Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 4.01 DrftCC 10-18& 11-4-03 Min SPECIAL MEETINE - OCTOBER , 03 A SPECIAL JOINT MEETING between the Dublin City Council and the Pleasanton City Council was held on Wednesday, October 1, 2003, in the Pleasanton City Council Chambers. The meeting was called to order at 5:35 p.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Dublin Councilmembers McCormick, Oravetz, Sbranti, Zika and Mayor Lockhart. Pleasanton Councilmembers Ayala,Brozosky, Campbell,Hosterman and Mayor Pico. ABSENT: None. DISCUSSION OF BART STATION DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR WEST ENDS OF PLEASANTON AND DUBLIN AND DESIGN OF STATION—Robert Russell and Orix Real Estate. Bob Russell provided an outline and timeline of the history to date for the BART station plans for West Ends of Pleasanton and Dublin. He also presented an overview of the Development Program. VBN Architects presented the architectural design of the Bart Station. • Cm. Campbell raised a question regarding parking and asked if there would be sufficient parking on both - *he Pleasanton and Dublin sides. was noted that a parking structure would be located on the Dublinside and allow for over 700 parking spaces. A parking structure would be located on the Pleasanton side and would allow for a little over 400 parking spaces. An EIR had been prepared with the initial East Dublin/Pleasanton Station construction and updated for the West Dublin/Pleasanton Station, which analyzed the parking issues for both cities. It reviewed which direction people would be coming from, and if they would move from the East Dublin Station to the West Station. Cm. Oravetz noted that a lot of traffic is generated on the freeway during the rush hour and asked if construction could be eliminated during this time. It was noted by Ron Hobbart,Manager of the construction of the West Dublin Station,that BART would be working with Caltrans. Originally,for this presentation,the plan was to shift traffic on both sides slightly while maintaining the width of the freeway. A work area will be created inside the construction project with deliveries made during the night and some access during the day. He noted that the construction planning for some highway projects is open, but that this project would be very constrained knowing full well what the impacts would be. Cm. Oravetz asked if there were plans to reroute traffic as it is coining down the Dublin grade. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES N'TOLUNIE 22 SPECIAL JOINT MEETING (with Pleasanton City Council) October 1, 2003 • Page 600 I 41.0 It was noted that there would be a general shift over the BART K-rail on the interior side to create workspace. There are two issues: the highway and the traffic. The plan is to shift one side first and take one BART rail out of service. This will allow single BART traffic through that area. The pilings are already there which is a tremendous savings schedule wise. The foundations for the exterior walls need to be built first. Cm. Ayala asked if there was a plan to reroute traffic down I-580/680 thereby eliminating the number of traffic lanes? Mr. Hobbart noted that the lane width would be maintained as well as the number of lanes.He reiterated that BART would be working with Caltrans. This would be a different approach and process than that of the other station, in that Bart will be working with Caltrans in how they would both approach this project. Cm. Zika declared that staggered crossovers would not work. He asked if the extension of the BART medians was a part of this project. It was noted that the extension was a part of this project only to where the actual station is, not going all the way to Castro Valley. Cm. Sbranti was concerned about the location of the Dublin walkway as it was currently shown at the end of the platform. He would like to have this design feature located more in the center, or a little closer. It was pointed out that the station structure was put in 10 years ago, and this design builds upon that plan. One of the items BART grappled with when putting this in as they did was trying to keep the weight of the station down as much as possible. The structure of the station was built almost like an office building with steel construction. It was also noted that the piles are already in and are located in size for the location of the platform and where the pedestrian bridges come in. This limits where these walkways can be located. Cm. Hosterman concurred with Cm. Sbranti's concern and would like to achieve some sort of balance. Mayor Lockhart was concerned about the design, access to and from BART, and access from both sides of the freeway to allow a safe route for bicyclists. It was noted that there would be an access for bicyclists. Bicycle racks would be located at both stations. The sizes of the bridges would be fairly generous and would accommodate people walking their bicycles. Elevators would also allow for people to transport their bicycles to and from the stairs. Cm. Sbranti asked if there was any thought given to the surrounding developments on both sides of the station that would allow for the design of the station to be architecturally compatible. It was noted that the thought was to place the design of the building more in context with the environment surrounding Pleasanton and Dublin. For instance, office buildings are located on the Pleasanton side and the design would fit into the context of the office building. For the Dublin side, they were trying to create a transit-related connection between the BART station and the downtown. The apartments were moved over to the street frontage to fit into the West Dublin BART plan design where more pedestrian traffic and CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 22 SPECIAL JOINT MEETING (with Pleasanton City Council) October 1., 2003 Pages. activity is going on. The hotel and restaurant sites are being looked at. The intent of creating and locating the garage where it currently is located on the plans was to draw people into the plaza area and into the downtown so as to have a connection with the community. Clarification was provided as to the parking garage located on the Dublin side of the station. It was noted that the parking garage would be a five-story structure with 700 spaces available for parking. Four hundred parking spaces would be available on the Pleasanton side. In response to Councilmember Hosterman's inquiry regarding parking availability at the East Dublin Station, it was noted that there were 2600 parking spaces. The EIR process was reviewed and the amount of parking spaces to be provided for the new Dublin and Pleasanton BART stations were determined as a result of that study, and taking into consideration in which direction the majority of the traffic would be coming from. Cm.Brozosky expressed his concern regarding not having enough, adequate parking spaces available. Cm. Zika wondered if there was any indication that the retail businesses located within the BART station would be successful. He also wondered if it would work. It was mentioned that nothing had been flushed out with regard to what type of retail businesses, if any, would be located at the BART stations. Cm. Hosterman wondered what formula was used to arrive at the amount of available parking spaces and asked what BART's goal was regarding future ridership in this area. It was noted that the EIR addressed some of the issues. As far as traffic generation in the area, it was noted that a certain number of criteria was looked at. BART had done an analysis of their line system from their 30 years of experience in ridership and projected what the growth was going to be. This was instrumental in determining the bond issue, as one needs to disclose how many riders there potentially could be in order to create those tickets to generate the traffic. It was noted that there are projected to be between 5,000 to 6,000 BART riders per day. Cm. Ayala pointed out the past problems BART has had with regard to parking issues, and asked what formula they were using to adequately address these issues. She was specifically concerned about the effect and impact this would have on traffic in the City of Pleasanton. Cathy Mayo,Deputy Executive Manager,BART,mentioned that they follow the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act in determining standards and traffic analysis. In fairness to BART, Councilmember Sbranti pointed out that no one could project the tremendous amount of growth in the Tri-Valley and East Contra Costa County. Cm. Brozosky expressed concern with regard to the bus system and bus routes for people to get to and from the West Ends of the Pleasant and Dublin BART station. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 22 SPECIAL JOINT MEETING (with Pleasanton City Council) October 1, 2003 Page 64 It was noted that the East Dublin BART station would be the major intermodel but several bus stations will be added to this project which would allow people the opportunity to ride the bus to and from the West Ends Station of both Pleasanton and Dublin. It was mentioned that there might be some opportunity to provide additional parking based on the EIR,as some of the traffic will be coming from Contra Costa County. It was noted that the West End Bart stations would provide for reserved parking. BART's parking policy allows for 24 hours and cars do have to leave at some point. It was noted that parking is a major concern of both the Dublin and Pleasanton City Councils. A better understanding is needed and other alternatives and options were requested and needed in the event there is overflow of parking. An analysis, specifically covering and addressing the long term parking issues,was requested. PUBLIC COMMENTS A citizen urged both the Dublin and Pleasanton City Councils to insist upon implementing an adequate walkway that would provide direct access to buses and various locations, for example, office buildings, etc. A citizen commented on the essential importance of the overall design of the Station. From her perspective no thought was given to the integration of existing buildings and structures located near the station. The Minutes of this special joint meeting were prepared by Dawn G. Abrahamson, CMC, Pleasanton City Clerk ADJOURNMENT 11.1 There being no further business to come before the Councils,the meeting was adjourned at 6:10 p.m. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 22 SPECIAL JOINT MEETING (with Pleasanton City Council) October 1, 2003 Page 60d REGULAR MEETING. ° NOVEMBER. ,, 2003 A regular meeting of the Dublin City Council was held on Tuesday, November 4, 2003, in the Council Chambers of the Dublin Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m.,by Mayor Pro Tempore McCormick ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Oravetz, Sbranti, Zika and Mayor Pro Tempore McCormick. ABSENT: Mayor Lockhart. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The pledge of allegiance to the flag was recited by the Council, Staff and those present. ACCEPTANCE OF GIITS TO CITY FROM DAY ON THE GLEN FESTIVAL SPONSORS 7:01 p.m. 3.1 (150-70) Parks & Community Services Manager Paul McCreary presented the Staff Report, and advised that the City received $8,500 in sponsorships for the Day on the Glen Festival. In addition, the City received overwhelming support in the form of in-kind donations of goods and services from local businesses. Certificates of Appreciation and gift bags were presented to the sponsors. On motion of Cm. Oravetz, seconded by Cm. Zika,and by unanimous vote (Mayor Lockhart absent),the Council formally accepted the gifts. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 22 REGULAR MEETING November 4, 2003 PAGE 627 PRESENTATION BY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF RELATED TO CURRENT DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CITY 7:05 p.m. 3.2 (420-10) Planning Manager Jeri Ram made a PowerPoint presentation related to current development occurring within the City. Current single-family projects under construction include: Dublin Ranch Villages (Area G) by Toll Brothers; Pinnacles, St. Andrews and Glen Eagle by Toll Brothers. The models for the new multi-family project called Dublin Ranch Villages are now open and many of the 1,396 units are under construction, including the 105 affordable housing units. Construction for the Senior Center by Eden Housing will begin in February 2004. Another multi-family project soon to be underway is Fairway Ranch at Dublin Ranch. In the Commercial/Office category, the City has been undergoing some revitalization. The projects include the Target Store, addition of a new retail store called Anderson's on Amador Valley Boulevard, a new Bank of America in the eastern Dublin area, as well as the retail stores in the Shops at Waterford development. CONSENT CALENDAR _ • 7:14 p.m. Items 4.1 through 4.8 A member of the audience pulled Item 4.4. Cm. Zika pulled Item 4.1. On motion of Cm. Sbranti, seconded by Cm. Oravetz, and by unanimous vote (Mayor Lockhart absent),the Council took the following actions: Adopted (4.2 595-10) RESOLUTION NO. 213 03 ADOPTING A ENDED BYLAWS AND RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR THE SENIOR CENTER ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 138-92 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 22 REGULAR MEETING November 4, 2903 PAGE 628 Adopted (4.5 600-60) RESOLUTION NO. 214 — 03 APPROVING FINAL MAP AND TRACT IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR TRACT 7453 and RESOLUTION NO. 215 — 03 ACCEPTANCE OF PARKLAND REQUIREMENTS FOR TRACT 7453 FINAL MAP Adopted (4.3 600-60) RESOLUTION NO. 216 — 03 APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE TRACT DEVELOPER AGREEMENT FOR T- .CT 7327 DUBLIN RANCH AREA G, NEIGH-PORHOOO H-2 BY TOLL-DUBL1N, LLC Adopted (4.6 600-30) RESOLUTION NO. 217 — 03 APPROVING AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH BKF ENGINEERS FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES Approved (4.7 600-30) Budget Change in the amount of $68,294 related to Construction Management Consultant Services for Fire Stations #17 and #.18 with the Zahn Group; Approved (4.8 300-40) the Warrant Register in the amount of $2,448,319.04. Cm. Zika pulled Item 4.1,minutes of October 21st City Council meeting and stated he would abstain as he was not present at that meeting. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 22 REGULAR MEETING November 4, 2003 PAGE 629 On motion of Cm. Oravetz, seconded by Cm. Sbranti,and by majority vote (Mayor Lockhart absent& Cm. Zika abstained),the Council approved (4.1) Minutes of Regular Meeting of October 21, 2003. Anna Shimko with Cassidy Shimko Dawson (20 California, Suite 500, San Francisco), stated she has been practicing law for I7years and was here on behalf of Hatt Wings, Inc. Hott Wings submitted an application for building permit for reuse of Coco's restaurant and that building permit would purportedly be affected by the urgency ordinance that was adopted by the City previously. `It is their view the urgency ordinance is not based on any credible claim of any type of emergency. To legally adopt a urgency ordinance you have to make findings that there is current an immediate threat to public health, safety or welfare. They don't believe there is substantial evidence to support such a finding. Adoption of an emergency ordinance very similar to this was considered 2 years ago in response to a proposed office development. When that application was withdrawn the urgency proceedings were terminated. They would like to incorporate the complete record of that proceeding into this proceeding If there truly had been an emergency situation the city would have acted by now and the city has not done so. Clearly there are no historic resources that are currently at risk of being affected by a wrecking ball and in fact the ordinance cites as evidence of historic resources the former location of the'Green family mansion, a general store that has been converted to a church and an oak tree. At this point there has been no historic resource analysis,no expert evidence in the record to support the moratorium. In addition the boundary of the proposed historic area is unsupportable,is not based on any evidence provided by any historic consultants,and is a different expanded boundary from that that was approved or was considered over 2 years ago. This boundary appears to have been developed after my client's building permit application was submitted The report that you're considering tonight does not comport with the requirements of the planning and zoning law,it does not describe the measures that have been taken to alleviate the condition that lead to the adoption of the ordinance hi fact, it talks about the need to develop evidence to support adoption of the ordinance because there has not yet been any historic evidence and based on what the report indicates, that evidence will not be developed because looking at a chain of title and permit record has nothing to do with historicity. For the record it is their view they feel the ordinance is inadequate and can't be extended The report should not be accepted due to the language of the urgency ordinance, the statute, and case law that affect this issue. The building permit application submitted by Holt Wings is not subject to that urgency ordinance in any event." Mayor Fro Tempore McCormick thanked Ms. Shimko for her comments. On motion of Cm. Zika,seconded by Cm. Sbranti, and by unanimous vote (Mayor Lockhart absent), the Council received (4.4 910-40) report and issued Agenda Statement as a written report describing measures taken to alleviate urgency condition within the Historic Area. CITY COUNCIL l INUTES VOLUME 22 REGULAR MEETING November 4, 2003 PAGE 630 PUBLIC HEARING , REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 21-88 LOADING ZONE ON DUBLIN COURT 7:19 p.m. 6.1 (570-20) Mayor Pro Tempore McCormick opened the public hearing. City Engineer Melissa Morton presented the Staff Report and explained that this is the second reading of an Ordinance which would repeal a loading zone on the north side of Dublin Court behind Dublin Station Shopping Center. The businesses in the center are no longer using the loading zone, and the additional parking would be advantageous for the auto dealership across the street. No testimony was entered by any member of the public relative to this issue. Mayor Pro Tempore McCormick closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Oravetz, seconded by Cm. Sbranti, and by unanimous vote (Mayor Lockhart absent),the Council waived the reading and adopted ORDINANCE NO. 14 — 03 REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 21-88 LOADING ZONE ON DUBLIN COURT PUBLIC HEARING — PA 02-024 PINN BROTHERS FINE HOMES/SILVERIA RANCH • PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) REZONING AND STAGE 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN 7:20 p.m. 6.2 (450-30) . Mayor Pro Tempore McCormick opened the public hearing. Senior Planner Janet Harbin presented the Staff Report. Finn Brothers Fine Homes has submitted a project application for City Council approval consisting of a PD Rezoning and Stage 2 Development Plan, Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Site Development Review for 254 multi-family and single-family homes on approximately 93.4 acres of annexed properties located southeast and northeast of the intersection of Tassajara Road and the future extension of Fallon Road. This is the second reading of an Ordinance which would approve this application. CITY COUNCIL, MINUTES VOLUME 22 REGULAR MEETING November 4, 2003 PAGE 631 At the October 21St public hearing, the City Council requested that the following issues be resolved prior to approval of the Development Agreement for the Planned District, which is currently being prepared by the City Attorney's Office: 1) Concerns that the creation of a bio-swale on the site will create habitat that will be attractive to known endangered species that have been discovered on adjacent development sites. 2) Construction and dedication of an extended 36' wide public street connecting Street"A" and "B" to the south to the adjacent Nielsen property. Design of said street shall ensure that the grade differential will be addressed using vertical curves to ensure smooth ingress and egress. 3) Mr. Nielsen is to provide a current parking diagram for his commercial activities and improvements will be designed to minimize the potential impacts on existing parking. 4) Develop a turnaround design for trucking activities that minimizes the interface between the commercial use on the Nielsen property and the residential use on the Silveria property. 5) A conservation easement or other similar instrument has been agreed to by Pinn Brothers Fine Homes (Pfeiffer Properties, Inc.) to permanently preserve the approximately 56 acres of open space in the project area (this includes the 8 acres that heretofore had not been placed in a conservation easement) 6) Median removed from plans. �~ Ms. Harbin gave a status and stated Staff spoke to Biologist Malcolm Sproul with LSA about the bio-swale and he indicated this would not make this a waterway but rather just a drainage. The vegetation would not attract any endangered species. With regard to construction and dedication of streets A &B, this will be a 36' wide public street. Design has been revised to make sure there are no bumps. Mr. Nielsen was concerned about parking once the new street goes in. Engineers will be working on this prior to the development of the DA this next week. On the turn around design,we have looked at this and increased the turning radius so it will not impact any residential traffic into the area and trucks will be able to turn around in the space. A conservation easement or similar instrument to permanently preserve open space is being worked on by our attorneys and the applicant's attorneys, so it will be clear that no further development can occur in that area. John Doyle representing Robert Nielsen, discussed the progress they have made with assistance of Staff and Mr. Ambrose. They look forward to resolving parking issues and bio-swale and they were pleased to hear the report from Mr. Sproul that a habitat would CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 22 REGULAR MEETING L_ November 4, 2003 PAGE 632 not be created in that area. He stated Mr. Nielsen is concerned over the relationship of he bio-swale as he does have a domestic well next door.. They are making progress. Mayor Pro Tempore McCormick closed the public hearing. Cm. McCormick asked if they looked at the bio-swale as it relates to the well. City Engineer Melissa Morton stated they reviewed this and it requires a 50' setback for stormdrains and they will amend to adhere to this setback requirement. It doesn't provide a substantial impact to that amenity. Mr. Ambrose advised that we also discussed putting in a permanent liner. Cm. McCormick reopened the public hearing. Robert Nielsen voiced concern that these are fairly new systems and 50' is a minimum, so they would like to monitor the well on a bi-monthly basis. Cm. McCormick again closed the public hearing. Cm. Sbranti stated he was happy to see issues are moving toward being worked out; ?arking and potential related to bio-swale and monitoring. Who would typically _ monitor something like this? Ms. Morton stated typically you can do water testing of a well,but with a liner she felt the well will be more protected with a liner system, and it will be impervious and we're not anticipating any penetration by the bio-swale. Cm. Oravetz suggested we could check it to make sure the families are comfortable. Who would do it? He asked if perhaps DSRSD could do this? Mr. Ambrose asked who would be responsible for paying for this? A Finn Brothers representative in the audience raised his hand indicating they would pay for this. The Council stated this can be negotiated. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES r' . VOLUME 22 REGULAR MEETING November 4, 2003 PAGE 633 • On motion of Cm. Sbranti,.seconded by Cm. Zika, and by unanimous vote (Mayor Lockhart absent),the Council waived the reading and adopted ORDINANCE NO. 15 — .03 , AMENDING THE ZONING MAP TO REZONE PROPERTY TO A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) AND APPROVING A RELATED STAGE 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR APPROXIMATELY 93.4 ACRES WEST OF TASSAJARA ROAD AND AT THE INTERSECTION OF FALLON ROAD PA 02-024 PUBLIC HEARING 2003 LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT 7:33 p.m. 6.3 (580-40) Mayor Pro Tempore McCormick opened the public hearing. Administrative Analyst II Amy Cunningham presented the Staff Report. The Local Law Enforcement Block Grant requires that a public hearing be held regarding recommendations for the expenditure of grant funds. Police Services Staff and the Block Grant Community Advisory Board have met and recommend the funding in the amount of $16,398 be used to partially offset the salary of a crime trends/bicycle officer. Cm. Sbranti asked what the rationale was for the committee making their findings. Ms. Cunningham explained that historically the grant funding comes from this and the balance from the State COPS grant to fund one officer. We have had this about 7 or 8 years now. Cm. Zika asked if state money is still going to be available? Ms. Cunningham replied yes. Cm. Zika stated we bought 2 electric bicycles and he asked what happened to those? Chief Thuman stated we still use them and will until such time as they are no longer functional. We have had to replace batteries,but they are still functional and we still use them. C "FY CO UNrilL MINUTES REG. i :Aa:9t 14'1..L:'1. P-4 n' `- 1 i veraP)er 4, 20-U PAGE 634 No testimony was entered by any member of the public relative to this issue. Mayor Pro Tempore McCormick closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Zika, seconded.by Cm. Sbranti, and by unanimous vote (Mayor Lockhart absent),the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 218 — 03 APPROVAL OF APPROPRIATION BY DUBLIN POLICE SERVICES FOR 2003 BLOCK GRANT FUNDS ($16,398 and approved a Budget Change. RESIDENTIAL OFF-STREET RECREATIONAL VEHICLE (RV) PARKING REGULATIONS ALTERNATIVES 7:37 p.m. 7.1 (570-20) Senior Planner Andy Byde presented the Staff Report. Following discussion by the City Council at the October 15, 2002,January and June 17, 2003 City Council meetings related to off-street parking of recreational vehicles, the Council directed Staff to evaluate modifying the requirement that RV's cannot cross from the nearest side lot line area into the side yard area. Currently,the RV regulations state that a 6' fence must screen any vehicles parked within the side yard. The modification would eliminate the screening requirement and allow RV's to be located anywhere • within the nearest side lot line area or side yard area as long as the vehicle maintained a 1' setback from the public right-of-way. Based on Staff's cursory review of various types of motorhomes,the vast majority of newer Class A and the largest Class C motorhomes are over 30' in length. These types of vehicles would not fit within the driveway or nearest side lot line area,given the current regulations. The City Council requested that the Planning Commission provide input on the contemplated modification (the requirement that the RV's cannot cross from the nearest side lot area into the side yard area) or other changes to the RV regulations that the Planning Commission determined appropriate. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 22 REGU BAR MEETING Nove bey- 49 2003 PAGE 635 The Planning Commission unanimously voted that no changes be made to the Ordinance,with a request that the City Council direct Staff to more proactively enforce the current RV regulations. Staff discussed: Background of Recreational Vehicle Parking Regulations; Public Safety Issues; Height and Lengths of Motorhomes; Requested Direction from Planning Commission; and Discretionary Permit Process to Regulate Recreational Vehicles. Currently, the Zoning Ordinance allows a Variance for an applicant that wishes to deviate from any current development standard, including parking of an RV. However, there are 5 required findings to approve a Variance,which include:, 1) special physical circumstances applicable to the property; 2) the adjustment shall not constitute a grant of special privileges; 3) the granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to persons or property in the vicinity or to the public health, safety and welfare; 4) the Variance is consistent with the purpose and intent of the applicable zoning district; and 5) the Variance is consistent with the Dublin General Plan and with any applicable Specific Plans. Findings 1 and 2 often prove to be very difficult to find in the affirmative due to the similarity of the existing lot patterns within the City. Staff suggested perhaps if the City Council wished,they could consider granting a CUP. In summary, Staff requested that the City Council determine whether or not to maintain the existing off-street parking regulations,and if not;to provide Staff with direction regarding desired modification(s). Cm. Sbranti asked about the time period prior to 1986 RV's were not allowed. He thought they got stricter. Mr. Byde stated there was probably a disconnect from what was out in the neighborhoods and the City's ordinance. They were not allowed in.the front or side yard. Cm. Sbranti asked about the original intent of the blue and yellow area differentiation. Mr. Byde stated it was based on self regulation and lot size. They spoke with the planner who worked on this originally. The length of RV's 15 years ago were substantially different than what's out there today. Cm. Sbranti asked if there was anything discussed with proximity to fence or house related to safety issues? CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 22 REGULAR MEETING November 4, 2003 PAGE 636 Mr. Byde stated there was some discussion by Staff and the discussion was framed by how safety impacts would be with change. Cm. Zika talked about safety issue of parking on garage side versus other side of the house and asked if it was felt this may be a problem with people getting out of their house? Mr. Byde stated windows are provided for ingress/egress. Ultimately they provide for emergency, so if an RV is parked next to a window area of bedrooms, potentially you could obscure access from bedrooms. Bob Fasulkey stated the Planning Commission took their role very seriously. They had a full audience both nights when this issue was discussed. They wanted to make a credible recommendation. They felt there were really no good alternatives and they took seriously the needs of people with monolithic motor homes. The yellow/blue line issue became very important for their discussion. One thread amongst the folks, even those with motorhomes, asked that better enforcement occur. We have good guidelines in place, and we should now go toward more active enforcement. Dan Rodrigues, Ione Way, stated this zoning regulation has been in force for many years with only a couple of violations. The Ordinance as it reads now is very good and he would hate to see any changes. The one foot from sidewalk provides enough clearance for safety purposes. Another feature is the difference between the yellow and blue line. This doesn't affect him very much one way or another,but if there is a change put in a provision if fence is removed to accommodate an oversize vehicle, whenever the vehicle is not there that a fence or gate be put there. The back yard should not be visible from the street. Brian Larson, Galindo Drive, stated he has one of the trailers which he himself pointed out isn't following the rules. He wants to see the yellow blue line disappear. He has a Mini-Winnie and it doesn't fit in his 20' driveway. He has a fence at the back of his garage. He stated he doesn't see the purpose of blue and yellow line and would like it gone. Arlene Lewand stated she would also like to see the blue and yellow line disappear. By leaving,you create hardships on people who are only over it a couple of feet. It really isn't in anybody's way. The rest of the Ordinance is okay. For people with boats, it is sometimes just the engine that sticks out,but if that line is there,they may not be able to keep it there. • CI'T'Y COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 22 REGULAR MEETING November 4, 2003 PAG E 637 Linda Lamke,Tamarack Drive, asked what about the boats? In her neighborhood, this is - their problem, not motorhomes. They have 2 or 3 boats put in driveways and consequently their cars/vans are put out in the street and they block views when you are trying to get out of your driveway. Let's look at boats also. The City Council clarified they were talking about boats also as they are classified as an RV. Donna McTee, Portage Road,brought up the issue of boats/RV's parked kitty corner in driveways and stated she would like to see them parked at 90 degree angle instead of 45 degree angle and taking up the whole driveway. A lot of the houses in Dublin, if you park at 45 degree angle,you are also blocking entrance to the home. She stated she delivers flowers and has had to go around boats to get to the front porch. Please consider not allowing parking kitty corner. Cm. Zika stated he has no problem with the yellow/blue areas, as long as it doesn't exceed 25'. If you have a 40 footer, you'd better have a yard big enough to store it in. Most houses would have an outside entrance from the garage which would not obstruct access. Maximum allowed would be 25' and anything over that you get in trouble. He stated he agreed with the Planning Commission that we be proactive with enforcement rather than reactive. Neighbors don't want to tell on neighbors,but they can get upset with the City. Mr. Byde clarified he wanted 25' length or less so they would still be 1' back from the sidewalk. Cm. Oravetz agreed that the Planning Commission did a good job and he also felt we should keep the existing Ordinance and improve enforcement. We should build some flexibility into the Ordinance such as if someone has a 30' RV and they can show they can park it safely. We could go with the CUP process and try it for 6 months and see how much Staff time this takes. Cm. Sbranti asked how a process would work? Mr. Byde stated we would have to do a Zoning Ordinance amendment and take it back to the Planning Commission and it would include an application fee of $50 and they would have to submit site plan, drawing in the length of the vehicle. A CUP has to be acted on at a public hearing and it would either go before the Zoning Administrator or the Planning Commission. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 22 REGULAR MEETING November 4, 2003 PAGE 638 _ Cm. Zika asked if all property owners within 300' would have to be notified? If they lon't like it do they appeal to the Planning Commission and then to the City Council? Mr. Byde stated yes this was correct. Cm. Sbranti stated he likes the idea of flexibility. Both on-street and off-street came up near the same time and they got sorts. clouded. He was glad we have resolved the on- street. He stated he likes maintaining the Ordinance the way it is,but he could support extending the blue/yellow area to 25'. If they can show they have enough room, he had no problem with allowing a CUP. Mayor Pro Tempore McCormick questioned wouldn't we have criteria with a CUP even before they would apply? Mr. Byde discussed how this could work. We could tighten up the criteria so people would know in advance. Mayor Pro Tempore McCormick brought up the issue with fence. Should we have regulations for fence if the RV is gone? Mr. Byde stated fencing regulations relate to how high and where they can be,but don't state you have to have a fence. Cm. Sbranti stated he likes the idea of allowing the 25'because we have tightened up the on-street and we can now allow more leniency with off-street,but it has to comply with a plan. One boat could take away all options for cars in a driveway as the resident mentioned, so a modification could accommodate this. This won't work for everyone, but it will for some. We could give them the extra 5' with a CUP potential if the room is there and if they have a good plan. This will help with some of the parking. Cm. Zika stated the same rules apply to boats as to any other RV. He would be reluctant since we allow people to convert garages to say that they can't park on the vertical. Linda Lamke stated people that observe the rules are never the problem. Who is going to regulate this? Keep in mind who the people are who are going to be abusive of this. Mr. Ambrose discussed past policies and stated in the past the City Council adopted various types of Zoning Ordinance regulations and specifically how enforcement works. Planning Manager Jeri Ram stated enforcement is proactive,but pointed out that we have one enforcement officer. We concentrate first on commercial areas and graffiti. In CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 22 • REGULAR GULAR MEE T ING November 4, 2003 PAGE 639 residential areas we first look at property maintenance issues and when we have time we look at RV's. They shoot to the top with complaints. Cm. Sbranti stated the Planning Commission gave a recommendation and if the City Council agrees,this is a priority. Mayor Pro Tempore McCormick stated we may need to look at this with the budget for increased enforcement. The City Council supported 25'. Mr. Ambrose clarified that the 25' would be carte blanche, to move yellow line back 6' and 30' would only be an issue if they cross the blue/yellow line. They can be 26' from the property line and a CUP process can look at situations if they exceed that length in the blue/yellow area. Cm. Sbranti stated Staff can come back with criteria and also increase enforcement. Mr. Ambrose asked for parking solely in the blue area if this still requires screening. On motion of Cm. Sbranti, seconded by Cm. Oravetz, and by unanimous vote (Mayor Lockhart absent),the Council agreed to maintain the current Ordinance with the exception of extending the yellow area to 26'. Staff will bring back what the CUP process criteria will be for any residents that go beyond 26'in yellow/blue areas and more proactively enforce the Ordinance. AGREEMENT WITH THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT (BART) REGARDING FUNDING FOR THE WEST DUBLIN/PLEASANTON BART STATION IMPROVEMENTS 8:25 p.m. 8.1 (600-40) . City Engineer Melissa Morton presented the Staff Report and advised that this agreement with BART will allow the City of Dublin to pass $4 million in Tri-Valley Transportation Development Fee funds through to HART for the West Dublin BART Station project. BART is responsible for the construction and management of this project. CITY COUNCIL, MINUTES VOLUME 22 REGULAR MEETING November 4, 2003 PAGE 640 The West Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station Supplemental Environmental Impact Report :EIR) was approved by the BART Board in April 2001, and the Transit Village development surrounding the station was included in the City of Dublin's adopted West Dublin BART Specific Plan. BART selected the Design/Build/Construction Team for the project in June 2003. The construction portion of the project is currently expected to begin in late 2004/early 2005,with expected completion of construction within two years of the start date. Cm. Sbranti stated the last Tri-Valley Transportation meeting was exciting and relatively smooth. There were questions about the design. Ray Kuzbari was pleasantly surprised and it received unanimous approval. On motion of Cm. Zika, seconded by Cm. Sbranti, and by unanimous vote (Mayor Lockhart absent), the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 219 — 03 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SAN FRANCISCO BART DISTRICT REGARDING FUNDING FOR THE WEST DUBUU'``./PLEASANTON BART STATION IMPROVEMENTS APPROVAL OF THE CLEAN AIR CONSORTIUM CHECKLIST FOR THE REDUCTION OF OZONE PRODUCING EMISSIONS AND PROGRAM CHANGES NECESSARY FOR ADOPTION 8:27 p.m. 8.2 (530-10) City Engineer Melissa Morton presented the Staff Report. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District Board is under Federal mandate to keep the Bay Area's air quality within certain air quality goals. The purpose of this voluntary program is to help maintain the goals to benefit the health of the Bay Area population. Adoption of the Clean Air Consortium Checklist would mean that certain activities in the City would not occur with the same frequency during the summer months when ozone producing emissions are highest. In addition, some increase in the cost of services may be experienced by the City if projects must be deferred due to Spare the Air Day designations occurring during the construction period. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 22 REGULAR MEETING November 4, 2003 PAGE 641 Cm. Sbranti asked about the frequency of edging. Ms. Morton replied obviously, in the winter months we don't mow or edge as often but in summer months, this could occur weekly. Cm. Sbranti stated you could have Spare the Air days 3 Tuesdays in a row and if we typically edge those days, how would this work? Ms. Morton stated the service would have to be rescheduled for a different day. Mr. Ambrose talked about overlays and slurry projects. There may times when we need to do this, and we have spoken with the board, and they feel we are making our best effort. This will be the exception. Cm. Zika pointed out he agrees with the goal. We will have more Spare the Air days and he stated he felt voluntary compliance is great. We don't have the money to fix the problem we're not causing. Mr. Ambrose stated unfortunately,because of our geography, most of the pollution comes from the east of us. Cm. Sbranti asked how many Spare the Air days we had last year? Ms. Morton replied there were 10,but only one day did we exceed the federal standards. Cm. Zika how many are we allowed per year before we trip the funding mechanism? Ms. Morton stated she did not know; she will have to look into this. Cm. Oravetz stated it bothered him that on Spare the Air days we were out there mowing. Mayor Pro Tempore McCormick stated tailpipe emissions are the biggest contributors. A gas mower running a hour is equivalent to 40 cars. Cm. Sbranti stated he felt our concerns have been addressed. Mayor Pro Tempore McCormick asked how often will you report to BAAQMD? Ms. Morton advised that we have to report every Spare the Air day. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 22 REGULAR MEETING November 49 2003 PAGE 642 Mayor Pro Tempore McCormick asked if the City Council could be given copies? Ms. Morton stated she will make sure they do receive copies. Cm. Zika asked if we can indicate what the cost is, whether we saved,or it cost us or neutral? Ms. Morton stated we would not be charged for the activity if it has to be skipped because of a Spare the Air day. On motion of Cm. Oravetz, seconded by Cm. Zika, and by unanimous vote (Mayor Lockhart absent),the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 220 — 03 APPROVING ADOPTION OF THE CLEAN AIR CONSORTIUM CHECKLIST AND EXECUTION OF THE VOLUNTARY AGREEMENT AS REQUESTED BY THE BAY AREA AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT and authorized the Mayor Pro Tempore to sign cover letter explaining the City's position on one of the checklist measures and to execute the Voluntary Agreement. OTHER BUSINESS 8:39 p.m. Mr. Ambrose advised that we have a nice event scheduled for November 15th, Saturday at 10 a.m. There will be a dedication of Fire Station #I8 and then moving over to Fire Station #I7 at 11 a.m. for a dedication and open house. The public is invited to enjoy the festivities. Mr. Ambrose advised that Staff is still working on scheduling a joint workshop with the City Council and Planning Commission on the Alameda County Courthouse proposal. The meeting is tentatively scheduled for November 24th. Cm. Oravetz reported that he and Cm. Sbranti attended a LAVTA meeting yesterday and they have a map of the Valley and they can follow all the buses in the Valley. It is really something to see. Eventually, these will be at the BART stations so you'll know how long you'll have to wait for a bus. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 22 REGULAR MEETING November 4, 2003 PAGE 643 Cm. Sbranti stated in addition to the LAVTA meeting, he also attended a Tri-Valley Transportation Council meeting where we received the money for BART. He also attended a homework club meeting with Pat Zahn. He reported that renovation of Dublin High School is being looked at. The committee hasn't made any final recommendations. They are looking at rebuilding on the current high school site, and including a performing arts center. Cm. McCormick stated she attended an ABAG Seminar in San Francisco and the theme was regional planning. It is harder than it looks. If ABAG and MTC can get together this will be a giant step. On Thursday she will attend the public arts meeting. She thanked all the merchants and businesses for their help with Day on the Glen and also thanked her colleagues for their help tonight. ADJOURNMENT 11.1 There being no further business to come before the Council,the meeting was adjourned at 8:43 p.m. Mayor AI EST: City Clerk CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 22 REGULAR EETI:N N=s vember 4, 2003 PAGE 644