Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-19-2004 Adopted CC Min REGULAR ME£TIN6 - OCTOBER t 9. 2004 CLOSED SESSION A closed session was held at 6:30 p.m., regarding: 1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Government Code Section 54957.6) - City Negotiators: Mayor Lockhart and Vice Mayor Zika - Unrepresented Employee: City Manager 2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of section 54956.9 (one potential case) Facts and circumstances: Government Code Section 54956.9(b) (3) (B) (Dublin Boulevard Widening - Village Parkway to Sierra Court, Contract No. 01-10) A regular meeting of the Dublin City Council was held on Tuesday, October 19, 2004, in the Council Chambers of the Dublin Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at 7:03 p.m., by Mayor Lockhart. .. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Council members 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 CLOSED SESSION ACTION Mayor Lockhart advised that no action was taken. .. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING October 19, 2004 PAGE 484 PROCLAMATION SUPPORTING RED RIBBON WEEK, OCTOBER 23-31, 2004 7:04 p.m. 3.1 (610-50) Mayor Lockhart Mayor Lockhart read a proclamation declaring the week of October 23- 31,2004, Red Ribbon Week and encouraged all citizens to participate in tobacco, alcohol and other drug prevention programs and activities, making a visible statement and commitment to healthy, drug-free communities in which to raise a generation of drug- free youth. She further encouraged all community members to pledge: NO USE OF ILLEGAL DRUGS, AND NO ILLEGAL USE OF LEGAL DRUGS. Police Chief Gary Thuman accepted the proclamation. .. ACCEPTANCE OF GIITS TO CITY FROM DAY ON THE GLEN FESTIVAL SPONSORS 7:07 p.m. 3.2 (150-70) Parks and Community Services Manager Paul McCreary presented the Staff Report and advised that the 2004 Day on the Glen Festival was held on Saturday and Sunday, September 25-26, at Emerald Glen Park. The festival was attended by approximately 10,000 people and was well supported by local businesses. The City received $8,550 in sponsorships for the festival. In addition, the City received generous support in the form of in - kind donations of goods and services from local businesses. On motion of Vm. Zika, seconded by Cm. Sbranti and by unanimous vote, the Council accepted the girls and directed Staff to prepare formal acknowledgements to the donors. .. INTRODUCTION OF NEW POUCE EMPLOYEES 7:10 p.m. 3.3 (700-10) Police Chief Gary Thuman introduced new Police employees: Deputies Oscar Perez, Shawn Sexton and Nick Soares. .. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING October 19, 2004 PAGE 485 PRESENTATION BY PUBUC WORKS STAFF ON ALAMEDA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY (ACTIA) MEASURE B PROGRAM 7:18 p.m. 3.4 (1060-40) Associate Civil Engineer Steven Yee presented the Staff Report and advised that Alameda County voters would be voting on a proposed a ballot initiative in November 2004 to continue a Yz-cent transportation sales tax to implement a 20-year expenditure plan to fund transportation improvements and services in the County (Measure B). Tess Lengyel, representing ACTIA, gave a brief presentation regarding Measure B, its history, projects and programs. She distributed copies of the ACTIA Citizens Watchdog Committee 2nd Annual Report and the ACTA/ ACTIA 2003 Annual Report, and briefly reviewed the contents. The Council discussed the value of Measure B and how much the funds were needed to complete projects on local streets and roads. . REQUEST FOR ENDORSEMENT OF BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT {BART> EARTHQUAKE SAFETY PROGRAM AND MEASURE AA 7:39 p.m. 3.5 (660-30) BART Director Peter W. Snyder stated that BART had initiated the Earthquake Safety Program because of the likelihood BART would be subject to a major earthquake, and to safeguard the public's significant investment in the system. The program would upgrade the original BART system operating facilities to ensure that it can return to operation shortly after a major earthquake. Facilities that are not directly related to operating BART trains would be updated to ensure safety for the public and BART employees. This would be accomplished by using the latest seismic standards to upgrade the structural integrity of vulnerable portions of the system. John Fisher, BART Governmental Affairs Officer, distributed information to the Council and gave a brief presentation on the Earthquake Safety Program, and advised that in November, voters will be asked to consider a general obligation bond, which would be added to funds already received for the Earthquake Safety Program. If approved by voters, proceeds from the bonds would fund up to $980 million of earthquake safety improvements. The bonds would be paid from proceeds of property tax estimated to average $7.04 annually per $100,000 of assessed valuation. For example, a property CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETlNG October 19, 2004 PAGE 486 valued at $400,000 would be assessed $28.16 per year. The bonds would be repaid by the property tax assessment over approximately 40 years. Measure AA requires a two- thirds vote in the BART District. The Council and BART representatives engaged in a question and answer session. On motion of Cm. McCormick, seconded by Vm. Zika and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 203 - 04 ENDORSING THE BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT (BART) EARTHQUAKE SAFETY PROGRAM AND MEASURE AA, APPEARING ON THE NOVEMBER 2, 2004, GENERAL ELECTION BALLOT .. PUBUC COMMENT 3.6 7:50 p.m. Kasie Hildenbrand, Dublin resident, presented Mayor Lockhart with "thank you" notes written by several 1 st graders who were recently given an impromptu tour of the Council Chambers along with a civics lesson by Mayor Lockhart. 7:53 p.m. Robert Vegas, Langmuir Court, stated that he was representing the Langmuir Lane/ Langmuir Court Neighborhood Watch Committee, which was requesting that the City Council consider installing a street light on an existing power pole on Langmuir Court. The neighborhood has been working closely with the Police Department to reduce drug and crime activity in the area, and a street light in the dark portion of Langmuir Court would help alleviate the drug activity. He submitted a letter signed by many of the concerned neighbors. Cm. Sbranti agreed that Langmuir Court was very dark, and the street also backs up to the High School alley. This has always been a concern with the residents in that neighborhood. The Council and Staff briefly discussed the neighborhood and the request. The Council asked Staff to work with the residents regarding their request. . CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING October 19,2004 PAGE 487 CONSENT CALENDAR 7:57 p.m. Items 4.1 through 4.11 Cm. McCormick pulled Item 4.8 for discussion. Cm. Oravetz pulled Item 4.10 for discussion. On motion of Cm. Oravetz, seconded by Cm. McCormick and by unanimous vote, the Council took the following actions: Approved (4.1) Minutes of Special Meeting (Workshop Study Session) of October 4, 2004; Approved (4.2 600-35) Budget Change in the amount of $37,523 from Unallocated Reserves and adopted RESOLUTION NO. 204 ~ 04 AWARDING CONTRACT NO. 04-04, TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT AMADOR VALLEY BOULEVARD AND STARWARD DRIVE, TO BROWN & FESLER, INC. Accepted (4.3 600-35) Improvements and authorized the release of retention (to Steiny & Company, Inc.,) after 35 days if there are no subcontractor claims; Adopted (4.4 600-60) RESOLUTION NO. 205 - 04 ACCEPTING STREET IMPROVEMENTS FOR FALLON ROAD AND SIGNAL HILL DRIVE ASSOCIATED WITH TRACT 7252 (DUBLIN RANCH AREA A) AND APPROVING REGULATORY TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES Adopted (4.5 600-35) RESOLUTION NO. 206 - 04 AWARDING CONTRACT 04-12, STREET LIGHT POLE REPLACEMENT, PHASE 3 TO ST. FRANCIS ELECTRIC, INC. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING October 19, 2004 PAGE 488 Received (4.6 320-30) Report on Annual Investment Policy; Received (4.7 320-30) City Treasurer's Investment Report for 1 st Quarter 2004-2005; Adopted (4.9 600-60) RESOLUTION NO. 207 - 04 AMENDING TRACT DEVELOPER AGREEMENT FOR FALLON ROAD LANDSCAPING ASSOCIATED WITH TRACT 7135, DUBLIN RANCH AREA A (TOLL CA II, L.P., A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP) Approved (4.11 300-40) the Warrant Register in the amount of $932,610.46. Cm. McCormick pulled Item 4.8 (330-50)? Financial Reports for the Month of September 2004? and noted that the sales tax appeared to be flat for the two periods. Finance Manager Fred advised that the sales tax did go up a little in 2003-04? and Staff was prqjecting a very small increase in 2004 -05. He explained the Triple nip program? which would affect the timing of sale tax payments from the State. The projection for this year was $13.6 million or approximately 3% increase over last year. Staff was not projecting any major new sales tax sources for the City this year. On motion by Cm. McCormick, seconded by Cm. Sbranti and by unanimous vote, the Council received the Financial Reports for the Month of September 2004. Cm. Oravetz pulled Item 4.10 (500-40)? Resolution Making Findings Granting the Appeal of Morgan King from the Decision of the City Manager that the Dog ''Saake?? is a Vicious DoS? and advised that he had been absent from the last Council meeting. Although he had watched the Council meetinS? read all of the testimony and evidence and concurred with the Council~ action during his absence? he asked the Clfy Attorney If it would be appropriate for him to vote on this action. Clfy Attorney Elizabeth Silver opined that If Cm. Oravetz had read all of the material and ~atched the entire item of the meetinS? it would be appropriate for him to vote on this Issue. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING October 19, 2004 PAGE 489 On motion by Cm. Oravetz, seconded by Cm. Sbranti and by unanimous vote the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 208 - 04 MAKING FINDINGS, GRANTING THE APPEAL OF MORGAN KING FROM THE DECISION OF THE CITY MANAGER FINDING THAT THE DOG "SAAKE" IS A VICIOUS DOG . PUBLIC HEARING - CITY OF DUBUN, EMERGENCY SHELTER AND TRANSITIONAL HOUSING REGULATIONS, ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 8.08, DEFINITIONS; CHAPTER 8.12, ZONING DISTRICTS AND PERMITfED USES OF LAND; CHAPTER 8.20, RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS; CHAPTER 8.24, COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS; CHAPTER 8.28, INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS; AND CHAPTER 8.64, HOME OCCUPATIONS REGULATIONS OF TIlE ZONING ORDINANCE, PA 04-029 8:03 p.m. 6.1 (450-20) Mayor Lockhart opened the public hearing. Community Development Director Eddie Peabody presented the Staff Report and advised that this was the second reading of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment which would regulate the use and development of emergency shelters and transitional housing for homeless persons in Dublin, and other matters, to comply with the requirements of California State Government Code Section 65863(a), Article 2, Planning and Zoning Law, and Goal F, Policy 1, and Program F.1.1 of the Housing Element of the Dublin General Plan. 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 waived the second reading and adopted ORDINANCE NO. 25 - 04 AMENDING CHAPTER 8.08, DEFINITIONS; CHAPTER 8.12, ZONING DISTRICTS AND PERMIITED USES OF LAND; CHAPTER 8.20, RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS; CHAffER 8.24, COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS; CHAPTER 8.28, INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS; AND, CHAITER 8.64, HOME OCCUPATIONS, OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE (ZONING ORDINANCE) TO REGULATE EMERGENCY SHELTERS AND TRANSITIONAL HOUSING, PA 04-029 ... CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING October 19, 2004 PAGE 490 PUBUC HEARING APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) (BRYANT) REQUEST FOR A MINOR AMENDMENT TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, PA 95-030 8:06 p.m. 6.2 (410-30) Mayor Lockhart opened the public hearing. Associate Planner Pierce Macdonald presented the Staff Report and advised that on August 9,2004, the Zoning Administrator held a public hearing for the Bryant Deck CUP application to amend the lot coverage requirements for a home at 3122 Colebrook Lane. The Applicants, Anthony and Windy Bryant, requested approval to build a second -story deck to the rear of their home and increase the maximum allowable lot coverage for the property permitted in the development standards of PD District PA 95-030. On August 13, 2004, Kevin and Angie Queenan, adjacent neighbors, filed an Appeal of the Zoning Administrator's decision to the Planning Commission. On September 14,2004, the Planning Commission heard the appeal, consequently upheld the decision of the Zoning Administrator by denying the appeal. Kevin Queenan, the Appellant, distributed a letter and color photos to the Council and requested a continuance of the hearing in order to allow the Council the opportunity to personally view the property. Mayor Lockhart advised that it was not generally part of the process to do that, and the Council had enough information and pictures to make an informed decision. Mr. Queenan indicated that the photos did not do the situation justice and it would be better viewed in person. Mayor Lockhart denied the request. Mr. Queenan referred to his cover letter and advised that his two main points were the invasion of privacy and the impact on the sale-ability and value of his property as a result of the proposed deck addition. He reviewed his photos and advised that the physical distance between the two properties was only 10 feet. One of the comments made during the concluding process was that there were already windows that looked into the house. His photos attempt to compare and contrast the difference between looking at their yard from a window and looking at their yard from a deck. A red line drawn on one of the photos was intended to show how much additional exposure was CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING October 19,2004 PAGE 491 provided by the deck being extended outward. It looked to be about 1/3 view of the backyard within the house and a full, completely exposed view from the deck. With a deck, there would be nowhere outside in his backyard where they would have any privacy. With a window, 2/3 of the backyard remained private. Taking into consideration the line of sight, there was a big difference. Furthermore, the way that their property was designed, their kitchen door looked directly into the yard. The Bryant's proposed deck would give them a view of the entire kitchen; the room where his family spends much of their time. Because of the way the house was designed, it was not possible to put any kind of shutters on the window. A real estate professional, who had physically viewed the site, advised him that his home value would go down, and be more difficult to sell. He asked the Council to carefully weigh the evidence and come to an impartial conclusion; he did not feel that the Planning Commission carefully considered the appeal. Both he and his wife felt that the Commission had already made its decision on the issue. Anthony Bryant, the Applicant, stated that he and his wife had met all of the requirements to build the deck. It was not the first deck in their community; it will be the sixth. Every other house in the Toll Brothers project, adjacent to theirs, had decks. They have gone through the approval process with the Homeowners Association and City Staff, as well as stayed within the City's encroachment requirements as far as their lot. They have a lot coverage issue. If their lot was a little bigger, this would not be an issue. Their neighbor's have a larger lot and, if they chose to build a deck, they would simply go to the Building Department and pull a permit. They live in a high density community and their backyard faces the golf course and Fallon Road. Their backyards are open and exposed. They can see people as they walk by, and people can see them. His neighbors can see in his backyard, and he can see into their neighbor's backyard. They can all look into each other's houses now, if they chose to. They did not buy their home with the understanding that they would be guaranteed privacy. The neighbor's installed trees in May 2004 to create privacy, and an acknowledged request was signed by him. Mr. Queenan advised him that the reason for the installation of privacy trees was to screen the Bryant's future deck. He notified his neighbors in November and December of 2003 that he planned to build a deck. He did not hear from them, and neither did they write letters to the HOA. He was not aware that they would have to go through the Conditional Use Permit process, and he felt that the Appellant was using this hearing as a hostage situation. Regarding the real estate issue, they bought their house with the plan to raise their children at this house. His neighbor is a lender with a lot of real estate friends and, if you have friends in real estate and need a letter, you can get one. Although the issue of building a deck and privacy may appear to be controversial, the issue is really about lot coverage. If he did not have a lot coverage issue, he could build his deck. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING October 19,2004 PAGE 492 Cm. Oravetz asked about the request process with the Homeowners' Association. Mr. Bryant stated that the HOA advised him to notify their adjacent neighbors, so he sent letters with sketches to his neighbors. The HOA also required that he obtain signatures acknowledging that they were aware of the deck. Cm. Oravetz asked if the six other decks mentioned were in his neighborhood. Mr. Bryant advised that they were located in Dublin Ranch; a fact that he learned from City Staff. On his personal walks through the community, he has seen two new decks recently built, one specifically in his neighborhood and one within Dublin Ranch community. Mayor Lockhart asked about the white concrete back fence with the wrought iron. Mr. Bryant advised that it extended through all the neighbors' backyards and along Fallon Road. The solid portion was approximately four feet high and the wrought iron was approximately two feet high. Adjacent from them, the Toll Brothers development also have open gated fences. Vm. Zika referred to the trellis Mr. Bryant built and asked if it was approximately where the uprights would be to support the deck. Mr. Bryant indicated yes, approximately. Cm. Sbranti indicated that he was under the impression that the solid fence was 6 - 8 feet. Mr. Bryant advised that the concrete portion of the fence was no more than four feet, and may be less. Mayor Lockhart closed the public hearing. Mayor Lockhart stated that she could understand Mr. Queenan's concern about someone on a deck looking into their kitchen window. However, these houses were built very close together, with back fences made of wrought iron, so privacy was not much of an option for anyone on their street. In her opinion, this was not a drastic change from what they already had. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING October 19, 2004 PAGE 493 Cm. McCormick noted that the Bryant's could already look down into the Appellant's kitchen. Vm. Zika agreed that the kitchen could already be viewed from upstairs. The photos showed that there was a bush growing beside the kitchen door, which could ultimately grow and block the view. Mayor Lockhart stated that the fact that these balconies were allowed in the neighborhood would lead her to believe that the majority of the homeowners in the area understood the fact that their privacy was fairly limited. There was nothing compelling to say that this deck would drastically change the existing conditions for both of their homes, except to give the Bryant's a better view of the open space. She would have a hard time disagreeing with the Planning Commission or the Zoning Administrator. Cm. Sbranti stated that he knew exactly where this was located and was familiar with the concrete and wrought iron fencing. In his opinion, this was not a dramatic change. Cm. Oravetz advised that he lived in a neighborhood that experienced a similar situation. Since that time, the trees have matured and the privacy issue has dissipated. Cm. McCormick commented that it was commendable that people who buy in areas with so much uniformity and personalized their homes within the constraints of their HOA. She lives in a single-story home in older Dublin surrounded by two-story homes and everyone looks in her yard. That is the way it is. You do what you can for privacy, such as plant trees. The Applicants have shown that they are being careful with the neighbors and doing everything possible to let them know of their plans. Cm. Sbranti advised that while he lived in Dublin Ranch, he and his neighbors had the understanding that lack of privacy was an issue in that neighborhood. Mayor Lockhart advised that she lived in Eastern Dublin and, if she chose, she could look into her neighbor's kitchen every day. She chooses not to look. The area has beautiful homes and it is a great place to give, but residents give up a total sense of privacy in their backyards. On motion of Vm. Zika, seconded by Cm. Sbranti and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING October 19, 2004 PAGE 494 RESOLUTION NO. 209 - 04 AFFIRMING PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A MINOR AMENDMENT TO LOT COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PA 95-030 FOR A SECOND-STORY DECK LOCATED AT 3122 COLEBROOK LANE (BRYANT, PA 04-023) . PUBUC HEARING CANCELLATION OF THE COMMERCE ONE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 8:43 p.m. 6.3 (600-60) Mayor Lockhart opened the public hearing. Community Development Director Eddie Peabody presented the Staff Report and advised that this was the first reading of an Ordinance that would cancel a Development Agreement (DA) between the City of Dublin, Alameda County Surplus Property Authority and Commerce One. Items in the DA include, but are not limited to, the financing and timing of infrastructure, payment of traffic, noise and public facilities impact fees, improvements of roads, and general provisions. The DA was being canceled because the project (Commerce One Headquarters) had been withdrawn and a new project has been approved in its place. No testimony was entered by any member of the public relative to this issue. Mayor Lockhart closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Sbranti, seconded by Cm. McCormick and by unanimous vote, the Council waived the first reading and INTRODUCED the Ordinance. .. RECESS 8:46 p.m. Mayor Lockhart called for a brief break. The meeting reconvened at 8:53 p.m. with all members of the City Council present. .. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING October 19, 2004 PAGE 495 PUBUc HEARING - ADOPTION OF A DOWNfOWN TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE ron AND ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDEI)NES 8:53 p.m. 6.4 (390-20) Mayor Lockhart opened the public hearing. Senior Civil Engineer Ray Kuzbari presented the Staff Report and advised that the establishment of the proposed Downtown Dublin Traffic Impact Fee program would provide a funding mechanism to finance transportation improvements and facilities needed to reduce traffic-related impacts caused by private development in Downtown Dublin. The following reasons were given in favor of adopting a Downtown TIF program: 1) the need to streamline the process of identifying traffic impacts for individual development projects by eliminating the need to conduct extensive traffic studies for each particular development; 2) provide an equitable fee system that would distribute the cost of transportation improvements on a even basis among all of the developers based on adopted fee guidelines and trip generation rates; and 3) ensure that the fee was sized to collect the unfunded cost of roadway improvements to support additional trips from new development. If adopted, the fee would go into effect 60 days after adoption. The Council and Staff reviewed examples and engaged in a question and answer session regarding the fee structure, how the fee would be calculated, and how the fee would be imposed on land use changes involving the discretionary approval by the Council. Cm. McCormick asked if public/semi-public facilities would be subject to the fees? Mr. Kuzbari advised yes. City Attorney Silver advised that if a public/semi-public use generated trips that the Council did not wish to charge, the Council could not spread those charges to other uses. The money would have to be found elsewhere. Cm. Sbranti asked if a builder would have to pay the fee if he submitted a proposal prior to the 60-day effective date. City Manager Ambrose advised that fees were collected at the time of the building permit, and the builder would be placed on notice that a new fee, to which they would be subject, had been adopted. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING October 19, 2004 PAGE 496 Cm. Oravetz confirmed that existing businesses would be not subject to the fees. Mr. Kuzbari confirmed that existing businesses would not be subject to the fee, unless they enlarged their use. If so, they might be subject to the fee. Cm. Oravetz expressed concern that the new fee would scare away new small businesses, but agreed that more revenue needed to be generated. City Manager Ambrose explained the trip generation threshold level which activated the fee. A smaller business going into an existing location would not likely generate enough trips to activate the fee. A brand new business going onto a vacant piece of property would pay the fee if they generated over 100 net trips. Dublin has already been collecting traffic impact fees to mitigate CEQA impacts, just in a different manner. Cm. Sbranti commented that the way Dublin currently collected traffic fees for downtown was unpredictable and time consuming. This program would make the fees predictable and uniform. Mayor Lockhart stated that she was also concerned about chasing away start-up businesses from the downtown area. City Manager Ambrose reiterated that smaller, independent businesses would tend to generate less traffic and would probably not activate the fee. No testimony was entered by any member of the public relative to this issue. Mayor Lockhart closed the public hearing. Cm. Oravetz suggested that a stipulation for request to consider waivers for non-profits be included. Mayor Lockhart stated that someone has to pay it. City Manager Ambrose explained the benefits of the proposed traffic impact fee program, which included time savings and cost savings in terms of the amount of the traffic impact fee study. Theoretically, the business could end up paying less with this program. They would also know at the time of application what their impact fees would be, and they could make an informed decision whether to pursue their project or not. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING October 19, 2004 PAGE 497 City Manager Ambrose advised that the Council's decision on this item could impact the Business Incentive Program, which the Council had previously asked Staff to develop. The Business Incentive Program may establish target areas that have been difficult to develop and identify whether the Council would like to put up General Fund monies toward the infrastructure associated for those types of developments. He recommended that, rather than trying to craft it into this fee schedule, the Council put the structure into place and deal with what areas the Council really would like to spend general fund dollars on as part of a subsequent item. It must be fair and equitable because it needs to meet AB 1600 standards. Cm. McCormick advised that she was willing to support the TIF, but was interested in the Business Incentive Plan, especially if it included non-profits and public/semi-public uses. City Manager Ambrose advised that Staff would present the Business Incentive Plan to the Council at its November 16th meeting. The plan, however, has been studied mainly in terms of areas that need special assistance, not in terms of business classifications. Non- profits and public/semi-public may need to be handled on a case-by-case basis. City Attorney Silver advised that the Business Incentive Program could be structured either way; either looking at particular areas of concern or certain types of uses or applicants. The Council discussed the Business Incentive Program and asked that the report include looking at particular areas of concern, as well as certain types of uses. On motion of Vm. Zika, seconded by Cm. Sbranti and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 210 - 04 ESTABLISHING A TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA OF DUBLIN and RESOLUTION NO. 211 - 04 ESTABLISHING ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDELINES RELATED TO DOWNTOWN TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES . CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING October 19, 2004 PAGE 498 ESTABLISHMENf OF CRITERIA WEIGHTING FACTORS FOR EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS FOR SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES 9:50 p.m. 7.1 (810-20) Senior Administrative Analyst Jason Behrmann presented the Staff Report and advised that the current agreement with Waste Management expires on June 30, 2005. On July 20,2004, the Council approved the release of the Request for ProfXJsals (KFP) for Residential and Commercial Solid Waste Collection, Disposal and Recycling Services. The City Council elected to implement a "double-blind" process to evaluate the proposes received in response to the City's RFP, which combines raw scores provided by an evaluation team and evaluation criteria weighting or prioritization established by the City Council. The individual Council weightings on both collection and disposal services would be compiled and displayed during the Council meeting. The Council would be asked to assign, by vote, a collective weighting factor to each of the four criteria for both collection and disposal services. Collection Services The Council reviewed their individual weightings for Collection Services, discussed their reasons behind their individual weightings, and engaged in a question and answer session with Staff. The Council agreed to the following percentages for Collection Services: Responsiveness to RFP: 12 Proposer's Experience & Qualifications: 30 Technical Proposal: 30 Compensation & Rates: 28 Total 100 Disposal Services The Council reviewed their individual weightings for Disposal Services, discussed their reasons behind their individual weightings, and engaged in a question and answer session with Staff. The Council agreed to the following percentages for Disposal Services: CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING October 19, 2004 PAGE 499 DispOsal Responsiveness to RFP: 12 Proposer's Experience & Qualifications: 30 Technical Proposal: 30 Compensation & Rates: 28 Total 100 Mr. Behrmann advised that the final weightin8s would be applied to the raw scores after this Council meeting to determine the weighted scores and proposal rankings. The results of the ran kings and Staff recommendations would be presented to the Council at its November 2, 2004 meeting . NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPACT FEE STUDY AND TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION, PA 01-039 10:20 p.m. 7.2 (430-80) Associate Planner Pierce Macdonald presented the Staff Report and advised that discussion of this agenda item was tabled at the October 21, 2003, City Council meeting for a period of one year due to economic conditions, pursuant to Council direction. During this meeting, the Council was being asked to provide Staff with direction as to whether a Nonresidential Development Affordable Housing Impact Ordinance should be prepared at this time and, if so, whether a fee Resolution should be prepared, as well; or direct Staff to prepare additional analysis to be presented to the Council at a later meeting. The Task Force recommendation was to adopt a fee limited to $1 per square foot of commercial area. On motion of Cm. McCormick, seconded by Vm. Zika and by unanimous vote, the Council took this issue off the table for further discussion. Vm. Zika asked what Pleasanton and Livermore charge. Ms. Macdonald advised that Livermore's fees ranged from 7¢/ square foot for industrial up to 81¢/square foot for retail/commercial. Pleasanton charges $2.31/square foot. Vm. Zika advised that he was in favor of this fee. He sat on the Task Force, which concluded that since commercial establishments hire people who cannot afford to buy our homes, they contribute toward the need for workforce housing and should share CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING October 19, 2004 PAGE 500 some of the costs. In his opinion, it is inappropriate to dump the costs on the new homeowners. He proposed that Dublin adopt the fee and charge this commercial linkage fee for new development in the area. Mayor Lockhart asked if anyone was notified that this issue would be on the agenda. Ms. Macdonald advised that the item was an update and was not noticed as a public hearing. Mayor Lockhart expressed concern about adopting the fee right now and recommended that the business community have plenty of notice so that can comment on it. Ms. Macdonald advised that the proposed Ordinance would require preparation on Staff's part and then would have to go through two public hearings, both of which would be noticed. City Manager Ambrose advised that the issue before the Council tonight was whether or not the Council wanted Staff to bring back the Task Force recommendation as a proposed ordinance. Cm. Sbranti advised that he also sat on the Task Force, and the thought was that everyone, residential and commercial developers, should contribute. The Council discussed the issue and agreed that it would be important to notify the business community that this item was back on the table for discussion and upcoming Council consideration. On motion of Vm. Zika, seconded by Cm. Sbranti and by unanimous vote, the Council directed Staff to prepare a Nonresidential Development Affordable Housing Impact Ordinance and fee Resolution, and return to the Council at a future meeting. Mayor Lockhart reiterated the importance of notifying the business community of this Issue. . APPROVAL OF nNAL ESTIMATE, CONTRACT NO. 01-10, DUBUN BOULEVARD WIDENING - VIUAGE PARKWAY TO SIERRA COURT 10:28 p.m. 7.3 (600-35) Public Works Director Melissa Morton presented the Staff Report and advised that on May 18,2004, the City Council accepted the Dublin Boulevard Widening improvements under Contract No. 01-10 and directed Staff to send a proposed Final Estimate to Granite CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING October 19, 2004 PAGE 501 Construction for the total amount payable to the Contractor. An analysis of the Contractor's exceptions to the Proposed Final Estimate has been completed for the Dublin Boulevard Widening project, and it is now recommended that the City Council approve an additional payment to the Contractor. On motion of Cm. Oravetz, seconded by Cm. McCormick and by unanimous vote, the Council: 1) Approved Budget Change for FY 2003-2004 in the amount of $431,240 for the additional work; 2) Approved extension for the Dublin Boulevard Widening Project through FY 2004-2005; 3) Approved Budget Change for FY 2004-2005 in the amount of $159,481 for the additional work and $485,443 for the budget transfer from FY 2004- 2005 to FY 2003-2004; and 4) Approved Final Estimate for Contract No. 01-10, the Dublin Boulevard Widening - Village Parkway to Sierra Court. . OTHER BUSINESS Cm. Oravetz advised that LA VT A had completed its financial audit, which looked good. LAVTA's new General Manager, Barbara Duffy, was welcomed at a luncheon last week. Dublin would be hosting the next League of California Cities East Bay Division meeting at McNamara's on October 21st. Senator Torlakson would be the speaker. Cm. Sbranti indicated that he enjoyed meeting with the Sports Management Group to talk about the different opportunities for the recreational facilities within the City for the future, as well as how to improve what we have now. Mayor Lockhart advised that at the October 5th Council meeting, Pat Zahn, representing the Rotary Club, had announced that they would like to help in some way with the Dougherty Hills Open Space Dog Park. On behalf of the entire Council, she wanted to recognize the Rotary Club for their generous offer; it was greatly appreciated. Vm. Zika advised that he attended the Livermore Airport Committee meeting; hopefully, they will be drafting a response soon. . M?jOURNMENT 11.1 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING October 19, 2004 PAGE 502 There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 10:35 p.m. Minutes taken and prepared by Fawn Holman, Deputy City Clerk. ATIT$T: ~~=~ Clerk Mayor FI\ CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 23 REGULAR MEETING October 19, 2004 PAGE 503