Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-15-2004 Adopted CC Min REGULAR MEETING = JUNE 15" 2004 CLOSED SESSION A closed session was held at 6:30 p.m., regarding: 1. CONFERENCE wrrn LABOR NEGOTIATORS Government Code section 54957.6 Agency Designated Representatives: Councihnembers Oravetz an~ Sbranti Unrepresented Employee: City Attorney 2. CONFERENCE wrrn LEGAL COUNSEL -- ANTICIPATED LmGATION Government Code section 54956.9(b) (1) (one or more cases) P Facts and Circumstances: Government Code section 54956.9(b)(3)(A) , , A regular meeting of the Dublin City Council was held on Tuesday,]une 15; 2004, in the Council Chambers of the Dublin Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at 7:12 p.m., by Mayor Lockhart. .. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers McCormick, Oravetz, Sbranti, Zika and Mayor Lockhart. ABSENT: None. .... PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The pledge of allegiance to the flag was recited by the Council, Staff and those present. .~..... ~ . !! REPORT ON CLOS£D SESSION ACTION Mayor Lockhart announced that Item 2.was discussed, with no action taken. Jtem 1 would be continued to the end of the meeting. -.+ CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15, 2004 PAGE 286 ·r PROCLAMATION DECLARING JUNE 21. - 27, 2004 "RELAY FOR LIFE" WEEK, , 7:13 p.m. 3.1 (610-50) Mayor Lockhart read a proclamation declaring June 21- 2 7, 2004 "Relay for Life Week" and presented it to Captain Tom McCarthy, who accepted on behalf of Police Çhief Gary Thuman. ". PROCLAMATION SUPPORTING AMERICANS FOR NATIONAL PARKS 7:16 p.m. 3.3 (610-50) Mayor Lockhart modified the order of the agenda and, at this time, read a proclamation sUpPOrting Americans for National Parks and presented it to Diane Boyd, representing Americans for National Parks. .... APPOINTMENT OF DUBUN REPRESENTATIVES TO THE LIVERMORE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN UPDATE ADVISORY COMMI1ïEE 7:20 p.m. 3.2 (110-30/420-50) Mayor Lockhart advised that the City of Livermore was requesting the Dublin 'City Council to appoint three (3) representatives to the Livermore AirPort Master I'lan Update Advisory Committee. The appointments to the Committee should include one Dublin City Councilmember, one member of the Dublin business community and ond at-large Dublin resident. The Committee will discuss, take public testimony, consider find make recommendations to the Livermore City Council regarding the Draft Airport Mater Plan Update and the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. Mayor Lockhart recommended the appointment of Vice Mayor George Zika as City Council Representative; Sybase Security Director Gabriel Navarrette as Business Comntunity Representative; and David Froio as the Citizen-at-Large Representative. On motion of Cm. Oravetz, seconded by Cm. Sbranti and by unanimous vote, the Council appointed Vice Mayor George Zika as City Council Representative; Sybase Security Director Gabriel Navarrette as Business Community Representative; and David CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15, 2004 PAGE 287 Froio as the Citizen-at-ùtrge Representative to the Livermore Airport Master Plan Update Advisory Committee. Vm. Zika requested that Staff provide each of the Committee members with a çopy of the Livermore AirPort Master Plan Environmental Impact Review. '. PUBLIC COMMENT 7:22 p.m. 3.4 John T. Collins, Sr., Dublin resident, spoke about the lack of proper timing of traffic signals on Dublin Boulevard and at the intersection of Amador Valley Boulevard and Village Parkway. He directed a comment to the Planning Commission and ask;ed if it was acceptable to have a commercial business, without permits, running from a backyard as his immediate neighbor did. He requested that it be looked into. , ~. "~ ~ CONSENT CALENDAR 7:24 p.m. Items 4.1 through 4.12 On motion of Vm. Zika, seconded by Cm. Sbranti and by unanimous vote, the Council took the following actions: Approved (4.1) Minutes of Regular Meeting of June 1, 2004 Accept (4.2 600-30) improvements by Artist Bryan Tedrick under the Art in the Parks Dolan Park Agreement; " Approve (4.3 600-40) Amendment to Agreement with Dublin Unified School District for Lease of Fallon School Multipurpose Facility; Adopted (4.4 600-60) RESOLUTION NO. 95 - 04 APPROVING FINAL MAP AND IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR TRACT 7414 (GHC ROXBURY, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILI1v) And CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15, 2004 PAGE 288 RESOLUTION NO. 96 - 04 ACCEITANCE OF PARKLAND DEDICATION IN LIEU FEE FOR TRACT 7414 t Adopted (4.5 600-60) RESOLUTION NO. 97 - 04 ACCEITANCE OF LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT 7141 (DUBLIN RANCH AREA A, NEIGHBORHOOD A-6) f Adopted (4.6 700-20) RESOLUTION NO. 98 - 04 ESTABLISHING A SALARY PLAN FOR FULL-TIME PERSONNEL IN ACCORDANCE WITH TIlE PERSONNEL RULES ¡ RESOLUTION NO. 99 - 04 ESTABLISHING A SALARY PLAN FOR MANAGEMENT POSITIONS EXEMIT FROM COMPETITIVE SERVICE RESOLUTION NO. 100 - 04 AMENDING TIlE CLASSIFICATION PLAN Adopted (4.7 360-20) RESOLUTION NO. 101- 04 APPROVING PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S REPORT, CONFIRMING DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT CI1Y OF DUBLIN STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 83-1 RESOLUTION NO. 102 - 04 APPOINTMENT TIME AND PLACE OF HEARING PROTESTS IN RELATION TO PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS CI1Y OF DUBLIN STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 83-1 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15, 2004 PAGE 289 Adopted (4.8 3èO-20) RESOLUTION NO. 103 - 04 APPROVING PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S REPORT, CONFIRMING DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 83-2 RESOLUTION NO. 104 - 04 APPOINTMENT TIME AND PLACE OF HEARING PROTESTS IN RELATION TO PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 83-2 Adopted (4.9 360-20) RESOLUTION NO. 105 - 04 APPROVING PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S REPORT, CONFIRMING DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 86-1 (TRACT 5511) RESOLUTION NO. 106 - 04 APPOINTMENT TIME AND PLACE OF HEARING PROTESTS . IN RELATION TO PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS f CITY OF DUBLIN LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE I ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 86-1 . Adopted (4.10 360-20) RESOLUTION NO. 107 - 04 APPROVING PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S REPORT, CONFIRMING DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT CI1Y OF DUBLIN STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 99-1 And CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15, 2004 PAGE 290 RESOLUTION NO. 108 - 04 APPOINTING TIME AND PLACE OF HEARING PROTESTS IN RELATION TO PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS CITY OF DUBLIN STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 99-1 Adopted (4.11 360-20) RESOLUTION NO. 109 - 04 APPROVING PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S ~PORT, LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 97 -1 (SANTA RITA AREA) RESOLUTION NO. 110 - 04 APPOINTING TIME AND PLACE OF HEARING PROTESTS IN RELATION TO PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 97 -1 (SANTA RITA AREA) Approved (4.12 300-40) the Warrant Register in the amount of $1,165,333.97. .. PUBLIC HEARING AMENDMENT OF EASTERN DUBLIN TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE AND AREA OF BENEFIT FEE RESOLUTION 7:25 p.m. 6.1 (390-20) Mayor Lockhart opened the public hearing. , Senior Civil Engineer Ray Kuzbari presented the Staff Report and advised that :this item would update the current Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee œDTIF) program which collects fees to finance transportation improvements and facilities needed to rrduce the traffic-related impacts caused by development in Eastern Dublin. The EDm ~eeded to be updated to reflect the current cost of acquiring land and constructing improvements. Also, additional territory (shown as the Transit Center) was added to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and that territory will be added to the EDTIF. The revised EDTIF'will reflect , CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15, 2004 PAGE 291 the addition of the Transit Center area and additional Ì1:t1provements related tQ the newly addedremrory. ' Cm. McCormick referred ro Exhibit C, specifically Standard· Commercial Offiqe and Medical/Dental Office as compared ro Clinics, and asked how Staff derived th;e trip generation estimates. Mr. Kuzbari explained that trip rates were based on empirical data obtained from ITE Trip Generation manual. Clinics are different in nature than medical office and tend to generate fewer trips on a daily basis. Medical office is more similar to standa~d office, although it has higher trip generate rate. According ro ITE Trip Generation, in the morning peak hour, trip generation from medical office is approximarely 56% higher than trip generation from a standard office. During the afternoon peak hour, the trip rate for medical office is approximately 154% higher than trip generation for standard office. Cm. McCormick asked about the Commercial/Retail shopping center trip generations rares and how the different uses were added rogether to come up with a propOrtioned rate. There seemed to be no nexus. . Mr. Kuzbari explained that there were three. different categories of shopping centers depending on the size. Each caregory has a different rate of trip generation. trip generation rates are based on well-established trip generation data from ITE, as well as San Diego Area of Governments. City Attorney Elizabeth Silver explained that when establishing the traffic impact fees, begin by looking at new growth planned in the General Plan and figure out how many trips are generated by the new growth. There will be certain assumptions on how many trips will be generated by different types of uses. Those numbers will be used, to figure out what improvements are needed to stay within the level of service establisJied in the General PIan, which is Level D. The next step would be to calculate what it w;ould cost to build those improvements, and then determine who to fairly apportion the total dollar amount between all of the new development. Exhibit C of the Resolution, which determines who to apPOrtion the cost, is based on the empirical data provided by well- established sources. When the fee was first adopted by the Council in 1995, it was based on the chart in Exhibit C. The determination was made at that time not to do a traffic study for every single project. The chart is being proposed to be slightly modified. r I CITY COUNCIL l\IINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15, 2004 PAGE 292 Cm. McCormick expressed concern that a not-for-profit business, medical for example, might be discouraged from coming to an area based on the proposed trip generation rate. . ¡ Mayor Lockhart asked about the 1999 Study Update, which included an estin:\ate of $19.5 million in traffic mitigation funds to be provided by Contra Costa County to pay for portions of the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee improvements. Dublin settled for $13.5 million. Was that study not based on this empirical data? How did the.figures change? City Manager Richard Ambrose advised that the payment settlement was negotiated after the update. Mayor Lockhart asked. if there was an "x" factor in the chart for a type of business or service which the City felt was very important to the community. Mr. Kuzbari advised that, from technical viewpoint, Staff used numbers from :nationally accepted manuals. Council and Staff discussed peak and non -peak hours and how the trip generation numbers and rates are determined, especially in relation to Standard Office V8,. Medical Office. Vm. Zika pointed out that the data is what the data is. If Dublin is going to adapt a traffic standard level of D, then money is needed to pay for the road improvements. If ValleyCare or any other medical use is given an exception, someone will have, to pick up the slack. Once granting exceptions starts, other groups will start to ask. Onçe exceptions are made, all fees based on data become irrelevant. The Council rµade a commitment to people in the west that they would not have to pay for development in the east. i Cm. Oravetz asked if the Council had the authority to grant exceptions to the .Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee. ' City Manager Ambrose stated that the Eastern Dµblin Specific Plan had a policy that required new development to pay its own way. The policy was created to ass~re Dublin residents that they would not be footing the bill for new development. Unus$l projects, such as IKEA, have had individual traffic studies done. If an applicant can sh9W from an actual traffic study, based on empirical data, that their results are different frçm the EDTIF, their requirements can be modified. The impacts from one property cannot be . CITY COUNCIL MINUTES ~ VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15, 2004 PAGE 293 passed on to the balance of property owners. If the traffic fees for one deve!opment were waived, the general property tax payer in the City would be responsible for picking up the difference. Cm. Sbranti advised that the Council was not suggesting waiving the fee; they were looking at the fee structure. Mayor Lockhart agreed and advised that she was interested in knowing if the empirical . data. from San Diego was the only information used in determining the rates or does the Council look at the community? . ¡ City Attorney Silver advised that the Council had a lot of power; however, the çourts have established a process for setting these types of fees. Because the structu~ to divide up the total amount of all the trips is based on this accepted empirical data, arbitrarily changing the structure makes it less supportable in court. Because the Genera1 Fund is not contributing, it's important for all of the developers to know that they are paying their fair share. The way tod¢termine how much everyone pays is based on the estimated weekday vehicle trip generation rate.. If there is some othe):' Way to allocate the total cost among different users and it's based on solid data, such as individua~ traffic studies, then Council could rely on that. ' Cm. Sbranti asked if an individual appHcant could have a specific traffic impaÞt study done with the possibility of changing the fees. City Manager Ambrose advised that it happens occasionally and then there is ¢mpirical data used to sUpPOrt the fee they are charged in terms of their impact. When a fee is lessened enough that is not capturing the impact for that use and an attempt is made to pass it on, the whole fee program is put in a position of being challenged. Cm. McCormick stated that she would like the Medical/Dental Office and Commercial Office melded together into one compromised fee. There was justification for~doing that, because the City already does that with affordable housing. Somebody pays for that and it is usually the builder. Other people do carry weight for not-for-profit services that benefit the health and safety of our community. City Manager Ambrose advised that, in regards to affordable housing, it is not a AB 1600 requirement, it is part of Dublin's Zoning Ordinance. Pat Cashman, representing Alameda County, advised that the Valley Care proþosal was the only office facility being contemplated in 50 miles and would be an asset to the CITY cOlrNcIf.'M:INTITEs ,.J. VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15, 2004 PAGE 294 community. Va1leyCare had advised from the start that the proposed TIF was 11 back- breaker to the project. At a meeting with Mayor Lockhart, Supervisor Scott H~ggerty and ValleyCare, the issue was discussed. At the endof the meeting, each said they would see what they could do. At that meeting, the County committed to underwrite. the traffic impact fees for ValleyCare up to the Office TIP. The County to the position, at'that meeting, that the Medical Office did not deserve a different category than regular office. He encouraged melding all the "office" categories together at the proposed Sbindard Office rate. Dublin's TIF has so many detailed categories that Developers are concerned because they don't know their TIF fees, especially in regards to retail and resía;,urants. Many of the definitions are out of date and discriminate. in an arbitrary manner. That said, the County and BART appreciate how the TIF was set up in relation to thý BART garage. There was one detail for the record regarding the TIr value assigned to the right-of-way for Scarlett Drive. In the Transit Center Development Agreement, the Surplus Property Authority agreed that it would do its best to get the County to accept the value in the revised TIF. They discussed and agreed to that at the time that the revised value would be based on an appraisal. When the TIF came out, the value was not based on an appraisal, but on appreciation from the old value. They would like to see an appraisal worked into the TIP before.the City asks the Surplus Property 'Authority to try to get the County to sell it at that rate. ' Vm. Zika suggested that the County reduce the price of the property to cover the cost of the Medical/Dental TIP if they wanted to sell the property: Mr. Cashman stated yes, they could give the property away, but they won't. Mayor Lockhart closed the public hearing. Cm. Sbranti referred to a letter received from Blake Hunt Ventµres, the Developer of the lifestyle shopping center approved on the northwest corner of Hacienda Driv~ anci. 1- 580, and in which they expressed concern with the assignment of higher trip: rates to fast food restaurants and convenience markets located in regional shopping centers and possible surcharges. It is his understanding that their concerns had been addressed in the Staff Report, and that they would be charged the rate of the shopping center and not charged additionally for fast food. . Mr. Kuzbari agreed unless they have a fast food restaurant, such as McDonaI4's, with a drive-thru. That would be a different issue. Cm. Sbranti confirmed that a sit down r~staurant would be charged the rate of the shopping center. . t CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15, 2004 PAGE 295 Mr. Kuzbari agreed. Council and Staff discussed the various uses and under which rate category they would fall. · Mayor Lockhart expressed concern about having so many categories. The dev~lopers would not know where their project fit. City Manager Ambrose stated that Applicants a:(e given TIF estimates at the very beginning of the process, and advised that it was important to develop a TIP that would hold up in çourt. The question for the Council would be what exposure the CQuncil is willing to accept. Cm. McCormick stated she was not prepared to revise the entire TIF schedule, but was still concerned about the medical center. There needs to be some way to put things together so Dublin can have a medical center. Vm. Zika reiterated that a developer has the option to fund their own traffic stµdy if they disagreed with the TIF. If their traffic study was validated, a change could be made. The Council discussed Standard Commercial Office vs. Medical/Dental and the possibility of eliminating the Medical/Dental category from the TIF. Medicalpr Dental uses would fall under Standard Commercial Office and be charged the same raté of 20/1,000 sf. City Manager Ambrose advised that it could be done, if it was the consensus of the Council, as long as the Council did it with the understanding of the potential exposure. City Attorney Silver advised that, to-date, there have been a number of offices ,built but no medical space. Typically there is not a much higher percentage of medical office space, so if the Council were to adopt the schedule with just one rate for offic((, 20/1,000 sf, then it would be justifiable to have one rate for Office. Cm. Oravetz made a motion to adopt the Resolution with a modification to Exþibit C to eliminate the Medical/Dental category, which would fall under the Standard' Commercial Office at 20/1,000 sf. Vm. Zika stated that the City has already made major concessions to Alameda:County, especially with the BART garage. The County could reduce the cost of the laqd. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15, 2004 PAGE 296 On motion of Cm. Oravetz, seconded by Cm. McCormick and by majority vote (Vm. Zika opposed), the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 111- 04 REVISING mE TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE AND AREA OF BENEFIT FEE OR FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS WImIN mE EASTERN DUBLIN AREA~ AS PREVIOUSLY ESTABLISHED BY RESOLUTION NO. 1-95 AND ' REVISED BY RESOLUTION NO. 41-96 AND RESOLUTION NO. 225-~9 . . . r and modified Exhibit C of the Resolution to eliminate the Medical/Dental Office I category. ~.'" T PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF PA 02-040, LOUKIANOFF SI.TE DEVELOPMENf REVIEW 8:16 p.m. 6.2 (410-30) Mayor Lockhart opened the public hearing. Senior Planner Andy Byde presented the Staff Report and advised that on Mayl!, 2004, the Planning Commission approved a Site Development Review application for a new single-family residence on an existing lot (Lot 1 of Tract Map 5073) located at 11229 Rolling Hills Drive. The single-family residence was approved to be 2,954 square feet in size with a garage that would be 587 square feet in size. On May 21,2004, Councihnember Claudia McCormick filed a timely appeal of the Planning Commission's decision, citing that the item had the potential to cause significant and material effects on the quality of life within the City of Dublin. Lot 1 was created in 1995 as part of the Hatfield Development project, and was sold later to Black Mountain Development Company. In January 2001, the City Council approved Black Mountain's development project for new single family homes,on six lots, including Lot 1. Lot 1 has a storm water drainage easement that extends along the southern portion of the property, with no structures to be located within that ~asement. Heritage Tree 353 is also found on Lot 1. The initial Council approval includ¥d a 5-foot setback from the heritage tree. During the review of the gradìng permit, Staff determined that the approved location of Lot 1 conflicted with Heritage Tree 353 and CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15, 2004 PAGE 297 would constrain where the residence could be located. Subsequently, the Applicant and currently Lot owner, requested permission to trim the heritage tree to acconurtodate the proposed residence. The Applicant's arborist determined that the proposed encroachment from the residence was in the capacity of the tree to survive. . ~veral other arborists, including the City's, reviewed and .concurred with the report. The tree report also determined that, because some of the original subdivision improvements and grading, the soil has compacted in an area and caused the tree not to have active roots within that area. Therefore, placement of the residence in the area where the ,soil was compacted would not further endanger the tree. Mr. Byde advised that the Council had three options: Option 1, Affirm the Planning Commission's decision; 2) Mfirm in part, the Planning Commission's decision, by modifying conditions; or 3) Reverse the action of the Planning Commission decision. Based on the Planning Commission report and draft minutes for the May 11, 2004 Planning Commission meeting, Staff recommended that the City Council evaluate the appeal and affirm the Planning Commission's approval of the project. Vm. Zika clarified that it was the conclusion of all the arborists that the tree had not f grown because of the compacted soil on that site. Mr. Byde advised yes, the tree had not grown on that side because of soil compaction. The canopy of the tree had not grown that far from the trunk of the tree in thç southern direction, although it has grown in other directions. Vm. Zika confirmed that the Applicant çould not build over the storm drain eflsement in the south and the location of the drip line on Tree 353 to the north. Mr. Byde advised that the Applicant did not own the easement, so he cannot encroach over it. The easement is retained for a storm drain, although there is no ac~l storm drain in it. The easement belongs to the Homeowner's Association (HOA). In'addition, the steepest portion of the lot is in that area. The residence could be built in tJ;1at area if the easement were moved, but it would result in additional costs to the AppliCant. Mayor Lockhart asked what recourse or actions were available for someone tq take regarding a faulty survey, such as this. Who would have recourse and who 'Vould be responsible? Mr. Byde advised that it was a legal question, but it was his understanding truit Black Mountain was currently in litigation with the surveyor who prepared the original documents, but could only speculate as to what the litîþation was about. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15, 2004 PAGE 298 Vm. Zika asked if there was any known use forthe currently unused storm dr~in. Mr. Byde advised that there was the watershed which served that area and was originally intended for that. It is very small and probably would not be neces$ary to put it in a pipe which needed to be in an easement. It could probably surface flow across the lot or be in a very small easement and pipe located in the southern portion. Most likely, when the final improvement pian for the lots was approved, there were probably some changes but the easement was never removed. However, it is still an existing legal document. Vm. Zika asked if a hydrologist study might indicate that the storm drain and ~asement were not needed, which might allow them to build in that area without a significant increase in cost. Mr. Byde advised that some type of facility would be needed with a full hydrologist study. Alex Loukianoff, the Applicant, requested that the Council reaffirm the Planni;ng Commission approval. They have been good citizens throughout the process tµtd have worked with Staff. Mayor Lockhart asked if he had explored any aspects of moving the easement~ Mr. Loukianoff advised yes, and deferred to his father, a licensed engineer and general contractor, to answer specific questions. Nick Loukianoff, the Applicant's father, advised that the drainage easement served only the house to the front toward the street, and virtuaUy no water comes off the backyard. The backyard is small, so whatever water comes off is minor. If the HOA wou,ld agree, it would be possible to move the point of the drainage easement but would be si&nificant extra cost. He requested that Staff be willing to work with them to minimize ~he drainage requirements and reduce costs. Mayor Lockhart asked Staff if there was any opportunity to work with this project to change a setback or do anything that would make it more this more feasible ~nd less intrusive to the tree. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15,2004 PAGE 299 Mr. Byde advised that if easement was removed, there would be other options. There would be some setback issues, but the Council had the authority to deviate froW the setbacks. Mayor Lockhart noted that the Council has made exceptions in the past with difficult lots in the area. : Cm. Sbranti asked what the Lot 1 setbacks were. Mr. Byde advised that the side yard setback was 5 feet with an aggregate of 15 feet. There had to be ~ minimum of 5 feet and the two had to add up to 15 feet. Cm. Oravetz asked what needed to be done to get the easement waived by the ROA. Mr. Byde advised that the HOA would essentially have to quitclaim their rights to put drainage into the storm drain; however, he was uncertain of the SPecific HOA,process. f The Council discussed the issue and agreed that the HOA would want to save the tree if the easement served no PUrPOse. City Attorney Elizabeth Silver advised that the Councilhad 75 days from the date of the appeal to take action and suggested continuing to a date certain to provide Mi. Loukianoff the opportunity to approach the HOA with the request to quitclaim the easement. Mr. Byde suggested that Staff devise a revised design, assuming that the HOA would approve an easement quitclaim, and with the Council's concurrence, approve'the revised design with the condition added that the easement has to be relocated1 If it does not occur, the plan would need to come back to Council. Cm. Oravetz asked if it would be appropriate for the Council to çall the HOA in support of this issue. He did not want to exceed the bounds of the appeal rules. Ms. Silver advised that the City Manager could call the HOA to advise them o~ the Council's support. Council and Staff discus~d the various options available to them. Mr. Louldanoff advised that they had had preliminary contact with the HOA, which seemed inclined to help. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15, 2004 PAGE 300 Mayor Lockhart asked what would happen if the Council approved it, as suggested by Mr. Byde, subject to the HOA's approval. . Ms. Silver advised that the Council could affirm the appeal in part and make a modification to the Conditions of Approval to include a condition that the hou§e be relocated 5 feet to the south. If the Council diq.nQthing else, it would be the only approval they had. If the Applicant could not work something out with the HÇ>A, then they would have to come back to Council. The Council had not discussed wh'ft their position would be if the HOA was not amendable to the request. ' Mayor Lockhart stated that there needed to be an either/or decision. The Coupcil needed to give them another option if the HOA did not give approval so the Applicant wouldn't have to start all over again. City Attorney Silver advised that if the Council could decide that tonight and be approved by straW vote, Staff could bring a revised resolution to the next Co~cil meeting for adoption. ' Cm. Oravetz made a motion, for discussion, to allow the Applicant to approach the HOA with a request to quitclaim the easement or, if the HOA denied the request, the Council would affirm the Planning Commission's ~cision. . Vm. Zika seconded the motion for discussion. Mayor Lockhart clarified that the motion was that the Council would first sUpPOrt the Applicant going to the HOA to with the request to move the home 5 feet and r,emove the easement. And, if not, the Council would uphold the Planning Commission decision. Cm. McCormick suggested adding the arborist's recommendations for the treç as mitigation measures, including annual monitoring of the tree and extending the bond to three years beyond the completion date. The spirit of the Heritage Tree Ordin~nce was to protect and preserve heritage trees, not figure out how far the trees can be }vhacked to put a house on a lot. She would not have voted the way she did if the Counci;l had had the correct survey information. The survey was wrong; the tree was not wne1;'e it was supposed to be. Somebody should go out and check the surveyor's, work when there was a heritage tree on the property, and was asking the Council to support that. Mayor Lockhart asked Cm. Oravetz if he was open to an amended motion wh¡.ch included the suggested mitigation measures as an alternative. . CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15, 2004 PAGE 301 Cm. Oravetz agreed. Cm. McCormick asked who would monitor the tree for three years. Mr. Byde stated that the approval was currently structured so it would be the ç,wners' responsibility. Furthermore, except for the bond requirement, the Conditions pf Approval included all of the arborist's suggested mitigation measures. The th~ee-year bond requirement would need to be added. . Mayor Lockhart advised that the amendment would be to add the three-year bond requirement. Cm. Oravetz agreed to modify his motion as suggested. Cm. McCormick requested that all of the mitigation measures and the conditiçms would be recorded. Mr. Byde advised that the Alameda County Recorders Office would not allow ~n informational tyPe of document of this nature to be recorded. It was not on t4eir list of recordable documents. The Applicant would be required to disclose the information upon transfer of property. Mayor Lockhart stated that the property owner would have to submit an arbopst's report once a year for three years on the condition of the tree. Mayor Lockhart clarified that the motion was that the first alternative was to )vork with the HOA to move the house 5 feet. The second alternative would be to uphold the Planning Commission's decision and add the three-year maintenance bond al1d the yearly arborist's report to be submitted to the City. City Manager Ambrose asked if the Council wanted written confirmation frotµ HOA regarding the easement issue. Mayor Lockhart stated yes, it was important to have written HOA confirmatiop for t4e record. Cm. Sbranti asked if Council members could legally contact the HOA, assuming that it took action tonight. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15, 2004 PAGE 302 , City Attorney Silver advised yes, but recommended a straw vote tonight and dttect Staff to return with a modified resolution at next Council meeting. Staff could conijict the HOA. The Council might also want to consider putting a time period on the first alternative to get the easement moved and relocating the house. The Council discussed a 30 day timeframe. Alex Loukianoff stated they would do it as fast as possible. He advised that a t,hree-year bond would be a financial burden and asked the Council to consider a one-year bond. . Cm. McCormick indicated that the bond would only be necessary if the house. could not be moved. Mr. Byde advised that the bond amount would be based on value of tree, which was determined by an arborist. The value of a similar tree had been set at approximately $10,000. 10% would be $1,000 a year for three years. City Attorney Silver suggested that, rather than having a time period, the motion require a written confirmation from HOA on the status ofthe.easemetit....Qtiçe fh~A-pplicant had provided the confirmation, Staff could move forward and prepare the modificii resolution for the appropriate Council meeting. Mayor Lockhart closed the public hearing. With a unanimous straw vote, the Council resolved the following: 1) Mr. Loukianoff to request that Silver gate Highlands Homeowner's Association approve, in writing, the movement of the storm drain easement to the southerp edge of the lot so that .the location of the home may be shifted away from the heritage tree; 2) Staff to draft a letter to the Homeowner's Association for the City Manager's signature in support of the Applicant's request; and 3) Staff to prepare a Staff Report with it resolution for the next council meeting affirming, in part, the appeal and making a modification to the Conditions of Approval to include a condition that the hotise be relocated 5 feet to the south unless the City receives written notice from the " Homeowner's Association that the Association will not agree to the relocation.of the storm drain easement, in which case the appeal is affirmed in part with the following additional conditions: a three-year maintenance bond shall be required for tbe heritage tree and a yearly arborist's report shall be submitted to the City on the conditipn of the heritage tree. CITY COUNCILl\1INütES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15, 2004 PAGE 303 . .þ , , .. .. . PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE REPEALING SECTION 6.64.020 OF THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING WEIGHT LIMITS FOR COMMERCIAL VEHICLES IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS 9:00 p.m. 6.3 (570-20) Mayor Lockhart opened the public hearing. Senior Civil Engineer Ray Kuzbari presented the Staff Report and advised that this was the second reading of an Ordinance, which was introduced at the City Councíl meeting on June 1,2004, repealing Section 6.64.020, Commercial Vehicles in Residential Districts, of the Dublin Municipal Code to maintain consistency with the recetltly adopted Ordinance 10-03, prohibiting operation of any commercial vehicle h,aving a gross weight, including load, in excess of 5 tons on any street within any residential district in the City of Dublin. No testimony was entered by any member of the public relative· to this issue. Mayor Lockhart closed the public hearing. On motion of Vm. Zika, seconded by Cm. Oravetz and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted ORDINANCE NO. 20 - 04 REPEALING SECTION 6.64.020, COMMERCIAL VEHICLES IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, OF CHAPTER 6.64 OF THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE ".. CITY CÖûNCILMíNUfE8 VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15, 2004 PAGE304 PUBLIC HEARING PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE FEE SCHEDULE FOR FIRE PREVENTION SERVICES (FIRE PEJYviffS, PLAN REVIEW, INSPECTION AND FIRE SERVICES) 9:02 p.m. 6.4 (570-20) Fire Marshal Theresa Johnson presented the Staff Report and advised that, in a~ effort to recover the reasonable costs of providing fire department plan reviews and building inspection services, Staff conducted a review of current fees and the actual tinte spent on the provision of services associated with these fees. Upon completion of the r~view, it was determined that the fees need to be increased to compensate for the City's costs. The fee scheduled has not been updated since October 1999. The Council and Staff briefly discussed how fees are charged in certain situatipns. No testimony was entered by any member of the public relative to this issue. Mayor Lockhart closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Oravetz, seconded by Cm. McCormick and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 112 - 04 AMENDING FEES ESTABLISHED BY RESOLUTION 192-99 . ... .. ... . ,'... " FOR FIRE PERMITS, PLAN REVIEW, INSPECTION AND SERVICES : ... "ART AT THE CROSSINGS" ART FESTIVAL - DUBLIN FINE ARTS FOUNDATION 9:08 p.m. 7.1 (900-50) Heritage & Cultural Arts Supervisor Theresa Yvonne presented the Staff Report and advised that in Fiscal Year 2001-2002, the Dublin Fine Arts Foundation (DFAF) received funding of $5,000 from the City of Dublin to plan an art festival. As part of ttIe funding approval, City Council had required that the plan for the art festival be brought back to City Council. " CITY COUNCIL lVIINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15, 2004 PAGE 305 Dublin Fine Arts Foundation Consulting Director Lynn Baer made a presentatiQn regarding the planned six-week art celebration (August 19 - October 3) at Ha..¢ienda Crossings, which would include art demonstrations from local artists, hand -on art opportunities, live performances, an "art" movie at the IMAX Theater, and oth~r hapPenings to be announced. . j I The Council discussed the event, expressed excitement about showing off the Çity's many pieces of public art, and thanked Staff and the Dublin Fire Arts Foundation for the . f presentation. ! f ..... CONTINUATION OF EMPRc;ENCY ACTION Al'lI>fR..()G:I{E~S REPORT ON REMEDIATION WORKÅTDüBLIN CNICC£NTER 9:12 p.m. 7.2 (600-30) Public Works Director Melissa Morton presented the Staff Report and advised !that the Civic Center incurred water damage from rain in ~ar1y-March 2004. At its March 16th meeting, the City Council approved a declaration of emergency in order to a1l9w a waiver of competitive bid to obtain a contractor for environmental remediatioh work related to the water intrusion. This item would approve a continuation of the: declaration of emergency, while the remediation work continues and provide ~n update on the progress of the project to-date. I On motion of Cm. Sbranti, seconded by Cm. McCormick and by unanimous vøte, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 113 - 04 APPROVING CONTINUATION OF EMERGENCY ALLOWING WANER OF COMPETITIVE BID PROCESS AND EMERGENCY CONTRACT FOR ENVIR01\Ù\1.ENTALRÊMEbUTIór'tIN DUBLIN CIVIC CENTER· ... .. .. r "+ t f ~ CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15, 2004 PAGE 306 SECOND AMENDMENT TO CONSTRUCTION TRUCK AÇCESS AGREEMENT WITII WINDEMERE BLC LAND COMPANY,LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED UABILITY COMPANY 9:13 p.m. 7.3 (600-30) . f Public Works Director Melîssa Morton presented the Staff Report and advised :that this was the second amendment to the current agreement between the City of Dubp.n and Windemere BLC Land Company, LLC, to allow this developer to continue usin.g Dougherty Road withîn the City limits to haul concrete and paving materials tþ the Windemere Ranch Development site in Contra Costa County through June 30~ 2004. The Developer agreed, in return, to mitigate prior impacts to Dougherty Road :pavement conditions from truck deliveries under the current agreement and guaranteed; to compensate the City for any pavement damage to Dougherty Road within DuJ::)lin caused by the project truck trips to the site during this phase of the project. : i i Mayor Lockhart noted that when the last extension was approved, Staff advi~d that Windemere was seeking another route which would keep them out of Dublin~ ¡ Public Works Director Morton advised that the. alternate route never materialized; however, negotiations with Windemere have been very successful. r Cm. Oravetz stated that Dougherty Road was being swept more often, which ~ept the construction debris down. ¡ I i On motion of Cm. Sbranti, seconded by Vm. Zika and by unanimous vote, the : Council adopted ' ' RESOLUTION NO. 114 - 04 APPROVING SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH WINDEMERE BLC LAND COMPANY, LLC ! í and approved a Budget Change in the amount of $13,966 to the General Funq. '. t >~ í ~ ' CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15, 2004 PAGE 307 GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION - NOVEMBER 2, 2004 9:15 p.m. 8.1 (630-20) Deputy City Clerk Fawn Hohnan presented the Staff Report and advised that hi November 2004, voters in Dublin would elect a Mayor to a 2-year term of office and two Councihnembers, each to 4-year terms of office. It was necessary to make a fontIal request to the Alameda County Board of Supervisors that Dublin's election be t . consolidated with the Statewide General. Election and that thej{egistrar of V otçrs perform certain services associated with the election. Also, the Council must qetermine whether candidates or the City pays for publishing costs associated with cand\date statements in the sample ballots and whether 200 or 400 words will be allowÿd in the candidate statements of qualification. [ On motion of Cm. Oravetz, secqnded by Cm. McCormick and by unanimous ~ote, the Council adopted t RESOLUTION NO. 115 - 04 CALLING FOR A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD IN THE CITY OF DUBLIN ON NOVEMBERS 2, 2004; REQUESTING TIlE ALAMEDA COUNTI BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO CONSþLIpATE TIlE CIlY OF DUBLIN GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION WITH TIlE STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION; , r AND AUTIIORIZING CERTAIN PROCEDURAL MA TIERS RESOLUTION NO. 116 - 04 I ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATES FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE PERTAINING TO CANDIDATE'S STATEMENT AND TIlE f COSTS TIlEREOF FOR TIlE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE CONsobDATED WITH TIlE STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION t TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 2,2004 +.. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15,2004 PAGE 308 EXPANSION OF THE CREDIT CARD PAYMENT PROGRAM FOR SELECTED CITY SERVICES 9:20 p.m. 8.2 (350-20) i , Assistant City Manager Joni Pattillo presented the Staff Report and advised that as Phase II of the E-Commerce Program, the City Council was being asked to consider ~cepting credit cards to pay for a broader range of City Services beyond Parks and Com'munity Services as additional convenience for the public. Implementation of Phase II of the E-Commerce Program that would allow for Yisa and MasterCard credit card acceptance to pay for City Services, with a minimum tþreshold of $10.00 and a maximum transaction amount not to exceed $1,000.00. : The City Council briefly discussed the proposed services and agreed that it woµld be a good public service. I I , On motion of Cm. Oravetz, seconded by Cm. McCormick and by unanimous vote, the Council authorized Staff to implement Phase II of the E-Commerce Program t11.at would allow for Visa and MasterCard credit card acceptance to pay for City Services, with a minimum threshold of $10.00 and a maximum transaction amount not to exCeed , $1,000.00. i .. REVIEW OF SERVICES AND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH MCE CORPORATION FOR PUBLIC WORKS MAINTENANCE SERVICES 9:27 p.m. 8.3 (600-30) ¡ Public Works Director Melissa Morton presented the Staff Report and advised; that the MCE COrPOration provided street, park, and building maintenance services tolthe City of Dublin. This amendment provided for an adjustment of rates for Fiscal Year 4004-05 as allowed under the terms of their current agreement with the City. The proposed 2004- 05 Operating Budget includes approximately $2,714,662 for the cost ofvariQUs services provided by MCE COrPOration. i , , Stan Smalley, MCE Corporation, made a brief presentation and demonstratio~ regarding MCE's Quality Assurance Program, which was now managed through a web-pased software program. ! CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15, 2004 PAGE 309 Cm. McCormick asked if the new system enabled MCE to change work orders pn spare- the-air days. i i Mr. Smalley explained that MCE had a system in place, which would enablefliem to stop or reschedule any feasible work during spare-the-air days. . Cm. Oravetz asked how MCE was notified of spare-the-air days. I Mr. Smalley advised that they were informed by various methods 24 hours in hdvance. ! Assistant City Manager Pattillo advised that City Staff routinely sent email notification to MCE of spare-the-air days, and noted that MCE's Quality Assurance Program àllowed for City Administrators to modify response time if it was felt that requests were not being responded to quickly enough. It is a powerful tool, and implementation was still in process. MCE has made a tremendous leap, and is using a lot of creativity an~ initiative. I Vm. Zika asked if there was a request category for potholes in MCE's prograni, and expressed concern about the potholes at the intersection of Amador Valley Boulevard and Village Parkway, which were created during construction. City Manager Ambrose advised that Staff would look into that specific issue, a$ it was not MCE's responsibility. ! On motion of Cm. McCormick, seconded by Cm. Sbranti and by unanimous vøte, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 117 - 04 APPROVING AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH . i MCE CORPORA nON FOR PUBLIC wORKS MAINTENANCE SERVICÊS ! .. i OTHER BUSINESS 9:43 p.m. Mayor Lockhart congratulated Cm. Oravetz for taking over as Chair of the Li~ermore Amador Valley Transportation Authority. ¡ CITY COUNCIL MINUTES· VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15, 2004 PAGE 310 i i ! i I i I Cm. Oravetz stated that he was looking forward to the challenge. LA VTA's budget was approved at the last meeting; however, they were still recruiting for an Executive Director. i , , Vm. Zika advised tbat he had attended several meetings and functions, including a meeting for Emerald Glen Park, Phase ill; a forum for potential candidates wo~kshop hosted by the Tri- Valley Chambers of Commerce; the Dolan Park Artwork Deq.ication; a 2-hour session hosted by Valley Care on their plans for the future; and the Ala;meda County Mayors' Conference held at Union City's new aquatic center. ¡ ! Cm. Sbranti attended a dinner recognizing High School Freshman Lorena Gon~ales as a nominee for Athlete of the Year. Although she did not win, congratulations w~re in order for the honor of the nomittation~ . He \\Tas alSQ attending CALED's confer~nce in Pasadena. There was a lot of good information coming out of conference, with the hot topic being business retention. i I Cm. McCormick advised that she had attended the Dolan Park Art Dedicatiotl'of "Dreams of Longing after Nothing," Dublin's first kinetic artwork. She had 41so attended a very "hometown" flag dedication at the Heritage Center, and than~ed the Dublin Heritage Preservation Association for hosting the event. ' Mayor Lockhart advised that she and Cttl. McCormick had attended a very spJcial East Bay Housing Organization (EBHO) event, which allowed local elected official~ to come . together to talk about what works to make affordable housing successful and what does not work. She also displayed a copy of Friction Zone magazine, which had a wonderful artic~e about Arlen Ness and the City of Dublin. : .. CLOSED SESSION At 9: 53 p.m., the Council went back into closed session to discuss Item 1: CONFERENCE WITII LABOR NEGOTIATORS Government Code section 54957.6 Agency Designated Representatives: Councihnembers Oravetz and Sbrartti Unrepresented Employee: City Attorney "+ CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15, 2004 PAGE 311 REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION ACTION ~ ì Following the closed session, Mayor Lockhart announced thatno action was íafen. . ADJOURNMENT 11.1 There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 10:20 p.m. ' Meeting minutes taken and prepared by Fawn Hohnan, Deputy City Clerk. ATTEST: ~ CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING June 15, 2004 PAGE 312