Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 4.1 Approve 04-28-1986 Minutes (2) ti REGULAR MEETING - April 28, 1986 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Monday, April 28, 1986 in the meeting room of the Dublin Library. The meeting was called to order at 7 : 37 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. CONSENT CALENDAR On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Jeffery, and by unanimous vote, the Council took the following actions : Approved Minutes of Regular Meeting of April 14 , 1986 ; Approved Financial Report for Period Ending March 31 , 1986 ; Referred to the Planning Commission an ordinance providing for Class C or better roof covering for all new apartments , hotels, dwellings and accessory buidings ; Authorized Staff to advertise Contract 86-6 (San Ramon Road, Phase II ) for bids once State and Federal authorization is received; Authorized Staff to advertise Contract 86-5 (Annual Slurry Seal Program) for bid; Accepted improvements under Contract 83-3 (Installation of Street Name & Approach Signs ) ; authorized retention payment of $2 , 292 . 30 to Chrisp Company; and authorized an additional appropriation of $3 , 200 from the Reserve for authorized projects ; Accepted improvements under Contract 84-11 (Street Reconstruction) ; authorized retention payment of $50, 743 . 96 to Rosendin Electric , Inc . ; Authorized attendance of Deputy City Clerk at IIMC Conference in Boston, Massachusetts, on May 18-22, 1986 ; Approved Accounting Procedures as amended; and adopted CM-5-85 Regular Meeting April 28, 1986 Auk 0 r RESOLUTION NO. 40 - 86 PROVIDING FOR AUTHORIZED SIGNATURES ON WARRANTS AND CHECKS and RESOLUTION NO. 41 - 86 AMENDING THE CLASSIFICATION PLAN (Administrative Services/Finance Director) and RESOLUTION NO. 42 - 86 AMENDING THE SALARY & BENEFIT PLAN (Administrative Services/Finance Director) Approved RFP for East Dougherty Hills Park Design and authorized Staff to advertise for consultants ; Approved Warrant Register in the amount of $6 , 006, 136 . 59 . PUBLIC HEARING ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT REGARDING SIGN ORDINANCE Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. Planning Director Tong presented the Staff Report and explained that on April 14 , 1986 , the City Council held a public hearing and directed Staff to make several revisions to the draft sign ordinance. The requested revisions have been incorporated into the revised draft ordinance and include : o Inclusion of a new entry within the Definitions Section to accommodate the use of Business Signs located off-site from the premises where the business they advertise or identify is located. • Modification of the provisions relating to Open House Signs to adjust the enforcement clause by striking the reference to "flagrant" violations . • Modification of the "Signs Requiring a Conditional Use Permit" Section to include a new category to allow processing of requests for the use of Special Easement Signs for use in instances where properties are served by a vehicular easement and lack street frontage (or have non-serviceable street frontage) on which to locate signs . • Modification of the "Signs Requiring an Administrative Conditional Use Permit" Section to include a new category to allow processing of requests for the use of off-site temporary For-Sale or For-Lease Signs for use in instances where properties are served by a vehicular easement and back street frontage (or have non-serviceable street frontage) on which to locate signs . CM-5-86 Regular Meeting April 28, 19806 -Cm. Hegarty questioned if Mr . Bettencourt, who expressed concerns at the last public hearing, had been in touch with Staff . Mr. Tong responded that the request, related to displaying a "For Sale" sign had been resolved. Cm. Hegarty also questioned if Mr. Woolverton had been given a copy of the revised sign ordinance . Mr. Tong responded that Mr . Woolverton had been given a copy at the last meeting and further that copies had been distributed to the Chamber of Commerce . Copies are also available at City Offices . Cm. Moffatt questioned if penant type flags would be prohibited under Section C of Page 11 . Staff responded that they would require either a CUP or an Administrative CUP. Cm. Moffatt also questioned if political signs displayed on vehicles were allowed. Staff responded that they would be allowed on private property only and not in the public right of way. Cm. Moffatt also questioned the use of paper signs such as in a grocery store . Staff explained that they are legal if they are displayed on the inside, and cover less than 25% of the window space . Discussion ensued related to vehicles that are used for advertising a business . If these vehicles are used as part of the business (i .e. a delivery van) , they can be parked on the street . Mary Ackley, Cranford Lane, questioned the signage at the new Japanese Restaurant in the Town & Country Center on San Ramon Road, and the fact that it appears that their sign changes every week. She also questioned if tenants in this shopping center will individually be able to erect any type of sign they want . She felt a certain uniformity would be desirable . Larry Tong explained that there is an overall sign program, but there is some flexibility and the larger corner businesses have a little more flexibility. As far as the changing signs, the restaurant was notified that their original temporary grand opening sign was not allowed and so that sign was changed to conform. Gretta Karanejian questioned the status of The Saw Mill sign which she found to be extremely offensive. Mayor Snyder indicated that this particular sign has been the subject of litigation for approximately a year and hopefully, it should be resolved soon . Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 43 - 86 APPROVING PA 84-077 ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING REORGANIZED AND MODIFIED SIGN REGULATIONS (Supersedes Resolution No. 39-86 ) and waived the reading and introduced an ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance . CM-5-87 Regular Meeting April 28, 1986 LAPEL PINS Council directed Staff to investigate prices for lapel pins bearing the City seal . Specifications and designs were presented for Council consideration . Cm. Jeffery stated that the original intent was to present these pins to volunteers and she questioned Staff with regard to the number required. Staff responded that approximately 25-40 would be needed. Cm. Hegarty questioned if Staff had contacted Dublin vendors . Recreation Director Diane Lowart responded that she had and the local vendor indicated they would farm it out . Cm. Hegarty felt he would like to "Buy America" and other Councilmembers concurred. Cm. Jeffery indicated she was concerned that the pins be of high quality. The Council determined that the lapel pin design should be the entire City seal with cloverleaf including stage, shamrock, plow and church . On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous vote, the Council directed Staff to place an order for 100 lapel pins with Ed Jones Company with an anticipated delivery time of 8 weeks . The cost will be $285 . 00 set-up charge and 100 pins @ $10 . 80 each. PARK DEVELOPMENT PLAN At the October 14 , 1985 meeting of the Dublin City Council , the City Council retained the services of Singer & Hodges , Inc . , to develop a Park Development Plan for the City of Dublin . The park sites to be included in the Park Development Plan were : Dolan, Dougherty Hills Open Space, East Dougherty Hills , Mape, Kolb & Shannon . Over the last 4 months , numerous neighborhood meetings have been held to provide input on the preliminary park design for these various parks . At its meeting of April 8 , 1986 , the . Park & Recreation Commission finalized its recommendations for the preliminary park design for all 6 parks , which is reflected in the Draft Masterplan Report which was prepared by Singer & Hodges and presented to the Council . The report is a summation of the consultant ' s research evaluations and recommendations for the design and development of each park, as well as a reflection of the community ' s input on how the parks should be designed. Singer & Hodges, Inc . , made a presentation of their report, showing slides of existing parks , along with what they are proposing for each individual park . Mr . Zev Kahn presented a petition urging the Council to begin development of the parks as soon as possible . Mr . Glenn Walder acknowledged the professional input the City had received with regard to developing Dublin ' s parks . He indicated he was very impressed CM-5-88 Regular Meeting April 28, 1986 with Singer & Hodges ' recommendations . He stated it had been a long time coming and expressed concern that the City Council should demonstrate that this is more than just talk. He requested time frames in which the parks would be renovated. Mrs . Terry Walder expressed concern regarding her fear that the 2 new parks will get placed as high on the priority list as existing parks . The Council considered the proposed designs for each park for incorporation into the Final Masterplan Report. At the April 8, 1986 meeting of the Park and Recreation Commission, the Commission prioritized the development of the parks as : 1 . Shannon Park 4 . Dolan Park 2 . Kolb Park 5 . East Dougherty Hills Park 3 . Mape Park 6 . Dougherty Hills Park Cost figures were reviewed and discussed. Glenn Walder questioned the priority list order recommended by the- Park & Recreation Commission. He felt the Council should look at the prospect of attempting to enhance a portion of each of the existing parks rather than put all the available money into one park. Mayor Snyder expressed concern in that some of the properties are not owned by the City and he felt the Council had a commitment to commit dollars to City-owned parks . His first choice would be Dolan, then East Dougherty Hills and then Kolb Park. Cm. Hegarty felt the City has an obligation to improve parks and that the City will eventually take over .all the parks , one way or another . The most usage occurs at Shannon Park, but he felt existing parks should be brought up to par and then dollars could be used to improve and enhance them. Cm. Vonheeder stated she felt an obligation to enhance existing parks . Most people have seen these parks at their best and now at their worst . She felt the Park & Recreation Commission ' s priority list should be used. The 3 oldest parks should be enhanced first, in phases . Funds available in park dedication fees were discussed. City Manager Ambrose stated that the City currently has $460, 000 in park dedication fees available and he thought DSRSD had approximately $200, 000 . Cm. Jeffery felt that using a phasing process would mean a longer interruption at a park and she would rather see development completed of one park at a time . She indicated she has a real problem with putting money into facilities that do not belong to the City . This could cause difficulty in future negotiations . Cm. Moffatt felt that priority should be to improve parks that are currently in existence and Kolb Park should be top priority. The City should analyze exactly how much money is available . CM-5-89 Regular Meeting April 28, 1986 The DSRSD situation was discussed with regard to the possible division of park properties between the Cities of Dublin and San Ramon. City Manager Ambrose gave a brief status of the negotiations for Kolb Park. The Murray School District is moving very diligently. They have hired an appraiser . A red flag has been raised, however, regarding the City ' s ability to purchase the site under the Naylor bill . School District personnel and City Staff will be going to Sacramento to meet with the State Board of Education. The City has been notified that it should be receiving $75, 000 for the Senior Center in June or July. Mary Ackley felt the City should develop the inner older areas of the City first. Alice Pitchford felt that people should go to the Board of Education and ask that they turn over the unused park sites to the City immediately so that they can be developed for the benefit of all the residents . The Council determined priorities for development of the six park sites by using a weighted rating. Each Councilmember reported their weighted priority list . The figures were tallied by Recreation Director Diane Lowart and the priority list will be : 1 . Kolb Park 2 . Shannon Park & Dolan Park (tied) 3 . Mape Park 4 . East Dougherty Hills Park 5 . Dougherty Hills Park On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted the above priority order for park development and directed Staff to include development of the parks in .the new Five Year Capital Improvement Plan. CONTRACT REVIEW & PROPOSED AGREEMENT ALAMEDA COUNTY SHERIFF ' S DEPARTMENT - DUBLIN POLICE SERVICES The current agreement for Police Services provided by Alameda County Sheriff ' s Department is scheduled to end June 30 , 1986 . Staff members have met with representatives of the Sheriff ' s Department and the County Administrator ' s Office to negotiate a contract for continued service to the City of Dublin. The level of service and workload indicators were reviewed and an attempt was made to evaluate key areas of performance to determine potential deficiencies and address concerns identified by Staff . The proposed contract provides for an Exhibit which describes the number of personnel in each classification to be assigned under the contract. On an annual basis, the City can request a modification to the staffing level and the County shall make every effort to provide the personnel within 90 days . CM-5-90 Regular Meeting April 28, 1986 An item which was not addressed in the original agreement was a condition which establishes a provision by which the City can provide input on the selection of the on-site commander. In order to preserve the legal requirements of having the services provided by an independent contractor, the actual selection and assignment will be made by the Sheriff . Staff felt that the inclusion of this language in the agreement would formalize the procedures to be used in the selection of the on-site commander. The agreement also contained modifications relating to the provision of vehicles . Given that the City has initiated the purchase of 8 marked patrol vehicles , the proposed agreement only addresses the unmarked vehicles . Staff has worked with County Officials to allow the termination of the vehicle lease by the City prior to the contract termination date . The City may find it more cost effective to own the unmarked cars in the future, however, Staff recommended that this issue be evaluated after operational data from the City-owned marked vehicles is available . The proposed contract requires that the City notify the County of the change by April 1st . It is anticipated that this will allow adequate time for an appropriation in the upcoming budget and adequate time for bidding and purchasing the vehicles . The proposed agreement contains the same provisions for insurance coverage as were included in the initial agreement . The language basically makes reference to an additional insurance agreement between the City of Dublin and Alameda County. During the period in which the City had liability insurance coverage, Alameda County was named as an additional insured. Alameda County then reimbursed the City for its share of the insurance premium cost. The term of the contract is for a three year period, however, it may be terminated with written notice of 6 months . This contract will cover services provided through June 30, 1989 . Staff recommended a change in the staffing level for 1986-87 . The change involves reclassifying the position responsible for narcotics enforcement to a detective sergeant . The program was initiated as a trial program in Fiscal Year 1985-86 utilizing a deputy classification. The intent was to determine the level of activity and evaluate whether an on-going program was necessary . The workload indicators represent an adequate degree of activity to continue with specialized enforcement. The continuation of a formal narcotics enforcement program will require the assignment of a detective sergeant classification. Staff also recommended the addition of one patrol officer . The City Council reviewed the services provided. Cm. Moffatt questioned how many officers had been on the Dublin force the entire tirle . Chief Shores responded that 11 of the current officers have been on the Dublin force since the contract began, as well as himself . Cm. Jeffery suggested that the City might want to consider leasing rather than buying the unmarked vehicles . CM-5-91 Regular Meeting April 28, 1986 .l On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous vote, the Council selected the staffing level as described ' in Exhibit A-1 , and authorized the Mayor to execute the proposed agreement. OTHER BUSINESS North Pleasanton Assessment District City Manager Ambrose reported that the City had received a letter from Mayor Brandes, City of Pleasanton, requesting that the City of Dublin meet with representatives of Pleasanton to discuss contributions to the North Pleasanton Assessment District with regard to improvements at I-580/I-680. Cm. Jeffery asked if this would be setting a precedent as one city would be coming into a sphere that is not theres . Mayor Snyder felt it would be wise to hold off until some time in the future . Other interested parties should be in on discussion, also. Cm. Hegarty stated he would prefer to look at this in more detail after Dublin ' s annexation is completed. Dublin ' s input was not sought when the assessment district was formed. City Manager Ambrose suggested inviting them to a meeting and have them make a .presentation. Cm. Jeffery suggested waiting to ask them until the annexation has gone through. Following discussion, Council consensus was to invite representatives from the City of Pleasanton to make a presentation. The property owners in the proposed annexation area should also be invited. Commission on Aging Mayor Snyder advised the Council that he had received a letter of resignation from Alice Pitchford, the City ' s representative on the Commission on Aging. The City will need to make another appointment and Mayor Snyder asked that Recreation Director Lowart investigate to see if she can find someone willing to serve in this capacity. CM-5-92 Regular Meeting April 28, 1986 Library Legislative Day Cm. Hegarty reported that Wednesday, May 14th will be a Library Legislative day in Sacramento. He will try to attend and reported that if he is able, he will probably require one nights lodging. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 11 :13 p .m. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk CM-5-93 Regular Meeting April 28, 1986