Loading...
1964-03-03 Regular CC MinutesREGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA HELD TUESDAY EVENING - - - - - - - - - MARCH 3 1964 The meeting convened at 7:30 o'clock p.m. with President Godfrey presiding. The Pledge of Alle- giance was led by Councilman Freeman, after which an inspiring Invocation was delivered by The Reverend Mr. Haywood Cross, Pastor of First Christian Church. ROLL CALL: The roll was called and Councilmen Freeman, La Croix, Jr., McCall, Rose and President Godfrey, (5), were noted present. Absent: None. MINUTES: 1. The minutes of the regular meeting held February 18, 1964, were approved as transcribed. 2.1/ The President stated the Council was delighted to have in attendance at this meeting the Eighth Grade students of Porter School. They were accompanied by Mr. Carl Payne, Principal, and two of the teachers - all of whom were introduced and welcomed. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: 3. From Mr. Thomas L. Ferro, Attorney, submitting a petition signed by thirty -seven owners of farm- ing lands on Bay Farm Island, concerning the filling of tidelands in this area - or the strengthening of the dike and the making of necessary repairs to Mecartney Road. The Clerk was asked to acknowledge said letter, indicating the Council's concern and interest and also to send a copy of Mr. Ferro's letter to Shore Line Properties, Inc., new owners of much of the property in this area - and ask the latter if they would also answer Mr. Ferro's letter and submit a copy of their reply to the City Council. Upon request, City Engineer Hanna reported that the condition of Mecartney Road was about the same as it had always been. The City had always performed low -grade maintenance. The street had never been paved and was not a dedicated public thoroughfare. City Manager Weller suggested that the letter to Mr. Ferro from the Clerk should contain an explana- tion about the legal situation with respect to both the road and the levee because the people in the area seemed to feel that Mecartney Road was a formally dedicated thoroughfare which had been accepted for maintenance by the City - which was not the case. There would have to be dedication, presumably by the abutting owners, and improvement of the road to City standards. Then, after acceptance by the City, it would be maintained by the City in the future. 4'. From Alameda Chamber of Commerce, signed by Mr. Ralph M. Smith, General Manager, transmitting copy of its Resolution No. 6402, "recommending that when the Hunters Point Naval Shipyard facility is shut down, the large graving docks be kept available for use by qualified private integrated shipyard operators - - -" - and requesting the Council to take action to assist in this vital matter. Councilman McCall suggested that said resolution of the "Chamber" be incorporated in a City resolu- tion in support thereof. There being no objections, the order of business was revised and the matter taken up under "Resolu- tions" at this time. RESOLUTIONS: 5. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman McCall, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 6569 Endorsing Position of Alameda Chamber of Commerce as Expressed in Its Resolution No. 6402 and Relating to Hunters Point Naval Shipyard Facility. The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Rose and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. The meeting was then referred back to "Written Communications" and continued under the regular order of business. 6. From Mrs. Jane Lee, 2043 Clinton Avenue, submitting a copy of her letter sent to the Alameda Times -Star with regard to its editorial about Mrs. Freeman. 7 From Mr. G. N. Pope, 1820 Bay Street, concerning the editorial in the Alameda Times -Star about Mrs. Freeman. The foregoing two letters were noted and ordered filed. 8: From Todd Shipyards Corporation, signed by Mr. A. H. Ainslow, Assistant Treasurer, notifying the Council of its intention to renew its lease for a further term of twenty -five years, ending September 30, 1989, for a total rental of $61,500. - as provided in the original lease. It was stated that the appropriate resolution would be prepared by the City Attorney for presentation to the Council at its meeting to be held March 17, 1964. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: vf 9. Mr. Frank Gottstein, 731 Haight Avenue, reiterated his contention that Webster Street should be raised before any further construction was done along this thoroughfare and urged the Council to establish the proper grade thereof at a sufficient height to obviate any future flooding. Upon inquiry,. Mr. Hanna stated he felt that, within six to eight months, his Department would be able to submit its report on its studies of this situation, including the suggestion that consideration be given to the official grade being higher. He pointed out that there was no great urgency in this matter. HEARINGS: 10. The matter was called up concerning the petition from Schmidt & Gravatt for the reclassification of property at 2713 and 2717 Central Avenue, from "R -1 ", One- Family Residence, District to "R -2 ", Two - Family Residence, District. The Clerk stated the Affidavit of Publication of said Notice of Hearing was on file and copies of the minutes of the Planning Board meeting at which this matter was considered had been sent to the Council- men for their information. The Planning Board had recommended approval of the petition for said reclassification. Upon request, Mr. Johnson, Planning Director, reviewed the history of this case, pointing up that there had been no protests against the requested rezoning of the property in question. There had been unanimous agreement by the Board that the proposed construction would be an attractive development in the neighborhood. Mr. Cunningham then stated the legal issue before the Council was whether the findings of the Planning Board in its advisory report based upon Section 11 -175 of the Zoning Ordinance should be approved, modified or disapproved. Upon the call for proponents and opponents, respectively, there was no response. The President then declared the Hearing closed. Councilman McCall felt this development would be a tremendous advantage to the City and moved the Council approve the recommendation of the City Planning Board and that said property be reclassified as requested. The motion was seconded by Councilman La Croix and on roll call carried by the follow- ing vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. The matter was then referred to " "Introduction of Ordinances ". 'Ay The matter was then submitted with regard to an Appeal from the decision of the Planning Board to allow a variance for certain proposed construction in the rear of the property at 1520 -22 Alameda Avenue. The Appeal was filed by Mrs. Marie Simonson, owner of the adjoining property at 1524 Alameda Avenue. Upon request, Mr. Johnson outlined the case and explained the circumstances involved in allowing ,a ten -foot driveway to the proposed rear structure. He distributed pictures to the Councilmen for their further information. The City Attorney stated the legal issue before the Council was whether or not the action of the Plan- ning Board, under Section 11- 161(b) of the Zoning Ordinance, should be upheld, modified or reversed. Upon the call for proponents, Mr. A. C. Johnson, Architect for Lakehurst Construction Company, spoke on behalf of Mr. Robert Minton, owner of the property in question, and pleaded that the decision of the Planning Board be upheld. He pointed up that, ultimately, there would be four living units on the property with adequate parking in the rear. The existing two -unit house would be renovated and the development of the parcel would upgrade the neighboring properties. The President then called for the opponents to the question and Mrs. Marie Simonson expressed her fear that, with only a ten -foot driveway, someone would run into her home which, unfortunately, was built right on the adjoining property line. Mr. Robert Minton, 820 Grand Street, owner of said property, offered to have a "guard" placed along the outside of the driveway to fully protect Mrs. Simonson's home. There .being no further speakers on the subject, the President declared the Hearing closed. In response to questions, Mr. Johnson, the Architect, assured the Council the driveway would be com- pletely straightened out and rebuilt. It was felt that with the safeguard along the driveway to protect the Simonson home, the driveway would be an adequate width. Councilman La Croix then moved that the Appeal be denied and the ruling of the Planning Board be upheld to allow the requested ten -foot driveway. The motion was seconded by Councilman Rose and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS, ETCETERA: 12. From Mr. Raymond E. Brown, City Auditor, requesting the creation of an additional position of "Accounting Machine Operator" for his office, and itemizing the reasons therefor. There being no objections, the City Attorney was directed to prepare the necessary resolution for con- sideration by the Council at its next regular meeting. 13. From City Planning Board, signed by the Secretary, recommending the denial of the petition filed by Mr. William D. Cox to rezone the property at 2615 San Jose Avenue, from "R -1 ", One- Family Residence, District to "R -4 ", Neighborhood Apartment, District. The date of Hearing on this matter was set for the next meeting of the Council, on March 17, 1964. 14." From the City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to J. H. Fitzmaurice, Inc., low bidder for the project of Installing Arch Culverts and Drainage Improvements at Various Locations, at the total cost of $26,484.85. Councilman Rose moved the recommendation be approved and the contract be awarded to the designated firm for the specified project at the price quoted. The motion was seconded by Councilman La Croix and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES: 15. Councilman Freeman introduced the following ordinance, after which it was laid over under pro- vision 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." (2713 and 2717 Central Avenue) UNFINISHED BUSINESS: 16,e' Councilman Freeman inquired about the situation in Unit II of the South Shore Project where the fire alarm boxes had been installed but were inoperative because the entire system had not yet been connected. Mr. Hanna reported that he had investigated and found that the Bureau of Electricity had an immediate and continuing contact with the Fire Department in such matters. He stated that as soon as the Bureau completed the wiring, it would notify the Fire Department, which was aware that the fire alarm boxes were not usable at this time. Mr. Hanna said he understood the wiring would be com- pleted in about three weeks. 17: Councilman Rose referred to the discussion at the last Council meeting with regard to the offer by Shore Line Properties, Inc., of a parcel in Unit IV and its development as a children's recrea- tional facility to be dedicated to the City. He felt the Council had not adequately expressed its appreciation to the Developer for his generosity and interest in the City - and suggested that such a letter be written. The Clerk was instructed so to do. 18Y / Councilman Freeman referred to a memorandum received in 1955 from the City Planner of Richmond which contained a breakdown of the direct cost to the City to serve one home for one year. She inquired if the City Planning Director could submit an updated resume of such cost, using the memorandum and the material now available, so that one would know what each piece of property must be assessed to carry its own weight. Mr. Weller pointed out that such a report could be made but no one could guarantee its accuracy. However, Councilman Freeman said she would like to have such a breakdown. Mr. Weller requested a copy of said memorandum and was asked to have such determination of cost made. 19. Councilman McCall referred to his recent request for a letter of confirmation from Mr. Robert Crown, Assemblyman, concerning the restoration of the $185,000. allocation in the State Budget for the development of the Alameda Memorial State Beach - and inquired if said letter had been received. Councilman McCall said he still felt the State Beach property should be fenced. Mr. Weller stated he would ask Mr. Crown for such a letter. He explained that he had been assured by Mr. Crown that he had every confidence this sum would be restored to the Budget and the City would be advised if there was any difficulty, which could then be taken care of by a City delegation appearing in Sacramento. 20/ Councilman McCall also spoke of other parcels of undeveloped land along Webster Street and inquired if the City Planning Director could prepare some type of plan for this area which would be desirable for the City. He felt this matter should be pursued with the aid of Mr. Johnson and the Development Committee of the Alameda Chamber of Commerce. 21. Councilman Freeman referred to a letter which had been received from the State Lands Commission and quoted from certain portions thereof. She asked Mr. Cunningham to write to the Commission for clarification of several statements made therein. 22./ Councilman McCall spoke of the recent publicity given the Sunday and Holiday Fun Pass now issued by the Alameda- Contra Costa Transit District which could be used anywhere in the East Bay. They cost sixty cents and it was felt that many Senior Citizens and children would derive much pleasure from their use. RESOLUTIONS: 23. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman La Croix, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 6570 Authorizing Execution of Amendment to Contract No. NBy(U)-44650 (Modification No. 'B') Relating to Employment Conditions in Special Services Furnished by City to U. S. Navy Off-Station Public Quarters and Homoja Housing Project." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Freeman and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 24. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman McCall, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 6571 Finding and Determining That Work Proposed to be Done Under Building Permit Applied for by Good Chevrolet is Compatible with Redevelopment Plan for Park Centre Project, No. Calif. R-63, and Authorizing Issuance of Such Permit." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Freeman and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 25. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Freeman, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 6572 Finding and Determining That Work Proposed to be Done Under Building Permit Applied for by Agnew & Copeland, Realtors, is Compatible with Redevelopment Plan for Park Centre Project, No. Calif. R-63, and Authorizing Issuance of Such Permit." 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. 26. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Rose, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 6573 Adopting Specifications, Special Provisions and Plans for Planting of Turf at McKinley Park, Calling for Bids and Directing City Clerk to Advertise Same." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman La Croix and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 27. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman La Croix, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 6574 Adopting Specifications, Special Provisions and Plans for Installing a Suspended Ceiling in the Golf Course Restaurant, Calling for Bids and Directing City Clerk to Advertise Same." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Freeman and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman McCall, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 6575 Requesting Owners of Certain Marsh, Tidelands and Other Lands on and Contiguous to Bay Farm Island, to Develop Plan Satisfactory to the City Council for Reclaiming, Filling and Improvement of Said Lands." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Rose. Mr. James B. Davis, Attorney for Shore Line Properties, Inc., was asked if his firm had any definite plans yet for the development of the lands it had recently acquired on Bay Farm Island. He stated that the Company was in the process of procuring a Land Use Planner in order to develop a detailed plan, but at present, there was no specific plan ready. He said it was hoped to move as quickly as possible in this matter and the plans would be submitted to the proper City Agencies in due course. Mr. Davis also commented that his client felt it would be beneficial to all concerned if there were a committee comprised of certain City Officials who could work with him and his Staff in preparing preliminary plans. Upon inquiry for more information about the membership of the "Committee", Mr. Davis replied that they would like to have the professional advice of such men as Messrs. Mark Hanna, City Engineer; Donald Johnson, City Planning Director; George A. Rose, Councilman; Eric Essex, member of the Planning Board; a member of the Recreation Commission; and Dr. Donald M. Roderick, Superintendent of Schools - all of whom were knowledgeable in their respective fields and would be of great help in the proper planning of all aspects of the development. Mr. Davis mentioned that all phases of the over-all development would proceed simultaneously - the working out of a Fill Agreement with the City, through the cooperation of Mr. Cunningham, City Attorney, and the use of both "Subdivision" and "PD" types of plans and maps for presentation, as well as the Reclamation District formation, if necessary. It was brought out that the City should be kept aware of all aspects as any proposed development progresses and therefore the possibility of more fire stations and more police protection, etcetera, should be made a part of any study about the City's future needs in this respect. The question was then put and the motion to adopt said resolution was carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. The President declared all of the foregoing resolutions adopted. FILING: 29. Specifications, Special Provisions and Plans No. PW 3 -64 -5 - For project of Planting Turf at McKinley Park. 30. Specifications, Special Provisions and Plans No. PW 3 -64 -6 - For project of Installing Sus- pended Ceiling in Golf Course Restaurant. 31. Affidavit of City Manager and Chief of Police concerning the expenditure of monies from Police Secret Fund from July 1, 1963, through February 28, 1964, as provided in Section 17 -11 of the Charter. 32. Financial Report - Bureau of Electricity, as of January 31, 1964 - Verified.by Hackleman & Larzelere. BILLS: 33. An itemized List of Claims against the City of Alameda and the Departments thereof, in the total amount of $12,731.13, 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 McCall moved the bills as itemized in the List of Claims filed with the City Clerk on March 3, 1964, and presented to the City Council at this meeting, be allowed and paid. The motion was seconded by Councilman Freeman and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. ADJOURNMENT: 34. There being no further business to come before the meeting, the Council adjourned - to assemble in regular session on Tuesday evening, March 17, 1964, at 7:30 o'clock. Respectfully submitted, ,City Clerk