Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.01 JointDraftMinutes 2-6-96 " ! STUDY SESSION - February 6, 1996 City Council and Planning Commission . A special Study Session of the City of Dublin City Council and Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, February 6, 1996, in the Dublin Civic Center Regional Meeting Room. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 by Mayor Houston. ...'....."..'.."".'......'+""'.""".'..'.."..."-' ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Barnes, Burton, Howard, Moffatt and Mayor Houston Commissioners Zika, Geist, Johnson and Lockhart Commissioner Jennings ABSENT: ...........................'+................. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG Mayor Houston led the Council, Commission, Staff, and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. .................--., + ,'O...'.... CITY OF DUBLIN HOUSING PROGRAM & .. INCLUSIONARY ZONING ORDINANCE (430-20) The Mayor Houston explained the goal was to give direction to staff on what the Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance should include. Tasha Huston, Associate Planner, introduced the two consultants that were hired to help the City identify the Affordable Housing issues so that the City could develop a workable program. She gave a brief outline on their backgrounds. She stated why we need an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. Ms. Huston went over what Affordable Housing was and how it effected the City of Dublin. She used an overhead chart to show Income Categories according to family size and affordable monthly housing cost. Mayor Houston asked if the chart reflected Alameda County median or City of Dublin. Ms. Huston stated the chart reflected Alameda County. Ms. Seifel explained in detail how these number were arrived at. She stated they were estimates. By State and Federal law, the City of Dublin must use Alameda County average to calculate the median income levels. . cITY' COUNCIL MINUTES \fOLUME 15 JOINT crn' COUNCIL &. Pl.ABNING COMMISSION STUDY' SESSION Feb:ru..a.ry 6, ~996 ~ PAGE 36 ITEM NO. rr' \(I ,/ Cm. Zika stated that HUD did not have a moderate income category. Mods. Goui~ explained how HUD defined their numbers, and that yes, HUD did not have a ., m erate mcome category. Cm. Zika asked what category do we use if we want to get Federal funds. Ms. Gouig explained how localities will adjust to the limit for the categories they were usmg. Cm. Burton stated the definition of Mfordable Housing is spending 30% or less on housing was unrealistic in today's market. Ms. Huston showed a chart of typical salaries by income categories. Ms. Seifel made a presentation on the information that the Planning Commission had requested at their Study Session on January 3, 1996. She described how she arrived at the information she was presenting. She stated what a family of four could afford for a home price or how much they could afford to pay for rent. She stated that underwriters typically use 30% for being able to afford a home. She showed a chart on affordable home price and rent ranges. She also showed a chart on comparison of Housing Units and Households by Income Level for 1990-1995. She went into detail on how she arrived at the information on the charts. Frank Ruskey asked where welfare and retirement income falls in the charts. .'... Ms. Seifel stated that would be considered very low income. Mr. Ruskey stated that income levels have reduced since 1990 census information. Most middle class Americans have taken a reduction in pay. Ms. Seifel stated that the wage chart was based on 1994 salary figures from the State Employment Development Department. The Median income level information was from 1990 census information. Mayor Houston stated that the percentage of renters units in the City of Dublin appears to be approximately 25% of the housing stock, if you take out very low and low. ISSUES & PRINCIPLES DISCUSSION Mayor Houston stated the Housing Element called for 20 units as a minimum project size to determine which projects would be subject to the Inclusionary regulation. He stated he had not heard much controversy on that number. crn' COUNCIL MINUTES \fOLUME 15 JOINT crn' COUNCIL &. PLANNING COMllISSIO.N STUDY' SESSION Febru.a.ry G, 1996 PAGE 3'7 e. .' . -- . em. Moffatt asked when the 20 units would apply. What about phasing of projects. Ms. Gouig stated that there could be language written into that Ordinance that would address that. Mayor Houston stated most developers would not build 18 units at a time to avoid having to apply the Ordinance. Ms. Gouig agreed. Cm. Moffatt stated that sometimes independent builders may build one house a year, would the number be accumulative? Ms. Huston stated that language could be included that a project would include approvals on one site within a year, or something to that effect. Mayor Houston asked if anyone had objections on the 20 units. em. Barnes asked if you could go back and change the 20 units at a later date. Mayor Houston stated it could be changed with a General Plan amendment. Cm. Moffatt asked if they would consider less than 20 units at a lower percentage. Mayor Houston stated that he was comfortable with 20 units and that tpere was consensus with that number. Mayor Houston asked about the percentage of housing which would be affordable. He stated that we should not tailor make something for ourselves with the carrot out here for State or Federal money. We need to do what is best for Dublin. He objected to the comparison against Alameda County. He felt we should be compared to our neighbors in the Tri-Valley and San Ramon and Danville. He felt ABAG figures are always being revised, and we should not be comparing ourselves to them. He was in favor of producing more moderate housing. Cm. Burton commented that he wondered if we needed Inclusionary Housing. He felt it was a social issue. The end buyer was going to pay the inclusionary requirements in order to meet the needs of the whole City. Are we doing a disservice to incoming people to balance our housing needs. You can't address affordable housing, it was more a social issue. He felt is was unfair. He stated we can make smaller houses on smaller lots. He thought we could build sweat equity houses or there was existing property in Dublin that could have granny units approved for college students, that could create more housing. We could have mobile homes or pre-manufactured homes. There was nothing wrong with them except our image of them. He stated we could specify certain areas where these types of homes could go. Crn' COUNCIL MINUTES \fOLUME 15 JOINT ern' COUNCIL &. PLItNNlN6 COMMISSION STUDY' SESSION Feb:ru..a.ry G, ~996 PAGE as Cm. 1\10ffatt stated Cm. Burton had some good points, but felt he was way off base. He was an advocate for starter type homes. He felt that we might be building in areas that might . not want to build lower end homes, it may create a whole new set of problems. Cm. Barnes disagreed with Cm. Burton. She believed that we do need an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance that could provide affordable housing that was dispersed throughout the community. Cm. Zika stated he liked the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance idea and the idea of sweat equity houses. We could disburse these throughout the community with CDBG funds. Or build starter homes, use tax credits, put limitations on when it come time to sell. The City would participate in the profit of the sale. Cm. Johnson said first we have to decide what affordable housing was: very low, low, or moderate. The market place could take care of the moderate, as it does now. He felt the market would not take care of the very low or low, but most developers are interested in the bottom line. Cm. Lockhart did not see a developer building a project with homes that were semi-finished, and might not be able to afford to do the landscaping because he was putting a second story on and you move next store to a guy who is continuously in the process of building or improvements. Let the developer build his project and pay in lieu fees. Cm. Geist agreed with Cm. Lockhart. She felt there was a definite need for the Inclusionary .' Ordinance. You have to provide an area where there could be things accomplished. There should be allowances made in developments over 20 units. Mayor Houston thought a great project in town was the Arbor Creek project. He gave figures of the wide variety of units they had. A 690 sq. ft. townhouse sold for $123,000. One way to solve the problems out front is to have the developer have different sizes within a community. The only way to get the cost down was to build different types of product, with a wide variety of costs and people who live there. Mayor Houston addressed the issue of percentage of units in each project that could be affordable. He stated that 5% was a good start for projects to provide affordable housing. Cm. Zika asked how do we base the fee if they include 5%, or how would that be figured. Mayor Houston bypassed that question for now. He stated the next issue was the targeted group. Who are we trying to service and put together a program for. Cm. Burton stated that according to the charts, teachers and police were considered low income. He had a problem with that. He acknowledged that was for a family of four with cITY' COUNCIL MINUTES \"OLUME 15 JOINT cITY' COUNCIL &. Pl.ABNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION Feb:ru..a.ry 6, ~99G PAGE 39 . ." .o, ...- . one working person in the family. He felt we should provide housing for people who have jobs in Dublin. Cm. Johnson stated we needed to have 8% low income housing based on the figures given. For all projects built in the future, we would have to have 20% for low income. Cm. Lockhart stated that if future units met the 5% requirement, that will make up for the shortage that we have now. Ms. Seifel stated what moderate income was, and if we compare Dublin to the County, the County had more low and very low income people. She said 20% was a very low number when proportioned to the 50% of median income. Cm. Burton stated that people coming in buying homes to subsidize 20%, that would be asking a lot. It was not just the responsibility of those moving in, it is all of ours as a comm unity. Mayor Houston asked if the Specific Plan allocated a percentage within a percentage of which we are trying to serve. Cm. Zika suggest 3/5 to very low, 2/5 to low and let the moderate take care of itself. Mayor Houston felt with new projects. $134,000 units would not be seen in Dublin for a long time. Ms. Seifel stated that it was very hard for very low income people to afford a unit in the whole Bay Area. But they could afford rent. Cm. Johnson stated that 5% made is easy to accomplish. We wanted to be able to reach that goal. Cm. Howard agreed to the 5%. Ms. Silver stated that the first percentage would be the total units within the project, the second percentage would be what percentage of those units would be low, very low, etc. . Cm. Barnes stated we have to strive to provide homes within the low and very low. Cm. Barnes thought 10% would be fair. Cm. Moffatt asked what standards did we have to follow. What was the criteria for setting this up. Ms. Gouig stated that the criteria in the Housing Element stated that we must create affordable housing within our community. Then, when drafting our element, we needed to Crn' COUNCIL MINUTES \fOLUME 15 JOINT cITY' COUNCIL &. PLllNNIN6 COMMISSION STUDY' SESSION Feb:ru..a.ry G, ~99G PAGE 40 use the ABAG number. Many communities challenge the ABAG numbers, but we should use the ABAG numbers as a bench mark. It was definite that we need low and very low housing. Mayor Houston stated that the consensus was that 5% was OK. Of the 5%, 2% should be very low, 2% should be low, and 1 % should be moderate. The next issue was project type requirements. He stated that some day we will have another apartment housing unit going into Dublin. . Cm. Moffatt stated he envisioned some of our existing housing stock could be transferred into a main unit and a granny unit that could be counted towards the total for affordable units. Mr. Ambrose stated we have already adopted a 2nd unit or granny units ordinance. Mr. Tong stated that there were about 6 legal granny units in Dublin. He stated that they were mostly 2nd story units. Cm. Burton stated that there may be more in the future it this were to go through. Cm. Zika stated the only way to meet very low was through rental units. They should not be excl uded. Mayor Houston stated they would include all types of units, rental, new, granny, etc.. Mayor Houston stated the next issue was how to set rents and/or sales prices. He felt we ." should stay out of it. Cm. Zika stated that one type of situation that could be on the unit was when they go to sell, the City participates in the profit to put money back into the program. em. Barnes asked how realistic is it for a developer to build a smaller house. She stated for a long time, there have not been developers who would be willing to build 1,000 square feet house instead of 2,500 to 3,000 square feet. Mayor Houston stated that we should take out the word house, and put in the word unit. Cm. Barnes asked how realistic are we being. Can we achieve these goals? Cm. Johnson stated that we would have to give exact numbers to the builder. There has to be a way to get the developer to either build the very low or low income units or pay in-lieu fees. Cm. Zika stated we could charge a fee based on the selling price of the homes. cITY' COUNCIL MINUTES \fOLUME 15 JOINT cITY' COUNCIL &. Pl.ABNING COMMISSION STUDY' SESSION Feb:ru..a.ry 6, ~996 PAGE 4~ . em. Barnes asked what could the fees be used for. .'-- Ms. Gouig stated that most communities collect the in-lieu fees. She stated it was a wide open field on how to use the money. She stated it could be used towards administrative fees. Mr. Ambrose asked if this program was implemented, we would have to define what affordable means. What does the 5% mean to the builder. Cm. Moffatt asked if we don't meet the affordable housing needs, will we lose our block grant funds. Ms. Gouig stated we would not lose our block grant funds now. Every now and then there is legislation proposed to do that, but then most cities would lose their block grant funds. Mayor Houston stated by using ABAG numbers, we would not be right. Let's use our own numbers and leave ABAG numbers out of it. Mayor Houston asked what median income figures are we going to use. Alameda County or Dublin. Ms. Seifel stated it is better to stick with County numbers. Mayor Houston disagreed. He felt our economic community was not typical of Alameda County, but more toward the Tri-Valley, including Danville and San Ramon. Mayor Houston felt we were being penalized because our average household size was 2.8 and not 4. ...,. Mr. Ambrose stated that for a household of 4, you would be looking at a certain unit size different from that of a household of 1 or 2. Ms. Gouig stated that HUD takes all that into account when putting out their numbers. Cm. Moffatt asked how were the numbers adjusted. Cm. Johnson asked if on table 6, were the Dublin numbers from the 1990 census. Mayor Houston asked the best way to accomplish this. With a new census, Dublin income will be higher in the year 2000. Ms. Gouig recommended they use the HUD median income because it comes out every year. It was a stable source of numbering that was not available elsewhere. Mr. Ambrose stated that there was not information on an annual basis for Dublin, that was why they recommended using HUD numbers. Ms. Gouig stated that no one was putting out annual numbers for Dublin. .<:' Crn' COUNCIL M.INUTES \"OLUME 1 ~ JOINT cITY' COUNCIL &. PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY' SESSION Feb:ru..a.ry G, ~99G PAGE 42 em. Zika stated that HUD figures were the standard. If they were wronZ for us, they were the same percentage wrong for everyone else. . Mayor Houston declared a 5 minute break. Mayor Houston stated we have members from the building communities present and wanted to hear from them. Matt Koart, Kaufman and Broad (K & B), passed out a letter to the City Council and Planning Commission. He indicated that K & B's perspective was that the best way to provide very low and low income housing was through rental projects and the use of tax credits. Provide affordable housing obligation off-site. It is important that they be able to transfer their obligation for single family housing to multi-family homes. It was called affordable by design. Danville can go as high as 140% of median level. They are deed restricted units. In other communities, in-lieu fees have been used, but they have not required the developer to build it. He addressed the Rental Housing Ordinance that currently exists, he wanted to know why it was developed in 1989. He felt that a new housing project should not be hit twice, by the Rental Housing Ordinance and the Affordable Zoning Ordinance. em. Burton asked if the builder was asked to build affordable housing and they choose to build single family, does that mean they don't have to do that. Can they build some smaller units to match the larger ones in lieu of fee. Mr. Koart stated that the K & B project in Eastern Dublin had single family units with 1300 to 2000 sq. ft. and townhomes at 1100 to 1600 sq. ft. So K & B was building smaller units. . Cm. Zika stated the affordable homes would not have the same amenities, he asked for some examples. Mr. Koart said some examples may be they may not have built in book shelves, or as high a grade carpet, lighting fixtures may be different. It would all be interior amenities, it would not be obvious from the street. One might be 1000 sq. ft. vs. 1300, with the same architectural detail and the same roof treatment. You would not be able to tell from the street. Cm. Johnson asked about transfer of credit from one project to another. The City would have to have some type of assurance that the townhomes would be built within a reasonable period of time so the developer would not walk away after the single family homes were built. Bob Harris stated that allowing builders to have flexibility was important. In-lieu fees are a good way to do it. He stated that 35-40% of the units in Eastern Dublin were at a density of 15 units per acre. If we are going to have affordable housing because our General Plan and cITY' COUNCIL MINUTES \fOLUME 15 JOINT cITY' COUNCIL &. PLABNING COMMISSION STUDY' SESSION Feb:ru..a.ry 6, ~99G P.A...GE 43 .' .',. Specific Plan say so, he would ask that there be an in-lieu fee and it be kept in keeping with what Livermore and Pleasanton were charging. Mayor Houston asked what were Livermore's and Pleasanton's fees? Mr. Harris stated that for single family detached Livermore was charging $1,843 and in Pleasanton is was $1,954 per unit regardless of the square footage. Pleasanton has a multi- unit fee of $650. Ms. Seifel stated in Pleasanton, everyone pays in-lieu fees unless you have 15% of your project units affordable housing, then you don't have to pay, regardless of square footage. em. Johnson stated that would encourage the builder to build bigger homes and just pay the in -lieu fees instead of providing affordable housing. It was cheaper for the builder to just pay the $2,000 fee and not even think of building a cheaper/smaller unit. Mayor Houston stated our General Plan and Specific Plan limit areas by zoning that must conform to medium, low and high density. Bob Harris stated Dublin was in a unique position because we have room to build out and even at 5%, we would be able to create more affordable units than other cities. Mayor Houston proposed that we set the price based on other Tri-Valley cities. .:': Cm. Barnes was leaning towards a price per square foot. The smaller the unit, the smaller the percentage and in-lieu fees. em. Zika stated you either meet the 5% requirement or pay the fee. Let's not get into deed restrictions. Ms. Silver stated we are creating an Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance which would be based on how the property is zoned. Ms. Gouig stated fees can be figured on square footage, price of house or the way Fremont does it. Ms. Seifel explained how Fremont did it. She outlined how it was figured. Mayor Houston wanted to be competitive with our neighbors. Cm. Zika asked if a developer builds one home to meet moderate, but does not build the very low or low unit, what fee would they pay. CITY' COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 15 JOINT cITY' COUNCIL &. Pl.ABNING COMMISSION STUDY' SESSION Feb:ru.a.ry 6, ~996 PAGE 44 . Mayor Houston stated then they would not meet 80% of their requirement and they would owe 80% times the number of units. em. Zika suggested we impose a premium penalty if they build the moderate or low and not the very low, they pay the whole in-lieu fee. . Mayor Houston suggested we take the average of the two competitive cities to use as our in- lieu fees. em. Barnes stated that she did not want to compare with the two other cities. We needed to come up with our own fee. Mr. Koart asked if there would be a difference between single family and multiple units. Mayor Houston said they would be the same. Cm. Moffatt stated he tended to lean towards a lower fee for multi family. It would encourage the type of units we need. Cm. Barnes asked how would be guarantee that they build the affordable housing. Cm. Moffatt stated we could require a bond Cm. Barnes stated it would have to be incorporated into the Ordinance. . Mayor Houston proposed a in-lieu fee of $1,900 for single family dwellings and asked for wishes for the multi-family fee. Ms. Silver stated Pleasanton does not have a Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance, they impose a fee. Our Housing Element stated that we can provide a fee in-lieu of building. The Housing Ordinance says we will adopt an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. Somewhere along the line, the goal is that the units be built, either by the builder or by in-lieu fees. Cm. Lockhart stated that developers are already building the moderate units, let's rethink the pie, and say 2 1/2 towards each low and very low in order to generate more money. em. Barnes stated we were past the subject of if we were going to have an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. We are going to have an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance and we should go on from there. Mayor Houston stated with a General Plan Amendment we could change the requirement of having an Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance, however, we were past that. Mayor Houston then proposed in-lieu fees of $1.00 per square foot for single family units, .50 for multi- cITY' COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 15 JOINT crn' COUNCIL &. Pl.ABNING COMMISSION STUDY' SESSION February 6, ~99G PAGE 45 . .' ." . units with a cap of $2,000. Townhomes, condos and apartments would be considered multi- units. Cm. Johnson stated that would be a way to encourage smaller units for a smaller price.. Ms. Gouig stated with this approach, we are reducing the amount we are going to collect. Cm. Zika stated. 75 cents per square foot would be better for multi-units. em. Barnes agreed and thought we should up the $2,000 cap. Ms. Silver stated these were based on a housing units not being build. Cm. Burton liked the $.50 per square foot fee for multi-units and $1.00 for single family; he felt it would encourage smaller units. Cm. Moffatt stated he would like to see the square footage be based on the CPI. Mr. Ambrose asked them to keep it simple. It should be something that is easily administered. Mayor Houston felt the $1.00 per square foot for single family dwellings would be OK. Ms Seifel stated she would encourage them to raise up the fee for multi-units to .75 per square foot. She felt if the fee were too low, people would opt out all the time. The consensus was $.75 cents a square foot for multi-units. All but Mayor Houston and Cm. Burton agreed to the. 75. cent and $1.00 per square foot fee with no cap. Mayor Houston indicated that would set the prices for Inclusionary Housing units. Mayor Houston indicated that there was not a purpose for resale restriction for units that were built, he was not interested in building and then tracking resale. We are looking for houses that cost less to build and that did not have all the same amenities as a regular sale house. Ms. Gouig stated what was more common among development was that the money goes to the owner, not the developer. Mayor Houston stated Livermore lends people the down payment. What would be the benefit for folks to participate? Cm. Barnes stated Livermore was having problems and are holding a lot of houses. Crn' COUNCIL MINUTES \fOLUME 15 JOINT cITY' COUNCIL &. Pl.ABNIN6 COMMISSION STUDY' SESSION Feb:ru..a.ry 6, ~996 PAGE 46 Mayor Houston asked if we needed to do resale restriction right now. He felt a lot of discussions had to take place to see what we wanted to do with the money. Ms. Silver stated there were two issues at hand, 1) resale restrictions on the houses built, and .'" 2) once we collect the fees, do we want to impose resale restrictions. The second issue could be decided at a later date, however, the first issue should be addressed tonight. Cm. Barnes wanted to know the consultant's opinion, and what other cities were doing. Ms. Gouig stated other communities imposed resale restriction because they did not want the ABAG figures to constantly change and once the unit was built, we wanted to keep the unit to count towards their ABAG goals. Mr. Koart was normally not in support of deed restrictions. $150,000 was the bottom line on the type of unit K & B could build. He felt that with low and very low units, it didn't matter what type of deed restrictions were placed on them. Mayor Houston asked Mr. Koart the cost of building rental units for a project of 50 units or more. Mr. Koart stated that was not his area of expertise. He stated if they could get the County to donate 5 acres of land, and then get a non and for profit partnership and build 100 units of garden style units and provide a efficient way of getting to meet the goals. Mr. Seifel stated that for an 850 square foot apartment, the construction cost is around $80,000 per unit plus land. . For a 1,000 square foot apartment, it will be closer to $93,000 plus land. Mayor Houston asked the consultants to provide examples of resale restrictions. Ms. Silver said all that would be required in the Ordinance was that we will require resale restrictions. She stated the Ordinance should address affordability. Ms. Seifel stated that a goal of maintaining unit affordability for 30 years was typical. Cm. Barnes stated that we should be thinking of how this Housing Ordinance will affect future generations. Mr. Ambrose suggested that the consultants bring some models back to take a look at. Mayor Houston addressed the options - how much time will they allow a developer to build off-site. He asked the consultants for models on what time period would be good to allow. Cm. Barnes stated we should make it hard, we wanted the developer to build the units, and not end up waiting 15 years. CITY' COUNCIL MINUTES \"OLUME 15 JOINT eITY' COUNCIL &. PI.Al4NIN6 COMMISSION STUDY SESSION Feb:ru..ary 6, 1996 P.A..GE47 . . e.:- .'~ Mayor Houston addressed the issue of credit for providing more units - what incentive or credit for doing more than your share. Can they apply that credit towards their next prqject. He asked for models to explore what types of credits were available if they went over the required units. Mr. Koart stated that he liked the idea of having the credits being transferable. Mayor Houston stated he was in favor of fee waivers, priority processing, but not reducing site design standards. Cm. Barnes asked if this could affect safety standards. Ms. Huston stated it would apply to design only, not safety standards. Mr. Ambrose asked the consultants to bring back a sample of options for incentives. Cm. Johnson asked if a land developer came in after a land subdivision was approved, would this apply if he sold the rights to build the houses. Ms. Silver stated that the Ordinance would apply to subdividing the land. Mayor Houston stated that the cost of processing an application just to avoid paying a fee would not be worth it. Cm. Lockhart asked if a rental housing developer could build a complex and meet all the Inclusionary requirements. Ms. Seifel gave a summary of our Rental Availability Ordinance. The Housing Element said a certain amount of units had to be made affordable. The Rental Ordinance requires a certain number of multi-family units must be rented for 5 years. Mr. Koart asked the City Council to amend the Housing Ordinance for the in-lieu fee. Cm. Burton felt a 5 year rental was not a good rental. It was a temporary issue. Mayor Houston stated that the Ordinance was no longer necessary that Dublin has enough Rental Housing, and he suggested the Ordinance be eliminated. Mr. Ambrose suggested we bring information back regarding the Rental Availability Ordinance and they could decide whether to initiate a GP Amendment if they with to eliminate the Ordinance. Ms. Silver stated until a General Plan Amendment was approved, the Rental Housing Ordinance still applies. crn' COUNCIL MINUTES \"OLUME 1 S JOINT cITY' COUNCIL &. Pl.ABNIN6 COMMISSION STUDY' SESSION February 6, 1996 P.A..GE4S ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Councilor Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 11 :00 p.m. 'nnnnnnn""'n. Minutes prepared by Gaylene Burkett. Mayor A TIEST: Chair, Planning Commission City Clerk cITY' COUNCIL MINUTES \fOLUME 15 JOINT cITY' COUNCIL &. Pl.ABNIN6 COMMISSION STUD)" SESSION Feb:rua.ry G, ~99G PAGE 49 .' .' . .', .':' .. REGULAR MEETING - February 13. 1996 A regular meeting of the Dublin City Council was held on Tuesday, February 13, 1996, in the Council Chambers of the Dublin Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at 7:10 p.m., by Mayor Houston. , ,nn'., ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Barnes, Burton, Howard, Moffatt 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. '..'+' INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEE 7:10 p.m. 3.1 (700-10) City Manager Ambrose introduced Eddie Peabody, the City's new Community Development Director, who has had more than 30 years experience, most recently as Community Development Director in the City of Brentwood. Mr. Peabody stated he looked forward to the challenges of this new job. ,',' """.~., APPOINTMENT TO PARKS & COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION 7:12 p.m. 3.2 (110-30) In December, Bob Trimble resigned from the Parks & Community Services Commission and Staff was directed to advertise the opening. Applications were received by the January 10 deadline from 7 people: Randy Cahn, Tom Clancy, Bob Cocilova, Bob Fasulkey, Becky Hopkins, Mark King and Eric Swalwel1. Mayor Houston announced his appointment of Bob Fasulkey to the Commission for a term which will end in December, 1996. Mayor Houston eXplained the new process being used and the reason for the length of time in filling this position. At the Council team building session, the Council indicated they would like an opportunity to review all applications received prior to voting to confirm the Mayor's appointment. CI1Y COUNCIL MINUTES \fOLUME. 15 RE.6ULAR MEETING . Feb:ru.ary 13, 1996 . PAGE 50 Mayor Houston stated Mr. Fasulkey has served in the community, mostly in the area of youth, and also on the Facilities Committee and the Business Task Force. . Cm. Moffatt stated he felt Mr. Fasulkey was a really good choice and explained some of the other programs offered for youth in the community. Cm. Burton stated he should be proud that he made the cut and also thanked all those who applied. We are always looking for people to serve the community. Cm. Barnes thanked Mr. Fasulkey and also all the other people who applied and stated she hoped we send thank you letters to those that applied. Mr. Fasulkey stated he hopes to incorporate some of the Boy Scout concepts that have been started. He thanked the City Council for this opportunity. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. BUlton, and by unanimous vote, the Council confirmed the Mayor's appointment of Bob Fasulkey to the Parks & Community Services CODlmission. uu,uuuuuuu..,+." ........,..........'u. PROCLAMATION 7:18 p.m. 3.3 (610-50) Mayor Houston read and presented a Proclamation to Eddie Jo Mack declaring February Black History Month and Saturday, February 17, 1996, Black History Day in the City of Dublin and urged residents to celebrate the rich heritage of African- Americans. The 3rd Annual Black History Celebration "The Legacy Continues ..." will be held at Valley Christian Center on Saturday, February 17 from 1-5 p.m. . Ms. Mack thanked the City Council and Staff. This dream has been evolving for her for the last 5 years. This event is for everyone. All cultures don't know enough about each other to get along well. .....'..""""""""""+..'..'........"..""'.'", APPOINTMENT TO LA VT A'S WHEELS ACCESSIBLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE (W AAC) 7:21 p.m. 3.4 (110-30) Mayor Houston stated the City was recently advised of the need to appoint a member to LA VTA's W AAe due to the resignation of Carrie Staehle. Dublin resident Mary Gibbert has applied and Mayor Houston recommended that the City Council confirm his appointment of Ms. Gibbert to fill the remainder of the term previously held by Ms. Staehle. crn' COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 15 REGULAR MEETING . Februa.ry ~3, 1996 . P.A..GE51 . .' .' .:-' Cm. Moffatt stated this opening was advertised and Mary was the only one who applied from the City of Dublin. The next step is for it to go to the LA VTA Board for their approval. On motion of Cm. Barnes, seconded by Cm. BUlion, and by unanimous vote, the Council confirmed the appointment of Mary Gibbeli to LA VTA's Wheels Accessible Advisory Committee. uuu'--"''-'''''''''''+''''''''"................., Crossridge Road Slopes - See Item 4.5 (550-10/600-30) Janine McCune, 7750 Crossridge Road stated she addressed the City Council in both November and December of 1995. She presented a petition requesting that the City take action to make sure the hill behind her house does not slide again the way it did in January, 1995. There was another slide 3 weeks ago. She asked when the City is going to correct the problem. Mr. Thompson stated Z weeks ago a little piece of the southerly slide came down. One of the neighbors called the Fire Department. The City Council directed Staff to hire a geotechnical engineer to determine the problem. Once this is known, a capital project will be done. Right now the ground is just too wet to go up and do anything there. We did double up with the sandbags and put more plastic though. Shelley Bergbower, 7724 Crossridge Road stated she called Mr. Thompson today and he led her to believe that she didn't need to come tonight. What concerns her are phrases like "a little slide". If anyone on the City Council lived in their homes, she did not feel this would be taken so lightly. This is very important to the people who live over there. Mayor Houston advised that the item dealing with the geotechnical engineer would be pulled from the Consent Calendar for discussion a little later in the meeting. -'u '-""",,,,,,,,,,, "+.""'''''''..''..''..''..' Air Raid Siren (520-10) Tom Ford, Tina Place stated on November 14, 1995, he raised the issue of reactivating an air raid siren. City Staff worked with Alameda County and with DRF A. He thanked Staff and the City Council for their review of this item. The decision was quite logical. .-',."u,"""""'+.,,"''''''''',..,,''''',... cITY' COUNCIL MINUTES \fOLUME 15 REGULAR MEETING . Febru.a.:ry ~a, ~996 . PAGE 52 CONSENT CALENDAR 7:30 p.m. On mc.:tlion okf Chm; Bllurt<:>n, sec<:>nded by Cm. Barnes, and by unanimous vote, the .' CounCl too t e 10 owmg actIons: Approved (4.1) Minutes of Regular Meeting of January 23, 1996; Adopted (4.2 720-10) RESOLUTION NO. 13 .. 96 AMENDING THE BENEFIT PLAN (Add Community Development Director to Management Positions Receiving Car Allowance) Adopted (4.4 600-30) RESOLUTION NO. 14 - 96 ADOPTING AGREEMENT WITH WASTE MANAGEMENT OF ALAMEDA COUNTY REGARDING SUBSIDY FOR RECYCLING PROGRAM OPERATIONS and authorized the Mayor to execute the agreement; Adopted (4.6 600-30) RESOLUTION NO. 15 .. 96 . AWARDING CONTRACT 96-01, 1995-96 ANNUAL SIDEWALK SAFElY REPAIR PROGRAM AND HANDICAP RAMP CONSTRUCTION TO ROQUEMORE ENGINEERING ($54,292) Received (4.7 330-50) the FY 1995-96 Mid-Year Budget/Finance Report and approved Budget Change Forms; Accepted (4.8 600-30) improvements under Contract 95-08, Shannon Center Floor Replacement and authorized $25,083.20 payment to Flooring Solutions; Approved (4.9 1020-30) appropriation of $12,635 from Street Light Assessment District Reserves (Fund 710) for the City's share of costs associated with utility undergrounding and authorized the Mayor to execute the Budget Change Form; Approved (4.10 300-40) the Warrant Register in the amount of $2,827,466.68. cITY' COUNCIL MINUTES \"OLUME 15 REGULAR MEETING . Feb:ru..a.ry I3, ~996 . P.A..GE53 . .' e:: ." Cm. Moffatt pulled Item 4.3 from the Consent Calendar related to part-time recreation personnel and asked about the stipulation for some of the positions that someone must be 15 years old or oldel: He also asked about our salary ranges if the minimum wage were raised Ms. Lowart explained the regulations under which the City operates in hiring young people and also stated if the minimum wage were to be raised, the City would adjust its salary ranges for those positions that fell below. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Burton, and by unanimous vote, the City Council adopted (4.3 700-20) RESOLUTION NO. 16 - 96 AMENDING THE CLASSIFICATION PLAN (Part-Time Recreation Personnel) and RESOLUTION NO. 17 - 96 AMENDING THE SALARY PLAN FOR PART-TIME PERSONNEL Cm. Burton pulled Item 4.5 from the Consent Calendar for discussion. He stated he did go and inspect the slide. He was concerned about the $27,000 and asked if we have any other options. Mr. Thompson explained that we want to find out the actual cause. The soils engineer will do some exploring. We don't want to have the same problem again. We want to do it right and not just waste our money. Mayor Houston stated he felt the residents would feel better if it is done right. We have to have the professional go out and do the bonngs and the testing and then we can get a recommendation on how to fix it. Mr. Thompson stated the soils engineer will try to identify the reasons for the problems. It will take about a month and it needs to be fairly dried out for them to get up there with a backhoe. Lothar De Temple, 7736 Crossridge Road, stated when they had the original mudslides, after those sl1des, he called Mr. Thompson on this very issue. Mr. Thompson made 2 pOlnts: 1) no repairs would be made during 1995 because of lack of funding; and 2) that the r81ns were 100 year rains and they would not have to wony about this again. The culvert tends to fill with a ve.ty small amount of mud He did not thlnk we should classify this as a littIe sl1de. The hill has the potential for serious damage. We need to make a thorough assessment of the problem this time. cny COUNCIL MINUTES \fOLUME 15 REGULAR MEETI.N6. . Feb:ru..ary I3, I996 . PAGE 54 Shelley Bergbower, 7724 Crossridge Roa~ stated she was concerned about the timeframe at this point. As the hill continues to saturate and dl)T out and if we wait another month, it reflects a completely different standard than what they are experiencing now. Ulhen it is . wet and saturate~ this is when it should be looked at. This has been going on for several years. As an indivldual homeowner, she has had to invest substantially to keep the water out of her backyard. They are not allowed to do anything as homeowners, or they would She volunteered to work with a consultant jf need be. Cm. Moffaft pointed out that the consultant is a geologist. Cm. Burton felt it was important to get it fixed immediately, but what he was hearing was that there may be other problems. The City Council is concerned that it be done the right way: Janine McCune asked if a backhoe was really necessal)T and if this was every engineer's opinion. She agreed with Ms. Bergbower that a consultant should be up there Jinmediate!y. Mayor Houston felt what is on the surface is not the problem. We have to have more thorough methods than just going up and observing. We have to rely on a geologist. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote, the City Council adopted (4.5 600-30) RESOLUTION NO. 18 - 96 . APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH BERLOGAR GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS FOR INVESTIGATION AND DESIGN OF SUDE REPAIR IN DOUGHERlY HILLS OPEN SPACE and approved a $27,000 additional appropriation from unallocated reserves. '" +- ,.,.,.. REQUEST FROM LA VTA TO OPPOSE ASSEMBLY BILL 2084 REGARDING TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT (TDA) FUNDING 7:46 p.m. 5.1 (660-40) Public Works Director Thompson advised that AB 2084 proposes to divert an unspecified percentage of local sales and use tax revenues from a local transportation fund into the County's General Fund. This could affect funding for the City's bicycle path construction, as well as some transit programs. The City's share of TDA funding at this time is approximately $10,000 per year. LAVTA has also noted that a number of transit services could also be affected. cITY' COUNCIL M.INUTES \fOLUME 15 REeULAR MEETING . Feb:ru..a.ry :1..3, :1..996 . P.A..GE55 . . .', ... Cm. Moffatt stated TDA money is about 79% of LA VT A's budget. This would be devastating for their operation. Cm. Burton asked if he knew why this bill was proposed. Cm. Moffatt stated it was originally proposed to bailout Orange County for the fiasco they got in to. The Board of Su pervisors in Chico voted against it. On motion of em. Burton, seconded by Cm. Barnes, and by unanimous vote, the Council authorized the Mayor to send a letter of opposition to AB 2084 to State Legislators. .. ,.., . ...+... PUBLIC HEARING DUBLIN RANCH PHASE I PD REZONE PA 95-030 7:49 p.m. 6.1 (450-30) Mayor Houston opened the public hearing. Planning Director Tong advised that Dublin Ranch is located within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan project area, east of Tassajara Road, approximately 4,000' north of 1-580. At the January 23 City Council meeting, the Council adopted a resolution approving the Dublin Ranch Phase I Planned Development District Rezone, and introduced an ordinance approving the PD District Rezoning of an approximate 210 acre site to PD Single Family Residential (570 dwelling units); PD Medium Density Residential (277 dwelling units); and PD Open Space (57.5 acres), for a maximum total of 847 dwelling units. The rezoning also includes a 5 acre neighborhood park and a 2 acre private recreational facility. No testimony was entered by any member of the public relative to this issue. Mayor Houston closed the pu blic hearing. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by em. Barnes, and by unanimous vote, the Council waived the reading and adopted ORDINANCE NO. 2 - 96 AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO PERMIT THE REZONING OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED EAST OF TASSAJARA ROAD AND APPROXIMATELY 4,000 FEET NORTH OF 1.580 FREEWAY WITHIN THE EASTERN DUBUN SPECIFIC PlAN PROJECT AREA ........,." + ....... ....,.. ,......' ern' COUNCIL MINUTEs \fOLUME 15 REGULAR MEETING . Febru.a.ry ~3, ~996 . P.A..GE36 PUBLIC HEARING - CAFFINO, INC., SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PA 95-040 7:50 p.m. 6.2 (410-55) Mayor Houston opened the public hearing. . Assistant Planner Kachadourian presented the Staff Report and stated this Specific Plan Amendment to Area 3 of the San Ramon Road Specific Plan is to allow a drive-in and drive-through business as conditional uses; a CUP to allow a drive-in and drive- through use in the C-l Retail Business District; to allow the alteration or expansion of a pre-existing use; and Site Development Review to construct a 220:t square foot drive-through espresso bar/kiosk in front of the Workbench Tru - Value Hardware Store located at 7660 San Ramon Road. Mr. Kachadourian discussed the issues involved, including: Specific Plan Amendment; Conditional Use Permit; Parking; Site Access; Site Development Review; Calaveras Fault; Traffic Impacts; and Public Comments/Concerns. Cm. Burton asked if this is related to the coffee wagon that we were to have at the Standard Station. Mr. Kachadourian responded no, that was an outdoor vendor use. They are not the same company. Cm. Burton asked if they are leasing the land or buying the property. Mr. Kachadourian stated the pavilion will be located on the Workbench property and the drive aisles will probably be leased from the owner. .' Cm. Burton asked who will make the decision as to what it looks like. We get surprised sometimes with colors. Cm. Barnes stated she made the supreme sacrifice and went to look at one over in Pleasanton. She was impressed. Cm. Burton stated since incorporation in 1982 we have attempted to change the look of the Workbench, so he was pleased to see this coming in. Cm. Howard asked about the landscaping plan for Caffino and also about the City's propelty . Mr. Kachadourian stated they will review the conditions and it must be something compatible to what's there. cITY' COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 15 REGULAR MEETING . Feb:ru..a.r-y ~3, ~996 . PAGE 57 . .. .. .: Mr. Ambrose stated the City's property will be turf, just like the adjacent properties. em. Burton commented on the high number of pages for approval of a 220 square foot project. Brenda Gillarde explained how Caffino got started with one individual. The first store was opened up in Napa in 1993. Since then, they have opened 20 additional stores in Northern California. They are all company owned, not a franchise. They personally oversee all phases of their operation. There are 2 drive-up windows. A large color photo was displayed. They are open 7 days a week. They generate very few new traffic trips, but rather draw from cars already on the road. Ms. Gillarde stated they selected this unimproved location in Dublin and feel their store will enhance this corner. The building will be an upscale Italian motif. They hope to have a purchase proposal before the City within the next 3 weeks. They have agreed to work with Mr. Perkins related to his desire to place a monument sign on his propeliy. They feel they will be a real asset to the community. Cm. Moffatt asked if they will put up a stop sign near the egress of the bikepath. Brenda stated they will work with Public Works to provide the proper signage. Cm. Burton congratulated them for this nice project. It looks good. Michael Perkins, 7370 San Ramon Road, owner of the Sleep Shop Ltd., stated he understands the City's enthusiasm for a project like this when the Workbench property has been unimproved all these years. He is concerned, however, about consideration for the use of his property. Brenda has kept in touch with him regarding what progress has been made. The City of Dublin owns most of the land from the front of Sleep Shop Ltd., out to the curb. A proposal would possibly include them buying the land and then putting it in his name or Nichandros' name. His concern is to not be left out of the loop. He was concerned that Mr. Nichandros might buy the property and then he is left with no ingress/egress. Cm. Moffatt stated he thought there were easements that run with the properties and his assumption was that the easements will always be there. He felt Mr. Perkins would be well protected in this area. Mr. Perkins stated he was suggesting that language be put in the approvals for Caffino which would also include protection that would allow him to be a part of the negotiations. Mr. Thompson stated there is currently a condition that addresses this. cITY' COUNeIL MINUTES \fOLUME 15 ItEGULAR MEETING . Feb:ru..a.ry 13, 1996 . P.A..GE 58 em. Burton asked if Mr. Perkins was offered a chance to buy the front property. Mr. Perkins stated he believed he was and if they did not buy it, they were asked to . landscape it. He ideally would like Caffino to buy the easement and give it to them and then they would lease it back to Caffino. He felt this would be a great improvement to this corner. David Cambra, 11863 Flanigan Court, stated he goes through this intersection everyday. He passed out information related to what he felt were the traffic concerns. He has no problem with a coffee shop at this location, but felt the traffic pattern changes. The overall concern is safety. Mr. Cambra made a lengthy presentation outlining the impacts on both San Ramon ,Road and on Amador Valley Boulevard. Mayor Houston asked if he had a solution or if his solution was "no project". Mr. Cambra stated he did not have a solution, other than perhaps to limit it to one lane. He did not see a solution. Mr. Thompson stated there was a traffic study done. If traffic becomes a problem, some kind of striping could be done. Cm. Barnes stated she was very familiar with this location and there are traffic breaks .: created because of the signals. Ms. Gillarde responded to Mr. Cambra's comments. Other Caffino sites such as Oakley and Martinez were referenced where similar situations exist. They have had no problems. Tom Ford stated he felt it is traditional for restaurants to provide public restrooms. We have lost two service stations in the immediate area, so we have increased need. It is surprising that a restaurant offering a liquid diet will have facilities available only to their employees. He requested that something be put in related to this public service. He felt this was worthy of some consideration. The Council responded that this will be a drive-through or walk-up facility, not a store that someone would be going into. Mayor Houston closed the public hearing. Cm. Moffatt asked if the CUP is for one year. crn:" COUNCIL MINUTES \fOLUME 15 REGULAR MEETING . Febru.ary 13, 1996 . P.A...GE 59 . . Mr. Kachadourian stated a CUP can run indefinitely and it runs with the propeliy. If the land is vacant, it would be reviewed. The Zoning Investigator could do an annual review to make sure it meets with the conditions. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Barnes, and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 19 - 96 ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DEClARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE FOR PA 95-040 CMFINO, INC., SPECIFIC PlAN AMENDMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW LOCATED AT 7360 SAN RAMON ROAD and RESOLUTION NO. 20 - 96 ADOPTING PA 95-040 CAFFINO, INC., SPECIFIC PlAN AMENDMENT TO AREA 3 (SAN RAMON ROAD PROPERTIES) OF THE SAN RAMON ROAD SPECIFIC PlAN and RESOLUTION NO. 21 - 96 .::, " APPROVING PA 95-040 CAFFINO, INC., CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT LOCATED AT 7360 SAN RAMON ROAD and RESOLUTION NO. 22 - 96 APPROVING PA 95-040 CAFFINO, INC., SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW LOCATED AT 7360 SAN RAMON ROAD ----....+ .........,............,.... PUBLIC HEARING - PUBLIC FACILITIES FEE 8:50 p.m. 6.3 (390-20) Mayor Houston opened the public hearing. Parks & Community Services Director Lowart presented the Staff Report and stated in January of 1995, the City Council authorized the preparation of a study by Recht Hausrath & Associates to establish a Public Facilities Fee Program for the City. The facilities which are the subject of this study are parks, community and recreational facilities, libraries and the Civic Center. The study documents the amount and cost of .':. , " cITY' COUNCIL MINUTES \fOLUME 15 REGULltIt MEETING . Febru.a.ry 13, ~996 . PAGE 60 new public facilities for city services required to serve new development and determines the public facilities fees that new development should pay to fund its fair .,' share of those facilities needs. Ms. Lowart discussed the summary of costs to serve growth and the impact fee by land use as contained in the Staff Report. Ms. Lowart advised that the actual implementation and administration of the public facilities fee program will involve adopting new procedures, training personnel, tracking facility costs and accounting for fee revenues. In addition, Staff will be frequently confronted with particular situations in which the program's criteria must be interpreted and special judgments rendered. Thus, the Consultant will be preparing administrative guidelines to assist Staff in implementing the Public Facilities Fee Program. The administrative guidelines will be brought before the City Council for adoption at a later date. Ms. Lowart discussed the relationship between the Public Facilities Fee Program and the Quimby Ordin~nce. In summary, Ms. Lowart stated the purpose of the public facilities fee is to finance municipal public facilities to reduce the impacts caused by future developments in the City of Dublin and Eastern Dublin. As shown in the Eastern Dublin GPA and SP, the Parks and Recreation Master Plan, and other related studies, future development in the .'",', City of Dublin and in Eastern Dublin will generate the need for the facilities that are the subject of the Public Facilities Fee Justification Adoption of a public facilities fee which is applicable to properties within the Eastern Dublin SP area will not preclude developers from picking and choosing from the various financing options available to them. Developers are required to prepare Financing Plans which are to be part of the Development Agreement. Ms. Lowart stated adoption of the public facilities fee is consistent with the General Plan and the Eastern Dublin SP. The Parks & Community Services Commission has reviewed and approved the Public Facilities Fee in concept. Ms. Lowart stated Staff was recommending that this item be continued to the first meeting in March. Comments were received only last Friday even though documents were mailed in January. Mr. Ambrose stated a number of issues were raised which Staff has not had an opportunity to respond to. Cm. Burton asked if there was any idea of the impacts of cumulative fees in the long run. This is quite a big chunk. crn' COUNCIL MINUTES \fOLUME 15 REGULAR MEETING . Feb:ru.ary 13, 1996 . P.A..GE 61 .: .' Mr. Ambrose stated we are one of several agencies that are responsible for providing certain infrastructure. DSRSD must provide water and sewer and a school district to be determined in the future. The fees vary substantially between the 2 school districts. Staff can provide a summary of fees. Cm. Burton stated he would appreciate an overview and what the options are with regard to all the fees. Mr. Ambrose stated Alameda County has opted to pay as you go with regard to paying for infrastructure to their project. The City plays a key role in designing a program and we play the switchman's role with regard to public financing. Matt Koart, Vice President with Kaufman & Broad stated they intend to be a long term partner with the City. Fees have gone up considerably. He went through a list of all the current fees. They are now at about $35,000 in fees for aI, 700 square foot house. Under the old fee schedule, prior to the East Dublin Specific Plan, they estimated fees of about $21,000 for the same size house. A lot of this is school district fees. He requested that the City try to set some priorities for phasing in some of the fees. Whatever the City decides on, K&B will go along with because they consider themselves to be partners with the City. Pleasanton's fees are about $28,000; and Livermore is close to $29,000. .':, Mayor Houston continued the public hearing to the City Council meeting of March 12, 1996. uu...,u.u..u,~ ,..........,............,.. PUBLIC HEARING - AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 9.28 OF THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE - QUIMBY ACT ORDINANCE 9:16 p.m. 6.4 (390-20) Mayor Houston announced that because the subject matter of this item is related to the previous item, this public hearing was also continued to the City Council meeting of March 12, 1996. .' uuuuuuu.......+.,..........,....,....,.... PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY DIRECTING THE FILING OF EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS TO ACQUIRE STREET LIGHTS AND STREET LIGHTING FACILITIES FROM PG&E 9:16 p.m. 6.5 (820-35) Cm. Barnes disqualified herself from discussion of this item, stating her husband is a retired employee of PG&E and that is their income. Mayor Houston opened the public hearing. .'. crn' COUNCIL MINUTES \fOLUME 15 REGULAR MEETING . February :::1..3, ~996 . P.A..GEG2 Public Works Director Thompson presented the Staff Report and advised that acquisition of street lighting facilities by the City will reduce the annual energy and .' maintenance cost, improve the standard of maintenance, and allow the City to impose higher construction and installation standards. The City's street lighting energy and maintenance costs are funded entirely by the Citywide Street Lighting Assessment District. The City's property owners therefore pay the cost of street lighting based on various factor rates. A single-family lot has been paying $19.34 per year. Commercial lots are assessed on the basis of lot size. The reduction in the cost of street lighting energy and maintenance can therefore be passed on to the property owners in the form of a reduced assessment. In December of 1993, the City of Dublin joined the Alameda County Street Light Acquisition Group, consisting of the County of Alameda and 10 cities within the County. Over the past two years, the group has met to discuss various aspects of the acquisition, including appraisals, financing, development of standard specifications, maintenance alternatives, and the mechanics of the acquisition. Mr. Thompson stated the Acquisition Group has submitted several offers and counteroffers to PG&E for purchase of the street lights and PG&E has, to date, rejected these offers and counteroffers. In order to achieve the cost savings at the earliest possible date, Staff is recommending that the City Council adopt a Resolution of Necessity, so that the City can take possession of the lights and begin paying the lower rates. The other jurisdictions in the Acquisition Group have agreed to take this same .": step toward acquiring the lights within their respective territorial limits. Mr. Thompson pointed out that adoption of the resolution requires a 4/5 vote of the City Council. No testimony was entered by any member of the public relative to this issue. Mayor Houston closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Barnes abstained), the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 23 - 96 NECESSITY OF ACQUISITION OF STREET UGHTING FACIUTIES BY EMINENT DOMAIN .."""...."""........+...",,..,..,,',,..,,",.. crn' COUNCIL MINUTES \fOLUME. 15 REGULAR MEETING . Feb:ru..a.ry 13, 1996 . PA..GE 63 . .: .' . PUBLIC HEARING AMENDMENT TO CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE 9:19 p.m. 6.6 (640-40) Mayor Houston opened the pu blic hearing. City Attorney Silver advised that the City's Conflict of Interest Code was last amended in October of 1994. At that time, the Code was amended to incorporate changes as a result of the reorganization of the City Manager's Office and the Administrative Services Department, and the position of Economic Development Manager was added to the list of employees required to complete annual Statements of Economic Interests. In July of 1995, the City's Classification Plan was amended to add the position of Community Development Director. The purpose of this amendment is to add this new position to the City's Conflict of Interest Code and to require disclosure in accordance with Categories 3 and 4. No testimony was entered by any member of the public relative to this issue. Mayor Houston closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote, the Council waived the reading and INTRODUCED the Ordinance amending Section 2.24.020 of the Dublin Municipal Code. . "..'.'..............'..."+.....'....'.""'..."...", PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 9 (SUBDIVISIONS) OF DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE 9:20 p.m. 6.7 (410-50) Mayor Houston opened the public hearing. Public Works Director Thompson presented the Staff Report and discussed various amendments to the City's Subdivision Ordinance. The changes would include the latest state laws and would ease the submittal requirements for Vesting Tentative Maps. No testimony was entered by any member of the public relative to this issue. Mayor Houston closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote, the Council waived the reading and INTRODUCED the Ordinance. "-----'--.----,.--..........+...,.......".............,' cIn' COUNCIL MINUTES \fOLUME 15 RE6.ULAR MEETI.N6. . Febru.a.:ry ~3, ::J.996 . P.A..GE G4 REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR AUDIT SERVICES 9:22 p.m. 8.1 (310-20/110-30) Administrative Services Director Rankin presented the Staff Report and advised that the .' City of Dublin has obtained audit services from the firm of Maze & Associates for the past 9 consecutive years. They do have the ability to modify their staffing of people to handle our audit. The current agreement expired with the issuance of reports related to the period ending June 30, 1995. In order to allow time for preliminary audit work prior to June 30, 1996, Staff has prepared a Request for Proposal. The RFP provides for the ability to select a firm to provide services for the next 5 years. Cm. Moffatt asked if there was any problem with an auditing firm providing services to surrounding cities. Cm. Burton felt it was a good idea to have someone on the City Council help in selecting and it should be an open RFP to see who is out there. Mayor Houston agreed that it is wise to open it up. He and Cm. Moffatt have served as the audit committee and he felt it would be wise for them to continue. At this point, there would be no restrictions on the firms that could submit proposals. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Barnes, and by unanimous vote, the Council reviewed the RFP and determined that Mayor Houston and Cm. Moffatt would serve as an ad-hoc subcommittee to assist with the selection process. .. . RECESS 9:28 p.m. Mayor Houston called for a short recess. All Councilmembers were present when the meeting reconvened. . FACADEENHANCEMENTPROG~ 9:34 p.m. 8.2 (470-20) Economic Development Manager Reuel presented the Staff Report and advised that in 1995, the City Council ranked the establishment of a Facade Enhancement Program as a high priority goal. Staff reviewed programs from 5 other agencies, all of whom are using redevelopment funds in project areas which have been classified as blighted project areas. Mr. Reuel stated Staff investigated funding sources and determined that there are no funding sources other than the City's General Fund for a Storefront Improvement Program. On the positive side, because of the strategic location of the City, a very low commercial vacancy rate exists regardless of building design and age. Facade enhancement is also happening in the City as a result of natural market factors that do not rely on a contribution from the City. crn' COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 15 RE6ULAR MEETIN6 . Feb:ru.a.ry 13, ~996 . PAGE 65 .' .":. .'" .... . Mr. Reuel stated Staff did not recommend implementation of a Facade Enhancement Program due to lack of funds and current market conditions that are facilitating storefront improvements in Dublin without the help of a City contribution. If the City Council decides to implement the program using General Fund monies, however, Staff recommended that a minimum funding level of $25,000 be established. Mayor Houston asked for a status of the old Lucky's store on San Ramon Road. Mr. Reuel stated people are asking if there is any way to be creative with signage that could be seen from 1-680. Mr. Ambrose stated prior inquiries for this site included substantial improvements to the center and into the building to dress it up. Mayor Houston asked about the status of the 76 Station at Amador Valley Boulevard & Village Parkway. Mr. Reuel stated this is the UNOCAL Station and they have directed that the facility be demolished. Cm. Howard asked about the property between Target and Montgomery Wards. Mr. Reuel stated these kinds of programs work best on large properties. At this location, they want to bring in maybe one or two new clients and expand to about 50,000 square feet. They have a couple of proposals they are looking at which could benefit the City. This is a good program, but it may not be the best for the City at this pain t. Cm. Moffatt asked if this type program could be extended to the tenant rather than the property owners. Mr. Reuel responded yes, it could be set up a number of different ways. It is usually set up as a matching grant. Mayor Houston felt this was good information and perhaps it could be kept on the back burner. There appears to be more roadblocks that what could be overcome at this time. On motion of Mayor Houston, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote, the City Council accepted report and opted to not go forward at this time. . crn' COUNCIL M.INUTES \fOLUME 15 RE6ULAR MEETIN6 . Feb:ru..ary ::1.3, ::1.99& . PAGE 66 STATUS REPORT - DUBLIN PRIDE WEEK AND ACCEPTANCE OF GIFT TO CITY 9:47p.m. 8.3 (I 50-80) Administrative Assistant Honse stated Dublin Pride Week is an annual event held to . promote a positive image for the City of Dublin. A committee, comprised of Cm. Barnes, City Staff and various civic organizations and business leaders has been formed to coordinate and expand this years activities. This year, Dublin Pride Week is planned for March 24-30. We have been deluged with volunteers of community groups and the problem now is coordinating all this. Cm. Barnes stated every group wants to do something. People are thinking about next year already. Mr. Honse briefly described the activities planned for this year. City funding of $2,500 was approved in the 1995-96 Budget, and Livermore-Dublin Disposal has offered to match the City's contribution. Mayor Houston stated when you go through the City there are people that do projects on their own individual homes and maybe there could be some recognition of people , with just a simple little certificate. He felt people would appreciate this. This could be considered in the future. Mr. Honse reported on a very successful recognition program they had in EI Cajon. It was entitled the Orchids & Onions program. . The Council discussed this type of a program and who would judge the entries. Mr. Ambrose indicated Staff could look into some type of a program in the future. Mr. Honse stated he would report back on this in the future. They let the Planning Staff submit pictures in EI Cajon. Cm. Barnes stated enthusiasm is contagious and Mr. Honse is the most contagious person around. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote, the Council accepted the $2,500 gift from Livermore-Dublin Disposal, directed Staff to prepare a formal acknowledgment, approved the Budget Change Form, and approved City participation in Dublin Pride Week with a City contribution not to exceed $2,500. --'"''+.,,''''''''' ".."'..," " crn' COUNCIL MINUTES \fOLUME 15 REGULAR MEETING . Feb:ru.ary 13, ~996 . PAGE 6'7 .' . .,. . FIRE SERVICE STUDY 9:57p.m. (8.4 540-70) City Manager Ambrose presented the Staff Repoli and stated at their meeting this evening, the San Ramon City Council will consider appointing members to a Public Safety Committee to consider a proposal from the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection district to provide fire service to south San Ramon and possibly evaluate other fire protection service alternatives. If the City of San Ramon concludes that it is in its best interest to terminate the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement (DRFA) and notifies the City of Dublin prior to June 29, 1996, the effective date of the termination would be June 30, 1997. If the City of San Ramon acts to terminate the JPA, the DRFA would be dissolved and the City of Dublin would be left without a fire service provider. Mr. Ambrose stated given the complexity of dissolving the Authority and the impacts of dissolution on the two Cities, it would seem prudent to request that the Fire Authority undertake a study which outlines the obligations and impacts of dissolution on both Cities and Authority personnel. The evaluation of options available to the City of Dublin for Fire Protection Services should San Ramon terminate the JP A could take considerable time, depending u pan the number of options the City evaluates. The City has 3 basic options in providing firel emergency medical response services: 1) providing the City's own fire protection service either with a traditional fire department or a public safety department; 2) contracting with another public agency to provide fire services; or 3) forming a new JPA with one or more valley cities (i.e., Pleasanton and Livermore), Alameda County, or San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District. Mr. Ambrose stated in order to effectively evaluate the Contract Service options, it will be necessary to develop a Request for Proposal for firel emergency medical services. Staff anticipates that it would require approximately 2 to 4 months to complete an evaluation of fire service options, depending upon the number of options evaluated. Cm. Burton asked how far along the County consolidation got. They were discussing consolidating as many agencies as possible. Mr. Ambrose stated there were 2 studies going on. He wasn't certain how far they got other than San Leandro contracting with the County for fire services. Mr. Ambrose stated we aren't sure if all of the agencies are even interested in submitting a proposal. We would want to get a formal proposal before proceeding. Mayor Houston asked if we should also look at the alternatives together with San Ramon. This would be more efficient for all the constituents. Mr. Ambrose stated they would discuss this tomorrow. crn' COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 15 RE6ULAR MEETIH6 . Feb:ru..a.ry 13, 1996 . P.A...GE 6S Dan Benfield, Local #1885 President stated he was just up in San Ramon. They realize Dublin has to look at their fire options. They hope to be a cooperative partner in this .', process. Their input can add a lot to a task force looking at fire service in the City of Dublin. He stressed how important communication is. They read the papers just as the City Council does. Mayor Houston felt we should encourage San Ramon to look together at these alternatives. It is very important for the union to also be involved. Cm. Moffatt asked what would be involved in breaking up DRFA at this point. Mr. Ambrose stated they have to give us notice and a resolution and they would have until June 30th to give us notice and then they have an additional year to pull out. Ms. Silver stated the notice can be given at any time but it cannot be effective until the end of the next fiscal year. Cm. Moffatt stated since San Ramon Valley Fire District has the right to garnish taxes, he asked if people have a right to vote on whether they want to increase their taxes and if this would take a 2/3 majority vote. Mr. Ambrose stated he isn't sure what the Contra Costa County rules are and felt there are ways San Ramon could get around it. He wasn't sure about Knox-Cortese .' requirements if they contract. As he understands it, there is not a proposal to charge south San Ramon additional property taxes. Cm. Moffatt felt maybe we should wait to send the RFP out until we hear what San Ramon does. Mr. Ambrose advised that the RFP would be brought back to the City Council. Mayor Houston pointed out that the Dublin action is contingent upon what San Ramon does. It is important that we bring all this to the table to protect our citizens, and the union, and ultimately the citizens of San Ramon. If they notice us in the near future, we need to be proactive and look at our alternatives. We need to know what our choices are in order to do what is best for the citizens of Dublin. Mayor Houston requested that we also request the City of San Ramon to work with us in looking at alternatives. Maybe there could be a better opportunity to analyze options together. Cm. Burton felt we may want to look at our own perspectives without input from San Ramon. cITY' COUNCIL MINUTES \fOLUME. 15 1tE.6ULAR MEETIN6 . Febru.a.ry ~3, ~99G . P.A..GE 69 . . . '. Ie Mayor Houston felt if all three groups do their own thing, this would not be the best approach. Cm. Moffatt asked if there was any idea on the costs for developing the RFP. Mr. Ambrose stated he envisioned that he and the Fire Chief would be developing the RFP and identifying levels of service. It would be brought back to the City Council prior to sending it out to providers. If a consultant is needed, Staff will come back to the City Council. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote, the Council: 1) authorized the City Manager to undertake an analysis of Fire/Emergency Response Service Alternatives available to the City of Dublin if the City of San Ramon withdraws from the DRFA; 2) authorized preparation of Request for Proposal for the purpose of evaluating contract Fire and Emergency Services; and 3) requested that DRFA study the financial and service impacts on the Cities of Dublin and San Ramon and the Authority employees if the Authority is dissolved. In addition, Dublin should request that San Ramon work with us to develop alternatives. .."...."..,",.....'.'...,',...........", OTHER BUSINESS 10:19 p.m. Livermore School District (515-20) Mr. Ambrose reported that a letter had been received from Livermore Unified School District to tour their schools. Cm. Barnes stated she wanted to clarify that no one is challenging the quality of education in Livermore schools. They simply have stated they want Dublin kids going to Dublin schools. Mayor Houston felt the City Council should hold off and talk about this at a future meeting. .. Bus Service/BART (1060-20 Mr. Ambrose stated BART is holding a forum at the LA VTA facility on February 26 at 2 p.m. and they would like to discuss the Dublin/Pleasanton extension and what kind of wheels service will be provided. Staff will RSVP if the Council is interested in attending. .. cITY' COUNCIL MINUTES \fOLUME 15 REGULAR MEETING . Feb:ru..a.ry 13, 199& . P.A..GE 70 BART Station Name (1060-30) em. Barnes stated she will not be here for the Tri-Valley Council dinner. She was . upset to see an agenda item about naming the BART Station. Danville, San Ramon and Livermore have no right to select a name. Mayor Houston stated he understood the issue has been pulled off the agenda. The City of Pleasanton will put it on their second February agenda. The City Council requested that this issue be placed on the February 27 City Council agenda to discuss. . Post Office in Dublin (6 10-80) Cm. Moffatt stated one of his goals in being on the City Council was to develop our very own post office here in Dublin. He would like to have a letter from the City stating we desire our'own post office. He doesn't have great expectations, but one of these days it could get done. Cm. Barnes stated she agreed. We need this, particularly for bulk mail. Mayor Houston requested that Cm. Moffatt provide Staff with the appropriate name .' ",:: and information and a letter could be drafted. Cm. Barnes pointed out when you go on vacation, you have to go over to Pleasanton to pick up mail that has been held. ""',..,"',.... Street Lighting (820-35) Mayor Houston reported that he recently had a constituent on Wicklow Lane call up with a street light out and he requested that Mr. Thompson follow up on this. .' Flood Control (550-10) Cm. Burton discussed housing on Silver gate that had soil washed out. It is a neighborhood concern. ""'." crn' COUNCIL MI.NUTES \fOLUME 15 RE6.ULAR MEETIH6. . Feb:ru..a.ry 13, 1996 . PAGE 7J.. . Animal Shelter (500-80) .' Mr. Ambrose discussed a tour of the animal shelter. em. Barnes stated she understood people who want to volunteer at the new facility are having problems knowing who to call out there. .. .... .. '.'."'+ " Joint Meeting - Housing Issues (430-20) Mr. Ambrose asked about a format for items of follow-up on affordable housing issues. The Planning Commission will be having a meeting on March 19 and it could be agendized as a joint meeting. The Council concurred with having this meeting be a joint one. .". """""".+- ADJOURNMENT 11.1 There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 10:34 p.m. .,:' ."""+."'" A ITEST: Mayor City Clerk """""""""""""""",.+.",',""""",',',',"',"',', . CITY COUNCIL MINUTES \fOLUME 15 aE6ULAR MEETING . Feb:ru.a.ry 13, 1996 . P.A..GE 72