HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 4.01 Approve 03-12-1990 Minutes REGULAR MEETING - March 12, 1990
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held
on Monday, March 12, 1990, in the Council Chambers of the Dublin Civic
Center. The meeting was called to order at 7: 35 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
allegiance to the flag.
CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Jeffery, and by unanimous
vote, the Council took the following actions:
Approved Minutes of Regular Meeting of February 26, 1990;
Accepted the City Treasurer's Investment Report for Period Ending
February 28, 1990;
Adopted
RESOLUTION NO. 21 - 90
RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 126-88 AND
ESTABLISHING MANAGEMENT POSITIONS EXEMPT FROM COMPETITIVE SERVICE
AND PRESCRIBING LEAVE BENEFITS FOR THE POSITIONS
(add City Clerk position)
Adopted a revised 1989 Position Allocation Plan;
Adopted
RESOLUTION NO. 22 - 90
AMENDING THE CLASSIFICATION PLAN
and
RESOLUTION NO. 23 - 90
ESTABLISHING A SALARY PLAN FOR FULL-TIME PERSONNEL
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PERSONNEL RULES
and authorized a budget transfer from the City's Contingent Reserve in
the amount of $3, 000 to the City Manager/City Clerk's budget;
Accepted improvements under Contract 89-13, Drainage Inlet Grate
Replacement Phase I and authorized payment ($67, 482) to P & F
Construction;
CM - VOL 9 - 50
Regular Meeting March 12, 1990
----------------------------------------------------------------------
COPIES TO:
ITEM NO. 9
Accepted improvements under Contracts 88-1A (Masonry Wall) and 88-8
(Wood Wall) Major Arterials Soundwalls; authorized a budget transfer
($28, 218) from unallocated reserves to the Major Arterial Soundwalls
Capital Improvement Project; and authorized final payment and
retention ($16, 638. 16) to B & B Concrete;
Authorized Staff to advertise Contract 90-05 Dublin High School
Football Field Renovation for bids;
Received the Financial Statements for Period Ending February 28, 1990;
Received the 1989 Police Services Calendar Year Report;
Approved Warrant Register in the amount of $354, 195.99 .
ASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS (ABAG) PROPOSED DUES INCREASE
Staff advised that the City recently received ABAG's Budget Summary
for Fiscal Year 1990-91, which includes an approximate 4% overall dues
increase. Dublin's increase is approximately 9.9%, and is mainly
attributable to Dublin's substantial population increase.
Cm. Snyder advised that the Executive Board met in February and this
increase was approved. At that time, he raised the question related
to the 3 , 000 incarcerated individuals being counted in as part of our
population statistics. We pay dues on these people, as a part of the
association. Unfortunately, the argument they use, and on which they
have a great deal of support is that the figure of $25.41 is
distributed annually to the cities by the State Controller. Cm.
Snyder did not feel that this logic makes a lot of sense, but they
apparently have a great level of support. This shows what you will be
getting back from the State and this is what they base their dues on.
Cm. Snyder felt Dublin should communicate to the Executive Director
that we do not agreed with their method of figuring dues. Dues should
be dues, relative to what they need to operate the organization, not
based on what the distribution is to the cities from the State
Department of Finance. From a philosophical standpoint, this is a
poor argument for the organization to use to assess its dues.
Cm. Hegarty felt a letter should be directed to ABAG stating our
concerns.
Cm. Jeffery suggested sending dues relative to what we feel our
population is and send a letter along with our check stating we feel
their figures are not justified. They would then have to respond to
us right away.
Cm. Snyder did not feel that ABAG would accept this. They may exclude
us from membership.
CM - VOL 9 - 51
Regular Meeting March 12, 1990
City Manager Ambrose pointed out that Dublin gets its liability
insurance through ABAG. If we drop out, we are out of the program.
Assistant City Manager Rankin advised that we are expecting about a
12% equity distribution, similar to a dividend, which equates to about
a 20% net decrease to our premium.
Mr. Ambrose clarified that ABAG does not use the Department of Finance
figures, but rather the State Controller's numbers.
On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Jeffery, and by unanimous
vote, the Council approved the ABAG dues increase, but directed Staff
to send a strongly worded letter related to the Council's objection
over the way the population figures are calculated.
PUBLIC HEARING
FIRST WESTERN DEVELOPMENT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONING. PA 89-050
Mayor Moffatt opened the public hearing.
Planning Director Tong advised that in November, 1988, the City
Council approved a Tentative Parcel Map and Variance application for
the First Western Development site. This approval divided an existing
7 acre site into two parcels, one of which had substandard effective
lot frontage (creating a "flag lot" type parcel) for which the
Variance was granted. A condition of approval for both the Variance
and Tentative Parcel Map required the Applicant to submit an
application for a Planned Development Rezoning. This application is
in compliance with that condition of approval.
Mr. Tong advised that Site Development Review for the site to allow a
10, 000 square foot retail building was approved in June, 1988, and is
currently under construction. On February 20, 1990, the Planning
Commission considered the PD Rezoning request and adopted Resolutions
recommending the City Council rezone the site from C-1, Retail
Business District to PD District, and directed Staff to prepare the
appropriate findings for the City Council resolutions relating to the
imposition of traffic impact fees. The City Attorney drafted a
resolution imposing traffic impact fees on future development on this
site which includes findings required by State Law.
Mr. Tong indicated that there are two provisions addressed in the
draft PD District which Staff/Planning Commission recommendation and
the Applicant's proposal disagree. One relates to existing
freestanding sign and the other to east elevation wall signage for
Parcel B.
The Applicant proposes to permit the existing freestanding sign to be
relocated or replaced with a similar sign at a new location on Parcel
A in the event future development in the northwest portion of the site
causes the sign to be relocated. The Applicant proposes that the
relocation be subject to property owner and City agreement.
CM - VOL 9 - 52
Regular Meeting March 12, 1990
The Applicant proposes to allow wall signage on the east elevation
(facing I-680) of the new building currently under construction,
subject to conditional use permit approval.
Cm. Jeffery questioned how the request for a sign on the east frontage
differs from what was approved for Howard Johnson's along I-580.
Mr. Tong advised that the City Council allowed a free standing sign
fronting a freeway when a parcel was of a certain size (about 4
acres) .
Cm. Hegarty questioned if they only wanted a free standing sign, we
have regulations they have to follow.
Mr. Tong advised that the Applicant would like to have the ability to
relocate the free standing sign subject to the property owner and City
Staff agreeing to the location without regard to the existing Sign
Ordinance. Staff feels it must comply with the Sign Ordinance.
Rick Hess, Applicant, advised that the existing free standing sign
currently conforms with the City's Sign Ordinance, but since they are
requesting a PD, they would like to have the City Council offer a
little leeway. They would like to have the ability to work with City
Staff related to any future development on the corner parcel. They
also would request that the Council consider allowing signs on the
east elevation through a Conditional Use Permit application. Staff
and/or the Planning Commission would review the signage prior to
installation. They feel that permanent and attractive signs could be
placed which would allow the merchants to take advantage of the
freeway exposure. This would ultimately benefit the City.
Cm. Hegarty indicated that the City went through a lengthy process
before the Sign Ordinance was adopted. He questioned the Applicant as
to whether they made any comments when the Ordinance was being
drafted.
Mr. Hess responded that they did not.
Mayor Moffatt closed the public hearing.
Cm. Jeffery indicated that there are 2 signs at the 7-11 Store on
Silvergate Drive @ San Ramon Road. She asked if there was a special
permit involved.
Mr. Tong advised that one of their signs is illegal. Staff processed
a Variance for replacing the front sign and a condition of approval
was removal of the sign facing the houses.
Cm. Snyder felt that signage on the east side of the First Western
Development is tantamount to the success .of a business at this
location. This is a fine location and it is very marketable.
Cm. Hegarty questioned if everyone was discussing identity or
advertising. The City went through a long process of developing the
CM - VOL 9 - 53
Regular Meeting March 12, 1990
Sign Ordinance and if we now grant a Variance here and there, he
indicated he was uncomfortable with this. It appears that we have set
the standard, and are now trying to pull away. He indicated he would
not be against granting this if we made a mistake in the Ordinance,
but sooner or later, we must stick to the Ordinance. We have been
very lenient, thus far.
Cm. Vonheeder stated we have already made an amendment to the
Ordinance because we did not recognize highway frontages, and this may
be an opportunity through the CUP process to take another look at it.
Cm. Jeffery felt there is an advantage to letting people on the
freeway know what is in Dublin because they will then come in and shop
other locations, as well.
Cm. Hegarty stated he was not against continuing this item to look at
it further.
Mayor Moffatt felt that the Council could adopt Staff's recommenda-
tions and then the Council could review it further when the CUP comes
in. He stated he would like to see everything possible done to insure
the success of the businesses.
Cm. Vonheeder felt the issue could be one of broad interpretation. It
faces a public road. How far away is an interpretation by Staff. The
definition could be construed that I-680 is their secondary frontage.
She felt there is a tremendous amount of latitude for free standing
signs in the Ordinance.
Cm. Jeffery made a motion that signs on the east side be allowed, and
the Applicant would have to go through the necessary permit processes.
Cm. Jeffery stated her motion would include adopting Staff's
recommendation, with this exception. Cm. Vonheeder seconded the
motion. This motion was not voted on.
Mr. Tong stated that Staff would bring back specific language for a
CUP process for consideration by the Council at the next Council
meeting.
The Council questioned whether the motion should be withdrawn or
simply tabled.
On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Jeffery, and by unanimous
vote, the Council continued the item to the March 26, 1990 Council
meeting.
Mr. Ambrose clarified that Staff's understanding was that it would
develop some language to allow a CUP process for signs on the eastern
elevation, but with regard to the free standing sign, the Council
concurs with the Planning Commission's recommendation.
CM - VOL 9 - 54
Regular Meeting March 12, 1990
AGREEMENT TO CONDUCT HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE COLLECTION
Assistant City Manager Rankin advised that pursuant to City Council
direction, Staff has worked with the Cities of Livermore and
Pleasanton to develop a HHW collection day. The cost of the program
will be recovered through an adjustment to the garbage rates to become
effective July 1, 1990. The proposed date of the collection is May 5,
1990. The estimated cost for Dublin will be approximately $16, 850,
which equates to approximately $.20 for each single family residential
customer.
Pursuant to State Law, garbage rate adjustments require publication of
a notice. In order to allow adequate lead time, Staff recommended
that the City Council designate a hearing on the garbage rate increase
for the meeting of April 23 , 1990. This should allow adequate time to
finalize negotiations on the residential recycling program as well,
thereby allowing consideration for a single rate increase covering
both programs.
The Board of Supervisors of Alameda County has reviewed a plan to
develop some form of a permanent collection program. A target date of
July 1, 1991 appears to be very optimistic.
In response to a question by Mayor Moffatt, Mr. Rankin advised that
the residential rate for 1 can service would increase $.20 per month.
Cm. Snyder requested that as much information as possible be available
at the April 23rd hearing related to AB 939. People should understand
that this is not something that Dublin instigated, but rather
something we must respond to.
On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous
vote, the Council adopted
RESOLUTION NO. 24 - 90
APPROVING AN AGREEMENT FOR PARTICIPATION IN A
JOINT HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE COLLECTION EVENT
AND DESIGNATING A FUNDING METHOD
and authorized the Mayor to execute the agreement and established a
public hearing for April 23, 1990 to consider a garbage rate
adjustment which would become effective July 1, 1990.
AMENDMENT TO WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
Assistant City Manager Rankin advised that the enactment of AB 939
revises the responsibilities of the County Waste Management Authority.
The Authority has requested that each of the Member Agencies adopt an
amended agreement. Due to the deadlines contained within the Law, Mr.
Rankin advised that it is important that an agreement be in place as
soon as possible. There still remains, however, issues which will
CM - VOL 9 - 55
Regular Meeting March 12, 1990
need to be reviewed by a Technical Advisory Committee consisting of
Staff members. It is anticipated that these issues may be resolved
through a future amendment to the JPA.
Mr. Rankin explained that the primary focus of the proposed JPA
amendment is to incorporate the Integrated Waste Management Process
identified in AB 939. The agreement also states that the existing
Waste Management Plan would stay in place until such time as the
Integrated Plan is prepared and approved by the State Board.
The second area which is changed addresses the need to prepare source
reduction and recycling elements to the plan. AB 939 requires that
each City prepare this document either individually or in conjunction
with other agencies. Language in the proposed JPA states that the
Authority would prepare a "baseline" document. The City would be
required to submit proposed changes or revisions to the Authority for
comment prior to adoption by the City. Mr. Rankin advised that it is
unclear as to the impact that this requirement will have when it is
implemented.
Also addressed in the amended JPA is the ability to continue to levy
fees upon solid waste operators. AB 939 repealed the current
authorization to levy these fees after January 1, 1990. This change
will continue to provide a source of funding for the preparation of
the County Waste Management Plan.
Another change relates to the imposition of fees and AB 939 authorizes
cities and counties to impose fees in order to pay the cost of
preparing, adopting, and implementing the Countywide Integrated Waste
Management Plan and its Elements. The proposed JPA would explicitly
grant this duty to the Authority and not the Cities and County.
The Alameda County City Management Association held a joint meeting
with the Waste Management Authority to discuss the proposed JPA. The
Authority legal counsel has clearly stated the need to have a
mechanism in place in order to legitimately collect fees levied under
the old plan. In order to address the needs of both parties, the
Authority adopted a resolution identifying a need for further review
of funding and planning issues. The resolution establishes a process
in which the Alameda County City Management Association would develop
a Technical Advisory Committee to review the JPA in terms of key
issues, including fee equity, distribution, amount, and method of
local funding, local control and flexibility, financial and program
liability, definition of "baseline" , and any other pertinent issues.
Cm. Snyder advised that there are some technical issues which need to
be dealt with. On March 21st, Mr. Shute will again meet with the City
Management group. Somehow, we need to hold the Authority together on
an interim basis. There are other pieces of legislation going through
to sift this out.
On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous
vote, the Council adopted
CM - VOL 9 - 56
Regular Meeting March 12, 1990
RESOLUTION NO. 25 - 90
APPROVING THE ADOPTION OF A JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT
FOR WASTE MANAGEMENT
. REPORT ON DOOLAN ROAD/CROAK ROAD
SPHERE OF INFLUENCE STUDY AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Planning Director Tong advised that the Alameda County Local Agency
Formation Commission (LAFCO) had a consultant prepare a Sphere of
Influence Study and EIR for the Doolan Road/Croak Road area. The
February 28, 1990 Study/EIR replaces the October, 1989, Draft
Study/EIR. The study area has been expanded to add approximately 480
acres generally east of Croak Road to the 2, 645 acres around Doolan
Road and the study analyzes two hypothetical scenarios: 1) The
previously studied moderate intensity urban level development,
including 3 , 000 dwelling units and 100 acres commercial/industrial
land; and 2) A low intensity rural level of development, including 200
dwelling units.
The study recommends that LAFCO allocate the study area to the City of
Dublin's Sphere of Influence. The study basically finds that the area
will be subject to significant urbanization pressure over the next 10-
20 years, and should be planned accordingly. The area would be more
readily integrated into the circulation, commerce and developing
community of East Dublin area and would be best allocated to Dublin
for planning in concert with the East Dublin planning area.
Cm. Hegarty felt this is just as important as Dublin's original Sphere
of Influence, as it will play a big part in Dublin's future. He felt
the City should send Mayor Moffatt to represent the City, and have all
necessary ammunition to bolster the recommendation of the report, and
be prepared to answer any questions that LAFCO may have.
Mayor Moffatt stated he wished to dispel media reports that Dublin is
a land grabbing green meanie. People should understand that Dublin
did not initiate this action with LAFCO; it was initiated by
Livermore.
Cm. Snyder advised that after Dublin's Sphere of Influence was adopted
in 1985, LAFCO asked all the cities in Alameda County if they wanted
an upgrade to their spheres of influence. Livermore wanted to include
a part of these properties in their Sphere of Influence. Some of the
property owners did not feel this was appropriate so they asked that a
study be done.
Mayor Moffatt clarified that there have been no proposals for
development on this land and the only thing now being discussed is
obtaining the Sphere of Influence. There have been no deals cut with
any developers.
CM - VOL 9 - 57
Regular Meeting March 12, 1990
On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous
vote, the Council strongly supported the findings and recommendations
of the study that Dublin is the appropriate City to plan urban uses in
the Doolan Road/Croak Road area and that LAFCO should allocate the
area to the City of Dublin's Sphere of Influence. The Council
directed Staff to submit written comments to LAFCO and indicated that
Mayor Moffatt should attend the LAFCO hearing and present the City
Council's position.
CITY PARTICIPATION IN DUBLIN PRIDE WEEK
Mayor Moffatt advised that he has been working with community
representatives to sponsor Dublin Pride Week, April 8-14, 1990. A
committee has been formed which includes representatives of the
Chamber of Commerce, Dublin School District and service clubs.
Mayor Moffatt requested that the City fund the activities associated
with the campaign and pay for advertising, ribbons for school contest
winners, flyers, etc. The proposed budget would authorize funding not
to exceed $2 , 775. The Committee hopes to help underwrite a portion of
the costs through contributions from service clubs. The Committee has
also requested authorization to use the City Seal on special trash
bags during the clean-up campaign.
Cm. Jeffery felt the idea was very good, but indicated she had a
problem with putting the City seal on trash bags. She felt this was
inappropriate.
Mayor Moffatt stated it is actually a litter bag rather than a trash
bag.
Cm. Hegarty stated he agreed that the City seal should be used very
carefully.
On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by majority
vote, the Council approved City participation in Dublin Pride Week at
a cost not to exceed $2,775, with the exception that the City seal not
be allowed on the garbage bags. Mayor Moffatt voted against this
motion.
OTHER BUSINESS
Open Keg Law
Cm. Jeffery advised that the Council had received a letter from Karen
Seals requesting that the City look into adopting an "Open Keg Law" .
Cm. Jeffery questioned if the City may possibly already have something
on the books that would cover this.
Lt. Rose advised that there is a County Ordinance on the keg law, but
he would have to check to see if this applies to Dublin.
CM - VOL 9 - 58
Regular Meeting March 12, 1990
Cm. Jeffery requested that this issue be researched and brought before
. the Council.
City Manager Ambrose advised that Staff will research this and prepare
a report.
National League of Cities Conference
Cm. Jeffery advised that she had recently attended the National League
of Cities Congress as a member of the Fair Committee in Washington,
D.C. With regard to the peace dividend, they tried to explain that
any monies which might become available would be many years down the
line. Most of the cost savings would be personnel, and would be
phased over many years. NLC is in the process of developing a policy
statement.
Alameda County Housing Authority Appointment
Cm. Hegarty stated that it was his understanding that no one had
expressed an interest in this appointment. He advised that he may be
able to again attend the meetings starting next month, due to his new
job and work schedule.
Police Department Assistance to Pleasanton
Mayor Moffatt advised that the City had received a letter from
Pleasanton Police Chief Bill Eastman thanking Dublin Police Services
for assisting with the incident last month. Pleasanton Police Officer
Mark Allen was injured. They specifically thanked Deputy Jim Jukich
for his assistance.
St. Patrick's Day Parade
Mayor Moffatt reminded the Council of the St. Patrick's Day parade to
be held on Saturday. Vehicles will be provided for the Council to
ride in and the Council should arrive no later than 8 : 30 a.m. The
parade begins at 9: 30 a.m.
CM - VOL 9 - 59
Regular Meeting March 12, 1990
CLOSED SESSION
At 8 : 55 p.m. , the Council recessed to a closed executive session to
discuss: 1) Litigation, Government Code Section 54956.9 (a) , Title not
stated, because to do so would jeopardize the City's ability to
conclude existing settlement negotiations to its advantage; and 2)
City of Dublin vs. Alameda County (Open Space Element) Alameda County
Superior Court No. V-000855-4, Government Code Section 54956.9 (a) .
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Council, the
. meeting was adjourned at 11:00 p.m.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
CM - VOL 9 - 60
Regular Meeting March 12, 1990