Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.1 Approve 09-12-1988 Minutes ...w.......♦....•. ..... ✓.l .I r.. •A. _x..Y.YP.Fu.hqrr.. nd... .4...Wi .✓ ✓1. REGULAR MEETING - September 12, 1988 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Monday, September 12, 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. * * * * PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Mayor led the Council, Staff and those present in the pledge of alle- giance to the flag. * * * * Smoking Ordinance Mr. Bruce Fiedler, 6589 Hemlock Street stated he wished to address the Council related to poisonous gases to which he is exposed when he frequents restaurants and other public places that are not complying with the City's Smoking Ordinance. This ordinance is not being enforced in several restaurants that he would like to patronize. He questioned who the City person is that is responsible for enforcement. City Manager Ambrose advised that he is the Enforcement Officer, and as is the practice of the 'City, we enforce ordinances on a complaint only basis. The City has received several complaints and typically we have been able to get voluntary compliance once we put someone on notice. Mr. Fiedler questioned if companies coming into the City are given a packet related to the Smoking Ordinance along with a business license. Mr. Ambrose advised that Dublin does not have a business license require- ment, nor is there an organized way of distributing this information. We attempted to inform people through our Community Newsletter last year, however, the passage of Proposition 73 has curtailed this means of communicating with the public. * * * * PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AWARD Dan Downey, District Manager of the California State Automobile Association presented a "Pedestrian Safety Award" to the City of Dublin. Mr. Downey explained that this citation was given to Dublin for its record of no pedestrian fatalities as reported in the AAA Pedestrian Protection Program while meeting AAA standards of program performance. This award represents a 4-year achievement. * * * * CM-7-271 Regular Meeting September 12, 1988 Jit,2 .M- CONSENT CALENDAR On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote, the Council took the following actions: Approved Minutes of Regular Meeting of August 22, 1988; Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 118 - 88 IN SUPPORT OF STATE BOND MEASURE FOR LIBRARY CONSTRUCTION Accepted the City Treasurer's Investment Report for period ending August 31 , 1988; Denied a claim received on July 20, 1988 from Pacific Bell and directed Staff to notify the Claimant and the City's Insurance Provider; Approved an agreement between the City of Dublin and Alameda County Transportation Authority regarding I-580/I-680 interchange modifications, and authorized the Mayor to execute the agreement; Approved the City Manager's Employment Agreement and authorized the Mayor to execute same; Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 119 - 88 ENCOURAGING THE NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE TO AWARD AN EXPANSION FRANCHISE TO THE OAKLAND-ALAMEDA COUNTY COLISEUM TO SERVE FANS OF THE CITIES AND COUNTIES OF ALAMEDA AND CONTRA COSTA Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 120 - 88 FOR THE ACCEPTANCE OF IMPROVEMENTS PORTION OF TRACT 5511 (VILLAGES @ WILLOW CREEK) and authorized Staff to accept a maintenance bond at a future date; Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 121 - 88 APPROVING A VEHICLE ACCESSWAY MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT FOR TRACT 5780 (VILLAGE VII - STANDARD PACIFIC) and authorized the Mayor to execute the agreement; Approved Warrant Register in the amount of $707, 191 .70; CM-7-272 Regular Meeting September 12, 1988 Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 122 - 88 STATING INTENTION TO VACATE A PUBLIC STREET PARCEL A OF TRACT 4991 (Easterly of Creekside Drive) Authorized a survey, Dublin Boulevard extension through Camp Parks, and authorized the transfer of $5, 000 from unallocated reserves for the property survey necessary to establish the alignment of the extension of Dublin Boulevard through the Camp Parks property; Accepted improvements under Contract 87-6 for Kolb Park improvements; authorized retention payment $33, 057 .47 to Valley Crest Landscape, Inc. , and approved the appropriation -of $3,115.63 from unallocated reserves for the 1988-89 Fiscal Year for this project. Cm. Hegarty requested that the item related to the Street Sweeping Services bid be removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion purposes. The bid amount received by our current contractor, A-1 Sweeping only increased a moderate amount. The low bid was received from Marc Sweeping Service dba American Environmental Industries. Cm. Hegarty felt uncomfortable because of the fact that we have contracted with this firm in the past and many complaints were received about their work. There were also problems related to equipment breakdowns. Since the City awarded the contract to A-1 Sweeping, things have run much more smoothly and he has received comments about how nice Dublin looks. Cm. Hegarty indicated he was satisfied with the performance of A-1 and feels that the increased price is reasonable. He expressed his desire to stay with this contract who has a proven record. Cm. Moffatt pointed out that the difference in price is approximately 10%. Cm. Hegarty responded that this would be a 5% increase for each of 2 years. Cm. Hegarty made a motion to award the Street Sweeping contract to A-1 Enterprises. This motion was not seconded. On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Snyder, and by majority vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 123 - 88 AWARDING CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING & LITTER PICKUP SERVICES TO MARC SWEEPING SERVICE dba AMERICAN ENVIRONMENTAL INDUSTRIES and authorized the Mayor to execute the agreement; Cm. Hegarty voted against this motion. * * * * CM-7-273 Regular Meeting September 12, 1988 LOPEZ/MacDONALD REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL TO INITIATE ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT Planning Director Tong advised that in 1987, Mr. Henry Lopez applied for a variance from 1 ) the required rearyard setback and 2) the required setback between structures at 7632 Canterbury Court. After public hearings by the Zoning Administrator, Planning Commission and City Council, the City Council on November 23, 1987, approved the variance for the reduced setback between structures and denied the variance to reduce the required 10, minimum rearyard setback for compensating yards to 8.51 . In January, 1988, Mr. Lopez requested 180 days to complete the removal of the room addition and patio cover to accommodate his tenants and to remove the building in more suitable weather. The City Zoning Administrator granted the request for 180 days beginning when the City Council took action on November 23, 1987, and ending no later than May 21 , 1988. On August 10, 1988, Mr. Peter MacDonald, representing Mr. Lopez, submitted a request for the City Council to initiate a Zoning Ordinance Amendment. The proposed amendment would add the following provisions: 1) the encroachment into the required yard had existed for 20 years or more at the time of application; 2) the deficiency from required yard dimensions does not exceed 50% of the yard requirements of the zoning district in which the property is located; 3) the applicant agrees to bring the non-conforming structure up to building code standards. Construction which meets or exceeds building code requirements for the time construction took place may be allowed to continue in existence provided any unsafe conditions are corrected. 4) The granting of the application will not be detrimental to persons or property in the neighborhood or to the public welfare. Mr. Tong indicated that Staff has several concerns with the proposed amendment which related to: 1) intent of yard requirements; 2) date of completion; 3) lack of inspections; 4) compliance with current Building Code; and 5) avoiding property taxes . Because of these concerns, Staff recommended that the Council deny the request to initiate the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment. Mr. Peter MacDonald distributed a letter and a draft ordinance which addresses concerns expressed by Mr. Tong. He felt that each of Staff's concerns are legitimate with the exception of the tax situation. There was no attempt to avoid property tax. With regard to the 2 1 /2, sideyards, there is actually 8 1 /2, to the property line. The Building Code requirements are also legitimate. Mr. Lopez is concerned that if he gets this ordinance adopted that there may be some small little technicality that would require his structure to be torn down. He wants to bring the structure up to code. The only real issue deals with a 1 1 /2, encroachment. Cm. Moffatt indicated that he has a problem with an attitude that if someone built a building 20 years ago and the regulating authorities indicate this is too bad, but it happened, so what? Now, however CM-7-274 Regular Meeting September 12, 1988 since it is obviously illegal, he feels that there must be some kind of mechanism whereby Mr. Lopez can bring it into compliance. The request has already gone through the Planning Commission and the City Council discussions on this subject and it was his understanding that it was agreed upon that Mr. Lopez was going to act accordingly. He would like to see the structure become legitimate, but he was disheartened that past decisions have not been applied. Cm. Hegarty felt that any licensed contractor knows that you must get a permit. He had a hard time buying the story that the contractor didn' t know a permit was required. It was put in illegally and if it is now approved, it concerned him that the Council would be granting special privilege. Anyone in the City could then come in and apply to make their projects legal, even though they may not have gotten building permits. Cm. Hegarty questioned how emergency equipment would get through if they needed to respond to an emergency situation at this site. Cm. Moffatt stated that if a building was built 20 years ago and it had a permit, then it would be legal, but there was none issued on this. The lackadaisical attitude of the County has created problems. This is now the City' s problem. Cm. Vonheeder felt that the Council knew that there would be problems like this that would come up. In the past, there was a lot of County ignorance about what was going on in Dublin. When someone hires a general contract- or, they expect that they will know the correct procedures to follow. Cm. Vonheeder did not feel that it was fair to say whether things were done properly or improperly by the County in this situation. She indicated she would like to have Staff take a look at the ordinance proposed by Mr. MacDonald in an effort to reach a compromise. They have acknowledged that they would bring the structure up to code. She stated she would like to see the item continued in order to give Staff the necessary time to review the ordinance. Cm. Snyder felt the greatest problem is the side yard encroachment. He stated he would like to have Vic Taugher, the City's Building Official, provide input related to this. Cm. Snyder questioned if the Council approved this could it be found that they were granting a special privilege. City Attorney Nave felt that this would apply to a very limited number of properties within the City. There is no relationship to this situation and the McCartney decision. On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Snyder, and by unanimous vote, the Council continued discussion of this item to the October 12, 1988 Council meeting. Cm. Moffatt and Cm. Vonheeder will not be in attendance at the next Council meeting scheduled for September 25, 1988. * * * CM-7-275 Regular Meeting September 12, 1988 APPOINTMENT OF TRI-VALLEY COMMUNITY TV CORPORATION BOARD REPRESENTATIVES City Manager Ambrose advised that the City has received a letter from the Tri-Valley Community Television Corporation indicating that the terms of the City of Dublin' s representatives (Cm. Hegarty and Claudia McCormick) , will soon expire. Mayor Jeffery indicated that she had been unable to reach Claudia McCormick to verify that she would be willing to continue on this Board. Cm. Hegarty indicated that if someone else wanted an opportunity to be on this Board he would support them, and if not, he would be willing to continue to serve. On motion of Cm. Snyder, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by .unanimous vote, the Council agreed to have the -current representatives continue to represent Dublin on this Board. PUBLIC HEARING - ESTABLISHMENT OF RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES NEW ROAD PARALLEL TO AND SOUTHERLY OF DUBLIN BOULEVARD (BETWEEN AMADOR PLAZA ROAD AND REGIONAL STREET Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. Planning Director Tong advised that this item had been continued from the June 27, July 25, and August 8, Council meetings. The Agenda Statements for these meetings were included as part of the record. At the meeting of August 8, Staff requested a continuance to this meeting in order to evaluate the potential traffic impact that Alternative 1 would have on access to the Crown Chevrolet site. Mr. Tong advised that with regard to the Crown Chevrolet driveway, there is an existing driveway on Golden Gate Drive near the proposed future inter- section of Golden Gate and the "parallel road" Alternative 1 . The location of the driveway could present some safety problems as it would be too close to the proposed intersection. TJKM met with the property owner and evaluated design modifications which would make the driveway safe once the parallel road is constructed. These changes include moving the driveway approximately 100' north. This relocation will eliminate 4 parking spaces and replace 3 of them in the old driveway location, for a net loss of 1 space. However, the new location would make entry to the property difficult for delivery trucks. Adding a driveway along the new road would provide easier access for trucks. The negative declaration has been revised to include mitigation measures to improve the safety, maintain security, and provide access for trucks. In addition, the mitigation measure requiring compensation for loss of parking would apply. The Woolvertons, property owners of the Crown Chevrolet parcel and the vacant parcel to the south, support Alternative 3, which would locate the southern right-of-way line along the southern property line of the vacant CM-7-276 Regular Meeting September 12, 1988 property. Alternative 3 would allow them to expand Crown Chevrolet onto contiguous property. Alternative 3 would bisect the Enea property (to the east) in a manner which creates 2 small (1. 06 and 1.29 acre) areas. The Eneas submitted a letter in support of Alternative 1 . At a meeting with the property owners, Staff and legal counsel, the Woolvertons and the Eneas made a 2-phase proposal. Mr. Tong explained the various points to this proposal and explained that Staff had several concerns with the proposal. These concerns relate to: 1) potential land development; 2) land use entitlement without future exaction; 3) six year offer and three year construction time limit vs. irrevocable offer; 4) offer to dedicate 41 wide strips along Amador Plaza Road; and 5) cost to the City. Mr. Tong summarized that Staff -supports the recommendation of Alternative 1 as the right-of-way alignment for the new road. The adoption of a right- of-way line for the new road parallel to and southerly of Dublin Boulevard will reserve the area specified in the proposed ordinance for a new road parallel to and southerly of Dublin Boulevard. Adoption of this ordinance will not result in immediate acquisition of any property; its effect is to prohibit construction of buildings in the designated area and to require dedication of the right-of-way under certain circumstances upon future construction. Because Mr. Bud Lake, representing Bedford Properties filed a protest at the June 27, 1988 hearing, his name has already been included in the ordinance. Mr. Harvey Levine stated that at the last meeting, he indicated that he made a rather dangerous statement in that they thought they could reach some kind of a deal with the Eneas. The Woolvertons have agreed to pay one-half of the costs and dedicate one-half of the road. They are willing to make this dedication now, in order to make the cost to the City a wash. They suggested phasing the process. They want to make everyone involved comfortable. They felt their proposal was fair and the reason for this exercise was that things are coming up quickly, particularly the potential with BART. This is the driving factor in determining where this road is going to go. There are lots of players around who will be contributing to a traffic problem. The source of all the traffic is not current develop- ment, but rather the future development expected from the specific planned development for the area. They understood as developers that the City has the right and the duty to require dedication and improvements and fees, on behalf of the community. They are concerned however, that Staff does not feel that this is a fair offer. They only want to pay their fair share. Their goal and proposal is Alternative 3 as it would not cost the City any extra. Mr. Robert Enea, 7450 Dublin Boulevard wanted to reiterate their reason for asking for a 3-year limitation is that the property they will end up with will be long and narrow and if the road is not in place, will pose access problems for any potential development. He expressed concern that they would like to get started on their development. They are currently talking with a lot of potential tenants and a hotel user who is very interested in being in this marketplace. There seems to be a lot of activity and the road situation has put their project on hold. It has been continued for 2 CM-7-277 Regular Meeting September 12, 1988 meetings now, and they would like to see the issue resolved. They currently have zoning on Parcel C, directly behind The Good Guys, which they can start, but in all fairness, they want to attempt to work out a suitable arrangement with their neighbors. Cm. Hegarty clarified that the whole property is zoned. Pat Costello, 7544 Dublin Boulevard stated that an average of 5-10 trucks come into their dealership each day. With the road as proposed on Alternative 1 , a 60, semi coming around the corner would have a very tight maneuver to make. The General Motors trucks which come in twice a day are more than 601 , as are freight liner trucks. Access on this street will be really tough. Chris Kinzel pointed out on the map and indicated that because of the low volume, this will not be a problem. Rich Enea, 6670 Amador Plaza Road stated that there is a 5-year limit on their offer. City Manager Ambrose stated that this was incorrect; it is an irrevocable offer. Mr. Levine summarized that the movement of long trucks was raised by them as a concern. They felt that Alternative 3 was an acceptable alternative to these problems. They have tried to create a silk purse out of a sows ear. They are willing to talk some more, but requested that the City consider this carefully. Cm. Hegarty questioned if under Alternative 3 no development takes place for 6 years, would there be no dedication of land. Then, after 6 years a plan comes in, there would be no dedication. Mr. Tong indicated that this was his understanding of the proposal. Cm. Hegarty then questioned if the road goes in, and development of the vacant parcels occur, the land development or land use would have to be geared toward accessibility. Mr. Tong stated that he understood that once the proposal is accepted, there would be no further dedication or improvement requirement under Alternative 3 . If we accept the proposal, we accept it with no additional requirements . We could not ask for additional conditions or improvements . Mr. Robert Enea stated that it is not their intent to preclude the City from taking property at a future date. They have already submitted a site plan for which they are in a position to go ahead and ask for approval. With regard to any potential traffic mitigations, the City has their proposed site plan. It can be determined at this time if there is going to be a traffic issue. It is not their intent to avoid any mitigation. The CM-7-278 Regular Meeting September 12, 1988 intent of the 6 year limit was that at some point in the future, the City would either say they want the property or they don't. If, by 1995, BART doesn' t come to Dublin, then the City will not theoretically have a need for this road. Cm. Moffatt asked if this agreement applies to individuals or properties. Mr. Tong advised that the offer will be open to the City for 6 years by the Woolvertons and/or their successors and by the Eneas and/or their successors. Mr. Ambrose asked .Mr. Kinzel if, under the terms of accepted traffic engineering practices, right turns were acknowledged to be safer than left turns . Mr. Kinzel responded yes. Mr. Ambrose then questioned if Mr. Kinzel felt after this road is -contructed, the big trucks could make right turns from Amador Plaza Road and the new road into Crown Chevrolet safely. Mr. Kinzel responded yes . Mr. Ambrose reminded the Council that as part of the previous land use review, the City entered into an agreement with the Enea owners regarding a particular development. That agreement provided that they were to dedicate or provide an irrevocable offer of dedication, for 100% of the roadway across their property. We are not talking about whether or not it' s fair that the Woolvertons get half or not. What the City must consider is the end result of what is being presented. The Eneas end up with dedicating half of what they've already agreed to dedicate and receive greater assurances from the City regarding future development that the City will need to review in terms of its compliance with CEQA. Robert Enea stated they were not ignoring how they came to dedicate the property as a result of a settlement based on litigation. This wasn' t something they wanted to do. They argued a year and a half ago that the road was premature. His point was that they did not want to dedicate the road in the first place until such time as there was a need for it. The settlement that they ended up with was considered by them to be the lesser of two evils . The road does not favor them at this point and Mr. Enea stated they wished to go on record that they oppose Alternative 1 . Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. Cm. Snyder felt that the City has tried to offer an opportunity for the Woolvertons to mitigate what they feel is the loss of the use of property that they might have under Alternative 1 . Evidently, the message hasn' t gotten across to someone, because it is very clear that the City does not want to lose anything that it has gained thus far through negotiation. It seems that the parties have not heard this. Cm. Snyder indicated he was still willing to continue this item if the parties will listen to what the Council is saying. If not, then he indicated he was willing to act on Staff' s recommendation at this time. He did not understand why the issue needs to be confused. The City has an offer of dedication now that is irrevocable. It is very likely that this Council may not be here when this develops, but this offer still stands. This Council is simply planning and giving direction. CM-7-279 Regular Meeting September 12, 1988 Cm. Moffatt indicated he would be willing to second this if it were a motion. City Attorney Nave indicated that if it is the Council's choice to continue it for further discussions, if the property owners want to do this, it would be advisable to rather than close the public hearing to continue the public hearing to whatever date the Council would choose. Mayor Jeffery questioned if the Council accepted Staff's recommendation, adopted the negative declaration and went for Alternative 1 , would this be subject to coming back to the next meeting and at that time if an agreement was reached that was acceptable between the Eneas and the Woolvertons it could be introduced as new evidence and could be considered at that time. Mr. Nave stated he would rather that the public hearing be continued. Cm. Snyder stated he did not see where there was any specific urgency that this be adopted today or next week or next month, etc. Mr. Ambrose reiterated the fact that the Eneas are interested in proceeding with the development and planning of the rest of their property. As long as this item remains open, the location of the road can't be planned with respect to the design and development of those structures. Cm. Snyder felt the Eneas have every right to plan this right now. The City has an agreement with them for the dedication of the roadway. RECESS Mayor Jeffery called for a short recess in order that the parties could consult. * * * * PUBLIC HEARING RECONVENED Mr. Levine indicated they would be willing to attempt one more shot at this and they asked for a 2 week delay. On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote, the Council reopened the public hearing. Robert Enea stated that Cm. Snyder is correct in that they can start their project tomorrow, but did not feel that it makes much sense to pay architectural fees and advancing with a study, when the plan line may change. They have held off on any significant architectural work because this issue has gone back and forth. He indicated they would like to see the Council make a decision at this time. If there are some problems with the proposal, he suggested because all parties are present, an attempt should be made to fine tune it. He did not feel that anything significant will change in the. next 2 weeks. CM-7-280 Regular Meeting . September 12, 1988 Cm. Snyder stated he could hardly believe what he had just heard. The Council has given every opportunity for both sides to reach some kind of an agreement, and now he hears from the Eneas that they would like to follow the plan line of Alternative 3 . Staff is recommending Alternative 1 , and it did not appear. that this is the action he wants the Council to take. The only way that Alternative 3 can happen is for them to have an agreement. Cm. Snyder stated there was no problem with proceeding with Alternative 3 as long as the City doesn't lose what it has now with the Eneas. Pat Costello felt that they need guidance from the Council on how to proceed. Mr. Ambrose stated that there are some conditions on the length and term of the dedication. Our existing agreement is irrevocable. The Eneas, in view of the level of development that occurred on their property, negotiated an agreement with the City, which is binding in court, regarding what they are going to contribute to mitigate impacts from their development, and that is 100% of the right-of-way that goes through their property. Mr. Nave clarified that as far as the Eneas are concerned, the City wants nothing more or nothing less that what it has. Mr. Ambrose indicated that if the Eneas now want the City Council to consider Alternative 3, . it would be necessary for them to put up 100% of the right-of-way, just as they have in our current agreement, but move it to the Alternative 3 location. On motion of Cm. Snyder, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote, the Council continued this item to the meeting of September 26, 1988. * * * * PUBLIC HEARING LIMITED PARKING AT 6398 DOUGHERTY ROAD Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. Staff advised that this item, which was introduced at the August 22 meeting, would provide a time-limited parking zone at 6398 Dougherty Road in order to allow customers of Pack & Ship room to park. A number of the businesses in this area are auto-related, and both the on-site and on- street parking spaces are heavily used by employees of the businesses and for vehicles waiting to be repaired or waiting to be picked up. Mr. Roger Smith, owner of Pack & Ship runs a packing and shipping service for the general public, and he is also in the process of establishing a branch post office. The post office is expected to open shortly, and will alleviate some of the overcrowding at the main post office on Village Parkway. Mr. Smith fears that potential customers will be discouraged by the lack of available parking. CM-7-281 Regular Meeting September 12, 1988 The City's Traffic Ordinance provides that 20-minute parking zones may be established and that the curb color will be green. Agreement has been reached by City Staff and Mr. Smith that approximately 190' of 20-minute parking would be adequate. At the hearing on August 22, a concern was raised by the Council related to the lack of stairs or a walkway between the curb and the parking lot in front of the building for pedestrian access. Mr. Smith stated that the building manager was considering the installation of a concrete walkway through the planter area to resolve this potential problem. No comments were made by members of the public related to this item. Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm.. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote, the Council waived the reading and adopted ORDINANCE NO. 17 - 88 ESTABLISHING A 20-MINUTE PARKING ZONE AT 6398 DOUGHERTY ROAD PUBLIC HEARING- SIGN ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS SECOND FREESTANDING SIGNS(PA88-055) & SERVICE STATION PRICE SIGNS(PA88-056) Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. Staff advised that on August 22, 1988, the Council introduced an ordinance amending the City' s Sign Ordinance and adopted a resolution approving the associated Negative Declaration. This ordinance proposes to amend the City' s existing Sign Ordinance relating to: 1 ) Service Station Price Signs; 2) Second Freestanding Signs; 3) Clarification of allowable aggregate sign area, middle 1 /3 of street frontage sign area, alternate types of freestanding signs, variance findings, identification sign, directional tract signs; and 4) Reformating to enhance readability. No comments were made by members of the public related to this item. Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Snyder, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous vote, the Council waived the reading and adopted CM-7-282 Regular Meeting September 12, 1988 ORDINANCE NO. 18 - 88 AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 7-86 RELATING TO SERVICE STATION PRICE SIGNS, SECOND FREESTANDING SIGNS, CLARIFICATION OF ALLOWABLE AGGREGATE SIGN AREA, MIDDLE 1 /3 OF STREET FRONTAGE, SIGN AREA, ALTERNATE TYPES OF FREESTANDING SIGNS, VARIANCE FINDINGS, IDENTIFICATION SIGN, DIRECTIONAL TRACT SIGNS, AND REFORMATING TO ENHANCE READABILITY * * * * OTHER BUSINESS League Conference - Voting Delegates Mr. Ambrose reminded the Council of the upcoming League of CA Cities annual conference being held in San Diego on October 16-19, 1988. The entire Council indicated that they will attend. The League has also requested that each City notify them of who will be the voting delegate and alternate for the conference. By consensus, the Council agreed to continue with Mayor Jeffery as the voting delegate and Vice Mayor Vonheeder as the alternate. * * * * Dogs @ Dolan Park Mayor Jeffery questioned if there will be signs posted at Dolan Park related to the. requirement that dogs be on a leash. She has received complaints about dogs being allowed to run loose. Staff indicated that it would review this. * * * * Dublin, Ireland - Trees Mayor Jeffery reported that she had received a letter from the President of the Tree Council of Ireland related to the planting of 1 , 000 trees from all over the world as part of their Millennium celebration. Mayor Jeffery suggested that this be agendized for future discussion by the Council. School Bond Issue Mayor Jeffery requested. that Staff place the issue of the School Bond Measure which is to appear on the November 8th ballot on a future City Council agenda, for discussion and endorsement. CM-7-283 Regular Meeting September 12, 1988 CLOSED SESSION At 9 : 37 p.m. , the Council recessed to a closed executive session to discuss personnel related matters. * * * * ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 11 : 40 p.m. * * * * Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk * * * * CM-7-284 Regular Meeting September 12, 1988