Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.01 Approve 11-13-1989 Minutes i REGULAR MEETING - NOVEMBER 13, 1989 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Monday, November 13 , 1989 , in the Council Chambers of the Dublin Civic Center . The meeting was called to order at 7 : 34 p.m. , by Mayor Paul Moffatt . ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Hegarty, Jeffery, Snyder , Vonheeder and Mayor Moffatt . PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Mayor led the Council, Staff and those present in the pledge of alle- giance to the flag . Introduction of New Employees Planning Director Larry `Tong introduced Planning Intern Charlie Haimes, who is a senior at U. C. Berkeley. Police Chief Jim Rose introduced two new Deputies, James T. Jukich and David J . Nyberg . Presentation of Civic Center Flag Councilmember Jeffery presented the first flag to fly at the Civic Center to Harris Koenig of National Medical Enterprises . N.M. E. was successful bidder for the flag at a Stepping Out charity auction. Request for Citizens Advisory Committee - East Dublin Marjorie LaBar , resident of 11707 Juarez Lane and President of Preserve Area Ridgelands Committee, requested that the City Council consider appointing a citizens advisory committee to assist Staff in the studies regarding East Dublin. Ms . LaBar stated that planning discussions should be open to all residents and that it was important to get input from all facets of the Dublin population regarding formation of the General Plan Amendment . CM-8- Regular Meeting November 13 , 1989 Carolyn Morgan, Doolan Canyon Road, asked whether the City would seriously consider a proposal formulated by the residents of Doolan Canyon and whether they would be given as much Staff time and cooperation as the sponsoring property owners . Mayor Moffatt responded that the City Council would have to decide the issue and that Ms . Morgan would need to contact the Planning Director to determine the proper procedure . Ms . Morgan asked whether the Doolan Canyon residents would be given as much Staff time dollar-wise . Mayor Moffatt stated that this would be up to Staff and the actual situation and that Ms . Morgan should make an appointment with the Planning Department . Cm. Jeffery mentioned that Staff ' s time is paid for by the sponsoring property owners . She then asked whether one person or group could formulate a plan for another person ' s property. Assistant City Attorney Elizabeth Silver stated that the City Council, rather than a property owner , initiates a General Plan Amendment Study. .The consultant is retained by the City Council and most of the cost is paid by the property owners . Ms . Morgan commented that those property owners then have the opportunity to rewrite the plan before the public sees it . Planning Director Larry Tong stated that the consultants are preparing various alternatives and have met with those funding the study, the sponsoring property owners, to update them on their progress . Regarding Ms . Morgan ' s request to prepare a plan, the City would refer the Doolan Canyon residents to the consultant to consider their area as part of the preparation of the General Plan Amendment . It is not appropriate to allocate more Staff time as the City Council has approved only the $50 , 000 contribution . The sponsoring property owners have contributed approximately $600 , 000 to date . Ms . Morgan asked whether the sponsoring property owners were allowed to review and reject the plan . Mr . Tong stated that they were not , but that the sponsoring property owners were given a progress report on the land use element and that they had had some concerns . The consultant is therefore making some refinements . Mayor Moffatt asked if Ms . Morgan would be able to join the sponsoring property owners . Ms . Morgan stated that the Doolan Road group did not have $600 , 000 but that they did have a planner that was willing to work with them. CM-8- Regular Meeting November 13 , 1989 City Manager Richard Ambrose interjected that the sponsoring property owners had conceptual plans for their own property and that if Ms . Morgan came up with a plan it should be for her own property. Ms . Morgan asked whether a plan that affects the surrounding area should not be considered. Mr . Ambrose stated that all the property owners had the same opportunity. Ms . Morgan continued that some property owners did not wish to develop their property and that they had submitted concerns which had been overlooked. Mayor Moffatt stated that the public hearing process had not started yet . Ms . Morgan asked if their plan recommended rural residential zoning for Doolan Canyon and the other property owners objected, whether their plan would be considered. Mr . Ambrose said that the residents would have an opportunity to comment at a public hearing in the future and that information would be provided to them as part of the public hearing process . He added that the residents could provide a plan for their own property for consideration. Ms . Silver commented that any plan submitted would also need to be subject to the public hearing process . Cm. Snyder added that one alternative to be considered by the Planning Commission and City Council would be "status quo. " Ms . Morgan stated that she was not against development but wanted rural residential development . Cm. Snyder said that if the proposed plan was for a density that Ms . Morgan didn ' t agree with, she should oppose it at the public hearing. Cm. Hegarty added that he would advise Ms . Morgan to wait until the public hearings and go through the proposed General Plan Amendment element by element . He said that the Council was willing to listen but that the proper sequence needed to be followed . Mr . Tong stated that there would be public forums prior to the Planning Commission and City Council public hearings . He said that one alternative being examined is development under existing General Plan policies . Ms . Morgan said she would still like to have a citizens advisory committee . Mayor Moffatt said that there was nothing to discuss at this point as there were no concepts ,yet . CM-8- Regular Meeting November 13, 1989 i Ms . Morgan said that it was important to be involved in the beginning and that she wanted to have input in how Dublin was put together . Custom Lots - Creekside Drive Al Bilotti , 8116 Creekside Drive, stated that he had two concerns . The first was that he wanted the Council to be aware of the amount of smog in Dublin. The second was concerning three vacant lots on Creekside Drive that now have a sign advertising custom homes . He felt the lots were unbuildable and wanted to know if the Council was aware of them. Mr . Bilotti felt . that if sufficient grading were done to make the lots buildable, the homes above these lots would slide down . He added that he did not want these three lots in the Silvergate Homeowners ' Association . Mayor Moffatt asked how Mr . Bilotti knew this was a slide area . Mr . Bilotti responded that there was a previous slide. Mr . Tong stated that Mr . Bilotti referred to several custom lots approved as. part of the Nielsen development ( consisting of the Kaufman and Broad tracts, Bordeaux Estates, and the Ahmanson development ) . Any person proposing to build on those lots would be required to get the proper geotechnical reports and permits . No applications have been received as yet but any applications would be reviewed at the time . Cm. Hegarty asked if the General Plan Amendment for this area was approved by Alameda County. Mr . Tong responded that it was, and that the Tentative Map and Final Map were approved by the City. Cm. Hegarty continued that since those lots were approved by the County, they were accepted by the City upon incorporation and were now up for sale . Mr . Tong added that applications would go directly to the Building Department since the Planning approvals had already been granted . Cm. Hegarty asked whether there was any way to protect a person purchasing those lots if they were determined to be unbuildable, since the County had approved the lots . Ms . Silver said that if the proper engineering reports were obtained, the lots could be built on and that nothing needed to be done by the City at this point . Cm. Hegarty said that if the lots had been mapped out by the County engineers and determined to be buildable he didn ' t have a problem with it, but he was concerned that the City ' s engineers might feel the lots were not buildable . CM-8- Regular Meeting November 13 , 1989 Building Official Vic Taugher stated that someone had purchased the lots and put them up for sale . A letter in' the file submitted by the original soils engineer for the development states that the old slide was properly repaired. An application for a building permit would require substantial grading to be done with a grading permit . A soils engineer would be required to review any proposed grading plans before any permits would be issued. Mr . Bilotti said that he didn ' t care if the lots were built on but that he didn ' t want them in the Homeowners ' Association . Public Works Director Lee Thompson said he understood that all lots subdivided by Kaufman and Broad were already included in that Homeowners ' Association . CONSENT CALENDAR Cm. Hegarty asked to clarify that the approval requested for Item 4 . 3 Landscape Architectural Services for Dublin High Football Field and Track Renovation was for a $47 , 220 contract to prepare plans only and that the project would be brought back to the City Council for approval prior to soliciting bids . Mayor Moffatt asked that Item 4 . 6 Annual Tree Lighting Ceremony be removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion . On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder , and by unanimous vote, the Council took the following actions : Received a report regarding newsrack locations and authorized Staff to prepare a draft newsrack ordinance for a future meeting; Appointed the following representatives to the Citizens for a Valley Performing Arts Center Committee: Dan Downey, Michal Dittrich, Robert Howarton, Sherry Wright, and Dr . Edmund Kemprud; Retained the firm of Beals/Lechner Associates to provide landscape architectural services for the renovation of the Dublin High School Football Field and Track and directed Staff to prepare the contract agreement at a cost not to exceed $47 , 220 ; Authorized Staff to solicit bids for printing of the 1990 Community Calendar ; CM-8- Regular Meeting November 13, 1989 Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 123-89 SETTING GOALS FOR DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE PROGRAM Authorized an additional appropriation of $4,000 to the Planning Contract Services account for the Joint County-Cities Mortgage Credit Certificate (MCC) Program; Approved Warrant Register dated November 13 , 1989 , in the amount of $727 , 927 . 15 ; Approved City Treasurer ' s Investment Report as of October 31 , 1989 ; and Approved Financial Statements for October , 1989 . Regarding the Annual Tree Lighting Ceremony, Mayor Moffatt stated that he wanted the Recreation Director to make a presentation regarding the activity so that those present would be aware of the plans and have an opportunity to provide input . Recreation Director Diane Lowart stated that the ceremony was planned for the evening of December 4th and, on recommendation of the Park and Recreation Commission, would be held at the Civic Center and would also involve the tree at the Library. Since the landscaping improvements at the Civic Center have not been accepted yet , it may not be possible to provide outdoor holiday lighting . Staff recommended obtaining a tree for the Administrative Wing lobby and certain outdoor lighting, entertainment , refreshments , and a visit from Santa . The budget for the ceremony is $1 , 700 , and the Recreation Department proposes to begin publicizing the event this week . On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder , and by unanimous vote, the City Council approved the plans for the tree lighting ceremony. WRITTEN COMMUNICATION: REQUEST FOR FUNDING FROM TRI-VALLEY MINOR HOCKEY ASSOCIATION, INC. Recreation Director Diane Lowart stated that correspondence had been received from John R. Sharkey, President of the Tri-Valley Minor Hockey Association, Inc. , requesting that the City donate. $2 , 000 to their association. This group, a non-profit corporation, is a youth hockey organization which plays at Dublin Iceland . In the past, the City has not made direct financial contributions to youth sports organizations but has made public facilities available for use. Ms . Lowart added that if funds are contributed to the Minor Hockey Association, other youth sports groups may come to the City requesting funds . Staff recommended denial of the request . CM-8- Regular Meeting November 13 , 1989 No comment was received from the public. On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Jeffery, and by unanimous vote, the City Council denied the request for funding . PUBLIC HEARING: REPEAL OF SELECTED ALAMEDA COUNTY ORDINANCES Mayor Moffatt opened the public hearing. Assistant City Attorney Elizabeth Silver stated that this proposed ordinance was introduced at the October 30 , 1989 , City Council meeting. This ordinance would repeal various provisions of the Alameda County Code which are no longer necessary, as they are either covered by State Law, are not applicable to the City of Dublin, or have been replaced with City of Dublin ordinances . The City Council had asked for clarification of items to be repealed, which include regulations pertaining to drawbridges . Those sections of the County ordinance regarding junkyards, noise, and use of the sidewalk have already been replaced by City of Dublin ordinances . No public comment was received on this issue. Mayor Moffatt closed the public hearing . On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder , and by unanimous vote, the City Council waived the reading and adopted ORDINANCE NO. 18-89 AN ORDINANCE REPEALING SELECTED ALAMEDA COUNTY ORDINANCES ORDINANCE WHICH ADOPTS THE 1988 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, 1988 UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE, 1988 UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE, AND 1988 UNIFORM HOUSING CODE Building Official Vic Taugher stated that since noticing procedures had not been followed, this item would not be a public hearing but that the title of the ordinance would be read and that the City Council would be requested to set a public hearing date of December 11 , 1989 , in order to provide time for noticing . Mr Taugher continued that State Law requires the City to adopt new editions of the Uniform Codes within six months after the State has adopted the new code . The City is required to have an ordinance which imposes the same restrictions as the State, or the City Council is required to make findings indicating why changes are necessary. Mr . Taugher continued that the proposed ordinance would repeal the existing Ordinance 58-87 and re-adopts those provisions with minor modifications along the Amendments to the Uniform Codes that are required by the State. CM-8- Regular Meeting November 13, 1989 The purpose of the repeal and re-adoption is to maintain all building regulations within a single document . The new ordinance is proposed to become effective on January 1 , 1990 . Developers who are issued building permits after that date will be required to comply with the new requirements . Cm. Hegarty asked whether developers were advised of new requirements or of those requirements specific to Dublin when they applied for permits . Mr . Taugher responded that most cities have different requirements for fire sprinklers . Dublin ' s ordinance is more restrictive than the Uniform Building Code . Otherwise, Dublin ' s requirements are the same as the State ' s . Cm. Hegarty stated that he wanted to be sure the builders did not come back to the City Council at a later date to challenge the requirements. Mr . Taugher said that developers are notified of building code requirements during the planning process and are also supplied a copy of the entire ordinance . Proposed amendments are discussed with developers and architects . Mr . Ambrose stated that the number of building code variance requests is very minimal and may be caused by a difference of opinion with the code or a change in technology which the Building Department wishes to approve . Cm. Hegarty said that he would follow Staff ' s recommendation regarding changes in technology but that he wanted to make certain the requirements were explained to the developer in advance . Mr . Taugher then read the title of the ordinance as. required: "An Ordinance of the City of Dublin Repealing the City of Dublin Building Regulations as Contained in Ordinance Number 58-87 , and Readopting the City of Dublin Building Regulations Contained in Ordinance Number 58-87 with Minor Revisions Therein, and Adopting the Provisions of the 1988 Uniform Building Code, 1988 Uniform Building Code Standards , 1988 Uniform Plumbing Code, 1988 Uniform Mechanical Code, 1988 Uniform Housing Code, and the 1987 National Electrical Code . " On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder , and by unanimous vote, the City Council set a public hearing date of December 11 , 1989 , for consideration of the proposed ordinance . SELECTION OF BUS STOP BENCHES . Public Works Director Lee Thompson stated that early in 1990 , the Livermore/Amador Valley Transit Authority would install bus shelters at most of their bus stop locations . At a previous meeting, the City CM-8- Regular Meeting November 13 , 1989 Council requested that alternatives to the present benches with advertising for those stops not receiving shelters . Staff researched types of available benches and proposed three alternatives . The "Wabash Valley" plastisol-coated expanded metal bench would be the most vandal-resistant because of its design and the material from which it is manufactured. The cost of the "Wabash Valley" bench is $248 . 63 each. The Timberform "Parkway" bench is made of wood with metal supports . Mr . Thompson stated that the existing wood benches with advertising are often carved or splintered and that any wood benches would be susceptible to that type of vandalism. The cost for the "Parkway" bench is $321 . 95 each. The third bench proposed is the Timberform "Greenway" which is also wood with metal supports . The cost for the "Greenway" bench is $389 . 15 each. Mr . Thompson continued that Staff had not investigated any concrete or metal benches because of comfort and cost drawbacks . Six bus stop locations which have the advertising benches will not receive bus shelters . Staff recommended supplying two benches per location and also purchasing two extra benches for "spares" for a total of 14 . The City Council was requested to select the type of bench and color and authorize Staff to either solicit bids at this time or to include the benches in the 1990-91 budget . Cm. Jeffery stated that she had a problem with Option A as far as lack of comfort . Cm. Vonheeder said she had the same comment but felt Option A was a better choice because of resistance to vandalism. Cm. Hegarty asked how often the buses went by. Cm. Jeffery said the schedule was every hour , or every half hour during the commute period. She said her other objection to Option A was appearance and that she preferred Option B the "Parkway" bench . On motion of Cm. Snyder , seconded by Cm. Vonheeder , and by majority vote, the City Council selected Option A the Wabash Valley bench and selected the color green . Cm. Jeffery opposed the motion. On motion of Cm. Snyder , seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous vote, the City Council directed Staff to solicit bids for benches to be delivered and installed at the time LAVTA ' s bus shelters are installed. CM-8- Regular Meeting November 13 , 1989 REPORT ON THE ALAMEDA COUNTY LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO) DRAFT DOOLAN ROAD SPHERE OF INFLUENCE STUDY AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Planning Director Laurence Tong stated that LAFCO had had a consultant prepare a Draft Doolan Road Sphere of Influence Study and Environmental Impact Report . The study area includes a majority of the property located in the Doolan Canyon watershed. Of the total 2 ,645 acres , 1 , 095 acres are within Dublin ' s present Sphere of Influence . A hypothetical level of urbanization was used in the study to estimate likely demand for municipal services and was not meant to indicate an appropriate level of urbanization. The East Dublin Study, which is not connected to the LAFCO study, will address potential land use . Mr . Tong continued that the LAFCO study recommended that the Doolan Road area be allocated to the City of Dublin Sphere of Influence, based primarily on geography of the area and its effect on future road access and community orientation . LAFCO will hold a public hearing regarding the report at the Pleasanton City Hall on December 7 , 1989 , at 7 : 00 p.m. Mayor Moffatt stated that he would be glad to attend the hearing . Cm. Vonheeder said she felt Mr . Tong or another Staff representative should make the technical presentation . On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder , and by unanimous vote, the City Council agreed to strongly support the findings and recommendation of the study, directed Staff to submit written comments to LAFCO as shown in Attachment 1 of the Agenda Statement, and directed Staff to attend the LAFCO hearing on December 7th to present the City Council ' s position. Retirement Dinner for Jim Walker Mr . Ambrose said that the retirement dinner for Pleasanton City Manager Jim Walker would be held on the evening of November 30th and asked if the City Council wanted to make a presentation . Cm. Jeffery said she felt it would be appropriate to do something . Mayor Moffatt suggested a proclamation or plaque . Cm. Vonheeder concurred. Cm. Hegarty said that the Councilmembers should attend and that a proclamation would be appropriate . CM-8- Regular Meeting November 13, 1989 Mr . Ambrose asked the Councilmembers to let Staff know if they wished to attend so that reservations could be made. Alameda County Housing Authority Board Cm. Hegarty said that he would no longer be able to serve on the Alameda County Housing Authority Board and asked that another representative be selected . Meetings are held on the second Wednesday of the month, with the next meeting to be in December . Selection of the new Board member will be placed on the next agenda . National League Policy Recommendations Cm. .Jeffery said that anyone who had recommendations should submit them to her this week . CLOSED SESSION At 9 : 00 p.m. , the Council recessed to a closed executive session to discuss potential litigation under Government Code Section 54956 . 9 (b) . ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 10 : 50 p.m. Mayor ATTEST : City Clerk CM-8- Regular Meeting November 13 , 1989 REGULAR MEETING - November 27 , 1989 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Monday, November 27, 1989, in the Council Chambers of the Dublin Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at 7 : 32 p.m. , by Mayor Paul Moffatt. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Hegarty, Snyder, Vonheeder and Mayor Moffatt. ABSENT: Councilmember Jeffery PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Mayor led the Council, Staff and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. Recycling Zev Kahn, 11708 Harlan Road, addressed the Council and stated that he was representing Boy Scout Troop #905 which has an ongoing recycling center for newspapers located between Montgomery Wards and Stafford's Restaurant. Newspapers can be delivered at anytime and they prefer that they be bagged or tied. He appreciated community support. CONSENT CALENDAR On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Jeffery absent) , the Council took the following actions: Approved Minutes of Regular Meeting of October 30, 1989; Received the Summer 1989 Recreation Report; Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 124 - 89 DESIGNATING THE CITY MANAGER AS CITY AGENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH DISASTER RELIEF ACT, PUBLIC LAW 228, 93RD CONGRESS Approved the location for a community St. Patrick's Day celebration, approved the parade route and authorized issuance of a parade permit. City Manager Ambrose advised that due to last minute changes which need to be made to the Agreement with the Dublin Fine Arts Foundation and E. L. Smyth, Inc. , this item should be continued to the December 11th Council meeting. This continuance was included in the above motion. CM - 8 - Regular Meeting November 27, 1989 Mayor Moffatt requested that the reappointment of Dr. Scudder to the Mosquito Abatement District item be pulled from the Consent Calendar in order that Dr. Scudder might give an oral presentation. Dr. Scudder advised that he has served the City on this Board since August, 1982 . This district is one of 52 special districts in the State. Legislation enacted in 1915 set this district up, to originally control malaria. Dr. Scudder gave a detailed report of the history of this Board, and advised exactly what they do and why they do it. Cm. Hegarty thanked him for all the time he puts in on this Board. He stated Dublin is very fortunate to have someone of Dr. Scudder's expertise, and who is doing a very good job. Cm. Hegarty questioned if Alameda County pays Dr. Scudder's conference expenses. Dr. Scudder responded that they do. Mayor Moffatt- felt the community was fortunate that it has had no outbreaks of these types of problems. Dr. Scudder advised that there is a problem with refugees who come from other parts of the world where they do not have the same health standards as the United States. On motion of Cm. Snyder, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Jeffery absent) , the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 125 - 89 APPOINTING DR. HARVEY SCUDDER TO A NEW TERM ON THE ALAMEDA COUNTY MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT Cm. Snyder requested that Check No. 4982 in the amount of $944 , payable to the League of CA Cities be voided and reissued in an amount $46 less. The reason for this change is due to conflicts in time schedules for Cm. Snyder and Cm. Vonheeder, who had signed up for special events at the League Conference in San Francisco on December 17-19, 1989. On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Jeffery absent) , the Council approved the Warrant Register in the amount of $302 , 120.75. REQUEST FOR SUPPORT FOR STATE GASOLINE TAX INCREASE City Manager Ambrose advised that the President of the Alameda County Mayors' Conference is requesting that the Council consider supporting the immediate passage of the Gasoline Tax Increase to fund the rebuilding and repair of essential transportation facilities in the Bay Area, as well as to address those infrastructure deficiencies which existed prior to the October 17th earthquake. CM - 8 - Regular Meeting November 27, 1989 Cm. Hegarty questioned the amount of the recent increase approved by the Governor. Staff advised that the Governor approved a 1/4 of 1% increase in the sales tax. Mayor Moffatt stated he did not feel that this is enough to take care of all that needs to be done. On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Jeffery absent) , the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 126 - 89 SUPPORTING IMMEDIATE PASSAGE OF A GASOLINE TAR INCREASE PUBLIC HEARING HANSEN HILL RANCH/BREN CO. TENTATIVE MAP, PD PREZONING AND ANNEXATION, 147 ACRE SITE, PA 89-062 Mayor Moffatt opened the public hearing. Senior Planner O'Halloran advised that the Applicant's current application request is for 1) a Tentative Map for 180 single-family lots on approximately 51 acres and approximately 96 acres of open space, 2) Planned Development Prezoning to allow single-family residential and open space, and 3) an annexation of the 147 acre site to the City of Dublin. The proposal includes general features of: 1) 180 single family dwellings (including production and custom home lots) 2) Approximately 51 acres residential 3) Approximately 96 acres open space 4) 5,700 sq ft to 23, 000 sq ft lot size range 5) 7, 720 sq ft average lot size 6) Two story floor plans 7) 2,715 sq ft to 3 , 630 sq ft dwelling unit size range 8) Landscape street entrances 9) Fire buffer zones separating development from open space 10) Emergency accessways to open space 11) Trail system throughout open space 12) Off site improvements a) Construction of new Valley Christian Center entrance road b) Creation of 5 new graded flat and level access pads on the VCC site c) Percent share contribution to widen Dublin Boulevard between Silvergate Drive and Hansen Drive d) Percent share contribution to redesign of Dublin Boulevard/ Silvergate Drive intersection. CM - 8 - Regular Meeting November 27, 1989 The Planning Commission held two public hearings on November 6 and 20, 1989 to consider the applications. The Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve 1) the Mitigated Negative Declaration, 2) the Mitigation Monitoring Program, 3) Planned Development Prezoning, 4) the Tentative Map, and 5) the annexation. Ms. O'Halloran explained that the first major policy issue the Council must deal with is to determine the appropriate alternatives/options related to the pads. Cm. Hegarty stated there would be 180 lots which range from 5, 700 to 23 , 000 square feet with houses sized approximately 2, 600 to 3 , 600 square feet. Of this figure, he questioned how many 5, 700 square feet lots there would be. He was concerned that when you take this size lot and put a 2 , 600 square foot house on it, it's very tight. Marty Buxton, Bren Company, indicated that she thought there were 4 lots in the size range Cm. Hegarty questioned. All of the houses are two-story, so' the actual footprint will be smaller. She gave a brief general overview of their proposal. They are requesting 10 lots in addition to the 180, and the site plans illustrate these lots, although they are only addressing 180 at this time. They hope to start building in the Spring of 1990. Glen Brown, Civil Engineer, indicated that he was present at the request of Milestone Development. They are the owners of the Cronin property and were concerned that their identified access is through Bren's property to the north. If the roadway is only dedicated and . not constructed, when the time comes to actually construct the roadway, there will be public outcry as it is shown in the open space. They would like Condition #95 amended in order to coordinate the roadway before residents get used to this being open space instead of just having a roadway indicated. Ms. O'Halloran discussed the 5 graded pads on the Valley Christian Center site. Approval of the pads should not be construed as authorization to build on the pads. Cm. Hegarty felt that everyone should understand that these pads will not be developed without some kind of design as to what will take place up there in the future. Any excavation that takes place up there, however, should take place all at once. He felt that it was realistic to expect that once the pads are put in place, they will be begging to be developed. Ms. Buxton advised that the Valley Christian Center road was not the original design on how the road was to be. They realize that this does not entitle them to any approvals, but see this as a once-in-a- lifetime opportunity to have these pads created. It should be noted that in order to build a major road, through there, it will create a lot of dust. The pads themselves will create only a small part of what will be a major construction project. The visual impact is quite minimal. CM - 8 - Regular Meeting November 27, 1989 Clark Morrison, Attorney representing the Bren Company, requested that the City Council follow the Planning Commission's recommendation and allow the 5 pads to be rounded to have a more natural appearance. Brent Salmi with Brian Kangas Foulk Associates in Walnut Creek stated that they could live with Option 3 . David Gates, Landscape Architect, gave a brief history of where the grading comes from. He stated they would prefer Option 3 . Zev Kahn expressed concern over this aspect of the development, and all of a sudden, in a very visible area, we have some pads that will be constructed. He questioned how long it would take to construct these 5 pads, and how long it would be before you could see landscaping. He also felt that hydroseeding might not be the best answer. This is in direct view of the freeway and seems to be in conflict with what the Council has said they want. Pads mean development and there is already a road there providing access to VCC, so it seems inevitable that they'll want to build something. Mr. Tong advised that the fourth alternative does not necessarily include off-haul directly to Dougherty Road. We would not necessarily require it to go to this location. The Applicant could off-haul to another appropriate location which was agreeable to the City. Mayor Moffatt asked if the pads will be engineered to address sliding. Mr. Thompson advised that they would be graded just the way the area would be in the rest of the development, with the same standards, inspections, etc. On motion of Cm. Snyder, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Jeffery absent) , the Council approved Option #3 to permit the pads, but with a rounded, more natural appearance. Cm. Hegarty indicated that a letter had been received from Valley Christian Center stating that they know they will have to go through the processes for anything they might want to do. He felt the church is having this graded for a specific purpose. However, no one should think that these pads are being cut and then nothing further happens. The City Council does not know at this point what will take place. Robert Patterson, 11552 Rolling Hills Drive, felt that they plan to develop this but it is in plain view of I-580, and felt that this is in violation of the General Plan. He questioned how the City Council could approve this. He stated he was opposed to putting in the pads, but if they are allowed, they should be sculpted so that no development can occur. Ward Tanneberg, 7254 Hansen Drive, representing Valley Christian Center, stated that whether or not the pads are approved, one does not hold access to 49 acres in the City of Dublin without having something happen to them in the way of development at some point in time. As Senior Pastor of VCC and as a Dublin resident, he felt the issue becomes, how do we go about developing the valley and hillsides in the CM - 8 - Regular Meeting November 27, 1989 best possible manner. He stated that he believes in strongly mitigating impacts. They have no specific plans regarding what they will do on these acres; they have ideas and dreams, all of which have been discussed with Larry Tong and Richard Ambrose. He felt that everyone needed to recognize that sooner or later something will happen on this site. They resist the idea that this property should be singled out as open space. When Automation Electronics and Pulte Homes were built, the site line issue became a non-issue. Zev Kahn felt that just because things have been done, this doesn't mean they were done properly. The Pulte Homes are almost considered an eyesore from the freeway. We should not tolerate another mistake on the hills. Mayor Moffatt felt that we were talking about something that no one knows about yet, and hopefully, something will develop that will improve the view. He felt that we could actually take something and make it better. Ms. O'Halloran advised that the next item for Council consideration was to determine the appropriate alternative related to the Open Space/Creek Corridor Access Road issue. Cm. Hegarty did not feel that 2 vehicles would be able to fit on the road which is only 8 feet of pavement. He questioned how an emergency situation would be handled, should one arise. Mr. Ambrose indicated that at certain times of the year, vehicles will be able to go onto the side of the road (4 feet of gravel on both sides) . Cm. Hegarty felt that in the dead of winter, it could be possible that 2 vehicles could not get in and out. Ms. O'Halloran advised that 12 feet of rock with 8 feet of pavement satisfied Staff's concerns. The Park In-Lieu fees could impact other projects which are already included in the CIP. Mayor Moffatt asked for some ballpark figures. Mr. Thompson felt that the $10, 000 figure would be to put in 8 feet of paved 2 inch asphalt road. Another few thousand dollars would be required to extend the ditches. If they put in the asphalt, this would reduce their park dedication fees by about $10, 000-$15, 000. Ms. Buxton indicated they tried to reach a compromise. It was one year ago that the site was walked. It is a beautiful site. In order to reach a compromise with Staff, they proposed a 12 foot roadway. They did not feel there was really any difference between alternatives 2 and 3 . They intended all along to put in drainage in the swale areas and also the retaining walls. Ms. Buxton explained that this is not an economical issue. It is substantially more to put in a 12 foot as opposed to an 8 foot roadway. They feel that they can meet the safety requirements with an 8 foot roadway. Other agencies have accepted this width with no problem. CM - 8 - Regular Meeting November 27, 1989 Mayor Moffatt indicated that the Police Department and DRFA both feel they need a 12 foot roadway. Ms. Buxton stated that the Police Department drive in standard vehicles and the Fire Department has indicated that they rely on Public Works to tell them what is needed. Other areas have found that Fire Department response to emergencies can be handled with smaller vehicles. Brent Salmi stated they originally felt that an 8 foot road was adequate, but after discussion with City Staff, came back with 12 feet. It would have a minimum impact on the area. All weather access could be accomplished with a rock road, it doesn't have to be paved. Cm. Hegarty discussed the length of the road as being about 2 , 100 feet, or roughly 1/2 mile. If a vehicle had to pull over to let another one go by, the road must be solid enough to accommodate this maneuver. Mr. Salmi stated that regardless of whether this is paved or rock, there will be some areas where this type of movement could occur. Mr. Gates advised that they spent a great deal of time coming up with a line for the grading. They are very sensitive to the number of trees and the quality of walking on the path. A drawing was displayed illustrating an 8 foot and a 12 foot scheme. Cm. Snyder questioned why Condition #78 was necessary. Mr. Thompson advised that the City was concerned about an 8 foot path because it will also have to have a retaining wall. That is why Staff is looking at a 12 foot width. Originally, however, we did not think they were putting in drainage. Mr. Thompson further advised that the Police Department will need to patrol this area on a regular basis. Staff recognizes that a certain amount of trees will need to be removed. Mr. Ambrose indicated that the v-ditch for drainage is the real issue. What impact does this have on the City if the road does not go in. There is a wide variance in the costs involved. Mr. Thompson indicated that the v-ditch is primarily a maintenance concern. If it is paved, it will be easier to maintain. Mr. Ambrose stated that with regard to the proposal made to Bren, improvements were discussed over and above the issue of whether or not it was a private access road. If they build a road which meets public standards, the City would look at recommending a credit for the difference between public and private access. At the time of discussion, it was an 8 foot roadway. Mr. Thompson advised that they then came back with a proposal for a 12 foot rock access road. CM - 8 - Regular Meeting November 27, 1989 Ms. Buxton indicated that the 12 foot rock was as a result of a compromise. The way this is written, they get no credits and must pay the difference between the 8 foot and 12 foot; that difference being about $150, 000. She indicated that if the modified plan is accepted, they are talking about a 12 foot rock road. She indicated that they do not want to have a safety issue. They were surprised that the City did not give credit. The first offer of a credit was made by the City Manager in consideration of the dedication of the land. Cm. Hegarty advised that without considering costs, he was very concerned over what was the right thing to do. If it boils down to a safety issue, he was unwilling to sacrifice the safety of the City for $150, 000. If a condition of approval is put on that requires it to be 12 feet wide with 8 feet being paved, with no credit, then this is what they must accept. Mr. Thompson stated that the road will be on the hillside for most of the distance and Staff feels 8 feet is too tight. Cm. Vonheeder stated that the top priority is to have something that preserves things as much as possible and still meets the safety issues. She indicated a willingness to risk the drainage ditch in order to preserve the area. We will lose some of the beauty of the area if an engineered road is put in. She was willing to go along with a 12 foot road, but felt that a culvert and v-ditch were too much. Mr. Thompson indicated that this is a remote area and will need to be patrolled by the Police Department. Ms. .Buxton clarified that her point about the credit was that they were trying to find a compromise in a very sensitive area. George Zika, 8046 Peppertree Road, advised that the presentation before the Planning Commission did not include any discussion of park in-lieu fee credit. He was opposed to the road as it was to be for safety vehicles only. Robert Patterson expressed concern with a road that slopes away and indicated that the taxpayers would end up having to maintain the road from washout. He requested that the City protect the taxpayers and future homeowners from this. Mr. Salmi indicated that there is a 50 foot easement just on the other side of the boundary and suggested granting access easement. Dr. Scudder, 7419 Hansen Drive, spoke on behalf of the Preserve Area Ridgelines Committee and stated that it appears that they want to minimize the impact on the one hand and would be doubling the environmental damage on the other hand. Recognizing what must be done regarding public safety, he questioned how other jurisdictions have handled this type of an issue. If you displace the natural water path, you disturb the plant life. CM - 8 - Regular Meeting November 27, 1989 Dr. Kahn stated that a year agb, he walked the site and the group walked on a road that currently exists which was approximately 8 feet wide. Because of difficulty following the arguments back and forth, he felt it behooves the City Council to look into this further. A freeway type road just doesn't fit into this area. He did not think that things had been planned well enough and thought out and suggested that Staff do some further work on this. It is not fair to the citizens for the Council to make a decision at this time. Cm. Snyder stated that no one knows if an emergency will occur in the future. With doors open on both sides, a vehicle needs 10 - 12 feet of 'room. Ms. Buxton advised that the road grade was offered prior to the Planning Commission meeting. They have been working on this since May. Planning accepted a modified alternative of 12 feet with drainage toward the creek. Cm. Snyder stated he had not heard Staff say they will accept this. This is a City Council policy decision. Ms. Buxton clarified that she meant the safety issues. Mr. Zika stated he was not aware that Staff was negotiating park in- lieu fees. Almost none of this property will be open to the public unless the City takes the dedicated road and opens it up to the public. There will be controlled access under private ownership. Ms. Buxton indicated they would be willing to dedicate it, but the City doesn't want it. On motion of Cm. Snyder, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Jeffery absent) , the Council approved Modified Alternative C (Require 12 foot wide compacted aggregate base access road similar to Applicant's proposal, however, also require drainage improvements at retaining walls and swale areas along roadway for creek corridor dedication. In which case, all park in-lieu fees would be collected. The City would then pave access road if needed for maintenance or safety purposes. A rough estimate of the paving cost for this road could range from $10, 000-$15, 000. It is estimated that the developer's park in-lieu fees will exceed $300, 000. ) Cm. Hegarty questioned why the City has to pick up the $10, 000-$15, 000 difference. Mr. Ambrose explained that the City is maintaining the open space area that may be used for open space in the future. We pick up the improvements if we choose to pave it. It has not been offered for dedication. They will cut it, put in the rock and the retaining wall. Mr. Thompson stated that the fence was to keep the wood and debris from going down into the creek. If it is dedicated, we want to separate the dedicated area from the private area. The fence could meander through the area. All other conditions in #78 still apply except the v-ditch and no slope drainage. CM - 8 - Regular Meeting November 27, 1989 i RECESS A short recess was called. All Councilmembers were present when the meeting reconvened. (Cm. Jeffery absent. ) Ms. O'Halloran advised that the Council would next deal with the processing issues. She advised that a correction should be made to the Exhibit A Resolution. On Page 2, Section 11. , the date listed, November 6, 1989 should be changed to read November 27, 1989. Ms. Buxton advised that they worked with Staff in reaching the compromise and are in total agreement with the Mitigated Negative Declaration. Mayor Moffatt closed the public hearing for this portion of the discussion. On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Jeffery absent) , the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 127 - 89 MAKING FINDINGS PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) AND APPROVING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (HANSEN HILL RANCH PROJECT) and RESOLUTION NO. 128 - 89 ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR NEGATIVE DECLARATION PA 89-062, HANSEN HILL RANCH/BREN CO. Ms. O'Halloran advised that the next issue deals with the Planned Development Prezoning. Ms. Buxton advised that this represents many hours of working with Staff in order to clarify, compromise, etc. Mayor Moffatt closed the public hearing related to this portion. On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Snyder, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Jeffery absent) , the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 129 - 89 APPROVING AND ESTABLISHING FINDINGS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) PREZONING CONCERNING PA 89-062 HANSEN HILL RANCH/BREN CO. Ms. O'Halloran advised that the Council already discussed the issue of the 5 pads on the Valley Christian Center property, as well as the open space access road issue. The next relatively minor issue for consideration is the textured paving at the project entrances. CM - 8 - Regular Meeting November 27, 1989 The Applicant proposes the use-of interlocking pavers for the roadway surface at the project entrances and intersections throughout the project, which would be the homowner association's responsibility to repair and maintain. Staff and the Planning Commission recommended against the use due to maintenance problems and public safety concerns. In addition, Civic Plaza is the only public road in the City which contains textured road pavement. The only other remaining issue deals with the Martin Canyon Road turnaround. Staff recommended inclusion of a condition requiring completion of the turnaround at Martin Canyon Road and the Planning Commission recommended deletion of this condition. Ms. Buxton stated it is truly amazing that with over 100 conditions, we are down to only 2 differences. They would like to have a specialness to the project by adding the interlocking pavement. They have offered to have the homeowners association be responsible for the maintenance. The Martin Canyon Road turnaround issue, they feel, is one of fairness. This was something that was never to be allowed as part of their project. They did not feel it was fair that they must construct a full turnaround. Mr. Gates stated he felt that everyone knows the benefits of special paving. If they didn't meet the maintenance standards, they wouldn't recommend them. An alternative would be to go to a colored textured concrete. Other communites have approved these types of pavers, plus Caltrans has also used them. This is at an additional cost to Bren, but they feel it improves the look of the project. Cm. Hegarty questioned what was used at the entrance of the Kaufman & Broad multi-family units. Mr. Thompson advised that they used a type of brick like what is used at the entrance to Civic Plaza. A professional company needs to place and replace them. It is nice for pedestrians, but once cars travel over them for a while, maintenance problems can occur. Staff did not feel the benefit is great enough when weighing the amount of maintenance problems. Mr. Salmi stated with regard to the turnaround, there is a 50 foot existing roadway easement on the other side of the line. By using this 50 foot right-of-way, there could be at least a hammerhead type street. He did not want to jeopardize the approval of this project, but suggested between the tentative map and final map stages, this could be considered. Cm. Hegarty questioned if all parties get together and agree to utilize this 50 foot easement instead of the 12 foot road, would this simply be a matter of modifying a condition. Mr. Thompson advised that a modification to the tentative map would be necessary. The Council should look at the beauty of the area with the trees going through it. For the City to use this for trail purposes, it does not have the benefit that the other side has. CM - 8 - Regular Meeting November 27, 1989 Mr. Ambrose indicated that if you are going to use the trail area you need to plan on how you are going to get in and how will you keep it clear. You can't get in there from the other side of the creek. Also, the Council is talking about a piece of property that doesn't have anything to do with this development. Ms. Silver advised that an easement can be granted for private or public or pedestrian purposes. The currently existing easement was granted for agricultural purposes and cannot be used for other purposes. Mr. Thompson advised that Staff did not feel that this is a desirable place for open space. Ms. O'Halloran advised that the stub road going into the open space beyond this project would be graded only to the stub. Mr. Gates reiterated that he did not feel there is a maintenance problem with the pavers. They are quite common in Europe and also other cities nearby. Cm. Vonheeder stated she understood the concern with maintenance of the pavers, but indicated she would like to see them allowed. On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Jeffery absent) , the Council agreed to allow the use of interlocking pavers for the roadway surface and the project entrances and intersections throughout the project, with the homeowners association being responsible to repair and maintain them. Condition #34 should be deleted. With regard to the Martin Canyon Road turnaround, Cm. Snyder questioned what the real benefit was. There are only 3 houses on the street. Mr. Thompson advised that the benefit is for vehicles to be able to turn around. The street sweeper was used as an example. This is on the north side of the creek. Cm. Vonheeder felt the City needed to recognize some responsibility for putting this in: It needs to be done, but the developer does not necessarily need to be held responsible. Ms. Buxton stated they did not understand why they should be the ones to make the turnaround when it is of no value to their project. Mr. Thompson discussed precedent setting, in that it was a requirement for 2 other developments in town. Mayor Moffatt questioned how many curb feet were involved. Mr. Thompson advised that if they don't do a whole bulb, it would be about 32 feet across the end. Doing a whole bulb would be about 150 feet. The turnaround would be entirely on the west side of the street. CM - 8 - Regular Meeting November 27, 1989 On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Jeffery absent) , the Council agreed with the Planning Commission recommendation and deleted this requirement. Condition #46 should be deleted. Mayor Moffatt closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Snyder, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Jeffery absent) , the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 130 - 89 APPROVING TENTATIVE MAP 5766 CONCERNING PA 89-062 HANSEN HILL RANCH/BREN CO. On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Jeffery absent) , the Council waived the reading and INTRODUCED an- Ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance to permit the prezoning of real property located west of Silvergate Drive north of Hansen Drive south of Winding Trail Lane. PUBLIC HEARING-EMERGENCY ORDINANCE REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 25-87 & ESTABLISHING BUS STOPS ON DUBLIN BOULEVARD WEST OF GOLDEN GATE DRIVE Mayor Moffatt opened the public hearing. Staff advised that the Livermore/Amador Valley Transit Authority (LAVTA) , has requested that .the bus stop on the north side of Dublin Boulevard west of Golden Gate Drive be lengthened to accommodate 5 buses. Susan Bruesels with LAVTA advised that after the October 17th earthquake, they went out to monitor how things were going and it came to light at that time that this was not a good situation. Dennis John, a Circle Way resident felt that the bus stop in question is an eyesore and questioned if the City could put some trash receptacles in at that location. Mr. Thompson advised that LAVTA will be providing bus shelters as well as trash receptacles beginning in April of next year. Mayor Moffatt closed the public hearing. Cm. Snyder requested Staff to follow up on the concerns expressed by Mr. John. On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Jeffery absent) , the Council waived the reading and on an urgency basis, adopted CM - 8 - Regular Meeting November 27, 1989 ORDINANCE NO. 19 - 89 REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 25-87 AND ESTABLISHING BUS STOPS ON THE NORTHERLY AND SOUTHERLY SIDES OF DUBLIN BOULEVARD WEST OF GOLDEN GATE DRIVE PRINTING BIDS FOR 1990 COMMUNITY CALENDAR As authorized by the City Council, Staff has solicited bids for the printing of the 1990 community calendar. Ms. Texeira explained that 4 bids were received by the deadline. The low bidder was AMP Printing with a bid of $10, 315. 87 . One bid was received after the deadline and was returned unopened to the bidder. Dennis John questioned if any minority or women owned businesses were given an opportunity to bid. Ms. Texeira advised that the City sent bid packages to anyone who requested them. On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Snyder, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Jeffery absent) , the Council awarded the bid for the printing of the community calendars to AMP Printing. DUBLIN SWIM CENTER RENOVATION - CONTRACT 89-12 Lee Thompson advised that the Swim Center renovation project consists of several phases which have been and are to be performed by different, specialized contractors. Contract 89-12 provides for relining the pool, repairing the gutters and leaks both in the pool itself and in the skimmers, and repairing and resurfacing the pool deck. With the adoption of the Joint Use Facility Improvement Agreement with the Dublin Unified School District, the City agreed to allow the School District Swim Team to use the Swim Center commencing February 1, 1990. In order for the City to meet its time commitment, Staff recommended that a special City Council meeting date be set in order to award the bid as a result of a proposed bid opening date of December 19th. December 20th was suggested and discarded due to a conflict with Don Biddle's retirement from the School Board party scheduled at the Civic Center that evening. On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Jeffery absent) , the Council authorized Staff to advertise the contract for bids and established a special City Council meeting date of December 21, 1989, 7: 00 p.m. to award the bid. CM - 8 - Regular Meeting November 27, 1989 DUBLIN CIVIC CENTER FACILITY USE POLICY Since moving into the new Civic Center in early October, Staff has received numerous requests to utilize the Center for community meetings, social functions, etc. A draft Facility Use Policy was prepared which sets forth the criteria for use of the Center, as well as establishes policies, procedures and fees for use by the public. The policy addresses such areas as: Classifications of users; priority of users; hours of use; and fee schedule. Cm. Vonheeder questioned if the 51% residency membership requirement could be applied if they have a business in Dublin. She questioned how Staff determined if they meet this requirement. Ms. Lowart advised that Staff asks for a membership roster. If a business has a Dublin address, this would be counted. In the past, we had a 75% requirement, but we now require only 51%. Cm. Vonheeder- felt that a business located in Dublin should be in category VIII instead of IX. Those in categories VII, VIII, IX and X are mostly commercial users. One month booking notice isn't enough time for sending out brochures advertising an event that they may want to hold at the Civic Center. She felt this should be changed to 2 months. She suggested adding a month to all the time schedules in those categories. Cm. Vonheeder questioned if the City has a right to bump other users. Ms. Lowart advised that the City could, if it had to and there are enough other facilities in the community to at least provide another alternative if this were to happen. Cm. Vonheeder stated she felt uncomfortable allowing outside use without an attendant on duty. She felt there should be an attendant around if there is a scheduled use in the courtyard because it is closed off from public view. Various uses were discussed which may take place in the courtyard area. Mr. Ambrose advised that uses would not be allowed that might cause liability exposure to the City. Cm. Snyder stated he agreed that anytime the facility is used there should be an attendant on the site. Ms. Lowart advised that for the next 3 months, the courtyard will not be available because of the fountain construction. Outdoor requests will be very limited until next Spring anyway. Cm. Snyder felt that even so, we should still have a policy in place. Mr. Ambrose advised that we could add courtyard use with an attendant fee required. CM - 8 - Regular Meeting November 27, 1989 By a Council consensus, Staff was directed to reverse the order of ' categories VIII and IX. With regard to fees charged, Cm. Snyder felt that actual MCE charges should be listed and questioned their rates. Cm. Vonheeder stated she has strong feelings about charging fees and wished that no charge had to be made. Ms. Lowart advised that $22 . 31 is MCE's actual hourly rate (including the vehicle charge) , or $14 .40 without overhead, etc. Acting City Attorney Silver suggested that the policy specify the words "actual costs" . There was a Council consensus to substitute this verbage. Page 4 of the Policy lists the address of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board and Cm. Snyder advised that this location was severely damaged in the earthquake. Staff was directed to delete the address for ABC. DECEMBER CITY COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE Staff advised that a second December Council meeting is necessary in order to award the bid for the Swim Center renovation project, as well as to discuss issues related to a proposed increase in the City's garbage rates, recycling, and household hazardous waste issues. The normal meeting date falls on December 25th, so the meeting would automatically be rescheduled for December 26th. The Council previously established the date of December 21, 1989 at 7: 00 p.m. , for their second December meeting. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business .to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 12 : 10 a.m. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK CM - 8 - Regular Meeting November 27, 1989