Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.01 Approve 01-26-1987 and 01-28-1987 MinutesREGULAR MEETING - February 9, 1987 A regular raeeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Monday, February 9, 1987 in the meeting room of the. Dublin Library. The raeeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. by Mayor Linda Jeffery. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Jeffery. Councilmembers Hegarty, Moffatt, Snyder, Vonheeder and Mayor PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ,~, - ~.--~ of alle- [ne M~yor led the Council, Staff ant those present in the giance to the flag. Request for Stop Signs Tamarack Drive @ Burton Street and @ Brighton Drive Larry Berk!and, 7141 Tamarack Drive addressed the Council and indicated he !iw~s near Frederiksen School. He commended the Council for their ac-aion with regard ~o parking near the school. He indicated that approximately 6 months ago a petition was presented to him requesting the placement of stop signs at Burton/Tamarack and at Brighton/Tamarack. Several months later, he received a letter from the City s%ating the intersections didn't warrant stop signs, but 'that patrol activity would be increased. Mr. Berkland felt that this street is a drag strip, with speeds of up to 65 mph. City Engineer 'fhompson indicated that many requests have been received for acemen,_ the pl ~ '~ of stop signs. This particular street has been targeted for additional enforcemenh. Cm. Hegarty indicated thaa the City is cognizant of the speeds on this street and felt that street construction activity on Amador Valley Boulevard and the additional [Placement of stop signs along Amador Valley Boulevard has contributed to the problems along t.his street. Even though Traffic Engineers don't recommend '.~top signs as a way ~o slow traffic, Cal. Hegarty indicated he would like this.~tem to be agendized for future consideration of stop ~.,_g~.~.~ ~. Mr. Thompson indicated that they ~?i!i ba comim3 back to the Council in March ' ~. _ ~ ~-'-- effectiveness o~ new sto~ signs placed on with a 6 ~r, ontn r~v~ e~,~ o~ ~ - ~ Donehue Drive. By consensus of the Council, S~aff ~.;as directed to combine this reouest wi%h the 6 month~_.v~e~.~ ..... o~_~ .... ~e Denohue~ Drive .~'%oe= ~J_qns~.~ . and brine., back to 'the Council in F. arch. C M- 5- 37 Regular Meeting February 9, 1987 Received a report regarding the Fall 1986 Recreation Program; Approved a program for towing services for abandoned vehicles with Gary' s Tow and authorized the Mayor to execute the agreement; authorized a budget transfer in the amount of $3, 000 from the Contingent Reserve; Approved a Budget change of $13, 450 for costs associated with the outfitting of police vehicles with light bars, push bars, etc . ; Approved Warrant Register in the amount of $334, 137 . 22 * * * * . WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS ' RE DRUG INTERVENTION PROGRAM The City has received a letter from "The Center" , requesting the City to contribute 1/3 of the cost of putting on a Drug Intervention Program for Tri-Valley residents . The total cost for speaker' s fees associated with this program is $900 . The Cities of Livermore and Pleasanton have each committed to a $300 contribution. Joyce Friedman from The Center was present at the meeting and explained the program in more depth. They have been in the Dublin schools for over 10 years . The Center and The Phoenix Program are planning a teen and adult presentation on March 18, 1987, to be held at the Amador High School auditorium. Teenagers who are recovering from chemical dependency will perform dramatizations of their own addiction experiences . Mayor Jeffery questioned how the limited attendance issue will be addressed. Ms . Friedman indicated they would do equal public relations in all communities . Admission will be free. When questioned, City Attorney Nave advised Cm. Snyder that he should abstain from the vote on this- issue because he sits on the Board for The Center. On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by majority vote, (Cm. Snyder abstained) , the Council authorized a $300 contribution for this program and authorized a Budget Transfer from the Contingent Reserve. * * * * PUBLIC HEARING SIGN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. On January 12, 1987, the City Council introduced an Ordinance amending the City ' s Sign Ordinance and adopted a Resolution approving the associated Negative Declaration. This Ordinance will amend the City' s existing Sign Ordinance related to: 1) allowing two Freestanding Signs on large parcels , 2) Special Easement Signs ; 3 ) Service Station Display and Price Signs , 4) CM-5-20 Regular Meeting January 26, 1987 Identification Signs , 5) Low Profile Signs, 6) Time/Temperature Signs and Electronic Readerboard Signs, 7 ) Shopping Center Master Identification Signs, and 8 ) reformatting and renumbering the Ordinance to enhance its readability. No comments were made by members of the public . Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Snyder, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by majority vote, the Council waived the reading and adopted ORDINANCE NO. 6 - 87 AMENDING THE. CITY ZONING ORDINANCE RELATING TO SPECIAL EASEMENT SIGNS, LOCATION AND NUMBER OF PERMITTED FREESTANDING SIGNS, SERVICE STATION DISPLAY AND PRICE SIGNS, IDENTIFICATION SIGNS, LOW PROFILE SIGNS, TIME/TEMPERATURE SIGNS, AND ELECTRONIC READERBOARD SIGNS, AND SHOPPING CENTER MASTER IDENTIFICATION SIGNS Cm. Hegarty voted NO on this motion. * * * PUBLIC HEARING APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DENYING SIGN VARIANCE APPLICATION - HOWARD JOHNSON' s MOTOR LODGE Staff advised the Council that on January 21, 1987, the Applicant advised Staff via telephone that he was withdrawing the application for a sign . variance to exceed the maximum permitted area for a directional sign. The recent sign ordinance amendment prompted this withdrawal . * * * * PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE CHANGING VIOLATIONS OF BUILDING AND ZONING REGULATIONS FROM A MISDEMEANOR TO INFRACTIONS Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. Staff explained that this ordinance, which was introduced at the January 12, 1987 City Council meeting is intended to facilitate enforcement of building and zoning codes, leading to a higher compliance rate . No comments were made by members of the public . Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote, the Council waived the reading and adopted CM-5-21 Regular Meeting January 26, 1987 ORDINANCE NO. 7 - 87 AMENDING 11 .15 OF CHAPTER 1, ORDINANCE NO. 2-84, AMENDING SECTION 8-107 OF ARTICLE 9 , PART 2, CHAPTER 2, TITLE 8 ALAMEDA COUNTY ORDINANCE CODE AS ADOPTED BY THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND REPEALING SECTION 8-107 .1 ARTICLE 9 PART 2 CHAPTER 2 TITLE 8 ALAMEDA COUNTY ORDINANCE CODE AS ADOPTED BY THE CITY OF DUBLIN and adopted RESOLUTION NO. 6 - 87 APPROVING BUILDING INSPECTION DEPARTMENT POLICY AND PROCEDURE FOR CITATIONS * * * * PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE INCREASING CITY COUNCIL SALARIES Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. Staff explained that this ordinance, which was introduced at the January 12, 1987 City Council meeting, would provide for the increase of Council salaries after November, 1988 . Cm. Vonheeder questioned if the table used for establishing salaries was based on population. Staff responded that it is . Cm. Vonheeder then questioned what happens if Dublin lumps to the next tier. Staff advised that the next tier was substantially higher than Dublin' s current population. Hans Hideau -auestioned how much the Council currently earns . Staff responded that the City Council is paid $300 per month. Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Snyder, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote, the Council waived the reading and adopted ORDINANCE NO. 8 - 87 AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6 AND PROVIDING FOR AN INCREASE OF THE SALARY FOR MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL * * * * PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE REPEALING CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION ORDINANCES NO. 1-84 & NO. 3-84 Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. Staff explained that if this ordinance is adopted, the State Law regulating campaign contributions would be the law regulating campaign contributions in the City of Dublin. State Law provides that candidates would have to disclose contributions and expenditures in excess of $100 and does not place an upper limit on constribution amounts that candidates can receive . • CM-5-22 Regular Meeting January 26, 1987 Elizabeth Schmitt advised that she had no objection ro raising the reporting limit to $100, but she did not feel comfortable with allowing unlimited funding. She would like to see a cap put on the amounts that could be accepted. Brian Raley indicated he totally supports the changing of the filing dates , but is totally opposed to allowing any additional campaign dollar limit. There is no correlation to the dollars spent as to the number of votes received. He felt contributions should be limited to Dublin residents . He questioned where the end would be if this is opened up . Dave Burton indicated he was in favor of complying with the State requirements . Anyone running against an incumbent needs resources in order to beat them. Business people who operate in Dublin certainly have an interest in what is going on in Dublin and he, therefore, was opposed to Mr. Raley ' s suggestion of allowing Dublin residents only to contribute to campaigns . Mr. Burton indicated that speaking from his own experience, the State Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) , keeps very close tabs on what goes on in campaigns . Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. Cm. Moffatt indicated that if a candidate receives more than a $250 contribution from a single source, they would be unable to vote on an issue affecting the donor. They would certainly be questioned also. The FPPC is very aware and they act as watchdogs over campaigns . There are many business owners in Dublin who do not live here. As far as the filing dates, Cm. Moffatt felt that a lot of unnecessary work had to be done during the last campaign. Cm. Hegarty felt that whether a candidate spends a great deal of money or a great deal of time doesn 't mean that one way is better than the other. The point is to get to the people and let them know what you are all about. Cm. Hegarty felt that the State FPPC provides enough of a check and balance system Cm. Snyder felt that it was unfortunate that we tend to mix the confidence of the voters of the community with dollars . He felt that some type of a limit should be -placed on contributions . Cm. Vonheeder indicated that her original consideration was the ridiculous filing dates . She would prefer to see a $100 cap remain, but raise the reporting figure from $25 to $50 . Cm. Moffatt felt the guidelines used by the State FPPC are very prudent and did not feel that we need another agency to oversee. Mayor Jeffery indicated that she was very vocal in adopting the ordinance in • the first place and she would rather see a compromise with limiting contributions to $100 and also raise the reporting limit to $100 . CM-5-23 Regular Meeting January 26, 1987 • On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by majority vote, the Council waived the reading and INTRODUCED an ordinance repealing Dublin Ordinance No. 1-84 and No. 3-84 , regulating campaign contributions . Cm. Snyder and Mayor Jeffery voted NO on this motion. * * * * PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE AMENDING TIME FOR FILING CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION AND EXPENDITURE STATEMENTS Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. This ordinance would consolidate 7 filings into 4 filings, as well as bring the filing period for the City' s ordinance into conformance with the filing period for the State . The City Council discussed this ordinance at its meeting of January 12, 1987, and continued the public hearing to its meeting of January 26, 1987 in order to first consider the possible repeal of Ordinances No. 1-84 and No. 3-84 . If the City Council repeals Ordinances No. 1-84 ' and No. 3-84 , the Council could vote to take no action. Elizabeth Schmitt questioned filing dates for the last election. Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote, the Council agreed to take no action. * * * * PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE RELATING TO SECONDHAND DEALERS & JUNK DEALERS Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. This ordinance is being brought to the City Council as part of the comprehensive revision of the City ' s ordinances and development of a Municipal Code. This ordinance would replace Title 1, Chapter 5 of the Alameda County Code which the City adopted by Ordinance No. 13-82 and requires Secondhand Dealers and Junk Dealers to comply with the provisions of State Law and the City' s Zoning Ordinance. A license would be obtained from the Chief of Police . The question was asked if this included garage sales . Planning Director Tong explained that typically, it would not. The Zoning Ordinance does not regulate garage sales unless it becomes ongoing. The home occupation guidelines would apply if it does become ongoing. These guidelines indicate that sales from a home cannot be on an ongoing basis . If a garage sale were held every other weekend, complaints would surely be generated. Cm. Moffatt questioned if this would apply to flea markets . Mr. Tong explained that through the Administrative Conditional Use Permit procedure, Staff can authorize this type of activity. There is a $25 processing fee. CM-5-24 Regular Meeting January 26, 1987 • Cm. Moffatt questioned if this ordinance would apply to insurance distress merchandise. Mr. Tong responded that from a zoning standpoint, no distinctions would be made regarding the type of merchandise. Mayor Jeffery questioned if definitions are included in the referenced code sections . City Manager indicated Staff could provide a copy of the somewhat lengthy code at the next meeting. Roy Onenea questioned if indoor flea markets would be subject to this ordinance if there were new items in addition to hand crafted items for sale. Staff responded that this would be an allowed useage. Terry Schuller questioned how this changes what is already in effect. City Manager Ambrose responded that it does not change anything. Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. . On motion of Cm. Snyder, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote, the Council waived the reading and INTRODUCED an ordinance relating to secondhand dealers and junk dealers . * * * * PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE PROHIBITING' SOLICITATION AT ACCIDENT SITES Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. This ordinance is being brought to the City Council as part of the comprehensive revision of the City ' s ordinances and development of a Municipal Code. This ordinance which would replace Title 5, Chapter 5, Section 5-34 .3 of the Alameda County Code prohibits soliciting or offering for sale, tow service or any other services at the site of a vehicle accident or other catastrophe or calamity. Brian Raley questioned if this also applies to attorneys . Staff responded that it did. Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous vote. the Council waived the reading and INTRODUCED an ordinance prohibiting solicitation at accident sites . * * * * PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE RELATING TO HOTEL AND LODGING REGISTRATION Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. This ordinance is being brought to the City Council as part of the comprehensive revision of the City ' s ordinances and development of a Municipal Code. This ordinance which would replace Title 4 , Chapter 5, Article 1 of the Alameda County Code, and establishes regulations regarding hotel registration. CM-5-25 • Regular Meeting January 26, 1987 No comments were made' by members of -the public . • ' -- Mayor Jeffery closed the public .hearina.. . On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by -unanimous vote, the' Council waived the .readina and INTRODUCED an ordinance relating to hotel and lodging registration: . *. * * *. PUBLIC HEARING - ' ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE .EXPOSURE OF PORTIONS, OF THE HUMAN BODY - Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. . ' . ' . This ordinance 'is being brought to the City Council as part of the ,.. comprehensive revision of the City' s ordinances and development of a . Municipal Code. ' This-ordinance which would replace Title 4, Chapter- 1, . Article 7 of the Alameda County Code, and prohibits the exposure. of certain , parts of the human body in any public palace, places open to the public, or places open to public view. . • ' Cm. Moffatt questioned if this ordinance would discriminate. aaainst nursing - mothers . - City Attorney Nave indicated that it would not, unless. they were participating in a floor show. ' - . Cm. Moffatt auestioned if thiswould make "mooning" and "streaking" illegal . Staff responded that these are already illegal activities . . Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Snyder, .seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote, • . . the. Council waived the reading and INTRODUCED an ordinance relating to exposure of portions of the human body. * * * * PUBLIC HEARING , - . ORDINANCE REGULATING UNAUTHORIZED USE OF CORPUS DATA Mayor Jeffery opened .the public hearing. This ordinance is a part 'of the comprehensive revision 'of the City' s . ordinances. and development of ,a Municipal Code. ` This ordinance would make it _ unlawful for any unauthorized person to. obtain. personal data from the Criminal Oriented Records Production Unified System (Corpus ) or for any person to provide such data- to' an -unauthorized-.person. This ordinance would replace Title 4, Chapter 1, Article 8 of the Alameda County Code which the City adopted by Ordinance No. . 13-82 . Cm. Moffatt questioned if the word "unauthorized" - is- defined. Lt. Severini explained that unauthorized would mean that information 'is for the sole use of public 'safety investigative services , and the information could not be passed to any group or individual not authorized, to. have this. ,information. It is elaborated in the ordinance. . . . ' CM-5-26 - - Regular Meeting . • January 26, 1987 Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. • On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Snyder, and by unanimous vote, the Council waived the reading and INTRODUCED an ordinance regulating unauthorized use of Corpus Data. * * * * PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE RELATING TO DRINKING IN PUBLIC Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. This ordinance is a part of the comprehensive revision of the City' s ordinances and development of a Municipal Code. This ordinance does not incorporate the provisions of the County Code which makes it unlawful to be in a drunken condition on public streets, because this provision is covered by State Law. The proposed ordinance makes it unlawful to drink intoxicating beverages on any street, sidewalk, alley or highway. It also makes it unlawful to drink intoxicating beverages on public or private property open to the public and within 1, 000 feet of any City street, sidewalk, etc . , and intended to be used for parking of motor vehicles, without the permission of the property owner. Cm. Hegarty questioned if he happened to be outside mowing his lawn, had a can of beer in his hand, and then decided to walk across the street and visit a neighbor, would he be in violation of this ordinance. ' City Attorney Nave responded that technically, he would be breaking the law. Norb Hudak questioned how this would affect block parties . City Attorney Nave replied that it could be implied that the City gives permission by allowing a street closure. David Burton felt the City is going quite a ways and nit picking to find something illegal . City Attorney Nave explained that this ordinance is another tool for enforcement. A sample was cited related to recent cruise nights in Dublin, with people standing on sidewalks drinking beer. Lt. Severini explained that in order to operate effectively, the Police Department needs tools desperately. Terry Schuller indicated she is not in favor of public drinking and questioned the effect on parades where people sit on the curb drinking beer. Discussion ensued related to drinking in public parks . City Manager Ambrose indicated that in order to legitimately drink in parks , permission must be obtained from the Dublin San Ramon Services district. Norb Hudak felt the ordinance needs some further revision. CM-5-27 Regular Meeting January 26, 1987 • Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. - - . - - • . . - Cm. Hegarty indicated -he had _a problem with Section I wording and 'felt it should, be redefined. Cm. Moffatt indicated he felt there was a problem with families using' parks ` but not being able to legally .have spirits . . . City Attorney Nave 'indicated -that if DSRSD wants to prohibit .drinkinc in a • park, all that is .necessary is that a sign ' be posted at the 'entrance of the park. . ' Cm. Vonheeder _ felt that drinking is already prohibited at the Dublin Sports Grounds . - On motion of Cm. Snyder, seconded by, Cm. Vonheeder, . and by majority vote, the Council waived the ' reading and INTRODUCED an ordinance relating to drinking in public . Cm. Hegarty and Cm. Moffatt voted NO on this motion.. * * * PUBLIC HEARING - . - . _ ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A :PROCEDURE FOR DISPOSITION OF UNCLAIMED AND STOLEN PROPERTY Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. Staff has determined that the City does not have an ordinance providing for the disposition of unclaimed and' stolen -property. This ordinance would _ establish broad procedures and guidelines for the disposition of unclaimed ' and stolen property. Property, covered by this ordinance would either be returned to the owner, offered for public auction, destroyed or disposed of ' ' or. used by the City, depending upon the circumstances . Mayor Jeffery auestioned-who nets the proceeds, from sales . - City Manacrer Ambrose reported that the City gets a portion and d -Alameda County keeps some of the money. Roy Onenea questioned the percentage that comes to the City. City Manager Ambrose stated he' did not know the actual breakdown. Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. . ' . . ' On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, . and by unanimous vote, the Council waived the reading and INTRODUCED an ordinance establishing a procedure for disposition of unclaimed and stolen property. . ' * * .* * REQUEST FROM DUBLIN HIGH SCHOOL - FOR MAINTENANCE ASSISTANCE •AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS The City has received a letter. from Joan'- King, Principal of Dublin High School with - a proposal that would allow the Recreation, Department `free use of the High School facilities in return for help with maintenance of school fields . . - . CM-5-28 , . Regular Meeting . . - January 26, .1987 The Park & Recreation Commission considered this request on November 6, 1986 and was in favor of pursuing the issue . A subcommittee was formed to investigate the feasibility of the proposal and to determine actual projects in which the City could assist. A list of projects included: 1 . Installation of an all weather track and stadium 2 . Construction of an additional soccer field (South End) 3 . Construction of an additional softball field (North End) 4 . Upgrade of existing practice softball and baseball fields 5 . Construction of two to four additional tennis courts 6 . Installation of a parr course 7 . Installation of a 9-hole pitch and put course 8. Resurface blacktop area Although actual cost estimates have not yet been prepared, it appears that the proposed projects , as well as maintenance, entail substantial costs which have not been budgeted. Therefore, it was the recommendation of the Park & Recreation Commission that any further consideration of Dublin High Schools request be deferred until the City Council considered the request. Staff recommended that the City Council consider the request from the Principal of Dublin High School and determine 1) whether there is sufficient benefit to the City to pursue consideration of providing financial assistance to Dublin High School ; and 2 ) whether the City and School District should jointly fund the services of a landscape architect to identify those costs associated with the improvements identified above and maintenance of those improvements . Joan King indicated that she appreciated the opportunity to make this presentation. The Dublin High School campus could and should be used all year around. The facility is now 18 years old and maintenance has not been what they would like since the passage of Proposition 13 . They are excited about trying to upgrade the facilities . She felt that by working together, the School District and the City, could enhance the facilities and could attract special olympics and other events that would bring a lot of people to Dublin. They currently get hundreds of requests annually that they must deny. Mayor Jeffery questioned if the facilities would be available to the City. Ms . King responded that whenever the school was not using the facilities, they would be available for City use . Cm. Moffatt questioned if it would be possible for high school kids to function as volunteer staff on some of the programs . Ms . King indicated that they would be willing to do whatever they could to make things function. City Attorney Nave indicated he would need some time to carefully consider legal issues involved. Cm. Hegarty questioned if they had a target date in mind. Ms . King laughingly responded that she hoped to see it accomplished in her lifetime. CM-5-29 Regular Meeting January 26, 1987 Kelly Rajala, a high school student indicated she is a tennis and soccer player. She urged the Council to attend sports events and see Dublin ' s athletes in action. The athletes deserve the best conditions on which to play. There have been some accidents in the past due to the poorly maintained playing fields . One of the tennis courts has been out of use for a long time. Also, the courts need windbreakers . Liz Schmitt indicated she was on the sub-committee which spoke to the sports groups . She indicated that her son had been hurt on a field that was not properly maintained. Norb Hudak indicated there is also an opportunity to put in a teen center. Richard Berg, President of the Dublin Boosters indicated there hasn 't been many cities in California where this type of a concept can be utilized, but it could be accomplished here. A lot of people yearn for different types of facilities . Dublin High School has facilities that are very desirable for community use . Where districts and cities get together and have the support of the community, a successful program can be accomplished which greatly benefits residents . Cm. Hegarty stated that since becoming a City, we have been asking for pride and identity. When large corporations consider coming into a community, they always question the quality of life in a community and how good the schools are. He indicated he would like to see the Council form a task force to study this proposal and do everything possible to create the image that residents want. He would like to see the committee set up within the next 2 weeks . Cm. Vonheeder felt what the School District wants is a commitment from the City Council that they should proceed with getting information. Cm. Snyder commended Ms . King for the spirit she displayed and for what she has done for the school and the community as a whole . He felt we must not lose sight of the fact that it would be very difficult to proceed in light of all that is going on in the community. She should check with the School Board and there is a need for a strong agreement. The Council will be looking at goals & objectives next month. Under the culture and leisure services category, there are already 19 goals listed. Cm. Vonheeder indicated that these kinds of programs are working for other cities and we don ' t want to lose an opportunity to utilize facilities . Mayor Jeffery indicated that if the City had a pot of gold, it would be great. During the goals & objectives meeting, the City must look at all the projects we are already considering. Some priorities might need to be changed. She indicated she would feel more confortable discussing this proposal if some of the legal issues were resolved. Mayor Jeffery also questioned how the proposed unification issue would affect this program. Additional funding sources should be researched that would not take away from other projects . CM-5-30 Regular Meeting January 26, 1987 w . City Manager Ambrose reported that Staff does not have the expertise to act in the capacity• of. a landscape architect and felt that- somewhere 'along the line, we will need to get professional services from a 'park .architect. • Ms . King reported that the School District has an architect that would be available. ' City Attorney Nave felt that the cornerstone should 'be to establish a legal basis on. whether this project can 'proceed. - , Cm. Snyder also felt the School District should determine what is most important on their list of 8 items . Ms. 'King indicated that they did not try to prioritize their list, but rather just looked at all the needs: Mayor Jeffery felt the Council could consider the composition of the task ' force at the next regular meeting of the 'City. Council on February 9,1987 . . On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by .Cm. .Vonheeder, - and by unanimous vote; the Council directed that Staff and the Park & Recreation Commission work together and *look into the concept of a possible feasibility -study. - * * * * . , ' OTHER BUSINESS Goals & Objectives Study Session . ' City Manager Ambrose reminded the Council of the Adjourned Regular Meeting scheduled for February 12th in which ,the. Council. will review the City' s goals and objectives . The format has been changed slightly and Mr. -Ambrose explained the changes to the Council. , ' . . * * *' * - Candidate Statements • . . City Manager Ambrose. reminded the. Council that semi-annual campaign - . • statements are due in the City Clerk' s. office no later than Friday, January 30, 1987 at 5: 00 p.m. . . • * * *• * • Citizen of the Year. . Staff has been advised that due to the potential of violating the Brown Act, . it will be impossible for the selection committee to meet the following morning to select the citizen of the year. An alternate, solution was offered` that the decision could be made at the special meeting on January. 28th.. Cm. • . Vonheeder' did not feel it appropriate to discuss the issue .in an 'open meeting. Cm. Snyder felt the item should be tabled in- order to deal with it • more appropriately. It ' s a very important award, which should be taken very' • seriously. . CM-5-31 , Regular Meeting - . . .. . ' .. January 26,'1987 6 Resolution No. 145-86 which establishes the rules for the conduct of City Council meetings, states : Page 4, 9 .a. No action shall be taken on any item not appearing on the agenda for a regular meeting as posted, unless (2) the City Council determines by vote of four out of five members that the need to take action arose after the agenda was posted. In order to avoid a Brown Act violation, on motion of Cm. Snyder, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous vote', the Council agreed to discuss the composition of the selection committee and the policy under which they would work. Consensus of the Council was that nominations could be accepted from the committee. Discussion was held regarding whether a nominee could be a repeat winner. Cm. Moffatt felt the same person should not receive the award two consecutive years. Another suggestion was made that the same person could only win once during a 5 year period. Also, someone suggested and the Council agreed, that there could conceivably be years when no one would win. Consensus of the Council was that the same person could not be selected to receive the Citizen of the Year award in 2 consecutive years . By consensus of the Council, the selection committee shall consist of a representative from the City Manager ' s Office, a representative from the City Council and a representative from the Chamber of Commerce. * * * * 1996 Summer Olympics Cm. Snyder reported that he had received a copy of a resolution passed by the County of Santa Clara Board of Supervisors regarding supporting the City and County of San Francisco hosting the 1996 Summer Olympics . Also, due to a federal mandate, the word Olympics cannot legally be used and must be changed to Games . Staff was directed to prepare a resolution for presentation at the next regular City Council meeting supporting the 1996 Summer Olympics being held in San Francisco. * * * * Wetlands Act Cm. Snyder indicated that there are 3 diferent definitions being used with regard to the Wetlands Act. The definition used by the U. S . Department of Fish & Wildlife Services does not really fit the situation in the Bay Area. Staff was directed to prepare a resolution for presentation and consideration at the February 9, 1987 Council meeting, using the definition used by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. * * * * CM-5-32 Regular Meeting January 26, 1987 DSRSD Study Cm. Moffatt questioned when the next scheduled discussion regarding the DSRSD situation was to be . Staff advised that this issue will be placed on the agenda for discussion at the next regular meeting on February 9, 1987. * * * * Stationery Notes with City Seal • Cm. Vonheeder requested that the City check into the possibility of ordering a quantity of small note paper with the City seal displayed as was used for the invitations to the volunteer recognition reception. She felt these would be very useful and could be used in lieu of letterhead in most cases by the Council. * * * * ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 10 : 24 p.m. • * * * * • Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk * * * * CM-5-33 Regular Meeting January 26, 1987 r f�^ • ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING - January 28, 1987 An adjourned regular meeting •of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Wednesday, January 28, 1987 in the east room of the •Shannon Community Center. The meeting was called to order at 7 :10 p.m. by Mayor Linda Jeffery. • • * * * * ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Hegarty, Moffatt, Snyder, Vonheeder and Mayor Jeffery. * * * * • PROPOSED CIVIC CENTER SCHEMATIC DESIGN • Paul Rankin, Assistant to the City Manager gave an overview of the Civic Center project and explained that at a special meeting on November 18, 1986, the City Council reviewed and approved' a program for the Dublin Civic Center. The approved program provides sufficient space to accommodate the City • through the year 2005. The total building size required to meet these projections is 45, 377 square feet. This provides space for a police facility, administrative offices, City Council Chambers, 'and a regional meeting room. Of this total 18, 710 square feet is devoted to the police facility. The 26, 667 square feet within the City Hall 'facility provides sufficient building flexibility to accommodate the provision of engineering and public works with City employees as opposed to contract employees . Also, space is provided to allow for the assumption of the management of sewer and water functions . • • Based on a review of the program needs, the design team developed a scheme which will accomplish the various functions which are requirements of a civic center. If the City Council approves the CCAC recommended schematic design, the architect has indicated a willingness to immediately begin the Design Development phase . 'Staff prepared an amendment to the existing agreement with the project architect, which will allow initial design work to proceed. A comprehensive agreement covering the remainder of the project will be presented at the regular City Council meeting on February 9, 1987 . Mr . Rankin explained the interim agreement which would cover work between now and February 9, . 1987 . • A model of the proposed Civic Center project was displayed. Mary Comerio gave a brief presentation. David Gates presented landscaping ideas and concepts which were incorporated into the design . +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ CM-5-34 Adjourned Regular Meeting January 28, 1987 • • • George Miers gave a brief presentation, displayed and discussed potential exterior and window materials and answered questions : Mayor Jeffery expressed concern that certain outside materials have a tendency to fade . . The use of cooper was discussed and George Miers indicated he liked to use copper as it gets better as it ages . The key to evaluate costs is how you • accomplish a particular look. Structural costs are generally the highest costs . Cm. Moffatt questioned the loss or gain of heat in the center of the building with all the glass being proposed. Cm. Moffatt also expressed seizmic and structural concerns . Cm. Hegarty questioned the possibility of adding another '2, 000 square feet for a possible television studio for use by Community Television Corporation. • Mr . Rankin indicated that it will be necessary to come back before the Council in the future for direction in several areas, for instance, do we build out the space, as the current program includes about 1, 700 square feet for water and sewer services . George Miers felt that it would make a lot more sense from a financial standpoint to add the space in the beginning. Mayor Jeffery felt it would be wise to talk with Community Television Corporation to understand exactly how serious they are with regard to a facility. City Manager Ambrose indicated that Staff will make a formal proposal to the Community Television Corporation. Lt. Severini suggested that some kind of a simple alarm system is needed from the administrative area to the police department . By a consensus, the Council indicated agreement with regard to the design of the building. Cm. Snyder questioned slippage in the time schedule. George Miers indicated the project design was about 6 weeks behind. In addition, one month has been added to the construction time because of the increase in size of the building. Brian Danley. with- Harris & Associates has been working very closely with George Miers & Associates in developing a time schedule. On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote, the Council approved the interim agreement for architectural services, with the total fee not to exceed $22, 400 . This provides for $11 , 700 in design services by -George Miers & Associates and $10, 700 of work provided by other members of the design team. Reimburseables shall not exceed $750 . The • Council authorized the Mayor to execute the Addendum _to the Agreement . +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ CM-5-35 Adjourned Regular Meeting January 28, 1987 • • T ' • • C'ity .Manager Ambrose reported to the Council that Tom Treto has requested an extension with regard to the land purchase of the Valley High School site . The School District is apparently getting a lot of -pressure from teachers and students . After discussing the issue with the City Attorney, *Staff was of the opinion that we should not reopen the agreement and advised the School District that the City wants the purchase to close escrow on July 15, . 1987, as scheduled. * * * * • ADJOURNMENT • • There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was • adjourned at 8: 55 p .m. • * * * * • • • Mayor • ATTEST: City Clerk * * * * • • • • • ++++++++++++++++++++++±++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ CM-5-36 Adjourned Regular Meeting January 28, 1987