Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 4.01 Approve 01-13-1986 Minutes (2) REGULAR MEETING - January 13 , 1986 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Monday , January 13 , 1986 at the Shannon Community Center. The meeting was called to order at 7 : 39 p .m. by Mayor Peter Snyder. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Hegarty, Jeffery , Moffatt , Vonheeder and Mayor Snyder. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Mayor led the Council , Staff and those present in the pledge of alleg- iance to the flag. MEETING FORMAT Mayor Snyder explained that due to the unusual characteristics of this particular meeting, some rules must be adhered to in order to move along as expeditiously as possible . It was anticipated that the meeting would be quite lengthy, but Mayor Snyder reported that everyone would have a chance to speak for 3 minutes . Mayor Snyder requested that anyone who wanted to address the Council complete a speaker' s card available at the front of the room. BOY SCOUT POST #500 Vincent Vonheeder addressed the Council and reported the formation of Boy Scout Post #500, serving the Livermore Amador Valley, which they hope to center in Dublin. This will be a high adventure post which will encourage outdoor recreational activities . Mr. Vonheeder stated they were very pleased to offer their services to the City of Dublin. The group was then introduced. KAUFMAN & BROAD COMPLAINT Rena Whitney , 11606 Amarillo Court reported a complaint regarding damage that has been done behind her house by the Kaufman & Broad Development Company . Her fence has been broken by the construction crew and she has had no satisfaction from Kaufman & Broad. Children playing around the construction site have broken her garage windows . Ms . Whitney felt there was a need for some type of security at the site and a telephone number where people could call to report activities occuring during non working hours . Ron Grudzinski representing Kaufman & Broad indicated to Ms . Whitney that she should contact him to resolve this situation. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- CM-5-1 Regular Meeting January 13 , 1986 e A0. CONSENT CALENDAR On motion of Cm. Jeffery , seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote , the Council took the following actions : Approved Minutes of Adjourned Regular Meeting of December 18 , 1985 ; Approved Financial Report for Period Ending November 30, 1985 ; Approved City Treasurer' s Investment Report for Period Ending December 31 , 1985 ; Denied claim submitted on behalf of Kevin Kittredge and directed Staff to notify the claimant and the City ' s Insurance Carrier; Denied claim submitted on behalf of George W. Filstead and David C . Filstead and directed Staff to notify the claimants and the City' s Insurance Carrier; Approved the request for the Dublin High School Super Bowl Sunday Run and waived the permit fee ; Received a report from the Police Chief related to the City' s existing litter law; Approved an agreement with Murray School District related to the purchase of 4. 03 acres of the Dolan School Site ; Approved activities associated with St . Patrick' s Day celebration, authorized the installation of a banner and approved the parade route ; Authorized participation in Phase I of Alameda County Liability Insurance Pool Study and authorized a $500 budget transfer from the Contingent Reserve to an Insurance Professional Services Account ; Adopted Statement of Investment Policy for 1986; Revised the 1986-87 Community Development Block Grant Project priority to fit the reduced funding available : Housing Rehabilitation $6, 700, Minor Home Repair/Paint $5 , 000; Dougherty Road Right-of-Way $29,900; Approved Warrant Register in the amount of $574, 586.67 ; Adopted Final Report Traffic Engineering Study and directed Staff to implement recommendations contained in Study. -------------------- CM-5-2 Regular Meeting January 13 , 1986 PUBLIC HEARING KAUFMAN & BROAD OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, PA 85-017 PD PREZONING & REZONING, ANNEXATION, TENTATIVE MAP & SDR APPLICATION Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. Staff reported that Kaufman & Broad is proposing a 130 unit multiple family residential project on Silvergate Drive north of Hansen Drive . The project involves the prezoning and annexation of approximately 13 .4 acres that are now outside of City limits. Major issues involve : 1) size and configuration of western recreational area - Staff recommended moving Unit #74 to another location, enlarging the area to approximately one-third of an acre and providing 8 parking spaces near the proposed pool area. 2 ) layout of units along Martin Canyon Creek - Staff recommended that 1 unit be removed & buildings shifted to provide a better visual and physical tie into the creek area. 3 ) size and configuration of eastern recreation area - Staff recommended that 1 unit be eliminated in order to provide additional area for the recreation area. 4) need for future public hearing on Site Development Review - Staff recommended that the Site Development Review be done at the Planning Commission level rather than Administratively. 5 ) reduction of project density by 2-3 dwelling units Cm. Moffatt questioned how long it had taken for the project to get to this point . On October 7th, the Planning Commission held its first public hear- ing. The application was initially filed in February, 1985 , but processing was held for preparation of traffic reports and horticultural reports . Cm. Jeffery questioned how much land for recreation is typically allowed per unit . Staff displayed and discussed a comparison chart of other projects . Cm. Hegarty questioned if the pool was not put in if Building #74 would need to be taken out . Mr. Gailey responded that if you were going to have to rely on just a passive type recreation area, the area would need to be larger. Cm. Hegarty expressed concern regarding the condition of trees along the creek with exposed roots . Staff responded that the horticulture report stated that the large mature trees are best left alone . Mayor Snyder posed questions with regard to Units #65 , #73 and #74 and the 3 proposed parking spaces. Staff recommended moving the 3 spaces across the street and making 4 spaces available adjacent to the proposed pool area. Ron Grudzinski , Kaufman & Broad, stated he realized that this meeting would likely be quite lengthy and would therefore keep his comments brief. ----=---------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- CM-5-3 Regular Meeting January 13 , 1986 Mr. Grudzinski stated that K&B had been involved in the building development business for over 25 years , and are one of the largest in the U. S . and the largest in California. Although the trend for multi-family dwellings is 12-15 units per acre , they considered this development to be single family attached homes with a density of 9 units per acre . They feel they have responded to the expressed desires that this site be developed with as high quality a project as possible . The site contains both active and passive recreation areas . The architectural designs represent 4 specific types . There will be 2 recreation centers ; the western area will be active and the eastern area will be passive . ,. Mr. Grudzinski questioned several of the conditions imposed on their development . Condition #2 - they requested Staff perform the Site Development Review rather than having to go before the Planning Commission. Condition #48 park dedication - calculation is based on number of units . Condition #66 - never included in Planning Commission public hearing. This was added subsequent to hearings and they felt inappropriately. Condition #68 - ties in with open space along Martin Canyon Creek. Condition #69 - relating to the proposed easement along southern edge of property . Mr. Jim Abreau, 11622 Amarillo Court expressed an interest in hydrologic studies of Martin Canyon Creek. The flood control people asked for a study to determine if changes that will be made to the creek will still allow it to accommodate drainage water. Mr. Abreau felt that the studies should be conducted ahead of time . City Engineer Thompson indicated that Condition #30 of the PD Resolution speaks to this requirement . This study would be done before any grading is done and if the creek is inadequate , improvements would have to be made . Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. Cm. Moffatt suggested that each item be considered and then voted upon. Discussion was held regarding Staff vs . Planning Commission performing the Site Development Review. It was pointed out that with a Staff review, the approval can be appealed anyway, thereby bringing it before the Planning Commission and subsequently the Council , if necessary. On motion of Cm. Moffatt , seconded by Cm. Jeffery, and by unanimous vote , Council determined that Unit #74 should be relocated into Building Group #65468 , in order to provide more space in the western recreation area. With regard to Building #51 , Cm. Vonheeder felt that if this area were more open it would encourage children to play in this area and would make the creek too attractive . On motion of Cm. Moffatt , seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by majority vote , the Council agreed to leave Unit #51 as is (i . e . dropping Condition #65 ) . Voting NO on this motion was Cm. Jeffery, who felt that the General Plan called for visual open space along this creek area. -- -------------------------- CM-5-4 Regular Meeting January 13 , 1986 With regard to the density , Council consensus was that the total number of units approved would be 129. With regard to Condition #66, on motion of Cm. Moffatt , seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous vote , the Council determined that Unit #43 should be deleted. With regard to the Site Development Review, on motion of Cm. Moffatt , seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by majority vote , the Council agreed that the SDR would be reviewed administratively. Voting NO on this motion were Cm. Jeffery and Mayor Snyder. With regard to the eastern recreation area, on motion of Cm. Moffatt , seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote , the Council agreed that this area should remain as a passive recreation area (i . e . not be developed with a multi-sports court facility or an equivalent active recreation facility) . On motion of Cm. Hegarty , seconded by Cm. Jeffery , and by unanimous vote , the Council agreed that the condition dealing with the easement for the Hansen property be retained. On motion of Cm. Jeffery , seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote , the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 1 - 86 ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE FOR THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ( PD ) PREZONING AND ANNEXATION REQUESTS INVOLVING 13 .4 + ACRES GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTHWEST OF THE CITY, AND FOR THE CONCURRENT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ( PD ) REZONING, TENTATIVE MAP AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REQUESTS INVOLVING THE SUBJECT 13 .4 + ACRES AND AN ADDITIONAL 0. 5 + ACRES LYING WITHIN THE CITY OF DUBLIN, COLLECTIVELY REQUESTED UNDER PA 85-017 KAUFMAN AND BROAD OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, INC . and RESOLUTION NO. 2 - 86 APPROVING AND ESTABLISHING FINDINGS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ( PD ) PREZONING AND REZONING CONCERNING PA 85-017 , KAUFMAN & BROAD OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, INC . and RESOLUTION NO. 3 - 86 DIRECTING CITY OF DUBLIN STAFF TO INITIATE AN APPLICATION TO THE ALAMEDA COUNTY LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO ) AND ANNEXATION PROPOSAL INVOLVING APPROXIMATELY 13 .4 + ACRES GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTHWEST OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN INVOLVED IN THE REQUEST FILED UNDER PA 85-017 , BY KAUFMAN AND BROAD OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, INC . and RESOLUTION NO. 4 - 86 APPROVING TENTATIVE MAP 5410 CONCERNING PA 85-017 . 4 KAUFMAN AND BROAD OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, INC . ------------------------- CM-5-5 Regular Meeting January 13 , 1986 and RESOLUTION NO. 5 - 86 AGREEING TO AN EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY TAX REVENUE CONCERNING PA 85-017 KAUFMAN AND BROAD OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, INC . , PREZONING AND ANNEXATION APPLICATION waived the reading and INTRODUCED an ordinance amending Zoning Ordinance to permit the prezoning of real property located generally southwest of the existing City limits . RECESS A short recess was called . All Councilmembers were present when the meeting reconvened . PUBLIC HEARING RECREATION VEHICLE ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. Staff explained that the existing Zoning Ordinance prohibits parking or storage of recreational vehicles , boats , trailers and similar items in required front yards and required side yards in residential districts . The Planning Commission held public hearings on October 7 , October 21 , November 21 and December 2 , 1985 , at which times considerable testimony was taken, both for and against the storage of RV' s in residential areas . During the Planning Commission review, three areas were considered: 1 ) in the rear yard ; 2) in the rear yard and side yards ; 3 ) in the rear yard , side yards and front yards . A number of major issues were raised during the analysis of the three alternative RV storage areas : 1) Storage in the front yard area - A basic issue raised was whether or not it was appropriate to have RV ' s stored in the front yards of the community. The front yards have been used' as semi-public open spaces typically landscaped with lawns , shrubs and trees . The typical height limit for fences , hedges and walls in the front yard is 4 feet . This height limit is intended to assure that the front yard is visually open for aesthetic purposes and so that there is little visual obstruction near driveways . This helps create and maintain the residential character of the community . 2) Safety and sight distance - A critical issue with parking in the front yard involved potential safety and sight distance hazards . If an RV was parked next to the driveway , there would be the potential for a driver backing out of the driveway to not see someone on the sidewalk, not see another vehicle in the street , or not be seen by a pedestrian or other vehicle . --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- CM-5-6 Regular Meeting January 13 , 1986 3 ) Storage on the driveway - The front driveway of a house typically leads to the required off-street parking spaces in the garage . The Zoning Ordinance requires that the required parking spaces must be kept continuously accessible . Short term, temporary parking is permitted. Storage or long term parking in the driveway would block access to the required parking spaces and could potentially result in additional parking and congestion on the street . The Planning Commission felt that RV' s and similar items should be specifically limited to 72 hours parking in the driveway. 4) Potential City liability - The City Attorney indicated that if the City allows an RV to be stored in a way that potentially blocks vision, the City would potentially be liable . An RV stored alongside the driveway could block the view between a car backing out and a pedestrian on the sidewalk. The City could be held liable from a safety standpoint if it allowed RV storage alongside the driveway. This becomes more critical as the City faces the prospect of being unable to obtain liability insurance in March, 1986. Mayor Snyder indicated that he would call the names in a random order of those people who completed cards indicating their desire to comment on this subject . Ed Motsenbocker, 7712 Canterbury Lane , stated he was in favor of liberty and justice for all . As an RV owner, he would not deny this priviledge to anyone and felt they should be able to keep them anywhere they want . Don Robinson , 11688 Amarillo Court , stated he has made provisions on his property to accommodate his RV and .boat . He was able to put in an extra driveway through a variance issued by the County prior to Dublin' s incorporation. Since the majority of the lots in Dublin do not have the necessary space to put in an extra driveway he felt that each situation should therefore be individually considered. Jim Cameron, 6876 Langmuir Lane stated he did not receive the recent survey and further stated that he felt the survey did not hold water. He also spoke against curb cuts for RV access . John T. Collins , 7011 Allegheny Drive , indicated he had recently purchased a boat . He felt that less law is better law and that the entire ordinance should be thrown out . Very few properties have 6 ' of side yard available . Sue Moore , 7637 Cardigan Street , indicated she felt that no specific considerations had been given to the unique situations on cul-de-sacs . Harry Short , P. 0 . Box 2357, stated he felt the City Council should represent the masses . Of approximately 175 homes that he surveyed in his neighborhood , there were approximately 14 RV' s , or less than 10%. He stated he hardly felt this was a majority . He considered RV' s to be a nuisance , create safety hazards and were eye sores . The City should offer some type of storage alternatives . Mary Tuma, 11878 Dublin Green Drive , stated there was no way they could get their RV into their side yard. They have emergency supplies stored in their RV and she would be very upset if they were forced into off site storage . Regular Meeting January 13 , 1986 Gary West , 7682 Cardigan Street , felt they should be allowed to park their RV in the area beside the driveway. The majority of people who have attended the RV hearings are in favor of parking everywhere . He was opposed to the ordinance and felt that people should be able to use their property as they wish as long as it doesn' t prove to be a hazard to others. Gerald Abernathy , 6699 Maple Drive , questioned exactly where private property begins and ends . No one seems to agree . He travels about 3 weeks of the month and has a 7 passenger van that won' t fit into his garage . Therefore , he would be constantly cited for violation of the 72 hour parking regulation in his driveway. Many homes have shrubs and plants that are more than 4 feet high, thereby causing the same safety hazard as vehicles . Ben Smith, 7414 Hansen Drive , felt that they should be allowed to park in driveways , as long as the sidewalk is clear. The issue of side yards is absurd, because if the space is not there , it is not there . The insurance argument is rather naive as State Law requires owners to have automobile insurance which covers their RV' s , etc . Everyone also has homeowner' s insurance . Someone who owns an RV is going to be a responsible citizen, and as such, will be adequately covered with insurance . Clifford Gonsalves , 11654 Amarillo Court , indicated he still wants to park his RV on the slab where it has been parked for 17 years . It is his property and he has a right to park anywhere on it . Every RV owner has this right . Roy Money, 7650 Hillrose Drive , was called to speak, but had apparently left the meeting. Steve Heath, 8541 Wicklow Lane , stated it was physically impossible for him to park his boat in the side yard or back. He recently spent $1 ,000 to put in a slab on which to park his boat . He was against curb cuts . He indicated that a farmer has outdoor storage space available at Vasco & Greenville Roads in Livermore at $35 per month. You must , however, sign a waiver releasing him from any responsibility. There are also outside storage spots available in Tracy at $45 per month. Ernie Strohmeier, 6415 Ebensburg Lane , stated he felt curb cutting is necessary in order to assure access out of the parked area. He felt people are better off parking in their front yard so they do not block their neighbors view. William Allen, 7696 Frederiksen Lane , indicated that he has cemented in the area beside his driveway for parking his 23 ' Winnebego . The City of Coalinga realizes the value of RV' s . Were it not for RV' s , they would have been in real trouble . Most RV' s are equipped with generators , CB radios , first aid equipment , etc . Fred Allen, 7054 Ann Arbor Way, stated this ordinance is not needed in his area. Ken Meadows , 6898 Mansfield Avenue , stated that he has rear yard access , but symphathized with those who do not . --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- CM-5-8 Regular Meeting January 13 , 1986 Lee Pletcher, 6923 Tyne Court , stated that RV' s are very beneficial in case of an emergency. He suggested that the allowed length of RV be changed from 20 ' to 40' and that a stipulation be inserted stating vehicle must be currently registered. They are no more of a hazard than a van, pickup truck or car, as far as being parked in the driveway. He handed out information related to a U . S . Supreme Court and Court of Appeals case Euclid Ohio vs . Fitzthur. You cannot discriminate against RV' s over other vehicles . Norbert Hudak, 6938 Mansfield Avenue , indicated he had recently purchased a boat that had been kept in a storage area, and many items were missing. He cannot park in his back yard. He felt the issue should be put to a vote or that a new committee should be formed. William Pennington, 7065 Portage Road, stated he felt it was unfair to put a time restriction on this discussion. With regard to the insurance issue , the City is liable for everything that happens anyway. Most people have plants that are more than 5 ' high also . He also was very disturbed that they were scheduled at the end of the meeting. Businesses are given all the priviledges and the people are getting dumped on. Jimmie Spickler, 7551 Calle Verde , felt that more thought should go into this ordinance before it becomes a law. He felt that the issue of obstruction of vision was not relevant , as this same situation could be caused by any vehicle . Wording in the proposed ordinance stated that the owner shall be totally responsible so he questioned the City ' s concern. Laurie Petty, 7379 Shadow Place , felt that the City' s liability should be strongly considered if a child or pedestrian were to be injured. She would not like to see the City' s dollars going to a multi-million dollar law suit . She urged the Council to adopt the Planning Commission' s proposed ordinance . City Attorney Nave stated several wording changes that should be made on the drafted ordinance . Cm. Vonheeder discussed procedure for obtaining variance to allow extra driveway. Cm. Moffatt questioned if a rounded curb could be the same as a curb cut . Staff responded that the standards are developed by the City Engineer and he would have the discretion to decide . Cm. Jeffery questioned if the safety aspect had been researched , insofar as accidents were concerned . Captain Shores indicated that his department mainly receives complaints . Discussion was held with regard to individual tracts of homes having CC&R' s which restrict RV parking. Planning Director Tong reported that Staff had looked at the CC&R' s for 3 tracts and only one addresses storage . Mayor Snyder indicated that CC&R' s could very well be more restrictive than the proposed ordinance , and they would take precedence over the ordinance . --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- CM-5-9 Regular Meeting January 13 , 1986 Cm. Jeffery felt the term RV needs to be better defined. Planning Director Tong indicated Staff had used the State motor vehicle description. Vehicles are registered with a certain designation. Cm. Vonheeder questioned if an RV was parked in a driveway for longer than 72 hours would it be in violation. Response was yes . Cm. Moffatt felt that the point of the ordinance is to get RV' s off the street and into an area where owners can control. Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. Mayor Snyder indicated he felt a need to clarify several points that had been brought up. With regard to the survey mentioned at this meeting, this survey was included in the City ' s Newsletter that was mailed to over 5 , 000 households in Dublin. Mr. Cameron, Langmuir Lane indicated he had never seen this Newsletter. Mayor Snyder stated that with regard to the comment about this item being placed last on the agenda , he invited the public to stay until the end of the meeting as there were many more items that would be considered following the close of this item. With regard to comments made about the City Attorney ' s opinions , Mayor Snyder clarified that the City Attorney advised the Council in matters of potential liability and the Council takes his concerns and advice very- seriously. With regard to imposing time limits , Mayor Snyder indicated that it was his priviledge as Mayor to impose time limits and he felt that everyone had been given a fair chance to make comments . Cm. Hegarty stated that when this issue first came up, comments were that people wanted RV' s off the streets . Cm. Hegarty stated he would tend to allow parking in the area beside and in the driveway and would hope that people would use common sense . Cm. Vonheeder indicated she was anxious to get vehicles off the streets , but felt that people should be able to park RV' s , boats , etc . , anywhere on their own property, within reason. Cm. Moffatt felt that the ordinance should be given back to the Planning Staff to rewrite . Cm. Moffatt felt further that there should be restrictions placed on people who rent or lease , as opposed to property owners . He also felt that any non-motorized vehicles should be restricted from parking on the streets between 2 : 00 - 6 : 00 a .m. Visitors should be given a permit to park their RV' s on the street for 7 - 14 days . There should be a limit of not more than 3 vehicles or more than one non-motorized vehicle in front of any house . Vehicles should be stored in such a way that they are safe and do not violate the freedoms of other individuals . Cm. Jeffery felt that the real issue of this ordinance relates to aesthetics and she is not sure the City is really ready to deal with this overall . -------------------------------- CM-5-10 Regular Meeting January 13 , 1986 On motion of Cm. Hegarty , seconded by Cm. Moffatt , and by unanimous vote , the Council directed the City Attorney to rewrite the ordinance and bring it before the Council in one month (February 10th Council meeting) . The revised ordinance would allow parking of at least one RV in the sections discussed as 5A or 5B. There should be no encroachment on public property. If it is not feasible to park an RV is sections 5A or 5B, then parking in area 6 would be allowed. Pads would need to be cemented . No visitor permits shall be issued . RECESS A short recess was called . All Councilmembers were present when the meeting reconvened. PUBLIC HEARING IMPERIAL FREEHOLDS CALIFORNIA, INC . APPEAL OF PLANNING ACTION TO CONDITIONALLY APPROVE PA 84-049 Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. On September 23 , 1985 , the City Council granted Imperial Freeholds a second continuance on their appeal of the Planning Commission approval for Parcel Map 3582 Extension. The appealed condition required the developer to pay $69 , 000 toward the installation of traffic signals at Sierra Court and Dublin Boulevard. Imperial Freeholds is requesting an additional continuance to allow escrow to close on the sale of the property. If escrow closes , the matter becomes moot . On motion of Cm. Jeffery , seconded by Cm. Moffatt , and by unanimous vote , the Council continued the public hearing until May 12 , 1986. MURRAY SCHOOL DISTRICT NOTICE OF INTENT TO SELL PORTIONS OF FALLON SCHOOL SITE AS SURPLUS REAL PROPERTY The Murray School District is selling portions of the Fallon School site . The Dublin General Plan calls for a 5 acre neighborhood park and single family residential uses on the site . The City has 60 days from the time of notice to indicate an interest in purchasing part or all of the site . On motion of Cm. Hegarty , seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote , the Council directed Staff to express to the Murray School District an interest in the proposed park site as modified in Staff Alternative Layout , express interest in proposed City Recreation Center subject to parking agreement and directed Staff to work with the School District per the Staff Alternative Layout and adopted ----------------------------------- CM-5-11 Regular Meeting January 13 , 1986 RESOLUTION NO. 6 - 86 DECLARING ITS INTEREST IN PURCHASING PORTIONS OF THE FALLON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SITE PROPERTY FROM THE MURRAY SCHOOL DISTRICT and directed Staff to negotiate purchase and bring back to City Council for review and approval . INCLUSION OF ELECTED OFFICIALS IN PERS MEMBERSHIP At the regular City Council meeting on August 26 , 1985 , the City Council reviewed a report on Public Employee Retirement System (PERS) contract options . Staff was directed to request an actuarial valuation on the removal of the exclusion for elected officials . The removal of the exclusion was evaluated under the option assuming that the removal would apply to those holding office at the time the contract is amended and they may be credited for prior service with the agency. The current PERS program provided to full-time employees is the 2% at 60 plan. The employee contributes 7 percent of their gross earnings exclusive of overtime compensation. The removal of the exclusion for elected officals allows each .of the elected officials the option to participate . State Law includes the City Attorney as an elected official without regard to the individual ' s elective status . Any officials which elect to participate in the PERS retirement program would also be able to participate in the PERS Public Employees Medical and Hospital Care Act . The City currently utilizes this program to provide health insurance to the City ' s full-time employees . The program requires employees and annuitants , who are members of PERS , be allowed to partici- pate . The City currently contributes up to $224 plus the administrative charges levied by PERS . The requirement to contribute towards annuitants creates an obligation for the City to contribute up to $224 per month for PERS members who retire while employed by the City. The results of the actuarial study indicate that the City ' s contribution rate would increase from 7 .878% to 8. 262% with the removal of the exclusion. This rate is applied to the gross wages of all City employees covered by PERS . The costs in the comparison were derived using salaries of the current members and an estimate of the City Attorney' s hours based on the prior year. Based on the new employer contribution, the City ' s annual retirement costs would increase by 9.7% if only City Councilmembers elect to participate . If the City Attorney elects to participate , the annual retirement costs would increase 25 . 2%. This does not include any increases as the result of merit salary adjustments or increased costs associated with the provision of health insurance . --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- CM-5-12 Regular Meeting January 13 , 1986 The City Council reviewed the results of the valuation. Cm. Jeffery indicated she had a problem with this in that the PERS benefit was not originally meant for elected officials , but rather an employee benefit . On motion of Cm. Moffatt , seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by majority vote , the Council directed Staff to proceed with the necessary steps to include elected officials in this benefit program. Voting NO on this motion was Cm. Jeffery. CIVIC CENTER SITE CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION, CITY OF DUBLIN PUBLIC FACILITIES PROJECT NO . 1 On December 31 , 1985 , the City finalized a financing package for the purchase of property and development of a civic center facility. The financing was arranged through the issuance of Certificates of Participation. On the recommendation of Bond Counsel , the final documents were amended to facilitate obtaining financing under 1985 tax laws . A report was presented to the Council which reviewed the amendments and identified the details of the financing. The City was able to obtain a BBB+ rating from Standard & Poors . However, Standard & Poors required the City to make numerous changes to the Lease and Trust Agreements before it would be willing to provide that rating. In addition to the changes required by Standard & Poors , the Underwriter indicated that several changes to the Trust Agreement were necessary in order to effectively market the City ' s Certificates of Participation issue during the last days of December. The most significant change was to restrict the City from an early call on the Certificates for a period of 10 years rather than the 3 years as originally presented to the City Council . First California Regional Securities, the City ' s Underwriter indicated that a buyer could not be found that would accept the 3 year call at the time that the City ' s Certificate of Participation issue was being marketed. The City ' s Underwriter also recommended a change in the payment schedule which would provide for a bulk of the Certificates ($8 , 380,000) coming due in the year 2010. This necessitated the establishment of a Sinking Fund in the Trust Agreement . The Sinking Fund would require the City to make payments annually into the fund from the years 2000 to 2010. The City then has the ability to request that these funds be withdrawn by the paying agent in order to call Certificates which mature in the year 2010 early. Thus , it is to the City' s financial advantage to call Certificates in the amounts shown on Page 15 of the Trust Agreement each year through the term of the issue . If the City did not call these Certificates annually but rather waited to pay the principal in the year 2010 , the cost to the City would be an additional $3 , 200, 000. The Underwriter was able to obtain an average interest rate of 9. 167% for the City. On motion of Cm. Moffatt , seconded by Cm. Jeffery, and by unanimous vote , the Council adopted ------------------------------------------------------------------=-------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- CM-5-13 Regular Meeting January 13 , 1986 RESOLUTION NO. 7 - 86 AMENDING SECTION 8 OF RESOLUTION NO . 134-85 ADOPTED DECEMBER 18 , 1985 and authorized a temporary loan in the amount of $3 ,100, 000 from the City' s Street Improvement Reserve to Dublin Information, Inc . DEMOLITION OF ILLEGAL BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES AT 7360 SAN RAMON ROAD , NICHANDROS On October 8 , 1984, the City Council directed the City Attorney to proceed with the abatement of building safety and zoning violations at 7360 San Ramon Road. This resulted in a Stipulation for Entry of Judgement and Order Thereon, which was filed in Superior Court . This document was signed by the property owner and his legal representative identifying his obligation to eliminate the violations . If the owner failed to do so , the City was authorized to enact the necessary measures to obtain compliance . The owner was notified on July 1 , 1985 as to what was required and the consequences of failure to comply with the terms of the Stipulation for Entry of Judgement . The owner was notified on August 23 , 1985 of failure to comply and the owner' s attorney was notified on October 28 , 1985 that a Judgement would be obtained. In order for the City to demolish the buildings , it will be necessary to first remove the merchandise and personal property from the building and place it in storage . Costs were estimated at $50 ,000. On motion of Cm. Jeffery , seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous vote , the Council 1) appropriated $50, 000 from the Street Improvement Reserve to accomplish the demolition of buildings and structures as specified in the Judgement ; 2 ) approved Specifications & authorized the Building Official to advertise for bids to remove all materials and personal property from the buildings and structures to be demolished and to remove all outdoor display of wares and merchandise except for plant materials authorized by Section 8- 48 . 2 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance ; and 3 ) approved Specifications & authorized . the Building Official to advertise for bids to demolish the buildings and structures specified in the Judgement . OTHER BUSINESS Valley High School By consensus , the Council authorized City Manager Ambrose to contact Superintendent Bill James to begin discussions regarding the location of Valley High School as it relates to the Civic Center. ----------------- CM-5-14 Regular Meeting January 13 , 1986 Bill Burnham - Appointment to Planning Commission Cm. Moffatt announced that he has appointed Bill Burnham to fill the Planning Commission vacancy created by John Alexander' s resignation in December. Street Sweeping Complaints Cm. Moffatt indicated that he had received several complaints recently related to the early morning hours which the street sweeper sweeps . City Manager Ambrose indicated that a real practical problem exists in that the commercial areas need to be swept before the cars are out on the street and if the sweeper isn' t able to go directly to the residential areas , then he is sitting around waiting with nothing to do . ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council , the meeting was adjourned at 12 : 45 a.m. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- CM-5-15 Regular Meeting January 13 , 1986