Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-1982 Adopted CC MinutesSPECIAL MEETING - DECEMBER 7, 1982 A special meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Tuesday, DeCember 7, 1982 in Suite 210, 6500 Dublin Boulevard. The meeting was called to order at 7:10 p.m. by Mayor Peter Snyder. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Cm. Burton, Hegarty, Jeffery, and Mayor Snyder. Cm. Moffatt arrived at 7:23 p.m. ABSENT: None ENGINEERING FIRMS Mr. Robert Mimiaga and Mr. Guy Erik~son of Harris & Associates presented their proposal. The proposal identified three areas: departmental operations, current development, and field operations. Mr. Mimiaga stated that he would handle 80% of departmental operations including public infrastructure, traffic engineering, Council meetings, counter services, establishing engineering systems, and development coordination. Since Harris and Associates only have governmental clients, they see no conflict of interest because they do not have private development firms as clients. Mr. Erikson stated that they saw current development to include responding to questions, reviewing proposals, coordinating with Planning Staff, and working on similar projects. The field operations of their proposal would include surveying boundaries and inspection services. On major or complex traffic issues, the services of DKS would be used. Mr. Mimiaga and Mr. Erikson then discussed their proposal with the Council. Items covered during the discussion included the consultant's background, fees, design work, and office systems. Mr. Richard Cole, Mr. John Poore, and Mr. Byron Larsen presented the George Nolte proposal. The proposal included preparation of standards and procedures, the design inhouse or administration of outside contracts for public improvements, construction inspections, administration of encroachmentpermits, and traffic operations and maintenance. Mr. Poore and Mr. Larsen would be available on an as needed basis, with additional staff available to handle any peak workloads. Mr. Poore reviewed his background regarding City Engineer responsibilities and Mr. Larsen reviewed his traffic planning, operations, and design background. The Council discussed the proposal with the consultants. The discussion included comments regarding grant applications, traffic problems, assessment districts, and avoiding conflicts of interest. Mr. Peter Santina, Mr. Lee Thompson, Mr. Michael Middleton, and Mr. Chris Kinzel presented the proposal of Santina and Thompson. Mr. Thompson presented the staffing proposal. Mr. Santina presented their background and experience. Mr. Kinzel of TJKM discussed his background and how TJKM would work on Traffic Engineer items. CM-1-165 The Council discussed with the consultants the role of City Engineer, the mix of the consultant's private, public, and industrial jobs, how the consultant would handle a potential conflict, the need for office hours, and the consultant's fees. ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION Following the presentation of proposals, the Council adjourned to Executive Session to discuss the personnel aspects of the City Engineer position. The Council selected the firm of Santina and Thompson to act as City Engineer, subject to the City Manager negotiating an acceptable contract. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 11:20 p.m. City CM-1-166 REGULAR MEETING - DECEMBER 13, 1982 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Monday, December 13, 1982 in the meeting room, Dublin Library. The meeting was called to order at 7:35 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. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Hegarty and by unanimous vote, the following were approved: Minutes of the November 22, 1982 regular meeting; Warrant Register in the amount of $23,337.92; Treasurer's Report for period ending October 31, 1982; Financial Report for period ending October 31, 1982. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Georgean M. Vonheeder Ms. Vonheeder has requested that the City Council consider the need for on-street parking adjacent to the Dublin Sports Grounds as part of a study to determine the potential need for traffic signals at that location. A request has also been made to consider changing the name of San Ramon Road to Foothill Road. Cm. Moffatt felt first request was appropriate for Traffic Engineer who will be coming on board in the near future. Ms. Vonheeder clarified that her request was just a formal means of ensuring that when the Traffic Engineer does look at the entire situation with relation to Dublin Boulevard, the Sports Grounds situation is not overlooked- It was felt that the red curb lanes restricting parking were excessively long. Cm. Burton addressed situation of name change of San Ramon Road to Foothill~ Road. There has always been confusion. He further questioned what is involved in changing a street name. Staff explained that we would simply have to notify those agencies involved with respect to identification; i.e. CalTrans for freeway off-ramp signing. Cm. Moffatt felt it would be more logical to have the name Foothill Road all the way to the Contra Costa County line. Cm. Hegarty stated it might be confusing in that an address now is either a number on Foothill Road or a number on San Ramon Road. People know that one is Pleasanton and one is Dublin. Mayor Snyder concurred. Cm. Jeffery felt that since a study is going to be done on San Ramon Road in the near future, perhaps this could be incorporated into that study. Consensus of Council was that this project will be put on hold until a later' date. APPEAL - PUBLIC HEARING Status Report on PA82-003~ NAUGLES, INC. At its meeting of November 22, 1982, the City Council continued the Naugles~ appeal so that Staff and the applicant could determine whether or not it was feasible to relocate the driveway further south and move the proposed drive-up window away from the public right-of-way. Staff discussed with Howard Nathanson and Robert Jacob the need for revised plans with sufficient time for Staff review. Because there has been insufficient time for other departments involved to respond to the revised plan which was received on December 9th, Staff recommends continuing the item until the next Council meeting. On motion of Cm. Hegarty~ seconded by Cm. Burton, and by unanimous vote, the Naugles appeal is continued until City Council meeting of December 27, 1982. PLANNING REVIEW BACKLOG On October 11, 1982, the City Council authorized Staff to secure the services of a part-time planning consultant for a period of up to 6 weeks. This action was taken in order to reduce a backlog of planning applications which resulted at the time that the City assumed planning review from the County. Various statistics were presented for Council review related to processing of applications. CM-1-168 -- If Staff could be certain that development activity would continue at its present rate, Staff would recommend that the City Council seriously consider hiring an additional full-time planner. However, because of the backlog which the City inherited from the County and the rather limited workload data (6 months) which the City has as this time, it is Staff's opinion that the City should wait until fiscal year 1983-84 in order to ascertain whether or not the level of development activity will be maintained, before hiring an additional planner. In the interim, it is Staff's recommendation that the City Council authorize Staff to continue to use the services of a part-time planning consultant on an as-needed basis not to exceed 20 hours per week. This will enable the City to provide a better level of service to the public. The estimated cost of such service for the remainder of the fiscal year would not exceed $17,700. The funds remaining in the Planning Department's contract services account is approximately $15,700. Therefore, it is further recommended that the City Council authorize a budget transfer of $2,000 from the contingent reserve to the Planning Department Contract Services account. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Jeffery, and by unanimous vote, the Council authorized Staff to secure services of contract planning assistance on an as-needed basis, not to exceed 20 hours per week, and authorized budget transfer of $2,000 from contingent reserve to planning contract services account. MODIFICATION TO SIGN ORDINANCE At the City Council meeting of November 23, 1982, the City Council requested the City Attorney draft an ordinance which clarifies the City's existing sign ordinance's prohibition of A-frame and sandwich board signs. The City Attorney has drafted an ordinance which prohibits portable on-site signs including but not limited to A-frame signs. The City Attorney explained that the ordinance submitted was purposely drafted in a broad manner in order that ramifications could be discussed. The direction was to ban A-frame signs, and liberty was taken which could be deleted by removing certain wording in ordinance. There are occasions when a sign other than an A-frame could be placed, similar to a real estate sign. This could be a portable on-sight sign. Also included for purposes of discussion was a ban on any motor vehicle advertising parked away from facility, but directing attention to a sales location. None of the restrictions would apply to any civic, charitable or educational type of advertising which may be temporary; i.e. a school advertising a school play, or a Chamber of Commerce affair, etc. Mayor Snyder questioned whether exception should be made for real estate signs. Attorney Nave then brought up the point that a group could then question why the City was favoring real estate profession. Cm. Jeffery felt section 3 was confusing with relation to political signs. She felt from reading this section that these types of signs were allowed. CM-1-169 Attorney Nave felt it would be muCh more effective to sit down and review the complete sign ordinance situation rather than do this type of modification on a piece meal basis. A draft of a sign ordinance covering all types of signs would be the correct way. Cm. Burton felt that drafted ordinance presented was so all inclusive, it would be very difficult to enforce. He also felt it of utmost importance to notify business owners. When we eventually change the rules, we should be very careful to make sure it is highly publicized and that the City will be enforcing the new law. Fees should also be discussed. Before we get into this type of enforcement, the City,should offer an applicant an alternative. Instead of advising applicant only what they can't do, we should be able to advise them what they can do and what would be acceptable. Cm. Moffatt felt a closer communication with the Chamber of Commerce would be advisable with regard to the sign situation as far as publicity° Cm. Hegarty concurred and felt perhaps the Chamber could call a meeting to get input from the businesses and let them work'with the Council insofar as establishing what is and isn't acceptable. No one wants to have Dublin looking like "Coney Island",.yet merchants have a legitimate interest in this area, and with all the businesses working together, an acceptable solution could be arrived at. Ms. Beth Grant DeRoos addressed the Council, indicating several of her friends own businesses in Dublin. Considering the fact that unemployment is at 10.3% and that all but 3 shopping centers in Dublin have vacancies, and that there are 23+ "nook and cranny" shopping centers around town, she could understand why some of the merchants have signs out. Because Alpha Beta is no longer there, that center is very dark. People, in driving down the street, are unaware that there are even businesses in that center. She felt that if a sandwich sign would sell one more sandwich or sell one more house, etc., the City should be willing to let the signs remain. She felt a one year moratorium on the removal of sandwich board signs should be instigated. Other areas involve the high schools in designing one acceptable size A-frame sign. They are doing this in Palo Alto. Bill Tenery, Planning Commissioner, addressed the Council. He indicated this matter has been discussed and~ as a result, at next Monday's Planning Commission meeting, it is an agenda item. The intent was to gain support from the business people and interested citizens to establish a committee to give input on the types of signing they would like to see in Dublin. They hope to have a good turnout of both sign makers and merchants, in order that a good committee can be established to give direction to the Planning Commission. Ms. Georgean Vonheeder stated that the Chamber of Commerce has chosen to stay out of this issue at this particular time. Robert Dunn, a property owner at 6930 Village Parkway brought a plea to the City Council that a decision be made as soon as possible. His tenants are ~ all asking when a directory will be in place out front. He has presented a CM-i-170 plan to the Planning Director, but cannot get it approved because it contains too much square footage. The signs on the individual businesses do not give the exposure required. Council suggested that perhaps the individual sign size could be reduced in order to utilize the largest possible size for their directory. Cm. Jeffery felt it important that this issue be resolved as soon as possible, but that it was a lengthy process. Bruce King was present at the meeting representing the Chamber of Commerce. He felt they do know what is going on and they ask that he attend this meeting and request that no decision be made on this ordinance at this meeting, but rather delay in order that the Chamber has an opportunity to look at it and set up a sub-committee to gain input from the business community. On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Burton, and by unanimous vote the Council deferred the matter to the Planning Commission. PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM At its meeting of November 8, 1982, the City Council adopted a Resolution of Intention and introduced an ordinance authorizing the adoption and execution of a contract between the City of Dublin and the Public Employees' Retirement System. This contract would provide retirement coverage for employees under the PERS. Cm. Moffatt discussed whether or not elected officials should be excluded, as was the concensus of the Council on November 8, 1982. The City Manager indicated the contracts could be modified at any future point in time. If this request were made, the PERS people would conduct an actuarial valuation and indicate what the impact on the City's present rate would be, and Council would have something to act upon. Clarification was made that elected officials are locked out but the Council could have them included at some future time should they so desire. On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Burton, and by majority vote, the Council waived the reading and adopted the ordinance. Opposed to the motion was Cm. Moffatt. ORDINANCE NO. 24 AUTHORIZING THE ADOPTION AND EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM CM-i-171 ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING JURISDICTION OF PLANNING DIRECTOR AND PLANNING COMMISSION WITH REGARD TO PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote the reading was waived and the following ordinance was adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 23 ESTABLISHING THE JURISDICTION OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH REGARD TO VARIOUS ZONING AND PLANNING MATTERS REPORT FROM CITY MANAGER RE LETTERS RECEIVED FROM DIANE SPRINKLE AND BILL TENERY In accordance with City Council direction, the City Manager and City Attorney have investigated the allegations made by Diane Sprinkle in her letter of October 1, 1982. Staff interviewed 6 individuals who had some knowledge re the allegations. Three individuals supported the allegations of Diane Sprinkle. One individual had little direct knowledge of the incident. The other individual, although not present in Mrs. ~Ivey's store, supported Mr. Tenery. Mr. Tenery indicated no need to be interviewed, and indicated his letter would suffice as a response. A verbal exchange occurred between Tenery and Ivey, owner of the Crafty Fox~ Macrame Shop re Ivey's car being parked in front of her store. Four people indicated that Tenery misused his power as Planning Commissioner during this heated verbal discussion. Cm. Burton felt concern in that the Council is setting a precedent in getting involved in what he felt was a private argument. Staff time spent on this incident was of concern. He felt incident should be noted and everyone should remember that they are public officials and act accordingly. Cm. Jeffery felt this was an opportunity for the City to set a good precedence. She felt very strongly that good leadership should be set in the community. This leadership should not cause embarrassment to the community. Her feelings were that Mr. Tenery had misused his title and felt there were grounds for his removal from his position on the Planning Commission. Cm. Hegarty felt great concern that anyone in this City, in any public capacity would use their position in any way to put tarnish on the City. He felt this incident should never have come up. His preference was that the incident should have been discussed in executive session, but he was informed by the City Attorney that this was not appropriate. Cm. Moffatt had some hesitations as far as whether or not the incident actually occurred. He questioned whether incident happened as a premediated act, or if not, which he suspected to be the case, it was perhaps simply people arguing and getting somewhat carried away. CM-1-172 Vince Vonheeder addressed the Council, stating as Councilmember Jeffery indicated, public officials have a duty to control and contain themselves and suppress their feelings, act on a higher plane. He understands and appreciates this. This City has a good name and what occurs today will affect the future, insofar as how we are viewed throughout the community, the valley and the county. He has come to know Mr. Tenery, has little understanding of what he does in his private life, and has even less concern over what he does in his private life. As a Planning Commissioner, hoWever, he was concerned with what Mr. Tenery does in chambers, meetings and public functions. He felt he had the right to conduct himself as any other businesman in the community would. He felt because interviews were not sworn statements, testimony did not warrant harsh actions. Cm. Hegarty felt that policy of the Council should be that anyone in any official capacity should watch what they do and if they foul up, they will be punished. Cm. Moffatt felt any citizen has a right to make a complaint against any official. He was disappointed that individuals making allegations were not present at the meeting to discuss the incidents. He felt allegations were mostly heresay. He felt the incidents should be acknowledged and Mr. Tenery should be rebuked, but did not feel that any damage had occurred other than a few feelings had been hurt. Mr. Tenery has many good attributes that he's giving to the City. Beth Grant DeRoos addressed the Council stating her feelings that everyone present is a human being and unless you go up to someone and say "Hey, I'm so and so and I'm on this or that Commission, and buster, you'd better watch it," then you are bringing the City into the matter. She felt it unfair if a person were to simply concoct an incident to get a public official's name in the paper, and blow it all out of proportion and really run the person's reputation into the ground. People should be able to be human beings, but once a person brings up the 'fact that "I am on such and such a Council" and if it only happens once, that's different, but if it keeps happening, the City must respond. Cm. Jeffery felt it very important that a precedent of good leadership be set for Dublin and made motion that William Tenery be removed from his position as Planning Commissioner because of the misuse of his position for implied intimidation. The motion was seconded by Cm. Hegarty, but failed to pass. AYES: Mayor Snyder and Cm. Jeffery NOES: Cm. Burton, Hegarty and Moffatt WORD PROCESSING EQUIPMENT As indicated to the City Council several times in the past, with a small Staff, word processing equipment will assist in doing job in a more productive manner and will obviate the need for more Staff as the City grows. This is not to say that additional Staff will not be needed, but it will reduce that need somewhat if we have word processing equipment. In addition, as Staff began to look at systems, it was discovered that there are a number of applications that could be used to our advantage, because CM-1-173 of the technology used in developing word processing systems of today. An area of particular interest is data retrieval and the ability of a system to handle such items as animal licenses, business licenses and land use inventory. A detailed breakdown identifying all the systems, listing features, price, etc., was presented to the Council As a result of the City's analysis, recommendation of Sta~ is to purchase a Syntrex Aquarius II word processing system. On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Burton, and by unanimous vote, the Council 1) authorized City Manager to purchase Syntrex Aquarius II word processing system pending satisfactory completion of trial period, and 2) approved budget transfers as follows: transfer from following accounts into City Manager's Equipment Account and Contract Services Building Management Equipment Acount - $3,000, Finance Equipment Account - $2,000, Contingent Reserve Account - $1,500. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT RESOLUTION At its meeting of September 27, 1982, the City Council heard a presentation by City Staff and County Staff regarding the Alameda County Urban County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. The Council approved an agreement to participate in the program. Since that time, County Staff has notified the City that a resolution is necessary to complete the agreement and satisfy HUD requirements. By adopting the resolution, the previously approved agreement becomes effective. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote, the following resolution was adopted: RESOLUTION NO. 60-82 APPROVING ALAMEDA COUNTY URBAN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM OTHER BUSINESS Parade Permit Dublin High School has asked for a waiver of the $60.00 permit fee related to a 10 Kilometer Run event scheduled for Sunday, January 30, 1983. After discussion, on motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous vote, the Council will waive the permit fee and ask for cooperation in cleaning up after .the run. CM-1-174 Holidays for City Employees The City Manager asked for Council direction with relation to the upcoming holidays as far as when City Offices should be closed. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Hegarty and by unanimous vote the Council directed that City Offices be closed on Friday, December 24th in observance of Christmas, and on Friday, December 31st in observance of New Year's Day. Gas Tax Bill The City Manager indicated recent receipt of a telegram from the League of California Cities with respect to the Federal Gas Tax Bill that is presently moving through Congress. They have requested that we contact our local senators and congressmen with resPect to the impact of this particular legislation on cities in general and their highways program. None of the revenue that is presently being proposed by Congress as part of the gas tax would trickle down to local government and in addition, that it is possibly being used in lieu of some of the other federal highway programs that are presently in effect, such as Federal Aid Urban. Consensus of Council was to direct Staff to write to senators stating concern and feeling that local government should certainly have some portion of the tax. Local Revenue Deficiencies/Legislative Priority Cm. Burton presented request for a resolution received from the Mayor of the City of Banning urging that Dublin prepare a resolution urging the State Legislature to make local revenue deficiencies the highest priority in the next session. Council consensus was that Staff prepare instead, a LETTER urging that the subject be ONE of the highest priorities. Selection of City Engineer/City Traffic Engineer Mayor Snyder indicated that at the Special Meeting held on December 7, 1982, the City Council selected the firms of Santina & Thompson and TJKM to act as City Engineer and Traffic Engineer, respectively. The City Manager will start immediately to negotiate the contract. CM-1-175 Letter Re Street Sweeping Mayor Snyder read a letter received from Dublin resident Mary Vollbrecht stating how pleased she was with the work being done by our new street sweeping contractor and thanking the City of Dublin for this unexpected service. Toys For Tots Campaign Mayor Snyder reminded Council of the upcoming campaign being held on the following Saturday at Midas Muffler. Radio Station KKIQ will broadcast live and there will be personalities from the A's and Giants present. Parks & Recreation AD HOC Committe Meeting Cm. Moffatt reported that there was a meeting held in early December with the group to enhance the recreation department within the area There will be another meeting on January 12, 1983. Community Address Book Cm. Jeffery indicated she had recently received in the mail a community address book, containing NO reference to the valley; i.e. Dublin, Pleasanton or Livermore. This book was put out by the telephone company, and she felt that obviously their marketing department doesn't know anything about the valley. Cm. Burton indicated when he receives his he will speak with the General Manager, who lives up in Danville. Library Commission Cm. Hegarty indicated the Library Commission of Alameda County is very interested in the development taking place in San Ramon in relationship to this library and they will be watching and attending the planning commission hearings in Contra Costa County. He felt they would be looking for Council support in that this is the library that these new people will be utilizing. Perhaps developers should come up with something toward the support of this library. CM-1-176 ADJOURNMENT Mayor Snyder announced at 10:30 p.m. that there being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned to Tuesday evening, December 14, 1982 at 7:00 p.m., in the conference room at City Offices. ATTE ST: CM-1-177 ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING - DECEMBER 14, 1982 An adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Tuesday, December 14, 1982 in the conference room at 6500 Dublin Boulevard, City Offices. The meeting was called to order at 7:10 p.m. by Mayor Snyder. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Cm. Burton, Hegarty, Jeffery, Moffatt and Mayor Snyder. ABSENT: None DISCUSSION OF CITY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES PLANNING - General Plan - Sign Ordinance - Zoning Ordinance - New Pre-Manufactured Units - Sphere of influence BUILDING & SAFETY - Building Services - In House vs. Contract - Construction Codes - Enforcement - New Pre-Manufactured Units - Transfer Building Records ENGINEERING - Citywide Traffic Studies - City Base Map - Median Strips COMMUNITY IDENTITY - Business Street Signs/Numbering - City Entrance Signs POLICE - Traffic Control~ Review of - Develop Public Relations Program - Police Contract Review & Formal Evaluation ,CM-1-178 ANIMAL CONTROL - Licensing & Clinic CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) - Streets w/Beautification, Median, etc. - City Facility - Undergrounding MAINTENANCE - Street Lighting Assessment District - Service Level Review & Evaluation - Tree Trimming/Maintenance - Sidewalk Maintenance - Trash Receptacles TRANSPORTATION - Feasibility Study: Tri-Valley Bus - Dial-A-Ride - Bus Shelters GENERAL GOVERNMENT (FINANCE) - Budget - Financial Forecast - Inventory Control - Purchasing Procedures - Investment Program - Business License ADMINISTRATION - Personnel Ordinance - Visibility, Community INTER-GOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS - Discussions w/DSRSD, Murray and Amador Valley School Districts, i.e. Joint Meetings of Boards, Staffs. - Pleasanton Housing Authority Representation - Pleasanton Agendas COUNCIL/MANAGER RELATIONS - Information Exchange System - Goals & Objectives Evaluation - 6 Months CM-i-17 9 The City Manager was directed to come back to the City Council with an implementation plan for the above goals which were agreed upon by the City Council. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 12:10 a.m. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk CM-i-180 REGULAR MEETING - DECEMBER 27, 1982 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Monday, December 27, 1982 in the meeting room, Dublin Library. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 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. Jeffery, and by unanimous vote, the following were approved: Warrant Register dated December 27, 1982 in the amount of 115,876.08; RESOLUTION NO. 61 - 82 PRESCRIBING TIME AND METHOD OF PAYING SALARIES AND WAGES Denial of claim of Jack Pearson on behalf of Christopher Pearson. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Beth Grant DeRoos and Richard Metzner addressed the Council with a request that Dublin withdraw its representative (Cm. Burton) from the Cable Televisi.on Advisory Committee and start a committee for Dublin only. Mrs. DeRoos felt concern that Dublin could possibly open itself up to lawsuits from filmmakers because of actions on the part of the committee. City Attorney, Michael Nave was unaware of any suits pending or any possible liability on the part of the City. Cm. Burton felt the group to be very worthwhile and the information that Dublin receives related to legislation that affects local cable programming is very beneficial. He felt perhaps there was a misunderstanding on the parts of Mrs. DeRoos and Mr. Metzner, and suggested that they attend the upcoming Advisory Committee meetings. CM-i-181 PUBLIC HEARING Naugles Appeal On October 7, 1982, the Zoning Administrator reviewed the proposed project, identified a potential traffic safety problem, and approved the project subject to conditions, one of Which required the relocation of the drive-up window. The applicant appealed the action and requested approval as originally submitted. At its November 22, 1982 meeting, the City Council heard and continued the Naugles appeal so that Staff and the applicant could determine whether or not it was feasible to relocate the driveway further south and move the proposed drive-up window away from the public right-of-way. Staff discussed project revisions with the applicant. The applicant submitted a revised plan. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Hegarty and by unanimous vote, the Council denied the appeal and approved the reVised project subject to the conditions that: 1) The required parking stalls are provided and the parking layout design is modified. 2) Adequate vehicle stacking space is provided. 3) The entire site, including the parking lot and western area, is adequately landscaped. 4) The project is completed within one year. 5) The site and structure are developed according to standard development conditions and security requirements. CITY ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT At a special meeting held on December 7, 1982, the City Council selected Santina and Thompson to function as City Engineer and TJKM to function as a subconsultant for traffic engineering services. The City Manager has negotiated an agreement with Santina and Thompson in accordance with City Council direction. As part of that agreement, the Consultant has agreed to hold office hours in the City Offices. At this time, it appears that the Consultant will be present in the City Offices about three days a week. Staff has met with the Alameda County Public Works Director and Staff in order to effectuate a smooth transition. Before the City can accomplish this transition, the City must provide the County with 30 days written notice that it wishes to terminate its contract agreement with the County for Examination of Tract Maps and Parcel Maps and also those portions of the Street Maintenance Agreement which provide engineering services. During that 30 day period, Mr. Flertzheim would continue to function as City Engineer for the City, and the County would attempt to complete all pending subdivision reviews. Any maps wh~ich the County did not complete prior to February 1, 1983, would be signed off by Lee Thompson after the review had been completed by the County. All new work generated during the 30-day transition period would be handled by Santina and Thompson. Since the City cannot have two City Engineers concurrently, Mr. Thompson's designation as City Engineer would be effective on February 1, 1983. CM-1-182 On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Burton, and by unanimous vote, the Council: 1) Approved agreement with Santina and Thompson 2) Adopted resolution designating Lee Thompson as City Engineer effective 2/1/83 3) Directed City Manager to notify Alameda County of its intent to terminate its agreement for Examination of Tract Maps and Parcel Maps and the Maintenance Agreement. RESOLUTION NO. 62-82 DESIGNATING LEE THOMPSON AS CITY ENGINEER FOR THE CITY OF DUBLIN TRAFFIC SIGNAL AGREEMENT Hopyard/Dougherty Roads at 1-580 At its meeting of September 13, 1982, the City Council approved in concept the installation of a traffic signal on Dougherty Road and 1-580 along with related improvements. The City Council directed Staff to work out an agreement with the City of Pleasanton and proceed with the environmental review. The City Council's approval of this traffic signal was conditioned on the installation of a traffic signal on the south side of 1-580 at the same time. Since that meeting, Staff and the City Attorney have developed an agreement with representatives from the City of Pleasanton, which is mutually acceptable to both Cities. The significant conditions of that agreement are as follows: 1. All costs of installation, maintenance, operation and future modifications will be borne by the City of Pleasanton. 2. The proposed traffic signal will not be made operational until the traffic signals at the intersection of Hopyard and the 1-580 eastbound off ramp are installed and made operational. 3. The proposed signal will be interconnected with the Dublin Dougherty signal subject to approval by the State of California Department of Transportation. 4. Dublin retains the right of final review on the project plans, and the phasing of the proposed signal and the Dublin Boulevard Dougherty Road signals. In addition to the agreement, the Dublin Planning Director conducted an environmental review of the signal project and has prepared a Negative Declaration which finds that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. Staff has published adequate notice regarding the Negative Declaration, and has received comments from the State of California Department of Transportation. Mr. Chris Kinzel, TJKM has responded to the comments of CalTrans. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous vote, the Council 1) made necessary finding and approved Negative Declaration; and 2) adopted resolution authorizing Mayor to execute traffic signal agreement with 'the City of Pleasanton. CM,1=183 RESOLUTION NO. 63-82 AUTHORIZING MAYOR TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF PLEASANTON FOR CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS ON HOPYARD/DOUGHERTY ROAD AT 1-580 WESTBOUND OFF-RAMP OTHER BUSINESS Mayor's Conference The City Manager reminded everyone that the next Alameda County Mayor's Conference is being held in Dublin on January 12, 1983. Cm. Burton will be the only Councilmember unable to attend. Alameda County Sheriff's Posse The City Manager has been contacted by the Alameda County Sheriff's Posse, who wished to find out whether or not the City would desire the services of the Posse for its next parade, and if so, they needed to know when it was going to be held and would appreciate a little advance notice. The parades in the past have been handled by volunteer groups according to A Mayor Snyder. Traffic Study 2-Way Right Turn from Dublin Boulevard onto Dougherty Road Cm. Burton stated he wished to pursue this situation, but wasn't sure of the necessary process. Residents are very upset over the traffic buildup at this corner. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Jeffery, and by unanimous vote, the Council directed that the City proceed with the study of the intersection of Dublin Boulevard/Dougherty Road to evaluate how to properly relieve the situation. Clarification was made that this study be added to the list, without prioritizing. Dublin Police Statistical Information Chief Shores provided the Council with statistical data related to arrests, citations, accidents, etc. Discussion was held related to the breakdown of these figures. Chief Shores indicated that in the future, the statistics will be broken down finer, thus providing more details. Animal Control Cm. Burton mentioned a recent article he had read in the paper, and asked Chief Shores whether or not he felt we had enough manpower in Dublin. Chief Shores responded indicating they have very little interface with animal control. Animal Control takes their calls directly and are under separate contract. The City Manager advised that discussions have been held with Chief Mitchell, who is the individual in the Sheriff's Department responsible for overseeing the animal control program. There is no question in his mind that they are undermanned and'cannot provide the level of service we Would like in this community. However, the City Manager advised that we had a vicious dog complaint last week, and Animal Control responded within a time period of 20 minutes. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m. ///'F CM-1-185