Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-24-1988EEGULAENEETING - October 24w 1988 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Monday, October 24, 1988, in the meeting room of the Dublin Library. The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m., by Mayor Linda Jeffery. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Jeffery. Councilmembers Hegarty, Moffatt, Snyder, Vonheeder and Mayor PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Mayor led the Council, Staff and those present in the pledge of alle- giance to the flag. CONSENT CALENDAR On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote, the Council took the following actions: Approved Minutes of Regular Meeting of October 10, 1988; Approved a Request for Proposal for professional landscape architectural services for the planning and design of the Shannon Park Renovation and authorized Staff to advertise for consultants; Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 137 - 88 AMENDING THE BYLAWS AND RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR THE PARK & RECREATION COMMISSION Approved Warrant Register in the amount of $1,145,983.53 FORMATION OF COUNTY SERVICE AREA FOR BRIDGES Assistant City Manager Rankin advised the Council that the County presently maintains 3 estuary bridges that lay within the incorporated limits of the Cities of Oakland and Alameda, but serve the entire County. Special District Augmentation Funds could be used to maintain the bridges if the County forms a County Service Area. This fund was created by State Legislature Assembly Bill 8. Cm. Snyder questioned if this was being formed as the other County Service Areas, whereby we can become a part if we so desire. Regular Meeting October 24, 1988 Mr. Rankin advised that the reason for forming this CSA is to utilize the special district funds. There is no financial impact to the City at this time. The County has committed to negotiate with the Cities if additional funding is required from the Cities. Cm. Snyder stated he wanted to clarify that residents will not see this on their tax bill. On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 138 - 88 CONSENTING TO INCLUSION IN THE ALAMEDA COUNTY, COUNTY SERVICE AREA FOR BRIDGES MEASURE E - DRUG PREVENTION MEASURE Assistant City Manager Rankin explained that Ed Campbell, Chairman of the Alameda County Board of Supervisors, has requested that the City endorse Measure E which has been placed on the November 8th ballot. Measure E would place a $10 parcel tax per benefit unit throughout the County for the purpose of funding Drug Prevention Programs in schools, after school sports, and recreation programs, as well as other activities aimed at discouraging drug use. It is estimated that the City of Dublin would receive funding of $99,262 in the first year of the program if it is approved by the voters. Mayor Jeffery clarified that this amount is to be used for drug prevention and education. Mr. Rankin advised that they consider latchkey programs and recreation programs to be one way of preventing youth from becoming involved in drugs. Cm. Moffatt questioned if the funds would be administered by the City or the County. Mr. Rankin stated that it was his understanding that the funds will be distributed by the County to local agencies. There will most likely be an application process whereby the use of funds must meet their criteria. Cm. Snyder felt it should be pointed out that Dublin's portion of $99,262 will be less 15%. The 15% was to be used for countywide programs and administration. Cm. Vonheeder stated that she attended a session last week at the San Diego League Conference on latchkey and childcare programs. She brought back some brochures which she had given to Diane Lowart to pass on to the Park & Recreation Commission. A city with a population of 15,000 has managed to fund 2 childcare centers with the assistance of a school district in some abandoned school buildings. One of the things that they @*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM-7-311 Regular Meeting October 24, 1988 discovered through this was that their drug problem significantly decreased. We may be able to look to this funding for a similar program in Dublin. Cm. Snyder stated it should be made clear that this is a first as far as this type of program, i.e., prevention rather than remedial. On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Snyder, and by unanimous vote, the Council agreed to endorse Measure E. PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST FOR 20 MINUTE PARKING ZONE IN FRONT OF 6908 SIERRA COURT Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. Ty Tekawa with TJKM advised that the City received a request from the owner of Equinox Press, 6908 Sierra Court, for a small area of 20 minute parking along the curb in front of the building. This company is one of the few businesses along Sierra Court that has in and out trade. On- street parking is generally taken by employees of other businesses in the area. TJKM investigated the request and determined that a 20 minute parking zone for a few cars would not present a safety hazard. Notices have been mailed to other offices in the same building, as well as neighboring properties, advising them of the public hearing. Most of these buildings have on-site parking lots. Cm. Moffatt questioned if other businesses in the area could use this parking. Mr. Tekawa advised that they could. It can be used by anyone for 20 minute parking. No members of the public spoke on this item. Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Snyder, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous vote, the Council waived the reading and INTRODUCED an ordinance establishing a 20 minute parking zone at 6908 Sierra Court. PUBLIC HEARING - REQUEST FOR STOP SIGNS ON SILVERGATE DRIVE @ ROLLING HILLS DRIVE AND ESTABLISHMENT OF NO PARKING ZONE ON SILVERGATE DRIVE ADJACENT TO ROLLING HILLS CIRCLE Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. Staff advised that the City has received a letter from Community Associations Consulting, representing the Silvergate Highlands Townhouses Owners' Association, requesting installation of stop signs on Silvergate @*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM-7-31 2 Regular Meeting October 24, 1988 Drive @ Rolling Hills Drive. The letter explained that there are 2 common areas within the townhouse development which are on opposite sides of Silvergate Drive and are used by all residents. The residents must cross Silvergate in order to use the common areas. The Association members felt it would be safer for the residents crossing'Silvergate Drive if stop signs were installed. TJKM performed a field survey of this area and considered traffic volumes, accident history, sight distance and critical speeds. TJKM's report indicated that while the minimum traffic volume warrants for all- way stop signs for this intersection have not been satisfied, sight distance conditions, especially for drivers on Silvergate Drive turning left onto Rolling Hills Drive or Rolling Hills Circle, are such that TJKM does recommend installation of ~stop signs at this intersection. TJKM felt that the stop signs would preclude the requested 125' of no parking zone south of Rolling Hills Circle on the east side of Silvergate Drive, and therefore, did not recommend this no parking zone. This area is adjacent to the townhouses only, and there is no residential frontage. TJKM also recommended that the suggestion be made to the Townhouses Homeowners' Association that the landscaping be monitored to ensure clear visibility for drivers exiting Rolling Hills Circle, and also that the newspaper racks be moved if at all possible. Ann Books indicated she was in favor of stop signs. help to slow traffic down. She felt they would Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 139 - 88 DESIGNATING PLACEMENT OF STOP SIGNS ON SILVERGATE DRIVE 6 THE INTERSECTION OF ROLLING HILLS DRIVE/ROLLING HILLS CIRCLE The Council determined by a consensus that the requested no parking zone would not be implemented. PUBLIC HEARING - ABANDONMENT OF STUB END OF ROLLING HILLS DRIVE AND ABANDONMENT OF PARCEL A~ TRACT 4991 Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. Staff advised that on October 10th, the Council held public hearings regarding the abandonment of the stub end of Rolling Hills Drive (east of Creekside Drive), and the abandonment of Parcel A of Tract 4991. Both items were continued in order to further research the City's control over the construction and design of a proposed DSRSD pump station to be located on the stub end of Rolling Hills Drive and in order to investigate the subjects of drainage and weed abatement that were raised by the Council and the public. 6*6*6*6*6*6*@*6*6*@*6*6*6*6*6*6*6*@*6*6*6*6*6*6*6*6*6*6*6*6*6*6*6*6*6*6*6 CM-7-313 Regular Meeting October 24, 1988 Staff provided background information and advised that at the time that Tract 4991 (K&B single family homes) was developed, Rolling Hills Drive was perceived as being a through street that would cross Creekside Drive and continue east into the yet-undeveloped Tract 5402 (Dolan School site). The City accepted the dedication of Rolling Hills Drive, including the stub end east of Creekside Drive. Because the City felt that the street connection might also be located elsewhere along Creekside Drive, the developer was requested to offer the entire Parcel A for dedication; however, Parcel A was not accepted at the time the Final Map was approved. When Tract 5402 was developed as Vista Green Terrace, Iglesia Drive became the connector street. At the meeting of October 10th, the rejection of a portion of Parcel A was rescinded and the portion of Iglesia Drive that crosses Parcel A was accepted. With regard to the DSRSD pump station, Staff advised that a meeting was held with DSRSD and it was determined that the only .structure to appear above ground would be a couple of vent pipes and caps that would project about 1' above the surface. The pump station, similar to one existing on Shannon Avenue, appear to make very little noise and were observed to be audible only if one stands right next to it. At the October 10th meeting, several residents commented on the condition of the open space portions of the Tract which are to ultimately be turned over to the homeowners' association. The association has hired the firm of Metro Management to maintain this area when they receive it. While this area would not be subject to the Property Maintenance Ordinance, weeds (as well as rubbish, refuse and dirt) may be abated according to the provisions of Government Code Sections 39560 et. seq. The Dougherty Regional Fire Authority is able to react to complaints regarding fire hazards due to weeds and other materials. Drainage concerns and problems were addressed. Storm drains have now been completed through the Dolan site, and much of Bordeaux Estates has been developed. Tract 5402 is still under the developer's one year warranty and Castle Construction has been asked to make repairs to Mr. Walker's catch basin (8042 Iglesia Drive), in order to minimize the possibility of future problems. Staff summarized that since Parcel A is entirely within the control of K & B, insofar as maintenance is concerned, and since the City can use this for no purpose other than street right-of-way, the City should adopt a resolution abandoning Rolling Hills Drive east of CreekSide Drive. The stub end of Rolling Hills Drive was accepted by the City as Street right-of-way, but is not needed as a public street. DSRSD has requested reservation of an easement for water lines and appurtenant structures. If the City does not abandon this stub end of street right-of-way, there would be some control over the construction of the pump station; however, the City would then be obligated to maintain that piece of property and would be subject to claims if any injuries were suffered on the property. @*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM-7-31 4 Regular Meeting October 24, 1988 City Engineer ThOmpson showed slides of several pump stations, and then introduced Bob Whitley, District Engineer with Dublin San Ramon Services District. Mr. Whitley explained why DSRSD is proposing a pump station and how they got to this point. The proposal is to build an underground water pump station. The structure will be built initially to house 2 pumps and will eventually contain 3. They will have about 20 hp motors and some ventilation fans to clear the underground atmosphere, and will be about 10' x 20'. Most of it will be underground with 2 protrusions. They understand that various concerns have been expressed regarding the affects on the neighborhood. They will be attempting to take all of the concerns into consideration. Mr. Whitley showed an artists rendering. He stressed that this was a preliminary concept and the final design would respond to neighborhood concerns. He explained that this pump station has been planned since 1982-83 when the land was originally proposed to be developed. There was an agreement between the developers and the District. Fire Chief~Harold Ritter explained that weed abatement is very different for the hillside development as opposed to the flatlands. They are currently addressing the various means and it appears that everything that will work has some negatives associated with it. Mike Hammer who lives in the K & B development stated that when he bought his house, he was promised that the open space would remain. The only open space is'pretty much just discarded space. It now appears that Bordeaux has'gone belly up. The entire area looks like a wasteland and it is a fire hazard. He questioned why they are paying $14/month in homeowners association fees. Alfred Bilotti, 8116 Creekside Drive, indicated that he did not understand why this issue keeps coming up; the property belongs to Tract 4991. It should, go to the homeowners of K & B. The property should be turned over to the homeowners association. Chris Books indicated that he owns the property directly west at 8078 Creekside. When he purchased the property he paid a lot premium which was for an unobstructed view. It was represented to him that Parcel A would be deeded to the homeowners association. Bill Myers~ 8136 Creekside Drive stated he felt the property should be deeded to the homeowners association. John Lewis stated that he lives on the corner of Creekside Drive & Iglesia Drive. He has the small lot adjoining his property which is a weed farm. He would like to have it included in his lot.' Mr. Thompson advised that it has been expressed by K & B that this piece of property will be deeded to Mr. Lewis, once the City abandons the offer of dedication. @*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM-7-31 5 Regular Meeting October 24, 1988 Gary Lofren, 8058 creekside Drive indicated that he paid a lot of money for his view lot and was told that the parcel in question would remain open. John Walker advised that he was impressed with the City .street dividers that have been put in. He felt that if K & B wants this land, they should assume liability and landscape it. He questioned what the homeowners association would be doing with it. Jeff Grist, 8050 Iglesia Drive stated that whatever is done, there needs to be a decision made. He was told that there is no premium for a view unless the people have it in their contract. If he decides to plant trees in his back yard, they could eventually obstruct someone's view. If this strip is public property, anyone can go on it and anyone would be liable if something happens. Ann Books indicated she lives over on the Creekside Drive side. The way the houses below are situated, it will take many years for trees to grow enough to block views. The'problem they have with seeing this property being given to the people below, is that as soon as they get the property they will put their fences up and trees will be planted and their view will be completely blocked. Currently, they can't even see the rooftops of the homes below them. If they put an 8' fence at the top of the street, however, this will affect their view. She indicated that the hills were there before these people bought their homes. If any children go there and play and get hurt, it is the responsibility of the association. She did not feel that the land should belong to personal individuals. Mayor Jeffery.explained that the Council's action at this meeting would not deed'this property to anyone. The issue before the Council is whether or not the City should release the street easement on the property. Lee Thompson stated that this is an offer of dedication which has been rejected by the City. What we are saying on Parcel A is that we have no need for a street anymore, since Iglesia now goes through. K & B currently owns the property, but there is a clouded title because of the offer of an easement to the City. Mr. Grist questioned if the beautification laws of the City would apply if they take over the property. He also asked if there was a time limit on when they would have to landscape it. Mayor Jeffery advised that the question of weed abatement could be addressed, but not the landscaping. Jim Levine, representing K & B stated he wished to reiterate that they simply are trying to tie up loose ends. They are quite concerned about K & B owners above Creekside Drive with regard to maintaining their unobstructed view. This is why they have not turned the property over to individual property owners. They want to turn the land over to the @*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM-7-31 6 Regular Meeting October 24, 1988 homeowners association. He has been in touch with management of the associationl and they have a draft letter all ready to.send, pending the Council's action at this meeting. Mr. Levine stated that it is hoped that the homeowners association will accept the offer. K & B will comply with fire regulations and clean up the parcel, but they do not intend to keep it. They are not in the landholding business.- Currently, each property owner's payment of $14/mon~h does not go to maintain this parcel. Cm. Vonheeder questioned the intention of K & B with regard to the property adjoining 7925 Iglesia Drive. Mr. Levine indicated that the homeowner has been approached, and it is their intention to deed the property to this property owner. This particular property dOes not obstruct anyone's view,~ City Attorney Nave advised that there may be a legal way to 'accomplish everyone's desires, assuming that the homeowners association did not want to accept this offer from K & B. This would be for K & B to deed the land to the contiguous landowners and impose an equitable servitude restricting any'fence from being visible at a plane equal to the elevation of the adjoining sideWalk on Creekside Drive. Klm Hammer, 7859 Creekside Drive indicated she would like to see the small parcel behind, her house turned over to the property owner of 7925 Iglesia Drive, in order that the property can be landscaped. John Walker questioned why the City Council is letting K & B build houses then leave this piece of garbage~ They should landscape it with ivy or ice plant and put in an irrigation system. Bill Myers advised that some of the difficulty is that people are wondering where their $14/month is going. They aren't sure if K & B has major control of the association, or whether they still have to wait for the other development to occur. Mr. Levine advised that K & B has absolutely no interest in the community association~any longer. Mr. Thompson advised that there is a homeowners association which has hired a management firm and they have a board of directors. He advised that he did not know who is on this board. Mr. Levine stated that a management group was hired by the community association to run the association. He indicated that they are in existence and'are not controlled by Bordeaux; however, they are waiting for Bordeaux to complete their landscaping to merge the two. Mr. Levine advised that he had a listing of the board of directors in his office if the people wanted to contact him there. @*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM-7-31 7 Regular Meeting October 24, 1988 Mr. Bilotti of Creekside Drive stated he felt sorry for the people who live down below because they say that people walk on the sidewalk and look down at their homes and see their pools, etc. When then bought their property, they also didn't know that anyone would be living above them. He felt the conditions behind his house were much worse.than what these people have. Mayor Jeffery requested that the comments be kept to the subjeCt at hand. Mr. Bilotti stated that because Bordeaux Estates have the most number of votes on the association, they control the board. Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. Cm. Vonheeder questioned if there were any requirements in the Conditions of Approval for K.& B which would'require them to landscape the open space prior to its dedication'to the homeowners association. Mr. Thompson advised that the first tentative map was done by Nielsen with 7 individual subdivisions. The first part was just houses that were sold to K & B and the open space all went with Bordeaux Estates. Bordeaux then subdivided their 3 parcels and I has since been defaulted on and has gone to another entity. K & B was required to develop a land- scaping plan for the open space above Creekside Drive. Bordeaux is required to put trees in as part of their development. Cm. Vonheeder stated there is nothing to keep K & B from deeding this land to the homeowners, even though it has a clouded title due to the City's easement. City Attorney'Nave stated that if the Council adopts tonight's resolutions, there will no longer be a cloud on it. Cm. Snyder felt the only question here is whether the City intends to develop a street. The only question is are we going to use the easement. Cm. Vonheeder stated the point she wanted to make is that ownership is not the issue. Even the maintenance of the space is not the City's issue to deal with. ~ Cm. Moffatt felt the reason for holding the easement was for the City to have some say regarding the type of structure for the pump station which will be put in by DSRSD. Cm. Hegarty stated that DSRSD must apply for an encroachment permit and at that time we can put restrictions on it. If we give up the easement, they do not have to come to us for a permit. Cm. Hegarty expressed concern that people ~are bringing up issues that don't relate to the issue at hand. The County approved this in 1978, and by the time the final map was approved it was too late to make any adjustments to the open space. He questioned why the City did not have information on file related to the homeowners association. @*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM-7-31 8 Regular Meeting October 24, 1988 On motion of Cm. Snyder, seconded by CTM. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 140 - 88 and VACATING A PUBLIC STREET (ROLLING HILLS DRIVE EAST OF CREEKSIDE DRIVE) RESOLUTION NO. 141 - 88 VACATING PORTIONS OF PARCEL A OF TRACT 4991 MEASURE AA - EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT BOND Recreation Director Lowart advised that the East Bay-Regional Park District has asked that cities consider lending their support to Measure AA, the Regional Open Space, Wildlife, Shoreline and Park Bond. The City's Park & Recreation Commission reviewed the provisions of Measure AA at their 0ctober-ll, 1988 meeting, and have recommended that the City go on record in support of the bond measure. If approved by the voters, this proposed $225 million bond measure would be issued in increments of $45 million each at 3-year intervals between 1989 and 2001. Each bond would have a lifetime of 25 years. Seventy- five percent of the bond sale proceeds would be used by the Regional Park District and the remaining 25% would be distributed to local park and recreation agencies within the District on a per capita population basis, to be used for local projects. The maximum tax rate required to service the bond debt would be $.01 per $100 assessed valuation. The beginning annual cost would be $5.72 for a property assessed at $100,000. Average annual household cost for the total bond issue would be $5.63, or $.47 per month. The highest cost would be $.81 per month in the year 2001, with progressively lower rates thereafter as the bonds are fully retired. Ms. Lowart advised that preliminary estimates indicate that Dublin's share of the bond proceeds would be $639,303. These funds could be used to offset the approximate $1,226,560 in unfunded park projects in the 1988-93 Capital Improvement Program. Cm. Snyder asked is Ms. Lowart could elaborate on the $56 million figure that was indicated on literature to be the amount that would be shared by cities, special districts and service areas. He questioned if this was a built in' carrot to get cities to buy into the program. Ms. Lowart advised that this is 25% of the $225 million bond. When East Bay Regional Park District initially talked about doing a bond, they went to city and park and recreation people asking for their support and @*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@,@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM-7-319 Regular ~eeting October 24, 1988 originally proposed a 20% payback ~to the cities. At one time, the cities were asking for close to 50%, and since the East Bay Park District is sponsoring the measure, they compromised at 25%. Doug Abbott, 8206 Rhoda Avenue, Chairman of the Tri-Valley Regional Sierra Club, advised the Council that the Sierra Club endorses the park bond measure. They feel it is vitally important to acquire this land now before it goes.into development and before it gets anymore expensive. He pointed out that the majority of the City Councils in both Contra Costa and Alameda Counties have endorsed Measure AA. Cm. Vonheeder asked if it is the Park District's intent to acquire any public lands already owned by the flood district or Alameda County, etc., or just private lands~ Bruce Walker, the Campaign Chairman for Measure AA, indicated that he does not work for the Park District, but rather for'the campaign. They are actually addressing their master plan, and he suspected that it would be mostly private land. There are 50 different projects that would be funded by the bond, as well as 139 miles of trails. Cm. Moffatt questioned if the money will be primarily to buy land or to develop parks. Mr. Walker stated it is primarily to buy. Acquisition is the primary thought on these monies. The East Bay Regional Parks had 12 million visitors last year. This is more than Yosemite, Grand Canyon and Yellowstone combined. This is a 25 year plan and looks toward the future. Cm. Vonheeder stated it was her understanding that a couple of years ago they were the largest park district in the United States in terms of acres owned. Marjorie LeBar, 11707 Juarez Lane stated she was present representing the Preserve'Area Ridgelands Committee, which has been active in the Valley since 1972, and they urged the Council to endorse Measure AA. Mayor Jeffery felt the Council basically had 3 options in dealing with this item. They could endorse the measure,, take no position, or not endorse it. Cm. HegartY stated he is all for parks, but was concerned with what they will do with it. You can fly over any state and observe that there is a lot of barren land. Some of the land you can't even get to. He indicated he would like more discussion on what they are actually going to do. He would rather see money going into providing better access for the general public. Both Mayor Jeffery and Cm. Vonheeder stated this is of. concern to them also. Not a lot of effort by the District has been put into developing existing lands. @*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM-7-320 Regular Meeting October 24, 1988 Mr. Walker stated this is to implement their master plan. They did a similar thing in 1934 in that they had a vision of the future. Ms. LeBar advised that specific portions of the master plan are to provide good public access. ..~ CTM. Hegarty stated that most of the parks that Dublin has developed were on land that was dedicated to the City. Cm. Moffat~ felt that passive parks, have their place also, as part of the ecological balance of living in this area' On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by CTM. Snyder, and by majority vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 142 - 88 · SUPPORTING MEASURE AA, EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT REGIONAL OPEN SPACE, WILDLIFE, SHORELINE AND pARK BOND Mayor Jeffery and Cm. Hegarty abstained from voting on this issue. OTHER BUSINESS San Ramon Valley Senior Council Cm. Snyder expressed concern regarding a letter received from Marge Stout with regard to the San Ramon Valley. Senior Council. He questioned what Dublin's responsibility is in 'this area. The letter appears to be a threat or coersion. If we participate, what is the benefit to us? Recreation Director Lowart advised that Staff is preparing to bring a report to the. next meeting. She stated that Dublin does not have a direct responsibility to this group, what has happened is that prior to incorporation of both Dublin and San Ramon, the group met here in Dublin. Although Dublin's activities are included in their newsletter, the activities are primarily fOr Contra Costa County, which is appropriate since the major funding is from Contra Costa County. Ms. Lowart reiterated that this will be a future agenda item. Letters from Joseph Stawicki. Cm. Snyder stated he was quite upset over allegations made in 2 letters that were forwarded to the Alameda County Board of Supervisors from Mr. Joseph Stawicki. Staff was directed to prepare a letter informing Mr. Stawicki of'his misunderstandings. ************************************ CM-7-321 Regular Meeting October 24, 1988 Escondido Civic Center Cm. Vonheeder stated that while'attending the League of California Cities conference in San Diego last week, some of the Councilmembers had an opportunity to visit EscondidO's new Civic Center. Escondido has produced some'informational brochures related to their new center and Cm. Vonheeder suggested that as we get closer to completion, Dublin should consider a similar approach. .. Tri-Valle¥ Transportation Committee Cm- Vonheeder indicated she had just~been advised that the subcommittee meeting was changed.from last week to this coming Wednesday evening. She would be unable to .attend and felt that someone on the CoUncil as well as Staff should be in attendance. The meeting will be in Pleasanton at 7:00 p.m. No member of the City Council indicated that they could be in attendance. Lee Thompson will be attending as a Staff person. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 9:25 p.m. **** ATTEST: Regular Meeting October 24, 1988