The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About*05-23-1994 CC AgendaMay 23, 1994 City Council Agenda A complete ~cket of information containing Staff Re~rts a~ exhibits re[at~ to eaCh age~a it~ is available for ~b[ic information several days prior to a Council meeting in the City Clerk's Office & also at the Dublin Library. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG 3. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 3.1 June Customer Service Award to Stephanie Main, Recreation Coordinator At this time, ~mbers of the audience are permitt~ to address the City Council on items of interest to the however, in accordance with G~ 54954.2, no ACTION or DISCUSSION shall take place on aw it~ which is NOT on the City Council Agenda. The Council may respo~ briefly to statements made or questions ~s~, or my request Staff to re~rt ~ck at a future meeting concerning the matter. Furthermre, a member of the City Council my take action to direct Staff to place a matter o6 business on a future agama. Any ~rson my arrange with the City Clerk (no later than 11:00 a.m., on the Tuesday preceding a regular ~eting) to have an it~ of concern p[ac~ on the agama for the next regular ~eti.ng. The exceptions u~er which the City Council MY discuss a~/or take action on items not appearing on the agenda are contained in GC 54954.2(b)(1)(2)(3). 4. CONSENT CALENDAR Consent Ca[e~ar items are t~ica[[y non-controversial in nature a~ are considered for a~rova[ ~ the City C~nci[ with one single action. Members of the audience or the City Council who would like an it~ r~oved fr~ the Consent Ca[e~ar for ~rposes of public in~t my request the Mayor to remove the item. 4.1 Minutes: Regular Meeting of May 9, 1994 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve 4.2 Financial Report for Period Ending April 30, 1994 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Receive Report 4.3 East County Area Plan (ECAP) Update Report The Alameda County Board of Supervisors clarified the East County Area Plan's urban and open space policies, and adopted the plano Staff believes that the plan, with clarifications, is consistent with the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Receive Report 4.4Warrant Register ($1,109,579o61) Dated May 23~ 1994 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve 4.5Sale of Remnant Parcels on Dublin Boulevard Extension This is an informational item regarding the sale of the .remnant parcels which came about as a result of the Dublin Boulevard Extension project. Since the adjacent property owners have declined to bid~ Staff is proposing to offer the property for public bid° STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Receive Report 5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATION 5.1 Agenda Items for the next Tri-Valley Council Meeting The City of Livermore will be hosting the next meeting of the Tri-Vatley City Councils on Thursday, July 21st and have requested notification with regard to potential agenda items. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Discuss and provide any items to be placed on the agenda. 6. PUBLIC HEARING 6.1 Request for Variance to Section 2516(m) of the Uniform Building Code On May 9th, the Council held a public hearing and directed Staff to draft a Resolution making findings to.grant a variance to ~the heirs of the Estate of John Young at 7852 StarWardDriVeo The variance would allow foundation posts to remain unanchored to the piers. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Conduct public hearing; deliberate; adopt Resolution granting variance~ 6°2 Zoning Ordinance Amendment to the Planned Development District Provisions PA 94-015 The City of Dublin is proposing to amend the Planned Development (PD) District provisions of the Zoning Ordi- nance to clarify that prezoning or rezoning of property to the PD District may take place independent of the approval of a Land Use and Development Plan and that PD Districts can be applied to any residential or non-residential districts. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Conduct public hearing; deliberate; waive reading and INTRODUCE Ordinance. .... ~ ~. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 7.1 City Council Participation in Pleasanton~s 100th Anniversary Parade Cm. Burton has suggested a theme for the City Council's participation in the Pleasanton parade to be held on June 18th~ He obtained price quotes for sign/banners to be attached to the vehicle in which the Council will be riding° STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Consider Cmo Burton's suggested theme and provide apPropriate direction with regard to ordering sign/banners~ 7.2 City Council Policy Regarding Code Compliance Surveys As a result of concerns raised related to liability exposure, Staff was directed to prepare a report and allow the Council to discuss and determine whether the City should continue to provide code compliance surveys for residents° STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Review issue and take appropriate action. NEW BUSINESS 8.1 Request for Amicus Participation In the case DeVita VSo County of Napa, voters amended the general plan to protect Napa County's agricultural lands. Superior Court held that the challenged initiative was valid. The Court of Appeal found that although a general plan has traditionally been regarded as a matter of local concern, it affects a mixture of statewide and local 'concerns, with a core of local concerns in certain areas and dominant statewide concerns iD others. An amicus brief is being prepared to argue that general plans are a matter of local, not statewide, concern. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize city of Dublin participation in Amicus Brief. 8.2 MTC's Regional Transportation Plan and the Alameda County CMA's Transportation Plan The Alameda County Congestion Management Authority has been working for several years to prepare a Countywide transportation plan which would identify transportation needs and project methods of funding to the year 2010. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission has been pursuing a similar goal for the entire Bay Area and is seeking comments on their draft plan~ This report describes the differences between the 2 plans and makes recommendations to MTC on their proposed plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Transmit letter to MTC: 1) recommend- ing that funding be increased in the Tri-Valley area to an amount based on the proportionate share of the Bay Area population for Track 1 and Tract 2; and 2) stating Dublin supports the need for the West Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station but requests that the additional monies above be assigned to the Route 84 project subject to the improvements being designated to be part of a future highway or expressway between 1-580 and 1-680. 9. OTHER BUSINESS 10. CLOSED SESSION 10.1 Conference with Legal Counsel regarding existing litigation: Dublin vs. Pleasanton Case No. C93-05746 in accordance with Government Code Section 54956.9(a). 10.2 REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION ACTION 11. ADJOURNMENT Agenda Printed May 19, 1994 3=39 PM