Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-21-1987ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING - July 21~ 1987 An adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Tuesday, July 21, 1987, in the west room of the Shannon Community Center. The meeting was called to order at 7:05 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 Investment Report for June 30, 1987, in the amount of $18,740,999.00. Approved Cal I.D. Contract Agreement and Authorized Mayor to execute the Agreement. Awarded bid Contract No. 87-5, Dougherty Road Fence at Camp Parks ($17,326), to Central Fence Company, and authorized Mayor to execute Agreement. Reviewed Dublin's Single Audit Report for Fiscal Year 85/86, including Report of Internal Controls, Report on Compliance, and Accountant's Report on Supplementary Schedule at Federal Assistance, and accepted the reports as presented. Approved City Manager's Employment Agreement, and authorized Mayor to execute Agreement; and approved Budget Change Form. Awarded bid Contract No. 87-6, Kolb Park Improvements ($621,329), to Valley Crest Landscape based on inclusion of all bid alternates, and authorized Mayor to execute the Agreement° Adopted CM-6-217 Regular Meeting July 21, 1987 RESOLUTION NO. 50 - 87 A RESOLUTION APPROVING PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S REPORT CONFIRMING DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT CITY OF DUBLIN STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 51 - 87 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING TIME AND PLACE OF HEARING PROTESTS IN RELATION TO PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS CITY OF DUBLIN STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT Denied claim submitted by State Farm Insurance, #0008DU, and directed Staff to notify the Claimant and the City's Insurance Provider. Authorized the Mayor to execute the Agreement for Distribution of "Measure B" Funds and appropriate the 1987/88 allocation to the Reserve Fund for Street Improvements. Authorized the Recreation Director to attend the National Recreation and Park Association 1987 Congress for Recreation and Parks to be held in New Orleans, Louisiana, September 18-21, 1987. Authorized the Mayor to execute the Addendum to the Kolb Park Landscape Architectural Services Agreement. Approved Warrant Register in the amount of $390,680.95. Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 52 - 87 A RESOLUTION APPROVING PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S REPORT, CONFIRMING DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT CITY OF DUBLIN LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 83-2 RESOLUTION NO. 53 - 87 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING TIME AND PLACE OF HEARING PROTESTS IN RELATION TO PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS CITY OF DUBLIN LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 83-2 At the request of Cm. Hegarty the Minutes for the meetings of June 16, June 22, and June 23, 1987, were removed from the Consent Calendar. CH-6-218 Regular Meeting July 21, 1987 Cm. Hegarty referred to page CM-6-196 of the Minutes of June 22, 1987, and stated that he had made a point of emphasizing at that meeting that there was already a Planned Development for the entire Enea Plaza property. Therefore, the City Council was acting on a request to amend an existing Planned Development. Although the new Planned Development request sets forth rules and regulations for only a portion of the original site, the new Planned Development request is an amendment to the existing Planned Development covering the entire Enea Plaza site. This supports the concept that conditions related to the entire Planned Development designation are appropriate. Councilmembers Snyder and Vonheeder indicated that they recalled Cm. Hegarty's comments. Mr. Rankin suggested it would be appropriate to add this statement to page CM-6-198 of the Minutes. Cm. Hegarty referred to page CM-6-211 of the Minutes of June 23, 1987, and said that at the end of the public hearing he had indicated he agreed with everything presented regarding the budget, with the exception of Staff's recommendation related to the Engineering Department. He stated that at that meeting he had asked that his disagreement with the recommendation be reflected in the minutes. Cm. Hegarty then referred to page CM-6-206 of the Minutes of June 22, 1987. He noted that he recalled some dicussion over the~'~wording of the motion related to whether the fireworks issue would be an advisory vote or an initiative. Subsequent to that meeting Cm. Snyder had requested that Cm. Hegarty allow for reconsideration of his motion. Cm. Hegarty said the minutes of the meeting where the motion was made do not reflect the flavor of what took place. Cm. Snyder said he thought the Minutes did reflect that discussion. He referred to the third paragraph on page CM-6-206 of the June 22, 1987, Minutes and the discussion of fireworks on page CM-6-204 of the June 23, 1987, Minutes. Cm. Hegarty said his concern was that he recalled that he just wanted to get it on the ballOt, and that he didn't think the minutes reflected that his motion was to put it on the ballot to see what the people would say. Cm. Moffatt said he would like to see it as an initiative, not as an advisory action. Mayor Jeffery referred to page CM-6-206, and suggested that a correction to the Minutes be added prior to the paragraph outlining the motion by Cm. Hegarty. Mr. Rankin advised that a review of the tape recording indicated that Cm. Hegarty had made a motion to put the issue on the ballot. At that point Cm. Snyder asked if he would consider having it as a Council initiative. Cm. Hegarty had responded "yes" and Cm. Moffatt asked if that was a motion. Cm. Hegarty responded "yes", and Cm. Moffatt then seconded the motion. CM-6-219 Regular Meeting July 21, 1987 On motion by Cm. Hegart~ the Minutes of the Regu] 1987, were approved inc] PUBLIC HEARING DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN ~.ND ASSOCIATED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT , seconded by Cm. Snyder, and by a unanimous vote, ar Meetings of June 16, June 22, and June 23, uding the amendments discussed. Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing. Mr. Tong said that discussion of the Dublin Downtown SPecific Plan and Associated General Plan Amendment had been continued from the City Council meetings of May 11 and May 26, 1987. He indicated that the Draft Specific Plan included a revised Table D, Estimated Implementation Costs, which specified amounts designated in the City's current Capital Improvement Program. He reviewed the chart contained within the Staff Report, out- lining the implementation strategy, the estimated annual dollar costs and estimated Staff time required. Mr. Tong said it was Staff's recommenda- tion that the Council provide conceptual approval on each section of the Draft Plan and associated General Plan Amendement, and the implementation Strategy; adopt the Resolution approving the Negative Declaration; adopt the Resolution adopting the Dublin Downtown Specific Plan and Associated General Plan Amendment; and direct Staff to bring back to the Council time frames for conceptually approved implementation strategies. Mr. Ambrose requested that the CounCilmembers reach closure on eaCh element of the Plan as it is reviewed. Comments were received on the following elements as indicated: CIRCULATION ELEMENT: Cm. Moffatt inquired whether or not consideration had been given to locating a street running parallel to 1-580, from Regional Street to Howard Johnson's Hotel. Mr. Kinzel said tht a street next to 1-580 was not specifically considered. He indicated that the original goal and purpose of the proposed street was to allow traffic originating in or distinct to that area to circulate on a street parallel to Dublin Boulevard. He said any type of connection would satisfy that goal, including the street suggested by Cm. Moffatt. He indicated that a street located more to the center of the block would attract more traffic and pull more traffic off Dublin Boulevard. The proposed street was also in an area where buildings are not presently located. Cm. Moffatt said since there is a great deal of accessible land parallel to 1-580, he hoped his suggestion would be considered. CM-6-220 Regular Meeting July 21, 1987 Mr. Cannon stated that if the street were installed as suggested by Cm. Moffatt, it could disrupt hotel and restaurant parking spaces and the Enea office buildings. Additionally, he said not too many other properties would benefit from a street parallel to the freeway. Mr. Cannon said one of the major considerations is you would be involved in condemning four buildings in order to obtain the property for the road suggested by Cm. Moffatt. He said this would be a very expensive solution, and would not accomplish much more than what has been suggested in the Draft Plan. Pat Costello, representing Robert Wolverton of Crown Chevrolet, asked that the proposed road be moved to the back of the property line. He said Crown Chevrolet is in a growth mode, and that property would be an asset to Crown. Mr. Ambrose said that the street indication was not a precise line. The City Engineering Department will be studying it this year. The Councilmembers indicated their concurrence with the Circulation Element of the Dublin Downtown Specific Plan. PARKING ELEMENT: Cm. Hegarty questioned the suggestion that excess parking existed in the downtown area. He cited the Orchard Supply Hardware parking lot as an example, and expressed concern that parking lots in the downtown area not be over-developed. Mr. Cannon advised that the study was done during the Christmas season, which is the busiest time of the year. He said the suggestion was not that a blanket action be taken, but that on an indivual basis the determination be made whether or not to eliminate some of the excess parking. Mayor Jeffery pointed out that the Council had the option to consider each area on an individual basis. Cm. Moffatt referred to item C. 1), page 11, of the Parking Element, and asked if "joint utilization of parking" was a mandate. Mr. Tong clarified that this would be done by mutual agreement between the property owners. The Councilmembers indicated their concurrence with the Parking Element of the Draft Plan. LAND USE PLAN: Mr. Tong explained that the implementation of the policies included within the Land Use Plan would occur within the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. Regular Meeting CM-6-221 July 21, 1987 Cm. Hegarty asked what was being proposed to encourage automobile dealerships to remain within the City. He directed his question to Pat Costello, representative from Crown Chevrolet. Mr. Costello said the feeling Crown Chevrolet was receiving was that the City is very opposed to automobile dealerships. He said they were getting pinched, both by the widening of Dublin Boulevard and by the installation of a road in back of their property. He said Crown Chevrolet is a family business and they want to keep it in the family and pass it on to the next generation. He said it was not their intent to leave the area or the property on which Crown currently exists. In response to Cm. Hegarty's question, Mr. Tong said that initially the City would not implement any policy that would restrict the continued operation of automobile dealerships in the downtown area. Cm. Hegarty assured Mr. Costello that the City is not opposed to auto- mobile dealerships. The Councilmembers indicated their concurrence with the Land Use Element of the Draft Plan. Mr. Tong referred to Table C, Development Standards, on page 36 of the Draft Plan, and said that discussion had been held at the Planning Commission level regarding the maximum Allowable Building Height. He said the downtown area is broken into 11 development zones, and that each zone has been identified with various land uses. He said the particular dicussion with the Commission related to Zones 3 and 4, in which the Downtown Committee had recommended an allowable building height of up to 75'. He advised that the Planning Commission recommended the height be lowered to 45', and that anything exceeding 45' be considered through the Conditional Use Permit process, with a maximum height of 75'. Mr. Cannon indicated that a 75' building could either be considered appro- priate for a five-story office building or a seven-story hotel. He said the number of feet per story varied depending upon the use. Additionally, he said the properties involved are fairly small, and the taller height was recommended in order to provide for adequate parking space. Cm. Hegarty stated that he would prefer not to set a limit on the height, but that if a proposal is received, it should be presented to the City Council for review. Mr. Tong advised that to accomplish what Cm. Hegarty was suggesting, the Draft Plan could be amended, requiring that a Planned Development be acted on by the City Council. He said another alternative would be to establish this as a Conditional Use Permit procedure, but that normally Conditional Use Permits are final at the Planning Commission level. The Councilmembers generally concurred with Cm. Hegarty's recommendation that proposals should be submitted to the Councilmembers for review. CM-6-222 Regular Meeting July 21, 1987 Cm. Hegarty referred to the letter from Bedford Properties. Mr. Tong said the suggestion is being presented that page 29 be reworded to indicated that a mix of uses integrating commercial uses and transit related parking will be encouraged in this location. Cm. Hegarty expressed concern regarding Mr, Bedford's desire not to have the remainder of his property encumbered by that which is proposed within the Draft Plan. Mr. Ambrose responded that the proposed new language, which refers to a mix of uses, would not restrict Mr. Bedford from typical commercial uses he may desire for that property. Cm. Hegarty asked for clarification regarding the .30 or .35 Floor Area Ratio. ~ Mr. Cannon said the intent was to limit the intensitY of building, but to retain flexibility if a proposed use would not generate additional traffic. He explained that most one story buildings average approximately .25 to .31, with very little landscaping. Mr. Tong cited the Dublin Town & Country Center as one which has a Floor Area Ratio of .25. Cm. Hegarty said he was pleased with the appearance of the Dublin Town & Country Shopping Center, and would like to see the rest of the City look the same. Cm. Moffatt said if more landscaping were required, the cost of the business would increase. In response to a comment by Mayor Jeffery, Mr. Ambrose said if Mr. Jeha had built two-story buildings instead of one-story bUildings, the landscaping would be basically the same but the Floor Area Ratio would have been a great deal higher and more parking spaces would have been re~aired. Mr. Cannon said that if the Floor Area Ratio was increased for Bedford, the City would probably have to deal with other property owners also requesting increased Floor Area Ratios. Cm. Hegarty asked about the Planned Development provision. Mr. Tong said if the City Council wanted to consider proposed projects on a Planned Development basis, language to that effect should be incorporated into the Downtown Plan. He stated that the Conditional Use Permit process could be utilized if the Councilmembers wanted the decision to be final at the Planning Commission level, or the Planned Development process could be utilized if the Councilmembers wanted to make the final decision. There was discussion regarding the necessity for each project to be consistent with the provisions of the Specific Plan. Regular Meeting CM-6-223 July 21, 1987 Mr. Nave recommended that the following statement be incorporated into the Downtown Plan which would provide the City Council with the option to increase the maximum height and maximum floor area ratio of Planned Developments: "Provided, however, that a Planned Development having a height and floor area ratio greater than set forth in this plan may be allowed provided that it is otherwise consistent with the policies set forth in this Plan and provides for additional public amenities such as, but not lmited to, landscaping, plazas, water elements and street furniture." The Councilmembers indicated their concurrence with the Land Use Element, contingent upon the incorporation of the statement provided by the City Attorney. CENTRAL BLOCK IMPROVEMENT PLAN ELEMENT Mr. Tong stressed that it would be Staff's desire to work jointly with property owners and tenants in accomplishing the improvements outlined in the Central Block Improvement Plan. He advised that most of the items listed are not public improvements. Cm. Moffatt asked if an incentive would be provided to obtain the "co- operation of land owners". Mr. Tong said the City would point out to the tenants and owners ways in which they would benefit by the implementation of the Plan, particularly in regards to potentially reducing the parking requirements. The Councilmembers indicated their concurrence with the Central Block Improvement Plan. URBAN DESIGN IMPROVEMENTS PLAN Mayor Jeffery inquired about the possibility of listing in priority order the different aspects of the Urban Design Improvements Plan. Mr. Tong indicated that Staff would retUrn to the Council with a potential priority ranking and time frame, which could be modified by the Council. Mayor Jeffery stressed that she felt the visual changes which would tie things together should be a priority. In response to an inquiry by Mayor Jeffery, Mr. Ambrose said the business license program was purely a regulatory tool and the funds generated by that would be the actual cost of the business license program. In response to an inquiry by Mayor Jeffery, Mr. Tong said the Restaurant Row Strategies would not be totally implemented during the upcoming year, but owners of the existing restaurants could be encouraged to set up a restaurant association to actively promote Amador Plaza Road as a restaurant row. ~ The Councilmembers indicated their concurrence with the Urban Design Improvements Plan element of the Draft Plan. CM-6-224 Regular Meeting July 21, 1987 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (Business License Program) Cm. Hegarty said he had a concern regarding the Business License Program, and referred to previous conversations held several years ago. He said at that time he stated that if he ever agreed with this concept, it would not be for the purpose of generating additional funds. Mr. Ambrose said the proposal covers the direct cost of a business license program and would not generate additional money. In response to an inquiry by Cm. Moffatt, Mr. Ambrose said a meeting had been held with representatives from the Chamber of Commerce, who suggested that a committee be established for the purpose of implementing a business license program. Mr. Ambrose indicated to them that if the City goes forward with such a program, the Chamber will be contacted. Cm. Snyder called attention to the fact that although there may be 1,600 businesses within the City, only 400 are members of the Chamber of Commerce, and so we are not really yet tapping the City's resources. Cm. Vonheeder had long discussions last year with Bill Foster and told him that the City was more interested in using a business license program as a way of monitoring this. She said Mr. Foster was positive as long as this was not tied to gross receipts. The Councilmembers indicated their concurrence with the Business Licenses Program element of the Draft Downtown Plan. (Downtown Promotion Program) Mr. Tong said a fair amount of Staff time would be associated with this particular item during the first year, and that on-going Staff time both in the Planning and Finance Departments would occur. In response to an inquiry by Cm. Moffatt, Mr. Tong said Staff would have to come back with the particular dollar amount associated with Staff time, as well as whether or not we factor indirect costs. In response to an inquiry by Mayor Jeffery, Mr. Ambrose said the person who would handle this would not be the same as the one who handled the business license program. He said this person would Probably work with the business associations. The Councilmembers indicated their concurrence with the Downtown Promotion Program element of the Draft Plan. (Parking Lot Landscaping Program and Signing and Graphics Improvement Program) The Councilmembers indicated their concurrence with theSe two elements of the Draft Plan. CM-6-225 Regular Meeting July 21, 1987 (Downtown Beautification Awards Program) The Councilmembers indicated their concurrence with the Downtown Beautification Awards Program element of the Draft Plan. Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing. On motion by Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by a unanimous vote, the Councilmembers conceptually approved each section and implementation strategy of the Dublin Downtown Specific Plan and Associated General Plan Amendment; and adopted RESOLUTION NO. 54 - 87 APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION CONCERNING THE DUBLIN DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN AND ASSOCIATED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT RESOLUTION NO. 55 - 87 ADOPTING THE DUBLIN DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN AND ASSOCIATED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT Staff will prepare time frames for the conceptually approved implementa- tion strategies, and will present them to the Councilmembers at a Council meeting during the month of September. REPORT FROM CITY ATTORNEY ON SPECIAL ELECTION RELATED TO FIREWORKS Mr. Nave identified three options available for calling a special election related to the fireworks issue. On motion by Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by a four-to-one vote (Cm. Moffatt opposed), the Councilmembers agreed to reconsider the motion originally made by Cm. Hegarty on June 22, related to a special election on the sale and use of fireworks. Cm. Hegarty moved to present the issue of fireworks to the public as an advisory election, which would enable the Council to retain the authority to establish a Council Initiative related to the sale, use and possession of fireworks. Cm. Vonheeder seconded Cm. Hegarty's motion. Cm. Moffatt expressed concern that if the election were an advisory action, at any time down road the Council could take an action which may not coincide with the desires expressed by the public. He said he would prefer this issue to be submitted to the electorate for a vote as an amendment to the Ordinance, and that if, in the future, the Council wanted to consider a change to the Ordinance, it could be presented to the electorate for another vote. He said the responsibility for the decision related to the fireworks issue would then be removed from the Council- members and given to the electorate. CM-6-226 Regular Meeting July 21, 1987 Cm. Snyder said his original preference was to adopt an Ordinance drafted by the City Attorney, and then if the community was not in agreement with the Ordinance, the referendum process could have been utilized by those opposing the law. Cm. Hegarty indicated that he would agree with an advisory election, that his main concern was to give the community an opportunity to indicate their opinion related to fireworks. He said five or six people had already spoken before the Council. Mayor Jeffery called for the question. By a unanimous vote, the Council agreed that an advisory election would be pursued. Cm. Hegarty moved, Cm. Vonheeder seconded, and by a unanimous vote, the Council adopted Option 3, calling a special election and placing the measure on the ballot with the statewide election in June 1988. The City Attorney's Office will prepare appropriate resolutions related to the special election and Will present them at a future City Council meeting. The City Attorney was also directed to determine the possible effective date if the measure is approved by the voters, and the impact on fireworks sales permits issued for 1988. 1987 DUBLIN SHAMROCK FESTIVAL Diane Lowart updated the Councilmembers on the status of the Shamrock Festival, and said Staff was recommending the Council authorize a budget transfer in the amount of $2,500 from the Contingent Reserve to fund the costs related to traffic control, public works assistance, and a meal allowance for reserve police officers. Ms. Lowart discussed a problem which had arisen related to insurance coverage. She said that, with the exception of only two, the insurance certificates received were incorrect in that they did not name DSRSD as the primary insured. She advised that DSRSD stipulated unless the appropriate certificates are received by Wednesday, they will revoke the Festival. There was discussion related to the insurance needs. The City Attorney suggested that it may be possible for the City to loan the necessary funds to the Festival to obtain the necessary insurance. Cm. Vonheeder moved that Shamrock Festival, Inc. be loaned enough funds to secure the necessary insurance. Cm. Hegarty seconded the motion. The motion failed by a one-to-four vote. On motion by Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by a unanimous vote, the Council authorized a loan to Shamrock Festival, inc. for a sum of up to a maximum of $10,000.00 for the purpose of securing the necessary insurance. Regular Meeting CM-6-227 July 21, 1987 Cm. Hegarty moved, Cm. Vonheeder seconded, and by a unanimous vote, a budget transfer in the amount of $2,500 from the Contingent Reserve was approved. DUBLIN/BRAY SISTER CITY ASSOCIATION VISIT Mayor Jeffrey advised that 18 people would be visiting from Bray, Ireland. She reviewed the activities planned during their visit. TRI-VALLEY COMMUNITY T.V. Cm. Hegarty updated the Councilmembers of the status of the Tri-Valley Community T.V. He also stated that due to his current work schedule, a new representative will need to be appointed. AREA AGENCY ON AGING Mayor Jeffery advised that at the Mayors' Conference Martha Banner was appointed to replace Alice Pitchford on the Area Agency on Aging. SB 407 Mayor Jeffery said it may be appropriate prepare a letter regarding SB 407 requesting an amendment which would make the bill applicable to the City of Dublin. Staff indicated that the League of Cities will be contacted regarding the best approach. CLOSED SESSION At 10:45 p.m. the Council recessed to a closed executive session to discuss pending litigation, City of Dublin vs. BART and City of Dublin vs. Pet Prevent-A-Care, Inc. Regular Meeting CM-6-228 July 21, 1987 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 11:05 p.m. Cify~Ierk CM-6-229 Regular Meeting July 21, 1987