Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 4.1 Approve 09-11-1991 & 09-23-1991 Minutes 4 JOINT PLANNING COMMISSION/CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION September 11 , 1991 A special joint Dublin Planning Commission and City Council Study Session meeting was held on September 11 , 1991 in the Regional Meeting Room at the Dublin Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at 7 : 38 p.m. by Mayor Snyder. * * * * * ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Burton, Howard, Jeffery, Moffatt, and Mayor Snyder; Planning Commissioners Burnham, North, Rafanelli, and Zika. ABSENT: Commissioner Barnes * * * * * PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Mayor led the Council, Commissioners, Staff, and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. * * * * * WESTERN DUBLIN JOINT STUDY SESSION Planning Consultant Brenda Gillarde indicated that this was the third study session on western Dublin. The purpose of the study session was to receive input and feedback from the Council, Commissioners, and Community. The topics in this study related to the road over the Skyline ridge in regard to the visual aspects of the road, how the road might interrupt the park trail, and the possible traffic and circulation problems . The options presented are to 1 ) incorporate the road into the Specific Plan; 2 ) have an alternate access road; or 3 ) not proceed with the road. Also to be reviewed would be the Hollis Canyon Linear Park. Dennis Dahlin, consultant for WPM, gave a brief overview of the map of western Dublin and pointed out the specific areas which were to be discussed. Mr. Dahlin explained that in regard to the nature of circulation, in the current Specific Plan there was only one link between central Dublin and western Dublin, that being Dublin Boulevard. Due to the fact that there is a 500 feet rise in elevation, there was no way that a straight through street could be constructed. There would need to be two access roads from the Cronin project. The three possibilities were to extend Brittany Drive, to have a road from Hansen Hills Ranch along Martin Creek as a fire access road, or to build a road over the ridge. Mr. Dahlin felt that the traffic created would not be heavy, but be the leisure Sunday drive type traffic, but there was some concern about adding traffic to the street. Several residents from Rolling Hills Drive expressed concern over increasing traffic on their street. One resident stated that there are people already treating the residential street as a boulevard and that CM - Vol 10 - 343 Study Session Meeting September 11 , 1991 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COPIES TO: AL f 1TEMT NO. there was already a s--ious problem of people sp_tding up to 60 miles per hour. Diana Day indicated that she would not allow her children to play out front and that the police have already been called numerous times in regard to speeders . Some of the residents have hosed down cars that were speeding. She questioned where the Cronin Ranch people would shop. She was afraid that they would just cut across and use their street. Marjorie LeBar felt that no matter how the cars came out of the Cronin development, that a large portion would be dumped onto Silvergate Drive which she felt already had a traffic problem. She was concerned as to whether the streets could take the additional impact of traffic. She was also concerned over the safety of children going to school and to the parks. A resident of Rolling Hills Drive stated that the street was steep and there was a problem backing out of their driveways . More cars would only increase the problem. Another resident of Rolling Hills Drive felt that people would try to avoid the I-580/I-680 interchange and use this road as a shortcut. The public road would cross part of the trail corridor, and the visual impact of the Cronin Development and the road over the ridgeline would not be good. Another member of the audience expressed concern that the City was trying to service the Cronin project at the expense of the ridge and open space. Mr. Dahlin indicated that a road over the ridge could damage the park district' s interest in acquiring land as an open space situation. He also expressed concern over the visual impact of both the road over the ridge, as well as the Cronin project which would be over the 740 ft level line of development. A resident questioned how the Cronin project would get water since the project was so high in elevation. Would a well be used? Mr. Dahlin responded that the present EIR stated that there was adequate water. Margaret Tracy indicated that she had read in literature from Zone 7 that there was not enough water for eastern and western Dublin. Councilmember Jeffery questioned whether the pictures showed the entire Cronin project. Mr. Dahlin responded that the pictures showed only one-third of the project . Eden Development was behind the ridge and therefore not seen in the picture. A resident questioned the status of development of Hansen Ranch. Mr. Tong responded that Bren Company had determined that the market was not healthy for them to proceed right now so they were working with the City to create a long term agreement for permits . CM - Vol 10 - 344 Study Session Meeting September 11 , 1991 } Someone in the audience asked who would build the road if Hansen Ranch was not being developed at this time. A resident of Rolling Hills Drive expressed his concern that when he bought his home he was told that there would be no building above him. He questioned whether the General Plan would have to be amended to allow for the building. Mr. Dahlin indicated that even if the Cronin property was built, Brittany Drive may not be extended. Glen Brown, consultant for Cronin Project, requested that a traffic study be done to see if there would be more or less traffic onto Rolling Hills Drive and Silvergate Drive. He asked if East Bay Parks District would be addressing the trail corridor. He indicated that another water zone would be established to service the homes in the Cronin Project. Mr. Thompson, Public Works Director for Dublin, explained that a lot of reverse curves would be needed to keep at a 12% grade due to the steepness of the area. He also indicated that Zone 7 had 4 to 5 years of water stored underground, but that they did not have the pumping capacity. State water had been cut off due to the drought, but he was hopeful that the drought would be over soon. Councilmember Jeffery asked how the visual impact would differ between an access road and a public road. Mr. Thompson responded that if it was not a public street, that there would not be any many standards to meet. Mr. Thompson indicated that the number of roads and types of roads depended on the number of units to service in the project. If there were over 75 units, there would need to be two access roads . 75 units and less required one paved road and one emergency vehicle access road. 25 units or less required one paved road. A resident inquired if 75 units could be built instead of 125 units. Mr. Dahlin stated that there was a high cost to develop in this area so there had to be a certain number of units built to make it fiscally possible to build. 125 units had been planned. A resident expressed concern about the removal of trees for the development. Mr. Dahlin indicated that there could be a reduction in the number of trees removed. Another resident expressed concern that the development could start and then stop like Ahmanson, leaving the hillside scarred. A member of the audience asked that since the Cronin project needed two access roads, could it be done without the extension of Brittany Drive. Mr. Dahlin indicated that there would be much grading needed to extend Brittany Drive . CM - Vol 10 - 345 Study Session Meeting September 11 , 1991 A resident asked how the dirt would be removed and what the timeframe would be. Mr. Dahlin responded that the dirt would be left on the site. Another resident asked if the dirt would be taken to fill the canyon? Mr. Dahlin responded yes . One member of the audience indicated that the fact that Brittany Drive was steep would increase the temptation to speed. He stated that one of the attractions for buying there had been that the General Plan indicated that there would be no more building above. His expectation was that the road would not be a through way. Now the rules were going to be changed in the middle of the game. He felt that there would be a loss of quality of life to benefit others . He hoped that other alternatives would be considered. Glen Brown felt it was unfair to say that 3, 000 trips would be made. He again requested that a traffic study be made. A resident questioned if an access road was built, what was the guarantee that that road would not .be turned into a public road later. Another resident felt that with the Cronin development in the middle of the traffic pattern, that temptation would be created when I-680 became a parking lot for people to use the road as a shortcut to get home through other people' s front yards . Mr. Dahlin responded that that could arise, but he was not sure people would want to wind their way through the streets . Linda Prat, Advanced Planning for EBRPD, expressed some concerns of EBRPD. There has been a Master Plan for many years . This area could be unique if left undeveloped. There was the possibility of a major ridge trail corridor where local and others could enjoy. The proposed ridge road would bisect the ridge trail cutting it in half and taking away the open trail experience. It would also create management problems in relation to grazing by creating two grazing units . The proposed road would also cut through the wild life corridor for animals . The major grading needed would damage the open space and could create public safety issues . The Park District might be favorable to an access road rather than a public road, but they would prefer to keep the open space. Councilmember Jeffery asked if the Park District had money allocated for the trail. Ms . Prat responded that she was not familiar with the money aspects. Councilmember Jeffery asked if Ms. Prat was aware that this land had been overgrazed. Ms . Prat responded that the Park District was very good at grazing management and that they moved the cattle around. Councilmember Moffatt asked how the park would be accessed. CM - Vol 10 - 346 Study Session Meeting September 11 , 1991 Ms. Prat answered that there would be a staging area in Eden Canyon and Donlan Canyon with local access trails linking up. Councilmember Moffatt asked if Rolling Hills Drive and Brittany Drive would be used. Ms . Prat responded yes . Councilmember Moffatt questioned how the land would be obtained. Ms . Prat responded that land was usually obtained through dedications . Councilmember Moffatt asked if after obtaining the . land through dedication, could the land then be sold off. Ms. Prat stated that the land would not be sold. Councilmember Moffatt questioned the timeframe for the opening of a park. Ms . Prat responded that she was not sure, but that it was possible for it to open fairly soon. Councilmember Moffatt questioned if camping and bicycling would be allowed. Ms . Prat answered that this would be a passive park, so camping would not be allowed. With single lane trails, bicycles would not be allowed, but if there were access roads, bicycles could be used. Ms . LaBar indicated that a trail along Martin Creek to Hansen would be simple to link. People would be on foot so there would not be a great impact in the neighborhood in regard to traffic. Donlon Canyon should be kept whole. Glen Brown asked the size of the grazing area. Ms. Prat responded that 200 acres was one management unit. A resident questioned the geological stability of the area. Was there a fault line through the area? Brenda Gillarde responded that there was not a fault line where the road was proposed. One resident indicated that since this study was addressing growth and impacts, that this gift of nature should continue to be respected because once the road is built, other roads could be created to branch off of it. Ms . LaBar questioned whether an alternate route for the emergency access road could be shown as part of the map. She felt that there would be considerable amount of grading, fencing, and movement of cattle. Mr. Dahlin responded that it would be quite minor, comparable to a jeep trail . CM - Vol 10 - 347 Study Session Meeting September 11 , 1991 • Libby Silver indicated that land use that falls under the General Plan can be amended, but once an owner dedicated property as open space it becomes permanently open space and can not be changed. Mayor Snyder reassured the audience that this session was not a decision making time. This was a study for the community to indicate their concerns . An EIR would be created to identify the positives and negatives and would be brought back in a draft form for further discussion. A resident indicated that he had bought his home in 1976 with the attraction being the ridge line. He has slowly watched the ridge line die. It was being killed. A member of the audience who is a trail advocate expressed that she had been in a lot of ridge parks and that there was not over grazing. In fact, the parks were well cared for and a pleasure to go through. She would like to see this area preserved because there was a need to have a place like this close to you. Commissioner Burnham asked what percentage of the Cronin Development was shown on the picture. Mr. Kennedy of CADP responded that about one-third was shown. Commissioner Burnham asked what an emergency access road was . Chief Ritter explained that there was a standard. For 1 to 24 units, 1 full public street was required. For 25 -74 units, 1 full public street and 1 emergency access which was not open to the public was required. For 75 units and over, two full public roads were required. An emergency access road is an all weather road that could support the weight of fire vehicles . Grades over 15% were generally not allowed. Commissioner Zika questioned what the blue road represented. Chief Ritter responded that this road already existed, but that it was a crude road used for emergencies . A resident pointed out that if winds blow west to east, smoke will block the open road. Chief Ritter responded that it would be something the fire department would have to deal with. Commissioner Burnham indicated that if the proposed ridge road was a dirt road, that he had no problem. But he would have a problem if the road was paved. In an aside, he indicated that now the people on Rolling Hills Drive know how the people on Silvergate felt with the additional traffic due to their development. Commissioner Zika indicated that all he saw were negatives and wondered why it should continue to be studied. Commissioner Rafanelli could see reasons to look at this, but he did not want to negatively impact the existing neighborhoods . He wondered if CM - Vol 10 - 348 Study Session Meeting September 11 , 1991 stop signs and speed aps could help the speedi-, problem. He was in • favor of parks and open space using the natural beauty. He supported an emergency access road rather than a full public road. Commissioner North asked if there were any other options for other roads . Could a third road be included in the area? Mr. Dahlin responded that the area was too steep and would create major environmental problems to go through Martin Creek. Audience responded with loud "N0. " Mr. Tong, Planning Director, stated that the Donlon Canyon project had been approved and had the entitlements. There would be 300 apartments and 17 lots with some permanent open space. Councilmember Burton indicated that his response might not be popular, but he felt that the new road would relieve traffic in the neighborhood by having cars go over the hill and not come down into the City. The road was important for circulation and safety. There must be flexibility and there was a need to get traffic out of downtown Dublin. This road could even be important to the people of Rolling Hills Drive and Silvergate. Safety and accessibility were the important issues. He was not concerned with the separating of the grazing. He also could not see stopping the road for a few hikers . As to the visual impact, as a native California, he has had to adjust to people coming to California. The City has to provide for people coming here. Councilmember Jeffery felt that there was a need to protect the hills . She was against using Hansen Road, but she had no problem with an access road. She also had a problem with bringing the traffic down Brittany Drive. Councilmember Howard expressed concern over the visual impact of the proposed road. She also was concerned that there would be only two access roads out. She did not like the idea of traffic coming down Silvergate. Councilmember Moffatt indicated that he would like to keep the options open and free. An access road was needed. He agreed with Councilmember Burton that the road would create free flowing traffic. He did have a concern over scarring the hills. Was there some way the area could be camouflaged with trees or canyon roads through the open space. Tilden Park had two major roads and was able to keep the scarring to a minimum with little effect on the flora and animals. Mayor Snyder expressed a concern with the road. He felt that the road violated the concept of privacy in the area. The cost and mitigation was unnecessary for whatever was developed on Cronin Ranch. The second item under discussion was the Cronin Ranch project being allowed to develop above the 740 ft elevation level. Mr. Dahlin explained. that the City policy was to not allow development above the 740 ft elevation level . The General Plan stated that there be no silhouette on the skyline. The Cronin Ranch project would not be on the skyline, but there would be a loss of open space and a loss of trees . Reducing the number of units in the project would reduce the CM - Vol 10 - 349 Study Session Meeting September 11 , 1991 visual impact, but wh, does the reduction in the _,umber of units do to the economic viability of the project. Commissioner Burnham questioned where Hansen Hills appeared on the picture. Mr. Dahlin responded that Hansen Hills was hidden by Montgomery Ward because it was lower in elevation. A member of the audience suggested that the 740 ft elevation mark be added to the pictures and maps for reference. Commissioner North questioned how many homes could be built if the project was kept below the 740 ft level . Ms . Tracy reiterated that Zone 7 made a statement that there was not enough water for the new areas . A resident stated that development along the ridge already had scars. It was not acceptable to continue developing if the ridge was trying to be preserved. Another resident indicated that this development was not considered affordable housing. This housing would be beyond the reach of 90% of the people. It was horrible . The City should be thinking in terms of what was needed in the way of housing needs . A member of the audience asked if the roads would be put in prior to the development . Would there be use of the roads while the construction was going on. Mr. Dahlin responded that these would be custom homes with the roads being built first and the homes built as they were sold. A member of the audience asked what the price tag on these homes would run. Glen Brown indicated that it would be difficult to know the cost at this time. Factors such as access, infrastructure, number of lots would need to be considered. A resident asked about the grading and the effect on the prevailing winds . Mr. Dahlin responded that there could possibly be an effect, but the ridgeline would not have gaps . Another resident indicated that he was aware that there had to be change, but that it was important to know about the changes and get together to make better changes . Their lives were in the City' s hands . Commissioner Burnham felt that there were not enough details, but he was in favor of staying below the ridge line. Commissioner Zika was concerned over the violation of the policy by allowing development above the 740 ft level . He felt it would ruin the CM - Vol 10 - 350 Study Session Meeting September 11 , 1991 character of the Ci. but he also felt that sere was not enough detail . Commissioner Rafanelli was concerned about the visual impact. He felt the City should hang onto the ridgeline. He saw the rape of the northwest. He was aware that there had to be growth, but he felt it should be directed. Commissioner North questioned the availability of water. He had seen the projected growth of Livermore and Pleasanton. He would hate to see us stop our plans if there was enough water. He would like to see the ridgeline remain, but there needed to be balance and compromise on the ridgeline. Councilmember Burton felt the picture was misrepresenting. More trees could be planted. There were mitigating measures to reduce the impact. An economic evaluation should be made to determine the number of units that could be reduced. Councilmember Jeffery indicated the development should be kept off the upper ridge. The 740 ft level should be kept. Homes should be kept off the hills . Councilmember Howard indicated that she needed more information. She felt the pictures were deceiving. She felt that this project was the same as what the City has now. Councilmember Moffatt felt the homes should be built on the knoll to preserve the horizon line. He wanted to minimize the impact. There were very few custom homes in Dublin. The homes could be built with constraints of the land layout. He had no problem with the project being higher than 740 ft level as long as the visual impact was alright. Mayor Snyder indicated that it was deceiving to look at the property with no landscaping. Briarhill 20 to 30 years ago would seem the same. Although the General Plan stated that no development should be above the 740 ft level, it was with the understanding that each case could be reviewed individually. Mr. Dahlin introduced Hollis Canyon Linear Park for discussion. Hollis Canyon Linear Park would be a new type of parkland. It would be left in a natural, open space. It would be unique. It would be for walking and bicycling. There was an existing reservoir. Ownership, liability, policing, and maintenance would need to be determined. This could be 1 ) a dedicated City park, 2 ) a landscape and lighting district for local residents, or 3) a homeowner' s association, making it a private park. We need to determine who would benefit by the park. It could be a Citywide asset though it was remote from other parts of Dublin. A resident questioned the width of the trails . Mr. Ambrose responded that a fiscal evaluation had not been done as yet. The purpose of this discussion should be conceptual rather than in terms of cost. Ms . LaBar indicated that this was the kind of recreational amenity that she was in favor of. Hallelujah, it was about time. She would not mind CM - Vol 10 - 351 Study Session Meeting September 11 , 1991 paying a couple of do irs more to her tax bill _ she was going to get this kind of park. This park presented quite interesting possibilities . Another resident indicated that he thought that Eden Canyon was going to have to do major changes with a lot of grading. Mr. Dahlin responded that it would be left as it is . A resident questioned where the park was in reference to specific streets and backyards . Mr. Dahlin responded that the park was not close to any existing homes . One resident cautioned that a lot of grading should not be done, but to preserve the natural values. A member of the audience asked if horses would be allowed to go through the park. Mr. Dahlin responded that there should be some consideration of areas for horses. Another resident expressed concern over the width of the bicycle trails . He did not want vehicles to be able to use the trails . Mr. Dahlin responded that it would be comfortable for bicycles to go in both directions, but that there would be only emergency access for vehicles . Cordelia Morris questioned how the park would go through the Morris property? Mr. Dahlin responded that there was an easement, but that the details needed to be worked out. Ms . Morris indicated that it was a private road. A resident questioned whether motorized or non-motorized vehicles would be allowed. Mr. Dahlin responded non-motorized. One resident felt the quality of life will be gone if the City allowed bikers and picnickers . There would be no way to stop the traffic. Mike McKissick of Eden Development said that Eden had no rights regarding the Morris property and if the Morris family chose not to participate in the park that the park and road could exist on either side of their property. Ms . Morris indicated that the Morris family did not want the quality of their life impacted by the development. Commissioner Burnham liked the concept, but stated that the details would have to be worked out between the City and the property owners . Commissioner Zika also liked the concept, but he was concerned about the cost of maintaining and policing the area, as well as insurance. Commissioner Rafanelli agreed conceptually with the idea, but would like to have the management of the park addressed later. Commissioner North also agreed with the concept, but needed more details . Councilmember Burton felt if a person bought a home near the area, they would not want an attractive nuisance. The area belonged with the CM - Vol 10 - 352 Study Session Meeting September 11 , 1991 people who live ther, therefore it should not made a public park. He felt it belonged with the development of the area and should not be a City park. Councilmember Jeffery stated that this new development should add to Dublin rather than detract from Dublin. This park had unique features . She felt the park should be shared by everyone. Mayor Snyder asked Mr. McKissick about gating. Mr. McKissick responded that gating was an option for part of the area. Hollis Canyon Road would be an open public thoroughfare with public access, later phases of the project had potential for gating. Councilmember Jeffery felt it should be a public access park. Councilmember Howard liked the concept, but needed to know the costs to the City. Councilmember Moffatt enjoyed and encouraged parks, but if the park was City owned, it could be expensive. He would like to see the park incorporated in the East Bay Regional Parks District, or have it put on the ballot due to the heavy expenditure. If the whole City was willing to pay, he felt it was a good idea. Mayor Snyder enjoyed the concept. It would be unique to have this facility, but he wondered whether it should be part of the private development. He was not so concerned with the maintenance costs . People would utilize and enjoy the park, but he felt the plan should be studied more. Brenda Gillarde stated that the next step would be to finish the EIR, which would be ready in early November. She summarized the discussions by stating that there seemed to be minimal support for the ridge road to be a public road, but as an access road, it would be alright. There was concern about allowing the Cronin development above the 740 ft elevation level, but that more information was needed. The concept of the Hollis Canyon Linear Park was liked, but that more information as to costs would need to be provided. Mayor Snyder adjourned the session at 10 : 23 p.m. * * * * * Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk CM - Vol 10 - 353 Study Session Meeting September 11 , 1991 REGULAR MEETING - September 23, 1991 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Monday, September 23 , 1991, in the Council Chambers of the Dublin Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at 7 : 35 p.m. , by Mayor Snyder. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Howard, Jeffery, and Mayor Snyder Councilmember Moffatt arrived at the meeting at 7 : 40 p.m. ABSENT: Councilmember Burton PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (610-20) Life Scout Jordan Kahn from Troop 905 led the Council, Staff and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. Jordan explained that he is a Patrol Leader who enjoys going on hikes and campouts, which they do every month, plus he enjoys helping younger Scouts advance and get their ranks. PRESENTATION OF OCTOBER CUSTOMER SERVICE AWARD (150-90) Assistant City Manager presented the October Customer Service Award to Officer Gary Berge who has worked for the Dublin Police Services for nearly 3 years. Officer Berge has received several letters of commendation from Dublin residents and from Sheriff Plummer and was recently recognized for his services assisting a mentally distressed resident out of her home and also for assisting an assault victim. He consistently goes the extra mile in order to better serve the public. INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEE (700-10) Assistant City Manager Rankin introduced Bo Barker, who was recently hired to fill the Management Assistant position in the City Manager's Office. Bo came to Dublin from the City of Manhattan Beach where he worked for 2 years, primarily in personnel, but with a lot of generalist duties. He also worked for 9 months as an Intern in the City of Walnut, which is a contract City very similar to Dublin, and was also an Intern with the Butte County Economic Development Corporation. The Council welcomed Bo aboard. A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A* *A A*A*A*A*A*A* * * *A A A A*A* CM - VOL 10 - 354 �{ if ii if Regular Meeting September 23, 1991 CONSENT CALENDAR On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Burton absent) , the Council took the following actions: Approved Minutes of Regular Meeting of September 9, 1991; Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 93 - 91 AWARDING CONTRACT 91-06 ($61,890) ANNUAL STRIPING & MARRING CONTRACT TO CHRISP COMPANY (600-30) and authorized the Mayor to execute the agreement; Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 94 - 91 ESTABLISHING A POLICY FOR THE REPAIR OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS DEEMED TO BE PEDESTRIAN HAZARDS (600-30) and authorized Staff to advertise for bids; Authorized Cm. Jeffery to attend the National League of Cities FAIR Steering Committee meeting in Washington, D.C. , on October 4-6, 1991 at an approximate cost of $800 (140-30) ; Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 95 - 91 DECLARING INTENTION TO ISSUE BONDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING FINANCING FOR CERTAIN PUBLIC STREET IMPROVEMENTS (340-20) Approved Warrant Register in the amount of $545, 119 .75 (300-40) . Cm. Moffatt requested that the Bissell & Karn agreement be pulled from the Consent Calendar for discussion. It was his understanding that there were 3 options presented and the Council should discuss the options. Mr. Rankin advised that Staff's recommendation was that Option 3 be selected. Mr. Thompson advised that if you do both projects separately, you have to do several things more than once. Staff felt there was a good cost savings to do the design of both projects at once. The actual construction would be done in 2 phases under 2 separate project contract. Cm. Moffatt indicated that he did not understand this and thanked Staff for explaining it. y y y y y y y y y y y y A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*^*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A* CM - VOL 10 - 355 Regular Meeting September 23, 1991 On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Jeffery, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Burton absent) , the Council- adopted RESOLUTION NO. 96 - 91 APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH BISSELL & KARN, INC. , FOR DESIGN OF DUBLIN BOULEVARD BETWEEN HANSEN DRIVE AND SILVERGATE DRIVE (600-30) and authorized the transfer of $28,850 from unallocated reserves to this project. OAKLAND SCAVENGER COMPANY 1992 RATE ADJUSTMENT REQUEST (810-30) Assistant City Manager Rankin advised that OSC has submitted a request to the City for review of a 1992 rate application. The City jointly reviews applications with other agencies serviced by OSC. Due to a proposed change in the methodology, the actual amount of the increase cannot be determined until further analysis by the Joint Refuse Rate Review Committee. Mr. Rankin advised that the report presented is primarily for informational purposes. The JRRRC will primarily base their review upon projections of revenue and expenditures for each jurisdiction. In prior years, the total company operations were evaluated on a whole. Mr. Rankin advised that David MacDonald and Dan Borges were present to answer any questions the Council may have. Cm. Moffatt questioned the rates indicated in the letter from OSC to the JRRRC. He questioned if we were looking at about a 10%-13% increase every year for the next 3 years, or if this was cumulative. Mr. Rankin advised that it is premature to assume that these figures have any relevancy at this time. Costs will be reviewed on a jurisdictional basis. Also, we don't know what impact the Measure D decision will have. Mr. MacDonald stated he felt that Staff had made a fair presentation of where they are right now. On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Burton absent) , the Council directed Staff to forward the request to the Joint Refuse Rate Review Committee for further analysis. A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A* CM - VOL 10 - 356 Regular Meeting September 23, 1991 PUBLIC HEARING - CHEVRON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (410-30) Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. Associate Planner Cirelli advised that PA 90-066 involves a request for CUP and SDR approval to construct and operate a new 24-hour service station, drive through car wash facility and food mart at 5933 Dougherty Road. They also request wall signage and one combined service station display and price sign structure. The Applicant requested a continuance in March, 1991, in order to resolve land use dedication issues. As a Condition of Approval for the project, the Applicant will be required to dedicate to the City right-of-way required for the ultimate improvements along Dougherty Road and Dublin Boulevard Extension on the project site. The amount of land required to be dedicated is 4,840 square feet. The Applicant has revised the site plan depicting the project site and related improvements before and after construction of the Dougherty Road widening and Dublin Boulevard Extension right-of-ways. Ms. Cirelli advised that the project would result in the installation of 12 self-service gasoline fueling positions. The food mart facility proposed to be 953 square feet in size, would accommodate the service station cashier and the sale of convenience items. The approximate 1, 224 square foot car wash facility would be a fully automated recycling type and would include restrooms. The combined service station display and price sign structure is 8 feet high with a sign area of 58 . 6 square feet double faced. Wall signage is proposed to identify the car wash, Chevron service station and food mart facilities. Ms. Cirelli discussed proposed parking, landscaping and signage and the architectural design of the buildings and structures. TJKM has concluded that the project will generate additional vehicular traffic at the Dublin Boulevard and Dougherty Road intersection and that payment of a traffic impact fee is warranted for the project. In lieu of requiring the Applicant to pay a traffic impact fee, conditions were included in the drafted Resolutions requiring the Applicant to mitigate traffic impacts associated with the project by: 1) dedicating to the City the right-of-way required for the ultimate improvements along Dougherty Road and proposed Dublin Boulevard Extension; 2) constructing ultimate frontage improvements along the Dougherty Road side of the project as shown on the Dougherty Road Plan Line; 3) designing the project site work to match the ultimate improvements for the Dublin Boulevard Extension project; 4) contributing funds for the ultimate construction of Dublin Boulevard Extension within the Applicant's property and any resulting modifications to the future Dublin Boulevard/Dougherty Road intersection; and 5) providing for the possibility of a joint access driveway between the project site and the adjacent eastern property once Dublin Boulevard Extension has been constructed. L y y L A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A* CM - VOL 10 - 357 Regular Meeting September 23, 1991 Ms. Cirelli advised that these requirements are included as conditions of approval on the draft Site Development Review Resolution. The Applicant requested clarification of Condition #50 regarding the joint access driveway. Staff recommended replacing the last sentence in Condition #50, page 8 with: "The Applicant shall comply with said Public Works requirements within 60 days after the City has acquired the adjacent eastern property and constructed Dublin Boulevard extension. " Cm. Howard asked if the color picture was before or after the dedication of the land right-of-way. Charles Lowry, Project Engineer stated that the picture is after dedication of the right-of-way. He indicated that he was comfortable with the information presented by Staff. Mayor Snyder referred to signage and indicated that in the past, the City Council has had competitors come and ask for modifications to the Sign Ordinance to allow a fourth line on the sign. Mr. Lowry stated they do not anticipate the need for a fourth product; generally this is for diesel. Cm. Jeffery questioned the development of new fuels and asked if this is something that could be incorporated in the design. Mr. Lowry advised that while they are currently investigating alternate fuel sources, more information is needed before they actually handle alternative fuels. Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Burton absent) , the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 97 - 91 ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR PA 90-066 CHEVRON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A GASOLINE SERVICE STATION, FOOD MART AND CAR WASH FACILITY AT 5933 DOUGHERTY ROAD and RESOLUTION NO. 98 - 91 APPROVING PA 90-066 CHEVRON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF A SERVICE STATION, FOOD MART AND CAR WASH FACILITY AT 5933 DOUGHERTY ROAD and with changed noted to Condition #50, adopted n*n*n*w*n*n*A*n*n*�*n*A*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*A*A*^*^*^*^*^*^*^* CM - VOL 10 - 358 Regular Meeting September 23, 1991 RESOLUTION NO. 99 - 91 APPROVING PA 90-066 CHEVRON SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A SERVICE STATION WITH 12 SELF-SERVICE FUELING POSITIONS, 953 SQUARE FOOT FOOD MART, APPROXIMATELY 1,224 SQUARE FOOT CAR WASH FACILITY AND WALL SIGNAGE AND TO PERMIT ONE COMBINED SERVICE STATION DISPLAY AND PRICE SIGN STRUCTURE AT 5933 DOUGHERTY ROAD PUBLIC HEARING - RENTAL AVAILABILITY ORDINANCE (430-20) Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. Senior Planner Carrington advised that this Ordinance, which was introduced at the September 9th City Council meeting, would allow fees to be paid in-lieu of a requirement that a percentage of units in large multi-family projects be rented for a specified time period. The amount of the in-lieu fee would be based on the amount necessary to subsidize the rental of a 3-bedroom market rate apartment for 5 years for a family of 5 earning 80% of the Alameda County median income, where no more than 30% of income is spent on rent. On September 9th, the Council expressed concern that the requirement of payment of the in-lieu rental fee prior to issuance of project building permits was too early and directed Staff to change the Ordinance to require payment of the in-lieu rental prior to final inspection of the first dwelling unit of a project. Section 8 . 12 . 060 which addresses the relation of the Rental Availability Ordinance to the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance was changed to delete "Chapter 8. 08 of Title 8 of the City of Dublin Municipal Code" because the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance has not been adopted. Mr. Carrington advised that 2 changes needed to be made to Page 2 of the Resolution. A paragraph should be inserted, "WHEREAS, this Resolution shall be effective 30 days following its adoption. " Also, the third paragraph from the top should read, "WHEREAS, the City Council did nold public hearings on said fee on September 9, and September 23, 1991 . " Cm. Moffatt asked if this would go into effect even if there is less than a 3 . 5% rental vacancy. Mr. Carrington advised that this is not related to the vacancy rate. The in-lieu rental fee could be increased by the rental rate increase. There is no provision for tying these to the vacancy rate. The fees would be used toward the provision of rental housing. Cm. Moffatt felt Dublin could end up with no rental inventory. Mr. Carrington stated he did not feel this could happen because this whole policy is based on providing rental units. We recognize the need, and that is why this Ordinance is being considered. ^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^* CM - VOL 10 - 359 Regular Meeting September 23, 1991 No comments were made by members of the public relative to this issue. Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Jeffery, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Burton absent) , the Council waived the reading and adopted ORDINANCE NO. 14 - 91 ADDING CHAPTER 8. 12 TO TITLE 8 OF THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE ENACTING A RENTAL AVAILABILITY ORDINANCE and with changes discussed, adopted RESOLUTION NO. 100 - 91 APPROVING THE IN-LIEU RENTAL FEE PUBLIC HEARING JL CONSTRUCTION PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONING-DUBLIN MEADOWS APPEAL (450-30) Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. Senior Planner Carrington advised that this planned development rezoning would amend Dublin Meadows' conditions of approval to allow payment of a fee in-lieu of maintaining 10% (21) of the multi-family units as rental units for 5 years. An Ordinance was introduced on September 9th which would amend the Zoning Ordinance to permit the PD Rezoning. If elected by JL Construction, the in-lieu rental fee would be $10,808 per rental unit in accordance with the Rental Availability Ordinance. The in-lieu rental fee would be paid no later than 30 days from the date of adoption of the PD Rezoning Ordinance for those units which have already received final inspections and prior to final inspection for those units which have not received final inspection. No comments, were made by members of the public relative to this issue. Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Burton absent) , the Council waived the reading and adopted ORDINANCE NO. 15 - 91 AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO PERMIT THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONING PA 91-001 TO AMEND CONDITION #54 OF CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 32-89 TO ALLOW OPTION OF PAYING IN-LIEU RENTAL FEE RATHER THAN PROVIDING RENTAL UNITS FOR JL CONSTRUCTION - DUBLIN MEADOWS A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A1A1A1/ .LA i CM - VOL 10 - 360 li i ii li if Regular Meeting September 23, 1991 PUBLIC HEARING - 20 MINUTE PARKING ZONE NORTH SIDE OF PENN DRIVE @ WELLS INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL (570-20) Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. Public Works Director Thompson advised that in August, Staff received a letter from Chuck Scanlon, Maintenance Superintendent of the Dublin Unified School District, requesting that a passenger loading zone be installed along the frontage of Wells School between the westernmost driveway and an existing Wheels bus stop. Additional requests included some small no parking zones adjacent to driveways for visibility purposes. After reviewing the situation, Mr. Thompson advised that Staff proposes to establish a 20-minute parking zone which would be effective Monday through Friday from 7: 30 a.m. to 3 : 30 p.m. This would allow the residents in the neighborhood to park for an unlimited amount of time during non-school hours. The School District also requested that the passenger loading zone be established across the frontage of the school parking lot, but Staff did not recommend making any changes in this area in order to allow for long-term parking lot overflow. Cm. Moffatt questioned if this emergency action required a 4/5 vote. City Attorney Silver advised that there must be a statement of grounds for an Ordinance to be adopted on an urgency basis. Four votes would be required. Cm. Howard asked if it was necessary to have the whole section marked "E" painted white. Mr. Thompson stated the 400' probably could be shortened, but it does abut a bus stop at the end. Currently, some of the teachers park in this area. Cm. Howard asked if the School District said anything about the fact that they are going to allow cars to go into the entrance and then out again, or if they are going to block this off during school hours. Mehran Sepehri indicated they said they would like this because it is the safest way to drop off the kids, however, they don't want to lose any parking spaces. The day they went out to review this, the parking was filled and teachers were parking in Section E. Five or 6 teachers were parking in the street. No comments were made by members of the public relative to this issue. Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. Cm. Moffatt asked if the bus stop area was close enough that the kids wouldn't get wet during the rainy season. CM - VOL 10 - 361 Regular Meeting September 23, 1991 Mr. Sepehri advised that there were no changes recommended to the location of the bus stop. The bus stop location shown is existing already. On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Burton absent) , the Council waived the reading and on an urgency basis, adopted ORDINANCE NO. 16 - 91 ESTABLISHING A 20-MINUTE PARKING ZONE ON THE NORTHERLY SIDE OF PENN DRIVE PUBLIC HEARING - DENSITY BONUS ORDINANCE (430-20) Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. Senior Planner Carrington advised that this Ordinance, which was introduced at the September 9th Council meeting, would allow density bonuses and other incentives to developers providing housing for very low and lower income households and for senior citizens as required by State Law. On September 9th, the Council expressed concerns related to 2 major issues: 1) Concessions and incentives where the City may approve a reduction of interior amenities for restricted units; and the waiver or modification of Development and Zoning Standards to allow the reduction or elimination of design requirements exceeding state building code standards; and 2) The ability of the owner of a restricted unit to recover the value of improvements made to the dwelling at the time of sale. Mr. Carrington discussed concessions and incentives, waivers and modifications and recovery of the value of improvements and the various alternatives and gave a brief analysis of each for Council consideration. Mr. Carrington advised that Section 8 . 16. 050 (c) (3) would allow the City to approve a reduction in interior amenities for restricted units as necessary to retain project affordability. Such a reduction of interior amenities could shift the burden of provision of the amenities from the housing developer to the lower income families which would eventually purchase them and could cause social problems due to contrasts with adjacent units with full amenities. Similarly, Section 8 . 16. 060 (a) (3) would allow the reduction or elimination of any design requirements exceeding state building code standards. Cm. Jeffery felt that Alternate C of the Staff Report appeared to be a good compromise which would encourage upgrades to a certain extent. n*A*A*w*A*A*w*A*n*�*w*A*�*�*A*A*A*�*A*A*A*A*A*A*^*�*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A* CM - VOL 10 - 362 Regular Meeting September 23, 1991 She questioned the amount of fluctuation in the different income levels. Mr. Carrington advised that there is not a whole lot. The median income will rise over a period of time and household size might change. There are a lot of factors that could go into this. Sales price is based on the lesser of the 3 ways of looking at an increase. Mr. Carrington stated that in order to maintain the availability of the restricted units, the proposed ordinance provides that the City would impose resale conditions. The density bonus concept contains opposing goals. On one hand, a goal of the concept is to provide restricted units at the lowest price for the longest time possible. On the other hand, the concept allows the owner of a restricted unit to recover the value of substantial structural or permanent fixed improvements and enjoy appreciation of their property due to their efforts. Cm. Moffatt expressed concern that if a family comes in and can fit the program to get into the low cost house and then 6 months down road their income substantially increases, there is no way the family can be restricted from using the unit. Mr. Carrington advised that this is correct. Cm. Moffatt stated if they utilize the house and disaster falls on the people and they cannot afford to maintain the house, will the City come in and help them out or will it just deteriorate. Mr. Carrington advised that the Ordinance makes no provision for assistance in maintaining the unit. They have to take out a loan and buy the unit just like anyone else. There are programs available through Alameda County for grants for some minor home repairs if they have problems maintaining the unit. Cm. Moffatt asked what happens if they let a unit get into disrepair. Mr. Carrington advised that it is conceivable that they could let this happen, but if they want to get the largest amount of money when selling their unit, they would most likely maintain it. Plus, there is also the Property Maintenance Ordinance that could be used, if necessary. Mayor Snyder stated maintenance or the lack of it drives the market across the whole community. Eddie Jo Mack, 7000 Ann Arbor Way suggested that the Council has no way of making people maintain their property and this is true in most neighborhoods. She urged the Council to waive the reading and reintroduce the Ordinance keeping the amenities. Mr. Carrington reiterated that Staff was recommending that 2 sections be deleted. ^*^*^*^*,^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^* CM - VOL 10 - 363 Regular Meeting September 23, 1991 Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. Cm. Moffatt stated he was concerned about fluctuating values and incomes of people. He asked if any other Ordinances address this issue. He sees problems whereby some enterprising developers might put the unit into such a state that the units can be sold at a lower price and then fix them up and sell them for a much higher price. Some streetwise people like speculators could come in and develop this sort of a situation. He wants to protect the low cost housing folks. He would like to see Staff come back with some Ordinances that would take a look at this and modify it. He would like to see another Ordinance that would take this situation into consideration. Mr. Rankin advised that this might be part of a planned development and typically these would have CC&R's and concerns about individual maintenance situations are usually the responsibility of a homeowners association. They would be paying dues which would typically cover maintenance. Cm. Moffatt stated he had similar concerns like in Berkeley with rental rates being so low there is no way you can get people out of the units. Mayor Snyder stated they weren't discussing rentals, but rather people have a right to own property. Cm. Moffatt questioned what would prevent someone from renting out their unit. Mr. Carrington stated the potential for a unit to become run down is always there, but sellers would not realize as much profit if this occurs. City inspections could occur and the City could pursue this type of an option, however, it adds quite a bit of responsibility onto the City. If work were necessary, it could be deducted from the sales price. Ms. Silver advised that the Ordinance currently provides that units cannot be rented except in cases of illness or incapacity and the City may approve rental of the unit to the same household type. Mr. Carrington also advised that there is a violation section in the Ordinance, and violations constitute a misdemeanor. On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Burton absent) , the Council waived the reading and reintroduced the Ordinance with deletions 8 . 16. 050 (c) and (a) , and addition of Alternate C 8. 16. 100 (c) to allow home improvements to be added to sales price, within parameters. A*A*A*�*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*�*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A* CM - VOL 10 - 364 Regular Meeting September 23, 1991 1991-92 VECTOR CONTROL SERVICES (560-50) Assistant to the City Manager Texeira advised that since March, 1988, the City has contracted with Alameda County for vector control services. Prior to that time, services were provided on an as needed basis by the local County Health Inspector. Currently, the City contracts directly with the County in lieu of participating in the Countywide Vector Control Services District and funds these services through the General Fund. As a result, Dublin property owners receive the same level of service as residents served by the District, but do not pay the assessment as part of their property tax bill as do other Service Area participants. During the 1991-92 Budget deliberations, the Council expressed interest in annexing to the Countywide Service Area. If the City annexes, costs associated with Vector Control Services would transfer from the City of Dublin to Dublin property owners. Payment would be calculated on the property owner's tax bill, and the annual cost to the property owner would be approximately $4 . 00 per year. Ms. Texeira advised that City Staff has worked with Alameda County Staff to pursue joining the District. County Staff developed a timetable for implementation of annexation of the City of Dublin to the Vector Control Services District. Mayor Snyder indicated he was not at the budget session when this action was first proposed and asked about the philosophy that brought this action forward. There is obviously some financial benefit to the City. Cm. Moffatt felt that as the City grows, vector problems get larger and since they charge for service, the City could save money. We should consider using Vector Control Services on a long term basis. We need the services to maintain health and welfare. This is a natural move to make rather than reviewing it on a year to year basis. Mr. Rankin explained that the City initially contracted on an as- needed basis. He discussed problems associated with this type of an arrangement. We have since moved to the same level of service as the district provides to other agencies. There is a commitment on the part of Vector Control to assure that the money collected will be spent within the community. The map displayed includes everything that is part of the City and also provides for areas that will be annexed in the future. Mayor Snyder pointed out that the schedule as submitted by the County will need to be altered because LAFCO's next meeting won't be until December 5th. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Jeffery, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Burton absent) , the Council adopted A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*^*^*A*A* CM - VOL 1 0 - 3 6 5 Regular Meeting September 23, 1991 RESOLUTION NO. 101 - 91 REQUESTING THAT THE TERRITORY OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN BE ANNEXED TO ALAMEDA COUNTY SERVICE AREA 1984-1 (VECTOR CONTROL) and approved the Plan for Providing Services. OTHER BUSINESS East Bay Division Breakfast (140-25) Cm. Moffatt reminded everyone that the East Bay Division of the League of CA Cities will be hosting a breakfast meeting at the League Conference on October 14th at 8 : 00 a.m. Tickets are going fast and he urged everyone to attend. CITYLINK Program (League of CA Cities) 180-10 Cm. Moffatt stated that since Dublin is a young and progressive City that likes to be on the cutting edge, he would recommend that we take the opportunity to join other cities in the CITYLINK Program through the League of CA Cities. He felt we could benefit tremendously through participation in this program. Cm. Jeffery asked if he wanted to put the request into the budget process for next year. Mr. Rankin advised that Staff could check with some of the current users and provide additional information. Mayor Snyder clarified that after the League of CA Cities Conference, it may be appropriate for Staff to prepare a report to the Council related to the CITYLINK Program for consideration. Voter Registration Outreach (630-70) Mayor Snyder stated the Council had received a letter from Del Miles related to a joint endeavor by the Alameda County Registrar's Office and the local League of Women Voters to register voters. There will be an appreciation gathering to recognize local businesses who are displaying and providing voter registration forms in their places of business on Thursday, September 26th at 11: 00 a.m. , in front of Orchard Supply Hardware. CM - VOL 10 - 366 Regular Meeting September 23, 1991 CLOSED SESSION At 9 : 00 p.m. , the Council recessed to a closed executive session to discuss: 1) Personnel, (700-20) Government Code Section 54957 . 6; 2) Potential Litigation, (640-30) GCS 54956. 9 (c) ; 3) Potential Litigation, GCS 54956.9 (c) ; and 4) Pending Litigation, Measure D, GCS 54956. 9 (a) ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 10:49 p.m. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk CM - VOL 10 - 367 of Regular Meeting September 23, 1991