Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.1 Approve 05-20-1991 and 05-28-1991 Minutes ti JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION/PARK & RECREATION COMMISSION STUDY SESSION - May 20, 1991 A special joint Dublin City Council/Planning Commission/Park & Recreation Commission study session meeting was held on May 20, 1991, in the Regional Meeting Room of the Dublin Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at 7: 30 p.m. , by Mayor Snyder. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Howard, Jeffery, Moffatt, and Mayor Snyder; Planning Commissioners Barnes, Burnham, North, Rafanelli and Zika; Park & Recreation Commissioners Downey, Donnell, and Jones. ABSENT: Councilmember Burton; Park & Recreation Commissioners Lockhart and Cahn PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Mayor led the Council , Staff and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. PARK MASTER PLAN STUDY SESSION Diane Lowart, Recreation Director, indicated that tonight's meeting would be to study the preliminary master park plan. There would be input from the Council , Commissioners and public. She reminded everyone that this was not a public hearing. No decisions would be made at this time. Public hearings would be held at a later date. She introduced David and Linda Gates, and Laura Livingston, the consultants working on the Master Park Plan. David Gates indicated that this proposed plan would be for a projected population of 85,000. He would be focusing on several pieces of the plan with an overview of the big picture. Linda Gates described the proposed plan. She indicated that they had reviewed the existing Dublin facilities and policies as well as the surrounding Tri-Valley communities. This established a base for them to proceed on. Ms. Gates indicated there were several different types of facilities, i.e. , neighborhood parks, community parks, city parks, etc. She described some of the standard needs for the city, such as approximately 60-80 acres of community parks and 80-100 acres for a city park. CM - Vol 10 - 186 Study Session May 20 , 1991 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- / COPIES TO: ITEM NO. � Mr: Gates presented a slide show. The slides described the existing facilities, land uses for parks; regional context; park programs; creek areas; urban trails; town square concept; pocket parks; neighborhood parks; community parks; central/city parks; and open space areas. Councilmember Moffatt asked if the County and Federal land had been taken into consideration when producing the park acreage. Mr. Gates indicated yes, except for Camp Parks. Commissioner North questioned the City park location in the East Dublin area. Was this location coordinated with the East Dublin planners. Mr. Gates indicated yes. He indicated that the proposed master park plan had more land for parks than the East Dublin plan. The actual location has not been determined and other areas can be explored. However, this piece of property is a very good location for a park. Brenda Gillarde, project coordinator for the East Dublin project, indicated that the East Dublin preliminary land use plan shows a portion of that area to be for medium density housing. Ms. Gates indicated that the location could be changed or trade offs be negotiated. Commissioner Zika felt that the master plan was to his liking. He asked if land that was considered unbuildable had been counted when considering the amount of acreage needed for park use. Mr. Gates indicated that unbuildable land was not counted. Commissioner Zika asked if the wind factor in the city had been considered. Mr. Gates indicated that they had studied several areas. With the correct designs, the wind factor could be handled. Commissioner Burnham felt that school property could be shared for park use. Ms. Gates indicated that the system had been set up without the use of school property. There was the possibility for a shared use. Mr. Gates felt that the door would be left open for sharing school property. There was the possibility of adjacent uses. Commissioner North felt that if people had to travel through Dublin Boulevard to get to the City park, people would not go. This would divide up the city. Commissioner Jones indicated that he was in favor of the central park located in the East Dublin area. It would bring the community together at one location. He liked the golf course on the west side CM - Vol 10 - 187 Study Session May 20 , 1991 of. Dublin. He preferred not to have neighborhood parks located on school land. The parks would not always be accessible to the public. Commissioner Donnell felt that the variety of parks being proposed . would address the needs of the City. The central location of the city park was a good idea. She indicated that people should not worry so much about "West" and "East" Dublin. The concern was all in their minds. Commissioner Downey was in favor of the proposed plan. He indicated that the consultants had accomplished a great deal and had created a good plan. Councilmember Howard agreed with the Recreation Commissioners. She was in favor of the plan. She indicated that the parks should not be shared with school lands. Councilmember Jeffery asked where the consultants came up with a projected population of 85,000. Ms. Gates indicated that they had looked at the Specific Plan and had been working with ABAG. The projection is reasonable and supportable. Councilmember Jeffery mentioned that the City might want to look into more recycling programs, such as composting. No other city would have such a program. Fred Doolittle had concerns regarding the impact on bicyclists and pedestrians. He suggested that the city look into a seamless network of trails linking to trails in adjacent cities. The existing streets of Dublin are not designed for bikes. There was a need for bike paths. He indicated that a connection from Dublin to Pleasanton would be a good idea. Marjorie LaBar had concerns regarding traffic congestion. She indicated there needed to be access from the east to west side of Dublin without using automobiles. She liked the idea of community gardens and the trail system in the West Dublin area. Carolyn Morgan had concerns regarding the animal population in the East Dublin area. There was a need for more horse trails. Dublin should contact Livermore Area Recreation and Park District (LARPD) and coordinate the plan with them. She felt that the Livermore Airport Protection Zone would be a good location for the golf course. An audience member expressed interest in seeing community and/or botanical garden uses as well as trails for walking and/or bicycling. Bob Gee was in favor of park trails. Different activities could work together. Zev Kahn questioned whether unusable land areas were being used to calculate the estimated acreage of park land needed for the city. He felt that school property could be used for practice fields. He was CM - Vol 10 - 188 Study Session May 20 , 1991 concerned that the West Dublin area would become another "Blackhawk" community. Ms. Gates indicated that using school property would balance out the total acreage of land required. Harvey Scudder had concerns regarding the elimination of open space areas. Were there any guidelines for preserving and/or using the open space areas for recreation? Mr. Gates indicated that there were guidelines for the open space areas. They would be meeting with Livermore and the East Bay Regional Park District to discuss these issues. There were valuable wildlife areas and the open space would need a management program. Councilmember Snyder felt that management, public or private, of the open space was a major issue. Donna Ogilvie had concerns regarding the animal habitat in the Dublin Canyon area. An audience member indicated that science and music centers would be a nice addition to the community. Mr. Gates indicated that cultural environments, such as zoos, theaters, etc. had been discussed. Milton Righetti indicated that the city should look into using grey/flood waters. Jim Stedman, representative for the Pao Lin family, indicated that they were working closely on developing their property. The proposed City park was on very valuable land and he was concerned about the park being developed on their site. His client would be concerned about the loss of his valuable property. Mr. Gates indicated that the location of parks was still in the preliminary stages and could be altered. Ron Blair had concerns regarding the loss of part of the sportsground site when Caltrans started working on the I-680/580 corridor. He felt that additional fields should be considered. Mr. Gates indicated that additional fields and trade offs located in other areas were being considered. Diane Watts had concerns regarding over development and wanted the open space areas spared. Councilmember Jeffery commented that there should be some restrictions on park usage in areas where eagle nests had been spotted. She questioned if these restricted areas could be used for recreation. Ms. Gates commented that some usage could occur in these areas; however strict guidelines would apply. CM - Vol 10 - 189 Study Session May 20 , 1991 Commissioner North asked what the possibility would be to locate a sportsground or golf course on the Camp Parks land. Mr. Gates indicated that this would be a gamble since the City may not get the land. Camp Parks could be an additional resource or bonus if the City was to acquire it. Commissioner North asked how many fields would be located at the City park. Ms. Gates indicated there would be approximately 8-10 fields. Mayor Snyder indicated that the public comment period was completed. Commissioner North indicated that he would like to see a golf course located near Camp Parks. Commissioner Burnham felt that it was premature to make permanent locations for parks. Commissioner Rafanelli felt that the proposed plan would link East and West Dublin with Central Dublin. He would like to see a small park located on Camp Parks. Commissioner Barnes was in favor of the proposed plan and liked the City park location. Councilmember Jeffery indicated that she would like to see more senior activities/programs, museums, trails/bike paths, and botanical gardens. The standard park ratios looked good. Community parks should have priority over neighborhood parks. There should be . different activities located in different recreational facilities. She indicated that there was potential for the closure of Camp Parks and there might be the possibility for usage of this land. Councilmember Moffatt was in favor of the proposed plan. He felt that there should be some flexibility on the location of the parks. Mayor Snyder agreed with Cm. Moffatt. He indicated that we needed to allow for trade offs in the future. Ms. Lowart indicated that the next step would to create an Administrative Draft Master Park Plan incorporating the input at tonight's meeting. It may be necessary to schedule another study session for the end of June. If not, a public hearing date will be set. CM - Vol 10 - 190 Study Session May 20 , 1991 ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9: 30 p.m. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk CM - Vol 10 - 191 Study Session May 20 , 1991 REGULAR MEETING - May 28, 1991 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Tuesday, May 28 , 1991, in the Council Chambers of the Dublin Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at 7: 30 p.m. , by Mayor Snyder. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Howard, Jeffery, Moffatt and Mayor Snyder. ABSENT: Councilmember Burton. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Mayor led the Council, Staff and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. DUBLIN PRIDE WEEK RECOGNITION (150-80) In recognition of participation in 1991 Dublin Pride Week activities, plaques were presented to representatives from all public and private schools in Dublin. These included: Adria & Michaela Shelton from St. Raymond's School; Elisha Peters from Valley Christian Elementary; Jeff Gadd from Valley Christian High School; Bill Basacker from Dublin High School; Rachel Statham from Frederiksen School; Jacob Goodwin, Jason Benz, Wanjiku Kamau (Kids for Saving the Earth Club) from Murray School; Janell Dilks from Nielsen School; Ann Read, Principal of Wells Middle School; and Liam Reardon from Valley High School. No one was present to accept the plaque from Valley Lutheran School. Brian McBride, Principal of Frederiksen School stated he felt this event provided a wonderful relationship with the City and they also appreciated the new playground at their school. Richard Del Tredici, Principal of Valley High School felt this was a real nice opportunity for the students to participate. Several other school faculty members, students and parents were present in the audience. Presentation to Mike Nave Former City Attorney (610-50) Mayor Snyder presented a plaque to Mike Nave, Dublin's first City Attorney and honored him for serving as City Attorney during Dublin's formative years from 1982 to 1990. Cm. Jeffery stated she especially appreciated Mr. Nave's sense of humor and his ability to entertain. A*A*A*A*�*A*A*A*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*A*A*^*A*A*A*A*^* CM - VOL 10 - 192 Regular Meeting May 28, 1991 Mr. Nave stated it was a great 8 years and he feels that Dublin is a great City. It is wonderful to have friends in such a special City. Everyone who lives in Dublin should be very proud of their City Council. He specifically noted that the appearance of Dublin Boulevard looked very pleasing now that the trees are 20-30' tall. He was very proud to have been Dublin's first City Attorney. Mayor Snyder stated had it not been for Mr. Nave and Interim City Manager George Gaekle, Dublin residents would not have been so fortunate as to collect 1% of the sales tax. We had to sue the County to be able to collect our full share. This is but one example of the very fine work that Mike has done on Dublin's behalf. CONSENT CALENDAR On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Burton absent) , the Council took the following actions: Approved Minutes of Regular Meeting of May 13, 1991; Received the Winter Quarter, 1991 Recreation Report (950-30) ; Authorized the City Manager's attendance at the ICMA Annual Conference being held in Boston on September 22-25, 1991 (710-20) ; Accepted improvements under Contract 91-01, Annual Sidewalk Safety Repair Program, and authorized final progress payment of $4 , 039 . 56 to E & D Systems (600-30) ; Accepted improvements under Contract 90-02, Alamo Creek Park Phase II, authorized $17 ,892 . 13 retention payment to RMT Landscaping, authorized Staff to release $15,821 which is being withheld due to a Subcontractor Stop Notice, once the Notice has been legally cleared, and authorized a $104 , 170 transfer from Unallocated Reserves into this project account (600-30) ; Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 42 - 91 APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH GRAPEVINE CLEANING SERVICE FOR CITY FACILITIES JANITORIAL SERVICES (600-30) (Civic Center-$4,517, Shannon Center-$1, 148, Senior Center-$573) Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 43 - 91 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH TERRASEARCH, INC. , TO CONDUCT AN ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT FOR THE DUBLIN BOULEVARD EXTENSION PROJECT (600-30) (Not to Exceed $6,800) A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A* CM - VOL 10 - 193 Regular Meeting May 28, 1991 Awarded bid for 3 IBM PS2 MOD30 Computer Units (replacing Development Services Syntrex Systems) to Whole Earth Access ($8 , 719 .92) and authorized an additional appropriation of $8, 720 from the Internal Service Fund reserve (380-20) ; Approved Warrant Register (300-40) in the amount of $342, 255. 83 . Cm. Howard requested that the report on the Afterschool Recreation Program be removed from the consent calendar for discussion. She asked if parents are warned a couple of times of the closing time. Recreation Director Lowart advised that they had never gotten to that point. There have been a couple of cases where parents advised that they would be late and the child would wait somewhere unsupervised. On motion of Cm. Howard, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Burton absent) , the Council received the report related to the Recreation Afterschool Program procedures (950-30) ; HOPE HOSPICE REQUEST RE TREE OF LIFE (560-60) Recreation Director Lowart advised that the organization, Hope Hospice, has requested the City's assistance in locating a tree site for their benefit event "Light Up a Life" . They would like the tree to be located in an area that is fairly visible to the community and ideally, have adequate space available for a tree lighting ceremony. City Staff recommended that the tree at the Library be utilized, and this has been discussed with representatives of both Hope Hospice and the Dublin Library. The annual cost to the City to install the lights on the tree is approximately $440. If the City no longer did this, we would reduce our expenditures. Cm. Moffatt stated he liked this idea very much; it is an excellent way for the City to help others. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Burton absent) , the Council granted permission for Hope Hospice to utilize the tree at the Dublin Library for their fund raising event. CITY OF SAN RAMON - PROMETHEUS DEVELOPMENT'S GATEWAY PROJECT (420-50) Planning Director Tong advised that several residents have written letters and called about the Prometheus Development's Gateway Project in San Ramon. The proposed project includes a 111, 000 square foot neighborhood retail shopping center and 140 single-family residential dwelling units on 85 acres at the northwest intersection of Alcosta Boulevard and San Ramon Valley Boulevard in San Ramon. The shopping center would include 2 anchor tenants, a Lucky Super Market A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A* CM - VOL 10 - 194 Regular Meeting May 28, 1991 (relocating from Dublin) and a Walgreens Drug Store. Dublin residents have expressed concerns about the potential impacts from the proposed project and the need for adequate mitigation measures. Mr. Tong distributed copies of their proposed site plan map. He advised that Dublin Planning Staff has identified issues and concerns related to traffic, noise, aesthetics, construction impacts, geotechnical and environmental review. William McCauley, 8786 Augusta Court stated that most of the issues of concern were addressed. This is a disturbing occurrence, particularly for those residents right on Alcosta Boulevard. Residents have listened to the developer describe the plan. They originally thought this site was to be residential. It is surprising that when you look at this project and consider the affects on an established neighboring community, it will have a profound affect on the neighboring area. Since Lucky's is a 24 hour operation, this seems like an enormous imposition on the community. Headlights from cars and trucks, as well as parking lot lights will also be another problem. Mr. McCauley discussed the proposed hook ramp. CalTrans advised that this was a very dubious project and that this was at least 6 years in the future. They have met with the developer and let him know their concerns. Another meeting is scheduled for Wednesday evening. He was very concerned regarding their basic integrity. Much of what he has heard doesn't give him much solace. He asked what they could expect in the way of help from the City. He questioned if this was a typical case of "you can't fight city hall" . He stated he hoped that the Dublin City Council is on good terms with the San Ramon City Council. He stated he believed that something can and will be done to make sure that everyone wins in this situation. Cm. Moffatt questioned what they were looking for. Lucky's is right across the street from them now. If they enlarged their store to 50, 000 or 60, 000 sq ft, Cm. Moffatt asked if this would be of concern to them. Mr. McCauley stated this was a different situation; he was talking about imposing on an established neighborhood. Lucky's was there when the neighborhood was built. This brings about a completely different situation and imposes hardships that don't currently exist. Cm. Moffatt questioned if they had seen any traffic figures on this area. Mr. McCauley stated they looked at some traffic studies of the area. It is particularly disturbing when you look at the traffic going up and down Southwick. It is shown as zero, so this would indicate that the street may be closed. Mr. Tong stated it was his understanding that there is no proposal to close off Southwick. Mr. McCauley stated it really didn't take an engineering degree to see how things are being set up. w*w*A*A*A*A*A*A*^*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*^*A*^*^*A*^*A*A*^* CM - VOL 10 - 195 Regular Meeting May 28, 1991 Cm. Moffatt questioned if ingress and egress were closed off of Alcosta Boulevard, if this would be an acceptable mitigation measure. Mr. McCauley advised that he would have to review this further before he could comment. They would certainly give consideration to any mitigations. He felt they could accept a mitigation factor of placing the shopping center on the north and residential on the south end of the project site. Michael Merrill, 8798 Augusta Court stated his rear property line backs up to Alcosta Boulevard. He expressed concern because somehow Dublin was not informed about this project. They are the only neighbors of this project and until very recently, they were never informed that this project was even going on. This certainly seems suspect. He was concerned that shopping centers attract crime, particularly those close to freeways become ideal for drug type crimes. The idea of good neighborliness should require the City of San Ramon to at least inform adjoining property owners. He thanked those Councilmembers who took the time to show up last week at their meeting and provide input. They look forward to any help the City can give them in resolving this. Cm. Jeffery stated she felt it was extremely rude on San Ramon's part that neither the residents nor the City were notified. Michael Jarchow, 8618 Southwick Drive thanked Mr. Tong's Office for , their helpfulness in this matter. He was concerned regarding conflicting information which has been given by the developer. Everyone is somewhat overly sensitive about this project. The shopping center could be moved to the north. He stated they need help from the City of Dublin. It seems that Dublin is getting the dark side of the fence from this development. The development will occur, and those impacted want some say in the process of how it will be done. Todd Regonini with Prometheus Development in San Mateo advised that they are currently processing the Gateway Project in San Ramon. The site is about 85 acres. He displayed maps and gave a background of the project. They concur with the recommendations of the Dublin Planning Staff and feel this is the best method and program to move forward. They will be meeting with the neighbors tomorrow night. A good portion of the information is not yet put together, but they will be dealing with the concerns at the meeting the following evening. Cm. Jeffery stated she did not feel the size of the project warranted a shopping center and she questioned their marketing research. Mr. Regonini advised that there had been a substantial amount of market research done. The stores feel there is a strong need in the area. A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*AL A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A* CM - VOL 1 0 - 1 9 6 Regular Meeting May 28, 1991 Cm. Jeffery stated she felt a lot of people will not shop at Lucky's if they move into San Ramon. She asked if they had considered not having an exit onto Alcosta Boulevard. She also asked if delivery trucks could enter the project at a place where they would impact the project rather than the residents of Dublin. Mr. Regonini stated they were considering having the main entry to service areas behind the stores from the north. This would reduce the truck and service traffic on Alcosta to exiting vehicles only. Cm. Jeffery questioned what other projects they have going in the Valley. Mr. Regonini advised that their most recently completed project is the Hacienda Garden Apartments in Pleasanton. They also finished up 1333 North California Street in Walnut Creek where Scott's Seafood Restaurant is located. Cm. Jeffery advised that if they ever considered doing a project in Dublin, we would demand courtesy. The Dublin Council meets regularly with the San Ramon Council at liaison meetings and this could have been discussed. Cm. Moffatt asked how long they had been in business and also who the principals were. Mr. Regonini responded that they had been in business for 25 years. It is a privately held company with one major partner and 4 vice presidents. They are located in San Mateo. Cm. Howard questioned the hook ramps which were mentioned to be built in the future. This will be a long detailed process in order to meet all the design requirements of CalTrans. Ingress and egress were discussed and Mr. Regonini advised that there will be some additional signalized intersections in the future. Ms. Jeri Kuni, 8799 Augusta Court referenced the San Ramon Planning Commission report related to the required findings. They state that the proposed development will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed development. She stated she hopes that San Ramon will live up to their statements. Cm. Jeffery questioned if the hook ramp is the one that the City of San Ramon will have to pay for themselves and stated that if this is the case, it may not occur. Mr. Tong advised that TJKM is currently reviewing a copy of the traffic study. We have also requested a copy of the Final EIR. Cm. Jeffery advised that Dublin had an agreement with San Ramon regarding the signal at Alcosta/San Ramon Road/San Ramon Valley A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A* CM - VOL 10 - 197 Regular Meeting May 28, 1991 Boulevard. We put the signal in and they agreed to handle costs of maintenance and any modifications in the future. Mr. Ambrose stated that the agreement recognizes that they are responsible for all future modifications. Mayor Snyder stated he presumed that there will be some benefit to the developer meeting with Dublin residents on Wednesday evening. The Planning Department will have contact with the City of San Ramon regarding this project and he was hesitant to ask for legal advice at this point in the process. Ms. Silver advised that she had only reviewed the Staff Report which was included in the agenda packet. She had not seen the description of the project or the EIR. She pointed out that Dublin does not have any control over land uses in the City of San Ramon. Mayor Snyder stated Dublin can comment under the EIR and will obviously do this to make sure mitigation measures are covered. Ms. Kuni questioned what happens after the Dublin City Attorney reviews the EIR and if something doesn't look right. Ms. Silver stated she would advise the Dublin Staff. Dublin residents need to follow the project very closely and make whatever objections they feel are appropriate. Mayor Snyder stated the City Attorney will advise the Planning Department if there are problems in the report. The mitigation efforts would attempt to come to some kind of conclusion and obviously, come to a win/win situation. Dublin's general protection is through the EIR process. It is quite common for developers to attempt to mitigate and listen to concerns as they go along. Tom Wadman, 8250 Rhoda Avenue expressed concern for Dublin as a whole as we lose shopping centers and/or they deteriorate. He asked if anyone had contacted Lucky's. Mayor Snyder discussed the downtown committee situation. This committee will be addressing this. He advised that he had spoken with representatives from Lucky's and invited them to sit down and discuss this. An unidentified member of the audience asked if the residents should challenge the EIR and if they did, questioned if Dublin would back them up. He advised that San Ramon even went so far as to contact the Town of Danville, but not the residents who are closest to the property. Ms. Silver advised that the EIR process is the opportunity for members of the public to comment on proposed projects. Comments need to be made to the City of San Ramon and can be submitted in writing or made at the public hearing. w*A*A*A*A*w*A*n*n*A*A*w*A*A*A*A*w*A*�*A*A*A*A*A*^*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A* CM - VOL 10 - 198 Regular Meeting May 28, 1991 Mr. Tong stated if the document is inadequate, the first recourse should be to address the City of San Ramon. This will only delay the project, but not stop it. It's also important for lines of communication with the City of Dublin to stay open. Cm. Moffatt asked if it would be appropriate to have a Dublin Planning Staff member present at the meeting the following night. Mayor Snyder stated if there was an invitation, we could certainly request that someone attend. Mr. Merrill stated they would welcome anyone from the Dublin Planning Department Staff to attend, as well as any Councilmember. The meeting was to be held at Majors Engineering, 100 Park Place, San Ramon. By a Council Consensus (Cm. Burton absent) , Staff was directed to continue to work with the developer, San Ramon, and residents in identifying potential impacts and obtaining adequate mitigation measures. REQUEST TO ESTABLISH DRUG FREE SCHOOL & PARK ZONES (580-40) Dublin Police Lt. Gomes advised that the Dublin Unified School District has requested that all public and private schools and all City parks be declared Drug Free Zones. While there are federal laws related to the use, sales, manufacturing and/or storage of controlled substances, they generally require that large amounts of a controlled substance be involved before the statutes can be enacted. Lt. Gomes advised that under the provisions of the California Juvenile Drug Free Zone Act of 1990, persons convicted of specific controlled substances violations within 1, 000 feet of schools, playgrounds or other specified facilities are subject to enhanced penalties when sentenced. The District Attorney's Office has assured Staff that they will charge eligible cases that occur in the City of Dublin with the appropriate enhancements as stipulated by law. This proposal would include the purchase, posting and maintenance of 21 Drug Free School Zone signs and 14 Drug Free Playground Zone signs at various school and park locations within the City. The estimated price for the installation of the signs is $100 per unit, which includes labor, steel pole and mounting hardware. This price does not include the signs themselves, which Staff estimates would not exceed $1, 000. Lt. Gomes pointed out that Valley Lutheran School had been left off the list. Lt. Gomes advised that the purpose of posting the signs is to provide a visible deterrent at schools and parks and to acquaint potential offenders with the additional penalties that may be incurred. Mayor Snyder indicated that signs may indeed be a deterrent, but we may not be aware of how much or if they help. A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A* CM - VOL 10 - 199 if ii Regular Meeting May 28, 1991 Cm. Jeffery asked if this item had come through the School Board. Lt. Gomes advised that Tom Mullican was part of a committee that started working through the School District in deciding how they wanted to go about this. At the time the committee began, there was only the Federal Law. There is now State Law in effect. Cm. Jeffery stated Berkeley has these signs up and it is kind of a joke. She indicated she had problems with putting up something like these signs as they do more harm than good. It seems to call negative attention to an area and also, they look tacky. Cm. Howard questioned if the Resolution could be adopted and the signs not put up. Lt. Gomes stated this could be done. Cm. Moffatt felt that any way you could stop the usage of drugs is certainly a valid program. He had discussed this with other cities and it seems to be very effective. This is a valuable tool to help stem the problem. Cm. Jeffery stated using this reasoning, why not also put up signs for prostitution free zones, stealing free zones, etc. Cm. Howard asked what would actually be on the signs. Lt. Gomes advised that the school committee recommended what the signs would say. Adoption of the Resolution will send out a message that the City supports this. Cm. Moffatt felt a Resolution would be forgotten in about 10 days. Cm. Jeffery stated if we put up these signs all over town, people making a decision on whether to move into our community would get the wrong impression. Dublin has drug problems, just as every community does, but she felt that these signs would take away from the warmth of the community. She did not feel that Dublin has such a great problem that it should be put up in neon. Cm. Moffatt stated he thought new people coming in would be happy to see the signs. Cm. Jeffery questioned if the money would come out of this years or next years budget. There will be things that might not get funded if money is spent on these signs. We may have to trade off something else. Mr. Ambrose advised that an option would be to have Staff include the project for consideration with next years budget when the Council deliberates in June. Cm. Moffatt asked if funds were available this year. CM - VOL 10 _ 200 if li ii if if .{ 1i if ii ii if i6 f Regular Meeting May 28, 1991 Mr. Ambrose advised that funds would have to be taken out of reserves. Cm. Moffatt made a motion which was seconded by Cm. Howard to adopt the resolution and to authorize a $4, 500 budget transfer from the Contingent Reserve to a new Capital Project Account for the purchase and installation of 37 signs. When questioned if Cm. Moffatt's motion included both adopting Resolution and installing signs, he verified that it did. Following further discussion, Cm. Moffatt withdrew his motion and Cm. Howard withdrew her second to the motion. On motion of Cm. Howard, seconded by Cm. Jeffery, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Burton absent) , the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 44 - 91 ESTABLISHING DRUG FREE SCHOOL AND PLAYGROUND ZONES WITHIN 1, 000 FEET OF DUBLIN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SCHOOLS AND RECREATION AREAS Mayor Snyder stated that installation of the signs would be considered during the budget deliberations. RELEASE OF WATER FROM DEL VALLE RESERVOIR COMMENTS FROM ZONE 7 BOARD OF DIRECTORS (1000-40) Public Works Director Thompson advised that in April, the City Council received an update on the status of drought restrictions and discussed the release of water by the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (Zone 7) from Del Valle Reservoir. The Council requested a status report regarding alternatives to the present system for releasing water from the reservoir. The State requires that the water level be kept at or below a specific point for flood control purposes. Zone 7's Chairman of the Board of Directors explained in correspondence that Del Valle Reservoir has a flood pool elevation of about 40, 000 acre feet. Normal operation is to fill the lake to the 40, 000 acre foot level by the end of May and maintain that level until after Labor Day when the State Department of Water Resources typically draws the lake down to about 25, 000 acre feet. This past winter, however, the Reservoir was left at about 30, 000 acre feet. Additionally, the DWR added another 7 , 000 acre feet to the Reservoir prior to March 4 , 1991. Therefore, the lake was nearly full, and it was not possible to capture local runoff without going over the 40, 000 acre foot level. A total of 3, 653 acre feet were released between March 25 and 27 , 1991. The Chairman's letter indicates that Zone 7 and 2 other water agencies have met with DWR to discuss the operation of Del Valle and the aqueduct. Zone 7 has also requested additional water from DWR to make up for the water that was released. ^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*. CM - VOL 10 - 201 Regular Meeting May 28, 1991 Mr. Thompson advised that Jim Dixon, General Manager of Zone 7 would make a presentation related to Zone 7's plans to increase well and pumping capacity so that the Valley would not be so dependent upon receiving water allotments from DWR. Mr. Dixon passed out charts and discussed the addition of additional wells. They will be able to produce about 75% of their demand. It is like needing a new car and buying 2 new cars in case one won't start. They plan to ask for 2 large additional wells on line by next year. They are projecting the water supply to be adequate to the year 2007. Mayor Snyder asked in years where the Valley's demands are somewhat less than what is available from the State Water Project, if it was Zone 7 's policy to accept what is available and then recharge the ground water system. Mr. Dixon advised that they never got the notice until very late, and they never expected to have to meet 100% of the daily demand from the ground water wells. Most agencies are making full payments to the State, but getting no water this year. They don't treat the water for agricultural purposes. Cm. Moffatt asked questioned related to Kaiser Sand & Gravel and Lone Star's levels. Mr. Dixon advised that they have agreed to pay so much per ton when they are through mining to reclaim the area for use by Zone 7. They have agreements for this. Cm. Moffatt questioned what happens to the excess water, and if it was given back to the State. Mr. Dixon advised that over the last few years, they have been taking their full allotment as they have more space in their underground basin. Cm. Moffatt advised that he had heard statements that we have a 10 year ground water supply and asked if this was correct. Mr. Dixon indicated that about 125, 000 acre feet could be extracted, which would last about 7 or 8 years. Recycled water and reverse osmosis procedures were discussed. Ground water will primarily be served this summer, so people will notice that it is harder. Mayor Snyder questioned the method of readjusting ABAG's projections and pointed out that they are not necessarily accurate from year to year. He asked the estimate of the per person water usage per day. Mr. Dixon advised that they will continue to update their Engineer's Report frequently as new information becomes available. They estimate an average of 200 gallons per day. This figure is also affected by industry in a community. A*w*A*A*A*^*A*A*^*A*A*A*A*A*^*A*A*A*A*A*A*^*A*A*A*A*A*A*^*^*^*A*A*^*^* CM - VOL 10 - 202 Regular Meeting May 28, 1991 The Council thanked Mr. Dixon for the report and Zone 7's response to Dublin's request. PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE ADOPTING 1990 EDITION OF NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE (440-20) Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. Chief Building Official Taugher advised that State Law requires the City to adopt the latest edition of the National Electrical Code within 6 months after the State has adopted the code. An Ordinance which would adopt the 1990 code was introduced at the May 13, 1991 City Council meeting. No comments were made by members of the public relative to this issue. Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Burton absent) , the Council waived the reading and adopted ORDINANCE NO. 7 - 91 AMENDING SECTION 7.36. 030 OF THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADOPTING THE 1990 EDITION OF THE NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE BY REFERENCE PUBLIC HEARING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ORDINANCE (600-10) Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. Planning Director Tong advised that on May 13, 1991, the City Council introduced the Development Agreement Ordinance which establishes procedures and requirements for the consideration of development agreements for specific projects. This Ordinance would add Chapter 8 . 12 to the Dublin Municipal Code. No comments were made by members of the public relative to this issue. Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Jeffery, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Burton absent) , the Council waived the reading and adopted ORDINANCE NO. 8 - 91 ADDING CHAPTER 8. 12 TO THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A* CM - VOL l 0 - 20 3 Regular Meeting May 28, 1991 PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR REVISIONS TO THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE (660-20) Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. City Attorney Silver advised that on May 13 , 1991, the City Council introduced an Ordinance which would add, delete and/or amend various chapters of the Dublin Municipal Code. Several of the changes were recommended as a result of the recent Conner vs. City of Santa Ana case, which requires a municipality to obtain a warrant prior to conducting inspections or abatement activities on private property. Most of the other changes are housekeeping in nature, and relate to location of issuance of Peddler Permits, Elections, Establishing Right-of-Way Lines, etc. The City Clerk will be coordinating the first update to the Municipal Code in the next few months, and all of these housekeeping type items can be corrected with the adoption of this Ordinance. Cm. Moffatt asked if there is a fee for a Peddler's Permit and how long they are good for. Ms. Silver advised that there is a fee, however, the change being recommended has nothing to do with the fee. The County would no longer be issuing the permits from their Hayward Office, but rather then would be issued by Dublin Police Services in the future. Lt. Gomes advised that normally, the permits are good for one year. Mayor Snyder indicated that on parking lot signs regarding used car lots, on the bottom of the signs there is reference to the Alameda County Sheriff's Office. He asked if this would be changed. Ms. Silver advised that the changes in this Ordinance only relate to Peddler's Permits. In most of the ordinances, we have changed reference from County to City. As new signs are put up, they will have the correct reference to the City. Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Burton absent) , the Council waived the reading and adopted ORDINANCE NO. 9 - 91 DELETING, AMENDING AND ADDING CERTAIN CHAPTERS AND SECTIONS OF THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE OFFICE PAPER RECYCLING PROGRAM FOR CITY OFFICES (810-60) Assistant City Manager Rankin advised that a proposal has been received from Livermore-Dublin Disposal (LDD) for the implementation of an office paper recycling program at City Offices, which will be w*n*n*n*w*�*�*n*n*w*n*n*n*A*n*..*A*A*�*n*�*A*A*n*n*A*A*A*n*A*A*n*A*A*A* CM - VOL 10 - 204 Regular Meeting May 28, 1991 helpful in addressing state mandates to reduce the amount of garbage placed in the landfill and in developing a model office paper recycling program. There will be no cost to the City. Mr. Rankin explained that LDD will provide special wastebaskets for each desk. The janitorial service will empty the recycling containers into a separate large basket. There will also be a large barrel available at the photocopier machines to collect recyclable paper and to allow employees to empty their individual containers during the day. A separate, locked, collection bin will be placed in the dumpster area and will be emptied on an as needed basis. Containers will be provided at the Civic Center and also at Shannon Community Center. LDD will report to the City on the estimated weight of paper collected. Mayor Snyder asked if we would in the future go to a special process to separate white paper from colored. Mr. Rankin advised that we will be able to include colored paper in the bins. LDD initially proposed 2 different types of programs. We requested that they address the situation from a long term standpoint. Dan Borges with LDD stated they anticipate that this program will work for a number of years. This program is designed to collect what is known as mixed ledger. If the market continues to go down, however, the people who buy the paper won't collect the mixed ledger. Cm. Moffatt asked if there would be a charge to take the paper away and if the costs would be offset since they are selling the paper. Mr. Borges responded that the program is being set up at no cost to the City. This is a pilot project between their offices and our offices. Cm. Moffatt asked if the City's rates would go down. Mr. Ambrose advised that we are not currently charged for pick up at the Civic Center as this service is included in the franchise with LDD. Mr. Borges advised that this will reduce the amount of waste that goes to the landfill. Mr. Rankin advised that LDD will report to us regarding the volume they are collecting so that we can report this in the future. Cm. Jeffery felt a container should be placed near the door to the Council Chambers. She also thanked LDD for their donation toward the Welcome Home Heroes Parade on May 18th. On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Burton absent) , the Council approved the implementation of this program and adopted A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A* CM - VOL 10 - 205 Regular Meeting May 28, 1991 RESOLUTION NO. 45 - 91 ADOPTING A POLICY FOR RECYCLING OF OFFICE PAPER GENERATED BY CITY BUSINESS AGREEMENT FOR FILING A NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT (NPDES) & FOR IMPLEMENTING A PROGRAM TO CONTROL URBAN RUNOFF (600-30) Public Works Director Thompson explained that the Alameda County Urban Runoff Clean Water Program was initiated to comply with the regulatory requirements of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board's San Francisco Region 1986 Basin Plan. The Basin Plan required the implementation of a program to evaluate sources of pollutants in urban runoff to estimate pollutant loads, to identify pollutant control measures, and to implement a program of pollutant controls. A Task Force committee consisting of representatives from 7 cities, the District, and Zone 7 of the District, was established to direct the completion of the needed work. Mr. Thompson advised that one of the key activities of the Agreement will be the filing for an NPDES permit by the agencies and co- applicants. The purpose of the NPDES permit is to monitor and clean up the City's storm drain water which flows into local creeks and eventually to the Bay. It is anticipated that the NPDES permit will be adopted for the Alameda County agencies in September, 1991, and that the permit will be for 5 years. It is then anticipated that the permit will be renewed after the 5 years and that the urban runoff program will be a permanent responsibility of the municipalities and other entities within Alameda County. Mr. Thompson advised that another key activity will be to implement the Alameda County Urban Runoff Clean Water Program. The Agreement provides for the creation of a Management Committee whose members will be appointed by the City Managers or their equivalent from each of the participating entities. This Committee will provide overall program direction and review, recommend an annual budget for approval by the participants, and provide budget oversight. Mr. Thompson discussed how the voting structure would be set up. The Agreement contains a statement of intent by the District to fund both the Individual and General Program costs for cities located in District Zones with Benefit Assessment Programs to the extent such funding is available. Dublin is not in one of these assessment districts, and will be responsible for its individual share of the costs. The General Program activities, estimated at $3 , 300, 000 per year, are proposed to be funded by the member agencies on a proportional basis, 1/2 on population and 1/2 on land area. Dublin's share of the cost and voting rights is 2 . 34% of the total ($77, 000) . Some of the A*A*A*A*w*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A* CM - VOL 10 - 206 Regular Meeting May 28, 1991 agencies already have an assessment district to cover these costs; other cities are contemplating the establishment of utility fees or new assessment districts. Mr. Thompson explained several methods for funding the costs of the NPDES permit and program. Dublin could elect to remain independent as opposed to joining with other Alameda County agencies; however, the stream monitoring costs and other administrative costs would be much higher as the City of Dublin could not spread these costs to other agencies. If Dublin elects to do nothing, the Regional Water Quality Control District would impose a plan on Dublin, one in which the City would not have input into or control over. If Dublin did not then follow through in implementing the permit, Dublin would be subject to legal action under the Federal Environmental Protection Act. Mayor Snyder advised that this program has been coming for a long time. Unfortunately, one of the bad things is that no funding comes with it. Cm. Jeffery asked if we had checked with DSRSD to see if it could be put on their bills. She also asked if the County could charge us for collecting the charges under SB 2557. Mayor Snyder felt it belonged on the tax rolls rather than the water bills as this is a community wide responsibility. Mr. Thompson advised that it is a little tougher to collect it under a water fee. An assessment district would require an election. Cm. Jeffery asked what would happen if people don't vote for it. Mr. Thompson advised that we could go back to the utility fee. Mr. Ambrose stated we cannot retroactively collect any costs incurred in Fiscal Year 91-92 . It appears that we will have a $144, 000 hit on our budget that we did not anticipate. Cm. Jeffery suggested sending this as an example to our representa- tives and showing what types of things we will have to eliminate as a result of programs put into place without funding. Mayor Snyder stated he felt we would be wasting our time doing this. This has been a long time in coming and the Federal Government has dealt with this for eons. What they are saying is that we are causing the problem so we have to deal with cleaning it up. Cm. Moffatt stated he thought there was a statute from the State that says if they pass down programs to cities, there has to be funding. Mayor Snyder clarified that this is a Federal program. Cm. Moffatt asked who enforces this. Mr. Thompson advised that we will have inspectors out more often than we currently do. We will have to hire an additional 1/2 time position A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A* CM - VOL 10 - 207 Regular Meeting May 28, 1991 to make sure we monitor industrial areas. We may look into fines for violators. Mr. Ambrose stated he felt the $144, 000 was just the tip of the iceberg. If we get a better handle on the types of things being dumped, we will likely incur even more charges. Mr. Shelley Sack with Alameda County Public Works stated this program is one that has been done by the cities and which is for everyone's common interest. It is designed to do what the State and Federal laws require, in the best form. Mayor Snyder asked if the cities weren't going together collectively had Staff looked at costs. Mr. Thompson advised that it would be more because each city would be duplicating each others work. Cm. Moffatt asked if all the storm drains feed down into the DSRSD structure. Mr. Thompson advised that some go directly to the Bay. Mr. Sacks advised that this procedure is extremely expensive. There is so much variation in the quality from storm to storm and even from community to community. Cm. Jeffery felt we should try to recover the money as soon as possible. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Jeffery, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Burton absent) , the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 46 - 91 APPROVING AGREEMENT TO IMPLEMENT THE ALAMEDA COUNTY URBAN RUNOFF CLEAN WATER PROGRAM Cm. Moffatt stated if we do this through DSRSD, the fee would probably be higher. Ms. Silver advised that the problem is that the City doesn't collect any utility bills. We have to ask DSRSD to collect the charge and they will probably want to add a charge. If the County collects it they can charge a fee also for the collection. Cm. Jeffery felt that whatever fee we set should cover the cost of collection. She would like to give Staff the option of looking at a combination. If it needs to be one or the other, she felt it should be an assessment district. Mr. Ambrose clarified that his understanding was that the Council wanted Staff to pursue a utility fee for Fiscal Year 1991-92 and then an assessment district in the future. The election process was discussed, and Cm. Jeffery stated she would hate to have a special election for this. A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A*A* CM - VOL 10 - 208 . Regular Meeting May 28, 1991 Ms. Silver advised that the main difference between a utility fee versus assessment district is that an assessment would be collected by the County through the property tax payment. DSRSD would collect a utility fee. Vacant properties can be charged, but they might not necessarily have water service. If someone didn't pay, our only recourse would be to pursue legal action individually. Cm. Jeffery pointed out that if the community says no to this, we may have to do this anyway. On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote (Cm. Burton absent) , the Council directed Staff to pursue a storm water utility and maintenance fee for Fiscal Year 1991-92 and/or begin proceedings for the long-term funding of this program through an assessment district. OTHER BUSINESS Hacienda Interchange Dedication (800-30) Mr. Ambrose reminded the Council of the invitation to attend the dedication ceremonies for the new Hacienda Interchange off I-580 on June 5th at 4 : 30 p.m. Cm. Jeffery questioned if the Dublin City Council was included or just bystanders. Mr. Thompson indicated he would check on this. ACTEB/ACAP (710-60) Cm. Moffatt advised that it appears that ACTEB will probably be taken over by the County. A consensus is that we probably won't have any representation on ACTEB or on ACAP. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 10: 30 p.m. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk ^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^* CM - VOL 10 - 209 Regular Meeting May 28, 1991