Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-27-1983 Adopted CC Minutes REGULAR MEETING - JUNE 27, 1983 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Monday, June 27, 1983 in the multipurpose room of Frederiksen Intermediate School. The meeting was called to order at 7:38 p.m. by Mayor Peter Snyder. ROLL CALL PRESENT~ Councilmembers Burton, Hegarty, Jeffery, Moffatt and Mayor Snyder. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Mayor led the Council, Staff and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. CONSENT CALENDAR On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Burton, and by unanimous vote, the following were approved~ Minutes of regular meeting of May 23, 1983; Warrant Register in the amount of $117,378.25; Financial Report for Period Ending May 31, 1983; City Manager's Employment Agreement. Cm. Moffatt asked that the item related to approval of final map for Tract 4988 be removed from the consent calendar for discussion. Cm. Moffatt felt concern related to complaints about dust on this project. The City Engineer indicated the builder has been using a water truck as often as possible. The builder is working with those residents affected, and the City Engineer felt a solution could be worked out. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by C~i~. Burton, and by unanimous vote, the following resolution was approved~ RESOLUTION NO. ~25-83 ACCEPTANCE OF FINAL MAP - TRACT NO. 4988 and RESOLUTION NO. 26-83 ACCEPT DEPOSIT IN LIEU - TRACT NO. 4988 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION RE USE OF FIREWORKS Mr. Fred Drena, Manzanita Lane, addressed the Council with a request that because the 4th of July is rapidly approaching, he would like the Council to CM-2-103 Regular Meening June 27, 1983 go on record and ask police to enforce the ordinance related to fireworks. He felt that the people of DUblin voted to have safe and sane fireworks, and therefore, users of illegal fireworks should be punished. He suggested that perhaps permit fees could be increased, and the additional money could be used to inform the community that illegal fireworks are very dangerous. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and Dy unanimous vote, the Council asked that police strictly enforce the ordinance related to fireworks and further, that awareness be present regarding the proliferation of illegal fireworks. REPORT FROM CITY MANAGER RE BONNIEWOOD INCIDENT Elmer & Diane Hanus, on April 11, 1983, requested City Council consideration of a juvenile curfew law in Dublin. They also indicated that there was a serious speeding problem in their neighborhood and requested placement of stop signs at the intersections of Bonniewood at Ardmore and Bonniewood at Sharon. The City Council asked Staff to identify alternatives available to the City which might prevent such occurrences as those on March 27, 28 and 29, 1983, in the future, and investigate speed mitigation measures on the streets of Ardmore and Sharon. The City Attorney prepared a memo which included a curfew ordinance from the City of Sacramento, which has been upheld in courn; and a noise ordinance from the City of Moraga, which has not been challenged. Chief Shores indicated that these ordinances would be useful tools for the police in controlling loud parties and loitering by juveniles. Chief Shores indicated he had discussed both ordinances with the County District Attorney's office. The DA's office indicated that both ordinances would make it easier to prosecute. Under the current Disburbing the Peace sections of the Penal Code, the police and the DA's office would have to prove that an individual was maliciously and willfully disburbing the peace of his neighbors, which is difficult to prove. The Morage ordinance sets forth a standard of reasonableness which is easier to prosecute. Cm. Burton felt the idea of a curfew law should be resisted, except by a vote of all the people. He felt this solution was like killing a gnat with a sledge hammer. Cm. Jeffery agreed and felt that a curfew law would be an overreaction. Cm. Moffatt stated he was appalled at the hour many young people, even as young as 8 and 10 years old, are on the streets. He felt a real need to control this type of activity. Cm. Hegarty agreed with Cm. Moffatt and felt public hearings could be held to get community input on this topic. CM-2-104 Regular Meeting June 27, 1983 On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous vote, the Council agreed to consider a curfew ordinance patterned after the Sacramento ordinance, and to hold public meetings for discussion of same. Discussion was held related to noise control measures. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote, the Council agreed to go through the public hearing process for a noise ordinance. With regard to the speeding problems in this neighborhood, the City Traffic Engineer has reviewed the problem, and due to the configuration of the streets, it was the Traffic Engineer's position that neither stop signs nor increased traffic enforcement in this area would be effective solutions to the problem. The Traffic Engineer recommended that the Council consider closure of Ardmore Avenue between Wicklow and Bonniewood, if it meets with the approval of the neighborhood. Some negative consequences, however, could result from street closure. The City Manager reported that barriers ]nay simply move the problem from this neighborhood to another. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. moffatt, and by majority vote, the Council authorized Staff to prepare the necessary dOcumentation to notify all affected residents that, on a temporary basis, blocking off is being considered. A 6 month time period would be used to see if this solution is effective or if it creates other problems. Staff should select area to send notices and a majority would be required to approve closure. Cm. Jeffery was opposed to this motion. BUILDING INSPECTION SERVICES CONTRACT In March, 1983, the City Council approved a Request for Proposal for Building Inspection Services and directed Staff to focus on private contract services, as opposed to investigating the alternative of providing building department services with City employees. As part of the request for proposal process, Staff contacted those firms and individuals which had previously expressed an interest in providing building department services to the City, and made arrangements with a private consultant and a contractor oriented publication to advertise the City's interest in contracting for building inspection services. Staff also contacted the County to determine if the County was interested in overcoming those obstacles identified last year and making a proposal to the City. In soliciting proposals, consideration was given to only those firms or individuals who had demonstrated experience in the area of building department services. In accordance with earlier City Council approval, Staff utilized the advisory services of William F. Anderson, who has approximately forty years experience in the area of building inspection and plan checking, and has served as Chief Building Official for a number of CM-2-105 Regular Meeting June 27, 1983 agencies in and outside of the Bay Area. Mr. Anderson assisted in the development of the Request for Proposal, reviewed the background of several firms which submited proposals and assisted in the interviewing of several firms. The City received proposals from a total of four private contractors and the County. Three of the four private contractors were invited to an interview. One of the three contractors withdrew his proposal at that point. Staff interviewed two private contractors. In the judgment of Staff and Mr. Anderson, Taugher & Associates had the best qualifications. Staff recommended that the City contract with Taugher & Associates, due to greater convenience to applicants, as all services would be provided in the City offices and the City would have greater control over the provision of this service. Cm. Hegarty questioned where Mr. Taugher would draw manpower from during rush times. Staff explained that the consultant would develop a pool of resource people. Cm. Hegarty also felt situation would be much cleaner if Mr. Taugher were already retired from the County. He stated he would rather wait 1 year before entering into this type of arrangement with him. A discrepancy was pointed out with regard to the price of $59.00 per hour to handle complex commercial industrial plan check between the agenda statement and Exhibit A of the Agreement. It was clarified that $59.00 per hour is the correct and agreed upon price, for complex structural commercial and industrial building plan checking only. Mr. Tim Nesbitt, field representative for the United Service Employee's International Union, Local 616 felt a definite conflict exists with the City contracting with Mr. Taugher, and that such a contract would be illegal. Mr. Fred Drena, a Dublin resident was also opposed to the City contracting with Mr. Taugher. He expressed concern with dealing with a Contractor who doesn't have a track record. On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Burton, and by majority vote, the Council 1) approved agreement with Taugner & Associates (with clarifications made to Exhibit A); and 2) authorized Staff to notify County of City's intent to terminate Building Inspection Services effective August 15, 1983. Opposed to the motion were Cm. Burton and Cm. Hegarty. RECESS A short recess was called. The meeting reconvened at 10:30 p.m. with all Councilmembers present. CM-2-106 Regular Meeting June 27, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSIONER RESIGNATION The City received a letter from Dr. Theodore C. Woy indicating his desire to resign from the City's Planning Commission, due to health reasons. On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Burton, and by unanimous vote, the Council accepted Dr. Woy's resignation and asked that a letter of commenda- tion be prepared thanking Dr. Woy for his service on the City's first Planning Commission. The Council further authorized Staff to advertise the vacancy. 1982-83 BUDGET MODIFICATIONS Article XIII B, Section 2 of the State Constitution states that "revenues received by an entity of government in excess of that amount which is appropriated by such entity in compliance with this Article during the fiscal year shall be returned by a revision of tax rates or fee schedules within the next two subsequent fiscal years". Staff extimated that revenues in excess of 1982-83 appropriations for Fiscal Year 1982-83 will be approximately: General Fund State Gas Tax Fund County Gas Tax Fund Revenue Sharing Fund 651,630 184,750 28,000 153,124 $ 1,017,504 The City Manager explained that given the fact that the City's organization has not yet been completed, the City will need reserves for future capital improvements, and reserves generate revenue. Cm. Burton suggested returning the money to the people. Discussion was held related to various ways to refund some of the money, perhaps $100,000 to residents. Cm. Hegarty felt the idea was good, but questioned the means by which this could be accomplished. Concern was voiced related to setting of precedent. Cm. Hegarty suggested the funds could be better used to upgrade visible service that will benefit the entire community. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, suggestion was made to refund $100,000 to people living in Dublin. The motion was defeated by no votes by Mayor Snyder and Councilmembers Hegarty, Moffatt and Jeffery. On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by majority vote, Staff was directed to appropriate those funds remaining as of June 30, 1983 to the Street Improvement Reserves in the General, State Gas Tax and County Gas Tax Funds; and to reserve for future anticipated projects in the Revenue Sharing Fund. The City's total reserves as of June 30, 1983 are estimated CM-2-107 Regular Meeting June 27, 1983 at $2,528,969, as indicated in the 1983-84 Preliminary Budget. Opposed to the motion was Cm. Burton. FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM The Mayor opened the Public Hearing for discussion of the Five Year Capital Improvement Program and 1983-84 Preliminary Budget and Revenue Sharing. The City Manager gave background information related to how the program was put together. He explained that it was not necessarily all inclusive, but rather a list of all possible projects he and his Staff could identify, and other items could be added, should the Council so desire. Projects could also come up next year which were not anticipated due to development, etc. The projects were prioritized over a five year period. The total cost of 1983 dollars is $7.2 million, and this is a preliminary estimate. A total of about $12.7 million is allocated for street related projects, and about $2.5 million has been set aside for community improvement projects. This plan was presented to the Planning Commission and they determined that it was in conformity with the anticipated General Plan, as they are required to do by State law. The Planning Commission did have some concerns with regard to the value of street trees along major commercial boulevards, and how those trees might impact the structural portion of sidewalks, curbs, etc. The Planning Commission also asked that Staff review the swales on the north and south side of Dublin Boulevard at Regional Street and look at street cross section on the north side of Dublin Boulevard between Regional Street and Golden Gate Drive as part of the Dublin Boulevard Rehabilitation Project. They also trees should be eliminated from the median ladnscaping projects. They also asked that a review be made of alternatives to construction of a Civic Center facility such as abandoned school sites. A page by page review was made of the Capital Improvement Program. Each project was discussed and eight modifications were requested~ i · 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. · Sewage Capacity - ask DSRSD if industrial uses can use other permits Add (1) bus shelter to project Business Area Street Number Signs - include all business a'reas Contact TJKM re traffic signal synchronization timing and cost Consider extension of Dublin Boulevard in Dublin Boulevard study Develop project for Village Parkway fences Split Village Parkway median improvement into a commercial and residential phase Scarlet~t Court - notify CalTrans of City's interest in Scarlett Court extension. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted the Five Year Capital Improvement Program. CM-2-108 Regular Meeting June 27, 1983 RECESS/ADJOURNMENT Due to the lateness of the hour, at 12:15 a.m. Mayor Snyder declared the meeting recessed until June 28,. 1983 at 7:30 p.m. at which time the Council will consider the 1983-84 Preliminary Budget and Revenue Sharing Program. ATTEST~ CM-2-109 Regular Meeting June 27, 1983