Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-27-1986 Adopted CC MinREGULAR MEETING - May 27, 1986 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Tuesday, May 27, 1986 in the meeting room of the Dublin Library. The meeting was called to order at 7:38 p.m. by Mayor Peter Snydero ROLL CALL. PRESENT: Councilmembers Hegarty, Jeffery, Moffatt, Vonheeder and Mayor Snyder. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Mayor led the Council, Staff and those present in the pledge of alleg- iance to the flag. Traffic on Peppertree Road Mr. Will Hansen, Peppertree Road resident, expressed concern regarding excessive speeding on Peppertree Road. He stated that on weekends some vehicles travel over 50 miles an hour in that area. Mayor Snyder said this topic will be discussed at a later time on the agenda. Kenneth Coup, resident on Silvergate Drive, expressed concern regarding speeding traffic on Silvergate between Castillian and San Ramon Road. He said the problem has been compounded by construction which draws additional traffic into the area. Introduction of Norb Hudak Cm. Vonheeder introduced Norb Hudak, who has agreed to fill the vacancy on the Park & Recreation Commission created by Eric Ovlen's move to Alamo. She advised that Mr. Hudak will serVe on that Commission until December. Traffic Study In response to an inquiry by Cm. Hegarty, Mr. Kinzel said a traffic study was scheduled to be Performed on Silvergate Drive after Silvergate has officially opened and traffic patterns have developed. With the agreement of Mr. Kinzel, Mayor Snyder tentatively scheduled a presentation .on the traffic study at the August 11, 1986, City Council Meeting. Mr. Coup suggested that additional police coverage may aSsist in detering speeders in the Silvergate/Peppertree area. Ms. Jo Loder, resident on Peppertree, said summer is the time when she notices the most traffic, and that in the middle of last August her automobile was totaled in an accident in front of her home. She also said that no traffic report was made a't. the time of the accident, which occurred near midnight,.and she didn't think the person driving the vehicle which struck hers was cited. Mayor Snyder asked the City Manager to review CM-5-103 Regular Meeting May 27, 1986 the file and determine whether or not a citation had been issued and a report made. In regards to the accident, Mr. Hansen said he had seen the accident report and that in it no mention was made of the fact that the automobile involved did not have a current 1985 license tag. He said in the past he had also had a car totaled in a similar accident in front of his residence. A woman from the audience said she has lived in the Peppertree/Silvergate area for nine years, and she thought that during that time the traffic problems have become progressively worse. She asked if it would be possible to have stop signs installed as they were on Davona. A man in the audience said that he had observed many vehicles which appeared to be traveling at speeds greater than 50 miles an hour, and that some of those speeding were actually residents in that area. A woman from the audience said she had noticed that drivers begin speeding from the bottom of the hill. CONSENT CALENDAR On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote, the Council took the following actions: Approved Financial Report for Period Ending April 30, 1986; Approved Minutes of Regular Meeting of May 12,1986; Awarded bid for street reconstruction, traffic signal, street lighting and landscaping, Dublin Boulevard at Sierra Court, to Steiny and Co., and authorized the Mayor to execute the agreement; Authorized Staff to solicit bids for median reconstruction and landscaping, street lights, and pavement and repair overlay, Amador Valley Boulevard, Village Parkway to Dougherty Road, once State and Federal authorization is received; Awarded bid for the Street Slurry Seal Program to Valley Slurry Seal, and authorized budget transfer from Contingent Reserve in the amount of $5,000; Authorized transfer from the Contingent Reserve in the amount of $7,400 to cover the surcharge for insurance on Alameda County contract services for the period from March 1, 1986, through June 30, 1986; Denied claim submitted on behalf of Wayne Robinson and directed Staff to notify the claimant and the City's Insurance Carrier; Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 48 - 86 DESIGNATING ALAMEDA COUNTY AS THE CITY'S AGENT FOR ACTIONS RELATED TO TAX REFUNDS CM-5-104 Regular Meeting May 27, 1986 Received a report from the Recreation Director summarizing the activity of the City's Recreation Department during the Winter Quarter of 1986; Approved hiring Singer & Hodges, Inc., for the design of the eight acre East Dougherty Hills Park site, and directed Staff to prepare the documents necessary to execute the agreement. Cm. Jeffery requested that the Peppertree Road Traffic Study be removed from the Consent Calendar and discussed at a later time during the meeting; Mr. Kinzel said that after the previous City Council meeting a records search had been done to determine if a Traffic Study had been performed at the north end of Peppertree, and that the search revealed that no such study had been undertaken. He advised that the study has now been initiated, and requested that this item be continued until the Council meeting of June 9, 1986. In response to an inquiry from Cm. Moffatt, Mr. Hansen, resident, said that he had noticed speeding on Saturdays and Sundays, and after 4:30 p.m. on weekdays, but that he is not at home during weekdays and so could not specify whether or not the speeding occurred throughout the day. Mrs. Basley, resident on the corner of Peppertree and Juarez, said she and her husband have sat on their front porch and observed traffic, and that last summer, when police radar was used to patrol the neighborhhod, it appeared that many tickets were issued between 5:30 and 6:30 p.m. She also said that on more than one occasion during the early morning hours a car had been operated at speeds greater than 50-55 miles per hour on Vomac, and that on occasion drivers had run stop signs on Shannon and Juarez Streets. Mrs. Basley expressed concern on behalf of the children and animals residing in that area, and in particular, for skateboarders during the summer months. On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote, the Peppertree Road Traffic Study was continued to the meeting of June 9, 1986. Mayor Snyder requested that the Warrant Register be removed from the Consent Calendar for correction; On motion by Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous vote the Warrant Register was approved with the 'following corrections: Warrant 5013, PG & E, should be in the amount of $3,050.70; the Subtotal should be $545,330.33, and the Grand Total should be $560,338.03 PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE RELATED TO SMOKING POLLUTION CONTROL Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. Mr. Rankin advised that the City Attorney had conducted a review of the Ordinance and had modified it by removing repetitive language related to tobacco stores. He advised that in most cases the Ordinance restricts smoking in public places, but allows for an establishment to create a smoking CM-5-105 Regular Meeting May 27, 1986 area, provided that such an area does not consiSt of more than 50% of the floor area. He also said that the model Ordinance addresses smoking in the work place, and that employers would not be required to engage in structural modifications to their facilities in order to accomplish smoke-free areas, but that employees would be allowed to designate their own work areas as non-smoking areas, and the employer would be required to designate at least 50 percent of employee lounges and cafeterias as no smoking areas, unless they were able to provide separate smoking and non-smoking lounges, cafeterias or lunchrooms. Mr. Rankin advised that the Ordinance would not place any restrictions on smoking within bars or private residents, hotel rooms, or hotel conference rooms which are used for private functions. He stated that in the case of restaurants, the Ordinance would require that 50 percent of the area be non-smoking, and would also require restaurants with hosts'or hostesses to inform the patrons of the ~existence of the separate areas. Mr. Rankin said a brief survey had been done of some of the cities which had previously adopted a similar ordinance, and initial involvement would relate to the efforts of informing employers/ businesses of the requirements of the Ordinance; this would incur the preparation of mailings and some postage costs. Mr. Rankin advised that cities which have adopted such an ordinance have not utilized a great deal of staff time in the enforcement of it. In response to a question raised by Mayor Snyder, the City Manager said as a result of discussion at the previous meeting, the item referring to tobacco stores in Section 1006, Where Smoking Not Regulated, had been deleted. Mayor Snyder asked for clarification on item 11 in the section which lists places where smoking is prohibited. Staff advised that the language grants the City a degree of control over the use of the room in question. Regarding item 13 having to do with polling places, Staff stated that it would be adviseable for the City to notify the Registrar of Voters that smoking would not be permitted at polling places. Susan Magazine, member of the'Alameda County Smoking Action Coalition, said thee Coalition is sponsored by the American Cancer Society, the American Heart Association, and the American Lung Association. She reviewed the history of the Coalition and listed several cities and counties which have instituted smoking ordinances. She said the Coalition desires to assist the City in the implementation of the Smoking Ordinance, if passed, and will help defray some of the initial costs. Mr. Fred Herskowitz, M.D. with the American Lung Association, defined passive smoke, and provided statistics related to the effects of passive smoke on non-smokers. Gloria Abad, American Heart Association, said she had been a health educator during the past 20 years and wanted to go on record as supporting the proposed Ordinance. CM-5-106 Regular Meeting May 27, 1986 Mark Pertschuk, Americans for Non-Smokers Rights, addressed the issue of enforcement of a smoking ordinance, and said the almost universal response to a survey he had performed was that there had been no problems in enforcing smoking regulations and no expenses were incurred. Shirley Anderson, a Dublin resi~.ent and member of the American Cancer Society, said she would encourage the Council to strongly consider the position taken by the Smoking Action Coalition, and set an example by adopting the Ordinance. Ms. Magazine reminded Councilmembers that a 1983 Gallop Poll indicated that 91% of non-smokers said that they favored separate areas, 83% of non-smokers favored controls in the work place, 86% of smokers favored controls in restaurants, and 74% of smokers favored controls in the work place. She urged the Council to consider passage of the Ordinance. Ms. Lee Adga, representative of the California Restaurant Association, addressed the portion of the Ordinance related to controls in restaurants. She said the Association opposes such an ordinance, and requested that restaurant owners be permitted the freedom to determine the needs of their clients and then to conform to those needs. In response to a question asked by the Mayor, Ms. Adga said that item 7 in Section 1004, would be excessively restrictive to restaurant owners. Joanne Castro, speaking on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Dublin Chamber of Commerce, asked that this topic be continued until the July 14, 1986, Council meeting to permit members of the Chamber to conduct a survey of local businesses in order to determine their response to smoking controls. Jack Schreder, private businessman and governmental consultant, provided Councilmembers with a packet of information related to the adoption of the Smoking Ordinance. He stated that he thought businesses needed the flexibility to solve their own problems and that a governmental body could not pass any type of ordinance which would meet the needs of the business. He suggested that the City set a model policy in the form of a resolution for City employees as an example to be followed, but not to pass the Ordinance restricting local businesses. Jim Lafferty, General Manager of Studebaker's Restaurant, said restaurant managers attempt to satisfy the needs of their customers. He said he disagreed with the Ordinance in that he is already aware of his customers needs and has desginated about 30% of the restaurant area for customers who want to dine apart from smokers. Dennis John, resident, said he is a reformed smoker and that he thought for the benefit of himself and his peers, the City of Dublin should be forward and pass the proposed Ordinance. He said it has been his observation that most restaurants do not have separate seating for non-smokers. Ms. Abad said that most of the comments had concerned restaurants, and she expressed her hope that the Ordinance would still be adopted as her main area of concern is the work place. CM-5-107 Regular Meeting May 27, 1986 Steve Vasquez, Dublin resident, asked how the Ordinance would affect bowling alleys. The City Attorney said bowling alleys were unique and the Ordinance does not specifically address them, but leaves smoking controls to the discretion of the operator· of the bowling alley. Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by majority vote, the Council continued the public hearing to the meeting of July 14, 1986. Voting NO on this motion was Cm. Moffatt, who said he felt a positive action · should be taken and the Ordinance should be introduced immediately, and then come before the Council on July 14th for a second reading. PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE PROHIBITING TRUCK PARKING Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. Mr. Kinzel said TJKM has investigated the problem of large trucks parking on Bellina Street between San Ramon Road and Galindo Drive. He stated that because of'the curved nature of the street, trucks parked there block both the sight distance of motorists exiting driveways and have a negative impact on the traffic flow. Staff recommended adoption of the Ordinance prohibiting parking on Bellina Street between San Ramon Road and the drainage channel. Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote, the Council waived the reading and adopted on an urgency basis ORDINANCE NO. 9 - 86 ESTABLISHING TRAFFIC REGULATIONS The Council directed Mr. Kinzel to perform a traffic study of Starward Drive from Amador Valley Boulevard to Oxbow and to report on that study at the June 9, 1986, City Council meeting. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSURE OF DOUGHERTY ROAD FOR RECONSTRUCTION Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. Mr. Kinzel reviewed the preliminary detour plan if the Council authorizes closure of Dougherty Road for grading and construction of the new road for a six-week period during the summer. He said closure of the road would expedite the construction of the new road, whereas, if Dougherty Road were to remain open it could extend the construction period up to two additional months. He addressed concerns expressed in the Staff Report and referred to CM-5-108 Regular Meeting May 27, 1986 comments made by staff from the Cities of San Ramon and Danville. He said that although problems may arise as a result of the detour, they would be fewer than what would be incurred if Dougherty Road were not closed. The City Manager emphasized that the entire approach of the Engineering Department's recommendation was to minimize the amount of hazardous time resulting from Dougherty Road construction. He said Staff is concerned about traffic on Stagecoach Road, and is convinced that it would be more feasible to have the inconvenience for a shorter period of time than a longer one. He said Staff is also concerned about the possibility of the construction, if not finished prior to the rainy period, lasting more than eight weeks if closure is not authorized. Susan Elices, 7480 Stagecoach Road, said she did not think consideration was given to residents of StagecOach Road, and said she was vehemently against the detour because of the increased traffic flow and the potential danger to children. She said she did not think the detour would last only six weeks, but probably closer to twelve weeks. Marc Goto, Public Works Director for San Ramon, said he spoke on behalf of the San Ramon and Danville staff. He summarized the concerns as stated in his letter dated April 2, 1986. He said he recommended that the City Council continue this item until staff from Danville and San Ramon and the Contractor have had an opportunity to develop an additional plan for directing traffic through the construction site. John Harker, resident on Stagecoach Road, said he was concerned about the volume of traffic which would result from the detour. He said traffic has already increased on Stagecoach Road because of inceased building. He said another concern he had was related to the children who lived on his block, and that traffic traveling south on Stagecoach Road still uses the frontage street. He inquired if adequate police coverage would be available in order to cite traffic offenders. Avery Pratt, Stagecoach Road resident, stated that all contractors and deVelopers must address the same types of problems, and suggested that some of them be contacted to determine what other options may be available-. He said he has three children and was also concerned about their safety. He also said that he 'had just learned about the closure of Dougherty Road on the day of the City Council meeting and indicated that if he' had known of the meeting in advance, all 23 of the property owners in his area would have. been represented at the meeting. Phil Flores, resident in Sunny Glen and past President of the Senior Citizens Board, said he agreed with Mr. Goto, and hoped to see a decision on this postponed until alternate options had been developed. He stated that he served on the original committee to have Stagecoach Road installed and didn't think the detour would greatly affect the road. He said he thought even if Dougherty Road remained open during construction, the heavy equipment would deter the traffic. He said the Sunny Glen Board would like to have a meeting with Mr. Goto and work out additional details, and requested that action on this be postponed for two weeks. CM-5-109 Regular Meeting May 27, 1986 Ron Nahas, Representative for the Property Owner, said that because of concern for residents on Stagecoach Road, a great deal of time and money went into the installation of a barrier on that road. He said several meetings had been held with Mr. Goto, that meetings were also held with residents of Sunny Glen, and that it was an oversight that a meeting was not also held with residents of Stagecoach Road. He indicated that as a result of the meeting with Mr. Goto, a detailed, specific plan for routing traffic through the construction zone had been developed, including the building of a separate road for that purpose. However, he advised that the result of that plan would be to add an additional eight weeks to the time of construction, possibly causing it to extend into the rainy season. Mr. Nahas said the conclusion of that study was that all but 100-200 cars would still be diverted. He said that the request for closure of Dougherty Road had been delayed from the City Council meeting of May 12, 1986, and that he believed all of the issues had been addressed. Mr. Pratt asked if it would be possible to divert traffic to 680 rather than Stagecoach Road. Mr. Kinzel responded that during the same time Dougherty Road would be closed, Hopyard Road would be undergoing construction which would curtail some of the traffic. He said that the signs which would be placed off-site near the freeways and up in Danville would be the most effective at announcing the detour. He said traffic will not be encouraged to use Stagecoach Road. Larry Carberry, resident of Stagecoach Road, said that rerouting the traffic would appear to benefit only non-Dublin residents. He. also stated that he thought this was the contractor's problem and that it may be possible for the grading and other construction to be done at night. He said he believed the City Council should make a decision which would benefit Dublin residents the most and indicated he is opposed to diverting traffic to Stagecoach Road. Frances Dolan said she had two concerns, i.e., the construction time table and the safety of the children who live on Stagecoach Road. She asked if anyone had considered, in the traffic studies, if closure would impact 3,500 cars per day it would be during the early morning and late afternoon hours, before and after the normal work day. She inquired if construction could accommodate those hours. Harry Martin, President of Sunny Glen Community, said that closing Dougherty Road would automatically divert traffic to Alcosta, and that there would not be many people using Stagecoach Road. He said he lives 15 to 20 feet from the Road and hasn't seen 3,500 cars on that road yet, and did not think traffic was a major problem. He also said that SUnny Glen residents would like a delay on the decision until they have obtained more accurate figures on the traffic count. Dale Schmitt, resident of Stagecoach Road, said he adamantly opposes any traffic detour on to Stagecoach Road. He inquired what physical impact the detour would have on the road itself, and asked if the City Engineer would maintain the road. He also asked about the possibility of an increased potential for lawsuits to the City with the increase of vehicles on residential streets. CM-5-110 Regular Meeting May 27, 1986 Mr. Pratt asked if the City had given consideration to requiring the developer to pay liquidation damages if the time limit of six weeks is not met. Mayor Snyder said this possibility had not been considered as the question had just arisen. ~n response to a question from David Elices, resident on Stagecoach Road, the City Manager said Stagecoach Road had been offered for dedication, but the City had not yet accepted it. The City Engineer responded to Mr. Elices inquiries regarding grading and unfinished work on the road, and advised that the City will take whatever action is necessary to insure the completion of t he r o a d. ~~~ ~ ~~~ '~ ~~~ ~/~~-~/~ ~~~-~.~. Mr. Schmitt said the delays in finishing Stagecoach Road have prohibited the residents in that area from believing that the work on Dougherty Road would be finished within the estimated six-week time line. Sherry Rent, resident of Stagecoach Road, stated her opposition to the closure of Dougherty Road, and said her reasons were the same as those already mentioned. Mr. Nahas inquired about the feasibility of reducing the speed limit on Stagecoach Road during the closure of Dougherty Road. Mr. Kinzel said the Vehicle Code makes provision for temporary reduction in speed during construction. In response to a question by Cm. Jeffery, Mr. Kinzel outlined the procedures utilized in determining a traffic count. Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. In response to an inquiry by Mayor Snyder, Mr. Kinzel said signs could be placed in strategic locations advising motorists of the closure of Dougherty Road and directing them to 1-580 and 1-680 as the primary routes during the closure of Dougherty Road. He advised that the details for these signs could' be worked out with the Cities of San Ramon, Danville and Pleasanton, as well as with Cal-Trans personnel. On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm Vonheeder, and by a unanimous vote, the Council directed that the Resolution be modified to strike the words "has prepared a preliminary detour plan" and to delete item (3), which reads "residents along the preliminary detour route", and adopted RESOLUTION NO. 49 - 86 ORDERING THE TEMPORARY CLOSURE OF A PORTION OF DOUGHERTY ROAD CM-5-111 Regular Meeting May 27, 1986 Mr. Pratt asked if the City had given consideration to requiring the developer to pay liquidation damages if the time limit of six weeks is not met. Mayor Snyder said this possibility had not been considered as the question had just arisen. In response to a question from David Elices, resident on Stagecoach Road, the City Manager said Stagecoach Road had been offered for dedication, but the City had not yet accepted it. The City Engineer responded to Mr. Elices inquiries regarding various problems that had been encountered with this particular subdivision. Mr. Schmitt said the delays in finishing Stagecoach Road have prohibited the residents in that area from believing that the work on Dougherty Road would be finished within the estimated six-week time line. Sherry Rent, resident of Stagecoach Road, stated her opposition to the closure of Dougherty Road, and said her reasons were the same as those already mentioned. Mr. Nahas inquired about the feasibility of reducing the speed limit on Stagecoach Road during the closure of Dougherty Road. Mr. Kinzel said the Vehicle Code makes provision for temporary reduction in speed during construction. In response to a question by Cm. Jeffery, Mr. Kinzel outlined the procedures utilized in determining a traffic count. Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. In response to an inquiry by Mayor Snyder, Mr. Kinzel said signs could be placed in strategic locations advising motorists of the closure of Dougherty Road and directing them to 1-580 and 1-680 as the primary routes during the closure of Dougherty Road. He advised that the details for these signs could be worked out with the Cities of San Ramon, Danville and Pleasanton, as well as with Cal-Trans personnel. On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm Vonheeder, and by a unanimous vote, the Council directed that the Resolution be modified to strike the words "has prepared a preliminary detour plan" and to delete item (3), which reads "residents along the preliminary detOur route", and adoPted RESOLUTION NO. 49 - 86 ORDERING THE TEMPORARY CLOSURE OF A PORTION OF DOUGHERTY ROAD CM-5-111 Regular Meeting May 27, 1986 PA 86-044 DUBLIN TOWN & COUNTRY ASSOCIATES - REQUEST FOR SAN RAMON ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT STUDY Staff stated that the request was for authorization of a Specific Plan Amendment Study for a 4.8+ acre property identified as the Dublin Town & Country Shopping Center. Approval is being sought to allow unlimited occupancy by personal service uses and financial or office uses, within an existing shopping center. The Specific Plan currently provides that the principal use of the subject area is to be reserved'for retail shopper stores and eating and drinking establishments. Staff indicated that the market feasibility information prepared in conjunction with the Downtown Commercial Study should be taken into consideration, although the subject property was not included in the geographic boundary of the Study. Staff referred to the San Ramon Road Specific Plan Amendment Study for the 1.5+ acre Moret property which was authorized by the Council on April 14, 1986, and which is currently pending, and which must be reviewed by the Planning Commission before it is brought back to the City Council. Staff suggested that approval of the subject request may be premature and recommended that the Council deny the request for authorization of the study. Cm. Moffatt stated his desire to see the subject area rezoned to a C-1 District. Mr. Dick Webe, Property Owner, summarized his position regarding the request, petitioned the Council for assistance, and expressed his hope that consideration would be given to'modifying the Specific Plan. Len Magnani said 17 lease transactions had been made for the Center, and the response he has noted has been that although the building is attractive to the owners of retail businesses, they want to be on Dublin Boulevard as opposed to San Ramon Road as they feel there is more traffic on Dublin Boulevard. He advised that interest in leasing space in the Center has been indicated for hair salons, one-hour photo shops, chiropractic offices, shoe repair shops, dental offices, copy shops and health spas, but that no action can be taken to secure these leases under the current zoning provisions. He cited information from ICSC, the International Council of Shopping Centers which indicated that non-anchor centers tend to have more service uses. Myron Crawford, Representative of a development organization, said when study was first made of the Moret property it also included the zoning in Area 3 in its entirety. He said his organization concurred with the information provided by the Applicant, and stated that they think the area merits a study. Zev Kahn, resident, said he is impressed with the unity demonstrated by the Dublin Town and Country Association, but that the Association should be aware that the aesthetics resulting from the types of signs being utilized should not be tolerated. He stated that he hoped the City Council would not permit the zoning for the Center to be changed until this has been rectified. CM-5-112 Regular Meeting May 27, 1986 There was discussion clarifying the use of dry cleaners in Area 3, and it was noted that dry cleaners were permitted under the Special Provision section of Resolution No. 81-83, Approving an Amendment to the San Ramon Road Specific Plan in November, 1983. Discussion was held regarding the possibility of amending the Specific Plan for all of Area 3, or amending it only as it relates to the Dublin Town & Country Shopping Center property. Mr. Tong advised that to amend the Specfic Plan, a study would have to be undertaken by the Planning Commission and the Commission would then need to make a recommendation to the City Council. Cm. Jeffery moved, and Cm. Moffatt seconded, that a Specifc Plan Amendment Study be authorized for all of Area 3. The motion failed to pass. Cm. Vonheeder moved, and Cm. Hegarty seconded, that the Planning Commission be requested to study the removal of the 25% limitation for personal services or financial uses in the Town and Country Shopping Center. After discussion, Cm. Vonheeder amended the motion to direct the Planning Commission to provide the City Council with a recommendation to amend the San Ramon Road Specific Plan only as it relates to the Town and Country Shopping Center, rezoning it to allow C-1 type uses, excluding unlimited Office Space. Cm. Hegarty seconded the amendment, and by a majority vote, the motion passed. Cm. Jeffery voted in opposition to the motion and amendment. TRI-VALLEY CITIZENS' COMMITTEE Staff referred to concerns expressed by Planning Commisisoner Raley regarding the original purpose and time frame of the Tri-Valley Citizens' Committee. Mayor Snyder directed Staff to contact Mr. Fraley, Alameda County Planning Department, for a written response to Cm. Raley's concerns. CLOSED SESSION At 11:50 p.m. the Council recessed to a closed executive session to discuss potential litigation and personnel. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 12:30 a.m. ~ ~ayorf ~ ATTEST: .... ~'~<~ ~t~-~. City C[o~J CM-5-113 Regular Meeting May 27, 1986