Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 4.01 Draft MinutesJntStdy 5-6-97 (2) .~ ..' -- ..-. ." TOINT STUDY SESSION MEETING - May 6, 1997 - A special joint study session meeting of the Dublin City Council and Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, May 6, 1997, in the Council Chambers of the Dublin Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m., by Mayor Houston. + ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Barnes, Burton, Lockhart and Mayor Houston. Planning Commissioners Fasulkey, Hughes, Jennings, Johnson and Oravetz. ABSENT: Councilmember Howard. + PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Houston led the Council, Staff and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. + STUDY SESSION Mr. Peabody stated the purpose of tonight's meeting was to discuss some issues that Staff needed direction on. He gave a brief history on the Zoning Ordinance uPdate. He stated the Planning Commission and City Council would hold public hearings on the issues outlined in the staff report, at a later date. Dennis Carrington, Sr. Planner, presented the staff report. On August 6, 1996, the Planning Commission established a "Zoning Ordinance Steering Committee" to assist Staff in the uPdate. The Committee, consisting of Vice Chairman Don Johnson, ex- Commissioner George Zika, and Chamber of Commerce President Maureen Nokes, worked with Staff to uPdate the Ordinance. Several sections of the Ordinance that needed revision were identified. Those that were revised by Staff and the Planning Commission were as follows: . Pennitted and conditional uses . Off-street parking and loading . Accessory structures and uses CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 16 JOINT OTY COUNCILIPLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MEETING 4 1 May 6, 1997 PAGE 176 ITErv1 ~O. ._" --~ --..,- . Development regulations including setbacks and building heights ..~ . Home Occupations . Landscaping and fencing . Non-confonnity . Planned Developments . Enforcement Mr. Carrington stated Staff took the existing Ordinance and also looked at the Ordinances of surrounding cities and set forth some alternatives for consideration. The first item was the off street parking of recreational vehicles. Staff did a survey of approximately 1,000 homes in Dublin. Approximately 5% of the residents had one or more recreational vehicles parked in front of their residence. Mayor Houston asked Mr. Carrington, what he meant by in front of the residence. Mr. Carrington stated he meant off-street parking; parking in the driveway and adjacent to the driveway. He showed some slides of multiple recreational vehicles parked in front of a residence. He showed overheads on allowable areas where vehicles can be parked. He stated what the neighboring cities allowed and gave the options addressed in the staff report to the Planning Commission and City Council. e. .. ~. . Mayor Houston asked if Staff or the Planning Commission had any questions or comments. Cm. Fasulkey stated the recreational vehicle parking issue has two very strong sides to it; however, he felt most people he has spoken with thought there should be a size limit. Cm. Johnson asked if the ten foot height allowed for the recreational vehicle included the air conditioning unit. ~ Cm. Burton asked why ten feet in height for a recreational vehicle was the magic number. Mr. Carrington stated that ten feet was what Livermore was using at the present time. He stated that there was no exact number that might be correct. Cm. Barnes asked the average length of a residential driveway. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 16 JOINT OTY COUNCILIPLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 177 .t .-_ Mr. Carrington stated that the typical residential setback was 20 feet. Cm. Barnes asked what if the recreational vehicle comes too close to the sidewalk without encroaching on it. There should be a definite amount on how close it may come so people won't bump into it. Cm. Jennings asked if prohibiting the recreational vehicle from overhanging in the public right-of-way or placing a length limit of 19 feet addressed Cm. Barnes concern. Mr. Carrington stated yes it did, but not the 19 foot limitation. Cm. Fasulkey stated the ordinance should include overhangs like bike racks, etc. Cm. Barnes asked if we don't allow the curb cuts, how can they park their recreational vehicle. Mr. Carrington stated that usually the resident will end up putting a block of wood along the curb and drive it up over the sidewalk. Cm. Barnes stated she was in favor of curb cuts. e-:-- Mayor Houston stated that curb cuts will limit the amount of street parking. Cm. Hughes stated he was concerned about the safety aspect of the larger recreational vehicles. If a recreational vehicle was 10-11 feet high, there was the safety issue, and it can provide a hiding space for people. Another concern was that 5% or less who own recreational vehicles block the view of the street. Several recreational vehicles were not taken care of and may be taken out only 3-4 times per year. He felt the City should prohibit recreational vehicles from being parked in driveways or side yards except those used for daily transportation. Cm. Lockhart stated that she felt most people who own recreational vehicles use them. She felt that the City did not have to deal with that many complaints. The City should consider another means of dealing with people who do not keep their recreational -:... vehicle clean; she was not in favor of telling residents they can't keep their recreational vehicle on their property. Mayor Houston asked if on page 3 of the staff report, it stated to Limit the number of recreational vehicles to one per lof7 does this includes boats, campers, and motor homes. . OTY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 16 JOINT CITY COUNOLIPLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 178 Mr. Carrington stated that recreational vehicles included, motor homes, boats on e" "": trailers, travel trailers, camper trailers, tent trailers, utility trailers, horse trailers, and " campers where the living area overhangs the cab. Mayor Houston stated when the Zoning Ordinance has a public hearing, there will be several options to consider outlined in the staff report. · Pennit recreational vehicles to be parked in driveways and side yards without limitations. · Prohibit the recreational vehicle from overhanging the public right-of- way or place a length limit of 19 feet. · Prohibit recreational vehicles from being more than 10 feet high excluding air conditioners. · Require that side yards in front of residences be paved if used for parking. · Prohibit additional curb cuts in front of paved side yards. · Prohibit recreational vehicles from being parked in driveways or side yards except those used for daily transportation. Mayor Houston suggested that the statement which prohibits the recreational vehicle . from overhanging the public right of way or place a length limit of 19 feet, should be ,J: changed to not come within one foot of the public right of way, including attached accessory devices. Cm. Barnes stated she had a problem with the ten foot height limitation. Cm. Lockhart stated she had a problem with the limit of one recreational vehicle per lot. If the residence has a sideyard or backyard access, why couldn't they park a vehicle back there. Mayor Houston stated if the vehicle can fit in the back of the lot it should be allowed. - Cm. Hughes stated that at our last meeting, we discussed having a 36 inch clearance for fire safety purposes. Cm. Fasulkey stated that attempting to strike some reasonable balance, the neighbor to the left has a right to sunshine. He felt ten feet in height was too excessive. He asked Dennis to clarify the number of complaints associated with recreational vehicles. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 16 JOINT CITY COUNCILIPLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 179 e:, e, .~, -- ..-. e:, Mr. Carrington stated this was one of the largest complaint issues the City gets. The largest complaint issue was on property maintenance. Mayor Houston stated that a study would be done by the Planning Commission to look at 10-12 feet for height. Cm. Burton stated to allow parking in the front yard, but not side yard behind the fence. He stated that a curb cut must have a city permit, and it could be worded to not take away from street parking. Cm. Johnson stated we changed the length of a recreational vehicle from 19 feet to not overhang into the sidewalk with accessory structures. Cm. Hughes asked if sidewalks were made to withstand the weight from a recreational vehicle. The City may share some liability if the sidewalk was damaged and someone got hurt. Mr. Carrington stated that they would have to pull it out and put in a monolithic driveway. Cm. Lockhart felt that if the City approved the curb cut then it would be okay. Mayor Houston stated most areas had a problem with limited parking in front of the house. Cm. Burton stated the City would have to make the call. Rich Ambrose, City Manager, stated our current ordinance requires a curb cut; a heavy vehicle would break up the sidewalk. A curb cut requires an encroachment permit and they were looked at on a case by case basis. Cm. Barnes stated she was in favor of curb cuts. Mayor Houston stated under Item B of the staff report, parking a recreational vehicle in the front part of the house, we suggest: limit to one vehicle per lot, limit the length with accessory structures to one foot away from the public right-of-way, look at the different heights, the side yards would be paved if used for parking, and not prohibit curb cuts. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 16 JOINT CITY COUNCILIPLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 180 Mr. Carrington stated the next item was parking of motor vehicles in front of . . residences for repair, dismantling or painting. He gave the options outlined in the staff" report. He showed slides with vehicles up on blocks and vehicles in disrepair. Mayor Houston stated from the photos, people were not working on vehicles, just storing them. Don't we want to get rid of inoperable vehicles stored on the lot. Mr. Kachadourian stated that if vehicles were parked in the side yard area, our existing ordinance was very specific. He stated that the vehicle must be registered, and in running condition. Cm. Jennings stated they picked option C of the staff report, which stated, pennit repair of motor vehicles within garages in residential zoning districts as an accessory use if the vehicle is registered to an occupant of the residence but prohibit painting of motor vehicles or the repair or maintenance of tractor trucks. Cm. Burton disagreed. He stated it should be limited to one vehicle per residence for repair and they should be allowed to paint them in their garage. Cm. Hughes stated that the law required from Cal-OHSA was different for painting a house than a vehicle. If you allow a person to paint their vehicle in an enclosed e garage, you are allowing them to kill themselves. . .' Cm. Lockhart stated there were hot water heaters in garages that could become a safety hazard. Cm. Burton stated that people will end up painting their cars anyway. Cm. Hughes stated that in our community, the storm drains have a fish painted on them. We have some people that were not responsible, that would let the paint go down the storm drain to the bay. Cm. Johnson stated businesses that paint cars have strict rules and guidelines to take care of the fumes. ..... .... Cm. Lockhart stated there were areas that do not have large garages and may not have the room to change oil. The City may want to consider allowing some flexibility for a limited time. Cm. Barnes stated that maybe we should set some time limits. The state of disrepair for a long period of time is the real problem. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 16 JOINT CITY COUNCILIPLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 181 .. ei e'- - .: Mayor Houston stated that the ordinance may want to define repair, dismantling and painting. Cm. Johnson stated to put the word "major" in front of repair to have better terminology. Mr. Carrington stated the staff report addressed repair, and he gave the list of things not allowed: 1) brake repair, Z) engine or transmission repair, 3) replacement of parts under the hood, with the exception of fluid batteries and filters, 4) replacement of parts under the car itself, 5) dismantling or, 6) painting. Mayor Houston stated that the City Council was split and he asked Staff and the Planning Commission for a better definition of the word "repair" but to look at page 4, items Band C of the staff report. Mr. Carrington stated the next item for discussion was the illegal car business operating out of a resident's garage. The vehicle must be registered to the occupant, otherwise it would be in violation of the home occupation of the ordinance. Cm. Lockhart asked if you could add a family member to that option, sometimes you might work on one of your family members cars. Mr. Carrington stated that we were allowing the repairs within a garage with limitations. The vehicle must be registered to the occupant of the home. It will also prohibit painting in the garage. Cm. Lockhart stated that she would like to see family members included on this issue. Mayor Houston stated the person should have to live there; otherwise the Police would have to start checking family lineage. He felt the Planning Commission's recommendation was valid. He stated the consensus was the Planning Commission's recommendation. Mr. Carrington stated that item 4 of the staff report was chain link fencing. The Planning Commission recommended to permit chain link fencing along side lot lines if behind the front yard setback, and along the rear lot line in the C-2, M-P, M-1, and M-2 zoning districts if it is planted with vegetation of sufficient density and height to screen the fence from adjacent parcels and public areas. Mayor Houston stated that new development does not use chain link fencing. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 16 JOINT CITY COUNCILIPLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 182 Mr. Carrington showed slides of chain link fences. e" Cm. Lockhart asked if people would be required to remove existing chain link fences. Cm. Jennings stated no, this applies to people putting up new fences. Mayor Houston asked if corner lots would be treated differently. Mr. Carrington stated that we would like to prohibit it on street side yards of corner lots altogether. The Planning Commission recommended not to allow it on street side yards of corner lots. Mayor Houston asked if the Council was in agreement with the Planning Commission. Cm. Barnes responded yes. Cm. Lockhart responded no. Cm. Burton was also in agreement. Mayor Houston stated that the Council agrees with the Planning Commission, but no e.:. chain link fences allowed on a corner lot. Mr. Carrington went to the enforcement issue. He stated the Planning Commission recommended and desired more proactive enforcement. Livermore's enforcement is on a complaint basis, but can enforce in extreme cases. Livermore's City Council does occasionally direct selective enforcement in problem areas. In Pleasanton, enforcement is on a complaint basis for recreational vehicles, and property maintenance. Enforcement is at the discretion of the enforcement officer in the cases of signs, construction activity before hours, and auto repair businesses in residential districts. San Ramon has enforcement on a complaint basis. The Planning Commission has expressed a desire for more proactive enforcement in the past, and wishes to discuss this issue with the City Council. Options which would require an it increase in staffing levels would have fiscal impacts. Mayor Houston stated it was a common problem, and that he has tried to work with citizens and businesses. People may feel we don't take our own rules seriously. OTY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 16 JOINT CITY COUNCILIPLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 183 .~ .~. ... ..-...-. e.. Cm. Barnes stated she went along with the complaint system we have. She felt the City did not give enough staffing to handle the problem. She felt it was the City's fault for not providing enough staffing to do the job properly. Mayor Houston stated that we should try to shorten the enforcement procedure, a verbal notice, a written notice, and then fines to compact the time to resolve the problem. Cm. Barnes stated by the time someone calls, they have already waited for something to be done. Cm. Lockhart stated she liked the idea of a verbal, but a citation will get their attention after the verbal and written notices. She agreed that it must be handled in a shorter period of time. Mr. Ambrose stated that we have been viewed as being too tough or too lenient. He stated that the main problem was not the availability of Staff. The philosophy of the Council was to educate people. He stated that 75% of the complaints were property maintenance and the condition had to be present for an unreasonable period of time, which does not start until we get the complaint; the problem could have existed for two months before someone complained. When the anti-ugly ordinance went into effect, there were many concerned people in the community, that Dublin would have an anti -ugly police. Mayor Houston stated it was a good idea to structure priorities for the Council, Staff and the Planning Commission. He stated that if the City was going to enforce everything equally, some on complaint basis, some enforced when Staff sees the problem. He felt we did not need to be overboard on enforcement, and take away people's civil liberties. There may be people who were in a financial situation that does not allow them to paint their house. He said there were apparent violations, but we do not want to step over reasonable bounds. He stated that he wanted to be careful on the property maintenance issues. Cm. Lockhart stated health and safety would be natural priorities. Cm. Barnes stated weeds 6 feet high could be a safety issue, there are times we have to pay attention to home safety issues. Cm. Jennings asked if there was anything on page 8 of the staff report that the Council felt should not be on that list. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 16 JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 184 Cm. Barnes stated it was a great list. ..: Cm. Lockhart stated home occupations should have more priority for enforcement. Mayor Houston stated that he wanted a little bit of care and thought in the property maintenance issues. Cm. Burton stated he would like it to be on a complaint basis, except those items more obvious. Cm. Jennings asked if there were any fiscal restraints. Mayor Houston responded yes, there were fiscal restraints. Mr. Carrington discussed corner landscaping issues. He stated that there were some commercial corners that were not well kept. Mr. Carrington showed slides of corner landscape areas. He stated that this was something that may want to be encouraged towards development in Eastern Dublin. Mayor Houston stated it needs to be addressed towards new development. He asked for the recommendation of the Planning Commission. e.; Mr. Carrington stated that the Planning Commission's recommendation was for all corners of intersections of commercial developments which will be maintained by the property owner. All corners of intersections of residential developments where both streets have a design ADT (average daily traffic) of 4,000 or more which will be maintained by the homeowners association. Cm. Burton stated if maintained by a homeowners association, you are assuming there IS one. Mr. Carrington stated that was correct, there would have to be a Home Owners Association like California Creekside. - - Mayor Houston stated he would like to encourage homeowners associations in new development. Cm. Barnes stated homeowners associations should be encourage and required, it benefits all property values. OTY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 16 JOINT CITY COUNCILIPLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 185 . e. . Mr. Carrington stated as an example, since it would not apply to existing Dublin and only to Eastern Dublin, the regulation would have applied to San Ramon Road, Dublin Blvd., Dougherty Road, Amador Valley Blvd., a portion of Village Parkway, and a small portion of Silvergate Dr. There would be eight intersections in the existing City that would be impacted by this, with some additional commercial intersections that would be impacted. Mayor Houston proceeded to the removal or replacement of trees in parking lots in multi-family, commercial, office, or industrial developments. The Planning Commission recommended that the majority of trees in a parking lot (or proposed parking lot) in a multi-family, commercial, office, or industrial development area are proposed to be removed for aesthetic reasons or for the purpose of increasing visibility for signage. That removal or replacement shall be pursuant to Site Development Review. Removal of trees in phases would not relieve the property owner of this obligation. Mr. Carrington stated there were two sides to this issue. Such as taking down trees for visibility of signange or taking down a heritage trees. Cm. Barnes stated that a tree may grow too tall, and may cause a problem like leaning against a house. She was more upset about shopping centers coming in and clearing trees. Mayor Houston stated that on the replacement or removal of trees, he asked the Commission to define "majority of trees", in their recommendation and remove "pine trees" from the Ordinance. Mr. Carrington discussed the distances between single family detached residences. He showed pictures of the Hansen Hill development that has 15 feet between houses. He stated it should be required in the new development in Eastern Dublin. He stated that the Commission recommends 1 0 feet of separation between two residences when non- habitable spaces (garages) are adjacent to each other, and 15 feet of separation between habitable spaces of residences. Side yard setbacks would range between 5 and 10 feet to ensure that the minimum distance between residences is maintained. ~ This option would provide more separation between residences on narrow lots than the current Ordinance provides. .. Cm. Burton was for maintaining what exists. He felt the land was what was costing. He felt the 5 foot minimum and 1 foot for every 10 feet of the existing Ordinance was okay. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 16 JOINT CITY COUNCILIPLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 186 Mayor Houston stated that if you increase the sideyard setbacks, you increase the cost e"" of the house. Cm. Fasulkey stated the idea was to look at what was being built and ten feet was too small. Mayor Houston stated this was a huge price issue. Cm. Fasulkey stated that ten and five feet were not a significant amount, but 2'l1 feet on each side raises the quality of life for these folks. Cm. Jennings stated that there were other issues such a safety and light. Cm. Barnes stated we tend to look at houses put on the middle of lots. How about putting them along the side, or having zero lot line homes. Mayor Houston stated this item needs more thought and more options brought out to look at. ADTOURNMENT 11.1 The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m. e: + Minutes prepared by Planning Secretary, Maria Carrasco. Mayor ATIEST: City Clerk --- - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 16 JOINT OTY COUNOLIPLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 187 . . .: - ..-. eo REGULAR MEETING - May 6, 1997 A regular meeting of the Dublin City Council was held on Tuesday, May 6, 1997, in the Council Chambers of the Dublin Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at 7:33 p.m., by Mayor Houston. . ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Barnes, Burton, Howard, Lockhart and Mayor Houston. ABSENT: None . PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Houston led the Council, Staff and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. . ACCEPTANCE OF GIFTS TO CITY 7:34 p.m. 3.1 (150-70) Paul McCreary advised that the City received $1,900 in sponsorships this year for the St. Patrick's Day Celebration. The 1997 sponsors included the J. Patrick Land Company and the Dublin Ranch Project. In recognition of their contributions, the sponsors were presented with Certificates of Appreciation, as well as 1997 St. Patrick's Day Celebration T-shirts and Dublin Town cassettes. John Moore and Ted Fairfield accepted on behalf oftheJ. Patrick Land Company and the Dublin Ranch project, respectively. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Lockhart, and by unanimous vote, the Council accepted the gifts; formally recognized the donors; and approved the Budget Change Form. . Alamilla Springs (910-40) 7:37 p.m. James Smith told the City Council a little about how he felt about Alamilla Springs. It's not a fun place to swim anymore because of people dumping in oil and tires and things. Chris and Kia, fellow classmates were present and presented pictures of the area. They feel this is a very historical spot and if it weren't for these springs, Dublin basically wouldn't be here. CITY COUNCIL MlNUTES VOLUME 16 REGULAR MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 188 Chris stated on May 2, Mr. Fiorio's third period history class was out of school and . they met to put in hours of hard but rewarding work cleaning up the springs. They wanted to restore the springs to its original beauty. They got their picture taken for the Valley Times. They thanked the Springs, Albertsons, Baskin Robbins and Mr. Fiorio for the great idea. Let's keep it looking great. Kia stated in some of the pictures you can see them filling up the dumpster. There was duckweed in the area rather than algae. They also took an after picture. Mayor Houston stated their work is appreciated on this project and they brought to light the significance of that springs. There has been talk of maybe talking to our Heritage Advisory Group on how to keep a tab on this historic area for the future. Cm. Barnes stated this group is a perfect example of what can be done. They got together and showed they cared about our community. This is what it takes; somebody caring enough to go out and volunteer. Cm. Burton felt what will probably result for the 25 kids that worked on this will be that 25 policemen will now probably keep their eye on this to make sure it stays nice. It will be difficult for somebody to throw their garbage in and get away with it. + . Traffic Control Regulations on Dublin Boulevard @ Hansen Drive (590-20) 7:43 p.m. Wayne Futack stated he has lived in Dublin for 30 years and reported that the corner of Hansen Drive and Dublin Boulevard is getting to be quite a bad situation. The swim club will be in operation in the next couple of weeks and things will get even worse. The curb area near the new Tradewinds Travel Company should be painted red. Mr. Thompson advised that there will be an agenda item related to this intersection at the next City Council meeting. + - - Comments on Study Session - Proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendments (450-20) 7:44 p.m. Ken Johnson, 7865 Tamarack Drive, stated Dublin does not have a homeowners association. Who pays the taxes? Not the Councilor the Police; they do as citizens and members of the community. One man's food is another man's poison. Some people cannot afford to have a mechanic do work on their cars. They should be allowed to do it in their garages. . CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 16 REGULAR MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 189 . .::: e. Mr. Johnson said in talking about RVs on property, he knew someone who asked a neighbor if his RV bothered him. He was glad he did this and his neighbor said it did not bother him. This whole thing should be discussed neighbor to neighbor before it's brought to the City. The City reacts too quickly. Mr. Johnson stated he lives on the corner of Tamarack and Bristol. He has a chainlink fence in his front yard. If it were wooden, people wouldn't be able to see at this intersection. He felt the people on this street belong to the racing association, and something has got to be done about this. Mr. Johnson stated he has side access to his yard and he had a driveway put in. He had to pay a $500 bond in order to put this in. It ended up costing him $1,500 to put this in, in accordance with City specifications. He got his deposit back from the City and was happy about that. It's BS to even talk about what Pleasanton and Livermore do. What difference does it make? What's the difference with homes being built 5' apart and others having a motor home right next to a house? Mayor Houston asked that Mr. Johnson adhere to proper decorum in speaking. Mr. Johnson stated he retired as a truck driver after 46 years and this is just the way he is. He would like to see Dublin have a town hall meeting and let people inform what they like and don't like about Dublin. The whole topic should be opened up to the people and let them have a say in this. He believes in town meetings like they have back east. Mr. Johnson questioned why the City doesn't have a situation like arbor day where people planting trees would have to get an okay. There's so many trees on Village Parkway 2 people can't even walk on the sidewalk. He suggested that the City just concentrate on getting rid of the ugly telephone lines and not worry about people's houses. There needs to be a lot more input from the people. + CONSENT CALENDAR 7:54 p.m. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote, the Council took the following actions: Approved (4.1) Minutes of Regular Meeting of April 15, 1997; CITY COUNCJL MINUTES VOLUME 16 REGULAR MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 190 RESOLUTION NO. 38 - 97 .""" '" Adopted (4.2 600-50) APPROVING ADMINISTERING AGENCY-STATE MASTER AGREEMENT NO. 04-5432 AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF SAID AGREEMENT Adopted (4.3 520-10) RESOLUTION NO. 39 - 97 DESIGNATING ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER/ ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR AS AGENT FOR EXECUTION OF DOCUMENTS PERTAINING TO ANANCIAL ASSISTANCE UNDER THE ROBERT T. STAFFORD DISASTER REUEF AND EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1988 OR THE NATURAL DISASTER ASSISTANCE ACT Adopted (4.5 600-40/1060-90) RESOLUTION NO. 40 - 97 APPROVING LOCAL MATCH AGREEMENT FOR THE 1-580/1-680 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS .: Authorized (4.6 600-30) the Mayor to execute amendments to the Agreements for the temporary displays of sculpture at the Dublin Civic Center (First Amendment-Steel Watercolor No. 99 & Second Amendment-Sirius); Adopted (4.7 410-40) RESOLUTION NO. 41 - 97 APPROVING PARCEL MAP 7109 Adopted (4.4 810-60) RESOLUTION NO. 42 - 97 ~ AUTHORIZING THE CAUFORNIA INTEGRAnD WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD TO ALLOCATE THE CITY'S SHARE OF OIL RECYCUNG FUNDS TO THE AlAMEDA COUNTY OUTREACH EFFORT FOR OIL RECYCUNG . CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 16 REGULAR MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 191 .: . -- -- e:. Adopted (4.8 670-40) RESOLUTION NO. 43 - 97 APPROVING PURCHASE AND QUITCLAIM DEED TO SEE'S CANDY SHOPS, INCORPORATED OF ABUTTERS RIGHTS and authorized the Mayor to execute the quitclaim deed; Adopted (4.9 620-20) RESOLUTION NO. 44 - 97 AUTHORIZING RE-INITIATION OF APPUCATION FOR REORGANIZATION FOR PA 96-037 SCHAEFER RANCH ANNEXATION Adopted (4.10 570-20) RESOLUTION NO. 45 - 97 ESTABUSHING NO PARKING ZONES ON DUBUN BOULEVARD (DOUGHERTY ROAD TO ARNOLD [SEBIUE] ROAD), DEMARCUS BOULEVARD, AND IRON HORSE PARKWAY and approved a Budget Change Form; Awarded (4.11 350-20) the bid for one marked Police patrol vehicle to Shamrock Ford for a total purchase price, including an extended warranty service of $25,178.52 with anticipated delivery to occur after August 1, 1997 and expenditure to be budgeted in Fiscal Year 1997-98; Approved (4.12 300-40) the Warrant Register in the amount of $1,159,724.93. + VALLEY HIGH SCHOOL COMMUNITY GYMNASIUM 7:55 p.m. 8.3 (600-40) (Order of agenda rearranged by Mayor) Parks & Community Services Director Lowart presented the Staff Report and advised that a proposal was being presented which would change the terms of the agreement between the City and DUSD regarding Joint Use of School Facilities (Gymnasium) whereby the City will now fund the incremental cost difference between the multi- purpose room and the gymnasium and will only fund its pro-rated share of the operating costs for the gym. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 16 REGULAR MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 192 Ms. Lowart discussed the various changes as outlined in the Staff Report and stated it e: would be helpful for the liaison committee to set some potential meeting dates. Cm. Burton asked if the repealing of the agreement would be part of the motion tonight. Ms. Lowart stated what was presented tonight was just a concept for consideration. John Sugiyama, Superintendent thanked Mr. Ambrose and Ms. Lowart for working with them to come up with this proposal. What is being proposed will definitely be a win for the community. This will allow them to expedite other bond projects for the schools. They are prepared to review this agreement tomorrow night along with construction projects for the next 3 years. Mayor Houston asked if this goes through tomorrow night at what point it will again go to bid. Mr. Sugiyama stated they will be prepared to go back out to bid on June 4th and given the normal time line they would anticipate construction to begin somewhere around the end of July or first of August. Cm. Burton asked if they have to get approval of the state. He stated the project has already been approved by the state and the modifications are now being reviewed. e.: Mayor Houston felt this is something they can all be proud of and it is positive for the entire community. Mr. Ambrose stated he wanted to clarify that the City is not in a position financially this next year to repay the District, so the payment schedule would need to be negotiated. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Barnes, and by unanimous vote, the Council authorized the Mayor to execute the letter to the Dublin Unified School District and that the proposal be forwarded to the District Board of Trustees for consideration at their May 7, 1997 meeting. The Council clarified that the repayment schedule would be negotiated between the City Manager and the District Superinten- dent and requested that a paragraph be added to the letter. . CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 16 REGULAR MEETING May 6, 1997 PA.GE 193 e. .~.. '. - ..-. e> With regard to possible dates for a liaison meeting, Mayor Houston and Cm. Lockhart, stated the afternoons of May 12, 13, or 21 would all work for them. + EASTERN DUBLIN SCHOOL MITIGATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE DUBLIN UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT & TENNIFER LIN Order of agenda rearranged by Mayor. 8:06 p.m. 8.1 (450-30) Senior Planner Cirelli advised that as a requirement of the Eastern Dublin prezone condition for the 1,538 acre annexation area, developers of property within the annexation area must enter into a written mitigation agreement with the affected school district and the City. A mitigation agreement between DUSD and the property owner Jennifer Lin was prepared and presented to the Council for consideration. Cm. Burton asked if this includes the Wallis property. Ms. Cirelli stated it is included; however, the portion the City is concerned with is the Dublin Ranch. In the future when the Wallis property annexation comes before the City, they will examine any school district issues at that time. It is currently in the Dublin district already. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Barnes, and by unanimous vote, the Council approved the School Mitigation Agreement between DUSD and Jennifer Lin and authorized the Mayor to sign the statement related to City of Dublin approval. + PUBLIC HEARING AMENDMENT TO DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 2.28 RELATED TO CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMITATIONS AND EXPENDITURES 8:10 p.m. 6.1 (630-20) Mayor Houston opened the public hearing. City Attorney Silver presented the Staff Report. At the November, 1996 election, voters passed Proposition 208 which amended the state law regarding campaign contributions. Following a review of the City's Ordinance in February, 1997, the Council directed Staff to revise the City's Ordinance to bring it into compliance with current state law. An Ordinance was introduced at the April 15, 1997 meeting which would establish a voluntary spending limit of $1 per resident based on population figures as of January 1 of each election year. The Ordinance has also been amended to delete the requirement that $25 contributions be itemized. CITY COUNCIL MlNUTES VOLUME 16 REGULAR MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 194 Each candidate shall file a statement of acceptance or rejection of the ceiling with the e' / City Clerk before accepting any contributions. If the candidate accepts the ceiling, the . contribution limit is raised from $100 to $250. Cm. Burton clarified that this matches the state law with regard to Proposition 208. Cm. Barnes asked if part of 208 is you can't transfer funds from one candidate to another. Ms. Silver stated this is not regulated at the City level, but it is part of the state law. No testimony was entered by any member of the public relative to this issue. Mayor Houston closed the public hearing. Cm. Barnes stated she believes the people asked for campaign reform and not to throw out those parts that require $25 reporting. Everyone has a right to know where the funding is coming from and because of this she supports the $25 reporting amount. The state said $1, but she did not feel we had to go this high. This puts it outside the realm of most people in the community. She felt this is going against the wishes of the people. The Council did not listen to what they really wanted. .:~ Cm. Howard clarified that the population figure includes the prisoners. Staff advised yes, it includes the total number of residents. Cm. Barnes stated she was appalled at the incorrect number of registered voters. She doesn't mind using the population number but was opposed to the amount. This means someone can spend over $26,000. She stated she would rather see a figure not to exceed $ .50 per resident. Cm. Burton felt it is not the money that makes the difference. Two Councilmembers elected last November spent less than $1,000 and got elected. It may be that an unknown may have to spend more money than a known candidate. Proposition 208 is ::: understood by everybody, so anyone running will know there is a common policy. On motion of Cm. Lockhart, seconded by Cm. Burton, and by majority vote, the Council waived the reading and adopted .: CITY COUNCIL :MINUTES VOLUME 16 REGULAR :MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 195 e' e:. -- ..-. e: ORDINANCE NO. 11 - 97 REPEAUNG AND RE-ENACTING CHAPTER 2.28 OF THE DUBUN MUNICIPAL CODE RElATING TO CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION UMITATlONS AND EXPENDITURES FOR ELECTIONS Cm. Barnes voted against the motion. . + PUBLIC HEARING - ADOPTION OF 1994 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE AND UNIFORM FIRE CODE STANDARDS BY REFERENCE 8: 17 p.m. 6.2 (540-10) Mayor Houston opened the public hearing. City Manager Ambrose advised that the Uniform Fire Code and the Uniform Fire Code Standards establish standards and regulations that provide for fire and life safety in the City of Dublin. As a part of the dissolution process of the Dougherty Regional Fire Authority, the City of Dublin will be responsible for providing fire suppression and prevention services to its residents and businesses. It is therefore necessary for the City Council to adopt the Uniform Fire Code and Fire Code Standards so that these standards and regulations will continue to be applicable in the City of Dublin. Jim Ferdnand, Fire Marshal and Jim Johnson, Deputy Fire Chief with Alameda County Fire Department were present. Mr. Ambrose discussed the process for adopting a code by reference in accordance with Government Code regulations, and recommended that the required public hearing be scheduled for May 20, 1997. Also discussed was the appeal process. Mr. Ambrose advised that the proposed ordinance authorizes the City Council to charge fees for plan review, inspection and permits to defray the City's reasonable costs for providing these services and permits. The fee schedule must be adopted by resolution. A similar fee schedule is currently in place for DRFA for the provision of these services and permits. Staff is currently evaluating the existing fee schedule in relation to the cost for services under the ACFD contract. A proposed fee schedule will be brought to the City Council for consideration and adoption prior to July 1, 1997. Cm. Burton asked if there's anything in the code like sprinklers required or any other differences. CITY COUNC~ MINUTES VOLUME 16 REGULAR MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 196 Jim Ferdnand stated there will be no changes compared to how we operated under e DRF A. Mr. Ambrose stated at some point in the future they will consider adoption of the 1997 Fire Code. No testimony was entered by any member of the public relative to this issue. Mayor Houston closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Barnes, seconded by Cm. Burton, and by unanimous vote, the Council introduced the ordinance and read the title, "An Ordinance Adopting by Reference the Uniform Fire Code, 1994 Edition and Uniform Fire Code Standards, 1994 Edition and Prescribing Regulations Governing Conditions Hazardous to Life and Property from Fire Explosion", and approved the form of the public notice for the May 20, 1997 public hearing. + PUBLIC HEARING WEED AND REFUSE ABATEMENT ORDINANCE 8:22 p.m. 6.3 (530-20/540-50) Mayor Houston opened the public hearing. . Staff explained that as part of the dissolution process of the Dougherty Regional Fire Authority, it is necessary for the City to adopt an ordinance establishing authority for weed and refuse abatement. DRFA's fire prevention function has included a successful weed abatement program which reduces fire hazards and unsightly debris in the City. The Alameda County Fire Department, under contract with the City, will continue to provide essentially the same program as has been provided by DRFA. No testimony was entered by any member of the public relative to this issue. Mayor Houston closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Lockhart, seconded by Cm. Burton, and by unanimous vote, the Council waived the reading and INTRODUCED an ordinance adding Chapter 5.68 to the Dublin Municipal Code providing for the abatement of weeds and refuse in the jurisdiction of the City of Dublin. + .. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 16 REGULAR MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 197 e:: HERITAGE CENTER MASTER SITE PLAN 8:23 p.m. 8.2 (910-40) Recreation Supervisor Bonnie Leonard presented the Staff Report and stated a master site plan for the Dublin Heritage Center had been developed, and if approved, would serve as a model for future site improvements. The plan also includes a strategy for implementation of improvements. Once the plan is adopted, the next step is the development of a plan to divide the work into logical projects based on project priority and projected financing. The current year budget includes funds to resurface the parking lot between the Schoolhouse and the Church. Thus, if the parking lot layout is satisfactory, Staff will prepare the necessary plans and specifications in order to put the parking lot project out to bid. .:.:' Alan Dreyfuss discussed the site plan. The gate seemed to be most important to the Planning Commission and also the sign addressing the unmarked graves in the southwest part of the site. They want to maintain the rural character of the area. At this point they are recommending asphalt for the parking lot. They recommend reintroducing Hawthorne trees and Oleander bushes that are missing. The cemetery itself is laid out fairly well and it has a nice feel the way it is now. An area directly north of the church is suggested for introducing trellises at either end. This will provide a nice photo opportunity for weddings. Cm. Burton commented he thought it looked very nice. There are 38 total parking spaces, 12 of which are compact and 2 are handicap. Mayor Houston felt the area where they show a turnaround should be opened up. This will be a place of activities and events and the middle needs to be opened up. He did not feel there should be any striping except for the handicap spaces. Mr. Dreyfuss stated they tried to reduce the area where kids play with their cars and a wide open space tends to diminish areas around it. Mayor Houston felt this is not a shopping center. Sometimes we will have events and -- there will be no parking there. Other events may have valet parking where they line the cars up. A lot of different things could be used in the space. Mr. Dreyfuss stated they tried to design a parking lot that meets the City's codes. Rather than limit, this may provide an enhancement for the site. .':' CITY COUNCIL MlNUTES VOLUME 16 REGULAR :MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 198 Cm. Lockhart felt the buffer between the church and the cemetery would be good. She ..'~ felt this would help both groups of people. She did not feel there will be any event that is so large that it could not be accommodated in the center space. She was dismayed with the idea of asphalt, although she understood the problems with kids. She felt once we start to upgrade the facility, they will stay away. Cm. Barnes stated she also was worried about using gravel. It is very difficult to walk on gravel. She stated she liked the island idea. Mayor Houston felt this was the way it was built. They did not originally have big buffers and separations. Cm. Lockhart pointed out that it is not just an historic cemetery, but there are still funerals there. She asked if it would be possible to have a small gazebo or something like that in the area behind the church. She thought a picturesque place for brides would be wonderful. Mr. Dreyfuss stated they carefully considered whether to introduce new structures. Cm. Barnes asked if they looked at the placement of benches around the cemetery part. People like to sit and meditate and spend time there with loved ones they have lost. e~- Mayor Houston asked if any costs had been developed at this point in the plan. Mr. Dreyfuss stated they've looked at using and enhancing what exists and the approach has been fairly economical. Ms. Leonard reported that they have 8 weddings planned so far. Cm. Lockhart discussed the gate and how it would be monitored. She would be concerned about something that is locked and people can't get in. Ms. Leonard stated it would be a possibility to have the gate opened early in the morning by Public Works and then closed in the evening. The gate would just be for cars. You could still walk in. ..-. - Cm. Barnes commented they had discovered that a lot of cemeteries are closed from dusk to dawn and you can't walk in. Cm. Burton felt the plan presented would indicate a circulation pattern when you go in. It's more obvious. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 16 REGULAR MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 199 .. . . -- - . The Council discussed water and sewer. Ms. Leonard pointed out that there is no water there now. Mr. D~eyfuss stated it could be extended to the cemetery. There was discussion on whether this would require a new meter and sewer connection fee. Staff responded that it would not. It could possibly be run from the street. Cm. Lockhart asked if this would be a project that we could work with community volunteer groups. Mr. Ambrose stated it would be a good idea to develop a list of projects which could be phased. On motion of Cm. Barnes, seconded by Cm. Lockhart, and by unanimous vote, the Council approved the proposed master site plan, directed Staff to prepare a phasing plan based on available funding, and directed Staff to prepare plans and specifications for the parking lot. + ESTABLISHING DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR PROPERTY RELATED FEES RELATED TO STORM WATER PROGRAM-REFUSE SERVICES, GARBAGE COMPANY RATES; AND ANNUAL FEE FOR MINIMUM RESIDENTIAL GARBAGE SERVICE 8:53 p.m. 8.4 (390-20) Assistant City Manager Rankin presented the Staff Report and advised that Proposition 218, which was approved by the voters in November of 1996 establishes procedures for the imposition of property related fees. The City Council will need to conduct a public hearing after providing 45 days written notice to all parcel owners. Staff prepared the draft notices and recommended the date of June 25, 1997 for the public hearing. Cm. Barnes asked what will actually be mailed to the residents. Mr. Rankin stated it will be 3 pages front and back, Exhibit 1 of the Staff Report. Cm. Barnes felt this may be too much to read. The bolded sentence, "PLEASE NOTE THESE ARE NOT NEW FEES", she would like to see on a line all by itself. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 16 REGULAR MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 200 On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Lockhart, and by unanimous vote, the e"' : Council authorized Staff to mail the notices and establish the public hearing for June 25, 1997. . OTHER BUSINESS 8:57 p.m. Tri - Valley Council Meeting 040-80) Mr. Ambrose advised that Staff had been notified that the City of Livermore will be hosting the next meeting of the Tri - Valley Council and they want to know if Thursday, June 12, would be a workable date for everyone. The first date of June 19, didn't work for all. The City Council tentatively marked their calendars and indicated this date was okay. . Cm. Howard's Return (610-05) Cm. Lockhart stated she wanted to welcome Cm. Howard back after her eye surgery. e She was glad to see her up and about again. . Traffic Control Regulations on Dublin Boulevard @ Hansen Drive (590-20) Cm. Lockhart stated she was glad to see someone come in about the Dublin Boulevard/ Hansen Drive intersection issue and to hear that the City will be addressing it at the next meeting. . Weeds @ Heritage Center (295-20) Cm. Lockhart stated she had noticed there are lots of weeds in the cemetery on the northeast side right behind the church. She hoped these would be addressed. . CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 16 REGULAR MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 201 . e: Alamilla Springs (910-40) Cm. Lockhart stated she felt the Heritage people, DHPA would be more than glad to discuss the Alamilla Springs. . Council Invitations/Activities (610-05) Cm. Lockhart commented she had gotten lots of invitations this week and wondered if the rest of the Council had also, and who was going to what events. The Council and Staff indicated they had received an invitation to the BART pre-grand opening ceremonies on Friday, May 9th. The Alameda County Transportation Authority is having a 10 year celebration on Friday, May 30th. Mayor Houston and Cm. Barnes both indicated they wouldn't be able to attend, so Cm. Lockhart stated she would go and represent the City. . e: City Newsletter/Recreation Brochure 050-40) Cm. Barnes commented that the Recreation newsletter she had just received is one of the nicest ones she has seen. She read every page and everything looked great. . Development Fees (390-20) Cm. Barnes stated she asked Carol Cirelli to send each of the Councilmembers a little worksheet that Tony Hirt from San Ramon prepared which discusses fees and what it takes to build a house. He developed a program on the computer and Carol plugged in Dublin's figures into it. This reflects homes in East Dublin. She stated she will also ask that a copy be sent to the Planning Commission. This was a lot of work for Carol, and -- she appreciated it. . Status of New Task Forces 010-30) e:. Mayor Houston asked about the status and uPdate of the various task forces that are to be formed; i.e., for downtown improvement, library, etc. He has been getting requests CITY.COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 16 REGULAR MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 202 ~ from inte~ested people in the, co~~u,nity. He requested that a report be brought to thee next meetIng on when we mIght InItIate these. . Mr. Ambrose stated all Department Heads will be immersed in budget preparation during the next 3 to 4 weeks and he appreciated the Council's patience. . Mape Memorial Park Reopening Ceremonies (950-40) Mayor Houston asked if Ms. Lowart had gotten any information on Mr. Mape. Staff responded yes they had received some information. . CLOSED SESSION 9:03 p.m. 10.1 (640-30) The Council recessed to a closed session to conference with Legal Counsel regarding Pending Litigation in accordance with Government Code Section 54956.9(a): a. Becker vs. Dublin, Alameda Superior Court No. V-012743-1; and b. Dublin vs. PG&E, Alameda Superior Court No. V-011583-4. e. 10.2 (600-30) >p:: Public Employee Performance Evaluation, Title: City Attorney, in accordance with GCS 54957. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ACTION No action was taken. . ADTOURNMENT 11.1 There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m. . .- -. Mayor A TrEST: City Clerk e: CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 16 REGULAR MEETING May 6, 1997 PAGE 203 .4