Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-28-1985 Adopted CC MinREGULAR MEETING- Tuesday, May 28, 1985 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Tuesday, May 28, 1985 in the meeting room of the Dublin Library. The meeting was called to order at 7'35 p.m. by Mayor Peter Snyder. ROLL CALL PRESENT' Councilmembers Jeffery, Moffatt and Mayor Snyder. ABSENT' Councilmembers Hegarty and Vonheeder. Assistant City Attorney Silver advised the Council and members of the audience that there were enough Councilmembers present at the meeting to sufficiently conduct business. A majority vote of quorum was present. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Mayor led the Council, Staff and those present in the pledge of alleg- iance to the flag. DONAHUE DRIVE TRAFFIC Charles Rogers, a resident along Donahue Drive addressed the Council and expressed concern regarding the hazardous traffic situation on Donahue Drive. Mr. Rogers submitted a petition stating residents' desire to see stop signs installed. At the present time there are no means of stopping traffic. There are many small children living on this street. Mayor Snyder directed Staff to review the situation. ARROYO MANAGEMENT PLAN - ZONE 7 Dave Simpson addressed the Council and stated he was in favor of the City supporting the development of a. bicycle trail along the Alamo Canal. There was a recent article in the newspaper about a Ms. Cameron who supported this program and Mr. Simpson stated he also supported the program. Mr. Simpson suggested putting the bike trail on the east side of the canal. CONSENT CALENDAR On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Hegarty & Cm. Vonheeder absent), the Council took the following actions' Approved Minutes of Regular Meeting of May 13, 1985; CM-4-99 Regular Meeting May 28, 1985 Approved Warrant Register in the amount of $81,569.35 Approved Financial Report for Period Ending April 30, 1985; Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 37 - 85 SUPPORTING THE REALIGNMENT OF IMPERIAL COURT ACROSS FROM SIERRA COURT IMPERIAL FREEHOLDS CALIFORNIA INC., PARCEL MAP 3582 Approved a Fourth of July Celebration; Authorized the Mayor to execute the City Manager's Employment Agreement; Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 38 - 85 ACCEPTING AND'DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE PRIVATE VEHICLE ACCESSWAY AGREEMENTS FOR THE AMADOR LAKES PROJECT (LOTS 1, 2 and 3 OF TRACT 5180, SUBDIVIDED IN CONJUNCTION WITH PA 83-035 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONING) Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 39 - 85 Adopted DIRECTING PREPARATION OF ANNUAL REPORT FOR MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 40 - 85 Adopted DIRECTING PREPARATION OF ANNUAL REPORT FOR LANDSCAPING & LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. 83-2 RESOLUTION NO. 41 - 85 ACCEPTING FOR THE PUBLIC TWO OFFERS OF DEDICATION FOR DRAINAGE EASEMENTS OVER 10 FOOT WIDE STRIPS OF LAND and instructed the City Clerk to record these documents; Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 42 - 85 and ACCEPTING DEPOSIT IN LIEU PARKLAND - TRACT 4930 RESOLUTION NO. 43 - 85 ACCEPTANCE OF FINAL MAP TRACT NO. 4930 CM-4-100 Regular Meeting May 28, 1985 DUBLIN COMMUNITY DAY AT THE ALAMEDA COUNTY FAIR The City is in receipt of a letter from the President of the Dublin Chamber of Commerce requesting the City's participation in Dublin's Community Day at the Alameda County Fair by having the Mayor in the Winner's Circle for Dublin's designated race. The Chamber has requested that the City consider sharing the expense involved of approximately $65.00 On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Hegarty & Cm. Vonheeder absent), the Council authorized financial participation in the Dublin Community Day at the Fair in the amount of $32.50. PUBLIC HEARING TOM HUENING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONING & SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AT 6767 DUBLIN BOULEVARD Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. On May 13, 1985, the City Council adopted a Resolution approving the Tom Huening Planned Rezoning and introduced an ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance. The City Council also adopted a Resolution which approved a Site Development Review to construct a 4,485 square foot building at 6767 Dublin Boulevard. No public comments were made. Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Jeffery, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Hegarty & Cm. Vonheeder absent), the Council waived the reading and adopted ORDINANCE NO. 10 - 85 AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE TO PERMIT THE REZONING OF REAL PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF DUBLIN PUBLIC HEARING DOLAN SCHOOL SITE MURRAY SCHOOL DISTRICT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONING & TENTATIVE MAP 5402 Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing'. In a special effort to facilitate processing, the Staff pre-noticed the City Council public hearing for the Dolan School Site Planned Development Rezoning and Tentative Map. The pre-noticing was premised on the Planning Commission making its recommendation on May 20, 1985. The Planning Commission continued the application until its June 17, 1985 meeting. Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. CM-4-101 Regular Meeting May 28, 1985 On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Jeffery, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Hegarty and Cm. Vonheeder absent), the Council continued this public hearing until after the Planning Commission makes its recommendation on this appli- cation. PUBLIC HEARING RESTRIPING REGIONAL STREET & AMADOR PLAZA ROAD FOR TWO-WAY LEFT TURN LANES Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. Chris Kinzel, City Traffic Engineer explained that on April 22, 1985, the City Council set a public hearing on the restriping of Regional Street and Amador Plaza Road between Amador Valley Boulevard and Dublin Boulevard to provide a two-way left turn lane on these streets. The existing streets now have one wide lane in each direction and parking on both sides of the street. The street widths from curb to curb are 52 feet, which does not require parking to be eliminated in order to add these proposed dual left-turn lanes. The new left-turn lanes would serve as a storage area for traffic turning left into driveways and an acceleration area for traffic turning left out of driveways. This safety measure was suggested by the City's Traffic Engineer to provide safe turning storage bays along both streets. The plan will not restrict access to and from driveways along the streets, however, some red curb is proposed at some of the driveways to improve sight distance from these driveways. Mayor Snyder asked if the left turns made onto Dublin Boulevard from Regional Street would ever be signalized with their own left turn arrow. Mr. Kinzel explained that thi's would further delay the time required to move cars through this busy intersection and that left turns had presented no significant problems. Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Hegarty and Cm. Vonheeder absent), the Council approved the striping plan and authorized a budget transfer of $3,000 from the Capital Outlay Account to the Striping & Marking Account within the Street Maintenance budget. PUBLIC HEARING AMADOR VALLEY BOULEVARD TRAFFIC STUDY & PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. Approximately one year ago, a comprehensive traffic study was presented to the Council and the public regarding traffic needs and proposed improvements to Amador Valley Boulevard between Village Parkway and Dougherty Road. CM-g-102 Regular Meeting May 28, 1985 The concerns of residents fronting Amador Valley Boulevard were primarily related to speeding and a safe crossing of Amador Valley Boulevard for schooI children. A number of traffic measures were then undertaken including stop signs at York Drive, additional signing and striping, and the use of radar. The City Council directed Staff to do a follow-up study 6 months after all these measures had been implemented. That time period has elapsed, and the City's Traffic Engineer has restudied the speeds on the street. The schematic plan, as amended, calls for reducing the width of the median on each side of the street by ~ feet to shift the one lane of traffic in each direction away from the curb parking. This will then allow slightly less than a 5 foot distance between parking and the traveled way. This will enable motorists to more safely get into and out of parked cars, allow more sight distance for residents backing out of their driveways, and allow room for bicyclists to be out of the direct traffic lane. Planted curb exten- sions would project into and shielding the parking bays. In addition, it is proposed to construct larger planted extensions at either end of the area fronted by single family homes to give a constricted residential feeling as motorists approach this area. Cm. Jeffery questioned if signs such as "Slow-Residential Area" would be helpful. Chris Kinzel explained that these types of signs have not been found to be effective. Signing and radar enforcement are the most effective tools. Dave Simpson felt that if one section of Amador Valley Boulevard is 35 mph and the other part is 25 mph, the City should put in signs indicating where the 25 mph begins. Chris Kinzel explained that there are currently ~igns indicating a reduction of the speed limit. Georgia DeStefano questioned if the protrusions would eliminate any parking spaces. It was explained that the bulbs would take away about 10-15 feet, but since they are located at corners, cars should not be parking that close to the corner anyway. Joe Martin questioned Staff with regard to measurements of medians and if trees would be eliminated in favor of cement in the medians. Staff explained that a new landscaping plan would call for complete new planting with a combination of trees, shrubs, groundcover and lawn. The new landscaping would be fully irrigated and maintained by the City. In addition, there would be miscellaneous fence improvements at both ends of Amador Valley Boulevard. Joe Martin questioned who had paid for the recent ramp curbs that had been put in. Staff explained that these were handicap curb ramps and were paid for by a block grant. Mr. Martin stated he was not sure this plan will resolve the problems on Amador Valley Boulevard. Bicyclists need to be considered as well as cars, and a new bike lane would just mean more traffic that residents will have to watch out for. CM-~-103 Regular Meeting May 28, 1985 Chris Kinzel explained that if the development along Amador Valley Boulevard were to occur today, things would be handled much differently than the way the County allowed. The situation presents a real dilemna in that a residential area also serves as one of Dublin's major boulevards. Because there are no easy solutions, Staff has worked on creating a peaceful co- existence, taking all facts into consideration. Mr. Martin questioned if there was a definite plan to have a stop light at Amador Valley Boulevard and Stagecoach Road. City Engineer Lee Thompson indicated this signal is scheduled for completion is approximately 6 weeks. Diane Moscetti felt the City should simply add more stop signs. She also questioned the possibility of Amador Valley Boulevard becoming a ~ lane street. Mayor Snyder explained that all decisions made are political and are made by existing City Councils. This City Council is trying to create a safer situation for residents. There is no guarantee, however, that a future Council would feel the same on any given situation. Doug Whistler questioned certain information he received from the City's maintenance department. Vince Bartoni felt a barricade should be erected at the railroad tracks and through traffic not allowed. Danny Raymond felt the City could save a lot of money if they put the bike lane on one side of the boulevard only. Staff explained that it is against the law to put a 2-way bike lane on one side of the street, as bicyclists must observe the same rules as vehicles. Pearl Latimer felt that adding more stop signs would allow vehicles to get onto Amador Valley Boulevard. Norma Perochi felt that stop signs and speed limits are only effective when they are enforced. She questioned if motorists were cited at 26 mph or at survey speed. Captain Shores responded that usually vehicles are traveling at around 30 mph before they are cited. Ron Walsh questioned if the traffic study took into account that next year Cronin School will be closed and students will be going to Fredericksen. Mayor Snyder explained that this is part of a traffic issue that will be discussed later in the .evening as a part of the School Safety and Crossing Guard Study. Leonard DeStefano felt that turn around areas were needed closer to the end homes rather than having to go all the way to the railroad tracks. Mr. DeStefano also questioned the types of landscaping that would be used in the medians. He felt that 'hot rodders' were a real problem in the area and more law enforcement was needed. Janet Hayes also indicated that turn around areas further west were needed. Regular Meeting May 28, 1985 Cm. Moffatt explained that 1/3 of the speeding tickets given were to residents of the immediate area. People should talk this up with their neighbors and try to set good examPles. Chris Grisham indicated he likes the City's plan for this street and also that he does encourage his neighbors to slow down. Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. Cm. Jeffery felt there was an immediate need to replace this street. On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Hegarty & Cm. Vonheeder absent), the Council approved the concept presented for improvements to Amador Valley Boulevard between Village Parkway and Dougherty Road and approved retention of 25 mph speed limit and to continue radar enforcement. The Council further directed Staff to look into the possibility of relocating the turn around area further to the west, closer to the end homes. RECESS A short recess was called. Ail Councilmembers were present when the meeting reconvened. (Cm. Hegarty & Cm. Vonheeder absent). PUBLIC HEARING SAN RAMON ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT $~-1 Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. On August 27, 198~, the City Council accepted petitions and passed resolutions setting the San Ramon Road Specific Plan Improvement District ($g-1) in motion. The necessary right-of-way appraisals have been made, and plans developed to carry out the proposed construction of improvements. An engineer's report setting out the estimated costs involved and the method of spreading assessment district costs was reviewed by the Council. The proposed spread is based on the following' I. For the extension of Amador Valley Boulevard and the traffic signal at San Ramon Road and Amador Valley Boulevard a) 50~ to Morrison Homes less the value of the land within the top of the cul de sac already dedicated. b) The remainder to Jeha and Nichandros prorated on the remaining square footage of their sites. . II. For frontage improvements on San Ramon Road and other required and requested off-site improvements (off-site fees for Morrison and sewer extension for Motet.) a) Spread to each parcel based on the cost of widening San Ramon Road ih ft for the actual improvemenvs along each parcel's frontage. CM-~-105 Regular Meeting May 28, 1985 b) Off-site fees and improvements assessed to those properties responsible for or requesting additional public improvements ($50,000 plus cost of left turn bay at Dublin Boulevard to Morrison Homes; extension of sewer main to Moret.) Although this item is not required to be a public hearing, Staff noticed the owners of parcels within the district in order that they could ask questions and be heard on this subject at this time. The actual improvements will be constructed in two phases; one to be the extension of Amador Valley Boulevard together with temporary signals facing this new extension. The second portion of the improvements will be con- structed with the Phase II San Ramon Road improvements to include frontage improvements and the necessary traffic signal. Roy Moret questioned the Council if a definite line had been determined as to where the City would sell the frontage property to the property owners. Mr. Motet also questioned the fairness in charging each property owner on a per foot basis related to San Ramon Road frontage. He inquired if a more acceptable arrangement could be worked out. Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 44 - 85 PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF ENGINEER's REPORT RESOLUTION NO. 45 - 85 APPOINTING TIME AND PLACE OF HEARING PROTESTS IN RELATION TO PROPOSED ACQUISITIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS AND DIRECTING NOTICE RESOLUTION NO. 46 - 85 CALLING FOR SEALED PROPOSALS RESOLUTION NO. 47 - 85 DESCRIBING PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, DIRECTING FILING OF MAP AND DIRECTING RECORDATION OF NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT SCHOOL SAFETY & CROSSING GUARD STUDY In November of 1984, the City Council received a request for a crossing guard at Lucania Street and Davona Drive. At the regular City Council meeting on November 26, 1984, the Council requested that the Traffic Engineer develop a scope of services to provide a comprehensive school safety study. The City Council approved the scope of study on December 10, 1954. CM-4-106 Regular Meeting May 28, 1985 The City Traffic Engineer has reviewed the existing conditions and met with school and police officials. The recommendations are based on the anticipated 1985-$6 Murray School District attendance boundaries. Table I of the report displays recommended warrants for the placement of adult crossing guards in the City of Dublin. This is' based on the proposed warrants in the Caltrans Traffic Manual and has been adapted to specific conditions in the City of Dublin. The formal adoption of these warrants will allow Staff to address future requests on an objective basis. The study recommends moving~the crossing guard from Village Parkway and Brighton Drive to Amador Valley Boulevard and Burton Street. This change reflects proposed changes in the Murray School District attendance boundaries. The Traffic Engineer has suggested that the Murray School District develop a school safety patrol for the intersection of Davona Drive and Lucania Street. The State Code allows for their establishment by a governing board pursuant to the Education Code. A safety patrol member must be at least 10 years old. This intersection does not meet the warrants for an adult crossing guard, however, it does meet the safety patrol criteria. The Traffic Engineer also evaluated conditions surrounding the Nielsen School. The final recommendations provide for changes in the signing at the loading zone adjacent to the school. These changes will help to assure that curbside parking is utilized in the most efficient manner. The Traffic Engineer is also prepared to discuss with school officials on-site changes to improve traffic flow. The crossing at Silvergate Drive and Amarillo Road does not currently meet the warrants for an adult crossing guard. However, it is recommended that this location be monitored as a potential location in the future. Also, the intersection of Sitvergate Drive and Hansen Drive may warrant an adult crossing guard at a future date. The study revealed the necessity for the shifting of a crosswalk adjacent to the Murray School District Offices. The current location directs pedes- trians into a driveway. Also, it is recommended that the crosswalk on the northern leg of Village Parkway and Tamarack Drive be relocated to the southern leg and that yellow crosswalks be added to the eastern and western legs. This will provide a direct route to school for students attending Wells Intermediate School. The study also suggests the removal of markings at Amador Valley Boulevard and York Drive. Elementary age students should be encouraged to utilize the proposed crossing guard at Burton Street. The removal of markings on Sitvergate Drive and Peppertree Road should also be completed to encourage Nielsen students to cross at Amarillo Road. The findings of the study indicate that with buildout traffic volumes, two additional intersections may warrant adult crossing guards. This assumes no change in school attendance boundaries. The maximum number of crossing guards would be seven, depending upon attendance boundaries. Currently the City and the Murray School District share the responsibility for the provision of adult crossing guards. The City provides the guard at San Ramon Road and Shannon Avenue and Village Parkway at Brighton Avenue. Regular Meeting CM-g-107 May 28, 1985 The Murray School District provides the crossing guard at San Ramon Road and Amador Valley Boulevard. Staff believes that the shared responsibility is appropriate as traditionally school districts have control over'the attendance boundaries, designation of utilized school sites, and decisions related to student transportation. Cm. Jeffery felt that the concept of utilizing students as crossing guards at locations that don't require an adult is a very good program. It gives children a sense of responsibility, and the kids take this very seriously. Ms. DeStefano made comments related to the elimination of the crossing guard at Village Parkway and Brighton Drive. Dave Simpson felt there was a greater problem on Village Parkway at Tamarack Drive. Arnold Durrer questioned if consideration had been given to the location of Silvergate Drive @ Castillian Way. Staff responded that the Dolan site and Kaufman & Broad developments had been taken into consideration in this area. On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Hegarty and Cm. Vonheeder absent), the Council agreed that the division of responsibilities be negotiated with members of the Murray School Board at the joint meeting on Thursday, May 30, 1985, and set a public hearing for the City Council meeting of June 10, 1985. OTHER BUSINESS Transit JEPA City Manager Ambrose reported that the City had received invitations from MTC to attend a reception at 3:00 p.m., on May 31, 1985, at which time the signing of the newly formed Transit Authority JEPA will be signed. Cm. Jeffery advised that she had been told that the Alameda County Board of Supervisors, when passing the JEPA, requested that the stipulation be added that in cases of condemnation, they have veto power. Cm. Jeffery felt that this would be unacceptable to the Cities involved, but the Cities would have to wait for formal notification. Tri-Valley Council Meeting City Manager Ambrose reminded the Council that the next meeting of the Tri- Valley City Councils, being hosted by the City of Pleasanton will be on June 6th at 6:30 p.m., at the Pleasanton Hotel. CM-~-108 Regular Meeting May 28, 1985 Arroyo Vista City Manager Ambrose reported that he had received a call from Jim Walker, City Manager of Pleasanton indicating that the City Council of Pleasanton had directed him to attempt to set up a joint meeting between the Pleasanton and Dublin City Councils for the purposes of studying the details of the Arroyo Vista Housing Project jurisdictional transfer and also to hear concerns raised by the residents of Arroyo V~sta and Kottinger Place. Pleasanton suggested two meetings be held: June 17th to discuss Kottinger Place and June 19th to discuss Arroyo Vista. Mayor Snyder and Cm. Jeffery felt it would be more appropriate for the Housing Sub-committee representatives to meet with Pleasanton, rather than the full Council. A lot of inaccurate information is going around which should be clarified. Cm. Jeffery felt that Staff Should notify Pleasanton that current circum- stances are such that there's not much the Council can do at this point, but they would like to have a representative at the meetings. Cm. Moffatt, a member of the sub-committee, indicated he would be unable to attend the meeting on June 19th and requested Staff to determine if it would be possible to switch the Arroyo Vista discussion to June 17th. Consensus of the Council was to direct Staff to contact the City of Pleasanton and advise that Dublin's representatives Cm. Moffatt and Cm. Hegarty would like to attend the Arroyo Vista public meeting if it could be switched to June tTth. % % % Reception for Dick Hooper, Irish Runner It was reported that the City had checked into the possibility of going together with the Chamber of Commerce regarding their activity planned for the Irish Marathon Runner, Dick Hooper, but the joint effort will not be feasible. With regard to the City hosting a reception, problems are being encountered with arrangments for food, because numbers cannot be given to a caterer. Mayor Snyder felt the City could just provide beverages and forget the food. The beverages could be obtained locally on consignment. Cm. Jeffery suggested the subject be brought up at Thursday nights meeting with the School Board and Dr. Cochran. CM- -109 Regular Meeting May 28, 1985 CLOSED SESSION At 10:08 p.m., the Council recessed to a closed executive session to discuss litigation, City of Dublin vs. The Sawmill. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 10:~0 p.m. The meeting was adjourned to a Special Joint Meeting with the Murray School District Board of Trustees on Thursday, May 30, 1985 at 7:30 p.m. Mayor / City Cl~rk~ CM-~-llO Regular Meeting May 28, 1985