Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 4.01 Draft Minutes 08-22-1994 ,< . . REGULAR MEETING - AUQUst 22. 1994 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Monday, August 22, 1994, in the Council Chambers of the Dublin Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m., by Mayor Snyder. * * * * ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Burton, Houston, Howard, Moffatt and Mayor Snyder. ABSENT: None. * * * * PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Snyder led the Council, Staff and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. * * * * CLOSED SESSION At 7:32 p.m., the Council recessed to a closed session to confer with Legal Counsel regarding existing litigation (640-30), City of Dublin vs. City of Pleasanton, Contra Costa Superior Court No. C93-05746. * * * * REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION ACTION At 7:45 p.m., the Council returned to open session. Mayor Snyder announced that on motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote, the City Council had agreed to accept a settlement offer made by the City of Pleasanton in the above litigation. Mayor Snyder read a summary of key provisions contained in the Settlement Agreement: "Dublin and Pleasanton agree to make certain amendments to the Roadway Improvements Agreement (with Alameda County and the Surplus Property Authority): delete Dublin's and Authority's guarantee of repayment to Pleasanton after 12.5 years if Pleasanton has not been repaid by assessments, special taxes or fees imposed on properties in East Dublin reduce the overall amount to be repaid to Pleasanton by $400,000 in recognition of traffic impacts in Dublin from Pleasanton traffic provide full reimbursement to Dublin for its inspection costs provide an adjustment to the "Costs of Construction" incurred by Pleasanton in connection with the design and construction of the roads *@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM - VOL 13 - 238 Regular Meeting August 22, 1994 -------------------------------------------------------------"--------- ITEM NO. ~/ COPIES TO: . . clarify the parties' intention that any bonds issued by Dublin to repay Pleasanton will be tax-exempt bonds make other minor modifications, such as to clarify the rate of interest, the date of acceptance of the improvements, the date of acceptance of the underlying property Pleasanton agrees to process an amendment to its General Plan to address issues raised by Dublin in the litigation and to respond to the Court's ruling in Dublin's favor Dublin will dismiss the lawsuit once the Roadway Improvements Agreement has been amended (i.e., once the County and the Surplus Property Authority agree to the Second Amendment) Prudential will pay Dublin its attorney fees and costs for the litigation in the amount of $67,303 the PUD Rezoning and Amendments to the Development Agreements made by Pleasanton in June 1993 will become effective upon dismissal of the lawsuit" City Attorney Silver suggested that the Council add an item of business to the agenda related to the ROadway Improvements Agreement. On motion of Cm. Howard, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote, the Council agreed that there was a need to take immediate action to consider approval of the "Second Amendment to the Agreement between the City of Dublin, the City of Pleasanton, the County of Alameda and the Surplus Property Authority regarding Construction of Certain Roadway Improvements", which is dated March 11, 1991; and that the need for action came to the attention of the Council tonight when it approved the Settlement Agreement with Pleasanton and Prudential Insurance Company; and that consideration of approval of the Second Amendment be added to the agenda pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2(b) . Ms. Silver presented the Staff Report and advised that earlier tonight, the Council approved an agreement settling the lawsuit which the City filed last year against Pleasanton concerning the rezoning of Hacienda Business Park. Part of the Settlement Agreement requires that, prior to September 6, 1994, the Council approve certain amendments to the agreement between the City of Dublin, the City of Pleasanton, the County and the County's Surplus Property Authority for construction of certain roadway improvements. The Second Amendment to the Roadway Improvement Agreement would: 1) Delete section 10, which eliminates the obligation of Dublin and the Authority to repay Pleasanton after 12.5 years. (This obligation was over $1 million for the City and the same amount for the Authority); 2) Reduce the overall amount payable by $400,000; 3) Allow Dublin to recover its full inspection costs which amounted to $144,944. (This allows the City to recover $40,000 it could not recover under the current agreement); 4) Eliminate the cap which will allow Pleasanton to recover all of its soft costs; 5) Clarify the parties intention that bonds issued by Dublin will be tax exempt bonds; and 6) Make other technical changes. As amended, the total project cost, including design, inspection and construction, would come to approximately $3,068,888. This amount is then reduced by SB 300 funds *@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM - VOL 13 - 239 Regular Meeting August 22, 1994 . . in the amount of approximately $573,272"for a net cost of construction of approximately $2,495,616. The net cost of construction is then reduced by $400,000, the amount agreed upon by Pleasanton and Prudential in the Settlement Agreement for reducing the net obligation to approximately $2.1 million. This amount will be repaid to Pleasanton solely from properties benefiting from the road improvements. Ms. Silver advised that the Pleasanton Council will consider approval of the Second Amendment at a special meeting called for August 23rd and the Board of Supervisors will consider the Second Amendment on August 30th. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote, the Council approved the second amendment to the Roadway Improvement Agreement. Cm. Burton congratulated Legal Staff and City Staff for accomplishing this remarkable thing. Hopefully, this will lead to a more friendly relationship between the two Cities. * * * * INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEE (700-10) Planning Director Tong introduced Jeri Ram, a new Associate planner who started working for the City about a week ago. Jeri has about 6 years of experience, most recently with the City of Galt. She has filled the position vacated by Dave Choy. The Council welcomed Jeri aboard. * * * * Visitor from Russia Introduced (610-05) Mayor Snyder introduced Natasha Dotsenko, visiting from a foreign country. She is part of the City Council of Troitsk in Russia. Cm. Howard stated she was with the first group of people who went over to Troitsk and she stayed with Natasha. * * * * CONSENT CALENDAR On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote, the Council took the following actions: Approved Minutes of Regular Meeting of August 8, 1994; *@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM - VOL 13 - 240 Regular Meeting August 22, 1994 . . Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 83 - 94 ACCEPTING QUITCLAIM DEED FROM UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (U.S. ARMY) FOR ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR DUBLIN BOULEVARD (670-20) and authorized the City Manager to sign the Certificate of Acceptance on behalf of the City of Dublin; Received the City Treasurer's Investment Report ($18,333,041.49) as of July 31, 1994 (320-30); Received a Preliminary Financial Report for the month of July, 1994 (330-50); Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 84 - 94 AUTHORIZING DISTRIBUTION OF EXCESS CONSTRUCTION FUNDS FROM DUBLIN BOULEVARD EXTENSION ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 91-1 (FUND #315) IN ACCORDANCE WITH STREET & HIGHWAY CODE SECTION 10427 (360-40) Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 85 - 94 AMENDING STAFFING IDENTIFIED IN AGREEMENT WITH ALAMEDA COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT FOR ENFORCEMENT OF STATE LAWS AND CITY ORDINANCES (600-40) Approved Warrant Register in the amount of $487,958.82 (300-40). Cm. Burton requested that the item dealing with the Senior Center floor be pulled from the Consent Calendar for discussion. He stated he had been told that some of the seniors dancing in high heels have been told not to walk in certain spaces because they will catch their heels. He felt $1,500 was a small amount to pay if someone were to be hurt. We should correct this situation. Cm. Moffatt asked if it really needed to be repaired or if it was just an aesthetic situation. Cm. Burton stated it is not a big area and he had been told that the tiles have split. Cm. Houston asked if the Building Management Budget has funds at this time. Mr. Rankin recommended that a transfer be made from the budgeted Contingent Reserve. The floor was reviewed by Public Works and the Senior Center Director and their conclusion was that the floor was safe, but they should keep an eye on it. Cm. Burton advised that he was told by Millie Von konsky and her dance groups, that there were areas where they should not dance. *@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*!*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM - VOL 13 - 241 Regular Meeting August 22, 1994 . . em. Moffatt asked if anyone from the Maintenance Department had gone over to take a look at it. Mr. Thompson stated there are several areas where the tile edges have curled up a little bit. There is a problem there, but Ms. Leonard did not feel it is a tripping hazard. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote, the Council directed Staff to go ahead and remove and replace the affected floor tiles at the Dublin Senior Center at a cost estimated not to exceed $1,500 and authorized the Mayor to execute a Budget Transfer from the budgeted Contingent Reserve to the Senior Center Account in the amount of $1,500 (240-30). * * * * REQUEST FROM DUBLIN FINE ARTS FOUNDATION (DFA) FOR CITY COUNCIL SUPPORT RE PLACEMENT OF ART IN THE VALLEY BART STATIONS (1060-30) Mr. Rankin advised that DFA is requesting City Council support for the commissioning of art for the new valley BART stations. Support from the Cities of Livermore and Pleasanton is being sought as well. Additionally, DFA is requesting that the City Council appoint a member from the DFA Board of Directors to represent Dublin on the suggested BART ART Advisory Committee. Linda Jeffery advised that the reason this was brought to the Council was many stations on the line have artwork included as part of the construction costs. They plan to contact all cities in the area and request support for art in the valley stations. Cm. Burton asked if the 2% figure was a standard amount. Ms. Jeffery explained that they don't know how much money is involved yet. It generally runs between $80,000 to $100,000 which is enough to commis~ion a fine piece of art. Cm. Burton asked who selects the commission to decide what will go in. Ms. Jeffery stated obviously each body will select a person to sit on a committee. Many of the stations have art because that particular city has an ordinance which requires 2% for art. Cm. Burton asked if it will be added to the contract cost when the bid is put out. Ms. Jeffery stated yes, but they need to know our feelings on this and that we do want it. *@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*~*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM - VOL 13 - 242 Regular Meeting August 22, 1994 . . On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 86 - 94 SUPPORTING THE PLACEMENT OF PUBLIC ART AT THE DUBLIN/PLEASANTON AND LIVERMORE BART STATIONS Also, the Council appointed Ms. Jeffery to represent Dublin on the BART ART Advisory Committee. * * * * PUBLIC HEARING AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 5. 1 08 OF THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE - TRIP REDUCTION ORDINANCE (590-80) Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. Public Works Director Thompson presented the staff Report and advised that the passage of Proposition 111 by California voters in 1990 resulted in sweeping changes in transportation planning and established a state mandated Congestion Management Program. Mr. Thompson explained that this was the first of two public hearings regarding a proposed ordinance that would repeal sections of Dublin's Trip Reduction Ordinance (TRO) and adopt the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) TRO by reference. The BAAQMD would then be able to enforce its ordinance within the City. Dublin'S existing TRO requires that employers with over 100 employees make a good faith effort to educate and encourage their employees to use mass transit, carpooling, or other alternatives to using single-occupant motor vehicles to get to work. The BAAQMD'S ordinance is more stringent in that it sets up certain trip reduction goals, and if these goals are not met, employers are required to take further steps to meet the goals. Mr. Thompson advised that in order to comply with Government Code Section 50022.1 etA seq., following introduction of the draft ordinance, Staff will publish and post a Notice of Public Hearing which states that the draft ordinance is proposed to be adopted at the September 12, 1994 City Council meeting. Cm. Burton asked if we have to either do this with the County or by ourselves. Mr. Thompson said yes, and it is more cost effective to have one big agency do it. Mr. Rankin stated the BAAQMD has much more stringent guidelines and previously the Council determined the agency developing the requirements should be responsible for enforcing them. Also, the City would be incurring costs with enforcing a program under the control of another agency. *@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*l*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM - VOL 13 - 243 Regular Meeting August 22, 1994 . . No testimony was given by any member of. the public relative to this issue. Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Burton, and by unanimous vote, the Council waived the reading and INTRODUCED the ordinance amending Chapter 5.108 of the DMC (repeal of Sections 5.108.030, .040, .050, .060, and .070) and adopting BAAQMD Regulation 13 Rule 1 by reference. * * * * PUBLIC HEARING SIGN ORDINANCE REVISIONS PA 93-062 (400-30) Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. Senior Planner Carrington advised that the City Council introduced an ordinance at its last meeting which would modify the existing Sign Ordinance. The draft Sign Ordinance has been a joint effort of the Sign Ordinance Task Force, the Planning Commission, the local Business Community, and Staff. The revisions will enhance sign visibility, allow for more flexible location of freestanding signs, banners, flags and temporary promotional signs and simplify the sign permit process. In addition, regulations relating to vehicular signs, open house signs, freeway signage and illegal and non-conforming signs have been made more flexible and clear. Mr. Carrington discussed the changes made at the August 8th public hearing dealing with Non-Conforming Signs, Temporary Political Signs and Vehicular Signs as addressed in the Staff Report. Since the ability to address parking areas is separate from the Sign Ordinance, Mr. Carrington stated the Council should provide policy direction regarding the available options separate from its action on the proposed ordinance. Mr. Carrington showed slides of vehicles displaying billboard type signs. Cm. Houston asked if someone were warned and they continued to park in a non-parking spot if they could be ticketed and/or towed. Mr. Carrington answered no, they could not be ticketed or towed. Currently, we do not have the authority to enforce parking in marked spaces in retail parking lots. Mayor Snyder asked if we attempted to enforce it, if the property owner would have the ability to ask for a modification and say they would like to use the existing plan. Mr. Carrington advised that the City Council could direct Staff to work with them through the Site Development Review process, which could modify the plan to reflect the current layout. *@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*i*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM - VOL 13 - 244 Regular Meeting August 22, 1994 . . Mayor Snyder stated he was trying to think of alternatives for the property owner. We have absentee property owners who really don't know or understand or even care about something that was done 33 years ago. Maybe we should write a courtesy letter to them. Cm. Houston suggested that Option A in the Staff Report be used as a first step. Cm. Burton stated he doesn't like to pass an ordinance to solve just one problem. That parking lot is a mess and it looks terrible. He would like to see the City work with the landowners and managers. Cm. Moffatt expressed concern because of the multiple owners of the Shamrock Center. Cm. Moffatt asked about non-conforming signs and if this was based on the fact that the property has not sold. Cm. Burton stated this would be a sign that would remain legal non- conforming and would run with the land. If it is destroyed, a new sign would have to meet requirements of the new ordinance. Cm. Burton asked how many signs are out there that are illegal. Mr. Carrington advised that according to the Zoning Enforcement Officer, there is a freestanding sign at Crown Chevrolet which is illegal, and also, there are some signs at Shamrock Ford that are too close to the street. No testimony was given by any member of the public relative to this issue. Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. Cm. Houston asked if the Chamber of Commerce was happy with the verbiage. Response from the audience was, "yes, very". Mayor Snyder asked that the issue of political sign size be addressed. Cm. Houston advised that he had big signs in his last campaign. We need to send out letters letting people know what size is allowed. He preferred keeping it the way it is now and allow 16 square feet maximum per sign. The Council concurred that political signs would remain the same. The maximum size allowed would be 16 square feet per sign. The previous ordinance had allowed 8 feet per side. Cm. Houston stated this had been a long time coming and he wanted everyone involved in the ordinance, plus Staff, to consider this a living document and in the future if revisions have to be made, there should be no animosity. *@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM - VOL 13 - 245 Regular Meeting August 22, 1994 . . Mayor Snyder agreed and pointed out that any City ordinance is open for review at any time. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Houston, and by unanimous vote, the Council waived the reading and adopted ORDINANCE NO. 6 - 94 REPEALING CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE DUBLIN ZONING ORDINANCE REGARDING SIGN REGULATIONS AND REENACTING THE SIGN REGULATIONS AS THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE With regard to vehicular signs, the Council directed the zoning Enforcement Officer to work with the property owners of the Shamrock Shopping Center to return the layout of the parking spaces to that shown on the approved plan. This would include placing diagonal parking spaces adjacent to Amador Valley Boulevard. All existing development projects are subject to these zoning Ordinance provisions. * * * * REPORT REGARDING ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REOUEST TO CONSIDER ESPRESSO CARTS (450-20) Planning Director Tong advised that on August 8, 1994, the City Council heard and discussed a report regarding a Zoning Ordinance Amendment request to consider espresso carts. In response to a request by the Dublin Chamber of Commerce, the City Council continued the item until this meeting. Mr. Tong advised that the Dublin Chamber of Commerce supports the current zoning ordinance prohibition on outdoor sales by vendors with no permanent business address in Dublin. Cm. Burton asked if there was any research done on the impact of traffic at this location. Mr. Tong stated Staff had not done that kind of review at this time. Jaynie Bunnell with Sidewalk Graffiti Company stated she was looking forward to putting an espresso bar at the Chevron Station in Dublin and her preference was that the City Council would expand the study to take a look at what other cities are doing. Cm. Houston asked Ms. Bunnell about the type of permit she was given in Danville. Ms. Bunnell stated she was given a Conditional Use Permit with a review in one year. They will review her permit annually. She stated with regard to a comment about competing with existing businesses, she wanted to clarify that her business will cater to a different type of crowd; the commuters. *@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM - VOL 13 - 246 August 22, 1994 Regular Meeting . . Cm. Moffatt asked if her relationship with Standard Oil was a sub- lease. Ms. Bunnell stated her contract at Blackhawk is with Chevron USA and it is under the supervision of Chevron. Cm. Moffatt asked if she would consider being a Dublin-based operation and if she would get a business license and have an address the same as the station. Ms. Bunnell stated she wasn't sure how this would all be established, but the station would be her address. Cm. Howard asked exactly where the stand would be located. Ms. Bunnell advised that 2 locations were being considered. USA is really stringent about where it could be located. It likely face Dublin Boulevard looking south about 5 feet from on the Grand Auto side. Chevron will most the door Mr. Tong advised that they had not yet seen a specific site plan showing the location of the cart. Cm. Moffatt stated he was confused about whether this is a sublet business or a moving business. He questioned if it would be the same thing as a hot dog cart. Ms. Bunnell stated technically, it is considered a mobile vending unit, but she will only be allowed to operate at that specific site. Cm. Howard stated she had problems with circulation of traffic through this station. This location has a terrible traffic problem. Cm. Houston reminded everyone that this level of approval was not what was before the Council at this time. Mayor Snyder discussed his concern related to the Chamber pointing out their support for the current ordinance. She will have a permit and a Dublin address through her sublease. She will have a business license and can't move the cart. It seems we are not violating our own ordinance and he questioned if there was really a need to go back through an ordinance amendment to deal with this. Mr. Tong stated the current ordinance requires that these types of sales occur within a building. Cm. Burton questioned why they picked this particular location. Ms. Bunnell stated the dealer expressed an interest in starting this at his establishment. He has a good customer base and wants to provide this service for them. Cm. Burton stated while the idea is clever, he felt this was the wrong place. *@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM - VOL 13 - 247 Regular Meeting August 22, 1994 . . Cm. Moffatt stated this station is a credit card station and has fast gas. He asked if her product could be purchased with a credit card. Ms. Bunnell stated Chevron is working on this, but they don't have it yet. Mr. Tong stated the ordinance says these types of uses have to be within a structure. At this point, previous direction was to follow input given by the Business Task Force and that being temporary periodic outdoor sales were limited to Dublin businesses. Cm. Burton asked if it would be legal for the gas station owner to put in the coffee cart. Mr. Tong stated under the existing ordinance, they could not do this. Cm. Moffatt asked if they could put a coffee vending machine outside. Mr. Tong stated 2 or 3 vending machines would be allowed. Mayor Snyder pointed out that generally, vending machines are not owned by the business owner, but by an outside vendor. Cm. Howard asked if this is allowed, could Target put in an outdoor hot dog machine, or could Mervyn's put an outside cart of some sort. Cm. Houston stated if we follow the model in Danville, the City Council has the ability to periodically review it. He felt the ordinance should be expanded to allow this. It will come back to the Council for final approval. This might be a great idea for the City. Mayor Snyder stated it would have to be identified as a Dublin business with a license. Cm. Houston discussed the big ugly shack that goes up in front of the True Value Store from time to time without getting any kind of permit. They apparently buy Levi's. This is the kind of thing they want to discourage. Cm. Burton stated he felt it was inappropriate to start outside sales and further he felt this was a bad location. Cm. Moffatt felt they should revisit the Chamber of Commerce and get their opinion. It looks like the conditions are being satisfied that they had concerns with. Kathi Schultz stated the main concern of the Chamber of Commerce was the idea of a permanent address. This is a real wavy issue. This is Chevron's address. pretty soon, a lot of things could be coming into the City. They are concerned that it not get out of hand. She lives near the existing station and relayed a problem that she once had. They don't want this major location in Dublin to turn into a swap meet look. *@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM - VOL 13 - 248 Regular Meeting August 22, 1994 . . Cm. Moffatt asked if the Chamber of Commerce did not want to have any business in a sublet situation. Ms. Schultz responded that this was a tough one. She is concerned with the way the City looks and would like to keep it clean. Mayor Snyder stated everyone needs to recognize we are in changing times and we need to respond to this. If it is controlled by the Council, the Council would have an opportunity to look at everyone of them. This makes it better for the community. He was willing to look at this as part of the Zoning Ordinance study, but not give any approval at this time. Ms. Schultz stated this was appropriate, plus she will be taking information back to the Chamber Board that she didn't have before. Their main concern is aesthetics. Mr. Tong stated the direction has 2 parts: 1) whether it is either a place of business in Dublin or doesn't have a place of business in Dublin. They presumed going into the study that it had physical space and it would have to have a business license. Space occupied had to be in a building, and 2) the existing study did look at outdoor sales, but previous direction was that it be temporary periodic sales. Cm. Houston stated if you have an address and mail goes there, this should be considered an address. Mr. Rankin advised that the Task Force had discussed the situation with brass sales several years ago. That person had an address in the City which was his home address, but he sold his brass items from another location. Cm. Moffatt felt if there is a bonafide lease, this would make a difference. Cm. Burton felt we were just trying to adjust our ordinance to meet speciai circumstances. He would rather not approve this at this time and stated he was in favor of a more general approach. Mr. Rankin advised that the process is that the Council currently has authorized a study which has to be reviewed by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission will make recommendations to the City Council. The Zoning Ordinance needs to be amended before any application can be presented. On motion of Cm. Houston, seconded by Mayor Snyder, and by majority vote, the Council directed Staff to modify and expand the Zoning Ordinance Amendment study to also consider allowing businesses with a place of business in Dublin to have ongoing outdoor sales. Cm. Burton voted against this motion. * * * * *@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM - VOL 13 - 249 Regular Meeting August 22, 1994 . . PROPOSAL TO FUND CROSSING GUARD SERVICES FISCAL YEAR 1994-95 (590-50) Assistant to the City Manager Texeira stated following the FY 1994-95 budget deliberations, the City Council made a proposal to the Dublin Unified School District to split the cost of funding crossing guard services 50/50 with the School District. Subsequently, the City and DUSD liaison representatives met to further discuss the issue. The DUSD Board of Trustees addressed the issue at their Board meeting on August 17, 1994 and are now requesting that the City Council consider funding the full cost of crossing guard services in exchange for DUSD assuming costs associated with maintaining the DHS football field effective September 1, 1994. Ms. Texeira advised that if the Council chooses to fund these services, the City could contract with Alameda County or with a temporary services agency. The cost to fund 100% of crossing guard services for FY 1994-95 through Alameda County would be $39,117 and through TSU Staffing would be $38,070. If the City contracts with TSU Staffing, the City will need to purchase vests, "stop" paddles and rain gear for the four crossing guards at an additional cost of approximately $425. These costs are exclusive of City staff time involved in administering the contract. The locations would be: 1) San Ramon Road & Shannon Avenue 2) Amador Valley Boulevard & Burton Street 3) Silvergate Drive & Amarillo Road and 4) Amarillo Road & Alegre Drive. Ms. Texeira explained that another part of the request by the School District deals with the School District assuming maintenance of the Dublin High School Football Field. Estimated maintenance costs for 1994-95 are budgeted at $18,766, with an estimated $4,310 expended during July and August. If the School District assumes this responsibility effective September 1, 1994, the City will realize cost savings of approximately $14,456 in FY 1994-95. Therefore, the net cost to the City associated with this agreement would be $24,039 in FY 1994-95. If these services are continued into FY 1995-96, the City's net cost in 1994 dollars would be reduced to $19,304 as the City would not incur any field maintenance expense or the initial crossing guard equipment costs. An amendment would be required to the MCE Corporation Agreement to reduce the estimated costs associated with maintaining the DHS football field for FY 1994-95 from $18,766 to $4,310 (estimated expenses for July through August). A budget change form would formally appropriate monies for the crossing guard activity. This will be accomplished by transferring $14,456 from the Park Maintenance account and adding an additional appropriation of $24,039 from Unappropriated Reserves. Cm. Moffatt asked if the School District does not maintain the field, will they reimburse the City for the money the City invested in the field. Ms. Texeira stated the maintenance must continue at the same caliber. *@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM - VOL 13 - 250 Regular Meeting August 22, 1994 . . Mr. Rankin advised that the City has no guarantees, however. Cm. Moffatt stated he hoped that the City's investment would be protected. If there is a default, there should be a penalty to the School District. Cm. Houston asked what kind of penalty the City could realistically charge. Ms. Howard stated they are going to be upgrading other fields with their bond issue, plus they are requesting 1 or 2 additional personnel, so they won't let the football field go. Cm. Burton asked if there was any way we could put into the agreement for the crossing guards a request to have the agency hire local people if they are available and willing. Ms. Texeira advised that they picked up one of the 4 last year who previously worked with the County. It is very difficult to recruit for crossing guard positions. Mr. Rankin stated this is the same firm the School District used in 1993-94, so hopefully, they will still have a list of the people who were there. Mayor Snyder stated the quality of maintenance of the fields is very important because the City has a major investment there and modification is a no win to the City, but an absolute win to the School District. If in the future the City has to go in and maintain the fields, it has lost by this trade. As a community, we need to look at where our priorities are. The community has not been made aware that it might be much wiser to take these funds and involve others in the community. He discussed an article from the Tri-Valley Herald regarding the high tech situation and the School District claims a $300,000 shortfall. He felt the money being spent on crossing guards could be better spent on school programs. Hopefully, by next year the School Board can do some type of study. There are alternatives, such as volunteer resources, and people are either not willing to look at them or they haven't been brought to their attention. Cm. Burton stated we are trading maintenance of the football field to have crossing guards. We provided crossing guards when we had the money, so he would go along with this because he felt this is the only way to make sure there are crossing guards. He would feel very bad if some child got hurt due to political maneuvering. He asked if there would be a crossing guard at Murray School. Ms. Texeira advised that initially, studies were done and 2 of the 4 areas were warranted. Mr. Rankin advised that with regard to the Murray situation, both the City and School District were contacted by a parent familiar with the *@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*#*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM - VOL 13 - 251 Regular Meeting August 22, 1994 . . volunteer type concept. The School District advised her that they have a successful school crossing guard program at one of the schools and we have not received any further information as to whether a volunteer program had been implemented. Cm. Burton asked if we could provide one guard for each school. Cm. Howard questioned how much of the $11.75 per hour the crossing guard actually gets. Ms. Texeira stated she thought they were paid in the neighborhood of $8 per hour. Cm. Howard felt if the School District hired them, they could get more people. staff pointed out that there are payroll taxes, etc., and this was a business decision. Rebecca Strong stated there is a need for a guard at Murray School at Davona & Bonniewood. She has 2 children who go to Murray School and she has seen a lot of close calls. Cars, trucks and buses fly down Davona and don't pay attention to the speed limit. This is a real bad spot. Mayor Snyder asked who makes the decision on where the guards are placed. He felt the argument could be made that we aren't providing guards at half of the intersections. Cm. Houston stated he felt all the elementary schools should be covered. Instruction should be given to the School District that maybe one of the Nielsen guards should go to Murray. The best use of funds should be to cover all the schools. He objected to having a traffic study and felt the decision should be made at the Staff level to move an existing guard. Cm. Burton suggested setting a cap and the Council authorize the money and Staff could negotiate for one person at each school. Mr. Rankin stated at least some level of Staff analysis was necessary. It would have to be brought back before another location could be traded for another. Cm. Houston stated technically, this is a new contract, so no changes are being made. Mr. Rankin advised that the City Council previously took action to place crossing guards at 4 locations, based on adopted City policies and Council action. Cm. Houston suggested that crossing guards be placed on an urgency basis until Staff could do a study; 4 existing ones plus 1 at Murray School. *@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ OM - VOL 13 - 252 August 22, 1994 Regular Meeting . . Mr. Rankin stated he didn't know how far the volunteer effort had gone. The School District indicated there is a volunteer program in place at one of the schools. Cm. Houston stated however we can do it, we need to get crossing guards in place before school starts. Cm. Moffatt asked if he was talking about 4 or 5 crossing guards. Cm. Houston stated we should take one of the Nielsen sites and assign it to Murray. His preference would be to take Alegre & Amarillo. Cm. Burton stated he agreed. If we have to come back later on, surely Staff should be able to work with the School Principals to decide where they are needed. The fairness of having a crossing guard at each school is important. Mr. Rankin advised that the City can secure the services of a fifth guard when school opens. Mr. Thompson advised that a review of the locations and whether they are warranted may not come back before the Council before October. Cm. Houston stated he would change his support for adding a fifth guard until we evaluate how best to place this person. Mr. Rankin stated Staff also needed to come back with a budget adjustment, based upon the final number of locations. On motion of Cm. Houston, seconded by Cm. Burton, and by unanimous vote, the Council agreed to fund 4 crossing guard locations. Staff will adjust the contract to provide for a 5th location on an interim basis until an evaluation can be made. The Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 87 - 94 AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT WITH TSU STAFFING TO PROVIDE ADULT CROSSING GUARD SERVICES (600-30) and RESOLUTION NO. 88 - 94 AUTHORIZING SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH DUBLIN UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT (DUSD) FOR RENOVATION OF DUBLIN HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL FIELD (600-40) and RESOLUTION NO. 89 - 94 AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH MCE CORPORATION TO ADJUST THE SCOPE OF WORK TO ELIMINATE DUBLIN HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL FIELD MAINTENANCE (600-30) and authorized the Mayor to execute the Budget Change Form. *@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ eM - VOL 13 - 253 Regular Meeting August 22, 1994 . . * * * * OTHER BUSINESS Reactive Civic Center Fountains (200-20) Cm. Howard stated she had received several inquiries and requests from people who would like to see the fountain turned back on at the Civic Center. She asked if Staff could review the costs. The other members concurred that this was something they would like to see. * * * * City Sonq (120-50) Cm. Moffatt questioned who owns the rights to the music of the official City song. He felt that the Dublin High School Band should have copies of the music. staff advised that they would investigate and report back. * * * * ABAG (140-10) Cm. Moffatt stated he had a report prepared by ABAG on Constitutional Revisions for the State. ABAG is requesting that comments be returned by September 30th. Mr. Rankin advised that Staff has a copy of the report and had planned to put this on the next agenda for discussion by the Council, Cm. Moffatt reported that Mayor Snyder is Chair of this committee. * * * * Fire Inspection Services (540-30) Cm. Houston asked with regard to the $11 assessed by the Dougherty Regional Fire Authority for fire inspections, who is ultimately responsible for this. Is it the tenant, the property owner, or who? Mr. Rankin stated he would talk to the Dougherty Regional Fire Authority and get an answer. * * * * Second September City Council Meetinq (610-10) Mayor Snyder advised that he and Cm. Moffatt would be out of town during the week of the September 26th City Council meeting and asked if there was a desire to reschedule the meeting. *@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ OM - VOL 13 - 254 Regular Meeting August 22, 1994 . . The Council agreed to make a decision at the September 12th meeting when Staff would have a better feel for what items needed to be acted upon. * * * * ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 10:20 p.m. * * * * Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk * * * * *@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM - VOL 13 - 255 Regular Meeting August 22, 1994