HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.01 DraftMinutes 2-23 & 3-8-93
.
.
.
..
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING -FEBRUARY 23, 1993
An adjourned regular
was held on Tuesday,
Dublin Civic Center.
Mayor Snyder.
meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin
February 23, 1993, in the Council .Charnbers of the
The meeting was called to order at 7:44 p.m. by
* * * *
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Councilmembers Burton, Houston, Howard, Moffatt, and Mayor
Snyder.
ABSENT: None.
* * * *
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (610-20)
Mayor Snyder led the Council, Staff and those present in the pledge of
allegiance to the flag.
* * * *
PUBLIC HEARING - Continued from January 21, 1993
EASTERN DUBLIN GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT & SPECIFIC PLAN (420-30)
Mayor Snyder announced that the meeting would be adjourned at 11:00 p.m.
He requested that anyone wishing to speak, complete one of the blue
slips and return it to the Recording Secretary. Everyone who wishes
will be given an opportunity to speak, but he indicated that for someone
to get up and reiterate what someone else has said is not productive.
Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing.
Brenda Gillarde, Planning Coordinator, indicated there were three tasks
to be accomplished at this evening's meeting. First, Staff would
provide response to the Council's requests from the January 21, 1993
meeting. Second, additional comments would be received from the public.
Third, Council will give Staff direction on which alternative to pursue
for the preferred land use concept of the Specific Plan.
At the January 21, 1993 Council meeting, the City Council directed Staff
to analyze the implications of Alternative #2 in regard to the Reduced
Planning Area with several modifications and the Livermore Airport
Protection Area (APA) modifications as they might affect the Proposed
Plan as recommended by the Planning Commission.
The Reduced Planning Area alternative would permit development in
Eastern Dublin within the current sphere-of-influence boundary. This
configuration would allow some development beyond the proposed Specific
Plan boundary but would not include Doolan Canyon.
Staff consulted surrounding cities to determine if elevation was used as
a criteria for defining the extent of development in hillside areas.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .
CM - VOL 12 - 78
Adjourned Regular Meeting
February 23, 1993
--------------------------------------~--------------~---~----~-------
ITEM NO.
4.1
COPIES TO:
.
.
.
Pleasanton was the only city to use such a delineation. Staff roughly
estimated the number of dwelling units that would be eliminated at
various elevation limits under Alternative #2. The number of units
eliminated varied from 4,039 to 6,749 at the 500 feet level. The
various elevation limits would also eliminate 771,000 square feet of
commercial area and 1,340 jobs. Several elementary schools and parks
would also be eliminated.
If lands above a certain elevation were precluded from development, some
other designation would have to be assigned to those areas. Those areas
could be designated as agricultural, open space, or a "Future Study
Zone".
Elimination or reduction of dwelling units could significantly imbalance
the jobs to housing ratio for the City. The existing City currently has
a near perfect ratio of 1.02:1.00. Reducing the units would result in
jobs/housing ratios ranging from 1.06:1.00 to an imbalance of 1.41:1.00.
Within the Airport Protection Area, the Proposed Plan designates
approximately 52 acres for low density single family residential (0-6
units/acre) and 75 acres for medium density multiple family development
(6-14 units/acres). 958 units would be eliminated.
Alternatives to Residential Development within the Airport Protection
Area include such options as 1) redesignate the residential areas as
Future Study Zone; 2) redesignate the area as rural residental/
agricultural; 3) redesignate the residential areas to some other
compatible use; or 4) maintain the proposed residential designations.
Redesignation of residential areas as "Future Study Zone" option would
indicate the City's interest in the area and the need for additional
studies on environment constraints, future land uses, infrastructures,
and other issues. The underlying County zoning of 1 unit per 100 acres
would prevail.
The City Attorney's Office determined that should the City decide to
overrule the Airport Land Use Commission's decision regarding
residential uses in the Livermore Airport Protection Area, the City
would not be exposed to any special liability.
During the public hearings, questions were raised concerning certain
fiscal aspects of the project. Economic Research Associates (ERA) felt
the property tax reduction by the State would not change the project's
overall fiscal feasibility to the City; the estimated sales tax revenues
used in the Fiscal Analysis were conservative and reasonable; over the
long run, revenues would cover costs even though deficits would occur in
the start-up years and would need to be financed; the project has the
financial capacity to pay for its own infrastructure; costs for
treating, transporting and/or reusing wastewater are included in the
Specific Plan; if the residential development proceeds slower than
projected, the fiscal situation will probably be somewhat better than
the forecast; the average value of the single family units for-sale was
assumed at under $250,00; the infrastructure estimates and the financing
analysis are conservative and adequate; and overall, the project would
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CM - VOL 12 - 79
February 23, 1993
Adjourned Regular Meeting
,.
.
.
be fiscally feasible to the City even with substantial reductions in the
number of dwelling units.
Due to change in personnel within the Army, the City has not been able
to meet with the Army to determine the status of the Camp Parks Master
Plan or the availability of "surplus" Army lands. The surplus lands on
Camp Parks are outside of the Eastern Dublin project area and the
potential for the City to acquire this land is beyond the scope of the
Proposed Plan and would need to be studied separately.
Grading policies, curvilinear street system, relocation of the high
school, availability of wastewater treatment capacity and water supply,
financing of proposed Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific
Plan, San Joaquin kit fox, and number of lanes on Tassajara Road needed
to be discussed by Council, with the Council giving Staff direction
regarding each issue.
Ms. Gillarde indicated that if the City Council was interested in
pursuing Alternative 2 with modifications and the APA modifications as
the preferred land use concept, an initial study should be prepared to
determine whether an addendum or supplemental EIR was required. Any
changes associated with residential uses within the Airport Protection
Area and in areas above a certain elevation should be referred back to
the Planning Commission for public hearing and recommendation.
If Alternative 2 with modifications and the APA modifications were
selected as the preferred land use concept for Eastern Dublin, both the
Specific Plan & General Plan Amendment would require extensive revisions
to the text and graphics. City Staff would do the bulk of the work with
WRT reviewing the work. WRT estimated an additional $6,969 would be
required to complete the necessary review and graphics work. Currently,
there was no funding source for the additional work required of WRT and
ERA. A funding source would need to be identified and secured for the
additional work.
Steve Spickard, ERA Consultant, addressed fiscal and economic questions
that had been raised thus far in the Eastern Dublin Public Hearing
process.
Impact of the 9% property tax reduction by the state: He indicated the
9% property tax reduction by the State would not change any of the
fiscal conclusions regarding the Eastern Dublin SpeCific Plan and that
the Plan would still generate a fiscal surplus over the 20 years
projected.
Sales Tax per capita in East Dublin beinq hiqher than Dublin's current
sales tax per capita: Sales tax revenue from Eastern Dublin was
estimated from projected sales volumes, not from per capita averages.
High sales volumes were anticipated in Eastern Dublin due to the
strategic retail locations close to interchanges along 1-580 and due to
the type of retail planned to maximize the regional draw and sales
volume per square foot of space developed. A "Mills Concept" combining
"value" retailers with "outlet" retailers has been proposed by the
County.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CM - VOL 12 - 80
February 23, 1993
Adjourned Regular Meeting
.
.
Would City's current reserves be used to make UP any shortfall in
revenues durinq the early years of development in Eastern Dublin: Over
the long run, Eastern Dublin is projected to generate sufficient
revenues to cover costs. Deficits would occur in the start-up years and
would have to be financed. The use of reserves as a financing tool was
not specifically investigated.
Only 25% of the infrastructure costs borne by a Mello Roos or some other
type of assessment district: Mr. Spickard indicated that on page 148 of
the Specific Plan, reference was made to the fact that only 25% of the
infrastructure costs would be borne by a Mello Roos or some other type
of assessment district. The remaining $307 million could be funded
through a system of impact fees. Given that commercial development made
up more than half the assessed value in the SpecifiC Plan area and would
also contribute its fair share to infrastructure costs, Mr. Spickard
felt it was very realistic that Eastern Dublin had the financial
capacity to pay for its own infrastructure.
Cost for expansion of the Tri-Valley Wastewater Authority sewaqe export
costs: The costs of treating, transporting and/or reusing wastewater
was estimated at $130 million. The existing DSRSD fee system was
expected to cover 94% of wastewater costs. The remaining 6% would be a
minor part of the Mello Roos assessment and be part of the .8% tax
burden in the Plan.
Could 1,000 units be absorbed each year: The projected absorption in
Eastern Dublin analysis starts with 300 units in 1996. The rate of
absorption is then projected to increase over time to a maximum sales
rate of 1,000 units per year early in the next century. The experience
of a single recession year in 1992 should not be indicative of the
longer term trend. If residential development proceeds slower than
1,000 units per year, the City's fiscal situation will prObably be
somewhat better than forecast. Revenues are generated
disproportionately by commercial development while municipal service
costs are generated disproportionately by residential development.
Market for $300,000 to $600,000 homes: With the exception of four rural
home lots which could be sold for more, there were no homes assumed to
sell for over $300,000 in Eastern Dublin. The average value of the
single family units is under $250,000.
Fiscal impact on City of reduced residential development: At projected
absorption rates, the limitation on units will not even be felt until
the year 2008.
Mayor Snyder asked what dollars were being used, 1992-93 or earlier.
Mr. Spickard responded 1990 dollars were being used and a constant
dollar was used.
Cm. Houston asked about the "Mill's Concept".
Mr. Spickard explained the "Mill's Concept" was referred to in the
County's documents and was the combination of several value retailers
with outlet retailers.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CM - VOL 12 - 81
February 23, 1993
Adjourned Regular Meeting
.
.
Cm. Houston wanted to know what the impact fees were in other areas in
relation to the estimated $12,300/unit for infrastructure costs in
Eastern Dublin.
Mr. Spickard indicated $30,000/unit in Vacaville with Fairfield and
Vallejo close behind in setting aggressive impact fees.
Cm. Houston asked if $30,000 was the exception or the rule.
Mr. Spickard responded most were in the range of $20,000 - $25,000, but
$12,000 was considered low. Higher impact fees and lower Mello Roos
created less of an on-going burden.
Cm. Burton asked if the schools were included in the fees.
Mr. Spickard indicated that the costs of schools had been factored in.
Cm. Houston stated that due to the fact Eastern Dublin was along the
freeway, there would be more commercial development.
Mr. Spickard agreed that by maintaining commercial development, it would
keep revenue producing. Residential development did not always pay for
itself.
Bruce Goslin, 8067 Brittany Drive, Dublin, of the Dublin'S Citizens
Committee indicated that the Dublin's Citizens Committee, Doolan Road
residents, members of the Greenbelt Alliance, Preserve Area Ridgelands
Committee, the Sierra Club and others met with two council members.
They wanted to work with the City in a cooperative way to modify
Alternative #2.
The Citizens' Modified "Alternative 2" for East Dublin was formally
submitted to the Council and becomes a part of the record.
The Citizens' Modified "Alternative 2" for East Dublin accomplished the
following key objectives: 1) to protect hillsides by moving development
off of steep, unstable, visible hills in the north; 2) to provide
adequate room for long term growth of Dublin; 3) to develop and improve
Camp Parks; 4) to ensure development provides a net surplus to the City
and does not increase costs to current residents; 5) to reduce traffic
by encouraging development near BART; and 6) to establish a buffer
around Dublin to preserve community identity.
The development concepts of their plan included 1) contiguous
development from west to east and south to north; 2) focusing
development around BART; 3) phased increments to respond to market
change; 4) establishing an urban growth boundary (UGB); 5) being transit
and pedestrian oriented; 6) creating a plan to enhance existing Dublin;
and respecting natural habitat, ridgelands, and riparian areas.
Modifications to Alternative #2 consisted of 1) acquiring the maximum
amount of Camp Parks with the Sierra Club helping politically at the
congressional level; 2) working in ripples with the most dense areas
being nearest BART and radiating out from rural residential to open
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CM - VOL 12 - 82
February 23, 1993
Adjourned Regular Meeting
.
.
space; 3) establishing direct BART connectors; 4) creating BART Parking
Ramp for 5,000 cars along with shopping and services area; 5)
eliminating Tassajara village and Foothill Residential; 6) exchanging
the community park with open space; 7) including a system of straight
"bike streets;" and 8) protecting land at UGB - Homeowner Mitigation
Fees.
Mr. Goslin indicated that in regards to financial and natural resource
considerations 1) development must bear all costs of infrastructure; 2)
financial surplus must survive slower absorption; 3) schools should be
totally financed by the development; 4) certify EIR for Modified
Alternative #2 only; 5) preserve wildlife corridors between habitats; 6)
create open space of 10 acres per 1,000 residents; 7) have EBRPD managed
areas of approximately 200 acres with links to other areas; and 8)
assess each household $15 per year maintenance fees.
Mr. Goslin concluded that the benefits of this plan were 1) it was
supported by coalition of citizen groups; 2) it increased greater use of
Camp Parks; 3) it presented a financially sound phasing approach; 4) it
migrated from dense to rural residential to open space development; 5)
it limited vehicular lane traffic; 6) it is transit & pedestrian
oriented; 7) it created UGB, economical maintenance, protects open space
& ridgelines; and 8) it connected Dublin together.
Cm. Houston asked about the amount of units in this modified Alternative
#2 Plan.
Cathy straus indicated that their plan transferred housing density that
was lost up in Tassajara area into areas south of Tassajara Village that
are open space in visually sensitive areas. There was not an
elimination in the number of housing units indicated in the Specific
Plan, but a transfer of the density of housing units from the northern
to the southern area. Also, in their Plan, the community park was
transferred from medium to low density housing in the eastern corner to
an area where it would phase better into the open space and put the
medium to low density housing where the community park had been.
Cm. Burton stated that the SpeCific plan was different from Alternative
#2.
Ms. Straus responded that the citizens' Modified Alternative #2 was not
asking for any change in the sphere of influence and they were trying to
work within the City's Specific Plan to limit the amount of money it
would cost to reexamine the proposal. Also, to make it possible not to
have to do an new EIR.
Cm. Burton indicated that Alternative #2 includes the sphere of
influence, whereas the Citizens' Modified Alternative #2 included only
the Specific Plan area.
em. Moffatt asked Mr. Goslin about the $15/year maintenance charge for
open space for every residential person in Dublin or was the charge for
specific residential people. Would the open space be a closed area
where the people who pay the maintenance charge have exclusive use of
the area.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CM - VOL 12 - 83
Adjourned Regular Meeting
February 23, 1993
.
.
Mr. Goslin explained that the maintenance fee was only for the residents
in the new Eastern Dublin area. It was a maintenance fee for this area,
but it would not be restrictive on who could use it. It is more of a
concept suggesting that there is a cost associated with open space and
the residents are appropriate to bear that burden since they are the
individuals who benefit from it. He felt the concept was the issue
rather than the number.
Cm. Moffatt expressed concern that other folks in the County and
throughout the state would have use of the open space, but would not be
required to pay for maintenance of it.
Cm. Burton felt the maintenance fee was not fair if it was a regional
park and that it should be a usage fee.
Doug Abbott, 8206 Rhoda Avenue, Dublin, indicated that it had been an
exciting past year. Six months ago many of the individuals involved had
not known an EIR from the IRS, but they had taken the time to educate
themselves about the process. They were now a valuable resource to help
in developing the plan for Eastern Dublin. It was a diverse group which
had met together. They were all trying to avoid another referendum, and
wanted to minimize the negative growth impacts on current Dublin. He
indicated that the Citizens' Modified Alternative #2 for East Dublin had
no wiggle room. Any changes to the plan could jeopardize the coalition
that put the Modified Plan together. He urged the Council to take the
proposal seriously and take it at face value and direct the Planning
Staff to flush it out with the appropriate detail.
Cm. Burton asked if Mr. Abbott was representing the Sierra Club.
Mr. ~bbott indicated he was a member of the Executive Board of the
Sierra Club
Cm. Burton asked who would represent the coalition, is there an
executive board, or is there anyone who could enter into negotiations.
Mr. Abbott felt the Dublin's Citizen Group is the prime organization
behind the modified plan and it is appropriate because it is made up of
Dublin citizens.
Cm. Burton stated the Council shared their concern and did not want
another referendum or devisive battle.
Marjorie LaBar, 11707 Juarez Lane, Dublin, indicated the area outside
the Specific Plan, but within the Sphere of Influence should become
General Plan Amendment area, separate and apart and requiring an entire
new process. The alternative of providing the City with consideration
flexibility was the phasing of the current development over a twenty
year period until such time as most the Specific Plan area is
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CM - VOL 12 - 84
February 23, 1993
Adjourned Regular Meeting
essentially 80% full. She felt the EIR as it stands was an inadequate
document and was not legally actionable. The Citizens' Modified
Alternative #2 for East Dublin mitigated much that was in the EIR. She
indicated that site specific documents would be needed because there
were things missing in the EIR. She stated that City officials were
working with the wrong people in dealing with Camp Parks and that they
should be working with the local congressman who is now chairman of the
Armed Services Committee. A lot of blood, sweat, and tears had gone
into the creation of this modified plan. She wanted it understood that
this group was not "no growth tree huggers". The City could be proud of
this Plan. It would add a good solid tax base.
.
.
Cm. Moffatt asked where the urban boundary line was in the Modified
Plan.
Ms. LaBar indicated on the map where she felt the urban boundary line
was. She further stated that the City needed to plan and phase the
development so that the development paid for itself and the City grows
in an orderly manner.
Cm. Moffatt asked if the urban boundary line was a twenty year line.
Ms. LaBar agreed that the coalition was asking that it be maintained for
twenty years and the City try to enter into an agreement with the County
to insure that for twenty years.
David Nesmith, 5237 College Avenue, Oakland, Conservation Director for
the San Francisco Bay Chapter of the Sierra Club, complemented the
Council on the long, exhaustive planning process which has produced a
lot of good information. He felt that the Council as the government of
Dublin was in a unique position. Dublin is the place in Alameda County
that ought to be most intensively developed of any place in Alameda
County which was not currently developed. For the Sierra Club, this is
a controversial position, but that the Sierra Club does have many "tree
huggers." He stated as growth is necessary and inevitable and must be
accommodated in some way, he felt Dublin was the most appropriate large
land area to be developed. As a member of the Sierra Club, he strongly
supported this modified Alternative #2 Plan. The Plan left lots of
space for growth. Dublin residents had been willing to sacrifice visual
sensitive area to preserve the Tassajara Village. He was outraged that
the military proposed to hold maneuvers in an area where the publiC has
invested half a billion dollars to provide heavy high speed rail to
serve an urban use. The Sierra Club will work as hard as they can at
all levels of government to see that the Camp Parks area closest to the
transit corridor is surplused and made available for planning purposes.
He felt the modified plan was an improvement of the Plan both physically
and environmentally and the only harm the modification causes is to a
couple of landowners. He urged the Council to make a policy decision
for the citizens of the region because he felt this was a regional
resource.
Cm Moffatt asked for clarification of several lines on the Modified
Alternative #2 plan Map. He further questioned the use of passive open
space or agricultural space.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CM - VOL 12 - 85
February 23, 1993
Adjourned Regular Meeting
.~
.
.
Mr. Nesmith responded that the cross hatching on the Modified
Alternative #2 Plan was open space and untouched area and should remain
in private hands. It would not all be passive open space, but there
would be a limited kind of recreational area and most of the outlying
area would be open space.
Cm. Moffatt asked about the fee people would be paying to protect this
area and whether it would be a fee for just those folks for their
specific use or would other people be utilizing this area and would
there be a cost for utilizing it.
Mr. Nesmith would see the bulk of the open space remaining in private
hands. He would hope a development mitigation fee would be levied on
new development within the Eastern Dublin area, which would be used to
purchase conservation easements or fee simple. The maintenance fee
would be used for maintenance of parks within the Eastern Dublin area.
He would urge the Council to consider an open space mitigation fee which
would be in addition to the $12,000.
Cm. Moffatt felt everyone enjoyed the parks so everyone should pay their
fair share.
Mayor Snyder asked if the green line designated as the urban growth
boundary line, would be considered the ultimate City limit boundary for
at least twenty years.
Mr. Nesmith indicated the green line represented an urban growth
boundary, but it did not necessarily indicate the City limits.
Cm. Burton questioned what was the Council supposed to do with and how
were they to classify the land that is not in the urban growth area.
Mr. Nesmith responded that it had not been discussed within the Sierra
Club or the Dublin's Citizens Group, it would need to be explored in
greater detail with certain areas identified for future growth in 20
years. There may be need for more growth in twenty years. If Sierra
Club loses Dougherty Valley to development, it would not make sense to
have two miles of permanent open space between the Dublin City limits
and "San Fernando Valley North." The more steep areas would be more
appropriate for permanent open space. A further discussion would need
to occur at a later point.
Cm. Burton clarified that they were not asking that the entire green
boundary be locked into permanent open space.
Mr. Nesmith responded that they were not asking for the entire area to
be permanent open space but that they would like it designated as a
study area.
Ted Fairfield, POBox 1148, Pleasanton, felt the Eastern Dublin Plan
was a major step in the City's history. He indicated that it would take
30 to 40 years to build out the area. This was the last best shot to
put a footprint in the area. He stated that once the Plan was adopted
it would be relatively easy to fine tune and amend the Plan internally,
but very difficult to expand externally. He encouraged the Council to
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CM - VOL 12 - 86
Adjourned Regular Meeting
February 23, 1993
.
.
think big, for he felt there was obvious risk in thinking small. The
General Plan and Specific plan cover many acres but also many different
ownerships. There are about 50 different landowners involved, 6 years
of time, and two dozen public hearings. This was the City'S plan, not
the developer's plan. No landowner, no developer obtains any vesting
under this Plan. Many goals and objectives are fulfilled in the draft
EIR. There is an almost perfect jobs/housing balance. If the total
number of single family houses shrinks, it could become a serious issue.
Mr. Fairfield submitted a "Property Owners' Analysis of Eastern Dublin
General Plan Amendment/Specific Plan and Selected Alternates" created by
MacKay & Somps. After considerable study, it was determined that if the
Council used an elevation limit, that the most appropriate contour line
is about elevation 660 - 700. If there must be a shrinking of the
development line, it should be pulled back to the Sphere of Influence
line. The formal boundary of the City's planning area should not be
reduced, because no one knows what will happen twenty years in the
future. To reduce the planning area would take away the flexibility
that the City can have just by saying it wants it now. Perhaps part of
the area could be designated "urban reserve" as defined in the County's
East County Plan. He was chagrinned that the Council has been presented
with what appears to be a non-negotiable set of demands. He was willing
to talk to anybody, any time, any where. He felt it would be
appropriate for the Council to give some direction in terms of the more
substantial landowners meeting with the coalition whether chaired by
persons in the City Staff or by the Mayor or by a committee of the
Council. He indicated there were areas where the landowners agree with
the coalition and there are other areas where they disagree. Whatever
document the Council settles on is one that is functional, it should not
be a pie in the sky plan which was unworkable or not able to achieve the
goals that had been set out to be achieved by the City. He concluded
that the landowners need to be included in the round table discussion,
for without the landowners' support in the end, it will not happen.
Cm. Burton felt a new word had been introduced with "urban reserve." He
was concerned with what we called it may be a problem. "Future Study
Zone" and "Urban" could be a different concept to different people.
Mr. Fairfield responded that what it was called was less of a problem
than how it is defined. "Urban Reserve" is defined in the County's East
County Plan.
Cm. Burton asked if the sphere of influence line was the boundary line
Mr. Fairfield was using.
Mr. Fairfield responded yes, it was.
Rod Andrade, of MacKay & Somps, gave some highlights of the "property
Owners' Analysis of Eastern Dublin General plan Amendment/Specific Plan
and Selected Alternates," created by MacKay & Somps with the help of Bob
Harris. The report focuses on two issues, 1) the potential for
shrinkage of the plan area to the Sphere of Influence line and 2) the
addition of an elevation limit to the area which might be developed.
The analysis assumes 1) that the "rural residential" designation as it
appears on the Plan is really an open space designation; and 2) the
density calculations are based on mid range density. In considering
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CM - VOL 12 - 87
February 23, 1993
Adjourned Regular Meeting
.
.
"rural residential" as open space, the open space element of the plan
comprises over 50% of the land area of the Plan. Within the 50% that
remains for development, the number of residential units that are
included in your Plan might well be about 30% less than is suggested in
the EIR by using the low density ranges rather than the mid density
ranges. He felt the low density range might better reflect market demand
and the design standards expressed in the Specific Plan. Low density
range does not necessarily mean low density project. If there is an
elevation restriction on development, he indicated that the 660 ft. was
the appropriate contour limit because 1) it corresponds closely with a
natural break in slope in the planning area; 2) it doesn't restrict
development to such an extent that infrastructure can't be funded; 3) it
preserves important vistas; 4) it threatens no high value natural
habitats; 5) it retains enough dwelling units that the jobs/housing
balance of the plan will be only marginally compromised; and 6) it
preserves substantial amounts of Single Family Housing. He also
recommended that the community park site be moved next to new open space
created by the elevation restriction. If the Plan was shrunk to the
Sphere of Influence, severe damage would be done to a well conceived
plan. Such a retreat destroys the job/housing ratio for the City and
for the region in general. The land use mix within the Plan would also
be destroyed in that it would eliminate 25% of the housing anticipated
in the current Plan and the ratio of housing to commercial would be
altered. It would erode the financial ability to pay its own way. A
larger infrastructure burden would be placed on the remaining elements
of the project because infrastructure costs are not evenly reduced in
portion to the density. He felt there would be no true environmental
benefits and provides no view shed benefits. But if the Plan must
shrink to the current Sphere of Influence line, the area to the east
area of this line should be designated "urban reserve" and the potential
for development there be revisited.
Cm. Burton asked how much of a difference to the developer there would
be if the plan is limited to the Sphere of Influence. There was not a
lot of housing in the space between the SpecifiC Plan and the Sphere of
Influence.
Mr. Andrade indicated there would be a significant difference.
Mr. Fairfield felt if one says "future study area," there is no
guidance, but with the term "urban reserve," he felt there was an
implication that at least there should be one eye kept open on how to
serve that area one day.
Cm. Moffatt questioned on the third chart whether the land between the
Specific plan and Sphere of Influence should be put into limbo that
would be revisited in twenty or thirty years.
Mr. Fairfield agreed that he felt this land between the SpecifiC Plan
and the Sphere of Influence should be put in limbo, while the other
group wanted the area east of the Specific Plan boundary to be put in
that limbo land. To his developer, it makes no difference because he
does not own that land. He was trying to present a broader picture than
just the property he represents. The land could be lost to the City of
Dublin if the City pulls back to the Specific Plan line.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CM - VOL 12 - 88
February 23, 1993
Adjourned Regular Meeting
..----.
.
.
John Anderson, 11174 Brittany Lane, Dublin, stated that a lot had been
said in regard to the jobs/housing balance. What is the purpose of the
jobs/housing balance. Is it so that jobs will be provided for the
citizens within the immediate locality? Is that the intent of the
jObs/housing balance?
Mayor Snyder responded that the intent was to eliminate the need to
commute as much as was possible. The housing/jobs balance of the
General Plan must be accepted by the State and there must be an
acceptable ratio the State will accept when the City submits the Housing
Element Plan to the State.
Mr. Anderson asked who currently really works and lives in Dublin or the
surrounding area. He had read an article that indicated the amount of
commuting had increased 450%. The reason why was because the jobs were
in the Bay area and the less expensive housing was in San Joaquin
Valley. He felt if commuting was going to take place regardless of what
type of community the City creates here, the City has to be cognizant of
what is added to the already strained traffic and pollution content.
Pollution is irreversible and cannot be mitigated out of the air. There
has to be accountability and certain standards should be met. He felt
the "standard" was the minimum acceptable level. He felt the City can
demand and get something better than the minimum level. We don't have
to follow, we can also lead. The fact that wood burning fireplaces were
the second greatest pollutants should be considered. Most of the houses
that exist in this valley have woodburning fireplaces. All the
categories need to be covered, not just the financial side, but the
quality of life side, too. The City is accountable for the immediate and
the future impact not only on ourselves but also on our neighbors. This
Plan is inside Dublin's control. But the City also needed to coordinate
on a regional basis. The plan needs to be functional and forward
looking for the entire valley.
Cm. Burton asked if Mr. Anderson was part of the coalition.
Mr. Anderson responded that he was not part of the coalition, but was a
concerned Dublin resident. If there was going to be negotiations and it
was City sponsored, he would find it to be totally unacceptable if it is
simply limited to a coalition and the developers and the rest of the
citizens do not have any input. He advised the need for a study group.
Don Redgwick, 1632 Loganberry Way, Pleasanton, representing Redgwick
Construction Company and 160 acres submitted as "Dublin Ranch North"
questioned some of the economics. Take 18,000 houses times $250,000
equals about four one-half billion dollars. Take 12,000 houses times
$250,000 equals about three billion dollars. The square footage on the
Plan for the Industrial/Commercial/Office amounts to ten million six
hundred thousand square feet. $40/$50 square foot for warehouse,
$100/square foot for office, with retail in between. Eight hundred to
nine hundred million dollars. He didn't feel the industrial/commercial/
office was going to carry the ball economically. The upscale housing
will be in the hills. He felt it was a mistake to only have housing on
flat lands or low lands. It takes money to build schools and pay for
police. He also questioned some of the wisdom of the environmentalists
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CM - VOL 12 - 89
February 23, 1993
Adjourned Regular Meeting
.
.
that suggested the downscaling of the Plan was good environmental
practice. He felt it was counter productive. He indicated a need for
affordable housing in Dublin. There has to be a balance. If people
work here, they have got to be able to live here. He felt this was the
last best place in the San Francisco Bay area region. Why reduce the
plan that is in the last best place area in favor of developing in San
Joaquin County?
Jim Stedman, 29 Eckley place, Walnut Creek and Civil Engineer for po-Lin
Property, indicated he supported the City's Alternative #2 Plan. He
would like to have certain aspects of the Plan addressed. He felt in
the town center area the street patterns, which are grid patterns,
reduced the flexibility of the design for the housing that can go in
those areas. They have asked that the Plan be made more flexible with
curvilinear streets so a different style housing might be developed.
The transit spine extending east-west through the town center should be
changed to four lanes east of Tassajara. Make the community design
elements more flexible. Small pocket neighborhood parks are not as
useful as large open space built into well designed projects and should
be deleted. Campus office use should be converted to general
commercial. He felt the Staff should come back with revisions to the
City'S Alternative #2 Plan. There was a good EIR so it should be
amended, with no need to recirculate.
Cm. Burton felt the market should determine what the specifics would be.
He felt there should be more flexibility in the Plan with some wording
changes. He asked Staff if that would change the Specific Plan.
Mr. Tong responded that Staff would need to examine particular elements.
Some are indicated as guidelines for illustration purposes while others
are indicated as proposed policies.
Joe Callaghan, 5674 Stoneridge Drive, #209, Pleasanton, did not want to
comment on the Alternative #2 Plan, but wanted to reenforce David
Nesmith's comments concerning EDAB. He felt there was definitely a
different climate in Washington, D. C., regarding the size and shape of
the defense establishment. He felt there was an opportunity for the
Alameda County Economic Development Association Board to work with the
Bay Area's congressional delegation. If Camp Parks could be broken
loose, there would be better circulation and better infrastructure for
the whole area and allows some flexibility in development around BART
Station.
Carolyn Morgan, 5184 Doolan Road, Livermore, indicated she had wanted to
leave "wiggle room" in the Citizens' Modified Alternative #2 plan, with
a cut off at Fallon Road, but she had not wanted to play games with the
City Council. If the SpecifiC Plan is done and the specifics are locked
in, even the market can't change them. She felt what should have been
done, was do the General Plan Amendment and then as individual plans
come in, do the Specific plan on them. As to the $15 fee, it was not
only for parks but also for the fringe area. By moving the park next to
Fallon, that protected two properties that are still under the
Williamson Act that gave them a buffer. But there were still areas by
the density that needed to be buffered, weed abatement, higher fire
patrol, higher police patrol, and the $15 fee would help take care of
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CM - VOL 12 - 90
February 23, 1993
Adjourned Regular Meeting
.
.
those expenses. She explained that the smaller plan was chosen and they
did not follow the contour line because straight lines are easier to
manage and easier to fence. It is almost impossible to fence a contour
line. How would the area be maintained. If the Council chose the
smaller plan, the infrastructure would not cost as much. Infrastructure
would not go up steep hills. She disagreed with the 700 foot elevation
because it was located in landslide areas. If the City allows the
development in the first place, if landslide problems arise down the
road, the City will be held liable.
Cm. Burton asked Ms. Morgan in regard to terminology, would "study zone"
be acceptable to her.
Ms. Morgan responded that she would prefer to be unincorporated Alameda
County. If a City had to be chosen, some would choose Livermore because
of the type of development that would be allowed. In the Dublin plan,
there would be 3,200 to 4,000 homes in Doolan Canyon. She felt "urban
reserve" should be used for the area inside the SpecifiC plan and
"Future Planning Area" for the area inside the Sphere of Influence," and
outside the Sphere of Influence should be "unincorporated Alameda
County."
Cm. Houston felt neither group had the domain on good ideas, but he
disputed the "take it or leave it" idea because he felt there were a lot
of good ideas presented and those ideas should be looked into.
MS. Morgan responded that the coalition was not telling the Council what
to take or leave as far as what goes within the line. But she stated
that other issues such as water and sewer needed to be addressed. She
felt that the numbers were not as important as how the valley was
affected, how the valley would look when it is done, and how the
environmental issues would be addressed. She was proud to be a valley
resident.
Andrea MacKenzie, East Bay Regional Park District, indicated there was
an update to the EBRPD Master Plan. She felt the Citizens' Modified
Alternative #2 Plan provided aspects that allowed for continuous open
trails. The $15 was an arbitrary amount. It would be impacted by the
proximity to development, size and buffer zones. Emergency access was a
concern. If the open space was fragmented, there would be higher
maintenance costs.
Cathy Straus, 7826 Alto Way, Dublin, felt questions had not been
answered, but were justified. She wanted to know if costs for sewer
capacity were included in the $12,300/home. Where would the rest of the
money come from.
Mr. Spickard responded that on page 148 of the SpecifiC Plan, an example
of 25% of the costs for streets and mass grading would be borne by a
Mello Roos district, whereas the Mello Roos financing would be used for
42% of total infrastructure costs. The remaining amount needed could be
funded through a system of impact fees. If half the remaining costs
were loaded on residential development, the total impact fees would be
about $12,300 per unit. Given that commercial development makes up more
than half the assessed value in the Specific Plan area and would
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CM - VOL 12 - 91
February 23, 1993
Adjourned Regular Meeting
.
.
contribute its fair share to infrastructure costs, Eastern Dublin has
the financial capacity to pay for its own infrastructure. This is a
strategic location with the hub of 1-580/1-680 and BART.
Ms. straus stated she was sorry the Council perceived the Citizens'
Modified Alternative #2 Plan as an ultimatum. They were trying to
present a Plan where there would be no objections, where development
stayed within the Specific plan so that a whole new plan would not be
required. There was a lot of compromise within the group to create this
Plan. "Urban reserve" was alright with her as long as the term did not
infer higher value of the land.
Cm. Burton asked if Ms. Straus had any Objections to using the Sphere of
Influence as the boundary.
Ms. Straus responded that for the General Plan Amendment, it was alright
to use the Sphere of Influence, provided the green line in the Specific
Plan remains agricultural.
Ms. Morgan clarified that when the City went to LAFCO, the whole Sphere
of Influence did not have to be annexed, but the City had to annex land
within the Sphere of Influence.
Mayor Snyder indicated he presumed that the public hearing would be
continued after this evening.
Because Staff had asked for specific direction on a number of items, Cm.
Burton indicated the following areas of agreement 1) Alternative #2
would be used as a working point; 2) the sphere of influence would be
used as the City boundary for twenty years; 3) ask Staff to study the
Tassajara exchange that was suggested by the coalition; 4) having more
flexible streets and housing; 5) the transit spine would be four lanes,
6) the freeway exposure be a combination of general/commercial/office at
this time; 6) there would be no elevation limits, but will be obvious
restrictions on slopes and slide areas; 7) the community park would be
moved to connect with open space; 8) that open space be studied versus
neighborhood parks; 9) the Defense Department would be approached in
regard to Camp Parks and try to get as much of the southern land as
possible; and 10) have Staff arrange for a meeting of both parties to
settle the differences. This was made into a motion asking Staff to
study and bring back in the future. No second was made.
Mayor Snyder responded that the City would not go beyond the Sphere of
Influence without modifying it.
Mr. Ambrose clarified that the special study zone or "urban reserve"
would begin at the Sphere of Influence line and cover the remaining
study area.
Ms. Silver indicated the Sphere of Influence line would be the boundary
of the General Plan Amendment with the Specific Plan boundary would be
the boundary of the .Specific Plan. Designate the area to the east of
the Sphere of Influence line as a "future planning area."
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CM - VOL 12 - 92
February 23, 1993
Adjourned Regular Meeting
. .
Cm. Moffatt recommended a citizen-developer meeting to see if the groups
could come to some agreement. He was trying to avoid another study.
Mayor Snyder agreed that the transit spine should be amended to be four
lanes to eliminate traffic congestion in that area.
Cm. Moffatt felt the transit area should be developed as a pedestrian
oriented area so there would not be need for cars.
Cm. Houston indicated he agreed with every point made by Mr. Stedman on
the small public parks and change from campus office to general
commercial. He wanted to reconvene as soon as possible where more
intelligent deliberations could take place.
Mayor Snyder indicated one week was not adequate time for Staff to
develop any information.
Cm. Houston explained that he was not giving Staff any direction
tonight, but he felt the Council needed time to digest all this
information that had been presented.
Mayor Snyder felt Staff needed to do some review for the Council and
bring back what the impacts of some of the items mean to the City and to
try to compress this information into a shorter period of time is
detrimental to the process.
Cm. Houston stated he himself was trying to elongate the process.
Cm. Burton explained Council was trying to narrow down the process and
not trying to settle the issues. Staff would bring back information
about what some of the new ideas do to the financing and the housing and
job balance. The people at the meeting could get together and try to
compromise on issues.
Cm. Moffatt suggested that the City Council could help facilitate the
meeting.
Cm. Burton recommended Staff set up a meeting with both parties with a
representative from the Council. Cm. Burton asked for a second to his
motion.
Cm. Howard asked how much extra it would cost the City and how it would
affect the Budget. Staff time would need to be paid.
Mayor Snyder stated he did not disagree in principal with what Cm.
Burton had said.
Cm. Burton wanted to narrow down the decision making process.
Cm. Moffatt indicated if Staff was at the meeting, questions could be
answered.
City Attorney Libby Silver indicated the General plan Amendment and
SpecifiC Plan were a legislative act and by law the City must get input
in a public forum and not just from certain groups. The meeting would
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CM - VOL 12 - 93
February 23, 1993
Adjourned Regular Meeting
.
.
have to be noticed with the opportunity for everyone to participate.
There could be a facilitator.
Cm. Moffatt was in favor of a subcommittee with it being more informal,
but he also liked the idea of a facilitator.
On motion by Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote,
the Council agreed to hold a meeting with a facilitator to work out the
problems on the Alternative #2 Plan.
Janet Lockhart requested that the business community be made aware of
the meeting.
Ms. straus indicated a willingness to meet with developers to see where
agreements and disagreements lay, but she did not want the City to have
to spend more money.
em. Moffatt stated as a private body the Citizens Group and developers
could meet and he encouraged them to do so.
Mr. Fairfield felt the groups should meet to get to know each other, but
he had a concern in that he represented only one of several developers
and he could not speak for the other landowners. He agreed to the idea
of having a facilitator and he offered to pay for the facilitator.
John DiManto was glad the Council was not going to go back and reinvent
the wheel, but he was frustrated by all the waffling that had been going
on for five years. Why waste more money? This was big business and he
felt it was time to make decisions. He encouraged the Council to get
the show on the road.
March 30, 1993 was chosen as a special meeting date which would be
proceeded over by a facilitator.
The Council concurred that the continuation of the publiC hearing on
Eastern Dublin will be on April 30, 1993.
* * * *
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting
was adjourned at 11:52 p.m. to a special meeting on March 30, 1993 at
7:00 p.m. in the Regional Meeting Room at the Dublin Civic Center.
* * * *
Minutes prepared by Sandie Hart, Secretary.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CM - VOL 12 - 94
February 23, 1993
Adjourned Regular Meeting
.
.
REGULAR MEETING - March 8. 1993
A regular meeting of the city Council of the city of Dublin was held
on Monday, March 8, 1993, in the Council Chambers of the Dublin civic
Center. The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m., by Mayor
Protempore Burton.
* * * *
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Councilmembers Houston, Howard, Moffatt and Mayor Protempore
Burton.
ABSENT: Mayor Snyder.
* * * *
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (610-20)
Mayor Protempore Burton led the Council, Staff and those present in
the pledge of allegiance to the flag.
* * * *
Cable TV Franchise Service (1050-30)
Mary Jane Hyde, 7426 Mancini Court, advised that she is a teacher in
Dublin schools. She was present primarily to state how unhappy she is
with Viacom. She received a communication from The Learning Channel
last week, and they say they are working with cable companies to add
The Learning Channel to the package. When she contacted Viacom, they
informed her that they will have this channel, but she repeatedly
asked when, and they were very evasive. Since the City is responsible
for the franchise, she felt the City Council should hear her concerns.
While she did not know about the rest of Dublin residents, she was
willing to give up television for several months in order to find a
better cable company. All the other cable companies offer up to 50
channels and Viacom offers the least of anyone. She hoped the city
Council has some way to address this.
Mayor Protempore Burton stated he understood that The Learning Channel
is being discussed and whether or not they will allow advertising on
it. According to an insert in his cable bill, starting next month,
you can get less channels for less money.
Assistant City Manager Rankin advised that on April 1st, they are
doing some changes on the lineup, but The Learning Channel is not one
that is being added.
A copy of the communication she received was given to the city Clerk
and Mayor Protempore Burton stated Staff would check into this and
respond to Ms. Hyde.
* * * *
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
eM - VOL 12 - 95
Regular Meeting
March 8, 1993
.
.
Tree Replacement Alonq 1-680 (800-30)
George Butler, Bloomington Court resident, stated he has lived here
for 25 years. About 2 years ago, 1-680 was widened on the east side
and all the trees were removed and so far, no one has replaced them.
Public Works Director Thompson stated he was not aware of any
replanting currently planned, but they probably eventually will be
replaced. They are concentrating now on the soundwall.
Mr. Butler questioned if ivy could be planted to deaden some of the
sound. There is an example of this near the Stoneridge Drive exit
that looks quite nice.
Mr. Thompson agreed that the problem with the east wall is that sound
tends to ricochet off the wall. He stated he would look into this.
* * * *
East Dublin GPA & SP Meetinq (420-30)
Mayor Protempore Burton stated there was a request to place an
emergency item onto the agenda. The item deals with hiring a
facilitator for the East Dublin group meeting to be held on March
30th.
On motion of Cm. Houston, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous
vote (Mayor Snyder absent), the Council agreed to add Item No. 8.6 to
the agenda to discuss and establish whether a facilitator will be
needed at the March 30th meeting.
* * * *
eONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by ern. Houston, and by unanimous
vote (Mayor Snyder absent), the Council took the following actions:
Approved Minutes of Regular Meeting of February 22, 1993;
Authorized Staff to advertise Contract 93-05, street Subdrains, for
bids (600-30);
Approved an agreement with La Perle Architects, Inc., for Dublin Swim
Center Bathhouse Renovation (600-30);
Adopted
RESOLUTION NO. 30 - 93
ADOPTING STEVE KING STEWART'S "DUBLIN TOWN"
AS THE OFFIeIAL SONG FOR THE eITY OF DUBLIN (120-50)
Approved Warrant Register in the amount of $1,541,219.37 (300-40).
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
eM - VOL 12 - 96
Regular Meeting
March 8, 1993
.
.
em. Moffatt requested that the item related to the Sidewalk Repair
Program be pulled from the Consent Calendar for discussion. He
expressed concern about this program in as much as we are talking
about going to bid for $50,000. He suggested that this item be held
until after the Goals & Objectives meeting. His understanding was
that if the City continues doing repair work, the city is liable.
Mr. Ambrose stated at the last budget meeting, the city council
identified 3 projects to be held up until we get the March sales tax
report. This was one of the items and the reason this item was
included was just to get authorization to go to bid. Once bids come
in, the city council can still throw all the bids out. They don't
have to accept any of the bids.
Mayor Protempore Burton asked if we go to bid, is there an implied
responsibility.
Mr. Ambrose indicated that this is the repair program that was
approved in June of 1992.
Mr. Thompson advised that this program last year was split into 2
parts. He discussed the grinding portion of the program. He
estimated about $37,000 for the first phase. Staff doesn't want to
run this work into the next fiscal year.
Mr. Ambrose advised that if it gets pushed into next year, then it
probably would be eliminated.
Cm. Moffatt stated his main concern was the city assuming liability.
city Attorney Silver stated in terms of liability, it is better for
the city to have a proactive program of identifying sidewalks where
repairs are necessary than not doing anything. The Municipal Code
indicates that the property owner has responsibility as well as the
city.
Mr. Ambrose stated Staff was trying to minimize the City'S exposure
for a trip and fall.
Cm. Moffatt made a motion to table this until more information is
available in 30 to 60 days. The motion died due to lack of a second.
On motion of Cm. Houston, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by majority
vote, the Council authorized staff to advertise Contract 93-03, Annual
Sidewalk Safety Repair Program, for bids (600-30). Cm. Moffatt voted
against this motion.
* * * *
PUBLIe HEARING
DUBLIN SWIM eENTER FEE SeHEDULE (250-10)
Mayor Protempore Burton opened the public hearing.
Recreation Director Lowart presented the Staff Report and advised that
a revised fee schedule for the Swim Center was prepared which reflect
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
eM - VOL 12 - 97
Regular Meeting
March 8, 1993
.
.
changes in the marketplace and also in the cost of providing the
service.
staff proposed to change the fee schedule as follows:
o - 5 Years
6 - 17 Years
Adults
seniors
Family Pass - $85.00
Single Admission
$ .75
$ 1.50
$ 2.00
$ 1.50
(Dublin Residents
swim
Pass (15
$ 7.50
$15.00
$20.00
$15.00
Swims)
Only)
Cm. Moffatt asked if this had been before the Park & Recreation
Commission.
Ms. Lowart responded that due to the timing, it did not go before the
Commission.
Cm. Moffatt questioned the definition of a senior.
Ms. Lowart advised that a senior would be considered to be someone 55
years or over.
Mayor Protempore Burton asked for an explanation of the policy on
family passes being for Dublin residents only. He questioned why we
should make it a law if there were only 2 or 3 families involved who
don't live in Dublin.
Ms. Lowart advised that the Commission will be reviewing the resident
requirement.
Cm. Moffatt agreed that the Park & Recreation Commission should
discuss this as a policy issue.
No members of the public gave testimony relative to this item.
Mayor Protempore Burton closed the pUblic hearing.
Cm. Moffatt discussed the family pass rate for Dublin residents only
and thought the Park & Recreation Commission should make a
determination on this.
On motion of Crn. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Houston, and by unanimous
vote (Mayor Snyder absent), the Council adopted
RESOLUTION NO. 31 - 93
AMENDING THE FEE SCHEDULE FOR THE
DUBLIN SWIM eENTER
The Council agreed to defer the issue of non-resident family passes to
the recommendation of the Park & Recreation Commission.
* * * *
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
eM - VOL 12 - 98
Regular Meeting March 8, 1993
.
.
DUBLIN FINE ARTS FOUNDATION REQUEST
"ART AND THE ENVIRONMENT" (600-30 , 900-50)
Recreation Director Lowart advised that the DFA is requesting to place
a temporary sculpture in the city right-of-way on the west side of San
Ramon Road and also a second exhibition which is still under consider-
ation, and finally, to place an exhibition in the civic Center Lobby
area.
Ms. Lowart advised that the proposal for installation on the hillside
of San Ramon Road near Vomac Road is from Ray Beldner. The sculpture,
entitled, "Nature Remains", would have letters to be constructed out
of metal, mesh and recyclable materials donated by Livermore-Dublin
Disposal. The sculpture will be approximately 60' long and each
letter will be 4' high by 3' wide by l' deep. The idea came from the
Walt Whitman poem. After you have exhausted what there is in
business, politics, conviviality, and so on - have found that none of
these finally satisfy, or permanently wear - what remains? Nature
remains.
The temporary works are planned for installation during the week of
April 5th in order to coincide with Dublin Pride Week, and would
remain until the end of June.
Another component of the "Art and the Environment" celebration is a
civic Center lobby exhibit highlighting the works created by 4th and
5th graders from the Art Education in the Schools program. This
temporary exhibition will begin the week of May 10th and continue
through the end of June.
Ms. Lowart stated it was her understanding that DFA has just selected
the artist for the second exhibition and that Lynne Baer would discuss
this.
Lynne Baer, Executive Director of the Dublin Fine Arts Foundation
thanked the City Council for its continued support. She then showed
slides of the concepts being proposed.
Mayor Protempore Burton expressed concern with open containers in the
'Nature Remains' exhibit which might attract mosquitoes.
Cm. Moffatt asked how long it would be up.
Ms. Baer stated it will go up on April 5th and will be taken down by
June 30th. They received grants and it is fully funded. They are
paying the artist to install the piece.
Mayor Protempore Burton asked if there will be pUblicity.
Ms. Baer advised that they will have a reception to pUblicize the
events. The second display which they hope to place on the grassy
area in front of the Library is by a Japanese American artist. The
display will point out that the environment is both man-made and
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
eM - VOL 12 - 99
Regular Meeting
March 8, 1993
. .
natural. Her pieces reconstruct nature. The school project portion
is being underwritten by Lucky stores.
Cm. Houston questioned on the 'Nature Remains' exhibit why words were
selected instead of something visual. His first thought was of the
big HOLLYWOOD sign.
Ms. Baer stated this is the idea; they didn't feel the response would
be as strong to an image.
Mayor Protempore Burton asked if the Walt Whitman poem will be tied in
somehow.
Ms. Baer said that it would.
Cm. Moffatt stated DFA always stimulates and projects thoughts and he
strongly supports this exhibition.
On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous
vote, the Council approved the request, subject to conditions that:
1) all installations, including location, shall be approved by the
Public Works Department; and 2) Staff shall prepare a signed waiver to
be completed by the Artists.
Linda Jeffery, President of the DFA thanked the city council and
advised that DFA will be starting another round of selling tiles. She
pointed out that this is a good way to recognize new babies.
* * * *
REPORT FROM BUSINESS TASK FORCE
ON FORMATION OF A BUSINESS AssoeIATION (470-50)
Assistant city Manager Rankin presented the staff Report and stated
that included in the adopted 1987 Downtown Specific Plan was a
recommendation that the city take steps to implement a Business
Association, as provided for under State Law. The city council has
established a Business Task Force to consider issues suggested in the
Specific Plan. The Task Force has completed an in-depth review and
has formulated a recommended approach on this issue.
Mr. Rankin advised that throughout the process, the Special Programs
Subcommittee found that businesses were interested in the concepts;
however, there was not a strong sense of commitment to establish an
Association. This is partly due to the nature of small businesses and
the difficulty in spending time away from their business. To be
successful, there needs to be a core group of businesses which
enthusiastically support the effort.
Mr. Rankin stated the consensus of those participating in the Task
Force meetings was for the city to encourage the Chamber of Commerce
to undertake a leadership role in addressing the needs and concerns of
the Dublin Retail Community. Staff recommended that this effort be
structured to identify specific issues and topics to be addressed. It
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
eM - VOL 12 - 100
Regular Meeting
March 8, 1993
.
.
is not foreseen that the city would have a direct role beyond having a
staff Member available to respond to any issues which corne up where
the city has an obligation.
Janet Lockhart advised that the Chamber Board will meet on Wednesday.
Discussion so far has been that this is a great project for the
Chamber of Commerce to take on. They will be seeking to learn if
there is an interest in the business community. She sees this as a
positive step, and feels there is a real openness to this.
Mayor Protempore Burton stated he was glad to see the Chamber of
Commerce coming into this process.
Ms. Lockhart stated what is needed now is to communicate real well.
Mayor Protempore Burton complimented staff for always being there and
putting a lot of effort into this. It apparently just wasn't the
right program or the right timing. It looks like we are resolving at
least one of the issues though in getting the City Council and the
Chamber of Commerce together.
Cm. Houston passed out to the Council a newspaper article about the
City of Tracy. The secret of their success was they really used an
Economic Development Committee to get their city going. This might be
something to discuss with Tracy's representatives.
Mayor Protempore Burton advised that one of the consultants who spoke
to the group was from Tracy.
Cm. Houston stated he thought you have to include the whole city in
something like this, not just 1 or 2 streets.
On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous
vote (Mayor Snyder absent), the council authorized the Mayor to send a
letter to the Chamber of Commerce leadership to encourage their
efforts to address issues facing the retail business community.
* * * *
BUSINESS TASK FORCE REVIEW OF
MODIFICATION TO POLIey GOVERNING OUTDOOR SALES (450-20)
Assistant city Manager Rankin presented the Staff Report and advised
that in April of 1992, the City Council received a request to
reconsider current restrictions which prohibit outdoor sales. The
City Council suggested that the issue be considered by the Business
Task Force. The Task Force has provided input as to issues which
should be covered by a revision. In addition, staff has presented a
means by which outdoor sales could be approved under the current
Ordinance, while a modification is being developed and considered.
Mr. Rankin discussed the current restrictions and the City Council
pOlicy on outdoor sales, which was established in 1984. The Business
Task Force review and findings were also discussed.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CM - VOL 12 - 101
Regular Meeting
March 8, 1993
.
.
Mr. Rankin stated Staff recommended that the city council pursue a
process which would allow outdoor sales to be approved without the
requirement for an ACUP. A process utilizing a zoning Clearance could
be developed, which would be consistent with the current approval of
other temporary uses. The process to accommodate this change was
discussed.
An interim process which would allow for the conduct of special sales
this summer was identified and discussed. The process would involve
the City council adopting a resolution which revises the current
policy regarding the interpretation of outdoor sales. In the
meantime, Staff would work on the amendments to simplify the approval
by having the permit issuance handled as a Zoning Clearance.
Mr. Rankin advised that if the Council is interested in pursuing a
modification, it will be necessary to identify the priority of this
project in relation to other assignments.
Cm. Moffatt asked if there would be any input from local businesses in
developing some new concepts. will this be Staff developed or with
cooperation of some of the community?
Mr. Rankin stated they have the input from the Business Task Force and
the Chamber of Commerce has discussed this with a separate group of
businesses. Staff would present something before the Planning
Commission at a public hearing. The intent is to move it along and
there would be hearings before both the Planning Commission and the
city Council.
Cm. Moffatt asked if there was any way to speed up the process for a
Zoning Clearance from 30 days.
Planning Director Tong clarified that the Zoning Clearance is
basically an over-the-counter process, but there is a 5-day appeal
period. Both the Zoning Clearance and an ACUP have a set $25 fee.
Mayor Protempore Burton felt that people will be aSking what the
criteria is for promotions. Will every little store or place have to
have a permit? We should look at joint promotions. The Planning
staff and Task Force should review this.
Cm. Houston asked if a store wants to have a promotion once a quarter,
do they have to corne in each time or can they come in once at the
beginning of the year and state they will be having sales every
quarter? He would like to see it as a one-time fee for the year.
Mr. Rankin stated the difficulty is whether or not they would know
what days they will have the sales and the specifics.
Cm. Houston questioned the reason the city needs to know this. Maybe
we don't need to be on top of every single thing with the business
community.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
eM - VOL 12 - 102
Regular Meeting
March 8, 1993
.
.
Mr. Rankin advised that potential traffic control is one
consideration.
Mr. Ambrose questioned how we would make certain that people are not
violating our Ordinance. There has to be some way of checking it or
why do we have the Ordinance. Guidelines must be adopted. He
questioned whether an interim process would work without guidelines.
Cm. Houston stated San Ramon has some very liberal guidelines for
outdoor sales, particularly during the summer months.
Janet Lockhart stated this issue got more attention from the business
community than anything in a long time. They worked on this over a
period of a few months. The consensus was that everyone was excited
about getting this rOlling for this summer. The Chamber of Commerce
wanted to find an idea for getting businesses working together and
getting everybody excited about doing this. The Chamber is interested
in helping to promote this but they are limited in how much they can
actually do in setting up the events. They see this as a real
opportunity for the business community to corne together and work with
the city.
Cm. Houston asked if the Chamber had had time to review the draft
resolution.
Ms. Lockhart stated she would be happy to bring this up for discussion
at the Board meeting on Wednesday.
Mayor Protempore Burton indicated that the CUP is an interim measure
which would allow them to have their outside sales this year. It will
also give the City council ideas on what types of things need to be
added.
On motion of Cm. Houston, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous
vote (Mayor Snyder absent), the Council directed the Planning staff to
prepare a Zoning Ordinance modification based upon the input to date
for consideration by the Planning Commission. The Council adopted
RESOLUTION NO. 32 - 93
AMENDING THE CITY eOUNCIL POLIey ON OUTDOOR SALES
AND AUTHORIZING APPROVAL SUBJEeT TO SEeTION 8-60.60.1
OF THE ZONING ORDINANeE
With regard to the priority of this project in relation to other
assignments, given the current reduced staffing in the Planning
Department, the Council concurred that this should be given priority
over all the other Zoning Ordinance Amendment studies except for the
auto dealership signage study which was initiated in 1992.
* . * *
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
eM - VOL 12 - 103
Regular Meeting
March 8, 1993
.
.
AeCEPTANeE OF GIFT TO eITY (150-70)
Recreation Director Lowart advised that the parents of those children
enrolled in the city's Preschool Program recently conducted a raffle
to generate funds for the Program and collected $295, which they would
like to donate to the city.
On motion of ern. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous
vote (Mayor Snyder absent), the Council accepted the gift and directed
staff to prepare a formal acknowledgment to the donors.
. * * *
OPTION TO ACCEPT OR REJEeT
THE DELEGATION OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BAY AREA
AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT'S TRIP REDUeTION ORDINANeE (590-80)
Public Works Director Thompson gave the Staff Report and advised that
the city of Dublin adopted a mandated Trip Reduction Ordinance which
requires employers who employ 100 or more employees to have an in-
house program to encourage employees to use mass transit. The Bay
Area Air Quality Management District now has a similar, but more
restrictive TRO and is asking if the cities would like to implement
the BAAQMD's ordinance in lieu of the District implementing their own
ordinance.
Cm. Moffatt asked if this decision is made now, can we go back in the
future and change our minds.
Mr. Thompson stated if we decide to take it over, we do have the
option to get out at some time in the future. He felt that things
will change in the next year and a half and the rules might be more
liberal in allowing us to go back and forth from one to the other.
Cm. Moffatt asked if we can utilize our existing Ordinance until 1994.
Mr. Thompson advised that the District wants to know by the end of
April on how we want to go.
Mr. Ambrose stated this is an opportunity to give the mandate back.
Mayor Protempore Burton stated he was concerned that the Air Quality
group has tremendous power they haven't used yet. They will be a
gargantuous agency. He stated he was inclined to want to keep control
for as long as we can.
Mr. Thompson stated the problem is they put it all on us to administer
their program. If we are found to be in violation, they can corne
after us.
Cm. Moffatt felt we should say to the Air Quality Board that we will
give it up in 1994 and in this way, we can have our own rules until
then; otherwise we have to adhere to their high standards and enforce
it.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
eM - VOL 12 - 104
Regular Meeting
March 8, 1993
.
.
On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by em. Howard, and by unanimous
vote, the Council agreed to not accept BAAQMD's TRO delegation of
authority and to continue implementing Dublin's TRO until July 1994,
and authorized the Mayor to notify BAAQMD by letter of the Council's
action.
* * * *
ITEM ADDED TO AGENDA
DIseUSSION REGARDING FACILITATOR AT EAST DUBLIN MEETING (420-30)
Planning Director Tong advised that Staff had contacted 3 or 4
professional facilitators regarding the possibility of covering the
March 30th meeting regarding the East Dublin GPA & SP. Several
indicated their availability and stated they would meet with Staff,
review background models and then hold a debriefing meeting with Staff
for $1,800 to $2,000. Staff would need to let the facilitator know
right away, and requested direction from the Council.
Mayor Protempore Burton stated the memo which was distributed,
"Environmental Groups' List of Major Points of Disagreement with
Proposed Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment for Eastern Dublin" did
not sound as if they were willing to compromise in any way.
Cm. Moffatt felt there should be some kind of a conflict resolution
type of meeting. We could say these are the big points and these are
the little points and then the city Council could make a decision on
how they feel is the best way to go. This will bring everything out
on the table and the public will have a chance to have input. We have
gone through this for 4 or 5 years and there are still some problems
and this would be an attempt to resolve these problems.
Cm. Howard pointed out that Ted Fairfield had volunteered to pay for
the facilitator.
Mayor Protempore Burton stated he felt the letter was very negative,
but the City should at least try to reach some compromise.
Ms. Silver stated the document being referenced was not part of the
pUblic record. A copy should be given to the city Clerk.
Staff advised that the letter carne in addressed to the City Clerk and
copies were made for the City Council and Staff.
Mayor Protempore Burton stated the objective was to get this over
with. Whoever is involved should realize that the city council can't
start over.
Janet Lockhart stated she felt a facilitated meeting was a good idea.
Local businesses could give input.
Becky Hopkins stated she also felt this was a very good idea and
effort on the part of the city to show the community that we do want
to work this out. Hiring a facilitator to do this would be a very
positive show of this.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
eM - VOL 12 - 105
Regular Meeting
March 8, 1993
.
.
steve Lockhart stated he would like for the city to accept Ted
Fairfield's $2,000 donation to help pay for this expense.
Mayor Protempore Burton stated he had been advised by the city
Attorney that it is not a good idea to accept this money.
On motion of Cm. Houston, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous
vote (Mayor Snyder absent), the Council directed staff to proceed with
a facilitator for the March 30th meeting.
Mr. Ambrose felt that the Council can identify those issues that
require further study so that on April 20th, the Council could deter-
mine if further review would be required by the Planning Commission.
Mayor Protempore Burton stated his understanding was that the Council
should not be in attendance on March 30th.
Ms. Silver stated the Council should be there as it will be a public
hearing.
Mr. Ambrose stated the Council could give direction on alternatives to
pursue.
Mayor Protempore Burton stated it should be understood that the
Council will not be making the final decision that night.
Mr. Ambrose indicated that if there are substantial changes, the
Planning Commission will have to reconsider the issue.
Discussion then centered around whether or not the Council will be
able to make a final decision on April 20th.
Ms. Silver advised that if the Council gives Staff preliminary
direction on March 30th to look at certain issues and to corne back on
April 20th, then the Council may be able to take a straw vote or
possibly even a final vote. It depends on the direction given on
March 30th. Some of the ideas discussed might require a supplement to
the EIR.
The Council agreed to hold the meeting in the Regional Meeting Room
and to begin at 7:00 p.m.
* * * *
OTHER BUSINESS
Business Reqistration for Firearm Dealers (390-40/585-80)
Cm. Moffatt stated he recently saw an article in the newspaper about
private gun dealers, which indicated that Dublin has 24 private
firearm dealers in the City. He questioned if they are licensed as
businesses in Dublin and also if the Police Department was aware of
where they are located.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
eM - VOL 12 - 106
Regular Meeting
March 8, 1993
.
.
.
.
Chief Rose stated he was aware that Dublin has quite a few. We have
people who have their dealership through their residence.
Cm. Moffatt stated he was concerned and wanted to make sure they are
all registered.
* * * *
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Council, the
meeting was adjourned at 9:38 p.m.
* * * *
Mayor
ATTEST:
city Clerk
* * * *
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
eM - VOL 12 - 107
Regular Meeting
March 8, 1993