councilman Morris. Before the question was put, Councilman Morris stated he wished to explain his forthcom- ing vote - that while he has the deepest respect for the members of the Planning Board, he believes there is room here for a definite difference of honest opinion and that in view of the circumstances as he sees them, this reclassification should be granted. Councilman Maurer then addressed the Council, stating that as he knows the Planning Board has spent more than the usual time in consideration of this matter and as the Board is made up of very capable men, it is his belief that the Board's recommendation should be approved, particularly as the Council has not had equal opportunity to spend in examina- tion of the problem. The Planning Board in making its recommendation, he believes, has the welfare of the City of Alameda as a whole in mind and looks at this question of re- classification from that angle, which covers the whole district rather than an individual piece of property. Councilman Maurer also stated he would like to aid Mrs. Hamilton in securing the approval of her petition were it possible to do so, but felt he should vote to uphold the decision of the Planning Board. Councilman Godfrey stated that by moving to override the decision of the Board in this instance, he does not believe in doing so it would offset in anyway the splendid work the Planning Board is trying to do. Councilman Godfrey stated that in his opinion there was not enough difference between a strictly one - family district and a three- family dis- trict which would permit the proposed construction, to draw the line and deny the re classification,or he would not be in favor of this particular reclassification. The roll was then called and the motion was denied by the following vote. Ayes: Coun- cilmen Godfrey and Morris, (2). Noes: Councilmen Carrington, Maurer and President Weichhart, (3). Absent: None. President Weichhart explained his vote, saying that it is he who nominated the various members of the Planning Board, that he has promised to uphold them in their decisions, consequently his vote must be "No ". Councilman Maurer then moved that the recommendation of the Planning Board be confirmed and the petition denied, seconded by Councilman Carrington. Councilman Godfrey now stated that in line with the general policy of the Council, the Mayor's recommendations must be approved; that he would like to support the Planning Board if he could do so with assurance and believe its recommendation is correct but in this instance he does not concur. Councilman Morris reiterated he cannot vote against what he believes is justified in this case; also that it is obvious the Council respects the gentlemen of the City Planning Board and a difference of opinion in this matter should not be construed to mean the con- trary. Councilman Maurer stated he feels this case is a question in point; that the future suc- cess of the zoning plan depends on the decision made regarding this proposed re- zoning, and that the Planning Board is now planning Alameda for the future and not for an indi- vidual house here and there. The City has employed a planning expert at considerable expense and the recommendation of the Planning Board is incorporated in his plan. At this point Councilman Godfrey stated he did not see why this case should be picked' out as a test case as to whether or not the recommendations of the City Planning Board and Mr. Shattuck should be upheld. Councilman Maurer stated that this was brought up 20' in the joint meeting of the members of the Council and Planning Board and the point was brought out that had this petition been requested a year or so ago, the Board could not definitely say whether or not they would have recommended this reclassification as Weber Street now lies in a single family residential district. Councilman Godfrey said he be- lieves there was no objection to the reclassification of the one piece of property in- volved, but the objections were against the entire street being re -zoned to permit three to four apartment dwellings. Councilman Carrington spoke, saying the City's present zoning ordinance, passed in 1928 placed all of Weber Street in Zone I; all of the present exceptions were established prior to 1928 and nothing could be done about it. It is his belief that spot zoning a street that is already in Residential District, Class 1, would eventually open up the entire street to permit converting the present dwellings into two, three or four- family use and the question of the reclassification of 1270 Weber Street in reality involves the whole street. In this case, an old structure is desired to be demolished and re- placed by a modern dwelling. The outcome would be an improvement, but undoubtedly fu- ture exceptions could not be so controlled. If this precedent were set, old structures could be remodeled and might be a detriment to the street instead of an improvement. Councilman Morris referred to an item in the newspaper where the Alameda Improvement Club advocates where the majority of homes are in a single family residential district, the whole district should be so classified and he can see no reason for changing the whole of Weber Street district to permit the use as requested in Mrs. Hamilton's peti- tion. He believes the proposed building would be a decided asset to the neighborhood in general. He does not see why it would necessarily effect the street as a whole. Mrs. Hamilton at this time addressed the Council in her own behalf. The motion was now put to roll call and was carried by the following vote. Ayes: Councilmen Carrington, Maurer and President Weichhart, (3). Noes: Councilmen Godfrey and Morris, (2). Absent: None. v 14. From the City Planning Board, recommending the denial of a petition from Mrs. Ann B. McKee for the reclassification of the southeast and northwest corners of High Street and Central Avenue from Residential District, Class 1, to Business District, Class III, to permit the construction of retail stores. Councilman Maurer moved that the recommendation of the Planning Board be adopted and the petition be denied, seconded by Councilman Carrington. At this point, Mr. Benjamin B. Unger addressed the Council, representing Mrs. McKee. Speaking against the petition were Mr. Woerhle, Mr. Homer R. Dallas and Mr. Sedwick. Mrs. McKee and Mr. Philipson also spoke for the petition. The roll was then called and the motion carried by the following vote. Ayes: Councilmen Carrington, Maurer, Godfrey, Morris and President Weichhart, (5). Noes: None. Absent: None. 15. From the City Planning Board, recommending the reclassification of property lying on the north line of Santa Clara Avenue, beginning 49' 10" west of St. Charles Street from Residential District, Class 1, to Residential District, Class 1 3/4 for the purpose of constructing a three - apartment dwelling. Councilman Morris moved, seconded by Councilman Carrington, that the recommendation of the City Planning Board be approved and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Councilmen Carrington, Godfrey, Maurer, Morris and President Weichhart, (5). Noes: None. Absent: None. v 16. From the City Planning Board, recommending the reclassification of property lying on the south line of Santa Clara Avenue between numbers 918 and 924, from Residential District, Class 1, to Residential District, Class 1 3/4 for the purpose of construct- ing a three - family dwelling. Councilman Maurer moved that the recommendation of the City Planning Board be approved, seconded by Councilman Carrington and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Councilmen Carrington, Godfrey, Maurer, Morris and President Weichhart, (5). Noes: None. Absent: None. 17. From the City Planning Board, recommending the denial of a request for a temporary revocable permit to conduct an institute comprised of massage, tub baths and spinal adjustments at the premises known as 2034 San Jose Avenue, now being used as a nursing home. Councilman Carrington moved that the recommendation of the City Planning Board be ap- proved, seconded by Councilman Maurer and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Councilmen Carrington, Godfrey, Maurer, Morris and President Weichhart, (5). Noes: None. Absent: None. ORDINANCES INTRODUCED: 18. Councilman Maurer introduced the following ordinance, after which it was laid over under provision of law and the Charter: "Ordinance No. New Series RECLASSIFYING PROPERTY (Known as South Line Santa Clara Avenue 267 Feet Easterly from Eastern Line of 9th Street)." 19. Councilman Carrington introduced the following ordinance, after which it was laid over under provision of law and the Charter: "Ordinance No. New Series RECLASSIFYING PROPERTY (North Line Santa Clara Avenue, 49 Feet 10 Inches West of St. Charles Street)." FILING: 20. Auditor's Balance Sheet - as of March 30, 1940 21. Report of Goodell & Henry - Bureau of Electricity - as of February 29, 1940. BILLS: 22. An itemized list of claims against the City of Alameda and the several departments thereof in the total amounts as follows, was presented to the City Council: General Departments, $445.96; Police Department, $144.34; Civil Service Department, $70.81 Pound. Department, $30.41; Fire Department, $208.92* Street Department, $1,041.96; Health Department, $73.69; Recreation Department, i88.50; Park Department, $621.68, Golf Course Department, $99.71; Store Department, 70.49; Social Service Department, $223.78; Initiative Relief Fund, $98.75; Gas Tax No. 2 Fund, $3,698.54; East Bay Municipal Utility District Fund, $2,292.29; Krusi Park Fund, 126.40. Councilman Carrington moved, seconded by Councilman Maurer, that the claims and bills against the City in the amounts listed and itemized in the List of Claims filed with the City Clerk on April 2, 1940, and presented to the Council at this meeting, be allowed and paid. On roll call the motion carried by the following vote. Ayes: Councilmen Carrington, Godfrey, Maurer, Morris and President Weichhart, (5). Noes: None. Absent: None. 23. There being no further business to transact, the meeting was adjourned to meet in regular session on Tuesday evening, April 16, 1940 at 8:00 o'clock P. M. Resp etfull subm 4'f/et mficiticc? 11-1 City Clerk.