Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-21-1992 Adopted CC MinutesADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING - January 21, 1992 An adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Monday, January 21, 1992, in the COuncil Chambers of the Dublin Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at 12:30 p.m., by Mayor Snyder. * * * ROLL CALL PRESENT: ABSENT: Councilmembers Burton, Howard, Jeffery, Moffatt and Mayor Snyder. None. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (610-20) Mayor Snyder led the Council, Staff and those present in the pledge of · allegiance to the flag. · * * * CONSENT CALENDAR On motion of Cm. Howard, seconded by Cm. Burton, and by unanimous vote, the Council accepted improvements under Contract 91-09 (600-30) Sidewalk Grinding Program and authorized $6,590.20 retention payment to Phil Thomasson Construction for a total contract amount of $14,701. City of San Ramon Redevelopment Agency (460-30) City Manager Ambrose advised that the City had received correspondence from the City of San Ramon Redevelopment Agency regarding their Alcosta Mall/Kodak Building/Village Parkway Realignment project. The Council needs to discuss this in order to determine if Dublin is interested in participating by providing input. On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote, the Council agreed to add this item to the end of the agenda. DUBLIN BOULEVARD EXTENSION ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 91-1 (360-40) Public Works Director Thompson presented the Staff Report and advised that at this time, it is necessary for the City Council to review the Engineer's Report related to the formation of an assessment district which would partially finance construction of the Dublin Boulevard extension between Dougherty Road and the Southern Pacific Railroad Right-of-Way. Mr. Thompson explained that the City has a short time line to meet the BART funding deadline. The Council should also set a public hearing date for February 24, 1992. Bids will have been opened by this date. · · · [] · · · · [] · · · · [] · · · · · · · · · I · · · · [] · · · · · · CM - VOL 11 - 17 Adjourned Regular Meeting January 21, 1992 Mr. Thompson advised that the assessment district will allow properties that will benefit from the improvements to be assessed a portion of the costs based on the benefit to those parcels. Miscellaneous costs such as legal, engineering and bond discounts will be included in the assessments. The costs that are not directly benefiting properties in the District will be contributed by the City through a loan from BART, with the expectation that these costs will be recovered through offsite fees and/or future assessment districts which include properties that benefit from the improvements. Mr. Thompson explained that the Assessment District spread, based on the Engineer's Report, is proposed to be: 1) B.J.Dublin Commercial (Moore's Tract 5900) $2,103,261 2) Vangelatos, et al. (Chevron parcels) 270,149 3) Nohr (Curtiss Dodge) 175,816 4) Dublin Commercial II (Old U-Haul parcel on Chabot Road) City of Dublin Contribution 5) 370,774 3,129,485 $6,049,485 Mr. Thompson advised that the actual costs will not be determined until all property condemnations have been settled and the construction contract has been completed. Should any of the property owners wish to dedicate all or a portion of their property, their assessment would decrease accordingly. Mr. Thompson reported that Mr. Nohr has opted to keep the southern portion of his property, and since that portion of his proPerty will benefit from having its 'frontage on a new arterial street, this parcel has been included in the proposed benefit district. In addition, Chevron has decided to hold off development of its corner site. Mr. Thompson explained the proposed method of assessment spread and gave a description of the documents included in the Engineer's Report. Mr. Thompson advised that John Moore had submitted a letter with a couple of questions. With regard to incidental right-of-way costs, since he will be agreeing to a figure, he requests that he not be charged for Mike Nave's time. Also, one of the figures should be corrected to 91,000 square feet. Cm. Burton stated he felt that over 3/4 million dollars in incidental expenses is a pretty good chunk. He questioned why it takes this much out of the project as it seems excessive. Mr. Thompson advised that it may not be anywhere near that high. This is a standard deposit. Cm. Burton clarified his understanding that Chevron was going to dedicate property and now that they are not going through with it, we are putting them in the assessment district, which means they will have to pay their share. · · · In · · · n · · · · · · · · [] · · · · · · · · · · I In nl · · · · · CM - VOL 11 - ~8 Adjourned Regular Meeting January 21, 1992 Cm. Moffatt stated the Engineer's Report states that bonds representing unpaid assessments will have a rate not to exceed 12%. He questioned if this is the rate that it will go in at. Robert Brunsell advised that 12% is the legal limit established by State Law, so this figure is what they use in the Resolutions. The actual amount will be what is in effect at that time. He stated he was hesitant to state what it might be, but they are hopeful that we will see some improvement in that rate. If they were to be sold today, they would probably be something under 9%. He also explained that the term "incidental" is probably not the best usage of this term. Mr. Brunsell discussed the bond discount and advised that this is a form of prepaid interest. Cm. Moffatt questioned if the numbers on the assessment rolls correspond with the lot numbers. Mr. Thompson advised that they should. Cm. Moffatt indicated that since parcels 12 and 13 will be acquired by a public agency and if they are sold off, he questioned if the privilege of not paying assessments will this go on with the property. Mr. Thompson advised that the City can set the price at the value of whatever we feel this property is worth because it has additional improvements on it. They would be in the assessment district, but they will not be assessed as they are City owned properties. Cm. Moffatt stated he also had concerns regarding incidentals. Mr. Thompson pointed out that a complete listing was contained in Exhibit B. Cm. Jeffery pointed out on the list of property owners, the number 12 street name should be Brittany rather than Brillany. Cm. Moffatt stated he thought the City was going to take a piece of property on the southeast corner of Scarlett Court and Dublin Boulevard. Mr. Thompson responded that this is correct; it will take the 5 parking spaces off Miracle Auto Painting, but this isn't in the district's boundaries. Cm. Burton questioned the little notch taken out going around the corner. Mr. Thompson advised that this is a little piece of property the County acquired for a signal timer. This is owned by the City and is like a City street. Cm. Burton questioned if Mr. Moore was satisfied that his requirements were met. CM - VOL 11 - 19 Adjourned Regular Meeting January 21, 199Z Mr. ThomPson stated yes, everything had been addressed. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote, the Council took the following actions: Instructed the City Clerk to file the Engineer's Report in the City's District Proceedings file. Adopted RESOLUTION NO. $ - 92 ACCEPTING REPORT AND SETTING HEARING OF PROTESTS Instructed the City Clerk to file the Notice of Improvements in the City's District Proceedings file. OTHER BUSINESS City of San Ramon Redevelopment Aqency (460-30) City Manager Ambrose advised that the City of San Ramon has requested that the City of Dublin determine if it would be interested in designating one Councilmember from Dublin to participate in the process of the Alcosta/Kodak project. San Ramon is being sued by property owners in the area and has not been able to sell bonds for the Village Parkway improvements. They have hired a conflict resolution consultant to work out some kind of consensus to meet everyone's needs. One January 28th and 29th, they are planning one on one interviews to see how our City views the redevelopment in this area. Then, a dinner meeting will include all the parties involved to discuss the issue further. If the Council is interested, Mr. Ambrose requested that they designate someone to participate. Mayor Snyder stated he did not realize that this would turn into a formal situation. He got a call from Pat Boom last week asking if he could attend these meetings. He asked her if it would be okay for Cm. Jeffery to represent him and they said this was okay. Cm. Burton stated it seems that this relates a lot to the Lucky Center situation. He questioned how much the City Council would be involved in the decision process. He questioned if it will involve Council type decisions or will they make decisions and we will be just informed. Mr. Ambrose advised that it would probably be the latter, but they want to get as much input as possible. If their decision ends up with a lawsuit, they want to avoid this. CM - VOL 11 - 20 Adjourned Regular Meeting January 21, 1992 Mayor Snyder clarified that the City is responding to an inquiry from the San Redevelopment AgencY rather than the City Council. They don't want us to file a lawsuit after they have realigned Village Parkway. Cm. Jeffery advised that she had not yet responded, but she was interested. Cm. Burton felt we should be informed and kept informed, but not tOo involved. By a Council consensus, it was agreed that Cm. Jeffery will represent the City Council. Citizen/Organization of the Year (610-50) Cm. Moffatt advised that Recreation Director Lowart recently brought up to him the subject of the Citizen and Organization of the Year awards. He questioned if they should proceed or drop this project. Cm. Jeffery stated she thought that these presentations were to be made during the St. Patrick's festivities. She felt it would be beneficial to continue. Cm. Moffatt stated they would send out forms like they had done in previous years. Cm. Howard stated that last year, someone in Pleasanton helped choose the winners. She advised that they will look for an unbiased group to help with the selections. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 1:00 p.m. ATTEST: CM - VOL 11 - 21 Adjourned Regular Meeting January 21, 1992