Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.01 Draft Minu 09-19-2000REGULAR MEETING - September 19, 2000 A regular meeting of the Dublin City Council was held on Tuesday, September 19, 2000, in the Council Chambers of the Dublin Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at 7:09 p.m., by Mayor Houston. ROLL CALL PRESENT: ABSENT: Councilmembers Howard, McCormick, Zika, Vice Mayor Lockhart and Mayor Houston. None. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Houston led the Council, Staff and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEES 7:10 p.m. S.1 (700-10) New employees introduced to the Council included: My Ngo, Office Assistant I in Parks & Community Services Department, and Carole Perry, Administrative Services Director. PROCLAMATION 7:13 p.m. 3.2 (610-50) Mayor Houston read and presented a Proclamation to the Tri-Valley Babe Ruth All-Star Team for their 2"a place finish at the 2000 Babe Ruth World Series. The Manager of the team is Dan Guilin and Coaches are Marie Martinez and Paul Ekstrom. Players include: Arthur Ackerman, Eric Basurto, Paul Beck, Brad Bergesen, barren Bowman, Glint Eastman, Kirk Ekstrom, Mark Gaulden, Derek Guilin, Anthony Martinez, Joe Munn, Ben Musselman, David Furpure, Chris Rogers and RW Smith. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 19 REGULAR MEETING September 19, 2000 PAGE 379 7:24 p.m. Shawn Costello reported some public safety issues related to Scarier Court. There is not enough room to go through the barriers. Also, three cars always park there and the corner should be painted red. They park there and go on BART and the cars are left there all day long. He was almost hit tonight in getting here because the barriers were knocked down and he had to go out in the street around them. Mr. Thompson stated they just started building the extension north of Sca~ett Court and putting in some utilities. It started a couple or three weeks ago with undergrounding and then they started the street work. Shawn Costello reported on a story of a dog that helps in the healing process of people like himself and other people with injuries. Whether he wins or loses the election, he stated he wants the City to help provide a dog like this; they're not very much. It will pay for itself in helping patients get better. 7:28 p.m. Steve Jones, Tamarack Drive, stated he was concerned that all of a sudden they are getting 3 new stop lights on Village Parkway. He has lived there for 22 years and doesn't remember getting anything about signals going in. On Friday, there was a piece of paper on his porch saying they're going to get started on these lights. The City Engineer, Ray told him why they are putting in the signals. He stated he understood the need near the high school, but questioned why all 3 corners? What happens to the cross streets? People will start zooming through those lights. Right now, he did not think this was completely thought through. What happens at midnight when the high school kids decide it's time to start driving around and their music, while stopped at a light for 3 minutes will seem like half an hour. Driving in this town is a complete nightmare. He stated he would rather drive up and down 880 than through traffic in this town. 7:33 p.m. George Williams, 11757 Casa Linda Court, stated he was responding to the Measure M debate, and what he called another nail in the coffin of liberty. The public is not a participant in the planning process. He discussed referendum and zoning laws. Negative impacts should be demonstrable. Open space areas could be of benefit to the public. Ballot box legislation is a slow process.' We should work toward more efficient CiTY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 19 REGULAR MEETING September 19, 2000 PAGE 380 land use. Reasoning is a key to personal freedom. He urged citizens of Dublin to vote no on Measure M. Keep our freedom and democracy. 7:38 p.m. Roxanne Nielsen, 11637 Alegre Drive, stated she was present to address false and misleading statements made on the City Council's ballot arguments. The public has a mechanism in place to halt the printing of misleading or false information in the voters pamphlet. She consulted a highly qualified land use attorney in San Francisco, and was told that she had justification for filing a writ of mandate concerning the arguments written in favor of Measure M by this City Council. However, time was short and she could not afford the fees to do this. She stated she felt it is crucial to citizens to have accurate information when casting their vote. She expressed gratitude for the opportunity to submit into the public record factual errors and misleading statements contained in the Measure M ballot arguments the City Council submitted. Areas of inaccurate or false statements included: "Measure M does not remove or restrict land uses that the landowners currently enjoy in that area." "The West Dublin Hills and nearly 4000 acres of open space are at risk." "There are no current protections for the ridgelands." "Homes can be built to the top of the ridges." "There is an increasingly urgent need to preserve open space." "Dublin residents voted on and approved East Dublin specific plan of 14,000 homes in the East. Shouldn't the voter have the same opportunity for the West." Ms. Nielsen stated Measure M is being misrepresented. It is not a question about development or about preserving open space as the arguments imply. The City Council should be clear and direct about the intent of Measure M. What Measure M does is to ask the voter to decide whether it is right or wrong... to legislate a alevaluing of private property in order to ensure the use of that land as City open space? Measure M is merely a land grab that must be stopped! CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 19 REGULAR MEETING September 19, 2000 PAGE 381 Ms. Nielsen stated as a voter and as a citizen aware of the factual information concerning the impacts of Measure M, she was appalled and disappointed to see the inaccuracies and misrepresentation contained in voter materials submitted by the City Council. While she could not stop the printing of these statements in the voter pamphlet because of monetary and time constraints, she stated she was grateful that this forum exists for her to enter this information into the public record. 7:44 p.m. Mark Breazeal stated he is running for City Council and ea~ier this year ran for County Supervisor. He felt he is a legitimate choice. He advised that he recently gave Shawn a ride and he pointed out some problems on the streets. He stated he wanted to say there are some problems with Measure M. If he's elected he will go with the majority. 7:45 p.m. Dave Burton, Dillon Way, stated he was present to reflect on what we've had in the past and what is fair. The Nielsens were promised that they would be part of Dublin some day. Rexanne has worked real hard and done a great job of representing the right way of handling the property on the west. There is a local group up there trying to make an issue of not developing that property. He stated he felt there was a way of compromising and hopes the City Council will consider how to make this possible. 7:47 p.m. David Bewley, who identified himself as one of the co-authors of Measure M, suggested maybe some open public debates would be wise, so people can see what the issues are. CONSENT CALENDAR 7:48 p.m. 4.1 through 4.11 Vice Mayor Lockhart requested that Item 4.7 be pulled from the Consent Calendar for discussion. On motion of Cm. Zika, seconded by Vice Mayor Lockhart, and by unanimous vote, the Council took the following actions: CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 19 REGULAR MEETING September 19, 2000 PAGE 382 Approved (4.1) Minutes of Regular Meeting of September 5, 2000; Authorized (4.2 600-35) Staff to advertise Contract 00~ 13, Street Name Identification Sign Replacement Program, for bids; Authorized (4.3 1000-30) Staff to issue a no-fee Encroachment Permit for Zone 7 installation of Monitoring Wells to monitor salt content in ground water; Authorized (4.4 480-10/600~30) the Mayor to sign agreements with Allied Housing Inc., the Dublin Housing Authority and the Valley Community Health Center for administering CDBG fund expenditures for Fiscal Year 2000-2001; Approved (4.5 600-30) an Agreement with Terry Pimsleur & Company for St. Patrick's Day Festival Production Services, authorized the Mayor to execute the Agreement, and approved the Budget Change; Adopted (4.6 1060-90) RESOLUTION NO. 168- 00 APPROVING THE CITY OF DUBLIN'S APPLICATION FOR FUNDING IN THE 2000 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AUGMENTATION FOR THE 1-580/TASSAJARA ROAD INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT and authorized the Public Works Director to execute and file an application with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission; Adopted (4.8 600-30) RESOLUTION NO. 169- 00 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH VALFORMS, INCORPORATED TO PREPARE A PROMOTIONAL MARKETING BROCHURE FOR THE CITY OF DUBLIN (NOT TO EXCEED $28,500) and authorized the City Manager to execute the Agreement; Received (4.9 330-50) Preliminary Financial Reports for the Months of July and August 2000; CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 19 REGULAR MEETING September 19, 2000 PAGE 383 Authorized (4.10 640~40) the City Attorney and City Clerk to review the City's existing Conflict of Interest Code and present any needed amendments to the Council at a future meeting; Approved (4.11 300-40) the Warrant Register in the amount of $533,184.15. Vice Mayor Lockhart pulled Item 4.7 related to the trail maintenance agreement with Zone 7 and asked if there is an option to do this in other parts of the City? She stated she was specifically thinking of the completed maintenance roads that run from Amador Valley Boulevard to Wildwood that follow Alamo Creek. Mr. Thompson gave some background information and advised that Staff has talked to Zone 7 about other areas. Vice Mayor Lockhart stated she would like to see us gain access for the community .for walking trails. On motion of Vice Mayor Lockhart, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted (4.7 600-40) RESOLUTION NO. 170- 00 APPROVING MODIFICATION NO. 2 TO THE LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND ZONE 7 OF THE ALAMEDA COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT REGARDING THE ADDITION OF CHANNEL PROPERTIES TO THE LICENSE AND USE OF FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL FOR A REGIONAL TRAIL CONNECTION PUBLIC HEARING - ORDER OF ABATEMENT HEARING FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7957 CROSRIDGE ROAD 7:55 p.m. 6.1 (440-40) Mayor Houston opened the public hearing. City Attorney Silver gave an opening statement. The Building Official has declared that the property located at 7957 Crossridge Road is a public nuisance and ordered that it be abated. This public hearing is to provide a forum to present the findings of the Building Official and to allow the property owner the opportunity to appeal the Order of Abatement. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME I9 REGULAR MEETING September 19, 2000 PAGE 384 Ms. Silver discussed the requirements of the Dublin Municipal Code. Staff is asking the City Council to conduct a public hearing, and if the Council concludes that the Building Official is correct, confirm his order of abatement. The DMC requires that the proceeding be transcribed, so a court reporter is present. Those who wish to provide testimony should complete a speaker slip. In addition, witnesses will be sworn in by the City Clerk. Ms. Silver asked anyone present who would be giving testimony to please stand. Ms. Keck swore in the witnesses. Code Enforcement Officer Regina Adams presented a summary of the facts and actions as contained in the Staff Report. The property owners applied for a building permit to build an addition on the front of the principal residence in October, 1997. In October of 1998, the property owners requested an extension for their building permit; until November, 1999. No permitted work has been performed since October 1998, and thus, no progress has been made toward completing the addition or restoring the residence to its initial condition. The condition of the structure has deteriorated as it has not been adequately weather-protected and secured. The addition's exposure to weathering and subsequent water damage has begun to compromise the integrity of the principal structure to which it is attached. The addition has become a health and safety hazard to the immediate occupants as well as a public nuisance. Various neighborhood complaints were filed in writing to the City on March 22, 1999, September 19, 1999, and February 1, 2000. Two site inspections were performed (March 9 and June 30, 2000) to assess the safety and general condition of the addition and residence. The documented violations warranted the Building Official to declare the addition "substandard" as defined in Chapter 7.52 of the Dublin Municipal Code, and thus, a public nuisance. Despite having been cited for failure to comply with the Building Officiars March 2, 2000 order to obtain a new building permit to correct the substandard and dangerous condition of the subject property, the property owners still have not responded to the requirements of the DMC and the Building Officiars order. The Senior Building Inspector issued a Stop Work Order on August 22, 2000. The property owners are continuing their disregard for City processes and habitability standards. Staff has attempted to gain the property owners' compliance in either completing the addition or restoring the residence to its initial condition but, to date, they have been unresponsive. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 19 REGULAR MEETING September 19, 2000 PAGE 385 Building Official George Thomas passed out pictures and discussed violations. The building as it stands is substandard and dangerous. Ms. Adams showed slides of adjacent properties in the neighborhood. In summary, Staff recommended that the Council conduct the public hearing and order abatement by demolition or repair, at the property owner's option. Failure to comply with that order will authorize the Building Official to demolish the addition. It was recommended that the Council adopt the Resolution condemning the property located at 7957 Crossridge Road as a public nuisance and ordering the abatement of the nuisance by demolishing or repairing the uncompleted addition to the residence. Mayor Houston asked Ms. Adams to define abatement. Ms. Adams responded; to demolish the addition and restore the original structure. This is the priority. Dennis Souza stated he is the owner of the property in question. He stated he felt the Building Department left out a couple of things. He agrees that his permit expired in November of 1999 but he was allowed to extend the permit. The property has sat only during the winter or during this summer because he is unable to meet the requirements of the Building Department to get a permit. At no time did anybody actually come to him and say this is a problem and ask to discuss it. They just said the permit is revoked and here is what we want you to do. He was requested to have his plans updated from the 1996 Building Code and he did this right away. He paid money to have this done. They gave them back to make changes. He has not come back to the City with them. He has been working on this himself. He doesn't have a big chunk of money to finish it. He has a loan broker in Pleasanton working on it right now. When he was first given an explanation to reobtain a permit a requirement was to get a performance bond. He had a problem getting someone to give him an estimate of what the total job would cost. He tried to get a home equity loan or refinance his second to get this started. His wife started a business and they ended up having to file a tax extension in April. When they went to the bank, they said they needed the tax return. Even in this condition, the house should be worth more than what he owes, She came back and stated she could not appraise the house. Mayor Houston asked, in order to get a win win situation, what his solution is today. Mr. Souza stated he got his taxes done in the middle of August and was turned down for a bond. He went back to getting a loan again in the last week or so. He stated he spoke CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME REGULAR MEETING September 19, 2000 PAGE 386 with a contractor yesterday and he will come back and give him an idea on when he can give him a construction schedule. Mayor Houston asked if it is his intent to have a contractor finish it? Mr. Souza stated there were some code violations noted and something about the water heater functioning correctly. He knows what's right and what's wrong. He was told he couldn't correct the code violations before the City Council meeting. He is hoping his loan will go through. Nancy Soares (who did not complete a speaker slip), stated they have lived on Crossridge Road about 8 years and have watched this for about 3 years. She also enjoyed watching 7 other projects that have been completed in a timely manner. She stated she is the queen of home improvement. She works for Home Depot, and this is her passion. They have added on to their home and completed it in a timely manner and made sure they had finances in order to complete the project. Some of the property values have decreased because of this project. The City has been very diligent in trying to get this gentleman to complete this project. He has bitten off more than he could chew. Safety issues also concern her. If he has exposed wires, and water causing shorts, with Dublin's windy conditions and extremely flammable shake roofs, he is posing a neighborhood danger. Children play a lot in this neighborhood. All of their children walk past this project. Some child could enter this and be hurt. She urged that the property get back to what's representative of the other homes in the neighborhood. Lothar de Temple, 7736 Crossridge Road, stated he lives just down the street from the construction site. He brought a copy of the CC&Es which in March 1987 were recorded with the Alameda County Recorder. Everyone who bought within the Alamo Creek development was required to sign. Section 6.11 discusses failure to complete work. The owner is required to complete work within one year after commencing construction thereof. The homeowners never formed an architectural committee, but essentially, the City became the architectural committee when it issued the permit in 1997. In all fairness to the owner, the neighbors have been very patient. It is time to move on; we've all gone through this long enough. Restore the neighborhood. He recommended that the Building Official's recommendations be adopted. Tony Oravetz (who did not complete a speaker slip), stated he often walks his dog down the street, and this has become a joke. We need to condemn the property because it is affecting property values and bringing down the quality of life. Janine McKuen (who did not complete a speaker slip), stated they are 9 year residents and are concerned about health issues. What is causing the blackened wood? Is it mold? CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 19 REGULAR MEETING September 10, 2000 PAGE 387 She stated she and others are going through chemotherapy and they are affected by mold. Other additions in the neighborhood have been completed in a timely manner. She urged abatement immediately due to safety and health hazards. Tony Guliano (who did not complete a speaker slip), stated he lives across the street and no one gets lost coming to his house. For almost 3 years he has had a birds eye view. The site has deteriorated so drastically, he no longer even tries to protect it. This is a neighborhood where homes sell in the mid $400,000 range. He stated he doesn't understand why the City would issue a permit. He is concerned about the safety of his family and deteriorating property values. His daughter has cerebral palsy and he is very concerned about her health. The open construction site is also a danger to inhabitants. He indicated a time when his wife observed two small children on the outside of the second story of this house. He and his neighbors want the site completed. They don't care who does it, but they want it done quickly. Mr. Thomas clarified that the permit issued November 12, 1997 was good for one year. Mr. Souza requested and was granted the maximum time extension to November 12, 199~. Generally, if that is granted, they don't do inspections until the applicant calls and asks for inspections. There was an error made in granting a third extension. This was found and revoked. While we cannot grant another extension, he can apply for another permit, but he has to comply with the requirements. He has to provide engineering and financing to complete the project. This building is substandard and dangerous. Mayor Houston clarified that it cannot be salvaged and saved. He asked if there was any idea of how much it would cost to take it down and restore it to habitable situation. Mr. Thomas stated he could not give an estimate. Ms. Adams stated a lien or some other form of judgment would be placed on the home or against the property owner. Mayor Houston asked how much it would cost to finish it and another number would be to pull it back as it was in the beginning. · Mr. Souza responded he had no idea. He has seriously considered replacing the questionable shear panel where the mold appears to be, but no one would look at it. Vice Mayor Lockhart asked if he agreed with the assessment of the condition of his home at this time. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 19 REGULAR MEETING September 19, 2000 PAGE 388 Mr. Souza responded not really. Some of the things are because the house is in construction. He does live there. He would not stay there if he felt it was unsafe. Homes are built in the wintertime and they do get wet. He is willing to get an engineer out there and take a look at it. Mayor Houston asked if Staff had an idea of the amount of time required to abate. Ms. Adams stated she could speak on the procedure. Pending outcome they will post order of abatement with the Alameda County Recorder within 5 days and when the property is vacated, Staff can secure it and then request the necessary estimates to do work. Mr. Thomas stated they would look at removing the building addition and repairs to existing structure and we would work with a contractor on a construction schedule. We would grant a building permit with a schedule and approved time line. He estimated this could take 3 or 4 months, or 6 months if the resources were there. Cm. Zika asked if Mr. Souza could live there while they are doing this and if not, why not? Mr. Thomas replied if they could alter the conditions to create a safe environment related to some of the wiring issues, this would be reasonable to see him living in the house again. He has demoed into the existing structure, but it was designed to be integral to the whole house. It would be harder to live there during this correction. Vice Mayor Lockhart questioned who pays for this. Does the City pay for it and then collects from Mr. Souza? Mr. Thomas discussed the possibilities for solution. Mayor Houston stated he felt it is possible to make some agreement that they could occupy the house during this construction. Ms. Silver stated she would like to take a break and discuss how Staff would recommend changing the proposed resolution. At 8:43 p.m., Mayor Houston called for a short recess. At 9:15 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened with all Councilmembers present. Mayor Houston closed the public hearing. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 19 REGULAR MEETING September 15}, 2000 PAGE 389 Mayor Houston stated it seems from his knowledge being in the mortgage business, that right now the loan is unfinancable. The only solution is to agree with the recommendations and abate the property. The City will go in and restore the house to as close to original state as possible. It is his desire that the owner is able to stay in the house as long as possible; at least, until we've evaluated the state of the property and can evaluate the situation. We can then decide whether he will need to vacate sooner or later. He stated he felt the only solution is to abate the property. Cm. McCormick stated she sympathizes with the property owner. This has gone on until it is now a real safety hazard. She agreed she would hate to see he and his family become homeless over this situation. Does the City have liability by allowing him to stay? Ms. Silver stated if the City Council adopts the resolution included in the packet to uphold the Building Official's recommendation, then the Building Official is authorized to order the residents to vacate the premises. Once this action is taken, then she would be concerned about liability. Until that point in time, the owners have been notified of the steps they need to take to abate the nuisance and they have until September 29th. Until then, the City can't do anything. Ms. Silver stated the City would have to get a court order if the Building Official tells him 'to vacate and he doesn't. Cm. Zika asked if we could get him to sign a hold harmless agreement to protect us. Ms. Silver stated we would want a waiver of damages to any persons or property. One possible compromise would be to allow him to stay until the City determines what action is to be taken. This would give him a few weeks. He would still need to sign a waiver. Mayor Houston stated he felt it will take quite some time to get a qualified contractor to bid on this. Any contractor is looking at G months out before they do jobs. It seems unrealistic to have him out of the house as soon as we complete our evaluation. If the unsafe situations can be solved short term, why can't he live there through demolition? He doesn't want him out of his house unless he has to be. Cm. Zika proposed two contracts; one to make it safe and habitable and the second one for demolition, which wouldn't be as time critical. There is no reasonable expectation that he can do this himself. The City is partially responsible for letting it go this long. He may have to be out during some period of time while they are making it livable, but we need the hold harmless agreement. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 19 REGULAR MEETING September 19, 2000 PAGE 390 Vice Mayor Lockhart stated she had another concern. She too feels the City owes an apology to the neighbors. She agreed that we need to take a look to make sure something like this doesn't happen again. We are looking at taxpayer dollars to repair someone else's responsibility. Her biggest concern is whatever it takes, the fastest way to get the work done is the way we need to go. This is for everyone's sake. The whole health issue is a serious issue. She is only interested in solutions for the most expeditious way to get this resolved. Mayor Houston agreed that it should happen as quick as possible. In the world of contracting, this is a small job. He is uneasy about the timing of getting somebody to do this. We need to make this as much of a win/win situation as possible. Ms. Silver clarified Cm. Zika's suggestion of setting up two contracts; one immediately to make existing house habitable. She asked Mr. Thomas if the two would be consistent with one another. Two steps or one step? Mr. Thomas stated he agreed with Mayor Houston about the difficulty of getting contractors. He does feel that once we have contractor on board, to make it habitable could be done fairly shortly. His concern has to do with dangers inherent with construction sites. He would like to see occupant out of house when construction begins as this would be the most expeditious way to get it done. He spoke to Mr. Souza about possible alternatives for living during construction. It will probably take several months; and he would be out of the house a couple of months. Mayor Houston stated in order for him to stay, he would have to cooperate and allow us to evaluate it and also sign a waiver. Otherwise, he would have to leave the property right away. We have to have access to make an evaluation. Mr. Souza stated this is fine; he will cooperate. Ms. Silver read drafted language which would be added to the last page of the Resolution Affirming Determinations of Enforcement Officer (Attachment 7 to the Staff Report). The Building Official is authorized to give notice to the occupants of the property to vacate the property on September 30, 2000; provided, however: ae If the property owners and all occupants consent in writing to allow the City to enter on to the property for the purpose of inspecting the property to determine what actions are necessary to abate the public nuisance by restoring the property to its original condition; and CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 19 REGULAR MEETING September 10, 2000 PAGE 391 If the property owners and all occupants sign a document in a form acceptable to the City Attorney waiving any and all claims for damages to persons and/or property as a result of occupation of the property on and after September 30, 2000 Then the property owners may occupy the residence located on the property until the City has evaluated the work required to be performed to remove the addition and restore the residence to a habitable condition. The Building Official shall give the property owners at least twenty (20) days notice to vacate. The property owners may return to the residence once the residence is secured and determined to be habitable by the Building Official, even if further work remains to be done by the City to abate the nuisance." Mayor Houston questioned the time period between evaluations. Mr. Thomas clarified that he would be out during the period when they are physically working on it until it is habitable. The addition itself has moved into the house and until we can make a determination that all known hazards have been eliminated, the construction period itself creates some hazard. We would leave it to Mr. Souza as to how comfortable he is living at a construction site. Mayor Houston stated safety issues usually revolve around electrical and gas potential dangers. Mr. Thomas stated they would hope to come back to the Council with a schedule from a contractor. Vice Mayor Lockhart stated she wanted to make sure Staff is not constrained because of allowing them to live in the house. Mr. Thomas stated he felt with a good demolition/remodel contractor, we could make this doable as long as Mr. Souza is working with us. Cm. Zika discussed a notification period. Ms. Silver stated this resolution doesn't contain a specific date. He has until September 29th, and then with this language, he would have at least another 4 weeks. Mr. Thomas stated he would not want to stipulate a specific number of days, but we will give as much notice as possible. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 19 REGULAR MEETING September 10, 2000 PAGE 392 On motion of Vice Mayor Lockhart, seconded by Cm. McCormick, and by unanimous vote, with the addition of the City Attorney's suggested verbiage, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 171 - 00 AFFIRMING DETERMINATIONS OF THE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER REGARDING 7957 CROSSRIDGE ROAD, DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA AND ORDERING THE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER TO PROCEED WITH ABATEMENT PUBLIC HEARING ~ PA 98~062 GREENBRIAR HOMES COMMUNITIES, INC. ~ DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 9:42 p.m. 6.2 (600~60) Mayor Houston opened the public heating. Senior Planner Dennis Carrington presented the Staff Report and advised that this Development Agreement with Greenbriar Homes Communities, Inc., is for Fhase I (lots 1-126) of a single-family dwelling unit subdivision located on Yarra Yarra Ranch on the west side of Tassajara Road and north of the Casterson and Tassajara Meadows developments. The DA, as required by the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, provides security to developers that the City will not change its zoning and other laws applicable to the project for the 5-year term of the agreement, and allows the City to obtain commitments from the developer relating to issues such as improvements and fees. Mr. Cartington advised that the DA runs with the land and the fights thereunder can be assigned. Cm. McCormick asked about the 500' setback that was in the plan. Mr. Cartington stated there is no 300' setback in the plan. It was more of a negotiation than a requirement. The State Department of Fish & Game and the Department of Wildlife is calling for a 300' setback. They are working with the State Department of Fish & Game and are close to agreement. Mr. Tim Quinn with Greenbriar Homes stated they are in concurrence with Staff. Regarding issues of Tassajara Creek, they have worked closely and have reached agreement on potential mitigation for the property and this will be resolved before the actual permits are issued. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 19 REGULAR MEETING September 19, 2000 PAGE 393 Mayor Houston closed the public hearing. Cm. McCormick stated she voted against this in March and doesn't feel any different about it now. On motion of Cm. Zika, seconded by Vice Mayor Lockhart, and by majority vote, the Council waived the reading and INTRODUCED the Ordinance. Cm. McCormick voted against the motion. PUBLIC HEARING ~ QUARRY LAND SCHOOL FA 99~064 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FREZONE AND ANNEXATION INITIATION This item was moved forward and heard following the Consent Calendar. 7:52 p.m. 6.3 (620-20) Mr. Peabody stated he was requesting that this item be continued. Staff has discussed this with the applicant and he is in agreement. Issues related to water have come to light that need to be resolved. It will be renoticed for public hearing in the future. Cm. Zika asked about people that might be present to speak on this item. Mayor Houston advised that they would need to come to a future public hearing and enter comments when it is renoticed. INSTALLATION OF STOP SIGNS ON CENTRAL PARKWAY (~, HIBERNIA DRIVE 9:47 p.m. 6.4 (590~40) Mayor Houston opened the public hearing. Public Works Director Lee Thompson presented the Staff Report and advised that since the opening of Dougherty Elementary School, City Staff has received a number of requests to provide traffic control for Central Parkway @ Hibernia Drive. This intersection is scheduled to be signalized in the future, but in the interim, it is proposed to install stop signs. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 19 REGULAR MEETING September 19, 2000 PAGE 394 Vice Mayor Lockhart asked about why we are doing a lot of extra stuff when the signal will go in in a few months. Mr. Thompson stated the signal is being put in by Sybase. They are working on the design at this point. Vice Mayor Lockhart asked if we have resolved the issue of crossing guards. Mr. Thompson stated we have to determine where the kids will be walking to see if a crossing guard is needed. Ms. Lowart stated the City included funds in the budget for a crossing guard and we are waiting for information from the School District on where it might be. We are setting up a liaison meeting and this could be discussed. No testimony was entered by any member of the public relative to this issue. Mayor Houston closed the public hearing. On motion of Vice Mayor Lockhart, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 172- 00 APPROVING INSTALLATION OF STOP SIGNS ON CENTRAL PARKWAY t~ HIBERNIA DRIVE PROPOSED OFF-LEASH DOG PARK AT ALAMO CREEK PARK 9:52 p.m. 7.1 (920-20) Parks & Community Services Director Diane Lowart presented the Staff Report and advised that at the direction of the City Council, the Parks & Community Services Commission conducted a public meeting on a proposed dog park on August 21 st. Notices were sent to over 400 residences in the Alamo Creek neighborhood. Seven written responses in opposition to the proposed dog park were received. Additionally, a petition containing 120 signatures of residents against the dog park was presented to the Commission. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 19 REGULAR MEETING September 19, 2000 PAGE 395 Ms. Lowart stated after considering the public testimony related to the dog park, the Commission unanimously voted to oppose the dog park at Alamo Creek Park. The opposition was based on: 1 ) aesthetic impact on the roadway and neighborhood; 2) lack of available parking; and 3) safety/access from Dougherty Road/Willow Creek Drive intersection. Ms. Lowart advised that the Parks & Community Services Commission and the majority of those who spoke in opposition to the proposed dog park at Alamo Creek Park were in favor of a City run dog park. Potential locations identified by the Commission included future parks in Eastern Dublin, Dougherty Hills Park, East Bay Regional Park District's Tassajara Creek Park, Iron Horse Trail and Camp Parks. Ms. Lowart stated if the Council determines, after receiving public testimony, that an off~ leash dog park at Alamo Creek Park is an appropriate use of the area, a budget transfer would be necessary: It will also be necessary to amend the Dublin Municipal Code to allow off~leash dogs in designated areas of parks. These would be presented to the Council at a future meeting. If the Council is not in favor of an off~leash dog park at Alamo Creek Park, Staff requested direction as to whether additional Staff time should be spent to find an alternate location for a dog park. Ms. Lowart pointed out that the adopted 2000-2001 Goals & Objectives include a low priority Council goal, "Undertake feasibility study for dog park". Louise Clemens, Tuscany Drive, stated she lives directly across from the area being proposed for a dog park. The petition has been presented with many people opposed to this. People in various places in Dublin that she spoke with were appalled that a dog park was being considered here. This area is really busy, particula~y on the weekends. The park is heavily utilized. There are many negatives about a dog park. In this case, you will be taking away a lovely and attractive open space for the City. If a dog park is supported by a majority of citizens, a more remote place can be found. Lothar de Temple stated he is a dog owner and lives in that neighborhood. He would not dream of imposing his wish of what he does with his dog on the other neighbors. If you look at the gated communities to the noah, you will not find dogs defecating at the entrance to their developments. People who bought homes 12 years ago in this development felt this would be an open green space. Rose Rose, 10738 Inspiration Circle, stated she moved here 2 years ago and really doesn't know where all the parks are. When she originally proposed this, it was thought that because this was away from houses, it was felt it would be away from people's yards. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 1O REGULAR MEETING September 19, 2000 PAGE 396 When she heard the testimony at the Commission's meeting, she understands totally the concerns of the neighborhood. They had some very good points. It is true that with regard to traffic, people might be distracted. The neighbors do understand the parking situation. She did not intend to go in and thrash the neighborhood. She understands that most of the people are not opposed to a dog park, but just not at this location. There has to be some place where a dog park can be located in Dublin with fenced area and two gates with seats, etc. She stated she hopes we can come up with some other site that will not impose on neighbors. Mayor Houston stated he has never driven by and seen a human being occupying this area. The core part of the park is used a tremendous amount and it would not be affected by this. There will never be a park in Dublin that is devoid of people and houses and activities in and around it. His parents live next to a dog park in Pleasanton and the neighborhood gets along famously. Ms. Lowart stated the obvious advantage in putting in a new park would be to design it into the park from the beginning. Cm. Zika stated he felt the P&CS Commission had some suggestions. Perhaps a provision could be put into the open space area in eastern Dublin. Vice Mayor Lockhart stated she is a resident of the Villages and the thing she likes about this location is you can redirect the dogs to an area where it can be controlled. Her concerns were the parking issue and getting the dogs themselves to the area safely. Her thought was to enter from the Wildwood side and use that as a staging area. She did like this location for a dog park. The only way we will see a dog park is to not take an existing park. She doesn't like the idea of Dougherty Hills Park or putting it along the Iron Horse Trail. The only other alternative would be to design it into a park when we are designing a new park. Cm. McCormick commented she felt we should not disregard Camp Parks as a possibility. Ms. Lowart stated for several years we have been in discussion with Camp Parks in getting land for a park. They asked us to come back in the Fall to re~open discussions. we were to build a site from scratch, we Would be looking at $75,000 to $100,000. If Cm. McCormick stated she would like to see us go forward and continue to look for a site. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 19 REGULAR MEETING September 19, 2000 PAGE 397 Mayor Houston requested that the Parks & Community Services Commission look for a location. STUDY SESSION WESTERN DUBLIN DRAFT GENERAL PLANB AMENDMENT STUDY 10:20 p.m. 8.1 (420~30) Community Development Director Eddie Peabody presented the Staff Report and advised that in February of 1999, the City Council directed Staff to initiate a Western Dublin General Plan Amendment Study to consider establishing an urban limit line along the western city boundary, pending the vote on the Urban Limit Line measure; and to consider appropriate land use designations and policies related to development within the Western Extended Planning Area. The Council further requested that, as part of the GPA Study, a Western Dublin Open Space Preservation Study be conducted to determine feasible options for open space acquisition and preservation within the Western Extended Planning Area. Mr. Peabody stated the purpose of the GPA Study is twoNfold: 1 ) to identify appropriate amendments to the Dublin GP to establish an urban limit line along the western city boundary, in the event the ULL measure is adopted by voters in the upcoming November election; and 2) to consider appropriate future goals and policies for the Western Extended Planning Area, in the event the ULL measure fails at the ballot. Any GPA the City Council wishes to adopt would be accomplished after the election, depending on the election results. Cm. McCormick questioned the 740' elevation and asked how this was chosen. Mr. Peabody stated it was one of the factors in the earlier attempts to talk about development caps. It was related to water service elevation given the location of the water tanks there. Roxanne Nielsen referenced Page 28, AMENDMENT 2: LAND USE AND CIRCULATION, WESTERN EXTENDED PLANNING AREA. The last paragraph says, "In addition to restricting urban development, the City will not approve or recommend approval of the permanent use or extension of city services or facilities, including but not limited to utilities or roads, to support or facilitate urban development beyond the Urban Limit Line." She asked if the development of a City park is considered urban development. Does this program jeopardize any of the recreational programs that could be developed? CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 19 REGULAR MEETING September 19, 2000 PAGE 398 Mr. Peabody responded that this comes directly from the measure being presented to the voters. Exhibit A says exactly the same language. If it were to pass, this is the language that would go into our General Plan. No, it would not jeopardize any City parks. Ms. Nielsen asked what is the definition of urban limit. Mr. Peabody stated normal city services would include water and sewer and facilities of that nature. Areas not having City services would be served by a septic tank and a well. Assumption being if you have 1 unit for 100 acres. Ms. Nielsen questioned if she and her brothers wanted to build homes for themselves on their 100 acres, if this would have to be voted on. Mr. Peabody stated yes they would have to have an election. Ms. Nielsen referenced Page 26, Amendment 1.8.1: LAND USE CLASSIFICATION, WESTERN EXTENDED PLANNING AREA, RESIDENTIAL. Residential: Rural Residential/Agriculture (1 unit per 100 gross residential acres). She asked what uses then does a landowner have under the agriculture zoning? Mr. Peabody stated there are a variety of permitted uses; raising horses, normal farm activities. There are some conditional uses that would be permitted, but predominately farm uses. Ms. Nielsen asked if the City will provide them with water for agricultural uses. Mr. Peabody stated currently, the City does not provide water. It would have to come from DSRSD or some mechanism for providing water service to bring water into areas that do not have sustainable water. Ms. Nielsen stated this leaves them with basically nothing. David Bewley, Brittany Lane, stated he is one of the proponents of Measure M. His main concern with the study, regardless of whether Measure M passes or fails, is that it would not impact on the open space study. This is more of a policy goal for the City, separate and distinct from Measure M. Measure M is just a process where the Urban Limit Line establishes a final result to go to a vote of the citizens. Measure M is really a process that was upheld by the CA Supreme Court. It takes away no land rights, but simply puts an extra element in. This does not prevent future urbanization. This area is right now part of Alameda County. Alameda County says this should be permanent open space. Dublin is not as restrictive as Alameda County. Dublin has 14,000 homes planned right now for CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 19 REGULAR MEETING September 19, 2000 PAGE 399 east Dublin. All this measure does is simply make it a public process. They just wanted public involvement. He understands the landowner's concerns. This is a legitimate concern of the public. Our General Plan is a written guide. Decisions made outside the public arena would be prohibited under Measure M. Robert Nielsen stated he thought we really already had a system in place and a secondary system being that of referendum. His family has been here for 125 years and is very much interested in the future of Dublin. If we keep putting more on top of it, we'll have a system that doesn't work. If they wanted to put in 4 homes on their 100 acres, he asked if the City is saying they would not provide sewer and water. Mr. Peabody stated the issue is if city services would be extended. We have no such prohibition to services elsewhere. Dave Burton, Dillon Way, asked what's wrong with building on the hills? In Europe everyone builds just the opposite and saves the other space for agriculture. He understands we wouldn't build at the top on the ridges. This is, however, a perfect site for nice estate homes and this should be considered. Think about this in a positive way. There is now an opportunity to have 200 or 300 acres of open space with 70 or so homes. This is one of our prime areas for estate homes. This is something that should be considered. Don't be afraid to put in some homes and get some donated open space. Lana McAlister commented on Mr. Bewley's comments. It is not a simple matter just going for a vote. He stated it takes away no land rights, but it does take away potential value. With regard to the reference to ECAP stating the entire area is open space, this is a general term. Cm. Zika stated on June 20, 2000, the City Council directed Staff to prepare an open space program. He is not opposed to looking at an estate home plan, but he will look at it towards the eastern portion and nothing on the western side of the ridge. If we acquire some of the land as a park, it will be a park we can use. Vice Mayor Lockhart stated she hopes we will get the issue resolved in November and then we can look at the area as possible open space area. On motion of Vice Mayor Lockhart, seconded by Cm. McCormick, and by unanimous vote, the Council directed Staff to prepare the Final General Plan Amendment after the November 2000 election results are known and return to the Council for adoption of appropriate amendments in the event the ULL ballot measure passes or fails. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 19 REGULAR MEETING September 19, 2000 PAGE 400 OTHER BUSINESS 10:49 p.m. Ms. Lowart reminded everyone that Saturday, September 23ra, is the Emerald Glen Park dedication from I 1:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Ms. Lowart stated Staff is trying to set up a School District liaison committee meeting. The committee should get back to Fawn with dates and agenda topics. Vice Mayor Lockhart stated she prefers Monday or Tuesday before a City Council meeting. Mayor Houston advised that he can't do that. He stated October 9th or 10th wilI work for him at 5:00 p.m. October 9th is Columbus day. Staff was directed to schedule the liaison committee meeting with the School District on October 9th Cm. Zika requested that the liaison committee add to their agenda the letter from John Ledahl regarding traffic problems around various schools. He suggested we have a task force of parents and traffic studies and people from the Police Department come up with a plan. He would like to see this added to the agenda. There are some very serious concerns. Cm. McCormick stated she artended the League of California Cities conference last week and went to some really interesting sessions and also had the prMlege of voting for her colleague. She also applauded Vice Mayor Lockhart for carrying the City flag at the opening ceremonies. Cm. Howard reported that she was voted in as First Vice President of the East Bay Division of the League of California Cities. Cm. Zika stated he also artended the League of California Cities conference and heard various proposals for redistributing sales tax, and also some interesting ideas on affordable housing. Vice Mayor Lockhart stated she also attended the LOCC conference. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 19 REGULAR MEETING September '19, 2000 PAGE 401 Vice Mayor Lockhart reported that she attended a planning committee meeting for waste management today and there was discussion on the impartial analysis done on the open space plan and Sierra Club measures. They recommended passage of Measure C (Vision 2010). She stated she has additional copies of the analysis. ADJOURNMENT 11.1 Them being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 10:55 p.m. ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 19 REGULAR MEETING September 19, 2000 PAGE 402