Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 4.01(b) DraftCC10-18-2005Mtg a-" ~ljii. MINUTES OF THE Crn' COUNCIL 111.~"~~\~ OF THE Crn' OF DUBJJN 19~ ~82 ~!J .!J.EGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER lð. 2005 CLOSED SESSION A closed session was held at 6:30 p.m., regarding: I. CONFRRENCH WITH LEGAL COUNSRL -ANTiCIPATED LITIGATlON Initiation of litigation pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9, subdivision c (2 potential cases). 11. CONFERENCE WITHLRGAL COUNSEL - ANTlClPATRD L111GATJON Government Code Section 54956.9, subdivision (b)(1) Facts and Circumstances: Government Code Section 54956.9, subdivision (b)(3)(B)- ClP Project If 96920 . A regular meeting of the Dublin City Council was held on Tuesday, October 18,2005, in the Council Chambers of the Dublin Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at 7:14 p.m., by Mayor Lockhart. . ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Hildenbrand, McCormick, Oravetz and Zika, and Mayor Lockhart. ABSENT: None + PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The pledge of allegiance to the flag was recited by the Council, Staff and those present. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETING October 18, 2005 PAGE 376 www.ci.dubIiIl.ca.lIs + REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION ACTION Mayor Lockhart advised that there was no action taken during Closed Session. · ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Introduction of New Emplovee: Jim Sr>arvoli, Permit Technician 7; 15 p.m. 3.1 (700-10) Community Development Director Jeri Ram introduced Permit Technician Jim Sparvoli. The Council welcomed Mr. Sparvoli to the City of Dublin Staff. · AcceDtance of Gifts to City from Day on the Glen Festival Soonsors 7;16 p.m. :U (150-70) Recreation Coordinator Lorri Polon presented the Staff Report and advised that the City would like to formalIy thank those sponsors who contributed cash or in-kind donations in support of the 2005 Day on the Glen Festival at Emerald Glen Park on September 18 - 19, 2005, including: Hacienda Crossings, Comcast, ValleyCare Health Systems, IKEA, Dublin Toyota, Foothill Chiropractic, ASRlSunrooms, Valley Times, Radisson Hotel Dublin, and Amador Valley Industries. On motion of Vm. Zika, seconded by Cm. Oravetz and by unanimous vote, the Council recognized the donors and formally accepted gifts. · DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETING October 18, 2005 PAGE 377 www.ci.duhIiIl.ca.us Acceptance of Gifts to City from Dublin Senior Foundation 7:19 p.m. 3.3 (150-70) Parks & Community Services Manager Paul McCreary presented the Staff Report and advised that the Dublin Senior Foundation made a contribution of $11,067, as welI as an in-kind donation of a new 50-inch television valued at $3,925, to the new Dublin Senior Center. Mayor Lockhart commended the Dublin Senior Foundation for its excellent work for the Dublin Senior Center. Dr. Ted Woy accepted the recognition on behalf of the Senior Foundation. On motion of Cm. McCormick, seconded by Cm. Hildenbrand and by unanimous vote, the Council recognized the donors and formally accepted gifts. . Proclamation Supoorting Red Ribbon Week, October Z3 ~ 31, Z005 7:34 p.m. 3.4 (610-50) Cm. Oravetz read a proclamation supporting Red Ribbon Week during October 23-31, 2005, and encouraged all citizens to participate in tobacco, alcohol and other drug prevention programs and activities, making a visible statement and commitment to healthy, drug-free communities in which to raise a generation of drug-free youth. Commander Gary Thuman accepted the proclamation on behalf of Dublin Police Services. . Proclamation Declarinst October Z8. Z005 as National Immistrants Dav 7:25 p.m. 3.5 (610-50) Cm. Hildenbrand read a proclamation declaring October 28, 2005 as National Immigrants Day and encouraged citizens to honor the immigrants welcomed by the burning torch of the Lady of Liberty to this land of freedom. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETING October 18, 2005 PAGE 378 www.ci.dlIhlin.ca.us . OOlic Comments 7;26 p.m. 3.6 No comments were made by any member of the public at this time. . CONSENT CALENDAR 7:27 p.m. Items 4.1 through 4.11 Vm. Zika stated that he would abstain from voting on the Minutes (4.1), as he was absent from the October 4th meeting. He would, however, vote affirmatively for the balance of the Consent Calendar. On motion of Cm. Oravetz, seconded by Cm. McCormick and by unanimous vote (Vm. Zika abstaining from 4.1), the Council took the following actions; Approved (4.1) Minutes of Regular Meeting of October 4, 2005; Adopted (4.2 750-40/750-60) RESOLUTION NO. 197 - 05 FIXING THE EMPLOYER'S CONTRIBUTION UNDER THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEE'S MEDICAL AND HOSPITAL CARE ACT RESOLUTION NO. 198 - 05 FIXING THE EMPLOYER'S CONTRIBUTION VESTING REQUIREMENT FOR FUTURE RETIREES UNDER THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEE'S MEDICAL AND HOSPITAL CARE ACT and DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETING October 18, 2005 PAGE 379 www.cLdublill.ca.us RESOLUTION NO. 199 - 05 ADOPTING AN EMPLOYEE PICKUP RESOLUTION PRE-TAX PAYROLL DEDUCTION PLAN FOR SERVICE CREDIT PURCHASES (CONTRIBUTION CODE 14) Adopted (4.3 600-35) RESOLUTION NO. 200 - 05 AWARDING CONTRACT NO. 05-12 CIVIC CENTER TRELLIS PAINTING TO BELLA PAINTING Adopted (4.4 600-35) RESOLUTION NO. 201 - 05 AWARDING CONTRACT NO. 05-11 DOUGHERTY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT PAINTING TO BELLA PAINTING Adopted (4.5 410-40) RESOLUTION NO. 202 - 05 APPROVING PARCEL MAP 8469 (DUBLIN CORNERS) Adopted (4.6 410-40) RESOLUTION NO. 203 - 05 APPROVING PARCEL MAP 8640 (DUBLIN RANCH, AREA H) Received (4.7 330-50) Financial Reports for the Month of September 2005; Received (4.8 320-30) City Treasurer's Investment Report for 1st Quarter 2005-2006; DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETING October 18, 2005 PAGE 380 www.ci.dllhlin.ca.us Adopted (4.9 350-20) RESOLlITION NO. 204 - 05 WAIVING THE COMPETITIVE BID PROCESS AND AUTHORIZING STAFF TO PURCHASE POLICE VEHICLES DIRECTLY FROM DEALER Approved (4.10 600-35) Extension of CIP No. 96920, Dublin Boulevard Widening Project - Village Parkway to Sierra Court, through FY 2005-06; and approved Budget Change in the amount of $74,913; Approved (4.11 300-40) the Warrant Register in the amount of $6,072,857.28. . WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None . PUBUC HEARINGS Public Hearing To Consider Adoption of a Resolution of Necessity to Condemn Real Property at 6457 Dublin Court (Lee) for Capital Improvement Program (CIF) Proiect No. 96852. Domthertv Road Improvements - Houston Place to 1-580 7:28 p.m. 6.1 (670-20) Mayor Lockhart opened the public hearing. Associate Civil Engineer Steven Yee presented the Staff Report and advised that in order to widen and improve the intersection at Dublin Boulevard and Dougherty Road, the City must acquire a portion of the property at 6457 Dublin Court, which is situated just southwest of the intersection. The property owner, and the property owner alone, has the right to address the Council on all of the proposed findings required to adopt the Resolution of Necessity. Others, such as tenants, may wish to address the Council regarding the acquisition and issues related to it, but their comments should not be DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETINC October 18, 2005 PAGE 381 www.cLdublill.ca.us considered by the Council when making the findings that must be made to adopt the resolution. The adoption of the resolution required a 4/5 affirmative vote. No testimony was entered by any member of the public relative to this issue. Mayor Lockhart closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. McCormick, seconded by Cm. Hildenbrand and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 205 - 05 DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN LAND AND DIRECTING THE FILING or EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS f'OR THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (ClP) PROJECT NO. 96852, DOUGHERTY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS - HOUSTON PLACE TO 1-580, WITH SCARLETT COURT ACCESS TO DUBLIN BOULEVARD LIMITED TO RIGHT TURN OUT ONLY AND RIGHT TURN FROM DUBLIN BOULEVARD TO SCARLETT COURT ELIMINATED - ANDREA G. LEE, PROPERTY OWNER ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 941-0550-010-15 .. Public Hearing To Consider Adoption of a Resolution of Necessity to Condemn Real Property at 6500 Dublin Boulevard (Lange et al) for Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Proiect No. 96852. Douozherty Road Imt'rovements - Houston Place to IN580 7:35 p.m. 6.2 (670-20) Mayor Lockhart opened the public hearing. Associate Civil Engineer Steven Yee presented the Staff Report and advised that in order to widen and improve the intersection at Dublin Boulevard and Dougherty Road, the City must acquire a portion of the property at 6500 Dublin Boulevard, which is situated just west of the intersection. The property owner, and the property owner alone, has the right to address the Council on all of the proposed findings required to adopt the Resolution of Necessity. Others, such as tenants, may wish to address the Council regarding the acquisition and issues related to it, but their comments should not be considered by the Council when making the findings that must be made to adopt the resolution. The adoption of the resolution required a 4/5 affirmative vote. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETING October 18, 2005 PAGE 382 www.ci.dubIiIl.ca.lIs No testimony was entered by any member of the public relative to this issue. Mayor Lockhart closed the public hearing. On motion of Vm. Zika, seconded by Cm. Oravetz and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 206 - 05 DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN LAND AND DIRECTING THE FILING OF EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) PROJECT NO. 96852, DOUGHERTY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS - HOUSTON PLACE TO 1-580, WITH SCARLETI' COURT ACCESS TO DUBLIN BOULEVARD LIMITED TO RIGHT TURN OUT ONLY AND RIGHT TURN FROM DUBLIN BOULEVARD TO SCARLETT COURT ELIMINATED -. JAMES & ELINOR LANGE, SUSAN PLISSKIN, LAWRENCE PLISSKIN, STEVEN & JUDITH GOLDMAN, AND GREEN BEAR, LLC., PROPERTY OWNER'> ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 941-0205-036 .. Public Hearing To Consider Adoption of a Resolution of Necessity to Condemn Real Property at 6380 Scarlett Court (Gil) for Capital Improvement Program (CIF) Proiect No. 96852, Dougherty Road Improvements - Houston Place to IN580 7:38 p.m. 6.3 (670-20) Mayor Lockhart opened the public hearing. Associate Civil Engineer Steven Yee presented the Staff Report and advised that in order to widen and improve the intersection at Dublin Boulevard and Dougherty Road, the City must acquire a portion of the property at 6380 Scarlett Court, which is situated just southeast of the intersection. The property owner, and the property owner alone, has the right to address the Council on all of the proposed findings required to adopt the Resolution of Necessity. Others, such as tenants, may wish to address the Council regarding the acquisition and issues related to it,but their comments should not be considered by the Council when making the findings that must be made to adopt the resolution. The adoption of the resolution required a 4/5 affirmative vote. DUBLIN CITY COlJNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETING October 18, 2005 PAGE 383 www.ci.duIJlill.ca.IIS Attorney Anthony Varni, representing the Property Owners, confirmed that their letter dated October 3, 2005, had been received by the Council and was part of the proceeding's record. The letter stated that his clients, Mr. and Mrs. Ralph GiI, have owned this property for a number of years and their son has operated a successful automotive repair business at this location. His clients wished to express their appreciation to the City of Dublin and to the City Staff for working with them so as to configure the widening of Dougherty Road in such a manner as to allow then to continue to maintain abuilding on the remainder of this site. They now had three tasks: 1) to arrive at a value of the property that was being taken and the severance damages to the remainder of the property; 2) to arrive at a value of the improvements that are on the property; and 3) to develop a design for a new building on the property which would allow GiI's Body Works to continue to operate at this site and which would be acceptable to the City of Dublin. In light of the City's cooperation in allowing his clients to retain a useable portion of their property, they had no objection at this time to the City's adoption of a Resolution of Necessity authorizing the acquisition of a portion of the Gil property. Mr. Varni advised that the challenge with this condemnation was that the GiI's building was going to be removed by the widening of the road. For a time, they would have to move the currently operating businesses to a temporary location and then move them back again. The property owners were asking for more cooperation because they would like to stay at this location. Mayor Lockhart advised that the letter had been received, and the City would do all it could to see that happen. Mayor Lockhart closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Hildenbrand, seconded by Vm. Zika and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted DUBLIN CITY COlJNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETING October 18, 2005 PAGE 384 www.d.dublin.ca.us RESOLUTION NO. 207 - 05 DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN LAND AND DIRECTING THE FILING OF EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS FOR THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (ClP) PROJECT NO. 96852, DOUGHERTY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS - HOUSTON PLACE TO 1-580, WITH SCARLETT COURT ACCESS TO DUBLIN BOULEVARD LIMITED TO RIGHT TURN OUT ONLY AND RIGHT TURN FROM DUBLIN BOULEVARD TO SCARLETT COURT ELIMINATED - RALPH & PAULINE GIL, TRUSTEES OF RALPH & PAULINE GIL LIVING TRUST, PROPERTY OWNERS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 941 -0550-012-08 . Public Hearing East Dublin BART Parking Structure Stage 2 Planned DevelODment Rezoninst and Site DeveIODInent Review 7;44 p.m. 6.4 (410-30/450-30) Mayor Lockhart opened the public hearing. Associate Planner Mamie Nuccio presented the Staff Report and advised that the East Dublin BART Parkins Structure project consists of a 6- 7 level parking structure, surface parking and 7,500 square feet of ground floor retail on approximately +4.99 acres of land within the Dublin Transit Center. The parking structure would replace the majority of existing surface parking for BART patrons at the Dublin Transit Center. Staff was asking the Council to provide direction with respect to the Planning Commission's recommendations related to: 1) Public Safety & Security; 2) Construction Traffic; 3) Displacement of Parking; 4) Exterior Color Schemes; 5) Communications Tower; 6) Covered Parking; and 7) Dublin Identification/Neon Shamrock Sign and East Dublin Signage. Ms. Nuccio discussed the phased parking plans and temporary displacement of parking during construction. Vm. Zika asked how 155 extra parking spaces on Site A would be created on a temporary basis. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETING October 18, 2005 PAGE 385 www.c.i.dublill.ca.lIs Ms. Nuccio explained that Site A would be expanded north and west to accommodate additional parking. There was room there because the apartment construction was staged to the north. Cm. Oravetz asked if the parking lot would be paved and striped. Ms. Nuccio indicated yes. Cm. Hildenbrand clarified that there would be a net gain of only 82 spaces after the completion of Phase 1. Ms. Nuccio indicated yes. Vm. Zika asked if, within the existing structure, diagonal parking had been considered. Some commercial parking structures spaces were diagonal, which reduced the aisle drive width. Does it give more spaces per square foot? City Engineer Mark Lander advised that diagonal parking was less efficient than perpendicular parking for this site. For example, with 45 degree parking, there would be a loss of approximately 33% of the parking spaces within a given plot of land. Diagonal parking was sometimes more efficient with constrained sites. Ms. Nuccio discussed access, circulation, architecture and landscaping. Cm. Oravetz asked if the BART sign at the top of the elevator would be lit at night. Ms. Nuccio advised that it was a back-lit logo. Cm. Oravetz asked if the light would be a glow from the top floor. Ms. Nuccio advised that she did not know how bright the light would be and deferred the question to the Architect. Mayor Lockhart stated that the current landscaping at the BART station was not acceptable and expressed concern about future landscaping, no matter how nice the plans looked. She needed to know that there was a better plan in place for addressing landscaping. DUBLIN CITY COIJNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETING October 18, 2005 PAGE 386 www.Ô.dlIhlill.ca.us Ms. Nuccio advised that the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority would be constructing Phase I of the project and would be installing the landscaping. She believed that they had an agreement with BART that the County would maintain the landscaping for a specified period of time, perhaps two years or longer, in order for the landscaping to take hold. Mayor Lockhart expressed the need for a plan that incorporated the existing landscaping with the new landscaping, and suggested that it be added as a condition to approval. Cm. McCormick asked if there would be recycled water piped into the area. Ms. Nuccio advised eventually yes, for landscaping as the housing development was constructed. Ms. Nuccio discussed the Planning Commission recommendations related to their concerns regarding Public Safety & Security; Construction Traffic; Displacement of Parking; Exterior Color Schemes; Communications Tower; Covered Parking; and Dublin Identification/Neon Shamrock Sign and East Dublin Signage, and advised of Staffs response to those concerns. Dilip Nandwana, Project Architect with International Parking Design, advised that the lights in the garage tower would identify the entry point into the garage for pedestrians coming back to their cars. The lighting in the garage needed to meet the safety requirements for the public. From the outside, a halo of the light would be visible. Vm. Zika asked for clarification as to whether the garage would be painted or not. If it would be painted, would the paint deteriorate because BART would not paint the garages in the future'! Mr. Nandwana advised that BART did not want paint on the project. However, from an architectural view, the Developer felt it was too large of a building not to have some paint on it. The suggested painted area would have good quality to extend the life of the paint. The Council and Architect engaged in a question and answer session regarding the proposed paint and architectural accents of the building. Pat Cashman, Alameda County Surplus Property Authority (ACSPA), advised that they hoped that the project would be approved tonight; however, he would like to discuss DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETING Octobcr 18, 2005 PAGE 387 www.(~i.dlIhlill.ca.lIs some of the conditions and issues. There was a misunderstanding with the security conditions, #55 and #56. The ACSPA thought the conditions were to read, "City standards OR as approved by the Police Chief." The "or" gave the Police Chief a little more flexibility to work between the City standards and BART standards. He requested that the two conditions be changed to read, "Or as approved by the Chief of Police," instead of "as approved by the Chief of Police." The construction traffic condition was fine. The ACSPA would go along with the condition regarding interim parking condition. The ACSPA did not want to paint things that BART did not want to maintain, and the ACSPA had worked to make sure the big concrete façade was well articulated with other elements and colors to look good and to serve BART's long-term needs. Two years ago they just assumed the tower would be relocated; however the cost to relocate was now too prohibitive at approximately $1 million. The tower itself was not that much of an imposition from the freeway, and the base would be surrounded with landscaping_ The canopy was the Planning Commission's idea, but the ASPCA was wilIing to install if they could get funding. The Alameda County Congestion Management Authority might be an unexpected funding source. Regarding maintenance of landscaping, they have committed to BART to do two years of maintenance to ensure that the landscape was established. ACSPA was hoping to get the Congestion Management Agency to fund three more years, for a total of five years of maintenance. The ACSPA was not in support of a Shamrock for signage. The ACSPA's only request was with respect to the paint and the color of the station, and they were looking forward to getting this under construction next spring. The project would be built by Avalon Bay, who had an abiding interest because, as soon as the garage was completed, they could take over the existing parking lot and begin developing it with apartments and condos. Vm. Zika expressed concern about BART patrons having to park very far away from the BART station, and asked if there was any provision to keep construction workers from parking in patron spots. Mr. Cashman advised that all three developments currently underway were given large staging and employee parking areas, so there was plenty of room. Vm. Zika disagreed and asked them to work harder to keep the construction workers out of patron parking spaces. Mr. Cashman agreed and stated that it was a question of enforcement. Mayor Lockhart asked BART representatives if there was any plan to upgrade or improve existing landscaping. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETING October 18, 2005 PAGE 388 www.ci.dublill.ca.lIs John Rennels, BART, advised that their budget was such that landscape maintenance personnel was under-funded and suggested that some of the landscape be considered within the Transit Village's common area maintenance. Mr. Rennels concurred with Mr. Cashman regarding Conditions #55 and #56, in that it was his impression that the word "or" would be used. BART was very keen on safety, and the opportunity to have it subject to the approval of the BART Police Chief and Dublin's Police Chief seemed reasonable if, in fact, there was a disparately between BART and City requirements. Mayor Lockhart asked if it would be prudent to work through Dublin's BART Director regarding the station naming issue. She suggested "Dublin - East" to signify that it was the east station in Dublin and to stay away from "East Dublin" so as not to divide the community. Mr. Rennels stated that he would put that forward to the BART Board. Jim Kenna, Dublin resident, asked if BART had considered extending the facility to the east or west instead of up, which was more of a visual impact. Mayor Lockhart commented that it was a transit center, and building up was preferable for land value and compactness. Ray Cloutier, Dublin Historic Preservation Association Member, asked what Pleasantofl was doing on the south side of 1-580. Mayor Lockhart advised that PIeasanton was doing some preliminary planning for a transit-oriented development on their side of the freeway. Mayor Lockhart closed the public hearing. City Attorney Elizabeth Silver reminded the Council that, in August 2005, the Council approved an agreement between the City and the Surplus Property Authority. Pursuant to that agreement, the City agreed to waive some of the provisions in the annexation agreement between the City, the County and the ACSPA. In particular, the City agreed to waive the requirement that the City's uniform codes would apply. The City also agreed to waive the requirement that the Developer enter into a Development Agreement. The ACSPA agreed to be subject to the Conditions of Approval and, by entering into this DUBUN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETING October 18, 2005 PAGE 389 www.ci.dlIblin.ca.us agreement, the ACSPA agreed that the City could file suit to enforce the Conditions of Approval. By agreeing to waive these conditions being subject to the codes, the City would not be inspecting the garage or issuing the certificate of occupancy. As such, the City did not have a mechanism to enforce the Conditions of Approval. As the Council did with the Courthouse, the City and the ACSPA entered into this agreement whereby it was a quid pro quo; the City agreed that the ACSPA would not be required to comply with the codes so they could have BART inspect it, and the City would not require a Development Agreement; however, the ACSPA would be bound by the Conditions of Approval. However, because the Conditions of Approval had not been approved, the ACSPA did not know what it was agreeing to comply with. The Agreement said that if the ACSPA objected to the conditions prior to the City's approval of the Site Development Review, and the City, none-the-Iess, approved the Site Development Review, this agreement shaH be null and void. It was her opinion that Mr. Cashman had objected to some of the Conditions of Approval. As long as his objection was part of the record then the agreement would be null and void, which would mean that the City had no longer waived the requirement that the City's codes apply, the City had not waived the provision about the Development Agreement, and the City did not have a mechanism to enforce the conditions. It would be important that the Council and Mr. Cashman work out which conditions, if any, the ACSPA objected to. Mr. Cashman should indicate on the record if the ACSPA objected to any conditions, so the Council understood the significances of its approval if the Council went forward with approval. In her opinion, Mr. Cashman was asking for a modification in verbiage to Conditions #55 and #56, which would qualify as an objection. He was also objecting to the proposed condition to relocate the tower. Mayor Lockhart asked if the Council had the ability to set the conditions at this time. Ms. Silver advised yes, but pursuant to the agreement that was entered into in August, if the ACSPA objected prior to the approval of the conditions, which she believed Mr. Cashman had done tonight, then the agreement would be null and void. That would have implications for the City and the ACSPA. Mr. Cashman stated that tonight he was requesting that the language change be made to Conditions #55 and #56, and he objected to Condition #62 relating to the tower relocation. Ms. Silver advised that the Council had the ability to impose the condition to which he objected. She assumed that the change in the two conditions related to the Police Chief was probably something that the Council could agree to, and then Mr. Cashman would need to withdraw his objection to #55 and #56. However, as long as he maintained his DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETING October 18,2005 PAGE 390 www.ci.dublin.cn.lIs objection to Condition #62, and if the project was approved with that condition in it, the agreement was no longer of any force or effect. This would mean that the City could issue the building permit and inspect the project, and the City would have no mechanism to enforce the conditions. Ms. Nuccio advised that it was Staffs intent that Conditions #55 and #56 should read, "Or to the satisfaction of the Dublin Chief of Police." Mayor Lockhart asked for Council consensus regarding Conditions #55 and #56, public safety and security, to contain the "or" clause. The Council and Staff briefly discussed the difference between BART and City standards, as well as the ultimate safety responsibility lying with BART. By consensus, the Council agreed to the verbiage change in Conditions #55 and #56 to read, "Or to the satisfaction of the Dublin Chief of Police." Mayor Lockhart asked for Council consensus regarding #21a, rebated to construction traffic. By consensus, the Council agreed that Condition #21a should be included. Mayor Lockhart asked for Council consensus regarding #Z3a, related to displacement of parking during construction. By consensus, the Council agreed that Condition #23a should be included. Mayor Lockhart asked for Council consensus regarding exterior color schemes. By consensus, the Council agreed to the exterior color scheme, as presented. Mayor Lockhart asked for Council consensus regarding Condition #62, relocation of the communication tower. The Council discussed the tower and, by consensus, agreed the tower should become a permanent structure. It was not worth $1 million to relocate it, but it needed to be landscaped around the base. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETING October 18,2005 PAGE 391 www.ci.dublill.\~a.us City Manager Ambrose clarified that the Council was authorizing the deletion of Condition #62. The Council concurred. Mayor Lockhart asked for Council consensus regarding Condition #61, covered walkway. She would like the ACSPA to try to get a grant from the Congestion Management Agency toward the cost of the walkway. Vm. Zika suggested that the phrase, "Should funds become available..." be stricken, and replaced with, "A walkway canopy shall be constructed." Mayor Lockhart disagreed because if the ACSPA did not get the funding, then they did not have the money. She felt that they would get the money. By consensus, the Council agreed that Condition #61 should be included, as presented. Mayor Lockhart asked for Council consensus regarding the Dublin Identification/Neon Shamrock Sign. By consensus, the Council agreed that this proposed condition should not be included. It should be identified as a BART parking structure, not Dublin parking structure. Ms. Silver recommended that the Council make and second a motion, and then the Mayor should ask Mr. Cashman whether or not the ACSPA would object to the conditions as proposed in the motion. Cm. Oravetz motioned to waive the reading and introduce the Ordinance, and adopt the Resolution approving the Site Development Review with revisions to Conditions #55 and #56 to read, "or to the satisfaction of the Chief of Police," and the deletion of Condition #62. Cm. McCormick seconded the motion. Mayor Lockhart asked Mr. Cashman if the ACSPA had any objections to the Conditions of Approval, as modified. Mr. Cashman stated that the ACSPA had no objections to the Conditions of Approval as modified. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETING October 18, 2005 PAGE 392 www.ci.dlIblin.ca.llS On motion of Cm. Oravetz, seconded by Cm. Hildenbrand and by unanimous vote, the Council waived the first reading and INTRODUCED the Ordinance adopting a Stage 2 Planned Development Rezoning; and adopted RESOLUTION NO. 208 - 05 APPROVING SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR THE EAST DUBLIN BART PARKING STRUCTURE LOCATED SOUTHEAST OF IRON HORSE PARKWAY ADJACENT TO 1-580 AND THE EXISTING DUBLlN/PLEASANTON BART STATION (FOR. OF APN 986-0001-009 AND FOR. OF APN 986-0001-013-02) with revisions to Conditions #55 and #56 to read, "or to the satisfaction of the Chief of Police," and the deletion of Condition #62. . RECESS 9:01 p.m. Mayor Lockhart called for a short break. The meeting reconvened at 9:12 p.m. with all Council members present. . UNFINISHED BUSINESS Mayor La:khart announced that Item 7.2 would be heard prior to Item 7.1. Emerald Glen Recreation and Aauatic Center Facility Studv PleEse note, this item was heard after Item 7.2 9;54 p.m. 7.1 (210-30/215-30) Parks & Community Services Manager Paul McCreary presented the Staff Report and advised that on April 12, 2005 the City Council held a joint study session with the Parks and Community Services Commission to review options for future community recreation facilities. The Council selected a preferred building program for the Emerald Glen Recreation and Aquatic Complex and directed Staff to report back on the estimated DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETING October 18,2005 PAGE 393 www.ci.du bIill.c.a. liS construction and operational costs of the preferred option. The Consultant and Staff have completed a thorough analysis of the construction costs and probable operational expenditures and revenues. Staff requested that the Council provide comments various alternatives, and schedule a Council workshop to discuss and evaluate funding options. Lauren Livingston, Sports Management Group, presented an outline of the market analysis, preferred space components, opinion of project costs, and financial analysis. The opinion of total project costs, including 15% design and construction contingencies, would be approximately $34 miIlion in today's dollars. Another 15% contingency was added to that, for an approximate total cost of $39.1 million, in 2005 dollars. Total probable operating costs projections ranged from $2.5 milIion to $2.9 milIion annually, in current dollars. That range would be at the higher end as the facility became more successful and, over time, the costs would go up. Revenue was projected at $2.5 million to $2.9 million annually. Generally it would take a couple of years to get to the average revenue level, as programs were added. How the City set its use and fee policies would impact the cost recovery. Mr. McCreary reviewed the Public Facilities Fee Program, as outlined in the Staff Report, and potential construction funding shortfalls of $21.96 million if the Council's preferred option was chosen. Several strategies were available to reduce the funding shortfall to construct a state-of-the-art recreation and aquatic complex. Three reduced alternative building programs, in addition to the Master Plan facility that was in the current Capital Improvement Program, were reviewed. Staff recommended that the Council provide comments regarding the various alternatives presented, as well as schedule a City Council workshop for the purpose of discussing and evaluating funding options. Mayor Lockhart asked if the need for a competitive pool had been researched. Mr. McCreary advised that the existing pool was very shallow and allowed only two starting blocks on the pool deck for practice only. For recreational team and summer program swimmers, it was a great facility; however, Dublin did not have a competitive facility that could accommodate competitive swimming, water polo, diving, or synchronized swimming. Youth have to go outside of Dublin to participate in competitive water sports. City Manager Ambrose advised that the High School Swim Team could not swim in the same manner in Dublin's pool as they do in other pools in terms of competition. The lack of pool depth was prohibitive. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETING October 18, 2005 PAGE 394 www.ci.dlIblin.ca.us Mayor Lockhart asked about safety liability incurred by the City in regards to cardiovascular and weight training machines available for public use. Ms. Livingston advised that liability had not been an issue as most Cities' require an introductory class before using the machines, as well as waiver and release forms. The cost model included supervision in the weight room. Mayor Lockhart asked if the wellness/fitness center that was going into the Gateway Medical Group facility had been taken into consideration. Ms. Livingstone advised yes. Vm. Zika asked if passes would be issued for each recreational use, or one overall pass for all uses. Ms. Livingstone advised that, typically, one pass provided access to everything. The idea was to keep the pass fees as low as possible to make them available to as many people as possible. Typically, there would be some kind of summer-only pass, too. Cm. Oravetz stated that he liked the preferred option, and indicated that funding should be studied. Cm. Hildenbrand stated that she liked the preferred option, as well as Alternative #1. There was a need for a year-around, state-of-the-art recreation facility for our growing, active community. Vm. Zika agreed, but stated that all the options should be considered. The Council discussed the various options and agreed that they should consider if similar facilities were offered at other locations, as well as what programs did not offer revenue or lose money. Mayor Lockhart expressed concern with the ability to accommodate everything and everyone in a neighborhood setting and cautioned against out-sizing the facility for Dublin's own population. Alternative #1 with a few more deletions might work. Sue Flores, Parks & Community Services Commissioner, stated that the Commission's intent was to accommodate as many people as possible, while still drawing in revenue from other areas. DUBLIN CITY COUNCil, MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETING October 18, 2005 PAGE 395 www.cLdublill.ca.us Mayor Lockhart advised that Council would schedule a date for a funding workshop at the end of the meeting. . Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Alternatives please note, this item was heard prior to Item 7. 1 9:12p.m. 7.2 (920-30) Parks & Community Services Director Diane Lowart presented the Staff Report and advised that one of the City Council Strategic Goals for 2004-2005 was to "Expand and enhance Dublin Historic Park." The City contracted with Royston Hanamoto Alley and Abey to develop a site master plan. The purpose of the Dublin Historic Park Master plan was twofold; (1) to assist the Council in determining the land uses for the Dublin Square Shopping Center as part of the Specific Plan process that is underway for the area; and (2) to assist the Council in determining whether the Dublin Square Shopping Center is the appropriate location for a park to fill the existing park deficit. The Council will consider three options for a possible Dublin Historic Park. Each option would include designating a portion or all of the Dublin SquaĊ“ Shopping Center for a park. Option #1 was for the fuIl site; Option #2 was for half site; and Option #3 was for one-third of the site (±$7 million). Each option included the expansion of the cemetery onto land owned by the Dublin Historical Preservation Association. Both the Parks & Community Services and Heritage & Cultural Arts Commissions recommended Option #1. Aditya Advani, Royston Hanamoto AIley and Abey, and Steve Merker, Economic Research Associates, outlined the proposed options and design schemes, as presented in the Staff Report, as well as estimated associated costs. With all general costs, including contingencies and escalating prices, Option #1 was estimated at $25 million; Option #2 was estimated at $11 million; and Option #3 was estimated at $9 million. Ms. Lowart stated that a Council funding workshop was recommended as part of the planning process to identify potential sources of funding if, in fact, this was something the Council wanted to move forward with. Steve Lockhart, Dublin Historical Preservation Association President, stated that the Council had a wonderful opportunity tonight. There was time to talk about the specifics of the project, but the property needed to be acquired immediately. The $2.4 million for DUBUN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGUl,AR MEETING October 18, 2005 PAGE 396 www.ci.dublin.ca.lIs the cemetery could be recouped from the sale of the niches and burial plots, which could be a joint project between the City and the Dublin Historical Preservation Society. Taking that and the $1 million building out of the mix, the project would be dropped to less than $14 million. It was important to lock in the full site program. If it was not done now, there would never be another chance. The Heritage & Cultural Arts and Parks & Community Services Commissions each voted unanimously to approve the full site. It was expensive and there would be a lot of work to determine where the money would come from, but this was an important project. Cm. McCormick stated that the Consultant gave a very thoughtful presentation, and she would like to have a financing workshop to iron out funding possibilities. Option #1 encompassed everything the Council ever wanted. This was our history, and we only had one chance to preserve it. Cm. Oravetz agreed, and noted that it was an excellent location for all residents to enjoy. Cm. Hildenbrand agreed with the full site option, and noted that the specifics could be worked out later. A funding workshop was a good idea. Vm. Zika concurred. Mayor Lockhart expressed concern about the parkland deficits in the western part of Dublin, and agreed that Option # 1 came closest to meeting those needs. She hoped there would be room to look at different options. She did not know the status of the Green Store, but would like Staff to look into that. It was an important piece of the puzzle, as it was the original Green Store. That store came to be because there was water and roads through the area. By acquiring that, it would help to do away with the park deficit in the west. She asked that the Green Store building be taken into consideration, and she would like to explore the funding. There was a great opportunity to work with the Historical Preservation Association to provide more opportunity to residents to remain in Dublin at the end of their life. City Manager Ambrose recommended that, if the Council so chose, a funding workshop date could be scheduled after the discussion regarding the Emerald Glen Recreation and Aquatic Center Facility Study. The Council concurred. . DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETING October 18, 20115 PAGE 397 www.ci.dublill.ca.lIs NEW BUSINESS Braddock and Logan Affordable Housing Proposal to Comply with Inclusionary ZoninS!: Regulations for the Braddock and I.os:&n Development at Fallon Village 10;34 p.m. 8.1 (430-80/450-20) Housing Specialist Julia Abdala presented the Staff Report and advised that the 11 property owners of the Fallon Village area have submitted a request for a Stage 1 Development Plan. At the same time, Braddock and Logan has submitted a request for a Stage 2 Development Plan and a vesting Tentative Map for the Braddock and Logan property, consisting of the northernmost 486 acres of Fallon Village. The Stage 2 submittal is for the creation of 1,043 single-family units. Approval of a Stage 2 Development plan and Vesting Tentative Map will trigger the requirements of the City's Inclusionary Zoning Regulations. Staff is asking the Council to provide direction as to whether the City should: 1) Inform Braddock & Logan that the Council will not waive the requirements of the Inclusionary Zoning Regulations required by the proposal; or 2) By consensus, direct Staff to work with Braddock & Logan to refine the proposal including, in particular, the timing of construction of the proposed affordable units. Ms. Abdala noted that the Staff Report stated that Braddock & Logan did not own the Atlderson property; however, she would like to clarify that they had an option on the property. Mayor Lockhart confirmed that the 26 integrated units would be single-family, and asked how many bedrooms and baths each unit would have. Ms. Abdala advised that they would be 3-4 bedrooms because the ordinance required that affordable units be built similarly to the market rate. Vm. Zika asked how the Developer intended to insure that the 26 secondary units, or granny flats, were rented out to low income people, and could not envision that someone paying $600,000-$800,000 for a home and then rent out a granny unit to a low-income participant. Jeff Lawrence, Braddock & Logan, advised they did not envision that that would actually be the case. The size of the unit would dictate what could be charged for rent. In addition, the secondary granny flat unit was envisioned to be a product that did not exist DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETINGTOctober 18, 2005 PAGE 398 www.lCÎ.dllhlill.ca.lIs today in Dublin. It was envisioned to be something to provide an opportunity to the young people, a family member that wanted to stay in the City, to be home but have their own space as they got on their financial feet. Or, it would be available to a senior family member. The unit itself could not command a huge rent and, therefore, provided itself to a low- and very-low opportunity for those people. Mayor Lockhart stated that whether it was replacing somebody else's need for low income housing or a family member's needs for low income housing, it was still taking a senior out of the mix of needing senior housing or one young person out of the mix of going in with two or three other people to rent. Mr. Lawrence advised that the project was developed to provide three different product types to allow affordability. There were items brought up in the presentation that talked about landscaping and energy expenses, etc. Braddock & Logan has decided that it would be a good idea to complete the landscaping in the rear yards and provide some energy- saving appliances to cut costs, specifically in those units. Instead of feeing their way out of it, they would provide an opportunity to build out 12.5% of the total units in a different, diverse product type that met different social needs. Vm. Zika disagreed, stating that it was an interesting plan but very far away from what Dublin's Housing Ordinance for workforce housing was designed and intended to do. Cm. Hildenbrand asked is Vm. Zika was referring to granny flats only. Vm. Zika stated yes, and advised that he was willing to work with the other ideas, but the granny units did not work for him. He would rather have the money so the City could build some adequate housing. Mayor Lockhart stated that she was always hearing complaints from constituents whose adult children could not afford to live in Dublin. This plan added a different element. It would allow parents to help their children get on their financial feet, as well as allow handicap and seniors citizens some independent living. Different alternatives for living in our community need to be offered. Cm. Hildenbrand concurred and stated that a variety of options, other than multi-unit, needed to be provided. The granny unit proposal almost addressed the controversial condominium conversion issue as an alternative option. She asked if the 88 unit apartment complex would be a mix of market rate and affordable. D1JBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETING October 18, 2005 PAGE 399 www.ci.dublill.ca.lIs Mr. Lawrence advised that all of the units were proposed to be affordable. Braddock & Logan would own and operate the complex without state or local assistance. Cm. Hildenbrand objected to that plan, stating that it went against the Council's plan not to have an area where all of the affordable apartments could be identified. Mr. Lawrence advised that there was additional area on that property in order to accommodate more units, but it was not included as part of this proposal because it was on the Anderson property and part of the Stage 2 plan. In preliminary design, they had the opportunity to build closer to 120-125 units at market rate. It was not part of the affordable proposal for tonight. Cm. Hildenbrand reiterated her concern about the apartment complex being grouped together and having residents stigmatized in that manner. She hoped that the second phase would have market rate around it to make it mixed in. Mr. Lawrence stated that there was additional area to accommodate additional units as market rate. The 88 units would be integrated within the 120-125 units. Cm. McCormick stated that the granny flats would meet a need. Vm. Zika reiterated his concern that the granny unit idea did not meet the needs of the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. Cm. Oravetz noted that the Affordable Housing Ordinance purposely included the flexibility for a Developer to present different alternatives to meet the 12.5% requirement. This was a good plan that provided opportunities for many needs. City Manager Ambrose advised that the practical problem at hand was timing. As Staff went through the Toll projects, market rate units were not allowed to be released until the affordable units were secured because they were not affordable until they were built and the City had the security it needed. If the majority of the Council were in support of the proposal, Staff would still need to work on the "belt and suspenders" with the Applicant to work something that satisfied the City's concerns and worked for the property owner. Mayor Lockhart su,ggested that Staff work with the Applicant to include the landscaping and energy-saving options on the 26 integrated units, which might set a precedent for other affordable projects. There would be opportunities for Staff to work with the DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETING October 18, 2005 PAGE 400uwww.ci.dublill.ca.lIs Applicant regarding timing issues, knowing that it was important to the Council to get those affordable units built as soon as possible. It was also important to enlarge the apartment product into a larger complex that dealt with people of all income levels. Cm. McCormick suggested that Green Building principles be used. On motion of Mayor Lockhart, seconded Cm. McCormick and by majority vote (Vm. Zika opposed), the Council directed Staff to work with Braddock & Logan to: 1) refine their proposal to include landscaping the rear yards and using energy~efficient measures in the homes to bring down the cost of living; 2) work on timing issues and obtain necessary security; 3) study the feasibility of integrating the 88 affordable apartment units into a larger project; and 4) incorporate green building principles, as practical. . After Action Reoort on July 4,2005 Public Safetv Activities 11 :07 p.m. 8.2 (650-60) Assistant City Manager Joni Pattillo presented the Staff Report and advised that the City Council would receive an informational report on the Public Safety Activities associated with the past July 4, 2005 holiday. There was a reduction in calls of service in 2005 compared to 2004. The Council commended Fire and Police Services for their attention to the safety of Dublin citizens during the holiday season. . Consideration of a Commemorative Inscription in Recognition of Cot. James Om. Camp Parks Commander 11 :12 p.m. 8.3 (610-50) City Manager Richard Ambrose presented the Staff Report and advised that Mayor Lockhart requested that the City Council consider commissioning a commemorative inscription in recognition of outgoing Camp Parks Commander, Co\. James Doty. The inscription, which would cost $100, would be engraved on a concrete bench leading up to the Public Safety Memorial located in the courtyard of the Civic Center. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETING October 18, 2005 PAGE 401 www.(Î.dublin.ca.us Cm. McCormick asked if every outgoing Camp Parks Commander would be recognized in this manner. The Council discussed issue and agreed that their service would have to be important enough to be recognized in this manner. Co\. Doty provided outstanding service to the community. Although the previous Commander, Lt. Col. Dawn Lee DeYoung, provided excellent service, the bench did not exist during her command. On motion of Vm. Zika, seconded by Cm. Oravetz and by unanimous vote, the Council approved the commission of a commemorative inscription in recognition of outgoing Camp Parks Commander, Co\. James Doty. + ornER BUSINESS 11:14 p.m. City Manager Ambrose polled the Council for its availability for a 2-hour Joint Planning Commission/City Council meeting on December 13, 2005, at 5:00 p.m. regarding the First Time Homebuyer Program. The Council concurred. City Manager Ambrose polled the Council for its availability for a 2-3 hour workshop regarding historical park and aquatic center funding on November 18, 2005, at 3:00 p.m. The Council concurred. Cm. Oravetz advised that he attended the Administrative Budget and Personnel Committee meeting at Livermore-Amador Valley Transportation Authority today and commended Barbara Duffy for saving the agency $177,000 this year. Cm. McCormick advised that she and Mayor Lockhart attended the League of California Cities Annual Conference last week, which was very informative. Mayor Lockhart advised that she would be attending Col. Doty's retirement dinner on Thursday evening, as well as the Change of Command ceremony on Friday morning at DUBLIN CITY COUNCil, MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETING October 18, 2005 PAGE 402 www.d.dlIblill.ca.lIs 9:00 a.m. She will be presenting a certificate of appreciation to Co\. Doty and advising him of the inscription on the Public Safety Memorial bench. Mayor Lockhart read a letter thanking the City of Dublin for supporting the people of Greater Jackson, Mississippi for its generous donation of $15,000 to the Hurricane Katrina Assistance Fund of the Community Foundation of Greater Jackson. .. @JOURNMENT 11.1 There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 11:22 p.m., to the annual Dublin Information, Inc., meeting to be held immediately following adjournment of the regular meeting. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk ·FIl DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 24 REGULAR MEETING October 18, 2005 PAGE 403 www.(~i.dllblill.ca.lIs