Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.1 Approve 02-08-1988 Minutes Il REGULAR MEETING - February 8, 1988 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Monday, February 8, 1988, in the meeting room of the Dublin Library. The meeting was called to order at 7 : 32 p.m. , by Mayor Linda Jeffery. * * * * ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Hegarty, Moffatt, Snyder, Vonheeder and Mayor Jeffery . * * * * PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE • The Mayor led the Council , Staff and those present in the pledge of alle- giance to the flag. * * * * CONSENT CALENDAR On motion of Cm. Snyder, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote, the Council took the following actions : Approved Minutes of Regular Meeting of January 25, 1988; Approved the City Treasurer ' s Investment Report for Period Ending January 31, 1988; Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 17 - 88 SETTING FORTH THE INVESTMENT POLICY FOR THE CITY OF DUBLIN FOR 1988 Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 18 - 88 ESTABLISHING A POLICY RELATED TO CONTRACT CHANGE ORDERS FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 19 - 88 AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A QUITCLAIM DEED AND ABANDONMENT OF STORM DRAIN EASEMENT PARCEL MAP 518 Approved a Change Order for resurfacing two tennis courts at Kolb Park at an additional cost of $17, 666 ; *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+ CM-7-30 Regular Meeting February 8, 1988 TT'1wI wTn / I "� With regard to the 1988 Summer Aquatics Program: 1 ) authorized an additional appropriation in the amount of $10, 000 to be offset by aquatic fees; 2) authorized a Budget Transfer from the Contingent Reserve in the amount of $4, 500; 3 ) authorized recruitment of part-time aquatic personnel; Authorized- out of state travel for the City Manager, Assistant to the City Manager and the City Attorney, February 17-19, 1988 related to refinancing the 1985 Certificates of Participation; Awarded bid for Trustee Bank for refinancing of Certificates of Participation to Bank of California and authorized Staff to sign agreement; and approved Warrant Register in the amount of $1, 068, 250 . 66. Cm. Moffatt requested that the item related to the informational report on the Tri-Valley Wastewater Authority be removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Cm. Moffatt indicated that he had received a flyer "The Sewers Are Coming" , from the Tri-Valley Conservation Committee. Some of the information contained is questionable, related to the building of the pipeline out of the Valley. They state that there will be about one million people in the valley in the next 20 years . He felt this was a high estimate. People do have a right to vote on this, but at this time, TWA has not made any decisions on what they will be doing. They are talking about enlarging the capacity. People should understand that the Dublin San Ramon Services District Board of Directors is the agency that makes decisions related to this issue. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Snyder, and by unanimous vote, the Council received the informational report related to the Tri-Valley Waste- water Authority (TWA) . * * * * PUBLIC HEARING - THE GOOD GUYS/ENEA PROPERTIES COMPANY SIGN LOCATION VARIANCE - APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL PA 87-161 Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. On January 25, 1988, the City Council held a public hearing on PA 87-161, the Good Guys Sign Location Variance application. The Good Guys requested a variance to allow a wall sign on the west elevation of Building B in the Enea Plaza Shopping Center, Amador Plaza Road at Dublin Boulevard. The application had previously been denied by the Zoning Administrator and the Planning Commission. The Council continued the item with direction to consider a resolution approving the application. Staff prepared and presented a resolution which included positive findings of fact and conditions of approval . Cm. Hegarty commented that he noticed under the findings, only a couple of words were changed. He did not feel that findings A and B really prove a point. Cm. Hegarty felt that in the future, the Sign Ordinance should be brought back to the Council to relook at it so that Staff and the Planning Commission will have a clearer understanding of the Council ' s direction. *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+ CM-7-31 Regular Meeting February 8, 1988 Mayor Jeffery questioned if Cm. Hegarty would like the special conditions defined. Cm. Hegarty felt this would be appropriate . Gregg Steele, representing The Good Guys, indicated that he felt the Resolution was well written and they agree to the conditions . Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. Cm. Snyder indicated he understood what Cm. Hegarty was saying and thought perhaps it was a semantical problem. We are not looking at giving any special favors to anyone in town. It says that this is a different type of property and as such, needs to be given a special look. He did not feel it would be necessary to look at the Sign Ordinance again. Others in the community can request that the City Council consider a variance request in any particular case. On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by majority vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 20 - 88 APPROVING PA 87-161 THE GOOD GUYS (APPLICANTS) & ENEA PROPERTIES COMPANY (OWNERS) - SIGN LOCATION VARIANCE REQUEST, SOUTHWEST CORNER OF DUBLIN BOULEVARD AND AMADOR PLAZA ROAD Cm. Hegarty voted against this motion. * * * * PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 10-82 REGULATING SALE & USE OF FIREWORKS Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. Staff advised that at the January 25, 1988 Council meeting, the Council waived the reading and introduced an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 10-82 . This amendment to Ordinance No. 10-82 provides that a fireworks booth permit issued during calendar year 1988 shall include a condition on the permit that indicates that the permit would not be valid in the event that the City Council repeals Ordinance No. 10-82 and No. 12-82 prior to June 28, 1988, and further, that the permittee shall bear the risk of loss of any costs incurred in connection with obtaining the permit. Cm. Hegarty suggested that the groups applying for permits be given a typewritten explanation. City Attorney Nave indicated that the Fire Chief could include this information with the permits . Glenn Forbes, an attorney representing the fireworks industry, stated that by taking this action, the Council is precluding the sale of fireworks for this year . The necessary time that it takes the groups to obtain insurance and to *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+ CM-7-32 Regular Meeting February 8, 1988 locate a space for their booths , the Council is putting the full loss on the charitable organizations . The costs are such that they will not be able to undertake the expenditure of the funds . There was time enough that an election could have been held earlier. Since the Council decided to consolidate this election and put it on the June ballot (he assumed because of costs ) , it will be very difficult for the groups to deal with because of the timing. Mr. Forbes felt that if the voters ban fireworks, it should not be effective this year. Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. Cm. Moffatt felt that anyone in business has to take risks and he cited the example of all the 49er items that were purchased in anticipation of their going to the Super Bowl . These types of decisions are part of being in business and part of making money. Cm. Vonheeder advised that we are not talking about people in business, but rather charitable organizations . She indicated she is very dissatisfied that a possible ban would go into effect this year. On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Snyder, and by majority vote, the Council waived the reading and adopted ORDINANCE NO. 2 - 88 AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 10-82 REGULATING THE SALE AND USE OF FIREWORKS Cm. Vonheeder voted against this motion. * * * * PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE ADOPTING ALAMEDA COUNTY CODE TITLE 3, CHAPTER 6, ARTICLE 14, BY REFERENCE (CONSTRUCTION, REPAIR, RECONSTRUCTION, DESTRUCTION, OR ABANDONMENT OF WELLS Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. Staff advised that this ordinance, which was introduced at the City Council meeting of January 25, 1988, would incorporate the provisions of Article 14 of Chapter 6 of Title 3 of the Alameda County Code, per Section 3-160 . 2 of the County Code. This particular portion of the Alameda County Code was not adopted by reference when the City incorporated. The County will continue to be the enforcing agency. 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 unanimous vote, the Council waived the reading and adopted *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+ CM-7-33 Regular Meeting February 8, 1988 ORDINANCE NO. 3 - 88 ADOPTING ALAMEDA COUNTY CODE TITLE 3, CHAPTER 6, ARTICLE 14, BY REFERENCE (WELLS) * * * * PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE INCREASING CITY COUNCIL SALARIES Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. Staff advised that in accordance with Council discussion in January, 1987, the City Attorney has prepared an Ordinance for Council consideration, which would increase Councilmembers salaries by 5% for calendar year 1988. However, incumbent Councilmembers would not be eligible to receive the increase until after the November, 1988 election. The Ordinance was introduced at the City Council meeting of January 25, 1988. This Ordinance was prepared in accordance with Section 36516 (a) of the California Government Code, which establishes a salary of $300 per month for City Councilmembers . Section 36516 (b) allows for an increase in Councilmember' s salaries not to exceed 5% for each calendar year. If the Ordinance is adopted, City Council salaries would be $347 . 29 per month after the November, 1988 election. No comments were made by members of the public. 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 adopted ORDINANCE NO. 4 - 88 AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6 AND PROVIDING FOR AN INCREASE OF THE SALARY FOR MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL * * * * PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE RELATING TO OVERSIZE TRUCK OPERATIONS . Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. Staff advised that in the 1982 Surface Transportation Assistance Act, the Federal Government pre-empted State and local governments from regulating the size of certain commercial vehicles operating on a network of interstate and certain other highways . However, the State and local governments do have the responsibility for providing reasonable off-network access to facilities and services and to terminal locations . . *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+ CM-7-34 Regular Meeting February 8, 1988 The maximum permissible semi-trailer length for trucks operating on the Designated System of Routes is 53 ' . In combination with the tractor itself, the overall vehicle length may be as much as 75 ' . The physical dimensions of many local streets will not accommodate a vehicle of this size because of the location of curbs, traffic signals, medians and other islands, street lights, signs, etc. A local jurisdiction is permitted to establish a procedure for allowing these "super" trucks to use its streets . This ordinance, which is modeled after the ordinance adopted by Alameda County, establishes procedures for terminal designation and truck route designation to terminals for interstate trucks operating on a federally designated highway system. Under this procedure, the Public Works Director/City Engineer would conduct a review of proposed routing at the expense of the applicant and determine whether or not the route was capable of accommodating the large vehicles . If no proposed route can safely do so, the applicant may request retrofitting of the route, to be performed at the applicant ' s expense. If an application is denied by the Director of Public Works, the applicant has the right of appeal to the City Council . Staff advised that the City has not, at this time, received any requests for terminal access . Mayor Jeffery questioned if there was a requirement that we have the oversized trucks in Dublin. City Engineer Thompson indicated that they may want to come into the American City Truck Stop . No comments were made by members of the public . Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. The Council questioned if Dougherty Road could, in its ultimate configuration, handle this type of a situation. Mr. Thompson indicated that this is something that Staff would need to look into. On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote, the Council waived the reading and introduced an ordinance establishing procedures for oversized truck operations . * * * * PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE RELATING TO PROPERTY MAINTENANCE Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. Staff explained that this proposed ordinance would make it unlawful to maintain dirt, litter, debris, clotheslines, trash containers, junk, broken or discarded furniture, overgrown vegetation, dead, decayed or diseased trees, weeds, graffiti, boats, trailers, or vehicles, camper sheels and similar unsightly materials visible from a public street in residential property. It would also be unlawful to maintain abandoned boarded-up, *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+ CM-7-35 Regular Meeting February 8, 1988 • partially destroyed, partially constructed buildings and buildings where the exterior paint is mostly worn off. The ordinance declares the conditions to be a public nuisance and prescribes procedures for abatement. The procedures would require seven days notice and a hearing before the City Manager. Any order to abate may be appealed to the City Council. If an order to abate is not complied with, the City can do the work and make the cost a lien on the property. As an alternate, a violation is an infraction and is subject to the citation procedure. Mr. Taugher indicated that the draft ordinance was sent to a number of agencies, including 4 homeowner associations in the City. Cm. Snyder indicated that with regard to clotheslines, his back yard is visible and contains a clotheslines . Mr. Taugher reported that this ordinance applies to conditions visible in a front or side yard only. Cm. Moffatt questioned if someone were involved in a hardship situation because of sickness, poor health, etc . , and their property cannot be improved, are there any provisions for mercy from this type of an ordinance. Mr. Taugher indicated that facts of this sort would probably come out in a hearing and would be taken into consideration in the order of abatement. City Manager Ambrose advised that code enforcement personnel would go out and look at a situation and then a hearing is held, at which time we would talk with the people to ascertain the people' s ability to remedy the situation. Perhaps they could take advantage of the minor home repair program. In any event, Staff would attempt to work out any situation with the individual. It would only come before the Council if no agreement could be reached. Cm. Vonheeder felt there was too much subjectivity and indicated she did not like the phrase "detrimental to neighboring properties or property values" . She questioned if Staff ' s intention was to enforce on a complaint basis . Staff responded yes . Cm. Vonheeder indicated she has a problem with ordinances of this type as they tend to force other peoples values on you. Mayor Jeffery indicated that the ordinance was modeled after the San Leandro ordinance. Susan Hurl, representing the Southern Alameda County Board of Realtors, indicated that her organization supported San Leandro' s ordinance and had the same concerns as with Dublin ' s ; namely, 1) How far can building inspectors go when inspecting a property that is in violation? ; 2) The question of liability; and 3 ) Clarification of some of the terms, i .e. , what is "junk"? City Attorney Nave indicated that the phrase "detrimental to neighboring properties or property values" , could be deleted from the ordinance. *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+ CM-7-36 Regular Meeting February 8, 1988 Ray Grimes, 7213 Dover Court, indicated that he lives in a leased house and is looking to buy a house in Dublin. On Sunday afternoon, he looked at a house on Ironwood Drive and was appalled to see that from the beginning to the end of this street, it is a good example of why Dublin needs this type of an ordinance. One house has a backhoe on the front lawn. Another house has broken up concrete pieces piled up . Another house has an abandoned Volvo parked with weeds all around it. Two trailers were parked in the street and Mr. Grimes felt they need to be ticketed because, the street sweeper obviously cannot do a proper job. He felt this ordinance was a good start and the City should be hardnosed about it and it should be strongly enforced. Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. Cm. Vonheeder questioned Susan Hurl ' s comments regarding latitude of building inspectors . Cm. Vonheeder asked if an inspector could cite other things if he goes out and observes a particular property. Staff responded yes , that an inspector can already do this under existing ordinances . City Manager Ambrose indicated that by deleting the wording related to causing detriment to neighboring properties or property values, the Council would be taking away the ability to do anything about the situation. Mr. Ambrose suggested adding the wording which relates to nuisances which are dangerous to the public health, safety and welfare. The Council requested that under Section 2 .1, (g) should be changed to read "Overgrown vegetation likely to harbor rats, vermin and other nuisances dangerous to the public health, safety and welfare or obstructing necessary view of drivers on public streets or private driveways and visible from a public street; " Section 2 .1, (h) should be changed to read "Dead, decayed, diseased or hazardous trees, weeds or other vegetation constituting unsightly appearance, dangerous to public safety and welfare or visible from a public street; " . Mayor Jeffery questioned why commercial buildings were left out. Mr. Taugher indicated that the ordinance was developed specifically for residential properties . He felt the Zoning Ordinance could be applied to most non-residential properties . Planning Director Tong indicated that the Zoning Ordinance would cover developed commercial property, but not undeveloped. The Council requested that Section 1 . 6 be changed to read "PROPERTY. "Property" shall mean all unimproved non-residentially zoned real property and all residential real property, including, but limited to, front yards, side yards, back yards, driveways, walkways and sidewalks and shall include any building located on such property. " On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote, the Council waived the reading and INTRODUCED an ordinance related to property maintenance. * * * * *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+ CM-7-37 Regular Meeting February 8, 1988 VALLEY COMMUNITY SWIM CENTER - REQUEST FROM DUBLIN HIGH SCHOOL Recreation Director Lowart advised the Council that Staff has received a request from the Principal of Dublin High School to utilize the Valley Community Swim Center for their swim team, commencing February 8, 1988. The City assumed the aquatic programming responsibility from DSRSD effective January 1, 1988. The District, however, is responsible for maintaining the pool until June 30, 1988. As part of the agreement with DSRSD, the pool will not be heated until June 1, 1988. If the City is interested in opening the pool sooner than June 1, Staff will need to secure permission from DSRSD, as well as pay all associated costs . Staff gave an update with regard to the situation of the swim team utilizing the pool at California High School in San Ramon in the past. There is a $500 per lane charge and Dublin could utilize 3 or 4 lanes at 5: 30 p.m. Because the pool has not traditionally been open during the Winter and Spring months, Staff advised that it is difficult to determine the cost to operate the pool from February through May. The DSRSD Park Maintenance Superintendent has indicated that if the pool were to be opened prior to June 1, 1988, there would not be any additional maintenance costs to the City as he has Staff in place who maintain the San Ramon Olympic Pool . DSRSD has notified Staff that before the pool can be opened, the pool deck needs to be either replaced or resealed. Deck replacement preliminary costs are estimated at $60, 000-$65, 000 . The estimate for resealing the deck is $4, 800 . Staff recommended that the deck be resealed for the 1988 swim season and then include the deck replacement in the 1988-89 Capital Improvement Program. It is anticipated that the resealing will take approximately one week to complete. Staff felt that the earliest date that the pool could be available for use by the swim team would be February 29th. Staff calculated the costs to operate the pool and a report was given to the Council. Total costs were estimated to be $27, 000-$35, 800 . The School District does not provide the high schools with funds to operate pools, but instead leaves it up to the individual schools to secure practice space for swim teams and provide the necessary funds to pay for the space. The School District does, however, provide liability insurance coverage. Staff did not feel that the City will be in a position to offer any programming for the public until late May, and therefore, the High School would be the sole user of the pool from February 29th to May 27th. Recreation Director Lowart indicated that the Dublin High Grounds Improvement Committee is looking at whether the City should spend any City money on school facilities . Cm. Moffatt asked if Ms . King had indicated any willingness to trade any uses and/or other facilities with the City. Ms . Lowart indicated that Ms . King has always indicated a willingness, but the City has not been able to utilize very much. *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+ CM-7-38 Regular Meeting February 8, 1988 Kent Jensen, Matthew Berkland, Dane Hodson, Laura Patterson and other students from Dublin High School who were also members of the swim team, addressed the Council and requested that the Council consider opening the pool as soon as possible. The swim team has grown considerably, and unfortunately, this growth has left the swim team without water in which to practice. It was reported that 85% of drowning victims do not know how to swim and the students felt that no one in the community should be deprived from learning this vital skill . Mayor Jeffery thanked the students for their very thorough presentation. Mr. Charles Young introduced himself as an English teacher at Dublin High and stated he will also be the swimming coach. Travel to California High is very difficult, and not many swimmers will hang with it. By using the pool in Dublin, a good program can be developed. Cm. Hegarty expressed concern in that this is a special interest group . The group wants to open the pool as soon as possible and questioned since they need the pool by 3 p .m. , could they get by using only 1/2 of the pool . He indicated he would feel more comfortable in serving the entire community. Mr . Jensen indicated that the swim team needs only about 4 lanes and the pool will accommodate 10 lanes . They would be willing to pay some money each month to help offset some of the costs . They currently pay .$35 per month as members of the Pleasanton Seahawks . Cm. Vonheeder questioned the possibility of an athletic fee. Mr . Jensen advised that they pay a $25 transportation fee . He transports students in the back of his pickup truck. Cm. Moffatt indicated he had questions regarding logistics . He asked who will supervise the pool until City Staff comes on board in late March. Mr. Jensen indicated that there has been no discussion regarding this . Mayor Jeffery felt that it would be appropriate for Recreation Director Lowart to discuss this with Joan King, Principal of Dublin High. In looking toward the future, the City needs to look at how this pool is funded. Cm. Snyder felt we also need to look at ownership of the pool . The property is actually school district property and the pool was constructed by the old Valley Community Services District. We need to look at what the existing arrangements are . City Manager Ambrose indicated that as part of the transfer of responsibility, the 2 agencies would have to sign these over to the City. Cm. Vonheeder felt that this is something the City definitely needs to look into . The lease is contingent on certain things happening. She indicated she was very involved in getting the pool reopened back in 1979/80 and she feels it is high time it is opened for use by the school . The kids should not be deprived from using the pool another year. *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+ CM-7-39 Regular Meeting February 8, 1988 Mayor Jeffery felt that the Council might be pre-empting some of the decisions being made by the Dublin High Grounds Task Force . Cm. Hegarty felt that the City is subsidizing the Library even though the City does not hold title to the building, and by doing so, the quality of life is increased for the community. Opening the pool would have its rewards . Costs were discussed, and it was felt that the best time for consideration would be at budget time, however, they are anxious to start their program now. A suggestion was made to direct Staff to make it work somehow and to find the money somewhere. Mr. Jensen indicated that the 8 ' x 4 ' strips now being used are not really effective as they let a lot of the heat escape. A new cover could be purchased which would allow better heating and also cut back on the heating costs . Cm. Snyder questioned when the school would be ready to utilize the pool for physical education programs . -Sr. Jensen thought it could be immediately. Cm. Snyder felt that if the operation could be split over the entire school, it would be a better way of splitting the costs . Ms . Lowart indicated that the City is concerned that whatever program the School District offers, they must have qualified staff on deck and that access to the pool would be closely monitored. City Manager Ambrose felt that the young people were to be commended for their willingness to participate in the cost sharing. On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Snyder, and by unanimous vote, the Council expressed a willingness to consider this request of opening the pool early if all the arrangements can be worked out. Staff was directed to contact the Amador High School District and DSRSD to work out all the details . The Council also directed Staff to request that DSRSD reseal the deck at a cost of $4, 800 . * * * * RECESS A short recess was called. All Councilmembers were present when the meeting was reconvened. * * * * TRAFFIC SIGNAL INTERCONNECT - INFORMTIONAL REPORT Chris Kinzel, TJRM, advised the Council that the City ' s Traffic Signal Interconnect is now operational at all intersections on Dublin Boulevard except San Ramon Road and Dougherty Road. The purpose of the system is to *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+ CM-7-40 Regular Meeting February 8, 1988 • improve traffic flow along the more heavily traveled Dublin Boulevard, the end result being greater fuel eficiency. On the coordinated system, the same cycle length is required for all intersections so that their timing with each other is maintained. John Gildae, Senior Engineer displayed slides explaining the interconnect system. The timing of the signals have to be continually finetuned. The Council thanked TJT{M for their very informative report. * * * * REVIEW OF NEGATIVE DECLARATION REPORT FOR PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO I-580/I-680 EAST & SOUTH OF THE INTERCHANGE Staff advised that Caltrans recently released a report for the Environmental Assessment and initial Study for the addition of and improvements to the interchanges at I-680 and Stoneridge Drive, I-580 and Santa Rita Road, together with auxiliary freeway lanes on I-580 between Santa Rita Road and Hopyard Road and on I-680 between Stoneridge Drive and the I-580/I-680 interchange . A public hearing was held on February 4th, and written comments are being accepted until February 26, 1988. Staff felt that it is in Dublin ' s best interest that these projects are constructed for the future of the Dublin extended planning area, but certain clarifications should be made to the report. The Federal Highway Administration is requiring that an arterial road parallel to I-580 be under construction before the NPID can proceed with the construction of the Hacienda interchange. NPID and Caltrans have assumed that the development of a plan line for extending Dublin Boulevard to Tassajara Road cannot be accomplished to accommodate the time frame associated with the construction of the Hacienda interchange (early 1990 ) . Based on this assumption, they are proposing to develop the existing frontage road along I-580 which would connect with Scarlett Court. Staff feels that to build this temporary frontage road would be a waste of money if the Dublin Boulevard extension can be constructed in the same time frame as the two interchanges . It is anticipated that the Dublin Boulevard extension road alignment between Dougherty Road the SP right-of-way will be scheduled for a Planning Commission hearing in early March. Staff advised that it has been having discussions with the Army and with Alameda County Staff regarding alignment and acquisition of the right-of-way for Dublin Boulevard. Staff prepared a listing of comments to submit. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote, the Council directed Staff to forward written comments on the EIR to Caltrans . * * * * *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+ CM-7-41 Regular Meeting February 8, 1988 ALAMEDA COUNTY WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY The City has received a letter from the Alameda County Solid Waste Management Authority indicating that the Authority' s existence will be terminated on January 27, 1988 and that the new Alameda County Waste Management Authority will come into being on the same date . The legal counsel for the Authority has indicated that this change will necessitate that each member agency of the Alameda County Waste Management Authority designate by Resolution, a member and alternate to represent each member agency on the new Authority effective as of January 27, 1988. The City' s current representatives on the Authority are Pete Snyder, Member and Paul Moffatt, Alternate . On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 21 - 88 APPOINTING A MEMBER AND ALTERNATE TO THE ALAMEDA COUNTY WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY (Snyder & Moffatt) * * * * PROPERTY EXCHANGE W/DUBLIN INFORMATION, INC. Staff explained that the City of Dublin currently holds title to a parcel of land at the location of the Civic Center project. This property was the former site of Valley High School and it is situated in the middle of the current Civic Center construction project. The location of the parcel creates a situation where portions of the Civic Center project will be constructed on City owned property, with a larger portion being owned by Dublin Information, Inc. Since the Civic Center project is funded through Certificates of Participation (COP' s ) , certain restrictions apply to the use of improvements funded with COP ' s . The parcel owned by the City was purchased with General Funds and has no restrictions . Staff prepared a property description which would exchange identical size parcels between the City of Dublin and Dublin Information, Inc . The end result is that the City owned parcel would be placed at the rear of the current Civic Center projects . No improvements are currently planned for this area, however, a possible future use could be accommodated. The plat accompanying the legal description amending the lease agreement identifies the final configuration if the exchange is approved. This exchange does not change the total amount of property subject to the adopted lease agreement . Staff advised that it is continuing to work with Rauscher Pierce Refenses as Underwriters and Bond Counsel to develop a revised Financing Package for the Civic Center project . The consultants have recommended that this exchange *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+ CM-7-42 Regular Meeting February 8, 1988 would improve the proposed financing by having the entire project under a single ownership . They have included language in the draft documents to accommodate a future exchange if the current location is not completely desirable . City Manager Ambrose advised that there is an advantage to the City in that under the new financing, we will be subject to the 1986 tax laws, and by moving this property to the rear, it enhances the future flexibility. There will then be no private use restrictions on it. On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 22 - 88 APPROVING A LAND EXCHANGE WITH DUBLIN INFORMATION, INC. and RESOLUTION NO. 23 - 88 AUTHORIZING THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE LEASE AGREEMENT RELATING TO PUBLIC FACILITIES PROJECT NO. 1 BY AND BETWEEN DUBLIN INFORMATION, INC. , AND THE CITY OF DUBLIN DATED DECEMBER 18, 1985 * * * * DUBLIN BOULEVARD EXTENSION, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT STUDY AUTHORIZATION Staff advised that after recent discussions with Staff of both Alameda County and the City of Pleasanton, and with property owners in the Eastern Extended f Planning Area, a potential alignment of the Dublin Boulevard has been identified that is different than that shown in the Dublin General Plan. The new alignment would be further to the north at approximately 2, 750 feet north and parallel to I-580 . This realignment may provide for a better land use pattern and better roadway network in the area. Also, moving the alignment away from the I-580 interchanges would provide more stacking space and more room for lane changes . The realignment may also meet the federal requirement for either a frontage road or an arterial parallel to I-580 north of the proposed Hacienda Drive interchange . If the Dublin Boulevard extension can be built at the same time as the proposed Hacienda Drive interchange, Dublin Boulevard could serve as the frontage road instead of one that extends from Scarlett Court to Tassajara Road. For the portion of the Dublin Boulevard extension between the Southern Pacific Right-of-Way and Dougherty Road, the existing Dublin General Plan policies are adequate and Staff is working on a plan line to implement the General Plan policies . The alignment of the rest of the Dublin Boulevard extension east of Tassajara Road will be considered in the East Dublin General Plan Amendment Study. Cm. Moffatt questioned if there are any federal regulations regarding how far a frontage road must be from the freeway. *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+- CM-7-43 Regular Meeting February 8, 1988 City Manager Ambrose advised that the people in Pleasanton did not feel that Dublin could move along fast enough on the Dublin Boulevard extension to use this alternative . Dublin Boulevard, however, is viewed as being preferable to the frontage road. City Engineer Thompson stated that if Dublin Boulevard doesn ' t get built, they still want to be able to build these interchanges . Cm. Hegarty questioned costs . Mr. Ambrose indicated that we had approached them with the question "if you are going to build frontage roads , why not help us with building Dublin Boulevard instead?" Their staff was not agreeable and had philosophical problems with this . The funding issue, therefore, is one that still looms before us . Cm. Hegarty questioned how many amendments we were allowed to make. Staff advised that we can make 4 adoptions per year. On motion of Cm. Snyder, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous vote, the Council authorized the General Plan Amendment Study. * * * * OTHER BUSINESS Future of Camp Parks City Manager Ambrose advised that Congressman Stark would like to discuss what the Council feels would be the best use of the Camp Parks facility. He has met with Alameda County and with BART regarding the 147 acres in trying to come up with a plan . BART has been working with Hacienda to get another station located in this vicinity . There are problems with the way BART wants to go about getting their second station. They are not in the development business . Mr. Ambrose reported that he will be meeting with the County on February 11, and with BART on February 17 . The Council requested that Staff set up a meeting with Congressman Stark to discuss this . * * * * Shell Station, San Ramon Road @ Dublin Boulevard Cm. Snyder requested an update with regard to what is happening with the Shell Station improvements . City Engineer Thompson reported that the State sent a letter last summer stating that they would sell the property back to the City. They want to keep control . Permits were issued for the driveway cuts, but permit fees were never paid. As far as he knew, it was dead. Staff will prepare an update and try to have them commit one way or another. * * * * *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+ CM-7-44 Regular Meeting February 8, 1988 Sphere of Influence Lines LAFCO Meeting Mayor Jeffery advised that there will be a LAFCO meeting on February 18, 1988 at 4 : 00 p .m. Mr. Ambrose advised that he had met with Livermore after the last hearing and Livermore ' s Mayor suggested a compromise which would follow Doolan Road and then tie in with our existing sphere line. We have not yet gotten a final commitment from Livermore . I, CLOSED SESSION At 10 :10 p.m. , the Council recessed to a closed executive session to discuss potential litigation. * * * * ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 10 : 40 p .m. * * * * Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk * * * * *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+ CM-7-45 Regular Meeting February 8, 1988 REGULAR MEETING - February 22, 1988 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Monday, February 22, 1988, in the meeting room of the Dublin Library. The meeting was called to order at 7 : 30 p .m. , by Mayor Linda Jeffery. * * * * ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Hegarty, Moffatt, Snyder, Vonheeder and Mayor Jeffery . * * * •k PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Mayor led the Council, Staff and those present in the -ledge of alle- giance to the flag. * * * Crown Chevrolet - Sign Pat Costello, President of Crown Chevrolet, addressed the Council regarding Crown Chevrolet ' s Service Entrance sign which Staff has advised must come down. The sign has been up since 1968 and he recuested that the Council consider looking into the situation and allow the sign to stay . Planning Director Tong was directed to meet with dr . Costello to gather more particulars . Mr . Costello also expressed concern that he noted no condition in the approval of The Good Guys sign request that related to the possibility that Crown Chevrolet might want to build in the future . He was concerned that they might not be able to build at the location because of the variance held by The Good Guys for their sign. The Council assured Mr . Costello that this variance in no way prohibited him from putting an additional building on his property. * * * * CONSENT CALENDAR On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous vote, the Council took the following actions : Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 24 - 88 APPROVING RIGHT-OF-ENTRY AGREEMENT WITH DUBLIN HOUSING AUTHORITY FOR CONSTRUCTION OF SOUNDWALL and authorized the Mayor to execute the agreement; *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+* CM-7-46 Regular Meeting February 22, 1988 authorized Staff to issue an encroachment permit to The Valley Artists to display a banner ( May 2 - May 16) , advertising their spring show and craft sale, once insurance certificate has been received; Approved Warrant Register in the amount of $272, 151. 26; Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 25 - 88 FOR THE ACCEPTANCE OF IMPROVEMENTS TRACT 5402 (VISTA GREEN) and authorized Staff to accept a maintenance bond at a future date . * * * * REQUEST FOR FORMATION OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FOR ACQUISITION AND IMPROVEMENT OF THE EXTENSION OF DUBLIN BOULEVARD FROM DOUGHERTY ROAD EASTERLY TO THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC RIGHT-OF-WAY Staff advised that it has been working on various alignments for the extension of Dublin Boulevard between Dougherty Road and the Southern Pacific Right-of-Way and is scheduling the alignment for Planning Commission review in March of this year . Staff met with the parties controlling the Bridgepoint property (located just north of Crown isuzu on Dougherty Road) , and it was pointed cut that if the property were resubdivided so that the frontage of the deep lots were on the extension of Dublin Boulevard rather than on the cul-de-sac extension of Sierra Lane, the value of the property would be enhanced. John Moore has volunteered to dedicate and improve a strip of land equal to that required by the extension of and in lieu of the land dedicated as Sierra Lane. He has further indicated that he would work with the City to attempt to form as assessment district to complete the improvements from Dougherty Road to the Southern Pacific Right-of-Way and to include a road connection from the Dublin Boulevard Extension to Scarlett Court . Mr. Moore has requested that the City investigate the feasibility of forming an assessment district for circulation improvements in the Scarlett Court area. Jim McKeehan, one of the property owners, addressed the Council . Mr. McKeehan stated that they have a final map on the site except for the top portion of the property. They are trying to develop some kind of a traffic flow which makes sense . He did not know the willingness of the other people to participate in an assessment district, but they are willing to talk to the property owners . On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Snyder, and by unanimous vote, the Council directed Staff to develop estimated costs, a proposed preliminary assessment spread, and a petition for the formation of subject proposed assessment district and approved a budget transfer in the amount of $1, 500 from the Contingent Reserve for the above work. * * * * *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+* CM-7-47 Regular Meeting February 22, 1988 PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE RELATING TO OVERSIZE TRUCK OPERATIONS Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. This ordinance was introduced at the February 8th Council meeting, and Staff advised that in the 1932 Surface Transportation Assistance Act, the Federal Government pre-empted State and local governments from regulating the size of certain commercial vehicles operating on a network of interstate and certain other highways . However, the State and local governments do have the responsibility for providing reasonable off-network access to facilities and services and to terminal locations . The maximum permissible semi-trailer length for trucks operating on the Designated System of Routes is 53 ' . In combination with the tractor itself, the overall vehicle length may be as much as 75 ' . The physical dimensions of many local streets will not accommodate a vehicle of this size because of the location of curbs, traffic signals, medians and other islands, street lights , signs , etc . A local jurisdiction is permitted to establish a procedure for allowing these "super" trucks to use its streets . This ordinance, which is modeled after the ordinance adopted by Alameda County, establishes procedures for terminal designation and truck route designation to terminals for interstate trucks operating on a federally designated highway system. Under this procedure, the Public Works Director/City Engineer would conduct a review of proposed routing at the expense of the applicant and determine whether or not the route was capable of accommodating the large vehicles . If no proposed route can safely do so, the applicant may request retrofitting of the route, to be performed at the applicant ' s expense. If an application is denied by the Director of Public Works, the applicant has the right of appeal to the City Council . Staff advised that the City has not, at this time, received any requests for terminal access . No comments were made by members of the public . 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 adopted ORDINANCE NO. 5 - 88 ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR OVERSIZE TRUCK OPERATIONS * * * * *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+* CM-7-48 Regular Meeting February 22, 1988 PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE RELATING TO PROPERTY MAINTENANCE Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. Staff advised that this ordinance which was introduced at the February 8th meeting, would make it unlawful to maintain dirt, litter, debris, clotheslines, trash containers, junk, broken or discarded furniture, overgrown vegetation, dead, decayed or diseased trees, weeds, graffiti, boats, trailers, or vehicles, camper shells and similar unsightly materials visible from a public street in residential property. It would also be unlawful to maintain abandoned boarded-up, partially destroyed, partially constructed buildings and buildings where the exterior paint is mostly worn off. The ordinance declares the conditions to be a public nuisance and prescribes procedures for abatement. The procedures would require seven days notice and a hearing before the City Manager. Any order to abate may be appealed to the City Council. If an order to abate is not complied with, the City can do the work and make the cost a. lien on the property. As an alternate, a violation is an infraction and is subject to the citation procedure. At the February 8th meeting, the Council directed Staff to make certain changes to the proposed Ordinance: namely, Section 2.1, (g) was changed to read "Overgrown vegetation likely to harbor rats, vermin and other nuisances dangerous to the public health, safety and welfare or obstructing necessary view of drivers on public streets or private driveways and visible from a public street; " Section 2.1, (h) . was changed to read "Dead, decayed, diseased or hazardous trees, weeds or other vegetation constituting unsightly appearance, dangerous to public safety and welfare or visible from a public street; " and Section 1. 6 was changed to read "PROPERTY. "Property" shall mean all unimproved non-residentially zoned real property and all residential real property, including, but limited to, front yards, side yards, back yards, driveways, walkways and sidewalks and shall include any building located on such property. " Mayor Jeffery questioned if this ordinance also covers improved commercial property. Chief Building Official Taugher advised that it did not. Planning Director Tong advised that we typically at least have a Site Development Review which controls the type of improvements allowed on a commercial property. This SDR can be used as a mechanism to allow dealing with any problems. City Manager Ambrose questioned how the City would deal with a complaint regarding the condition of a property if a property owner doesn't come in for a SDR. How can we respond? Mr. Tong advised that all developed commercial properties have either a SDR through the City, or one that was done through the County prior to incorporation. *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+* CM-7-49 Regular Meeting February 22, 1988 � r . Taugher advised that outdoor storage is not permitted. Pat Costello, Crown Chevrolet, advised that when he was going for a permit, he was told they can ' t stack engines in the back of their prooerty. They remove engines and there is an interim time period when the engines are stacked neatly. Mr . Tong advised that Staff would look at a particular operation and allow reasonable uses, but when we get into a situation where items are stored for more than 1 day, then we do have the existing Zoning Ordinance to refer to. With regard to weeds on commercial property, Zev Kahn questioned the situation of the tall weeds near The Workbench Store. Mr. Tong advised that this would be considered an improved commercial site and we would look at the Zoning Ordinance for relief of this situation. Mr . Ambrose questioned if this situation can be abated. Mr. Tong responded not in terms of long grass and weeds . Mayor Jeffery questioned if we couldn ' t utilize the phrase "weeds and other unsightly vegetation" . Zev Kahn requested that the City Council consider adding commercial property that is developed to the ordinance . Mr. Kahn asked another question related to weeds that might harbor rats . He cuestioned how it would be determined whether the weeds harbor rats . . Mr . Ambrose advised that the City would have a representative from Vector Control take a look at the situation . Discussion was held regarding aesthetics, and how vegetation which would be considered unsightly by some may be acceptable to others . Mayor Jeffery cited an example of neighbors who planted corn in their front yard. Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. Because of the situations of reported tall grass, Cm. Snyder felt the Council should consider the issue of including commercial property in the ordinance. Mr . Ambrose advised that the ordinance could be changed to include residential and non-residential properties, but the ordinance would need to . be re-introduced rather than adopted at this meeting. Cm. Hegartv stated it was his understanding that this ordinance is not really a vehicle that would allow us to abate a situation of tall weeds . Mr . Ambrose stated that the key phrases are contained in Section 2 .1 (g) and (h) (nuisances dangerous to public health, safety and welfare ) . Cm. Snyder felt maybe the problem was a grammatical one. *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+* CM-7-50 Regular Meeting February 22, 1988 Acting City Attorney Steve Meyers reported that the fundamentals have to be related to public health, safety and welfare . Cm. Moffatt felt it was difficult to determine what is and isn 't considered a weed. Cm. Hegarty felt that everyone can determine what looks unsightly. Mr . Ambrose stated this is why we are looking at developing some standards to be used. On motion of Cm. Snyder, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote, with the changes discussed, the Council waived the reading and re-introduced and ordinance relating to property maintenance. The Council directed that the ordinance be brought before the Council at a future meeting for adoption. * * * •* PUBLIC HEARING - REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO SECTION 1205 (a) OF UNIFORM BUILDING CODE AT 8662 FENWIC_{ WAY Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. Chief Building Official Taugher advised the Council that this applicant proposes to construct an 18 ' x 10 ' 8" solarium at the rear of the dwelling at 8662 F env_Cs i , . The addition O. the solarium „_� l cause tt existing family room to become an inside room with no glazed openings to the outside. Section 1205 (a) requires each habitable room to have glazed openings which open directly to the outside. The purpose of this require ment is to provide natural light and ventilation to habitable rooms . The existing sliding glass door in the family room satisfied the above requirement, but by adding the solarium, the sliding glass door no longer opens to the outside. This section also provides that in lieu of natural ventilation, mechanical ventilation may be used. The mechanical ventilation must provide two air exchanges per hour with 20% of the air supply taken directly from the outside. The solarium could be constructed without a variance if the wall between the solarium and the family room were 50% open. This approach has a 'Catch 22 ' because then the solarium would become conditioned space and the solarium have to comply with the State Energy Conservation regulations . Since the solarium is practically all glass, it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to comply. The solarium also could be built without a variance if windows could be installed on either side of thefireplace. This also is not practical because these walls are shearwalls . if the family room has the required ventilation and the solarium is all glass , Mr. Taugher stated that it is his opinion that the intent and purposes of Section 1205 (a) of the building code, of providing light and ventilation to habitable rooms would be satisfied. Staff, therefore, recommended that Lhe variance be granted, subject to the condition that the existing heating *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+* CM-7-51 Regular Meeting February 22, 1988 and air conditioning equipment be modified so that 20% of the supply air is taken from the outside and a minimum of two air changes per hour be provided in the family room. Cm. Moffatt questioned if a skylight would serve this purpose . Chief Building Official Taugher responded yes, but a skylight cannot be out • in because there is a bedroom on the second floor above this room. Mr. Holt, the homeowner, questioned if they needed to make any changes in their central air conditioning, or if there were ways to avoid this . He indicated they had only used their air conditioning on 2 occasions last year. Mr . Taugher indicated that their existing system is capable of providing the required 20% air change . They would only have to run their system when they felt it necessary. Mr . Holt indicated that it was conceivable that they would never have to turn the mechanical system on . He did not feel any modifications should be required. The location of a required vent would be in the front of their house as there is no other place to put it because of the location of their furnace . Cm. Moffatt questioned if there would be space underneath the house. __r. Holt advised there is space under the house, but he did not believe you could get there . Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. Cm. Moffatt felt there would be a problem 5 years down the road when this solarium becomes a room and it won ' t be allowed. He felt it should be understood that this is a solarium and not a room from the standpoint of being part of the house . It will not contribute to the total square footage of the house . Cm. Snyder questioned how you control this . He feels this is just another room addition onto the house . On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 26 - 88 GRANTING A VARIANCE TO SECTION 1205 (a) OF THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE (SOLARIUM @ 8662 Fenwick Way - Douglas & Leslie Holt) * * * * +*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+* CM-7-52 Regular Meeting February 22, 1988 1 PUBLIC HEARITG AMARILLO ROAD - NO PARKING ZONE, « PASSENGER LOADING ZONE Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. Staff advised that in April of 1937, the City Council held a public hearing regarding a traffic study performed on Amarillo Road. The purpose of the study was to attempt to resolve traffic congestion problems at Nielsen School . The Council determined that no changes in speed limit or signing should be made, but directed Staff to work with the School District toward redesigning their driveway and parking lot in an attempt to create a more orderly traffic flow. • A diagram of the proposed improvements was presented. The School District will be responsible for any changes located on their property and has begun to make modifications . Staff recommended that .the City be responsible for improvements within the Public right-of-Way, which consist of _painting curbs and posting signs for no parking and passenger loading zones . The existing passenger loading zones , one of which specified buses only, were established by adoption of Ordinance No. 31-85 . The City ' s new Traffic Ordinance permits establishment of no parking zones and passenger loading zones by resolution; however, since an ordinance cannot be repealed by resolution, adoption of an ordinance repealing Ordinance No. 31-85 is necessary in order to cancel out the existing zones . No comments were made by members of the public . Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. Cm. Snyder questioned with regard to the no u-turns, would this be all the time, or lust during school hours . City Engineer Thompson indicated that u-turns would be _prohibited at any time . A member of the audience, Barbara Michardi, indicated she wished to comment on this issue . With Council consensus , Mayor Jeffery reopened the public hearing. Barbara Michardi indicated that it was hoped that the no u-turn could be posted as not allowed from 8: 00 a.m. - 10 : 00 a.m. , and from 1 : 00 p .m. - 3 : 30 p .m. , or 3: 00 a.m. - 3 : 30 p .m. They submitted this recuest a couple of weeks ago to the City ' s Engineering Department. Mr. Thompson indicated that this issue will be discussed in a future meeting. Mavor Jeffery again closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Snyder, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous vote, the Council waived the reading and on an urgency basis, adopted *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+* CM-7-53 Regular Meeting February 22, 1988 ORDINANCE NO. 6 - 88 REPEALING CITY OF DUBLIN ORDINANCE NO. 31-85 (PASSENGER LOADING ZONES ON AMARILLO ROAD) and adopted RESOLUTION NO. 27 - 88 DESIGNATING NO PARKING ZONES AND A PASSENGER LOADING ZONE ON AMARILLO ROAD * * * * PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION CONCERNING PA87-174 GOODWILL INDUSTRIES CONDITIO1AL USE PERMIT REQUEST TO OPERATE A GOODWILL DONATION STATION TRUCK TRAILER iN PARKING LOT OF HOWARD JOHNSON HOTEL SITE Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. Staff advised that on January 13, 1983, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider a CUP application from Goodwill industries to locate a Goodwill donation station truck trailer in the parking lot of the Howard Johnson ' s Hotel site . The Applicant was not present at this meeting, and after hearing testimony from Staff and the public, the Planning Commission denied this request. On January 27, 1988, the, Applicant appealed the Planning Commission ' s action to the City Council . Staff advised that the Applicant is requesting approval of a CUP to allow a Goodwill donation station in the southeast corner of the site. The donation station consists of a blue and white truck trailer standing 13 ' in height, 25 ' long and 8 ' wide . As proposed, the truck trailer would occupy approximately four parking spaces . The temporary loss of these spaces would not jeopardize this site with respect to compliance with City parking regulations . Staff felt that the proposed donation station would create an inappropriate mixture of land uses on the property. The Goodwill donation station serves as a drop off point for discarded, though sometimes reusable, items . Discarding these items sometimes leads to the unwanted proliferation of debris and junk which in some cases , can sit visable to the public for days at a time . Staff felt that a Goodwill donation truck would be more appropriate on a site located in Light Industrial (M-1 ) District or a site that contains a super- market or shopping center . Staff listed 4 potentially appropriate locations, each of which contained retail activities . Staff felt that another problem with the proposed location of the trailer on this site was that although it would not be visible from any Dublin street, it would be highly visible from 1-530 . This would not be conducive to creating and maintaining a positive and attractive image of the City. *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+* CM-7-54 Regular Meeting February 22, 1988 • The Downtown Specific Plan sets forth policies for the subject site, and this project does not comply with 4 of the policies . Anthony Cassette addressed the Council and stated that Goodwill Industries took exception to several comments made by Staff in its report. With regard to concerns of visibility, their trailer would not be visible from any Dublin streets , but only from the freeway . They have the permission of the property owner . There have been no presedents set with regard to what types of land districts are approoriate for donation stations . Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. . Cm. Hegarty felt this situation was somewhat similar to a situation where a business person was parking a 27 ' van behind his property. He was cited and had to move the truck. Cm. Hegarty did not feel that this recuest was any different. There were no findings that could be made to allow outdoor storage. Cm. Snyder felt that this site was not a good location. He felt that the entire Council recognizes the name of Goodwill Industries as being a valuable community asset . He questioned the possibility of other potential sites . Discussion was held- related to the status of other sites . Cm. Snyder stated he would like to see the City work closely with Goodwill to try to help them Find a location. It is a needed station, not only for disposal of items by the community, but also to help others . On motion of Cm. Snyder, seconded bv Cui. VOnheerer, and b°I unanimous vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 28 - 88 UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION' S ACTION DENYING PA 87-174 GOODWILL INDUSTRIES DONATION STATION - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR A 25' LONG TRUCK TRAILER LOCATED IN THE HOWARD JOHNSON' S HOTEL SITE PARKING LOT AT 6630 REGIONAL STREET The Council agreed to lend support to help Goodwill Industries find another spot. L * * * * PUBLIC HEARING ENEA PLAZA A (SOUTHERN PORTION) REZONING REQUEST Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. Planning Director Tong advised the Council that on June 22, 1987, the Council adopted Resolution No . 41-87 approving a PD, Planned Development Rezoning through Planning Application 87-018 . The rezoning permitted a change in land use from a previous Planned Development (1464th Zoning Unit under Alameda County) which allowed administrative office uses and a limited range of retail uses compatible with office uses, to a new Planned Develop_ ment which allows a wider range of retail shopper, office, personal service and *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+* CM-7-55 Regular Meeting February 22, 1988 Financial uses . This request applies to approximately 5 acres generally located on the southeast and southwest corners of the intersection of Amador Plaza Road and Dublin Boulevard. One of the conditions of approval of the new PD rezoning in PA 87-018 required that the Applicant dedicate and fully improve a roadway through the southern portion of Assessor ' s Parcel No. 941- 1500-40 . Attachments were presented which showed the general location of the road. On November 24, 1987, the Eneas filed a lawsuit challenging the condition requiring the dedication and improvement of the proposed street right-of-way. As part of a settlement agreement, the Eneas have submitted an irrevocable offer to dedicate the street right-of-way to the City, which the City agrees to accept only when the rest of the proposed road between Amador Plaza Road and Golden Gate Drive is ready for construction. The settlement agreement also requires the City to initiate the planned development rezoning process for a redefinition of the PD to provide that the uses permitted in the southern portion shall be identical to those uses permitted pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 41-37 and Planned Development Application PA 87-013 .f The Planning_. Commission, on February 1st, recommended that the City Council approve the rezoning, making the same land uses approved in PA 87-018 applicable to the 3 acres in question . The only difference being the clarification that "cocktail lounges" would be considered as "taverns" under conditional uses . The land uses proposed on the 3 acre site are consistent with goals and policies of both the General Plan and the Downtown Specific Plan. The General Plan calls for retail, office and automotive uses . The Specific Plan calls for a wide range of uses for this area, including retail, office, hotel, restaurant and commercial facilities . Compatibility would be maintained if the same land uses approved in PA 87-013 were applied to the 3 acre site in question. Staff advised that if the planned development rezoning request is approved, all suture development on this site shall be reviewed through the City' s Site Development Review procedure . The balance of the site shall continue to be controlled by the land uses listed in the 1464th Zoning Unit. It will be emphasized that Applicants thoroughly review the Downtown Specific Plan before submitting development proposals to the City. Cm. Moffatt questioned if the Negative Declaration were adopted, would the City be able to adjust the density of the buildings . The road appears to be getting very small and it is very congested. He questioned if fire engines could get down there if necessary. Planning Director Tong indicated that Staff feels the proposed Negative Declaration is sufficient at this time . Circulation and fire access provisions would be looked at in a SDR when one comes before the City. At this time, there is no actual building proposal . City Manager Ambrose indicated that this is in the context of the settlement agreement. A parallel section of road to Dublin Boulevard would be needed to improve circulation in this area when the property develops . *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*±*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+* CM-7-56 Regular Meeting • February 22, 1938 � e tYat Costello, Crown Chevrolet, felt that if this impacts where the road will go within 10 ' , they will need time to study this issue . He reuuested that the Council allow them time to address this . Mr . Tong advised that the specific alignment of the road will come before the Council in the future for a public hearing. All affected parties will be notified of the hearing date . Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 29 - 38 ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE CONCERNING PA 87-178, ENEA PLAZA (SOUTHERN PORTION) PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONING APPLICATION and adopted RESOLUTION NO. 30 - 88 APPROVING AND ESTABLISH FINDINGS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONING CONCERNING PA 87-178, ENEA PLAZA (SOUTHERN PORTION) PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONING APPLICATION and waived the reading and INTRODUCED an ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance to permit the rezoning of real property located at the rear southern portion of Assessor ' s Parcel cumber 91-1500-040, on the west Siue of Amador Plaza Road near Dublin Boulevard. * * * * DUBLIN SPORTS GROUNDS USE POLICY Recreation Director Lowart advised that in July, 1936, the City' s Recreation Department assumed the field scheduling responsibilities for the Dublin Snorts Grounds from DSRSD. As Part of the City' s agreement with with. DSRSD, it was agreed that the City would utilize the fee schedule adopted by the DSRSD Board, as well as enforce any applicable park rules and regulations . The Park & Recreation Commission discussed the development of a field use policy at their meetings in August and September, 1987 . Based on the innut received from the Commission and the public, Staff developed a Field Use Policy which divides users into 5 classifications and ident_fies a Priority system for use . The policy also outlines a reservation Procedure that Staff feels will s i molify the issuance of permits . The new policy would go into effect for the 1988 season, beginning March 1, 1983. *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+* C2I-7-57 Regular Meeting February 22, 1988 • • The fee schedule which was presented reflects the fees previously charged by DSRSD . Although the Park & Recreation Commission was initially in favor of reducing or eliminating fees , they agreed to defer consideration of a new fee schedule until the City had a more accurate idea of the costs associated with operating and maintaining the fields . Cm. Moffatt questioned if there were to be an extemporaneous use when the fields are not being used, would the people be allowed to stay or kicked off. As an example, he used a neighborhood using the ball fields on a spontaneous basis . Recreation Director Lowart indicated that this would be allowed. We are not in a Position to have a Staff member make sure oerlits have been obtained. Cm. Vonheeder indicated that there is one 90 ' diamond and the rest of them are only 50 ' . She felt it might be a good idea to mention the field dimensions on the application forms . Staff concurred. Mayor Jeffery questioned if we wanted to keep the designation of Dublin Sports Grounds or should we just refer to the site as Sports Grounds . Ms . Lowart indicated we may need to look at this in the future if we assume scheduling responsibilities for school fields . On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 31 - 88 ESTABLISHING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE USE OF THE DUBLIN SPORTS GROUNDS and adopted RESOLUTION NO. 32 - 88 ESTABLISHING FIELD USE FEES FOR THE DUBLIN SPORTS GROUNDS * * * * OTHER BUSINESS Upcoming Meetings City Manager Ambrose reminded the Council of the following =coming meetings : February 23rd - Goals & Objectives , 5 : 30 p .m. , Shannon Center February 29th - Dougherty Regional Fire Authority Meeting, 7 : 00 p .m. , San Ramon Council Chambers March 1st - Special Meeting, 7 : 30 p .m. , Library . * * * * +*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+* CM-7-58 Regular Meeting February 22, 1988 . . ., Fire Authority The 'ire Fighters Union would like to have a lunch or dinner get together • t t members of the Board of DR FA. Staff f reri este l t those e ��7� _n the _. .ate__� o� 3�ar 1 0_ �_ ..__. ..._ate� � ._ 1_�._ G that � _os._ Councilmembers who serve on this Board advise of a date that would be The d of ' 3 r' stew either lunch Or dinner convenient. _h data o March ..r was suggested for _ * * * * Alameda County Housing Authority Cm. Hegarty re Ported that he had recently attended an Alameda County Housing Authority Workshop . T1er e will be an election coming u7 for senior housing and he would like to see everyone sup port this . Also, Section 3 programs come due _n 1991 and if the Federal Government quits doing this, i _ would be disasterous , so they may be looking toward having City Councils lobby as much as possible . O:chelia Basgal, Executive Director of the Dublin Housing Authority will probably be briefing the DHA Board of this in the future. * * * * League of CA Cities, East Bay Division Meeting Cm. Vonheeder ''eminded the Council of the dinner meeting of the East 3av Division in Danville on Thursday evening, February 25th. Ghe requested t Staff send letters to the Mayors of the various Cities regarding t7° need to a000int a member to the Transportation Subcommittee . BY a Council consensus , it was determined that Cm. Vonheeder would continue to serve as Dublin ' s reoresentative on this Subcommittee . * * * * '.`;inter Olympic Games/Bran Boitano Mayor Jeffery stated that everyone was very proud of the fact that Brian Boitano (who practices at Dublin Iceland) , had received a Cold Metal for Men ' s Figure Skating at the Winter Olympic Games at Calgary 8S. She felt the City should do something to honor Mr. Boitano and let him know how proud the City is of his accomplishment. Deputy City Clerk Xav Keck advised Mayor Jeffery that the Manager of _celand had come into City Offices to speak with Mayor Jeffery regarding some type of low key festivities to _ Ono_ _ =Jica lo. He requested that _aVOr 1 e =2r call him to discuss this . -+ * * * * *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+* CM-7-59 Regular Meeting February 22, 1988 �. " Sphere of Influence Issue Mayor Jeffery reported that at the LACO hearing 1.n lass. :�]n.,�_'�:, r.�1JCUJS on was held related to the conflict between Dublin and Livermore on the sphere boundaries . Basically, Dublin won . * * * * ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council , the meeting was adjourned at 9 : 01 p .m. * * * * Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk * :': * * *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+* CM-7-60 Regular Meeting February 22, 1988