Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 06-06-1994 ~-.~~,.,r ~ • Regular Meeting - June 6, 1994 A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on June 6, 1994, in the Dublin Civic Center Council Chambers. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Commissioner North. * * * * * * * * * * ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Burnham, Downey, North, and Rafanelli; Laurence L. Tong, Planning Director; Fawn Holman, Recording Secretary. Absent: Commissioner Zika * * * * * * * * * * PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG Cm. North led the Commission, Staff, and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. * * * * * * * * * * ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA The minutes for May 16, 1994, were approved as submitted. * * * * * * * * * * ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None * * * * * * * * * * WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS None * * * * * * * * * * PUBLIC HEARING None ~ * * * * * * * * * * NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS SUBJECT: Review of 1994-99 Capital Improvement Program (CIP~ Cm. North asked for the staff report. Regular Meeting PCM-1994-49 June 6, 1994 [6-6minJ F e • . Mr. Tong deferred to the City Manager and the Public Works Director to present the staff report. Mr. Richard Ambrose explained that State law required that the Planning Commission review the Capital Improvement Program and determine whether or not the improvements were in conformance with the General Plan. The new 5-year Capital Improvement Program included carry over projects from the previous CIP, as well as new projects. Mr. Ambrose briefly discussed General Improvements, such as data processing system upgrade and records automation, which did not require general plan conformity approval. Cm. North asked if the data processing replacement would be assisted by a consultant. Mr. Ambrose indicated that a member of his staff with an extensive data processing background had developed a data processing master plan for the next 5-7 years. Mr. Ambrose discussed the community improvement projects, indicating that two projects were actually CDBG fund contributions ($10,000 each) to the Kaleidoscope Activity Center and the Tri-Valley Haven for Women. Other community improvement programs included the annual sidewalk repair, business enhancement sign program, street name identification sign replacement program and widening Village Parkway sidewalks (Dublin Boulevard to Amador Valley Boulevard). Commission and Staff discussed the Business Enhancement Sign Program and agreed that signage which would identify Dublin from the freeways would be very beneficial for Dublin businesses. Cm. North noted that when the I-580 Hopyard exit was closed, Cal-Trans did not install a sign at Hacienda Drive to indicate that it was a Dublin exit. Mr. Ambrose indicated that freeway signage, even off-site, involved discussion and approval by Cal-Trans. For example, a readerboard sign which the Planning Commission recently approved was turned down by Cal-Trans as a potential danger to drivers on the interchange. ~ Cm. North requested that Cal-Trans be asked to install temporary signs indicating alternate Dublin exits until the Hopyard exit reopened. Mr. Ambrose indicated that a request could be made, although, he was unsure of Cal-Trans' turn-around time for sign installation. Cm. Burnham referred to the Village Parkway widening project and asked if it would be mandatory for property owners to widen their section of sidewalk as they came in for planning permits. He expressed concern about the sidewalk being a hodgepodge of 5-foot and 8-foot sections. Regular Meeting PCM-1994-50 June 6, 1994 [6-6min] . w • • Mr. Lee Thompson, Public Works Director, indicated that if there was a nexus between the proposed project and increased traffic, the property owners could be required to pay additional funds. A minor project would not be required to contribute to the fund. Mr. Ambrose advised that with the tight business climate, the City should ask only for what was absolutely necessary. With the delicate balance between the economics of the project and the amount of infrastructure that's required, a strong nexus between the proposed project and increased traffic needed to be determined before a traffic impact fee was required. Mr. Ambrose discussed parks improvements (including Dublin Sports Grounds Renovation, Heritage Center Acquisition/Renovation, Murray School and Fredericksen School Athletic Field Renovations, as well as Athletic Field & Play Area Renovations to Dublin and Nielsen Schools and Wells-Cronin Play Area), indicating that the projects identified for funding generally reflected the priorities of the Parks and Recreation Commission. Two exceptions which Staff recommended funding due to potential safety hazards were: 1) the Dublin Swim Center Deck Repair, and 2) the Shannon Center Social Hall Floor Replacement. Much of the funding for the proposed parks improvements depended upon the receipt of Park Dedication In-Lieu funds from two previously approved projects (Donlan Canyon and Hansen Hill). Cm. North asked when the existing social hall floor at Shannon Center was installed. Mr. Ambrose indicated that the floor was put in approximately 5 years ago. Certain areas of the floor underlayment were failing due to heavy carts constantly being rolled over the floor or possibly due to water under the foundation. Mr. Ambrose reviewed the various street improvement projects (such as several Dublin Boulevard and Dougherty Road improvements, and bike path projects, as well as a Downtown Traffic Impact Fee Study, Benchmarks & Monuments, and Street Light Acquisition Program), indicating that the annual overlay program was a maintenance program and did not fall within the general plan conformance aspects of the CIP. Credit was given to the Public Works Department for an excellent job competing for federal funds. Cm. North referred to the street light acquisition program and asked how the Assembly bill to reduce the electricity rate by 25% would affect the City's program. Mr. Ambrose was unsure. It would depend on how PG&E restructured their rates. Cm. Rafanelli clarified that the 1350 street lights made up 75~ of the City's street lights. Regular Meeting PCM-1994-51 June 6, 1994 [6-6min] . ^ ~ ~ Mr. Ambrose confirmed the percentage, indicating that the City would realize savings after the first year of the street light acquisition. Cm. Burnham referred to the traffic signal safety upgrade conflict monitors and suggested that Dublin become the first city in California to allow vehicles in the left turn lanes to proceed at the same time as through traffic; it was too dangerous. Mr. Thompson indicated that several major intersections in Dublin already had traffic signals that had single direction phases only. Examples were Dublin Boulevard/Dougherty Road and Village Parkway/ Amador Valley Boulevard. Cm. North concurred with the Cm. Burnham's observation, particularly as Dublin attracts more senior citizens. To his knowledge, 25% of all traffic violations by citizens over 55 were left turns. Mr. Ambrose acknowledged the Commissioners' concern. Cm. North asked if Dublin Boulevard could be widened without doing the repair to the bridge over Alamo Creek. Mr. Thompson indicated that some work would need to be done to the bridge for the street widening project; although, some repairs might be done in conjunction with the installation of the bike path that is going from I-580 north to the San Ramon city limits. Cm. Burnham asked if the legal distance required for street visibility began at the first line of a crosswalk or beyond. Was it the City's or the developer's responsibility to make sure the visibility requirement was met. Mr. Thompson indicated that at a non-signal light intersection, a vehicles should stop at the crosswalk and then pull forward, when safe, until the driver could clearly see down the street. Currently, there was a visibility problem for vehicle operators coming out of Wineberry Way. As a result, the crosswalk will be moved out 5 feet. However, it was the vehicle operator's responsibility to make sure he could see before entering the intersection. Cm. Burnham indicated that at the intersection of Amador Valley Boulevard and Dougherty Road, visibility was not possible until the car was almost past the crosswalk. Mr. Thompson pointed out that at that particular intersection, which had a signal, if a vehicle operator was making a right turn on the red light, he should inch out to make sure the lane was clear before making the turn. Visibility would be easier, however, if the wall bad been erected further back. Cm. Burnham suggested that street visibility be considered on future projects. Regular Meeting PCM-1994-52 June 6, 1994 [6-6minJ , . ~ ~ Mr. Ambrose acknowledged the concern. Cm. Downey suggested that the Iron Horse Trail bike path go over or under the intersection on Dougherty Road. Mr. Thompson pointed out that pumps would have to be installed to keep it clear of water during the rainy season if the path went under Dougherty Road, which would increase the cost of the project. On motion from Cm. Downey, seconded by Cm. Burnham, and with a vote of 4-0, the Planning Commission found that the Capital Improvement Program was in conformance with the General Plan. * * * * * * * * * * OTHER BUSINESS None ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Planni Commission Chairperson ATTEST: ~ Laurence L. Tong, P an ing Director Regular Meeting PCM-1994-53 June 6, 1994 [6-6min]