HomeMy Public PortalAboutCC MINS 1976
Special Meeting - January 5, 1976
A special meeting of the City Council was called by Mayor Futch
for Monday, January 5, 1976, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers
for the purpose of concluding labor negotiations.
Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Staley, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch
Absent: None
The meeting convened at 7:30 p.m. and immediately adjourned to
an executive session. The meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
APPROVE
~ /;( &~
11. Mayor
I) !.~
~ C1ty Clerk
. rmore California
ATTEST
Regular Meeting of January 5, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on January
5, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue.
The meeting was called to order at 8:05 p.m. with Mayor Futch pre-
siding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Staley, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch
Absent: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Futch led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the
audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES - Dec. 15 & 22
P. 164, 5th paragraph from the bottom, last line, second word
should be quorum.
P. 166, 1st paragraph, lines 3 and 4 should be changed to read:
became apparent that these two studies would overlap. Mr.
Bradlet suggested.....etc.
P. 186, 6th paragraph, line 3 should read: develop and be in
conformance with the older version of the Ordinance. Strike
the remainder of that paragraph.
P. 173, second paragraph, should indicate a public hearing will
be scheduled January 5th rather than January 6th.
P. 176, add another paragraph under (Measure of Population Turnover)
to indicate that the staff was directed to do such a study by using
PG&E or telephone connections, or by using a telephone book count
at random.
CM-31-200
January 5, 1976
(Minutes - Dec. 15 & 22)
P. 183, 2nd paragraph, beginning of line should read: lowered in
1973.
P. 190, 3rd paragraph from the bottom, add another sentence, as
follows: The majority of the Council agreed to allow Cm Miller
to write the ballot statement.
P. 165, 3rd paragraph from the bottom should indicate that it
would cost $1 million just for the water to fill the pit - not $1.
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETINGS OF DECEMBER 15th AND 22nd WERE APPROVED,
AS CORRECTED.
INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS
-WEBELOS PACK 951
Cm Turner introduced Mr. Eastwood and boys from the Scouts, Webelos
Pack 951 who are observing the Council meeting. The boys are working
on their citizens award as part of their Cub Scouting requirements.
P.H. RE REVISION TO SOLID
WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN
FOR ALAMEDA COUNTY
Mayor Futch opened a public hearing for the purpose of hearing public
testimony concerning revisions to the Solid Waste Management Plan for
Alameda County.
No testimony was offered from the public.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE
THE PUBI,IC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
em Staley stated that if the Council would concur he would request
a short recess during which time the Council might be allowed to
read the suggested changes to the Plan.
Mr. Parness commented that Oakland and San Leandro have not adopted
the form of resolution required by the State Board and this may mean
that there will not be an adequacy of population and numbers of cities
to qualify.
Cm Miller noted that the first time the Council discussed the Plan
it was approved, more or less, with many objections to portions.
Overall there were enough people to approve the general concept of
the Plan but there were a number of objections made by the majority
of the population and cities. Consequently, the second round is
the revision to be discussed by the Council this evening which takes
into account most of the objections that were raised by various cities.
Mr. Parness commented that it is his understanding that Oakland has
conditionally adopted the second round of suggested revisions and
this is not acceptable to the Solid Waste Management Board. The
same is true with San Leandro and another city, so if it is true that
the Board will not accept conditional adoption, the status would be
uncertain.
Cm Miller stated that the status is as follows: If a plan is not
approved by the majority of the cities for the majority of the popu-
lation, then the state will impose a plan. The state might impose
a plan similar to this or they may impose their own. The cities
CM-3l-20l
January J, 197b
(P.H. re Revision to Solid
Waste Mgt. Plan for Ala. Cty)
are taking a risk in not adopting a plan because they could get
one they really don't like, a plan forced upon them by the state.
em Miller stated that he would like to try to explain why there
is a second revision. He mentioned that there were a number of
objections and many of those objections centered around a so-called
"new level of government" which would be brought about by a joint
powers agency. This was the item being settled by Oakland Scaven-
ger.
Cm Miller added that everyone knows that joint powers agencies are
an equivalent line of government because everything is done between
equal agencies but people believe what they want to believe.
Secondly, Oakland Scavenger seems to have convinced people that
it is acceptable to make long-term commitments before there is any
real thorough study of what the alternatives might be with respect
to public and private operations for the various aspects of waste
management.
As a result of these kinds of concerns by councilmen of various
cities, the County staff rewrote various portions of Chapters I
and VIII, which cover policy, to take into account the objections
raised by some of the cities.
Cm Miller felt that in doing this it completely weakens the desire-
able aspects of the Plan that was distributed originally. Personally
he feels that one aspect which is very important, and has been weakened,
is the part about not allowing long-term commitments.
It is hard to believe that it is in the public's interest not to
consider, carefully, what will be done with respect to solid waste
management (public or private) before making such a long-term com-
mitment. In any case, the present wording is substantially weaker
than the original wording and very close to what Oakland Scavenger
wanted.
One of the things added in the revisions was for an interim council
before setting up a joint power agency, and em Miller believes that
an interim council will do absolutely nothing. Essentially it would
be a board used as a holding pattern while Oakland Scavenger pre-
empts all planning of solid waste management.
One thing that is lacking in the system is a facilities plan and
an organized way to begin a facilities plan, so that we do not
become pre-empted without any public input to the planning pro-
cess.
These issues were considered by the Solid Waste Management Plan
Advisory Committee in their December meeting when they reviewed
the revised version and they made a number of suggestions that
were in the letter and which can be seen in various places in the
revised plan.
The Committee was almost unanimous on their recommendations for
the amendments to the revised version and Cm Miller would like
to urge the Council to prepare a resolution approving the plan
with the amendments suggested by the Solid Waste Management Plan
Advisory Committee, AND SO MOVED. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL.
Cw Tirsell wondered if Item 5 on Page 2, of the paper received
this evening, is the interim committee Cm Miller has referred to.
-'
Cm Miller explained that because it is an interim committee there
is no pressure to form the actual joint powers agency or any other
kind of agency to actually oversee all of this. Consequently, in
CM-31-202
January 5, 1976
(P.H. re Revision to Solid
Waste Management Plan for
Alameda County)
that time period, nothing much will happen. Since it is only an
interim committee and because of the insistence to have a Solid
Waste Management Plan staff which is small, there would be essentially
no regulation of any of the scavengers - Oakland or otherwise. There
are very sporadic regulations and no uniform regulations of the scaven-
gers or comprehensive regulations of scavengers at this point. The
idea to trim the staff down to an administrator and secretary and use
them as an interim council prevents any real planning steps to take
place until a joint powers agency is formed and there would be no push
to form one. It could take ten years to form a joint'powers agency.
Cw Tirsell commented that perhaps this problem would be taken care of
in the legislation because she believes the next phase after the state
sees the plan, is to supply the implementation plan.
Cm Miller noted that an implementation plan can be written down but
it could take a long time to implement the plan. There can be some
legitimate time delay in forming the joint powers agency because
each of the jurisdictions will have a different interest and various
items will have to be worked out. In the meantime, nobody is looking
over the scavenger companies shoulders, adequately.
Cw Tirsell wondered if there were no suggestions to utilize the Solid
Waste Management Committee, at all, and em Miller noted that the County
Planning Commission nearly abolished this from the time before. They
do not like this recommendation.
Cw Tirsell stated that she believes this was the recommendation from
several cities.
em Miller commented that they recommended the use of the Joint Refuse
Rate Committee which is, essentially, being run by the City of Oakland
and at this point is recognized by most members of the Advisory Com-
mittee as being largely the "voice of Oakland Scavenger".
Cw Tirsell stated that this means that all of the recommendations in
front of the Council this evening are the recommendations of the Solid
Waste Management Committee.
em Miller stated that this is correct.
'.",,",---c'
Cm Miller explained that the Solid Waste Management Plan Advisory
Committee prepared, with the County staff, the first draft of the
Management Plan which was their original recommendation. Then there
was a letter from the Committee stating philosophical views about the
long-term commitments which the Council approved. However, the other
cities did not all agree with the letter and the plan has now been
revised to take into account the objections of the other cities. The
green copy was written to take into account the objections of the other
cities which had to do with eliminating one committee. It had been
proposed that there be a joint powers committee as well as a regula-
tory committee and some of the cities objected to two committees so
they went back to one committee. The Advisory Committee didn't pro-
test that change too loudly. In that revision (green) there were
changes reflecting some of the wishes of the County staff which
the Solid Waste Management Plan Advisory Committee felt were too
weak and that there should be a strengthening, which led to the
letter in the agenda packet this evening and the proposed changes
designed to restrengthen the plan. These are the changes recom-
mended for adoption by the Solid Waste Management Plan Advisory
Committee.
Cw Tirsell stated that she feels comfortable about this because
the Council essentially agreed with what the Solid Waste Management
Advisory Committee said the first time.
CM-31-203
January 5, 1976
(P.H. re Revision to Solid
Waste Management Plan for
Alameda County)
CW TIRSELL CALLED FOR THE QUESTION AT THIS TIME AND THE MOTION
PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
The resolution will be prepared for adoption next week.
COMMUNICATION RE
DISMISSAL OF LAW
SUIT - ASSOC. BUILD.
INDUSTRY OF NO. CALIF.
--,,'"
A letter was received from the law offices of Sturgis, Den-Dulk,
Douglass and Anderson informing the City that Associated Building
Industry of Northern California has dismissed their suit against the
City of Livermore and that action is no longer pending.
COMMUNICATION RE RES.
RE WATER QUAL, MGMT.
PLANNING FOR ALAMEDA
CREEK WATERSHED ABOVE NILES
A resolution concerning the water quality management planning for
the Alameda Creek watershed above Niles was received from the
California Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Cm Miller stated that he read the letter from the Water Quality
Control Board, with increasing irritation. He urged that the
City send a letter to the Regional Board supporting LAVWMA as
the lead agency even though BASSA has already made a decision,
with comments about their reasons for selecting Zone 7.
I. It is the intention of LAVWMA to work with Zone 7
to see that the ground water supply is protected.
2. Zone 7's enabeling legislation gives them the authority
to participate in such planning, but LA~~ also has this
ability.
3. The fact that 85% of the watershed is out of LAVWMA's
boundary is true but there is no waste water problem in
that area if the Regional Board requires connection and
consolidation with the LAVWMA Agency. Furthermore, 95%
of the waste water originates within LAVWMA boundaries
over which Zone 7 has zero authority.
4. It was indicated that Zone 7 has no experience in this
planning and LAVWMA does because LAVWMA has been involved
in the 201 Study for l~ years.
em Miller stated that he thinks there should be some response
to this letter by the City and that the above mentioned points
do need to be made.
Cw Tirsell commented that she believes a letter will not help.
Cm Miller stated that copies of the letter should be sent to the
Regional Board, BASSA, ABAG, the State Water Resources Control
Board, the Air Resources Board and to Clair Dedrick.
Cw Tirsell stated that the point of the whole letter is in the
last paragraph - not what was said before.
~
Cm Miller stated this is true but it is very clear from the resolu-
tion that if Zone 7 does not adopt a resolution of intention that
the County Board of Supervisors will undertake that responsibility.
CM-31-204
January 5, 1976
(Comm. re Dismissal of Law
Sui t)
Cm Miller stated that regardless of what is said in the last paragraph,
this is still equivalent to allowing sewage for Geldermann.
Cw Tirsell stated that she would like to have time to think about
a letter being sent and asked that the item be postponed until later
in the meeting. The Council concurred.
COMMUNICATION FROM
SO. COUNTY COMMUNITY
COLLEGE DIST RE OFF-RAMP
FROM I-580 TO COLLIER
CANYON ROAD
A copy of a resolution from the Chabot College South County Community
College District, urging the California Transportation Agency to con-
struct an off-ramp from I-580 to Collier Canyon Road in Livermore,
was distributed to the Council.
The item was noted for filing with the notation that the Council
has already supported this request.
COMMUNICATION FROM ABAG
RE PROPOSED PUB. MEETINGS
RE AMEND. TO GEN. PLAN
ABAG has informed the Council that they will sponsor a public meeting
concerning proposed amendments to the Livermore General Plan for
Wednesday, January 7, 1976, at 3:00 p.m. at the Hotel Claremont in
Berkeley.
Cm Miller wondered if the City will be making a formal presentation
at this meeting and it was noted that the purpose of the meeting is
to take public testimony and that there will be a discussion among
the ABAG people.
Mayor Futch stated that he believes someone from the City should
attend the meeting and that Cw Tirsell plans to attend.
Cm Miller stated that he will attend, and Cw Tirsell stated that she
wants the City Attorney or his assistant to attend the meeting.
Mr. Musso stated that he has spoken to the ABAG staff and it is
anticipated that some type of a brief presentation from the City
will be made.
Cw Tirsell stated that she thinks it would be improper for the City
to do anything other than to explain any questions ABAG might ask
because the City has not taken pUblic testimony as yet. She would
suggest that questions be answered with perhaps a brief explanation
of how the Plan was developed or something of this nature but would
hesitate to do anything other than to answer questions.
Cm Miller felt it would be in order to prepare a two minute presenta-
tion along the lines mentioned by Cw Tirsell in addition to the fact
that Livermore is awaiting the comments from ABAG's Regional Planning
Committee.
Cw Tirsell commented that ABAG is interested in regional implica-
tions only, and this is all they will be looking at.
It was suggested that the old map and the new map be taken to the
meeting for illustrating the changes.
CM-31-205
January 5, 1976
(Comm. from ABAG re Pro.
Pub. Mtg re Amend. to G.P.)
Cm Miller felt it would be useful to ask the Planning Director
to prepare a list which contrasts the new with the old with some
points about the regional questions.
It was noted that the ABAG people do not intend to act on this
item and it is possible that they may make no comments or dis-
cuss it at all. They will meet again in February at the time
they are to take action.
REPORT RE PROPOSED
ALIGNMENT - LIVERMORE
INTERCEPTOR SEWER LINE
TO LAVWMA EFFLUENT LINE
Mr. Lee reported that inquiries have been made by engineers, on
behalf of LAVWMA concerning possible location of a proposed ef-
fluent line westerly from the Water Reclamation Plant. An align-
ment has been selected and appears to be acceptable to the City
provided it does not substantially conflict with the Airport
Master Plan.
It is recommended that the Council adopt a motion approving
the proposed line alignment.
Mr. Lee explained that the staff is checking with the F.A.A.
to determine if there would be a conflict with the Airport
MasterPlan but believes that the alignment could be made com-
patible with future expansion of the airport.
CW MILLER MOVED TO APPROVE THE ALIGNMENT PROPOSED BY THE CONSUL-
TANT WITH A POSSIBLE CHANGE IN THE VICINITY OF THE AIRPORT,
SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
DISC. RE APP. FOR
TENTATIVE MAP EXTEN-
SION - TRACT 3607
(Great American Land)
A letter was submitted to the City Council by Earl Mason, engineer
for the Overra property to be developed by the Great American Land
Company, requesting a 90 day extension beyond the January 29th dead-
line for Tentative Tract Map 3607, for sewer hook-up and the vari-
ance for the rear lot.
Mayor Futch questioned as to whether this item would have to go
back to the P.C. and the City Attorney felt it would have to.
It was concluded that rather than going back to the Planning
Commission and then coming to the Council again the Council could
take action this evening to eliminate that procedure.
CM MILLER MOVED TO ALLOW EXACTLY A 90 DAY EXTENSION BEYOND JAN.
29, 1976, AND THAT THE REPRESENTATIVES AGREE IN WRITING THAT IT
WILL BE ONLY 90 DAYS. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL.
Cm Turner asked for an explanation of the motion.
Cm Miller explained that unless they agree, in writing, that it
will be only 90 days there is a question of whether the City
can extend without extending the full year. A tract map can
be extended for a year and there is some question as to whether
it can be extended for any portion of the year or whether it
must be extended for the full year.
CM-31-206
January 5, 1976
(Disc. re App. for Tent.
Map Extention - Tr.3607)
Cm Staley stated that it is reasonable to understand that the exten-
sion is for 90 days but would like to know if this implies that they
would not be able to ask for another extension at the end of 90 days?
em Miller stated that they are entitled to ask for an extension but
the point is, if the Council agrees to an extension without having
the representatives agree, in writing, that it ends in 90 days, the
Council may be committed to a whole year.
Earl Mason commented that there are three items that need to be
covered at this time: I) the tentative map, 2) the variance approved
2-3 weeks ago~ and 3) the sewer connection. He commented that a vari-
ance was granted about three weeks ago and was conditioned to January
29th which is not in the resolution. He added that the request for
the 90 day extension is for the tentative map, the variance, and the
sewer hook-ups.
Cm Miller stated that he is not about to include the variance in the
90 day extension.
Cm Staley stated that he is concerned about how the sewer connection
portion should be handled. He added that he is in agreement with the
motion but would like to know if the Council is following the correct
procedure.
Mayor Futch stated that he would assume the sewer connection could be
taken care of in a separate motion.
Mr. Parness stated that as he recalls, in the action taken last
summer by the Council, the approval of the tentative tract map
indicates that sewer connections and building permits would be made
available up until January 29, 1976. This was the final date for
applying and receiving the building permits. They are now asking
for an extension of that date and he would assume that the exten-
sion for the building permits would be concurrent with the extension
of Tentative Tract 3607.
CM MILLER AMENDED THE MOTION TO INCLUDE THE EXTENSION OF 90 DAYS
FOR TAKING OUT BUILDING PERMITS AND SEWER CONNECTIONS. SECONDED
BY CW TIRSELL.
It was noted that the variance would be a separate motion.
The City Attorney advised that since the variance is a change in
the actual terms of the variance, it probably should go back to
the P.C. The other items are not that significant. However, the
variance is a change in the term of the variance itself which the
P.C. originally granted. All the Council did was to amend the
variance and add to it.
Cw Tirsell noted that the Council adopted the P.C. recommendation
concerning the variance.
The City Attorney explained that the recommendation had a specific
time limits according to Mr. Musso and if this is true it is a change
in the recommendation. He did add that the Council is the final
arbiter and if the Council wants to make a decision tonight there
should be no problem.
em Staley commented that he really would prefer to make a decision
tonight. There is no reason to go to the P.C. and back over this
recommendation because it is rather clear cut and it would be an
unnecessary waste of time.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM-31-207
January 5, 1976
(Disc. re App. for Tent.
Map Extension - Tr. 3607)
The City Attorney commented that he will prepare the necessary
resolutions to appear on the next Council agenda.
COMMENTS RE FIRE
FIGHTERS NEGOTIATIONS
Cm Miller stated that before going to the Consent Calendar, there
are fire fighters in the audience who might be interested in the
results of the negotiations which took place prior to the Council
meeting.
Mayor Futch explained that an agreement for a 12 month extension
was reached in the Executive Session approving the Memorandum of
Understanding, dated January 5, 1976, between the City and
L.F.I.A.F.F., Local 2318.
Mr. Parness stated that on behalf of the City Council and the
City staff he would like to pass his personal commendations
to the negotiating team from the Fire Fighters Union for meeting
in such an amicable fashion and processing this matter so quickly
to the resolutions and mutual benefit to both employer and employee.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Res. Granting
Var. - Tract 3607
It was concluded that the first item on the Consent Calendar with
respect to a variance for Tract 3607 should be removed for dis-
cussion immediately.
A variance application for yard setbacks has been allowed by the
P.C. but appealed by the City Council. After discussion the
Council authorized a resolution granting the variance which is
on the Consent Calendar at this time.
CM STALEY MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION GRANTING THE VARIANCE,
SECONDED BY eM TURNER.
Mr. Mason commented that
make to the resolution.
it states, "Development
Revision 6". This date
Revision 7.
there is a correction he would like to
In the last paragraph of the resolution
Plan - Tract 3607, dated June 19, 1974,
should be changed to August 22, 1975,
The City Attorney explained that at the last meeting the Council
adopted all the recommendations of the P.C. but wanted to be
assured that the map the Council was looking at would be the
map which would be followed in terms of the placement of the
buildings, etc. That is the specific reference noted in the
resolution but apparently the reference the City Attorney got
from the Planning Department was incorrect. The correct refer-
ence is the one just mentioned by Mr. Mason and the date that
will be used. This will be amended in the resolution.
em Staley wanted to know if the P.C. saw the map dated August
22, 1975, Revision 7.
It was noted that the P.C. saw Revision 6.
Mr. Musso explained that the P.C. granted a blanket variance
and they didn't discuss individual lots. The map was presented
as an exhibit and Mr. Musso does not know what happened to it
but the only map the Planning Department has is the map of
June 19, 1975, Revision 6.
CM-31-208
January 5, 1976
(Res. Granting Var.
Tract 3607)
It was suggested that the motion apply to the map approved on
the August meeting of the City Council.
The City Attorney stated that he sees nothing wrong with tying the
motion to the changed date, as suggested by Mr. Mason, and make it
Revision 7, because this is a very specific reference.
Cm Turner stated that he would really like to know what he is approv-
ing and would suggest that the item be continued for one week.
CM MILLER SUGGESTED THAT THE MOTION BE AMENDED TO ADD, SUBJECT TO
VERICATION THAT AUGUST 22, 1975, REVISION 7, IS THE CORRECT MAP,
AGREED TO BY THE MOTION AND THE SECOND.
CM STALEY ALSO AMENDED HIS MOTION TO INCLUDE AN EXTENSION OF THE
VARIANCE TO EXPIRE, CONCURRENTLY, WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP (90 days). AMENDMENT AGREEABLE TO THE SECOND.
MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Cm Miller dissenting) .
RESOLUTION NO. 1-76 (a)
A RESOLUTION EXTENDING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 3607
RESOLUTION NO. 1-76 (b)
A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCE (Clarence Overaa, et al)
Report re Proposed
Ballot Measure
This item was removed for later discussion.
Report re Public
Safety Tax Override -
Proposed Pro Arguments
This item was removed for later discussion.
Report re Historical
Landmark - Ravenswood
LAPRD has requested the adoption of a resolution by the City, as
title owners of the Ravenswood Park, requesting designation as an
historical landmark. It is recommended that such a resolution be
adopted.
Also submitted to the Council was a brief status report on the
progress of the architectural study which is underway for Ravenswood
Park.
RESOLUTION NO. 2-76
A RESOLUTION GRANTING PERMISSION TO REGISTER
RAVENSWOOD PARK AS A HISTORICAL LANDMARK
Report re East Ave.
Annexation #8 Agreement
This item was removed for later discussion.
Report re Vehicle Bids
Bids have been received for six compact sedans for use as police
patrol vehicles, as follows: Crown Chevrolet, 27,326.61, and
Cooper Motors, Fremont, $24,715.90.
CM-31-209
January 5, 1976
(Report re Vehicle Bids)
It is recommended that a resolution awarding the bid to Cooper
Motors be adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 3-76
A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID (Police
Vehicles - Cooper Motors)
EIR Report re Commun-
ity General Plan
The EIR for the Community General Plan has been filed and copies
have been distributed to all interested parties. This matter is
noted for Council information only.
Report from P.C. re
Planning Consultant
Contract Modification
This item was removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion
later.
Report from Dir. of
Public Works re Air-
port Activity
A report from the Public Works Director was submitted to the
City Council concerning airport activity.
em Staley stated that in reading the report, apparently there
has been a decline in the number of hangars. He would like to
know how this would affect the pOlicy of hangar expansion.
Mr. Lee explained that there is a relationship but the demand
is substantial for hangers and even if this number were lower
the City would still have a real demand for hangars with expansion
of the facilities.
Res. Rejecting Claim -
J & M Incorporate~
A claim has been filed against the City in the amount of $24,980.50,
by J&M Incorporated, alleging monies past due under contract. It
is recommended that a resolution denying the claim be adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 4-76
A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF J&M INCORPORATED
Mr. Res. re
Appointments
The Council adopted a resolution appointing Anita Thorsen to the
Design Review Committee. An appointment was to be made to the
Industrial Committee but this resolution was removed from the
Consent Calendar because a selection has not been made for this
committee.
RESOLUTION NO. 5-76
-,'
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBER TO DESIGN
REVIEW COMMITTEE (Anita Thorsen)
CM-31-210
January 5, 1976
Various Minutes
Minutes were received from the following:
Design Review Committee - December 10
Social Concerns Committee - December 14
Report re Claim
Settlement
Inadvertently some private property being held by the Police Depart-
ment was destroyed. The property was a motorcycle engine and a
report has been submitted by the Police Department concerning this
matter. It is recommended that a resolution authorizing payment
of the claim in the amount of $300 be adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 6-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PAYMENT OF
CLAIM (Peter M. Cupps)
Res. Auth. Exec. of
Agree. (Elliott Property)
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution authoriz-
ing execution of an agreement concerning the contract for sale of
the H. C. Elliott, Inc., property. The contract formalizes arrange-
ments previously agreed to by the City for the purchase of 19 acres
of property located in Tract 3333. The County has agreed to share
the expense to the extent of 45%.
RESOLUTION NO. 7-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
AGREEMENT (Contract for Sale of Real
Property: H. C. Elliott, Inc.)
Payroll & Claims
There were 51 claims in the amount of $156,950.72, dated 12-17-75,
and approved by the City Manager.
There were 123 claims in the amount of $219,851.34, and 287 payroll
warrants in the amount of $98,501.84, for a total of $318,353.15,
dated 12-26-75 and approved by the City Manager.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED WITH THE ITEM DELETED, AS OUTLINED
ABOVE.
DISCUSSION RE ITEMS
REMOVED FROM CONSENT
CALENDAR - (Ballot
Measure Wording)
The City Attorney noted that a replacement resolution is proposed
which provides for a modification in the measure wording over the
adopted wording for the Trailer Storage Ordinance measure adopted
at the last meeting.
CM-31-211
January 5, 1976
(Disc. re Items Removed
from Consent Calendar-
Ballot Measure Wording)
The City Attorney explained that the reason for the change is
that the referendum calls for repeal of the ordinance. In review-
ing the State Code, the requirements became very clear - that the
question to be posed to the voters is a question of whether they
approve or disapprove the ordinance. The only way to accomplish
this is to ask, "do you approve the ordinance, yes", or "do you
not approve the ordinance, no". The language speaks in terms of
a majority of people voting for the ordinance makes it effective
and a majority voting against the ordinance repeals it. Neither
the electorate or the Council can act on it for a year. This
is the reason for the change - it has now been made a positive
question. The proponents of the measure as well as the opponents
of the measure have been notified and the ballot argument wording
should now be consistent.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE MODIFICATION
IN THE MEASURE WORDING, SECONDED BY CM MILLER.
RESOLUTION NO. 8-76
A RESOLUTION PROVIDING THE FORM OF BALLOT FOR
A MEASURE TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS OF THE
CITY OF LIVERMORE AT THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELEC-
TION TO BE HELD AND CONDUCTED IN THE CITY OF LIVER-
MORE ON MARCH 2, 1976, AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION
NO. 266-75.
(Re Pro Arguments
re Safety Tax Override)
The City Manager has circulated a proposed draft of a supportive
statement for the public safety tax override ballot measure. Once
adopted the wording would become the support statement of the City
Council on the measure. It is recommended that the Council adopt
a measure approving the statement.
Cm Turner stated that the reason he requested that this item be
removed from the Consent Calendar is because there seems to be
a descrepancy in the amount mentioned. In the second paragraph
of the satement it mentions $350,000 and the first paragraph
on the second page mentions $450,000. He wondered if this was
a typographical error.
Mr. Parness stated it is not really an error but he would agree
that this may be a little confusing. The purpose is to try
to impress the voter with the fact that even though the City
is asking for a 25~ tax override it would not generate enough
money to pay for the minimum personnel addition that the Police
Department and Fire Department are recommending. If this is
confusing, perhaps it would be proper to change it.
em Miller stated that he had the same question in mind and he
believes that if this is the case the request for staff addi-
tions are excessive. The staff additions should be consistent
with the amount of money to be raised - $350,000. He stated
that he is not willing to overcommit the public to an expendi-
ture of $100,000 more.
Cw Tirsell stated that she was a little unhappy with the order
of the items and the way in which the ballot statement was writ-
ten. She wondered if this is the way the ballot statement is to
be written or if the items are outlined for consideration.
-'
Mr. Parness explained that the statement could be made up in a
more gramatical way but he found that this method used too many
words so he listed things point by point.
CM-31-212
January 5, 1976
(Re Pro Arguments
re Safety Tax Override)
Cw Tirsell stated that if this is the case she would suggest reorganiz-
ing the points for the benefit of the voters because the statement
jumps around from police to fire and making different statements on
the revenue to be raised, etc. She then suggested rearranging the
paragraphs in order as follows: I, 4, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 3, and 10.
'-
Cw Tirsell stated that she would also create two sub-titles because
5 and 6 refer to police, and 7 and 8 refer to fire fighters. The
rest of the items are general comments about the measure.
Cm Turner felt the last paragraph (10) should be amended to use the
first sentence only and to create an lIth paragraph to provide for
the second sentence.
Paragraph 10 would read: The City Council unanimously endorses
this measure.
Paragraph II would read: The Police Chief, Fire Chief, Police Associa-
tion and Fire Association urge approval as well.
The Council concurred with this change.
Cm Staley stated that he has also prepared a draft which he would
like the Council to review, even though the draft is by no means
a final draft. He added that he can appreciate the problems Mr.
Parness had in trying to write a ballot argument because he spent
considerable time trying to write one as well.
Cm Miller stated that he likes the narrative form used by Cm Staley
but there are also points made by Mr. Parness that should be used.
One of the points made was that the money would be supplemental
money and it would not be a substitute for other things. Secondly,
there should be mention of exactly how much money will be derived,
namely, $350,000.
em Staley stated that he believes people really do not understand
how little of the property tax money the City receives and this
is something people should know and it should be included in the
argument.
Mr. Parness stated that he also feels it is important to state on
the ballot that it would be mandatory that this money be used ex-
clusively for fire and police protection and it cannot be diverted.
It was concluded that Cm Staley would meet with the staff to prepare
wording for the ballot.
CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THE ARGUMENTS MADE THIS EVENING AND TO
INSTRUCT CM STALEY TO MEET WITH THE STAFF TO DRAFT APPROPRIATE
WORDING FOR THE BALLOT. MOTION SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL, AND
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
(Report re East Ave.
Annexation #8 Agree.)
Mr. Lee reported that Alameda County and the owners of the Livermore
Gardens Apartments on East Avenue have requested confirmation of com-
pliance with the requirements of the East Avenue Annexation No. 8
Annexation Agreement. The County will not accept the dedicated
channel right-of-way from Livermore Gardens until the title
is clear of all encumbrances, including those within the Annexation
Agreement.
CM-31-213
January 5, 1976
(Report re East Ave.
Annexation #8 Agree.)
Cm Turner stated that he asked that this be removed from the Con-
sent Calendar because he would like to ask a question about it.
In the letter there is a list of items which have been completed,
as per the agreement and he would like to know which items have
not been completed.
Mr. Lee explained that all of the requirements of the agreement
have been satisfied and were those listed.
-
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE RESOLUTION CONFIRMING FULFILLMENT OF OBLIGATIONS WAS
ADOPTED.
RESOLUTION NO. 9-76
A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING FULFILLMENT OF OBLIGATIONS
UNDER EAST AVENUE ANNEX NO. 8 ANNEXATION AGREEMENT.
REPORT FROM P.C. RE
PLANNING CONSULTANT
CONTRACT MODIFICATION
Several additional public meetings have been scheduled concerning
the adoption of the proposed General Plan. However, all of the
hearing obligations under the current consultant contract have
been met. It is necessary for the consultant to attend the addi-
tional public meetings (5) which would amount to an additional
$1,500 in consultant fees. It is recommended that the Council
adopt a resolution authorizing a contract amendment providing
for up to an additional $1,500 for consultant attendance at the
public meetings.
It was noted that the Council does not have a copy of the resolu-
tion and the City Attorney explained that this is because he was
asked to check the agreement to see if the request might be cover-
ed in the agreement. In checking into the agreement the City
Attorney concludes that I) for extra meetings the consultants
should be compensated, and 2) there may be additional require-
ments which the consultants feel they should be compensated for
and the City Attorney feels that because the way the agreement
was written, they should be compensated.
There is substantial question as to how much should or should
not be included and just how far the Council wants to go with
the use of the consultants. There is no contract amendment
prepared for this evening, and there is no resolution prepared.
The City Attorney suggested that the Council direct the staff
to meet with the consultants to determine exactly what they want
to do. There have already been three amendments to this agree-
ment and he would rather not have four more. He would suggest
getting all the remaining work to be done under one final agree-
ment.
If the Council would agree the agreement would cover more than
just the additional necessary meetings because apparently the
P.C. has been making requests that the consultants conduct
studies on alternatives and the City Attorney feels that the
contract really does not call for this. It would be additional
work and if the P.C. or the Council wants a reanalysis or a new
analysis of alternatives, there should be arrangements for this
type of thing, perhaps on an open-end basis to pay the consultant
for whatever he performs.
---
Mr. Parness stated that he is not aware of any more work to be
done by the consultants, outside of the additional meetings,
unless the P.C. has not communicated with him.
CM-31-214
January 5, 1976
(Rpt from P.C. re Planning
Consultant Contract Mod.)
Mr. Parness added that the consultants have claimed that they have
attended 18 meetings, four more than the number covered in the con-
tract, so it is a matter of negotiation and conclusion on the part
of the staff. If it is true that the P.C. would like additional
work done this should be investigated and he would agree with the
City Attorney that everything to be done should be covered in one
agreement. The City Council would have to decide if additional
work requested is justified, also.
Mr. Musso stated that he has a list of items the P.C. would like
done by the consultants.
It was concluded that no action will be taken by the Council on
this item pending a report from the City Manager as to what an
appropriate agreement might be, including requests by the P.C.
RECESS
Mayor Futch called for a brief recess after which the Council meeting
resumed with all members of the Council present.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Ravenswood)
Mr. Parness reported that LARPD has requested a meeting with the
members of the Council to discuss, primarily, the architectural
progress concerning the structures at Ravenswood. January 2lst
has been selected as the meeting date, and hopefully the Council
can attend.
(BART Meeting)
Mr. Parness stated that the joint meeting between BART representatives
and the other cities has been scheduled for January 28th and he would
hope that both Cm Turner and the Mayor will be able to attend this
meeting.
(Multipurpose Center)
Mr. Parness commented that he has received proposals from several
architectural firms for the multipurpose service center and he
has selected four firms to make a presentation. He would suggest
that there be an interview panel composed of one member of the
Council, or more, and at least two members of our Social Concerns
Committee, as well as the City Manager.
The Social Concerns Committee is very concerned about this project
and they have made at least two tours in other cities to look at
similar structures. They are very interested in participating in
the entire process.
In addition, it might be appropriate to invite a member of the LARPD
Board to sit in on the interview process, as well. The Council may
wish to consider relegating a portion of the center, or at least a
portion of the structure to LARPD's management. In any event, it
might be worthwile to allow a member of the LARPD Board to participate
in the architectural recruitment.
em Staley felt the recommendation for composition of the interview
panel is very reasonable. The Council concurred.
It was noted that a date has not been selected for the presentations.
CM-31-2l5
January 5, 1976
(Label Samples
for Wine Bottles)
Samples of wine bottle labels were distributed to the Councilmembers
for comment. The label selected will be placed on special bottles
of wine to be given to visiting dignitaries.
Cm Staley stated that he likes both designs but he would prefer
the round label. Cw Tirsell concurred.
Cm Staley added that he believes the triangular design would
make the best impression when it is placed on the bottle.
CW TIRSELL MOVED TO SELECT THE TRIANGLE DESIGN, SECONDED BY CM
STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(re Council Policy)
VERBATIH TRANSCRIPTION
Mayor: I became aware of the fact that one Councilmember has
met with the Firemens Union without the knowledge of the Council,
during a time of intense contract negotiations. I did inquire as
to the reasons for this meeting and was told that Cm Turner wanted
to support the 25~ tax override.
This is certainly a desireable position, which is uniformly and equal-
ly supported by all members of the Council, but I felt it was inappro-
priate for one Councilmember to be present at a union meeting during
a period of contract negotiations and without the knowledge of the
Council.
I discussed my feelings with Dale, privately, as he obviously dis-
agreed. Since I still felt that it was inappropriate I therefore
feel that I had no choice but to discuss the matter with the Council
and I certainly think Dale had the best of intentions but tonight
we did kind of have to act as a judge between the firemen's welfare
and the expenditure of public funds.
I'm sorry that Dale doesn't recognize my concerns in the timing of
the matter and the fact that I thought it was inappropriate because
of that knowledge, but that's my feeling and I bring it before the
Council now just to point it out.
Cm Turner: I think you used the word, "judge". People are going
to judge me now.
Mayor: No, I didn't use the word "judge". I use the word that
we are sitting up here acting in a somewhat judicial manner in
which we have to decide the welfare of an adequate contract for
the firemen. At the same time we have to consider the cost to
the City. That's not the only point - I thought the Council should
be aware of the attendence during contract negotiations.
em Turner: I asked you to bring our conversations to public, Archer,
after you talked to me Sunday evening. We have used the word, "agonize"
before, I believe, on items and it was after a great amount of agoniz-
ing that I elected to make a public statement this evening about
our conversation.
I asked that the subject matter be made public because you elected
to make it semi-public by verifying certain events with unknown
people. I'm going to make an opening statement and it will be
,~
CM-31-216
January 5, 1976
(re Council Policy)
followed up later, if the Mayor allows me to continue. He mayor
may not.
After the call from the Mayor Sunday evening I spent Sunday even-
ing and long into Monday morning writing this information and if some
of it is emotional - you can rest assured it is emotional.
The first thing is, and I wrote it down Archer as you did so I wouldn't
forget, that I am appalled that a public official with no greater
status than I, has the audacity to suggest any inproprieties on my
part by conducting a personal investigation based on unfounded allega-
tions from a source which you are unwilling to disclose to me, and I
want to clear the air right now and I want to clear it in public.
I appreciate the fact that you brought the issue up. I have some
other comments to go along with that opening statement and I would
like your permission to read them.
Mayor: Go ahead.
Cm Turner: Thank you.
Cm Turner: I said I felt the following issues should be made public:
On January 4, 1976, I received a call from the Mayor, Mr. Futch, and
he wished to quiz me on certain questions, searching for answers
to items that had disturbed him lately.
I. The question was asked of me, did I meet with the Firemen's
Union recently, and my answer was, "yes, why do you ask".
The Mayor then stated that he had been in City Hall and overheard
a conversation and the above was part of it.
The Mayor then said he felt it was wrong that I met with them, mean-
ing the firemen, because we are in labor negotiations with the Fire
Department. I should contact the Council before meeting with them
or any other group.
Mayor: During labor negotiations.
em Turner: Let me finish, please, then you can comment. Thank you.
Now I told Archer the following: I) I met with the Firemen's Associa-
tion - not the negotiation team, so I did not meet with the labor
negotiating team even though I freely admit that the negotiating team
was part of the Firemens Association.
I met with them at their regular meeting, twice, at their request,
to discuss one of their agenda items - the Public Safety Tax Override
Measure. Chief Baird was in attendance with me and this was the only
item discussed while I was present. The Association came to no decis-
ion as to whether they would support or not support the issue, nor
did I ask them for a position.
I'll read a letter that I received from the Firemen's Association
after my meeting with them. This is dated December 22, 1975, and
I met with them on December 19th. It's addressed to me and says:
Dear Dale:
On behalf of the Board of Directors, I would like
to express our thanks to you for taking the time
to answer our questions about the proposed tax over-
ride. The position of the Board in reference to the
above is as follows:
CM-31-217
January 5, 1976
(re Council Policy)
Livermore Fire Fighters Local No. 2318 shall remain
neutral on this issue until finalization of a new
Memorandum of Agreement with the city. At that time
the general membership will make a statement defin-
ing our position and intent with respect to the pro-
posed override.
Respectfully yours,
Steven C. Dick
President
I believe Steve is also a member of the negotiating committee.
Is that right?
Person: Not audible
Cm Turner: I was wrong. Thank you.
The Mayor has suggested my meeting with the firemen was improper.
It has been further suggested that I have interceded with the
Police union in management problems. Let me say that I have never
interceded on behalf of any special interest groups.
It's further suggested that I had overstepped my authority by
meeting with Mrs. Parra on a pOlice matter, and Cw Tirsell
(who was blameless - only I was at fault) and police officials
and with the knowledge of the Mayor and the City Council.
The Mayor overheard all of the above items in City Hall in a
general conversation, then contacted other unnamed people to
verify the information.
Mr. Futch obviously believes the meeting with the firemen was for
evil purpose.
After the Mayor gave me the opportunity to clear myself, in pri-
vate, I asked him to make our conversation public. He said he
would if that was my wish.
I believe, at this point, that the Parra incident and the police
issue was simply camouflaged and the unknown, who Mr. Futch re-
fuses to give their names to me, had hoped to nail me on the
fire issue. I believe their timing is incredible.
The timing is right before the '76 Council Election and in a
vaguely disguised attempt to discredit me or anyone I might
support.
In closing, Mr. Futch, I would like to say I will attend any
meeting I choose and I don't feel it is necessary to ask your
permission. I would never represent the Council without authority
or do anything to discredit the Council.
By not naming my alleged accusors I can only conclude that: a) I
present a threat, politically, and you want to discredit me, and
would have, at a later date, if I had not insisted our conversation
be public~ b) that the allegations were made up by unknown persons
and yourself and you're being used.
You have, in my opinion, overstepped your authority as Mayor by
investigating me on unfounded charges and without my knowledge
and I would submit that if you intend on continuing your term
as Mayor in such an irresponsible manner, that you consider
stepping down. You had no right to suggest to others that I was
acting improperly - all you had to do was ask me.
CM-31-218
January 5, 1976
(Re Council Policy)
Mayor: Dale, I think I should have the opportunity to respond briefly
to your comments.
The last comment, briefly, was the fact that there were accusors who
I've refused to name. It's agreed that the facts are not in doubt.
The only thing I brought up tonight was your attendance at the meeting
of the Fire Union. Do you agree to that?
Cm Turner: Agree to what?
Mayor: That you were there.
Cm Turner: I just admitted that I was there, in a public place
with the Firemens Association.
Mayor: I know, but let me finish now. That's a stated fact that
you agreed to - we agreed to. That's the only fact that I made
tonight and everyone agrees to it so I don't see any accusations.
Everything is agreed to as far as that fact.
The only question is, in my mind, whether that was appropriate at
this point in time - with negotiations. You may disagree - that's
your privilege, but I felt it was a reasonable thing for me to express
my concern to you on that one point, which I did and which I brought
up tonight.
I didn't mention the police tonight - you brought that up. You did
essentially call a meeting with the Police Commission.
ern Turner: Mrs. Tirsell and I.
Mayor: Yes, but I think that that's appropriate whenever the Police
Commission meets - that the Council be aware of it and I was aware of
it but I think the Council should be informed.
I really don't want to go into all of that. I had no intention of
bringing those items up. My main concern, and the only one that
I mentioned, was the attendance at the Firemens Union, at this
point in time. I felt like that needed clarification and some
Council policy.
Cm Turner: May I respond to something? The whole point of what I
said is that I don't feel that you have any right as an elected
official to investigate certain accusations that were made about
me, with other people. I don't think you have that right and you
told me that that's what you did.
You overheard the conversation and then verified the facts. You
have no right, sir, to investigate me without my knowledge. That's
the whole point.
Mayor: Well Dale, I think that if you had heard that maybe some
other Councilmember had done this you might just kind of casually
inquire too.
Cm Turner: I would certainly have talked to that member.
Mayor: Alright, and that's what I did. Anyone else want to
comment on this?
Cw Tirsell: Well maybe we should clear the air so that everybody
understands.
Cm Staley: Can I ask a question on this? Since I wasn't on
the Council during earlier negotiations, during one of the executive
sessions when we were discussing the Fire Fighters contract
CM-31-219
January 5, 1976
(re Council Policy)
somehow I got the impression that there was some sort of policy
about this and I don't really know what the policy was, so maybe
you could explain to me what it was.
Mayor: Well I'm not sure that there is a written policy, but I
think that it is a well known agreement that this was not a
proper procedure.
em Miller: Wait - hold on a minute. The policy of the Council
is that our staff negotiators do our negotiations. Councilmen,
themselves, do not enter into negotiations. Okay, that's the
policy. If this is what this discussion is about then I don't
understand why you were upset about what Dale was doing, be-
cause all he was talking about was the tax override. That
doesn't make any sense.
Mayor: You think it's appropriate to go to a union and meet?
Cm Turner: I didn't go to a union.
Mayor: I'm asking Don a question. It was the meeting of the
firemen during a period in which there have been contract
negotiations, and without the knowledge of the other members
of the Council. Do you think that's appropriate?
Cm Miller: It depends on the circumstances. The circumstance
described is that Cm Turner went to a meeting of the Firemens
Association, which among other things had on its agenda for dis-
cussion, union affairs, but he was invited to discuss something
for which the Council had a unanimous opinion. Namely, there
should be approval of a tax override. That is the only thing, as
I understand it, according to Dale, that was discussed at this
time period. Dale said he left, the Chief was there when he
came in, if I remember right, and the Chief was there when he
left and there was no discussion of any other item. He was
invited solely to discuss the override.
If I were invited to talk about an override at a Firemens Associa-
tion meeting, I would have no hesitation in going, but I certainly
wouldn't say one word to them about anything else. I don't see that
there is anything unreasonable. All the Councilmen get invited to
talk to various kinds of people at different times about one issue
or another and as long as the discussion does not, in any way, in-
volve something for which there is a Council policy, like Councilmen
stay out of negotiations, then I don't see what the hang-up is. I
really don't understand this at all.
The second thing that bothers me is this business - well it
bothers Dale, obviously, that you mentioned too, was your con-
cern about the meeting with Kay Parra. We discussed that openly
in the Council and Dale and Helen were the ones to go. Mrs.
Parra did not want me to go and we agreed - I wouldn't go. That
was fine. We talked about it - it was approved.
Mayor: That was not approved as far as the Council. That was
not approved.
em Miller: We discussed it.
Mayor: No. That was not approved.
Cm Miller: Well my memory was that it was approved. We didn't
make a formal motion appointing a committee consisting of Helen
or otherwise but that was what the tentative agreement was. The
Police Commission is an unofficial group anyway.
CM-31-220
January 5, 1976
(re Council Policy)
Mayor: That was not discussed as an item of business at all.
Cm Miller: Weird. My memory -
Mayor: Don your memory is strong on this. You have an excellent
memory - much better than mine, but it's wrong on this.
Cm Miller: We certainly did not have it as an agenda item - that
is true. There are many things in the question of appointments
that are not taken up as an agenda item. It comes up - gee we
need to have somebody do this and we decide that's okay.
Mayor: It really wasn't discussed in the process of doing business
at the Council meeting.
em Miller: Everybody on the Council, however, knew that Dale and
Helen were going to meet with Mrs. Parra, so it wasn't done in
secrecy. I don't understand how you can come to that conclusion.
One thing that I must say is that each one of us is independently
elected. This Council consists of equals. Anybody who serves as
Mayor or Vice Mayor is first and second among equals and that we
have every right as an elected pUblic official to go to any meeting
we choose, providing we don't represent ourselves as representing
a point of view of the Council without being authorized, and we
don't disobey Council policies which have to do with any kind of
negotiations, and I don't see that either of those are involved
here.
Mayor: Well, I don't think you really understand the implications.
I don't want to argue with you about it. I don't think it's worth
a long harangue.
Cm Miller: I don't understand why this issue was brought up by
anybody because I don't see that there was anything wrong done by
Cm Turner. If you were invited to a group to speak about -
Mayor: Why do you want to kep.p arguing with it then. That's your
opinion, you have expressed it, why do you want to -
Cm Miller: All right,~all right.
Mayor: I understand your opinion, I disagree with it. Anyone else?
em Staley: Well, I guess I now understand the policy if I didn't
before; that is, in fact, the Council pOlicy. Is that the Council
policy?
Mayor: I certainly think that Don's right. That's part of the
Council policy, but it is certainly also clear to me that it is
inappropriate for a Councilman to be at a meeting of this nature
at this time.
Cm Miller: I don't believe what I'm hearing. You are asked to talk
about something completely independent of the labor negotiations. I
don't see that that violates a Council policy which makes sense -
namely, not to be involved in labor negotiations.
Mayor: Well-
Cm Turner: Let me offer this again. I am not upset that Archer
called me about meeting with the firemen. I am upset that I was
investigated prior to a call. The events that led up to my going
on the 19th were that I had talked to Ron Lindgren and he said it
looks like the police are going to support the issue. I called
Chief Baird and said how do the firemen feel about it and he said,
gee, I don't know.
CM-31-221
January 5, 1976
(re Council Policy)
I got a call from Mr. Dick, this was on the 17th I believe,
a Wednesday, and he said, hey, we are going to have a meeting on
Friday, could you come before our meeting at 10:00 at Home Savings,
in a public place with Chief Baird, and answer any questions we
might have, and I said sure, I'd be happy to - not thinking that
I was doing anything wrong. I called Chief Baird to confirm that
he was goning to be there, yes, and he would have most of the in-
formation.
I then called Mr. Parness' office on Friday morning because I had
left all of my stuff at home. He wasn't in so I asked Pat if she
could give me the information on the tax override and she said, I
can find it, and low and behold, George Nolan walks in. George
had the information at his fingertips and I jotted it quickly
down, was asked a couple of questions and went on my way to the
post office and picked up the mail and went back to the bank by
ll:OO. I still do not feel I've done anything improper. I would
do it again, I would do it again. I do not feel I did anything
improper and I don't think the firemen were doing anything improper
by asking me, or did they have any ulterier motives.
I did verify before I voted tonight, with the negotiators, did the
firemen raise any question in your mind as to whether or not I
should vote on this issue and they said no, nothing, absolutely
nothing. I said fine, okay, thank you, I'll vote on it. I voted
favorably for it.
It's just a matter of the investigation. It's so wrong, in my mind.
A phone call would have cleared it.
Mayor: You've commented on a vote in an executive session.
Cm Turner: You just gave it - that we approved it in open session,
sir.
Mayor: But I didn't give the vote.
Cm Staley: I think perhaps we've discussed this enough, in my opinon.
em Turner: I appreciate that John.
Cw Tirsell: Well I have a different impression of the Council policy
than I had before and if that's the way it's going to be then that's
how I'll abide by it too. Because we weren't talking to firemen
individually, or policemen individually, or groups or anything, and
that's the way I understood it.
Cm Turner: I appreciate that Helen, I appreciate your comments.
I'm not upset about that, don't get me wrong. If I violated
Council policy -
Cw Tirsell: If that's the way it's going to be, that's the way
it should be.
Cm Turner: No, if I violated Council policy I should be called
down on it. I should not be investigated though. I'm worthy of
a phone ca II.
Mayor: Dale, no one really - I resent that implication.
Cm Turner: You can resent it, but you said it.
-'
Mayor: You're twisting my words around now.
CM-31-222
January 5, 1976
(re Council Policy)
Cm Turner: Sir, you said that you overheard it and you verified
the facts.
Mayor: I read my statement and I did not use the word investigate
Cm Turner: You verified this stuff with -
Mayor: Wait a minute Dale, I'm talking. I didn't interrupt you.
I read a statement that I prepared very carefully, just expressed
my concern about what I considered improper attendance at a meeting
during a period in which we were having negotiations. That's the
only thing I commented on. Now certainly I asked some questions
about what had occurred. I don't really consider that an investiga-
tion. I was interested in what happens to the City and so I inquired.
I think that's the way it should be worded.
Cm Turner: It would have been a lot easier if you'd called me.
em Miller: Mr. Mayor, I'd like to comment about our policy which
I think the position Helen has taken is strange beyond rationality
in the following sense:
Cw Tirsell: Well that's what we went by last year.
Cm Miller: Well wait a minute. Let me tell you what I mean by
the following sense: Our policy was, and has been for a long time,
and all Councilmen have agreed to this, in all Councils. That
the Councilmen would not discuss labor negotiations other than
through our staff negotiators. They would not discuss our negotia-
tions with individual firemen, groups of firemen, with their nego-
tiators, or whatever.
The policy is that all the labor negotiations that are to take place
through our staff and the staff negotiators. Okay. In order to do that,
I will be very repetitious, we don't discuss any labor negotiation
matter with any of the City employee groups for that matter - not
just the firemen. But that doesn't mean that you can't talk to
a pOliceman or a fireman about other issues, like "how's the beat
today", if you're talking to a policeman, or "how many fires did
you have?, are you guys interested in a state ballot measure or
a even a local ballot measure?". The point is that it is an
irrational policy which says that you must not talk to any City
employee on any subject whatsoever while there are negotiations
going on. It is obviously the labor negotiations aspect covered
by this policy.
Cw Tirsell: I think that's quite correct but I was going by what
was done last year during negotiations. The Mayor at that time,
Mayor Pritchard, had a very good friend who was a fireman and
whenever he walked in Mayor Pritchard said, "not now, we are
under negotiations".
Dale said when they came in his bank, "I can't talk to you now
we are under negotiations". He made that statement to us and
I'm sitting here - I don't have a best friend who's a fireman
and they don't walk in my bank. So I'm saying, okay, that's
the way it is during negotiations and I would be happy to pass
the time of day at any other time, but not then.
I'm going by how the Council acted and conducted itself during the
last year. You will recall that we had an executive session when
they came to us and I was struck by the fact that only the Mayor
could talk and we agreed to that ahead of time, and he conducted
the meeting and all things followed through him for negotiations
to them.
CM-, 31-223
January 5, 1976
(re Council Policy)
Cm Miller: Sure, but that was a negotiation matter.
Cw Tirsell: But I was reacting to how everyone else conducted
themselves during that time period and so I assumed that's the
way it was, cause that's the way you said you did your thing
and that's the way the Mayor, at the time, said he did his thing.
So, if it's not that way, then I want it stated because -
Mayor: You thought that was the proper procedure at that time.
Cm Miller: Certainly it is proper procedure not to discuss anything
to do with labor negotiations and working conditions while negotia-
tions are underway but that doesn't mean that you can't talk to a
fireman or a pOliceman or a member of the Public Works Department
on any other kind of issue. It's really bizarre to think that
everything else is excluded.
Mayor: I think that we could continue.
Cm Staley: I'll maybe just make one comment. I think I under-
stand what Dale is saying here about his concern but I don't know
what happened here in th~ background but if you hear somebody sug-
gesting that a problem has occurred that the Council should look
into I don't think it is unreasonable to verify the facts before
you talk to somebody about it. That doesn't seem to me to be an
unreasonable course of action.
Cm Turner: First let me say, Helen, you're probably right. I
have no disagreement with what you're saying. I'm gonna go right
back to the other issue.
If I hear something about Cm Staley from overhearing a conversation,
I don't believe, John, that I have the right to run off to other
people to try and verify that information and then come back to
you and say, "John, I'm gonna give you a chance to clear yourself".
That's wrong. If I hear something about you, Cm Staley, I'll call
you up and I'll tell you who made the accusations if they want
me too. If they don't, then it's not even worthy of pursuing,
in my mind. That's the thing that's wrong.
Now when we start investigating each other on certain items, that
is wrong, in my mind. I don't agree with it. If I was wrong on
Council policy by meeting with the firemen it was in all innocence~
then I was wrong and you can judge me on that, but don't investigate
me. If you feel I've done something wrong, ask me about it and then
go ahead and investigate it. Tell the Council you are going to in-
vestigate. That's fine with me.
But this crap about running around to other people is wrong. It's
not right. I don't agree with it, I wouldn't do it, and I don't
expect anybody else to do it to me. That's my point.
Cm Staley: Well, okay, I don't know if that was done. I'm speak-
ing now more as an attorney and not as a Councilmember.
Cm Turner: Then maybe you shouldn't comment on it, John, if you
don't know.
Cm Staley: Well, alright, then I won't.
-'
Cm Turner: Thank you.
CM-31-224
January 5, 1976
(re Ideas for Bike
Path - East Avenue)
Cm Turner stated that he has spoken with Ayn Weiskamp of the Beautifi-
cation Committee, who has some ideas for the bike path at the fire
station located on East Avenue and Cm Turner believes the suggestions
are worthy of pursuing.
He requested that this item be placed on the agenda for discussion
next week.
(LAVWMA Meetings)
Cm Miller stated that LAVWMA will be having meetings sometime this
week and one of the items they will discuss is the interaction
between LAVWMA, the valley jurisdictions, and Zone 7, as far as
sewer is concerned.
A draft letter is proposed which says that the best definition of
adjacent areas to be sewered is "in a Sphere of Influence", which is,
in fact, developed by the staff of the Alameda County Local Agency
Formation Commission.
The LAFCO staff has proposed a Sphere of Influence line which is
about halfway into our Planning Area, our present General Plan
and overall an urbanizing area, which is a compromised "adjacent
area", which could be changed.
It seems that our position should be that Zone 7. should not do any
sewering within our long-term urbanizing area. That means, essen-
tially, all of the Valley below the 600 ft. line.
Cw Tirsell wondered why Zone 7 should do any sewering at all.
Cm Miller stated that we've been through this before. The point is
that our position to LAVWMA is that we won't accept sewering by
Zone 7 in any area below the 600 ft. line. This makes it very
clear that if somebody draws an arbitrary line, Zone 7 won't go
into the sewer business.
Our question to Zone 7 was to have an answer as to whether they
will or will not be a sewer agency anywhere in the Valley, and they
have not responded. Our point is that we should not accept Zone 7
sewering anywhere in the developable area in our end of the Valley.
Cm Miller stated that if this is agreeable with the Council, he
and the Mayor can make this point to LAVWMA at their meeting.
Mayor Futch indicated that he would not be able to attend the meet-
ing and Cm Miller stated that in that case he and Cm Turner will
present this view.
(Bottle Bills)
Cm Miller stated that in the past when the Council has discussed
the question of bottle bills, one of the things that motivated
the Council to back away from doing something locally was the
concern about being part of a major area and that it would have
to be done in a wider district.
The City of Berkeley has adopted a pOlicy which is to go into
effect in about eight months. Berkeley is a lot less isolated
than Livermore is and they felt they could go ahead and do some-
thing.
CM-31-225
January 5, 1976
(re Bottle Bills)
Berkeley did surveys and they found that only a few people would
drive out of the city and use non-returnable bottles. The economics
is that it costs less to use the returnable bottled beverages
and the people seem to accept this in Berkeley. Even the mer-
chants have agreed to work with the ordinance.
Since Livermore is even more isolated and less subject to the kind
of problems they would expect to have in Berkeley, he would like
to know if the Council would like to have copies of the informa-
tion received from Berkeley describing their justifications and
a copy of their ordinance.
It was concluded that the Council would like to review this infor-
mation.
(Ballot Statement
Proposed for Ord. 872 -
Trailer Storage)
Cm Miller stated that he has distributed copies of a statement
proposed for the ballot concerning Ordinance No. 872, relative
to trailer storage.
Cm Turner commented that there is a statement in the paragraph
relative to the reason the ordinances were adopted and wondered
if the statement can be substantiated.
The City Attorney commented that the Council does not have to
worry about substantiating a ballot argument.
The City Attorney further explained that this ballot argument
in no way is the initial support the Council adopted in terms
of adopting the ordinance. This is a very partisan argument
and there will be arguments stretched on both sides.
Cm Miller explained that he used the classic arguments used
by other jurisdictions and are accepted.
Cw Tirsell wondered if the City Attorney had made a determination
as to whether the present ordinance would remain in effect or if
the City would have to go back to the ordinance which was in effect
in 1972.
The City Attorney stated that the old interim ordinance is in
effect now and will remain in effect. If this ordinance is
repealed by the voters the old interim ordinance would still
remain in effect unless there is a time limitation on it. In
that case it would go back to the old ordinance.
CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE STATEMENT WORDING FOR PLACEMENT
ON THE BALLOT, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
(Ways and Means Aspect
of Municipal Government)
Cm Staley stated that in reviewing the 25~ tax increase proposal
and the budget, it occurred to him that there is no member or
standing committee that investigates and understands the ways
and means aspect of municipal government.
-'
Most legislative bodies have a Ways and Means Committee which
has some understanding of the financing, revenue, and expense
trends of the City.
CM-31-226
January 5, 1976
(Ways and Means Aspect of
Municipal Government)
The Council is aware of the problems encountered with SB 90 and
the fact that the City is limited in raising revenues and the fact
that the City is about to adopt a General Plan which will have some
impact on the City's future expenditures.
Cm Staley stated that he thinks there is a need to establish, within
',,-- the Council, one or two members that have some responsibility for
developing expertise in ways and means.
Perhaps this should be discussed at a future Council meeting. His
concern is financing but he has been noticing, increasingly in the
last 3-4 months, that the sophistication and diversity of the City may
require more and more sub-committees of the Council in order to
develop the expertise on the Council to deal with problems as they
arise.
Cm Staley suggested that: I) a Ways and Means Sub-Committee be
established, and 2) that the Council consider other standing committees
that the Council needs for dealing with the complexity of City manage-
ment.
Cw Tirsell suggested that a title other than Ways and Means be used
because this sounds as if the City intends to raise money. She has
served on a million of these committees.
Cm Staley stated that perhaps Revenue and Taxation would be a better
name for the committee.
The item will be placed on an agenda for discussion at a later date.
(Tract 3607)
Cm Staley stated that he finds it difficult to understand what
happened with Tract Map No. 3607 (Great American Land) in terms
of the map and in terms of the P.C. recommendation. He added
that he would like to know if the Council would be interested in
an investigation of that process for the purpose of information.
First of all an ordinance was adopted with a tract map that had
already been submitted but was not taken into consideration. It
would seem that the Council should review the process. He added
that he would like to know, for instance, if the P.C. saw that
final map before they made the recommendation to the Council on
the variance. If they didn't see the final map, did they know it
was available and was it something they should have seen?
One of the problems he found while he was on the P.C. was that
they don't always exactly understand what the Council wanted them
to do, and problems of communication were often brought up.
Cm Staley stated that he would like to see in the P.C. minutes
discussion, how that variance came to be granted and whether or
not the map was necessary for them to see or whether it didn't
make any difference. Also, how the map was submitted in several
variations and the Council didn't seem to understand what was
happening.
Cm Miller stated that Mr. Musso did tell the Council that the P.C.
never saw the structural layouts for any of the lots. A blanket
variance was allowed without consideration of the layout at all.
Mr. Musso explained that the applicant did not request approval
of that type of map. They 'simply requested a blanket variance
for all of the lots.
CM-31-227
January 5, 1976
(Tract 3607
Great American Land)
Cm Miller pointed out that the P.C. did not ask the applicant
if the ordinance could have been satisfied without the variance.
Cm Staley commented about the mixup with the two different maps
and that the Council apparently did not know what map was finally
approved, and then secondly he would like to know how the Council
could have adopted an ordinance that affected a tentative tract
map, in the mill, and not know that it was in the mill or not dis-
cuss that as part of the ordinance. Thirdly, does the P.C. think,
now that they are aware of the problem, that they should have seen
that map in the first place.
....-/
If the rest of the Council would agree he would like a report to
determine if there is a problem with the system or just one of
those things that would never happen again.
Mr. Musso stated that to answer one of the questions, in the ten-
tative map approval there is no discussion concerning setbacks.
The City doesn't know what the developer intends to build and he
doesn't know what he will build. That is never an issue.
Cm Staley stated that
P.C. should have seen
if the applicant does
are not required to.
submit as evidence on
he is still not sure whether or not the
that map and Mr. Musso commented that
not choose to submit it as evidence, they
The applicant chooses what he wishes to
his variance request.
Mr. Parness commented that the staff will prepare the history
for Council information.
(Meeting re R.R. Proj.)
Mayor Futch stated that the City Manager has requested that
the Mayor, Cm Miller, and Dan Lee meet with him to review some
of the complicated details of the railroad project.
Mr. Parness stated that it is necessary to review some of the
contract and design problems.
(Constitutional
Amendment Draft)
Mayor Futch stated that he has received a Constitutional amend-
ment draft which basically states that no person shall be re-
quired to join or to pay dues or fees to any employee organiza-
tion, as a condition of employment, by any government entity,
including but not limited to the state, city, or county as
chartered or unchartered, etc.
He asked if the Council would like to see this item on the
agenda for discussion.
Cm Miller stated that he does not want to discuss it because
in his opinion it is not the Council's business. It is a ques-
tion of whether or not employees will be allowed to be unionized
and if so, what kind of shop they have. The employees should be
able to negotiate for themselves and not be subject to Council
decision.
Cm Turner stated that he doesn't want to discuss it either.
Cw Tirsell stated that she doesn't know what it's all about and
she, personally, would like to have the information. ~
CM-31-228
January 5, 1976
ere Letter to BAAPCD
re Air Quality)
Mayor Futch stated that it has been suggested that since the air
quality is such an important element of our General Plan, that
the City specifically write to the BAAPCD asking for their comments
on the Air Quality Element of the General Plan.
It was noted that this item has been referred to them but the Mayor
felt a letter to them specifically, would be in order.
The Council concurred.
ORD. AMEND. INTRODUC-
TION RE ENCROACHMENT
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE ORDINANCE AMENDING THE BUILDING CODE RELATIVE TO ENCROACHMENT,
WAS INTRODUCED, AND TITLE ONLY READ BY THE CITY ATTORNEY.
CITY MANAGER WEEKLY
STATUS REPORT
Railroad Project
Mr. Parness reported that the pour has been made on "P" Street
for the columns. All the form work for Livermore Avenue has been
finished and it should be poured within the next day or two. The
City has been lucky that weather has permitted the work to progress
quite rapidly.
The next step will be curb, gutter, and paving, and hopefully the
street will be open for service in the near future.
Reclamation Plant
The water reclamation plant expansion is nearing its final completion.
There are a couple of motors to be installed and they are difficult
to obtain. The City has experienced a great difficulty and delays
in getting delivery of material.
After everything has been installed there will be a considerable
amount of testing for all of the new installations.
Finance
As to the matter of finance, the departmental budgets will begin
next week. This should mean an update in the ability to refer
the document to the Council in a month, hopefully. In accordance
with Council direction, this item will be on next week's agenda
(the schedule) so the Council can choose a format.
Social Concerns Committee
Our Social Concerns Committee has been busy. They have finished
their second tour in visiting multipurpose centers. However, the
second center visited was more of a recreational building. At
any rate, they did gain experience in visiting centers.
They are very interested to help in the planning and architectural
design of our multipurpose service center.
CM-31-229
January 5, 1976
(Social Concerns Committee)
Mr. Parness added that application for the second year funding
(:HCDA funds) has been sent, in accordance with the schedule
adopted by the County.
Loss of Personnel Officer
Mr. Parness reported that he is sorry to report that the City is
losing its personnel officer, Peter Kolster, who has submitted
his resignation. He has accepted a similar post as personnel
director for Sierra College.
~"
CONTINUED DISCUSSION
RE LETTER TO REGIONAL
BOARD RE WATER QUALITY
MANAGEMENT PLANNING
Cw Tirsell stated that she believes letters that rebut letters
that rebut letters are of little value.
Cm Miller stated that the point is not just to send the letter
to the Regional Board but to send it to all kinds of other
places. Ultimately, the pecularities of what's going on north
of the City will gain the attention of the statewide agencies
and this is one way to alert them - that there is something strange
going on because we will need their support. There is no harm in
letting them know about the unusual things that are happening.
Cw Tirsell stated that she would suggest addressing it with ref-
erence copies to the Regional Board because it doesn't make much
sense for them to read letters just from Livermore.
Cm Staley felt this would be a good idea because he didn't under-
stand the points brought up by Cm Miller and at the time he read
their letter there were questions in his~mind. He feels it is a
good idea to set the records straight.
Mayor Futch stated that, furthermore, Zone 7 has the power outside
but they don't have the authority for 97% of the sewage generated
from the Valley.
Cm Staley noted that they don't have experience either and he
believes these are excellent points, and the records should be
set straight.
M~F9ri, Futch indicated that the City should be careful about send-
ing too many letters because they will say, oh, it's just another
letter from Livermore. "
Cw Tirsell felt the facts should be very straight before a rebut-
tal is made.
Cm Miller stated that he would agree and it can be overdone. How-
ever, on the other hand, letters that call attention to various
aspects of a problem are like the gentle rain - ultimately they
make an impression.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Council, the
meeting was adjourned at 11:20 p.m.
~----/ ,
APPROVE
~ ~ 7kZT
~i ~;J;;L
.. ~itY Clerk
, LI~ermore, California
ATTEST
CM-31 230
Regular Meeting of January 12, 1976
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore
was held on January 12, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers,
39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at
8:05 p.m. with Mayor Futch presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch
Absent: Cm staley (Seated Later)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Futch led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the
audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
P.H. RE ASSESSMENT
FOR SIDEWALK REPAIR
A public hearing has been scheduled for the purpose of hearing
testimony for the sidewalk assessment at 1249 Hillview Drive. It
is recommended that at the close of the public hearing a resolution
be adopted overriding protests and confirming assessment.
Mr. Lee explained that the assessment will be for work done on the
sidewalk at 1249 Hillview Drive. The repair costs are in the amount
of $400, consisting of 76 sq. ft. of sidewalk and 24 lineal ft. of
curbing. If the property owner does not pay the $400 within a certain
period of time the City has the authority to place a lien against the
property at the rate of 6% per anum.
THERE BEING NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY, ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED
BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
C
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
RESOLUTION NO. 10-76
A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING REPORT OF SUPERINTENDENT
OF STREETS AND CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT AGAINST REAL
PROPERTY.
CM STALEY WAS SEATED DURING THE ABOVE PUBLIC HEARING AND VOTED ON
THE MOTION.
COMMUNICATION RE
RESIGNATION OF
RICHARD M. FLORES
The Council received a communication from Richard M. Flores inform-
ing the Council of his resignation from the Social Concerns Committee.
ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO WRITE TO MR. FLORES THANKING HIM FOR HIS
SERVICE ON THIS COMMITTEE.
COMMUNICATION RE
POSSIBLE BART SERVICE
EXTENSION IN FUTURE
The Council received a copy of a letter written by Robert S. Allen,
BART Director, directed to the Editor of the Valley Times concerning
extension of the BART rail.
CM":'31-231
January l2, 1976
(BART Rail Extension)
Cw Tirsell stated that at the COVA meeting, representatives from
VCSD expressed concern that the committee doesn't wait too long
to lobby for BART extension to be attached to approval of the 1/2~
sales tax. This would be to prevent BART from cancelling our ser-
vice after the 1/2~ tax went through. The 1/2~ should be contingent
upon -ex~cl'\3ion of DAR-T. (!rYav)-..-<-,--d.~;PW t'/ /-1/,J;'.L-e4-<L/'. ~-I-<-,<v'. ,aL/L.-<._L:t!.R./.
~-dL~ ~-" (!i,-bj: Qi!-L~~_ .
Item was noted for filing. f
-'
NOTICE RE PG&E RATE
INCREASE APPLICATION
The Council received a notice of an application by PG&E to the PUC
for a rate increase.
em Miller stated that it is his understanding that during the past
15 years the PUC has increased the rates of return of all the pub-
lic utilities to a substantial extent. Each time they raise the
rate of return there is a corresponding rate increase. The rates
of return are now relatively high and he would suggest that the
Council recommend to the new PUC that they consider reducing the
rate of return and not allow PG&E's proposed rate increase.
Cm Miller added that before voting on this matter he would sug-
gest that the"Council obtain all the history in terms of the last
20 years.
The item was continued for two weeks pending information, as re-
quested, ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE.
COMMUNICATION RE
SENIOR CITIZENS
MULTI-SERVICE CENTER
A letter was received from the Director of the Senior Citizens
Multi-Service Center thanking the Council, Mr. Parness and
Don Bradley for their continuing interest and concerns for the
older people of the community.
Included with the letter was material on the Mayor's Senior
Citizen's Discount Program with the comment that if this
is feasible they would be glad to help.
CW TIRSELL MOVED TO REFER THIS MATTER TO THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,
SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
NOTICE RE LEAGUE
OF CALIF. CITIES
REGULAR MEETING
A letter was submitted by the East Bay Division League of Califor-
nia Cities concerning their regular meeting scheduled for January
23, 1076, at the Pleasant Hill Golf and Country Club.
COMMUNICATION FROM
BASSA RE WASTEWATER
MANAGEMENT PLANNING
--.
A letter and resolution was received from BASSA concerning the
agency to be designated for the Wastewater Management Planning
in the Upper Alameda Creek Watershed area.
CM-31-232
I
January 12, 1976
ere Wastewater Management
Planning Agency)
Cm Miller felt there would be some merit in sending a letter to
BASSA similar to the one authorized to be sent to the Regional
Board about this very same issue.
Cm Miller added that their resolution talks about implementing waste-
water treatment facilities outside the LAVWMA boundaries with the
possibility of Zone 7 doing it. This means that Zone 7 would be in
the sewer business for development such as Geldermann's. We should
reiterate to BASSA that we support LAVWMA as the lead agency, etc.
He asked that he be allowed to prepare a draft letter for review
by the Council at the next Council meeting.
The Council concurred.
APPEAL RE HOME OCCUPA-
TION PERMIT DENIAL
(N. S. Cheema)
The Council moved to the item concerning the home occupation permit
denial (N. S. Cheema, 717 Hazel Street) because there were people
in the audience who were interested in this item.
Mr. Musso explained that the home occupation permit appeal is be-
cause of the denial by the Zoning Administrator, Mr. Horst. Mr.
Horst denied the application for the home occupation permit to
allow an office for a Real Estate Broker and a Registered Engineer,
based on the City policy concerning a real estate business. The
policy is that a real estate business would not be allowed as a
home occupation.
Mr. Cheema commented that his place of business is in Byron and it
is his understandng that if you have a place of business elsewhere
you are allowed to have a real estate license in the home. He
stated that he works 8 hours a day as a professional engineer and
for this reason there would be no traffic at his home, no employees,
and no signs in front of his home.
Mr. Musso explained that it is not necessary for someone to have a
business license to receive telephone calls or mail at his home
address and this is what Mr. Cheema meant. On the other hand,
it wouldn't be required for someone to have a place of business
in Livermore if they are working out of town.
It was concluded that part of the request would require a business
license but the other part would not and CM Miller noted that it
is difficult to clarify what the issues are in this case.
Mr. Cheema stated that he would like to become a member of the
state Board of Realtors of Alameda County and they require a
business address. Since he sells real estate for only about two
hours a week (part-time) he does not want to have to pay $100 a
month for an office. He indicated that business will be done by
telephone and mail and that people will not be coming to
his home.
Cm Staley stated that there are a few issues that need to be clarif-
ied: I) Does the gentleman need a home occupation permit to do what
he wants to do? Cm Staley stated that at this point he really can't
tell if a home occupation permit is needed and if the applicant would
agree to a delay he would suggest that the item be postponed for a
week or two to allow the staff time to meet with Mr. Cheema and
determine if a permit is necessary. If he does, it can again be
referred to the Council for a decision.
Cm Miller stated that it would appear that a permit is needed because
business is being transacted from the home and that this particular
business would not be allowed because of the City's pOlicy.
CM-31-233
I
January 12, 1976
(re Home Occupation
Permit - Cheema)
Cm Staley stated that he must agree with the comment made by Cm
Miller, at this point.
It was noted that Mr. Cheema would be allowed a permit if his line
of business were real estate with his principal office in Byron~
however, he does engineering work in Byron - not real estate.
Cm Staley explained that he believes the policy allows someone
to bring work home if they are in a particular business. The
policy is not designed to allow someone working as an engineer
in another city to have a part-time occupation as a real estate
broker in his home.
CM MILLER MOVED TO DENY THE APPEAL, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND
PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Cm Turner noted that he would be voting for the motionbeeause
he has gOnSiS~9B~ly vo~ed 3~3iBa~ home occupations, even though
Mr. Cheema is his neighbor.
A resolution will be on the Consent Calendar next week.
REPORT RE PROPOSED
BIKE PATH ALIGNMENT
FOR EAST AVENUE
The Council moved to the item concerning the report on the bike
path alignment for East Avenue, because there were people in the
audience who wished to speak on this item.
Mr. Lee explained that this matter was brought up as a result of
some concern about the new fire station going in on East Avenue
and the fact there might be a problem with school children passing
in front of the fire stateion. em Turner has asked that the matter
be investigated.
Mr. Lee illustrated the design of the bike path on a map, and show-
ing the areas considered to be hazards. He stated that he and the
Fire Chief have concluded that the fire trucks move very slowly and
make a lot of noise when making an exit from the station property
and there would be no problem in allowing the children to continue
crossing in front of the station. It is felt that even if a path
were provided behind the station, children would continue to go
in front of the station.
Ayn Weiskamp, 1413 Lillian Street, stated that she can understand
the difficulty in trying to get a child to ride behind the station
if he is on his way to Almond Avenue School, but there is no reason
why the Jackson Avenue students and those going to the park or for
soccer practice, can't go behind the station. She added that she
believes the people from the fire department would be cautious but
children are not - they are daring. She was told that originally
the path along Robert Livermore Park was along the east side of
the park all the way to East Avenue but now it has been changed
to go around the fire station. She expressed concern for the
path around the station and for her son who would be using the path.
Don Larsen, Jackson Avenue principal, stated that most of the child-
ren from the areas that would use the path are bussed to school but
some of them choose to ride their bikes. Also there are times when
the Almond Avenue School children and the Jackson Avenue School child-
ren have differences and decide to settle them and they do this in
the vicinity of the station. He would suggest that if at all possi-
ble, a path behind the station might eliminate potential problems
and liabilities for the City and the School District. He stated
that his concern is for the small children who might not know what
to do and the older children who tend to take chances.
CM-31-234
em Turner stated that he does not believe there is a conflict
because he has consistently vote~ ~gajnst variances to )the
Home Occupation Ordinance. ~ ~~ ~~~_
January 12, 1976
(East Ave. Bike Path)
Cw Tirsell wondered if there would be someone standing out in front
to warn people that trucks would be coming out of the station and
Mr. Lee indicated that he really is not sure.
em Turner stated that he doubts very seriously if a truck would be
able to stop quickly after they started rolling out of the station.
It was noted that the problem is that only about half of the children
would use the path behind the station.
Cm Miller suggested leaving the path as it presently is until after
the station has been in operation and at that time if it is felt
necessary, a path can be provided behind the station, and the land
needed for the bike path can be condemned.
It was also suggested that the staff contact the Fire Department to
find out what their procedure is when the trucks rollout and simul-
taneously the staff should contact the School District to find out
if they would be willing to contribute to the cost of a bike path
to the rear, and to find out if LARPD would also be willing to
contribute.
RECESS
Mayor Futch called for a recess at 8:55 to allow the Council to meet
briefly with the P.C. to discuss the item concerning the Sunset
Development Company. The Council meeting resumed at 9:20 with all
members of the Council present.
APPEAL RE VARIANCE APP.
- SUNSET DEVELOP. CO.
An appeal has been filed by the Council reo P.C. approval of a variance
to allow continued use of a portion of the property located at the cor-
ner of Concannon Boulevard and Cordoba Street, for a corporation yard.
Mr. Musso explained that during the past year the City has had
difficulting in abating the equipment stored at Cordoba and
Concannon Boulevard. The matter was taken to the District Attorney
who continued to ignore the situation and allowed the applicant to
file for a variance.
The P.C. allowed continuance of the variance because that particular
area is better for policing and based on findings contained in their
report. The continuance was for a period of six months, or until
the two subdivisions are completed, whichever comes sooner. Both
subdivisions are nearing completion.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ALLOW THE VARIANCE, AS RECOMMENDED
BY THE P.C., AS LONG AS THE USE IS ABA~ED BY JUNE I, 1976.
SECONDED BY MAYOR FUTCH.
Cm Miller stated that at the end of the six months if the tracts
are not complete, the same argument will be made allover again.
The developer will indicate that the storage yard is needed for
only a short period of time and in fact, this same argument has
been going on for a number of years. This argument can be used
in perpetuity.
Discussion followed concerning the fact that there has not been
any development contiguous to the storage area for about 5 years
and the reasons that were given to the Council for not wanting to
move the storage yard.
Cm Staley stated that he agrees the six months is a short period
of time and worth granting the variance. However, if some type
of legal proceedings have to be instituted on June lst to get the
equipment moved, this is another 5-6 month delay. Personally, he
doesn't feel the use belongs there but he will go along with the
motion.
CM-31-
235
January 12, 1976
(Sunset Develop. Co. Variance)
Cm Miller commented that approval can be conditioned with a bond
and he would suggest that this be done to avoid problems, come
June I.
The City Attorney stated that as of June I, Sunset Development
Company must move their equipment. If a bond is required the
matter could take a year to get to court and by then they may
show in court that there was no legal right to require the bond
in the first place then the time for court and the year has to
be taken into consideration with the City coming up with nothing.
The simple purpose of a variance is to allow a limited period of
time and at the end of that time they must leave.
~."
Cm Turner stated that the problem is, if the Council decides this
evening that Sunset Development must remove their equipment it may
mean legal action on the part of the City. lIe is acting on the
assumption that Sunset is acting in good faith and ~dll reMove
their equipment on or before June I, 1976.
The City Attorney pointed out that the legal action concerning
this item would be very simple after the variance expires.
Cm Staley stated that he is a little uneasy about voting for a
motion without having someone from Sunset Development agree that
they would vacate the premises by June lst.
Mr. Musso stated that he has received a letter from Sunset Develop-
ment Company indicating that they agree to the conditions and the
recommendations. The condition is that he vacate on June l, 1976.
Cm Miller stated that on June I, 1976, the buildings and equipment
will still be there and there should be some condition specifying
that they have a certain length of time to get the property cleared.
The City Attorney stated it would be quite reasonable to require
that the property be cleared within 30 days, or something like
this.
CM TURNER MOVED TO CHANGE HIS MOTION AS FOLLOWS: THAT THE COUNCIL
SUPPORT THE DECISION OF THE P.C. WITH THE ADDITION THAT THE PROPERTY
MUST BE CLEARED IN 30 DAYS AFTER THE TRACTS ARE COMPLETE OR JUNE I,
1976, WHICHEVER COMES SOONER. MOTION SECONDED BY MAYOR FUTCH.
MOTION PASSED 3-1 (Cm Miller dissenting and Cw Tirsell abstaining).
Cw Tirsell mentioned prior to the vote that she would be abstaining
because she belongs to the Swim Club adjacent to the storage pro-
~~r;~ythf~: ;~i~~:~ ~~:i~ :~a~~P:~~ ~:~a~:~o~~~~
A resolution will be on the Consent Calendar next week.
CONTINUED DISCUSSION
RE ENERGY CONSERVA-
TION COMMITTEE FORMATION
The item concerning formation of an Energy Conservation Committee
was continued from the meeting of December 22nd. The P.C. has
recommended establishment of a formal committee.
Mayor Futch commented that there is an energy conservation group
at LLL who have indicated that they would like to serve on the
committee and the Mayor wondered if the City Clerk has received
their names.
It was noted that there would be support from the lab in the way
of services or assistance but the City was not given specific
names.
CM-31-236
January 12, 1976
(Energy Conservation
Committee Formation)
CM MILLER MOVED TO APPROVE THE FORMATION OF AN ENERGY CONSERVATION
COMMITTEE, WITH APPOINTMENTS TO BE DISCUSSED AT A LATER DATE. MOTION
WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
ern Staley commented that he is not sure why this committee is to be
a formal committee rather than just advisory to the Planning Commi-
ssion as was originally suggested. He stated that he is concerned
about the hearing times, etc., because this has to be done in a
public session. Perhaps it would be better if this were done by
the Planning Commission.
Mr. Musso commented that one of the reasons it was felt a formal
committee should be established was because of support from the lab
and possible federal financing to the City. Apparently they have
money to expend and this can be done through local programs.
Bob Selden explained that one part of the energy program is concerned
with urban energy conservation and general policies that cities around
the country can adopt. When the people from LLL found that Livermore
was considering an Energy Conservation Study Committee they approached
him indicating that they would like to actively participate and that
would be interested in developing long-range energy conservation
policies and goals, which a formal committee could do.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
The Council then discussed the size of the committee to be formed.
Mr. Parness stated that since the Council has indicated it would like
a formal committee he would like to request that the item be referred
back to the staff for drafting of the formal composition for such a
committee, setting forth the number and how they are to be appointed
as well as the length of their term and statement of their charge.
CW TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL REFER THIS BACK TO THE STAPF FOR
A REPORT, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CONTINUED DISCUSSION
RE CBD ASSESSMENTS
The matter of assessed valuations for the CBD properties was con-
tinued from the meeting of December 22. The Council has received
reports and communications concerning this matter and additional
discussion is scheduled for this time.
ern Miller stated that the City received a letter from the assessor
which was a little incoherent. He would suggest that a letter
be referred to the Grand Jury requesting that they encourage the
assessor to remove the inequity in assessments and for the assessor
to start imposing a factor. He would like the letter to the Grand
Jury to list of all the properties and noting the following points:
I) All residential properties went up in the last year by
approximately 80%.
2) Approximately 75-80% of the commercial and bulk acreages
were either unchanged or went down.
3) The residential properties go up every year but most of the
commercial and bulk acreages stay constant for several years.
This creates an assessment gap and residences have an increasing-
ly higher assessment relative to commercial and bulk acreages.
This gives a special tax benefit to non-residential property.
CM-31-237
January 12, 1976
(Energy Committee)
4) This inequity can be fixed by treating all classes of
property exactly the same~ namely, imposing an annual factor
on all property.
5) The factor can be approximated and at the time of physical
assessments the inequities from the approximate factor can be
adjusted for the commercial and bulk acreages in exactly the
same way as the factor for residential is adjusted at the time
of physical reassessment.
--/"
6) The assessor implied that he stopped working on a factor.
The factor could have been applied as an approximation and
adjusted in the next year or at the time of the next physical
assessment.
7) Urge the Grand Jury to rapidly consider this issue because
if the assessor does not change his practice before the March
lst deadline, another year of inequities will go by.
Cm Staley commented that he is not as convinced as Cm Miller is
that there are inequities present, now that the Council has
studied the issue.
There was discussion concerning what Cm Miller feels the inequi-
ties are, and with graphic illustrations concerning this point.
Cm Staley stated that he would agree the assessor seems to use
a factor in assessing residential property. However, if you sell
a house or purchase a house in a year they will reassess the house
at the price you paid for it, minus a small consideration.
FJk~,~ .
Cm Miller st~ that this is~~xactly what he is talking about.
The assessor" reasses~~~~~~ !2f';J'lhic~ .l.:j,~~sales have
been made but does noth~ng,1l.n areal{ pro'pert~~ve not sold.
If the houses have a factor placed on them every year, so should
the commercial. This factor has been applied for the past 6-7
years and will continue for the residential properties.
Cm Staley stated that he has no objection with sending a letter
to the assessor pointing out the things mentioned by Cm Miller
but sees no evidence or justification for sending it to the
Grand Jury.
Cm r>1iller pointed out that a letter to the Grand Jury is one
means of getting the assessor's attention. We wrote the assessor
a letter and we didn't get his attention. It is true that we got
a response but he didn't address the issue.
CM MILLER MOVED TO SEND A LETTER TO THE GRAND .JURY, INCORPORATING
THE POINTS MADE BY HIM. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Cm Turner stated that he would be willing to support the motion
as long as the Council has a chance to read the letter that is
to be sent to the Grand Jury.
Cm Staley stated that he does not want to start a discussion with
a threat, and a letter to the Grand Jury would be a type of threat.
He suggested that the City ask for the assessor's cooperation first.
em Miller stated that he would hope that pressure of this kind would
cause the assessor to use factors for the commercial property this
next year. He added that he has mentioned that our assessor should
receive credit because he is better than most assessors in California
- most of them don't pay any attention to commercial property.
----.
CM-31-238
January 12, 1976
CM MILLER MOVED TO SEND A LETTER TO THE ASSESSOR, INCORPORATING
THE POINTS MADE BY HIM. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM STALEY. MOTION
PASSES BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE PRELIMINARY
BUDGET HEARING SCHEDULE
The City Manager reported that the Council has requested discussing
the subject of meeting for the budget session because of the par-
ticularly long day required to review the budget last year.
The City Manager distributed the budget calender noting that the
schedule calls for distribution of the preliminary budget on May 17th
and a study session can be held any time thereafter until about mid
June.
After the study session, one or more public hearings will be held
for receiving public testimony concerning the budget, prior to its
adoption the first meeting in July.
It has been suggested that the Council take two days for the budget
session, rather than the usual one long day.
ern Staley stated that he really believes it is a mistake to try to
take care of the entire budget during one session, or possibly even
two days. He stated that he would suggest that the budget be divided
into smaller segments for discussion.
Cw Tirsell stated that she really likes the suggestion of discussing
primarily the capital improvements at one meeting, and rather than
including staff adjustments at this time she would suggest that
they be discussed at the time the operating budget is reviewed. She
would like capital improvements to be discussed one day with staff
adjustments and operating budget another day. She indicated that
it is difficult to pick up the continuity of the budget unless one
whole section is discussed at one time. If smaller segments were
discussed it would mean that the Council would have to start meet-
ings in April in order to get finished, and there wouldn't be any
continuity to the discussions.
Cm Miller stated that he will not be present for the budget session
this year but he would suggest that there be one day for discussion
of the budget itself, another day for salary adjustments, and a third
day for capital improvements. This way there could be continuity with-
out having the incredibly long day for handling everything at once.
Cw Tirsell stated that one of the problems the Council had last year
was vacation schedules. Cm Turner was gone in July and this is going
to happen again - people have vacations scheduled.
Cm Turner stated that he is not opposed to handling the budget in a
one day session but would like the salary adjustments discussed at
a different time.
The Council concurred generally with a two day budget session.
REPORT FROM P.C. RE
COUNTY REFERRAL -
EBERT LOUNSBURY PROPERTY
The County referred an application by Ebert Lounsbury to subdivide
property located on portola Avenue into two lots.
CM-31-239
January 12, 1976
(App. to Subdivide
- Ebert Lounsbury)
CW TIRSELL MOVED TO REFER THIS ITEM TO THE COUNTY BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ENDORSING THE RECOMMENDATION OF OUR PLANNING
CO~MISSION TO OPPOSE THE SUBDIVISION. MOTION WAS SECONDED
BY CM TURNER.
Cm Miller stated that we should add that this property is
also in our sphere of Influence, WHICH WAS INCLUDED IN THE MOTION.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
COUNTY REFERRAL REQUESTING
RECLASSIFICATION FROM A
DIST. TO M-I DIST. (Stanley Blvd.)
The P.C. reported that Alameda County has referred the application
of Rhodes and Jamieson for reclassification from A District to
M-I District to allow light industrial development of approximately
five acres of land located on Stanley Boulevard.
Cm Turner stated that he would abstain from the vote because the
bank in which he works may possibly finance their development
if the rezoning is allowed.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT THE PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE APPLICATION BE DENIED IN VIEW OF THE
FACT THAT REZONING AT THIS TIME WOULD BE PREMATURE, AND FOR
ALL THE REASONS LISTED IN THEIR STAFF REPORT. MOTION SECONDED
BY CW TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY (Cm Turner abstain~ng).
C~;7 U::.<:vnI'l..-/ ?.f-<--tt-<..<...f.~o.~I't..4.A~o ~L4'-:Z~~j ~2.f.:.:-:<~j- _ti,,: /;~'~' ttZ{o-c:"J f
_AL _-/L~.. ~l-~~I- d-Lf(Ju-,~(~,(~ ~ ...-L4<-& ~ ?-'-r~,
REPORT FROM P. C. RE Ml#-4_fJfl, tl"d;-;-~"uI6-
COUNCIL REFERRAL RE . T
ROUTE 84 REALIGNMENT
The Council receive a report from the P.C. concerning the referral
from the City Council as to the realignment of State Route 84.
Exhibits were included in the report and the Council discussed
the realignment.
CM MILLER MOVED TO HAVE A STREET AT "X", A PEDESTRIAN ACCESS
AT "Y", AND TO SUPPRESS "Z". MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
"X" is the exit from Yosemite Drive to Kitty Hawk Road
"Y" exits from Chalmette Court to Kitty Hawk Road
"z" is at Rainier
Mr. Musso pointed out that "Y" and "Z" involve acquisition of
an existing lot with a dwelling. The vacant lot is "X", and
"z" has never been considered before but also is an occupied lot.
Cm Staley stated that he feels it is not necessary to provide for
pedestrians at "Y" because they can get out at the other access
areas and the City does not want to encourage pedestrian traffic
on the major street.
Mr. Lee indicated that there will be an internal bikeway system
and pedestrians and bicycles can exit from "K" to go either west
or east.
Cm Miller wondered who would need to use the major street from lIy",
and for what purpose?
Mr. Musso commented that the P.C. felt the people in the vicinity
of "Y" wanting to go toward Pleasanton, westward, would use lIylI.
CM-31- 240
January 12, 1976
(re Route 84 Realignment)
It was noted that people from the "Y" area could easily exit from
the "X" area and Mayor Futch stated that in the future he would
like to see access in the area of "Z" for provision of both the
automobile and pedestrian, depending on the circumstances.
MOTION WAS AMENDED TO PROVIDE ACCESS AT "X" ONLY, AND ELIMINATE
"Y" AND "Z". MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER. MOTION PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM MILLER MOVED TO INSTRUCT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PROCEED WITH
THE ACQUISITION OF LOT "X", SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED
UNANIMOUSLY.
Cw Tirsell stated it was her understanding that Lot "X" was
reserved for the freeway alignment, and Mr. Parness indicated that
this is correct but the City needs to acquire the property.
Mr. Parness stated that he would assume this action clears up the
entire Elliott property acquisition matter and that the "Y" lot
can now become occupied.
Mr. Musso stated that this was a condition of approval for the
tentative and final maps and possibly this should be a formal
resolution of release.
The City Attorney indicated that a motion would be sufficient.
CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ALLOW OCCUPANCY OF THE HOUSE AT "Y", SECONDED
BY CM STALEY AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (~1'1;...:;1o.-/.. 3'3?3)
P.C. SUMMARY OF ACTION
The summary of action taken at the Planning Commission meeting of
January 6, 1976, was noted for filing.
REPORT RE REPRODUCTION
EQUIPMENT LEASE
A report from the City Manager indicated that comparative costs have
been prepared for the leasing of new reproductive equipment. The
study indicates that a savings can be obtained by a lease-purchase
agreement with the Bank of America. It is recommended that the
Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute
the lease agreement with the Bank of America at the prices quoted.
Mr. Parness commented that the lease arrangement with the Bank of
America would mean a savings of about $3,000.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE
LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE BANK OF AMERICA.
RESOLUTION NO. ll-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF LEASE AGREEMENT (A.B.
Dick Company and Scriptomatic-Bay Area With Assignments to
Bank of America)
Prior to the motion Cm Turner questioned if the 7% is an annual
~te ~an add-on rate, and Mr. Parness stated that this is an
... ~~~~ ate. He then wondered if other lending institutions were
contacted.
Mr. Parness commented that the purchasing agent did contact several
lending institutions but he is not certain how many were contacted.
CH-31-241
January 12, 1976
(Repro. Equip. Lease)
Cm Turner stated that in working for a bank he know how important
deposits are and he believes it is important that lead banks have
the opportunity to bid on any City financing project, in that the
deposit~yrnay b. e an incentive to offer lower rates.
;:t:lu.y QA-"'cCt.~
f/ Pt!H'J- -
The Council concurred.
_/
REPORT RE TRAFFIC
SIGNAL PRIORITY
A traffic signal priority list was submitted to the Council for
informational purposes, by the Director of Public Works, showing
the following priorities:
(I) "p" Street at Chestnut Street,
(2) "P" Street at Railroad Avenue, and
(3) Murrieta at Olivina Avenue
Various other intersections were listed with the comment that the
City cannot proceed because other jurisdictions are involved, such
as the intersection of East Avenue and Vasco Road.
Mr. Lee commented that he would like the Council to discuss the
alignment for the Murrieta/Olivina intersection so that the City
can proceed with the design, and that this be scheduled as an
agenda item in the near future.
CW TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE MURRIETA/OLIVINA INTERSECTION BE SCHEDU-
LED FOR DISCUSSION ON JANUARY 26, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED
BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Res. Auth. Purchase
of Real Property
(Kissell)
It is recommended that a resolution be adopted authorizing purchase
of Kissell property to add to the park area, north of the freeway.
RESOLUTION NO. 12-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF REAL PROPERTY
(.61 Acre - Christiansen Park)
Res. Approving Solid
Waste Management Plan
for Alameda County
The following resolution was adopted approving the Solid Waste
Management Plan for Alameda County, following the hearing of 1/5/76.
RESOLUTION NO. 13-76
A RESOLUTION APPROVING SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN
FOR ALAMEDA COUNTY
~
Payroll & Claims
There were 84 claims in the amount of $192,837.52, dated 12/31/76,
and approved by the City Manager.
CM-3l-242
January 12, 1976
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(General Plan)
The City Clerk reminded the Council that public hearings should be
scheduled for the General Plan and it was concluded that they would
hold a public hearing on January 26th and February 2nd and if neces-
sary, additional public hearings will be scheduled.
The City Manager stated that he has talked with the consultant con-
cerning their obligations to the City in their contract for the
General Plan, relative to meeting times. The contract states that
they are required to attend no more than 14 meeting dates and our
records indicate that they have met IO-12 time but they claim they
have attended 18 meetings. They have listed these dates and they
have submitted a bill to the City for the extra meetings in the
amount of $1,050.
The City Manager stated that there were no special adjustments
requested of them at the time the 14 meetings were to be exceeded
and he cannot believe that the City has any obligation to reimburse
the consultants. There are some five additional meetings that the
consultants will be asked to attend and they will be reimbursed for
those meetings.
Cw Tirsell wondered if Mr. Parness kept track of the times the
consultants attended meetings, and Mr. Parness replied that the
Planning staff was doing that.
Cm Turner asked if the consultants are saying that the City requested
their appearance at all the meetings they claim they attended and
Mr. Parness stated that this is not the case. They are simply saying
that they were here.
Cm Turner felt if the City requested their appearance that the City
is obligated to pay them for whatever number of meetings they attended;
however, if they attended on their own the City is not obligated.
Cw Tirsell stated that she remembers one occasion on which they
telephoned the Mayor and requested that they attend the meeting
to clarify an issue before going to print. If she had known that
this was costing the City some $300 it could have been settled by
a long-distance telephone call.
Cm Staley stated that before making a decision he would like a report
from the consultants as to who asked them to attend a meeting and
what was discussed at that meeting, and whether or not they happened
to be in the area and attended stayed to attend a meeting.
Cw Tirsell stated that possibly they are counting the times they
went to the Lab to talk to people doing the model out there.
(City's Incorporation)
Mr. Parness reported that at the request of Cm Staley he has checked
and found that the City was incorporated on April I, 1876.
ern Staley suggested that this be referred to some of the City com-
mittees to find out what they would recommend. It would seem that
it would be opportune to celebrate bur 100 year centennial at the
time the bicentennial is being celebrated. Perhaps this should be
referred to the Community Affairs Committee as well as the Chamber
of Commerce and the Civic Affairs Committee, and Bicentennial Com-
mittee.
CM-31-243
January 12, 1976
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Reclamation Plan)
Cm Turner commented that he will not be present at the January
17th meeting. He has spoken with Ralph Mitchell from Lone Star
Industries who indicated that he would like to come to a Council
meeting to explain their Reclamation Plan.
~
It was noted that the Council would be happy to hear what Mr.
Mitchell has to say after the General Plan hearings have taken
place.
(Kiosks)
Cm Turner stated that the attended a meeting of the Cultural
Arts Committee and they have suggested that there be no expen-
diture of funds for a kiosk until they have spoken with the
Council concerning some recommendations.
(Comprehensive Health
Planning Council Meeting)
em Turner stated that he and Cw Tirsell met with the Director of
the Comprehensive Health Planning Council last week.
Cw Tirsell commented that the Director did not have a copy of the
study submitted last April, so this was given to her, as well as
a letter concerning populations as well as the resolutions from
Livermore and Pleasanton. They expressed the concern that the VMH
and Comprehensive Health Planning CounPi~~ftr~.~djourning to execu-
tive sessions for planning purposes.~ very surprised to
hear this because it is strictly against their policy. They are
a public agency and she intends to check into this because she is
opposed to any such thing as private sessions.
The Director commented to Cw Tirsell and Cm Turner that planning
done in this manner is rarely accepted in the community and this
is the very fact that planning is done in public and gains public
acceptance. Everything should be open and everyone from the public
as well as the press should be encouraged to attend planning meet-
ings. VMH would be defeating their own purpose by having closed
door meetings.
Cm Turner stated that the Director did say that in the Gorsline
Report thevfiaures are "outrageously optomistic".
-f~C~~
Cw Tirsell stat~d t~tL~~AP~~~~~o~1~~ indicated that this
planning process~ 1n~~l1e Gorsline Report and if this
is true the Gorsline Report was at least made a public document.
The Director stressed over and over that they need public sup-
port and they won't get it the way they are going about it.
The Director is going to report their conversation to Thomas
Andrews, VMH Administrator, and urge that the public be a part
of the planning and that there be open meetings. She was sympa-
thetic to the Council's viewpoint even though they are assisting
VMH in their studies, but their staff has not attended meetings.
(Mailboxes)
Cm Turner stated that Larry Mirnliti on Tahoe Drive in the Sunset
area has contacted him about mail boxes. He pointed out that in
Pleasanton and Dublin, boxes are being allowed behind the property
line on the lawn.
CM-31-244
January 12, 1976
(Mailboxes)
Cm Turner stated that because of the conversation that would probably
go into this item he would like to request that it be scheduled as
an agenda item.
(Council Policy)
Cm Miller stated that a few months ago the Council decided to place
some of the policy items on the agenda for a decision. Some of these
had to do with property markers, and operation of the Council. These
things should be set for the agenda so the Council can discuss them.
(Community Development)
Cm Miller stated that he attended a League of California Cities meet-
ing on community development and housing was discussed, on one hand,
with financing on the other. It was noted during the discussion
that any city or housing authority can become certified as a housing
agent. It is important for the City to become certified as a housing
agent because it means that all local housing support can be reviewed
and approved by the City or the Housing Authority. In order to do
this you must have a Housing Element in the General Plan, and we
are supposed to have one. The point is that if you are not the hous-
ing agent, any state housing finance agency board comprised of a num-
ber of developers, real estate men and labor representatives, can
place housing in your community without any concern for local planning.
Consequently, it is essential for the City to become the housing agent.
The City must apply to Mr. Arnold Sternberg at the Housing and Commun-
ity Development Agency - this is a different agency.
(Questions re Tract 3607)
Cm Staley stated that he asked questions last week about Tract 3607
(Great American Land Development) located on Murdell Lane, but the
questions were not really clear and he would like to pose them again
this evening, as follows:
I. Was the final map submitted on September 12, 1975, as
the developer indicated?
2. Did the City Council begin consideration after that map
was submitted (final map)?
3. Did anybody on the Planning staff notice that the final
map had been submitted and would conflict with the pro-
posed changes?
It was noted that the tentative map was filed on September 12th but
it may have been part of their final map process when it was discovered
that the new ordinance no longer allowed what they wanted to do.
Cm Miller stated that something was submitted to Planning and Public
Works on September 12th. What was it? The developers claim that
this was their final map.
Mr. Lee stated that he would have to check the record because he
doesn't know what was submitted.
Mayor Futch stated it was his understanding that this was what the
staff was supposed to do and report back to the Council.
CM-31-245
January 12, 1976
(re Tract 3607)
Mr. Musso stated that the Planning Department never thought
about a final because a final was never filed.
Cm Miller stated that in that case, why did everybody tell the
Council that a final had been filed? That they had filed a final
even though it hadn't been approved?
Mr. Musso stated that he believes what they were talking about was
that the map the Council saw is part of their subdivision packet.
Cm Miller asked if the subdivision packet had a final map in it
and Mr. Musso stated that it does, when it is submitted but it has
not been submitted.
Cm Staley stated that their testimony was that they had submitted
everything they needed to submit to the City, on September 12th,
before deliberations on the setbacks.
Mr. Musso commented that they were talking about their tentative
map.
Cm Staley stated that the tentative map was submitted two years
ago. They specifically stated that they submitted everything for
final approval on September 12th and just before they applied for
the variance they suddenly discovered that the rules had changed.
That was the testimony given and nobody contradicted it at that
time.
Discussion followed concerning this item with the conclusion that
Cm Staley's questions had not really been answered to his satis-
faction.
Cm Miller stated that the real question is, did they put in a
final map submittal prior to effectiveness of the ordinance?
If they didn't have a final map proposal in before the ordinance
went into effect, then they distorted what the situation really
was in their testimony. If they did put in a final map prior
to the effective date of the ordinance, then their argument was
valid.
It was concluded that the matter would be dropped unless there
are further developments.
(Public Hearing for
Urban Study)
Cw Tirsell stated that the City should be preparing a statement
for the public hearing concerning the Urban Study to be done by
the Corps of Engineers on January 20th.
COVA, last Thursday night, took the unanimous position to oppose
a point source study done by the Corps. Those opposing the study
are LAVWMA, Livermore, VCSD, and COVA.
(Meeting re
Mitigating Measures)
Mayor Futch stated that he and Cm Turner need to set a date for
discussing the mitigating measures. They agreed to meet at 9:00
on Saturday at the bank to prepare something for LAVWMA's hearing.
Mr. Lee indicated that he is not sure that he will be able to
attend, as he has a commitment at that time.
CM-31-246
January 12, 1976
(Appointments)
Cw Tirsell commented that there is a backlog of appointments to
be made and this should be scheduled for the agenda. It was
concluded that this will be on the January 26th agenda.
INTRO. OF MUNI CODE
AMEND. RE GARBAGE, ETC.
The City Council briefly discussed the Municipal Code amendment which
was to be introduced and Cm Miller indicated that some of the wording
did not make sense.
No action was taken by the Council and the matter was postponed until
the next Council meeting.
ADOPTION OF MUNI CODE
AMEND RE OCCUPANCY OF
PUBLIC PROPERTY
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT RELATIVE TO OCCUPANCY OF PUBLIC PROPERTY
NAS ADOPTED.
ORDINANCE NO. 876
AN ORDINANCE ADDING A NEW SECTION 6.2.5, RELATING TO
OCCUPANCY OF PUBLIC PROPERTY, OF ARTICLE I, RELATING
TO ADOPTION OF THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, OF CHAPTER 6,
RELATING TO BUILDINGS, OF THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 1959.
CITY MANAGER WEEKLY
STATUS REPORT
Reclamation Plant
The Water Reclamation Plant is nearing completion and we have
finally received all motors which are being installed. The only
thing remaining will be the testing of the plant equipment.
Fire Station #l
Fire Station #l is nearing completion and is on schedule.
With the Council's permission Mr. Parness would like to arrange
for a dedication ceremony at the completion of the fire station.
He stated that he would suggest April 2nd as the dedication date
and the City would like the attendance of the Mayor and em Miller.
With the Council permission the City would also like to invite
Congressman Stark to attend the ceremonies to officiate.
This is one major capital improvement which has been paid for by
federal revenues.
Police Department
The Police Department is about to begin a couple of interesting
programs. First of all, we are sending our police officers, one
by one, to attend a crises intervention seminar training school
held by the state.
CM-31-247
January 12, 1976
Police Department
Secondly, the Police Department will sponsor a Senior Citizens
Safety Program which will be a one day program. All citizens
are welcome to attend but the emphasis and invitation will be
primarily for the senior citizens. The purpose is to give
them help and education concerning personal safety.
Taxi Subsidy Program
The Council may be interested to know that 40 persons have been
enlisted in the Taxi Subsidy Program and according to rumors the
County is considering eliminating the stringent standards adopted
earlier in the program about income. This would be a big step
forward.
S.P. Development Co.
S. P. Development Company has indicated just today that they are
very pleased with the results of their development in the downtown
shopping area and that at present only about 28% of the facilities
have not been leased, but they have several potential lessees.
There is a building site (vacant) at the corner of "P" and First
Street which will be occupied by a banking firm, and a building
permit has been taken out for that lot. The other building site
is near "Q" Street and they are near the final stages of a lease
for that building. The establishment will consist of an eating
place.
Cm Turner pointed out that that particular shopping center clearly
demonstrates the need for adequate parking spaces. The City should
never let anyone tell them the 3-1 parking ratio is unnecessary be-
cause that shopping center is already short on parking spaces.
The old Safeway building will apparently be occupied by a hardware,
building supply business and the final stages of the lease arrange-
ments are near. Reportedly it will be a very large and reputible
company with 6-8 other store locations, primarily in Santa Clara
County, and there will be no outdoor storage of supplies.
S.P. has indicated that they will be letting the City know, in
the near future, what the plans are for their second stage of
development.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further Council business, the meeting was adjourned
at 11:30 p.m.
ATTEST
~f:~
, Mayor
.'~\ / ./.. .. ,(/0) 'aLl' 1
i '.. ~'-I/ ,. J /
~__~~_,_,\Q, . t. ,
1/ ;' ~_j CJ. ty Clerk
U [ Livermore, California
APPROVE
'-~'
CM-31-248
Regular Meeting of January 19, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on January
19, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue.
The meeting was called to order at 8:15 p.m. with Mayor Futch pre-
siding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Miller, Staley, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch
Absent: Cm Turner (Excused for Business Reasons)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Futch led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the
audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES - Jan. 5, 1976
P. 210, middle of page, beginning with Cm Staley stated: The second
line should read, has been a decline in the number of airplanes.
P. 219, middle of the page, beginning with: Mayor: Yes, but I
think that that's, change to read: Yes, but I think that it's...etc.
P. 221, third line should read: Don, your memory is wrong on this.
P. 221, fourth paragraph from the bottom should read: Mayor: I
certainly think that Don's partly right.
ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STAI.EY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF JANUARY 5, 1976, WERE APPROVED,
AS CORRECTED.
OPEN FORUM
ere Ballot Measure "A")
Bob Tette, stated that he and Steven Dick, representatives of the
policemens Association and the Fire Fighters Association, would
like to thank the Council for supporting Proposition "A" on the
upcoming ballot and that both of these associations will actively
campaign and support the measure as well.
(Sign Removal)
Mary Stullich, of Valley Realty, 1732 First Street, stated that on
Saturday afternoon, Mr. Miller went around removing "Open House"
signs which were located on private property. She stated that it
is her understanding the signs are illegal but it is difficult to
get a sign on a post into the ground because of the hard soil, and
is the reason for the use of the "A-frame" signs. One sign was on
public property and the other two were located on private property
for which permission was granted. She added that the homeowner was
extremely upset that the signs had been removed because about 60%
of the people viewing the home come because of the signs.
She suggested that if this is the law it should be reviewed because it
does not hurt her company but rather hurts the person trying to sell
his home.
Cm Miller stated that the policemen are supposed to remove such signs
but they are overworked and do not always have the time. The signs
were illegal because the City owns the property lO ft. in from the
curb, and all of them were on public property. Also, all portable
CM-31-449
January 19, 1976
(Sign Removal)
signs are illegal, and all off-site signs are illegal, which ~~ ,~
signs, w~~~ The signs allowed are those signs located/at the ~
~~e'~, and which every office has. A sign on a post would
Iso be illegal because it would still be an off-site sign.
Cm Miller added that most real estate offices abide by the ordinance
and therefore it is unfair for some of the offices to advertise by
way of the off-site signs.
Cm Miller stated that the reason the ordinance was adopted was to
eliminate advertising in neighborhoods.
Cw Tirsell commented that the Sign Ordinance is an ordianance that
has been enforced equally upon all people in the community and there
has not been a variance to the Sign Ordinance. It is felt by the
Council that people do not want commercialization in their neighbor-
hood and one sign is allowed on the property of the home for sale to
ident!fYJ~ but if others are allowed it is a type of commercializing.
If Orl~rnpany is allowed to post signs, all companies would be allowed
to do this and one can imagine the number of signs that would be posted.
Livermo~~_PA~l~IQ-lp~.t~~~over for approximately 15,000 dwelling units,
and if'~' 6~..ofh~ three or four signs you can imagine what
our neighborhoods might look like.
Cw Tirsell added that she supports the Sign Ordinance and eight
Councils before her have supported the Ordinance because it is
equitably enforced.~She believes that the community also supports
the ordinance becaus~ neighborhoods are ~elatively free of all types
of advertisements. ~L, (.v'-~..I /YlA-l- --Ild--''<-~ ~.'.?, ~.e.;z::It-4-' k:U-1-r'/~-<
.~./ .7---A.-f-' ./J-Y7 a,Yr-YU.A.J ~~ 77 kL-L{.cJ tLJ, ~--(,...<..,;,-,-<: '/
~~
COMMUNICATION RE
DEADLINE FOR CON-
SOLIDATION WITH
PRIMARY ELECTION
A letter was received from James A. Riggs, Registrar of Voters, in-
forming the City of the deadline to request consolidation of any
local measure with the 1976 Primary Election. It is March 26, 1976.
COMMUNICATION REQUESTING
NAME OF CARNEGIE BUILDING
AND PARK REMAIN UNCHANGED
A letter was received from the Livermore Woman's Club requesting
that the name of the Carnegie Building and Park remain unchanged.
Cm Miller stated that he would suggest that a letter be sent to
the Woman's Club indicating that the Council agrees and that since
the park and the building are the property of the City the Council
can assure people that the name will remain unchanged, AND SO MOVED.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
COMMUNICATION TO MTC &
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
DIST. FROM FRED COOPER
The Council received a copy of a letter sent to the MTC and the
Air Pollution Control District from Supervisor Cooper concerning
the Air Quality Maintenance Plan and his suggestions for compar-
ing the simulated air pollution model using different assumptions,
as suggested in his letter.
Cm Miller stated that he believes the suggestions made by lir. Cooper
are very good but Crn Miller would suggest additional things, as
follows:
CM-31-250
January 19, 1976
(Communication to MTC & Air
Pollution Control District)
Send a letter to the MTC and the Air Pollution Control District
asking that they consider some other cases, as follows:
I. Consider adding 50,000 people, uniformly, to the
whole Bay Area, vs. adding 50,000 to just the Valley.
2. What the air quality would be for the whole population
if the population had been moved west. In other words,
would they be getting better air quality in Castro Valley
if there were no people in the Valley.
3. The present population in the Valley if there were no
commuters. It should be pointed out that even if all of
of the smog was blown in and none of it generated locally,
to consider the effect of the addition of more people into
a place that is worse.
4. It would be of value to have the MTC and the Air Pollution
Control District contact URS and LAVWMA Environmental Impact
people~ A. D. Little and VCSD enviornmental people as well
as our own technical Smog Committee.
Cm Miller stated that what he is suggesting is that the Council
write a short letter supporting his recommendations and adding the
alternatives the Council would recommend.
The staff was so directed.
COMMUNICATION RE SCOPE
OF WORK RE RECLAMATION
PLAN - DEPLETED QUARRY
The Council received a copy of the Scope of Work for the Reclamation
Plan for Depleted Quarry areas. The plan has been made necessary
because of state legislation and because of.County quarry permit
requirements. There is a provision in the Scope of Work for input
by local governmental agencies and it is implied that a certain amount
of City staff work will be requested.
Cw Tirsell stated that it would seem that under A. 4., there should
be an additional item c., to review the consistency of regulation
and control for quarry permits and reclamation plans.
Cw Tirsell explained that the gravel operators in the Valley are
paying for this and it would be of value to know what permits
are on the books and what their requirements are and what reclama-
tion plans are filed, the letter to be directed to the Valley Sand
and Gravel Study Committee.
REPORT RE COMPUTERIZED
PRICING IN SUPERMARKETS
A report from the City Manager indicated that a citizen recently
informed the Council that supermarkets plan to introduce a product
code, or unit pricing. The citizen was concerned that prices could
be changed as often as they choose and the customer would not be
aware of product prices because they will no longer appear on the
merchandise.
The staff was directed to investigate this matter and to consider
legal entitlement of the City to regulate the practice by local
ordinance.
CM-31-251
January 19, 1976
(Report re Computerized
Pricing in Supermarkets)
Mr. Parness stated that the unit pricing would cause a computer-
ized type of system to be installed at the check-out counter
and a screening device would electronically read the unit price.
The purpose would be to tally an accurate cost which would also
be useful for inventory purposes.
A pilot program is underway in the City of San Leandro and it is
felt that time and money would be saved in using this system but
there is still a lot of concern voiced by the consumer and this is
evidenced by the consumer advocate organizations contacted on
this matter.
Legislation has been enacted which will prevent the discontinuance
of pricing on items until at least April I, 1977. This will allow
everyone to learn more about the program.
The report from the City Attorney explains that the City has been
pre-empted by the state for the next year, until April 1977, and
the City could not pass an ordinance until that time.
Mr. Logan explained that this would be a legislative act and the
present Council cannot adopt an ordinance to become effective
in April 1977 because it would pre-empt the next City Council.
The next Council may have a different viewpoint on the matter.
The City Attorney stated that if the legislation takes no further
action after April 1977, the law expires and the Council can take
action.
CW TIRSELL MOVED TO NOTE AND FILE THIS ITEM, SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
Cm Staley stated that he believes the Council should take a look
at this again in November or December 1976.
Cw Tirsell stated that she would like to know from the representa-
tive of Lucky Stores, present in the audience, if they plan to use
this system.
Bob Grant, representative from Lucky Stores, stated that Luckys
is the store in San Leandro which is presently trying the system.
Nothing is planned beyond this - it is a test program. Safeway
Stores are running a test store in Carson City, Nevada because
of the state legislation.
Leon Dillenberg, representative of the Bay Area Grocers Associa-
tion in Oakland, stated that he would be happy to answer any
questions the Council might have with the comment that the
subject is item pricing rather than unit pricing.
Mr. Parness wondered what the intention is, industry wide, for
the application of this new system and Mr. Dillenberg replied
that it is for the purpose of accuracy in pricing and for inven-
tory control. A third reason is for product movement or how
fast items move through the checkstand.
Mr. Dillenberg added that they are not trying to hide anything
from the consumer because prices will be available on the shelf
and if customers object to price removal on items he is sure
they will go right back to item pricing.
Mr. Parness stated that what he wanted to know was whether or
not this would be applied, industry wide.
Mr. Dillenberg stated that it will be applied industry wide but
because of the cost of installation only the largest stores will
be able to afford the capital outlay.
CM-31-252
January 19, 1976
(Report re Computerized
Pricing in Supermarkets)
It was noted that the price will flash on the register and when
you get the grocery tag it will be about three inches wide and will
tell you what you bought and the price charged.
Mr. Lee asked if there will be scanners in the isles to allow a
customer to look up the price of an item.
Mr. Dillenberg stated that this has been discussed.
Mr. Grant noted that quite a few chain stores have had this type
of counter for checking out and that very few customers used the
stand, and it costs about $IO,OOO for that checkout stand.
A member of the audience asked how items will be taken care of when
they are on sale and it was explained that the scanner indicates
what the item is and the computer gives the price for that day.
Mr. Parness stated that this is one of the advantages of the system.
Rather than having to change hundreds of items that have to be
changed every time the price changes 2~, for example, the price for
the computer can be changed immediately. This is advantageous to
the company because it saves time.
Mr. Grant explained that in November three stores were opened up
in the San Antonio area, using this new system, and it has meant
a savings of 15-20% to the customer.
Cm Miller stated that he will vote against the motion because he
would like the motion to request that it appear again on the agenda
in the future. He would ask that when it comes back that it come
back with supporting literature and up-to-date literature from the
legislature about this issue so the Council will be able to make a
decision. He added that he won't be on the Council at that time
but he may appear in the audience to discuss the item.
Cm Miller stated that he believes there are alternatives that should
be considered. For example, having scanners available for the cus-
tomer without too much difficulty. It is important that people are
able to check the price on the shelf vs. what it will actually be
at the checkout stand.
MOTION PASSED 3-1 (Cm Miller dissenting).
REPORT RE EMERGENCY
AMBULANCE SERVICES
The City Manager reported that the matter of the emergency ambulance
services has been under study for the past five months and in the
interest of time and convenience it is suggested that a joint study
session be scheduled for the Council, Pleasanton City Council, the
County staff, Supervisor Murphy and the Valley Memorial Hospital
Board and staff, at which time our consultant can make a presentation
and a joint discussion held.
The Council selected January 27, 1976 for the joint meeting if
possible.
APPEAL RE DESIGN REVIEW
COMMITTEE ACTION - Jack
Acord (Wards Store)
Mr. Lee stated that the developer of the Wards Store to be located
on Olivina Avenue, adjacent to l1cDonalds, has proposed to leave the
CM-31-253
January 19, 1976
(Appeal re Design Review
Committee Action - Jack Acord
(Wards Store)
side of the building (facing Olivina Avenue) a plain finish. The
Design Review Committee Board has recommended that the roof be
continued around the corner to the back of the building and the
side facing Olivina Avenue, as well as a window and columns on
this side.
Cw Tirsell wondered if the store had received a variance to be
able to develop there because of the residential development
across the street.
Mr. Lee stated that he is not sure about this but he would have
to check with Mr. Musso.
Mr. Musso commented that about six months ago the Council discussed
a CUP which would allow the automotive sale use in a CO Zone.
Jack Acord, the developer, stated that a CUP was issued in July
and they are still working on this. They have submitted their plans
to build a Montgomery Wards Store and the problems seems to be with
the Olivina side of the building. The Design Review Committee has
recommended that they continue use of the tile roof on that side
which would be considerably more expensive, in addition to columns
about every 20 ft. He stated that he would have to agree that the
north side is rather austere but this is what he assumed the CUP
wanted, and quoted Condition #2 of the CUP. Condition #2 calls for
a planter area that would screen the side of the building with no
access to that side of the building. Also, Condition #4 says there
shall be no window on that side. It would seem the Design Review
Committee didn't really know what the CUP calls for.
Mr. Acord stated that the lease and rent of the property is made
on the assumption of a certain type of building and the recommenda-
tions of the Design Review Committee would amount to an additional
$5,IOO. They could ask Wards to pay more rent for the building but
it is doubtful that they could get more money and the economic
situation in this case is very tight. He explained that a new
type of material is being used for construction of the walls and
they can be changed in contour to eliminate the flat wall appearance.
Mayor Futch wondered what the primary cost is for the additional
$5,100 required to meet the recommendations of the P.C. and Mr. Acord
commented tha~ the tile and the framing are the major costs.
Cm Miller stated that the Design Review Committee's recommendation
for columns and the quote from the contractor do not seem to be
the same. The contractor has quoted 2 ft. square columns and it
is not clear that this is what the Design Review Committee is
recommending. Perhaps the Building Inspector can comment on what
the Design Review Committee wanted. It would appear that the
Design Review Committee asked for 2 ft. wide columns - not 2 ft.
square. This certainly would make a difference in the cost.
Mr. Street commented that on the parking lot side there will be
columns 2 ft. square but the Design Review Committee felt columns
could be provided on the north side using a single brick veneer
about 2 ft. wide to similate the appearance of the columns. This
would be very inexpensive compared to the cost of a 2 ft. square
column.
Cm Miller then explained the composition of the Design Review
Committee and its purpose, and knows of no reason the Council
should not support their recommendation, AND MOVED TO DENY THE
APPEAL. MOTION SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL.
Cw Tirsell stated that she regrets this means a cost to the
developer but this is located in a commercial/residential
neighborhood and the City has worked very hard to see that
CM-3l-254
January 19, 1976
(Appeal re Design Review
Committee Action - Jack Acord
Wards Store)
all the buildings located in that area are compatible. The City went
through a hassle with Fotomat over their roof design and thus far the
City has done a good job in getting a good looking McDonalds, Fotomat,
and appropriate signs. The requests by the Design Review Committee
are not really outrageous requests. The use being brought to the
City is a real addition and the building warrants good design.
Mr. Acord commented that the requirement for a 2 ft. wide column
would be much less expensive than the 2 ft. sq. column but he would
question whether the Council really feels the extension of the mansard
roof for the north side is really necessary from the viewpoint of
aesthetics.
Mr. Acord stated that they are required to place a IS ft. planter
in an area that would shield the building and he feels the roof
recommended by the Design Review Committee is not really necessary.
Cw Tirsell explained that there are architects and artists on the
Design Review Committee who try to give their best recommendations
and the Council takes these recommendations very seriously.
These people deal every day with form and design and they feel the
roof is important. In her opinion she feels that the roof is neces-
sary for the finished look for the residents in that area.
Mr. Acord stated that he agrees with what the Design Review Committee
has recommended but the City and the Committee should understand where
aesthetics end and economics begin. This is their problem.
Mayor Futch stated that the cost would be less than the $5,100 that
was quoted because the 2 ft. sq. columns are not required and per-
haps the developer should consider using a different roof overall
if the cost of the additional roofing is prohibitive.
Mr. Acord stated that they also want an attractive building because
they want to attract customers but they also have a budget to con-
sider. The contractor has said that with the addition of a few
hundred dollars the finish and color can be changed and this is
what they would prefer.
Cm Staley stated that Mr. Acord should really discuss~th~~ls~rna- )~~
tive of using a variation in the plaster for effect'~ratner-~€fi.~~~r~. ~n.
the Council but at this point he will vote for the motion. .
1.
It was noted that the Council is not particularly interested ~n
requiring that a window be installed on the north side and the
Committee indicated that they would recommend this unless it is
prohibited.
Mayor Futch stated that he would like this item to go back to the
Design Review Committee and it was pointed out that if this appeal
~s denied Mr. Acord can go back to the Design Review Committee if
he chooses, to try to pursuade them to accept something else.
Cm Staley stated that he appreciates the fact that the extension of
the mansard roof would be an additional expense but he really sup-
ports this recommendation, because this completes the appearance
from Olivina Street. Otherwise, the only place completed in
appearance is from "P" Street.
Cm Miller stated that he believes the appeal should be denied and
if Mr. Acord can satisfy the Design Review Committee with another
alternative, this is up to him and the Committee.
Mr. Acord questioned the definition of #4, concerning lighting, and
Mr. Musso explained that this has to do with height and direction
CM-31-255
January 19, 1976
(Appeal re Design Review Committee
Action-Jack Acord-Wards Store)
of lights so it will not illuminate adjacent properties, and to
be consistent with the ordinance and subject to Design Review.
Mayor Futch stated that it is his understanding that the details
of this matter were not discussed with the Design Review Committee
and although he will support the recommendation of the Design Re-
view Committee he would hope to encourage the applicant to talk
to them again.
Mr. Acord stated that he will meet with the Design Review Com-
mittee. Previously he had communicated to the Planning Depart-
ment by means of a letter.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO DENY THE APPEAL.
REPORT RE PARCEL MAP
#1858 - REQUEST TO
SUBDIVIDE (County Referral)
The County has received an application to subdivide property loca-
ted at Tesla and Greenville Roads, into two parcels. This con-
sists of approximately 62 acres of land.
Crn Miller stated that prior to any discussion concerning this
matter he would like to report that he is part owner of a piece
of property located south of this land and consequently has a
conflict of interest and will abstain from any discussion.
Mr. Musso stated that this property is involved with the problem
that arises more and more often where there is a request for a
subdivision because of a severance of the property by a street,
or in this case, the aqueduct. The Attorney General's opinion a
couple of years ago, was that a street cutting throught your
property does not make it two lots - it is still one lot. There-
fore, there are more requests for subdividing.
The P.C. felt that this particular property was of a nature that
there was access across the aqueduct and although our standards
are for 50 acres in an agricultural zone, this would be a split
of 67 and would be in conflict with our standards, and they recom-
mended denial of the request.
CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE P.C. RECOMMENDATIONS TO DENY THE
APPLICATION, FOR TRANSMITTAL TO THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
WITH THE ADDITIONAL FINDING THAT THE CONTINUED LOT SPLITTING IN
THIS MANNER CREATES POTENTIAL FOR FURTHER LOT SPLITTING BECAUSE
OF THE LONG DEEP LOTS CREATED IN LOT SPLITTING. THIS ENCOURAGES
QUARTERING OF LOTS. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY. MOTION PASSED
3-1 (Cm Miller abstaining) .
RECESS
Mayor Futch called for a brief recess after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present as
during roll call.
P.C. SUMMARY OF
ACTION
The Planning Commission's Summary of Action for their meeting
of January 13, 1976, was noted for filing.
CONSENT CALENDAR
CM-31-256
January 19, 1976
Res. Denying Appeal
- N. S. Cheema
RESOLUTION NO. 14-76
A RESOLUTION SUSTAINING THE DETERMINATION OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION (N. S. Cheema)
Res. Granting Variance
- Sunset Development Co.
A resolution granting a variance for Sunset Development Company for
property located at the west side of Cordoba Street, north of Con-
cannon Boulevard.
It was noted that Cw Tirsell abstained on the resolution and Cm Miller
was opposed to granting the variance but voted in favor of the resolu-
tion in order to facilitate Council business.
RESOLUTION NO. 15-76
A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCE
(Sunset Development company)
Res. Rejecting Claims
The following resolutions were adopted denying claims:
RESOLUTION NO. l6-76
A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF
MICHAEL A. KELLMAN, SR. AND BEVERJ..Y J.
KELLMAN
RESOLUTION NO. 17-76
A RESOLUTION DREJECTING THE CLAIM OF WILLIAM
F. DOUGHERTY AND VERONICA V. DOUGHERTY
RESOLUTION NO. 18-76
A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF WILLIAM
F. DOUGHERTY AND JOHN A. DOUGHERTY, A MINOR
Departmental Reports
The following Departmental Reports were submitted for information:
Airport - Financial and Activity - Quarterly and Month of December
Building Activity - December
Emergency Services - Quarterly Report
Library - Quarterly
Las positas and Springtown Golf Courses - Quarterly Financial
Reports
Mosquito Abatement District - November
Municipal Court - November
Planning-Zoning Activity - December - and Yearly, 1975
Police and Pound - December
Revenues and Expenditures - Six Months Ending December, 1975
Water Reclamation Plant - December
Cw Tirsell commented that under Revenues and Expenditures, she would
like to know why some of the agencies are low in revenue if things
are to be paid back on grants later.
CM-31-257
January 19, 1976
(Departmental Reports)
Mr. Parness explained that the report has to do with some of the
major ones that fluctuate as to the receipts - they are not
apportioned monthly. We may get a major source in April, for
example, possibly 80% and then for the 9 months preceeding that
we would get something like 20%.
Minutes
Beautification Committee - November 5
Housing Authority - November 18
Payroll & Claims
There were 173 claims in the amount of $1,364,774.26 and 266
payroll warrants in the amount of $97,273.70, for a total of
$1,462,047.96, dated January 15, 1976, and approved by the
Director of Finance.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED WITH CW TIRSELL ABSTAINING
FROM RESOLUTION NO. 15-76.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Tract 3607)
Mr. Musso stated that as the Council will recall there
approved for Tract 3607 which was made a part of their
The map established certain models on the lots and the
thing they brought in was the final map to be checked.
the map given to the Council by Earl Mason was not the
was a map
variance.
last
Apparently
correct map.
Mr. Musso stated that the map he is now showing the Council is the
same map the Council saw with respect to the models and for the
most part, the same location, except some of the property lines
were moved slightly and the side yards were adjusted.
Brief discussion followed concerning the lots and the changes.
Cw Tirsell requested that this item be postponed at this time
and scheduled for discussion as an agenda item.
(Arroyo Bridge Bikeway)
Mr. Lee stated that the Council asked if something could be done
during the winter to remove the water under the Holmes Street
bridge, blocking use of the bikeway.
The water has been removed and bicyclists can use the path at
least until the rains begin.
(Request for Execu-
tive Session)
The City Attorney requested an executive session immediately after
the meeting to discuss condemnations and to discuss a possible
Community Development Director.
CM-31-258
January 19, 1976
(re SB 798 - Use of
Dept. of Trans. Funds)
Mr. Parness stated that he would like the Council to encourage our
legislators to support a bill modifying the use of the State Depart-
ment of Transportation funds, which are TDA monies. The measure is
SB 798. At the present time the funds are passed through MTC for
use by local agencies and MTC's current policy is that the monies
are available only for local agencies if they are expended or appro-
priated to existing metropolitan transit authorities (AC Transit) .
This severely restricts our latitudes and is one of the serious
limitations we have.
CW TIRSELL MOVED TO EXPRESS OUR SUPPORT FOR SB 798, SECONDED BY
CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
(re SB 879 - re BART
Expendi tures)
Mr. Parness reported that SB 879 would require that BART could expend
District money only for the purpose of extension of rail line services
outside of the District only if rail lines are extended to the Liver-
more/Amador Valley and Eastern Contra Costa County first. In addition,
a rider has been attached to this which would be very important, which
is that BART would be precluded from cancelling express bus services
to the two respective regions, unless they have first received approval
from the legislature.
This bill was moved quickly out of the Senate just last week on an
almost unanimous vote, but the big hurdle comes in the Assembly.
He would ask that the Council allow the City to indicate support
of SB 879.
CW TIRSELL MOVED TO URGE SUPPORT OF SB 879, SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
Cm Staley stated that he would like to request that the City send
a representative to lobby for SB 879. The measure is extremely
important and the matter should be discussed at the BART meeting.
Mayor Futch commented that the City also intends to llobby for the
I MGD sewer expansion.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
(SB l294 re Compulsory
& Binding Arbitration)
Mr. Parness stated that SB 1294 would provide for compulsory and
binding arbitration for police and fire services, but only for
local public safety services. It further prevents public strikes
but this is a rather meaningless phrase. It would have failed in the
Committee on Governmental Organizations but because of lobbying fac-
tions they were able to convince four additional votes on that Com-
mittee that were traditionally opposed to this kind of labor vote,
including the vote of Senator Collier who would never support this
kind of thing.
It passed and has been sent to the Senate Committee on Revenue and
Taxation, and the Senate Committee on Finance was bypassed which
previously was always the hurdle that could not be overcome.
This is a critical issue and if passed it could do irreparable
damage to the finances of local government in the state.
CM-31-259
January 19, 1976
(re SB 1294)
Mr. Parness urged that the Council adopt a motion unanimously
objecting to this measure.
CM STALEY MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO WRITE A LETTER OF OPPOSI-
TION STRESSING THAT THE DISCLAIMER OF AN SB 90 IS UNBELIEVABLE.
MOTION SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL.
Cm Staley wanted to know if there is anyone on the Finance
Committee that the City could contact and Mr. Parness replied
that there is nobody in the Senate the City could contact. There
is only the Chairman of the Revenue and Tax Committee.
CM STALEY ADDED TO THE MOTION TO DIRECT A LETTER TO THE CHAIRMAN
OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE POINTING OUT THAT IT IS UNBELIEVABLE
ANYONE WOULD SAY THIS WOULD NOT HAVE ANY AFFECT ON LOCAL FINANCE.
MOTION SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
(AB 237)
Cm Miller mentioned that AB 237 is the same type of measure as
the one previously discussed (AB 1294) and he wondered if the
City has taken a position on this measure.
Mr. Parness commented that the City has not expressed a position
and this is a substitute measure that is a very complex, compre-
hensive type of measure for which he is personally not prepared
to offer a view. He believes that he would be opposed to it, as
is the League, but there are certainly counter arguments to it.
He will try to get more information to the Council concerning
this item.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Safety Tax Override)
Mayor Futch stated that it has been suggested
be a Committee to help support the Safety Tax
like the Council to consider this suggestion.
have to discuss and make appointments if they
such a committee.
to him that there
override and would
The Council would
want to appoint
Cw Tirsell stated that it wouldn't do much good to get to this
in three more agendas and suggested that perhaps it can be open
to anyone who would be interested in helping to support the
override, be allowed to help.
Mr. Parness stated that he is very concerned about the passage
of this measure and firmly believes that it is important that
there be an involved, interested, group of local citizens - local
leaders and people who are known in the City, who hopefully will
be supportive of this measure and can help offer the proposition
to the public through whatever means they might decide.
Presently there is a Police Committee and Fire Committee that
are meeting in concert~~~ support the measure but this is in
house and the public~probably will accept what they have
to say but may they are subjective in the question.
Cw Tirsell stated that she would not be opposed to such a com-
mittee but is not sure how to get one started and Cm Miller
suggested that the newspapers notify people to contact the
City if they would be interested in supporting the measure.
CM-31-260
January 19, 1976
(Safety Tax Override)
It was concluded that anyone who might wish to help support the
measure will be allowed to help and that a tentative chairman
will be selected by the Council.
(Editorial re State
of the City Address)
Mayor Futch stated that he read an editorial in the newspaper which
suggested that the Mayor address the State of the City and outlining
what has been accomplished during the past few years. He stated
that he intends to do this and he believes that an appropriate
time to make a statement would be during a Council meeting. He
requested that this appear on an agenda as a Special Item.
The Council concurred that this is an excellent idea.
Mayor Futch stated that there was a misleading statement in the
editorial which indicated that the Council voted against the people
with regard to a local bus tax measure.
Mayor Futch stated that the action the Council took was to direct
the staff to come up with a plan for organizing a bus system without
any increase in taxes. It was felt that it was not a desirable goal
to request an increase in taxes for two separate items at one time.
The Council has every intent to do everything possible to form a
local transit system.
Cw Tirsell stated that she is delighted to see that the Mayor is
correcting this statement because she has also been bothered with
these accusations.
INTRO. OF MUNI CODE
AMEND RE GARBAGE, ETC.
CM MILLER MOVED TO INTRODUCE THE MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT RELATING
TO GARBAGE, RUBBISH, ETC., WHICH HAS BEEN PREPARED TO UP-DATE OUR
REGULATIONS CONCERNING CERTAIN NEW STATE REQUIREMENTS. MOTION WAS
SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
TITLE ONLY WAS READ BY THE CITY ATTORNEY.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Futch adjourned the meeting at 10:10 p.m. to an executive session
to discuss condemnations and the Community Development Director.
APPROVE
~#:~
Mayor
(\ ".,r-,
/
ATTEST
CM-31-261
Regular Meeting of January 26, 1976
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore
was held on January 26, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers,
39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at
8:05 p.m. with Mayor Futch presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Staley, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch
Absent: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Futch led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the
audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES - Jan. 12, 1976
P. 232, lst paragraph, last line, strike extension of BART, and
replace with the following wording: upon continuatIOn-or-express
bus service.
P. 236, last major paragraph under item concerning the Sunset
variance, delete the last sentence of that paragraph which
begins with Cw Tirsell.
P. 244, 6th paragraph from the bottom, line six should read:
tive sessions for planning purposes. The Director was very
surprised.....etc.
P. 244, 3rd paragraph from the bottom, line two should read:
planning process was to replace the Gorsline Report.....etc.
P. 234, 5th paragraph should read: Cm Turner noted that he
would be voting for the motion, even though Mr. Cheema is
his neighbor.
Add a paragraph after the above 5th paragraph, as follows:
Cm Turner stated that he does not believe there is a conflict
because he has consistently voted against variances to the
Home Occupation Ordinance.
P.240, add last paragraph after motion concerning the County
referral: Cm Turner would have voted against the motion if
he had not abstained from the motion.
P. 241, 2nd paragraph from the bottom should indicate an annual
rate rather than add-on rate.
P. 242, first paragraph, last line should read: deposits they
control may be an incentive........ etc.
P. 244, 4th paragraph from the bottom, second line should read:
Report the population figures are.....etc.
P. 238, 7th paragraph from the bottom should read: Cm Miller
stated that this is exactly what he is talking ~bout. The assessor
does reasses commercial properties for which like sales have been
made but does nothing with commercial properties which have not
sold. Remainder of the paragraph remains the same.
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF JANUARY 12, 1976, WERE
APPROVED, AS CORRECTED.
CM-31-262
January 26, 1976
OPEN FORUM
(Sphere of Influence)
Norman Stout, resident outside the City limits, stated that he would
like to have some answers to questions about the Sphere of Influence
issue. He would lieke to know if he would be allowed any input
as to planning or zoning for his area if the Sphere of Influence
legislation is adopted.
Mayor Futch explained that the Sphere of Influence boundaries are
imaginary lines which would be used by the County in referring items
to the City for comment. It is also an indication of area that would
probably be developed by the City if it were ever to develop. It
does not mean that there is any intention of development and in
order for it to develop the properties would have to annex to the
City and the property owners would have to agree to annexation.
Mr. Musso commented that there is a little more involved than just
reacting to the County. In the past the City has gone to the County
on behalf of the property owners on Buena Vista to request a zoning
change to agree with what the property owners wanted for that area.
The same was true for owners on Lomitas Avenue. In listening to the
owners the City agreed to change the development standards and the
General Plan to show a lower density than the General Plan previously
indicated. There are circumstances for which the City has acted on
behalf of the property owners in the unincorporated areas.
Cm Staley pointed out that any development outside of the City will
likely look to the City for services, at some point - sewer services,
police and fire protection, etc. For this reason the Sphere of
Influence is designed to allow the City to have some form of notifica-
tion of the sort of development and planning processes taking place
right outside of its borders. The City has the ability to influence
what is done in that area by presenting testimony, but it isn't sure
how great the influence might be.
em Miller stated that the prime concern for owners outside the City
limits is the possibility of increased development in their area.
The City has been very strong, in all of these areas, in supporting
the point of view of the residents that live out in the County.
The pressure for more development and subdivision has come from the
County - not from the City. The ultimate protection for the property
owners who do not want development, is not to annex to the City.
Mr. Stout thanked the Council for their clarifying statement.
(Speed Limit on
First Street)
Dan Silverberg, 4260 First Street, stated that he would like to
know what could be done about lowering the speed limit on First
Street to the east and whether or not the City has the power to
lower the speed.. limit.
Mayor Futch stated that First Street in this area is a state highway
and this request would have to be made to the state.
It was noted that the City can recommend a lower speed limit but
Mr. Silverberg should also ask the County Board of Supervisors
to request a lower speed ~imit, because part of First Street out
by the freeway is in the County.
Mr. Lee stated that posting a lower limit might not really solve
the problem and perhaps it should be suggested that the limit be
enforced.
Robert Weissel, City Engineer, stated that the speed limits in
the area out by the freeway are County signs. There are no speed
surveys in that area and therefore the City Police cannot patrol
the area.
CM-31-263
January 26, 1976
(Speed Limit on
First Street)
Cw Tirsell suggested that the Livermore Police Department patrol
the area and report as to whether or not something should be done
with respect to a speeding problem.
The Council concurred.
P.H. RE GENERAL PLAN
Mayor Futch opened the hearing and explained that the City is
in the process of adopting a new General Plan for the City of
Livermore that commenced approximately three years ago. A Citizens
Committee was appointed, and Cw Tirsell was the Chairman of the
Steering Committee who submitted their report on the General Plan.
The City then hired a consultant to study and make recommendations
for a new General Plan.
Mr. Musso commented that the P.C. has conducted a number of public
hearings (four) and study sessions and a lot of the problems encoun-
tered are being ironed out. Two additional public hearings have
been scheduled, as well as a number of other study sessions. Much
of the discussion and time has been devoted to changes in the text.
Most citizens are not interested in the pros within the plan but
rather with the map itself and how their property is designated.
Most of the land use discussions have dealt with land that was
in the unincorporated area and the areas on the map indicated in
color have been discussed and the P.C. has instructed the staff
to prepare an alternate map, but no changes have been decided, as
yet. He then explained some of the proposals - one being that the
City has too much surplus industrial property and that some of this
may be returned to agricultural use. In the public testimony it was
noted that there is not enough rural residential zoning and the City
is trying to accommodate this suggestion by possibly designating
a certain area for this use.
Some problems still exist in the quarry areas and a determination
has not been made as to designation of land use. The Sphere of
Influence has a common boundary line between Livermore and Pleasan-
ton. On the Pleasanton side we are showing it as they show it in
their new plan. It will also change their plan to reflect
our plan, with adjustment of the two plans within the area of
overlap.
There was only one major discussion concerning the Circulation
Element of the General Plan, and that was the extension of Mines
Road, south of East Avenue.
There were some changes in the industrial areas to reflect the
rezoning discussed a few months ago, reflecting light and heavy
industrial designation. The P.C. will probably use the same
designation presently in the Plan.
The other issue that seems to be coming from the study sessions
is the method of designating density. The Plan proposes that
there be density ranges Urban/Low the most common with 2-4 d.u./
acre and the higher density from 4-8 d.u./acre and the rural from
.5-2 d.u./acre. In looking at this it was discovered that the
Mehran building development in the Shadowbrook area qualified as
rural residential, with respect to density. That area was there-
fore designated the same as Lomitas Avenue.
CM-31-264
January 26, 1976
(P.H. re General Plan)
There is one item still to be discussed, which is the growth rate
- not necessarily the growth rate itself but how it is spread.
Mr. Parness commented that the City Council designated tonight as
the opening of the official General Plan hearing as a matter of a
procedural accommodation so that it could be continued as the need
arose. The P.C. is expected to finish its hearings on their meeting
of the lOth and the Council will receive the official transmittal
from them at the Council meeting of February 17th. The Council
probably will want to devote some detailed attention to recom-
mendations of the P.C. at this time.
Cm Miller stated that time is binding and it would seem advisable
for the Council to essentially devote the meeting of February 17th
entirely to discussion of the General Plan.
The Council concurred with the suggestion.
Cm Staley stated that there is one small problem and that is that
he will be out of town from the lIth to the evening of the l6th
and would like to know if it would be possible for him to get the
reports from the P.C. sometime prior to 4:00 p.m. on the lIth.
Mr. Parness stated that he believes this could be arranged.
A PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN SCHEDULED FOR NEXT WEEK AND THIS ITEM
WAS CONTINUED TO THAT MEETING.
COMMUNICATION FROM
CORPS RE URBAN STUDY
A letter was received from the Department of the Army concerning the
Upper Alameda Creed Urban Study, with enclosure of the minutes of
a meeting of November 13th concerning this matter.
Mayor Futch stated that he attended a meeting last Tuesday and gave
the City's position at this meeting. Several points were made and
one was that the City would be opposed to the Corps of Engineers
becoming involved in point source wastewater treatment. At that
meeting it was the Mayor's understanding that the Corps has decided
to no longer become involved in urban or point source wastewater treat-
ment. This has been one of the major objections of the City and
apparently the City has been successful in its protest.
The second significant item discussed was with regard to the develop-
ment of the arroyo. The City felt there should be no concrete channel
or structural development. If protection were needed the City would
urge flood plain zoning.
Cm Miller stated that he also attended this meeting and made comments
as an individual, not as the view of the City. His argument was that
the Corps of Engineers should drop the Urban Study altogether because
this is a duplicate effort of other studies that have been made or
are about to be made. He suggested that rather than doing an Urban
Study, they become the major contractor for ABAG who will be doing
the 208 Study, which is the same kind of study for the whole Bay
region.
Cw Tirsell stated that COVA sent a letter asking that the Corps
withdraw any consideration of point source study and noted Chart
4-E which was an implementation chart that was entitled, "Wastewater
Management". This could mean urban runoff or any other wastewater
management problem but could also mean an implementation scheme for
point source facilities.
CM-3l-265
January 26, 1976
(Comm. from Corps
re Urban Study)
Cw Tirsell stated that she has been contacted and informed that
this would be changed to be clearly defined.
em Miller stated that the City's original request of Congressman
Stark and the Corps of Engineers was that they do nothing about
engineering planning or otherwise for urbanization on the north
side of I-580. It is within the power of the Corps to do the
flood control planning and they can do the flood control construc-
tion project also. Our position was that no study of urbanizing
possibilities north of I-580 and perhaps the City should repeat
this position. Congressman Stark promised that the Corps would
not get into this study area and perhaps he should be reminded.
Mayor Futch felt this point had already been made and it wouldn't
really be necessary to say anything further.
em Miller stated that possibly the City could send a short state-
ment saying that we still have our original concerns and would
urge the Corps not to study matters related to the urbanization of
that area north of the City limits, but have no objection to con-
sideration of recreation or open space uses for the waterways in
that area.
-'
Cw Tirsell pointed out that the testimony given before COVA was
very ambiguous. COVA pointed out a specific land with specific
suggestions as to what could be done on Camp Parks property that
was transferred to VCSD. The East Bay Regional Parks Department
needs a bridge across the arroyo in order to be able to use the
land and the Corps did not seem at all anxious to do implementation
for recreational purposes.
em Turner stated that he would like to see a copy of the letter
indicating the Council's original position as well as the draft
letter that the City Manager is going to prepare.
REPORT RE SUPPLEMENTARY
BUDGET PAYMENT - LAVWMA
The City Manager reported that LAVWMA has incurred additional
budgetary obligations by virtue of consultant work to the extent
of $135,915. The City has been requested to forward its share,
$53,590, in order to meet the cost obligation. The other two
public jursidictions have already forwarded their share.
The last time this item was discussed by the Council there was con-
cern that the additional cost might not qualify for federal/state
reimbursement and whether or not the federal/state grant program
might be able to forward the money so that local agencies would
not have to pay now and look toward reimbursement later.
A letter has been received from the State Water Resources Control
Board confirming that the cost would qualify for grant allowance
and that the local agencies will have to make the payment with
reimbursement to follow later.
Mayor Futch commented that the concern of the City was that we
would pay this money and lose the interest on it while we are
waiting to be reimbursed~ however, it looks as if there is no
choice but to pay and wait for reimbursement.
CM-31-266
January 26, 1976
(Rpt re Supplementary
Budget Pyrot - LAVWMA)
CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PAYMENT OF
THE FUNDS TO LAVWMA. MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Cm Turner stated that his only question is on the completion of
Step I, who approves Step I?
Mayor Futch stated that he believes that at the time the planning
process is completed and they go out to bid.
Mr. Parness stated that Step I is really a process approved by the
LAVWMA Board but is subject to the concurrence of the state.
Cm Miller pointed out that one of the things the City did get by
holding out on the payment, was agreement for reimbursement in writing.
He stated that he would, however, vote no on the motion to make the
point that the City is being robbed of the interest on $53,590. This
money comes out of the pockets of the people of Livermore for the bene-
fit of the bureaucrats who do not want to lift a finger to amend con-
tracts when they should be amended.
Cm Staley stated that he is also concerned about voting for this
motion and would like to know if there are any other options.
He stated that he was not on the Council when LAVWMA was organized
and wondered if this was a state fostered project to begin with.
Cm Miller stated that it was mandated - the state forced the project.
It was created because the Regional Board, which is a state agency,
insisted that something like this be done.
Mr. Parness pointed out that there is no option.
Cm Staley wondered if the additional funds are necessary as a result
of things initiated by LAVWMA or required by the state and it was
noted that they were required by the state and EPA.
ern Staley added that he believes it is not fair for Livermore to
burden the other two taxing powers in the Valley with paying our
share by our withholding our share. On the other hand, it is very
unfair that the state requires the local cities to use taxpayers
money from the cities to pay for this project when it is something
the state is forcing us to do. While he will vote in favor of the
motion he would MOVE TO AMEND TO INCLUDE THAT THE CITY WRITE A LETTER
TO ASSEMBLYMAN MORI POINTING OUT OUR CONCERNS.
Cm Staley stated that he believes the Assembly should study the loss
of money to the cities because they have to pay money in advance for
project costs and be reimbursed some 3-4 years later.
Mayor Futch stated that he believes the money will come from sewer
service charges, annexation fees, etc. which is somewhat different
than coming from a property tax.
Cm Staley stated that it still comes out that the City will lose
the use of $53,590 for each year at a rate of 8-9%, or perhaps
more for each year we are not reimbursed.
Mr. Parness stated that the concerns expressed by the Council and
particularly Cm Staley are reasonable. However, there is a difference
here between the points made by the Council that the state should
allow reimbursement in accordance with the financial mandate as
dictated by the state law and this one. This program is under the
auspices of the Federal Clean Water Act Program and the state monies
are from state bonds which are merely used as a contributing share
towards the federal program. This type of administrative arrangement
is dictated by federal statutes and the remedy would be to get this
type of problem corrected.
CM-31-267
January 26, 1976
(Rpt re Supplementary
Budget Pyrot - LAVWMA)
Mr. Parness stated that he agrees with the Council and that these
concerns should be forwarded to the proper authorities.
IT WAS NOTED THAT CONGRESSMAN STARK WOULD BE ONE PERSON TO CONTACT
AND THE MOTION WAS AMENDED TO INCLUDE THAT A LETTER OF CONCERN BE
SENT TO HIM.
-'"'"
MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Cm Miller dissenting) .
RESOLUTION NO. 19-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PAYMENT OF FUNDS TO LAVWMA
REPORT RE SETBACK
VARIANCE - TRACT 3607
GREAT AMERICAN LAND
(Clarence Overaa, et al)
The City Council has been requested to review the appropriate map
for Tract 3607 (Clarence Overaa) which will depict the proposed
building lines and lot coverage and setback allowances for resi-
dential structures.
Mayor Futch explained that the Council approved the tentative map
and was in the process of approving the RS Ordinance and changes
in setbacks. The developer for Tract 3607 came in to say that he
had submitted his final map while the changes were being made and
at that time he did not have time to submit a final map prior to
changes in the Zoning Ordinance. He therefore came in requesting
a variance.
Based on the fact that the City made a change in the setback re-
quirements and believing that a final map had been submitted the
Council agreed to a map that was submitted to the Council. Appar-
ently this was the map that was submitted as Revision #7 in June,
1974. That was the map used as the exhibit for that variance.
Mr. Musso commented that the map exhibited was not the so-called
final map but rather one of the construction plan maps.
Mayor Futch stated it was his understanding that a final map had
been submitted at the time the Council granted the variance.
Mr. Musso stated that a map had been submitted for plan check
and that map was reviewed and sent back to the developer for his
corrections and was the one used and referred to.
The issue here has to do with a minor change in the map since the
variance was granted.
Cm Miller stated that the statement was that a final had been sub-
mitted, but in fact, a final had not been submitted. It was a map
for checking that was submitted. The final map is the one before
the Council now.
Mr. Musso pointed out that the final map is not before the Council
yet. He believes it is being submitted for a final check. The
Council is not talking about a final map tonight but rather sub-
stituting an exhibit on the variance.
Cw Tirsell stated that the difference between this map and the one
the Council saw the night the variance was granted is shown by
dotted lines.
CM-31-268
January 26, 1976
(Rpt re Setback Variance
Tract 3607)
Mr. Musso explained that the difference between the map the Council
saw and the one they are reviewing tonight means a difference of
a one lot difference - one lot less needs a variance, and there is
roughly an increase in the amount of land to be dedicated to parks.
Cw Tirsell asked if it is true that they have received a three month
delay in filing that final map and it was noted that this is true.
Therefore, in effect, they were not prepared to file a final map the
night the variance was granted. They were not prepared to file a
final map at that time because of financing and they asked for a three
month delay before filing the final map and this is what her under-
standing was and the reason she voted in favor of allowing the variance
and the three month extension. She stated that she voted for the motion
because they were not ready to file the final map. She stated that she
did not hear them say they had filed a final map, ever. They had not
filed a final map and would not be prepared to file-a-final map for
three months and would like an extension so the tentative would not
run out.
Cm Miller stated that the argument made by them was that the final
map had been submitted but had not worked its way throught the City
processes and they wanted another three months to record it. The
point was, they had submitted the map that was to be their final
map, early on, for checking, and all these problems arose. Now it
turns out that the map that was to be their final map is not going
to be their final map - it's something different and the Council is
looking at a different one than the one submitted and different than
the one the Council discussed the night the variance was granted.
Cw Tirsell wondered if it would be possible to erase the previous
resolution about the variance since it does not apply to the present
map and work with the current map tonight and create a new resolution
that would apply to it.
The City Attorney stated that the Council will be working with a
new resolution.
It was explained that the solid lines on the map will be the new
final property lines and the broken lines were the lines the Council
originally looked at, and the resolution will apply to the property
lines indicated as solid lines.
Mayor Futch stated that the Council approved a variance and part
of the variance was a specific map. Does this mean that another
variance has to be approved?
The City Attorney stated that the Council is dealing with a different
map now and the effect is to rescind the resolution adopted before,
dealing with the other map. This totally wipes the slate clean and
the Council will deal with the map before them tonight.
Cm Miller stated that it doesn't make any difference if the dotted
lines or the solid lines are the old map. The issue is that the
Council is looking at a different map tonight than the map made
as a condition of the variance last time. The whole point is that
the map has changed.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE, AS
SIGNED BY THE ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY, WHICH HAS NO DATE. MOTION
SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
Mayor Futch commented that the placement of the buildings should
not really be included. This is a variance which has nothing to
do with the placement of the buildings.
CM-31-269
January 26, 1976
(Report re Setback
Variance - Tract 3607)
The City Attorney explained that he believes placement of the build-
ings has a great deal to do with the variance. If the buildings are
shifted around the setback lines for which the variance was granted
could be violated. If the Council will recall their discussion there
was concern about placement of the buildings and Cm Miller pointed
out that if a "blanket variance" were granted a lot of larger units
could be placed on larger parcels and this was not the intent of
the Council. There was concern that the units listed should remain
as shown on the specific lots. This was reflected in the minutes
and this is also the reason placement of the buildings is included.
He viewed this as a primary concern of the Council at the time.
-"'
Mayor Futch stated that it was his understanding that the Council
approved a variance that changed the setback requirements.
The City Attorney stated that the Council approved a variance pre-
cisely the way the P.C. represented it to the Council but then by
a motion made to amend, the Council added the additional requirement
that the buildings on the map remain in the same position as they
were. That is the reason this is indicated. Otherwise, the Coun-
cil would be creating exactly what the P.C. did, giving a blanket
variance for the properties.
em Miller stated that as he recalls this motion was made by em
Staley and Cm Staley agreed.
em Staley stated that as he recalls the variance was to return
the application of this map to the ordinance which was in effect
prior to the change in the rear yard setbacks. In order to
ease em Miller's concern that the developer would go back and
resubmit a new map with larger floor plans, the variance was to
be applicable to that particular map and that was the purpose.
The purpose was not to change the setbacks but rather to change
the coverage of the lots.
Earl Mason, engineer for Tract 3607, stated that when the Council
approved the variance it was to return the development of the
houses and lots to the old ordinance. Concern was expressed at
that time that the developer could come in and put a 1,700 sq. ft.
house where a 1,300 sq. ft. house had been indicated previously.
The Council asked Mr. Mason if there would be any objection to
tying down the model of each house for each lot and there was
no objection to this condition. That was the reference to the
tentative map dated 8-22-75. The June date was the map revised
with the 8-22-75 date written over the title box. The Council
approved the map in accordance with Revision #7 - the last re-
vision of the tentative map. Normally, there is a slight
variation between a tentative map and a final map and there would
be no question concerning a slight change.
Mr. Musso had questioned whether the lot lines could change a few
feet since the Council had referred to a specific map, and this is
the purpose of submitting a map that is now the final map and the
one that was submitted on 9-12-75, along with the construction map.
Cm Miller stated that in June Mr. Mason submitted a map with lot
lines on it. In August the lot lines were moved because of lot
coverage and to satisfy the variance. Now Mr. Mason has come in
with new changes - different changes.
Mr. Mason stated that they are substantially the same.
Cm Miller stated that there has been quite a bit of shuffling.
Mr. Mason stated that it is the normal amount of shuffling from
a tentative to a final, except it is tied to a specific map.
CM-31-270
I
January 26, 1976
(Report re Setback
Variance - Tract 3607)
Cm Staley stated that he would like to know if the map the Council
is reviewing tonight meets the ordinance requirements in every way
except for a change in the RS Setback Requirement.
Mr. Musso noted that it does meet the requirements.
Mr. Musso added that the City has not scaled the yards. The City
has taken the designated yard setbacks at face value. This will
be checked at the time they take out their building permits.
Cw Tirsell stated that the map, at this point, conforms, prior to
filing a final.
em Staley asked if the Council votes to approve the variance tonight
for this map, and the map does not conform to the RS Ordinance, has
the Council granted a variance for more than what was intended?
Mr. Musso replied that this would not be granting more because the
yards are designated and they are satisfactory.
em Staley questioned this because Mr. Musso had previously stated
that the lots had not been checked.
Mr. Musso explained that they have not been scaled but the numbers
are correct, and they must conform at the time permits are taken out.
MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Cm Miller dissenting) .
RESOLUTION NO. 20-76
A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCE (Clarence
Overaa, et al)
RECESS
Mayor Futch called for a brief recess after which the Council meeting
resumed with all members of the Council present.
DISC. RE CURBSIDE
MAILBOX PLACEMENT
Mayor Futch commented that there are people in the audience who wish
to discuss the item concerning placement of mailboxes and requested
that the Council move to this item on the agenda.
Mayor Futch stated it is his understanding that the postal regulations
allow mailboxes to be installed up to 15 ft. from the curb line. The
City owns the land 10 ft. from the curb and the City would require
an encroachment permit if the box were installed within 10 ft. from
the curb. This means that there is 5 ft. in which a box can be
installed that does not belong to the City and will be in an area
the post office will make delivery.
The Planning Commission has recommended that clusters of mailboxes
be allowed in an area 15 ft. from the curb and consistent with postal
regulations, to be submitted for design review.
Mr. Musso explained that the P.C. found that a mailbox would be
considered the same category as a flag pole, etc., allowed in the
front yard without being subject to design review.
Cm Staley pointed out that a letter was sent by Senator Tunney
concerning this issue and if legislation is passed it would make
this a moot discussion.
CM-31-271
~ayor Futch stated it was proper for the chairman to subdivide a motion
~~~'for any member of the council to request subdivision of a motion.
I
January 26, 1976
(Disc. Re Curbside
Mailbox Placement)
Mayor Futch stated that this is true but during the interim period
prior to passage of legislation these people need to know what they
can do.
It was suggested that citizens interested in this legislation
write to their congressmen urging support of the measure concern-
ing curbside mailboxes.
REPORT RE EASTERLY
CBD VEHICLE PARKING
The City Manager reported that in 1975 a considerable amount of
staff work was done on the general .topic of parking in the easterly
segment of the Central Business District. The addition of a staff
assistant to the Police Department was approved to increase man-
power assignment to regulation of parking time and also the staff
was directed to convert several curb parking areas from parallel
to diagonal parking.
The item concerning the possibility of invoking a parking time
limitation in the leased off-street parking lot north of First
street was postponed until after the holiday season, and will
be discussed this evening.
There was some discussion concerning the last survey taken for
the municipal parking lot and Cm Miller pointed out that the
survey did not take into account the parking for the court build-
ing and it was noted that a number of people who use the court
building also use the municipal lot.
Mayor Futch commented that it would take considerable staff time
to do a complete survey allover again and he would suggest that
it might be sufficient to study the lot connected with the court
building.
CM MILLER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PROCEED TO ADD THE CARLISLE
PROPERTY TO THE OVERALL LOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH OUR. TENTATIVE AGREE-
MENT WITH MRS. CARLISLE LAST YEAR~ 2) MAKE A DETAILED SURVEY OF
ALL THE PARKING, INCLUDING THAT WHICH IS INVOLVED WITH REGAN'S
COURT BUILDING AND OUR OWN LOT OVERALL SO THAT WE CAN DETERMINE THE
TRUE SHARE OF THAT WHICH BELONGS TO THE COUNTY~ AND 3) ADJUST THE
BUSINESS LICENSE SURCHARGE AFTER GETTING THE COUNTY'S FAIR SHARE.
Cm Staley stated that he strongly supports the first part of the
motion concerning negotiations for the Carlisle property but he
is not sure he can support the second and third parts of the
motion for the following reasons: First of all the letter from
the County Administrator indicates that not only would he recom-
mend that the County not increase its share, but would also pos-
sibly suggest that the County withdraw its share of the cost all
together. Therefore, it wouldn't do much good to do a survey if
the County isn't going to pay anyway.
Secondly, since the Council has studied this item he has had the
opportunity to discuss this item with the merchants in the area.
It appears that everyone would agree that the current system
is not a good system, but the proposed system or any other would
not work any better.
There was brief discussion concerning the propriety of dividing
the motion into three parts and Cm Miller agreed to divide it
into parts.
CM-31-272
January 26, 1976
Report re Easterly
CBD Vehicle Parking)
Cw Tirsell commented that it has been pointed out in the past that
the businesses in the mall do not pay into the business license tax
override for use of the municipal lot and they do have access on that
street and many people park on "J" Street in order to use the mall.
The Council asked if it would be possible to add the properties in
the mall to the business license tax and she would like to know if
this has been pursued.
Mr. Parness stated that the Council has the right to determine who
should be assigned to the benefit zone.
Cw Tirsell stated that she believes it would be proper to add the
properties located in the mall. There is a very deliberate access
from the merchants parking lot that goes to the mall property.
THE MOTION TO ADD THE CARLISLE PROPERTY TO THE OVERALL LOT PASSED
BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
THE MOTION TO DO A COMPLETE SURVEY INCLUDING THE MERCHANTS LOT AND
THE CIVIC BUILDING WAS AMENDED BY CW TIRSELL TO DO ONLY A SURVEY
FOR THE MUNICIPAL COURT LOT, SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
em Turner stated that in the report that was done for the merchants
parking lot in October it showed that the County office people used
it more than anybody else. If we are going to put time and effort
into a new survey, what are we going to do with the information. Will
something positive be done?
Cw Tirsell stated that the City will request more money from the
County for their support of the parking lot. This is the reason
the facts and figures are needed.
There was brief discussion as to whether it would be worthwhile to
conduct a survey.
Mr. Regan stated that he has sent letters to merchants on
Street asking that they refrain from parking in the court
ing lot as of March I, and to so inform their employees.
this means that a survey will not be necessary.
First
park-
Perhaps
THE AMENDED MOTION AND SECOND TO DO A SURVEY WAS WITHDRAWN.
Cm Staley stated that he noticed that the beauty college is taking
an inordinate share of the municipal lot parking and he would like
to know if it would be possible to increase their share of the parking su:
surcharge. He would suggest that.a survey be done so that the City
could show the beauty college how much of the parking they are taking
and then request that they pay more towards parking, in accordance
with what the survey indicates.
Mr. Parness stated that this is one of the problems encountered with
benefit districts. Uses can change and many arguments can be made
about the benefits received. Many of the merchants have already
made such arguments. Perhaps in the case of the beauty college
it does justify approaching the owners requesting more money.
Cm Staley stated that normally he would agree, if there were a
3-4% difference in the number but the college uses almost 20% of
the entire parking and it would seem that they should pay more.
CM MILLER AMENDED THE MOTION TO ADJUST THE BUSINESS LICENSE TO
THE SURCHARGE AFTER GETTING THE COUNTY'S FAIR SHARE, TO INCLUDE
THAT THE STAFF APPROACH THE OWNERS OF THE BEAUTY COLLEGE TO SEE
IF THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO MAKE A CONTRIBUTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH
WHAT APPEARS TO BE THEIR FAIR SHARE AND IF SO, ADJUST THE BUSINESS
LICENSES IN THE AREA PROPORTIONALLY. SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
CM-3l-273
January 26, 1976
(Report re Easterly
CBD Vehicle Parking)
Cm Turner stated that the merchants along Second Street and So.
Livermore Avenue have indicated that the diagonal parking that
has been provided has really been a great benefit to them. If
the City asks the Beauty College to pay more money for parking
in the municipal lot it may mean that they will ask their students
to park elsewhere causing problems somewhere else.
Mel Luna, Livermore merchant, stated that if the County and the
Beauty College doesn't agree to pay more money, why not post the
parking lot for a two-hour parking limit and perhaps this would
solve the problems. The problem right now is all day parking.
It was noted that there was some concern about a two-hour limit
for customer parking in the municipal lot and the Council would
discuss this possibility later.
MOTION TO CONTACT THE COUNTY AND THE BEAUTY COLLEGE PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADD THE PROPERTY OWNERS OF THE MALL WITH
THE LIST FOR THE TAX SURCHARGE FOR PARKING, SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
Cm Turner stated that as a merchant he would appreciate being
contacted personally about being added to the list rather than
to receive something in the mail indicating that they have been
added to the list.
CW TIRSELL INCLUDED IN THE MOTION THAT THE STAFF BE DIRECTED TO
CONTACT THE OWNERS IN THE MALL EXPLAINING THE REASON FOR THE
SURCHARGE FOR PARKING, SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
Cm Turner stated that he believes the owners must be contacted
before the motion is adopted.
The City Attorney explained that the Council shouldn't forget
about fundamental due process. They can't be taxed until there
is some type of hearing and reassessment.
Mr. Parness explained that the formula has been established and
the merchants have already been billed for the parking for this
fiscal year and many of the merchants have probably already paid
their business license tax for this fiscal year. He would suggest
that if there is to be a change it be effective at the beginning
of the next fiscal year.
Cm Staley pointed out that at this time the Council would only
be setting the item for an agenda item as to whether the tax
should be imposed because the merchants will have to be notified.
CW TIRSELL MOVED TO AMEND HER MOTION TO SET FOR AN AGENDA ITEM
WITH PROPER NOTICE TO THE BUSINESSES IN THE MALL, THAT THE COUNCIL
IS CONSIDERING ADDING THOSE BUSINESSES TO THE LIST OF THOSE PAYING
A SURCHARGE FOR THE MUNICIPAL PARKING LOT, AND THAT THEY BE NOTIFIED
AS TO THE DATE THIS WILL APPEAR ON THE AGENDA. MOTION SECONDED BY
CM STALEY. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
DISC. RE APPOINTMENTS
TO COMMITTEES & COMMISSIONS
There are numerous committees and commissions for which appointments
need to be discussed and a selection made and the Council has re-
quested that this be placed on the agenda for discussion.
CM-31-274
January 26, 1976
(Disc. re Appt. to
Committees & Commissions)
CW TIRSELL MOVED TO APPOINT SAMUEL ROMANO TO THE BEAUTIFICATION
COMMITTEE, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 21-76
RESOLUTION APPOINTING SAMUEL ROMANO TO THE
BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
JOLENE ABRAHAMS WAS APPOINTED TO THE COMMUNITY AFFAIRS COMMITTEE.
RESOLUTION NO. 22-76
RESOLUTION APPOINTING JOLENE ABRAHAMS TO
COMMUNITY AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
RANDY SCHLIENTZ AND WILLIAM OWEN WERE REAPPOINTED TO THE DESIGN REVIEW
COMMITTEE.
RESOLUTION NO. 23-76
RESOLUTION REAPPOINTING RANDALL SCHLIENTZ AND
WILLIAM OtiEN TO THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
Cm Turner stated that he would like to recommend Dennis Hundoble
to the Industrial Advisory Committee. Dennis is the manager of
Caterpillar Truck in San Leandro and his expertise would be a
welcomed addition to the Industrial Advisory Committee.
Cm Staley commented that the Council solicited a recommendation
from the Industrial Advisory Committee and therefore the Council
is somewhat obligated to wait for their recommendation, although
he would be in favor of the selection of Mr. Hundoble for the
vacancy.
Cm Turner stated that he believes the Industrial Advisory Committee
has had sufficient time to make a recommendation and they have not
responded. This is the reason he has made a recommendation.
It was concluded that the suggestion of Mr. Hundoble to serve on
the Committee would be forwarded to the Industrial Advisory Committee
for comment.
There was brief discussion concerning an appointment to the Social
Concerns Committee with the comment that perhaps one of the alternates
might wish to become permanent members of this Committee.
Mayor Futch stated that he would like the Council to adopt the policy
of appointing alternate members because he feels that many of the
alternates feel that they really don't get a chance to participate.
Cw Tirsell suggested that the Committee be requested to ask the
alternate members if they would like an appointment as a permanent
member and this is different than asking for recommendations, in
general.
Cm Turner stated that the Council makes appointments and if they
ask the Chairman of the Social Concerns Committee to ask if anyone
who is an alternate would like to be selected as a permanent member,
this would mean that the Council is almost morally obligated to make
that appointment.
Mayor Futch stated that he is sure there would be about 7 alternates
who would be interested in the appointment so the Council will still
have the option of making its own selection.
CM-31-275
January 26, 1976
(Disc. re Appt. to
Committees & Commissions)
Cm Staley pointed out that the Council is only asking for people
who have indicated interest, not a specific recommendation, and
the Council will still have the option of making the selection.
REPORT RE SIGNALIZATION
AT INTERSECTION OF
OLIVINA AVE. & MURRIETA
Mr. Lee reported that the Council has discussed, at length, the
matter of how to treat the intersection of Olivina Avenue and
Murrieta Boulevard which is a four-way intersection that is a
major street intersecting a collector street (Olivina Avenue) .
Murrieta Boulevard is a major street with heavy traffic and at
present that particular intersection is very inconvenient and
the two suggested alternatives have been signalization at this
intersection or realignment of Olivina Avenue west of Murrieta
Boulevard to eliminate the four-way intersection.
Mr. Lee stated that the planning policy is to have major streets
with four-way intersections, at traffic signals. Collector
streets are planned in order to continue without interruption
of a major street and this would be possible with realignment
of Olivina Avenue because of vacant property west of Murrieta
Boulevard. This would eliminate the immediate need for a four-
way signal. He indicated that the costs are close, one way or
another, but the original estimation was that the realignment
would be less expensive without knowing the cost of property
acquisition and other matters.
em Staley stated that originally the estimated cost for realign-
ment was $45,000 and signalization $87,000. He wondered if the
cost for signalization is still estimated at about this amount or
if this cost has escalated.
Mr. Lee indicated that the roadword and islands are included
in the $87,000 estimate, and that there are no up-to-date cost
estimates for the widening.
Cm Staley stated that since acquisition costs and other items
have not been recently estimated it may be that the cost for
realignment would cost $40,000-$50,000 more than signalization.
Mr. Lee stated that he would agree the $45,000 estimate for
realignment was probably low but it certainly could be done
for $87,000 or the same amount as the signalization.
Mr. Lee added that there was some feedback from the property
owners who felt that realignment would cause damage to their
property but they didn't say it couldn't be worked out.
Cm Staley stated that he would suggest that possibly Olivina
Avenue be made a right turn only onto Murrieta from the West.
The only reason people would be going to Murrieta from Olivina
would be to go towards Stanley Boulevard because if they wish to
go in the other direction they can go out Olivina and then to
Hagemann Drive.
Mr. Lee stated that he believes this would create a lot of
problems and for instance, what if they wanted to go straight
ahead towards Value Giant and McDonalds?
CM-31-276
January 26, 1976
(Rpt re Signalization
Murrieta & Olivina)
MMr. Lee stated that the realignment of Olivina Avenue would eliminate
its use as a thoroughfare through town and the other thing would be
the elimination of the bad four-way intersection.
Discussion followed concerning other routes that could be taken
by motorists if Olivina were realigned, in order for them to get
to the downtown shopping area and other areas of town.
Cm Turner stated that if people are made to make a right turn from
Olivina to Murrieta it means that they cannot get to the freeway
on Murrieta and whether we like it or not, Murrieta has become a
main street to the freeway for a major portion of the population.
em Turner stated that we already have the four-way intersection and
he MOVED TO INSTALL THE TRAFFIC SIGNALS .AT THIS INTERSECTION, SECONDED
BY CW TIRSELL.
Tom Kerkes, resident of the Somrnerset area stated that most of the
people from his area would orefer to make a left turn onto Olivina
from the north to go to the downtown area and lip" Street rather
than to go down Stanley and try to get off of Stanley at the poorly
constructed turn by Sarnbo's.
em Miller stated that what Mr. Kerkes is saying, essentially, is
wait until the underpasses have been completed and then see what
the traffic situation is at the four-way intersection, and perhaps
a realignment is not necessary.
Cm Staley stated that he does have some disagreement with a signal
at that intersection because he believes it is more important that
the four lanes be completed between Stanley Boulevard and Olivina.
Secondly, it might be better to leave the intersection with Murrieta
the through street and a stop on Olivina. This would have to dis-
courage major cross town movement on Olivina.
Cm Miller pointed out that this would essentially isolate that
subdivision completely because there would be no place for them
to cross the heavy traffic.
Cm Turner pointed out that regardless of what anyone says Murrieta
has become a major street and always will be. Even with the opening
of lip" Street as access to the freeway, the amount of traffic for
Murrieta will never change. At some point a traffic signal will
have to be installed at that intersection and it may as well be
now. The need for it has been pointed out.
Cw Tirsell stated that commuters from Sunset, Carlton Square
and the Elliott tract all use Murrieta to get to the freeway and
it is very doubtful that the opening of "P" Street will affect
any of that traffic.
Mr. Lee did mention that the curve on Stanley near Sarnbo's is
temporary and this turn will be eliminated when Railroad Avenue
is completed and extended closer to Murrieta.
Mayor Futch stated that he has heard a lot of good arguments and
would prefer to think about this rather than vote this evening.
Skip Claussen, 370 Pearl Drive, stated that he would like to express
favor of a traffic light at that intersection, particularly if the
cost is about the same. It would seem that the traffic light would
be much safer than the proposed design for realignment.
CM-31-277
January 26, 1976
(Rpt re Signalization
Olivina & Murrieta)
em Miller stated that he believes the four-way intersection with
a traffic light is the right way to go. Since this will be an
item for next year's budget and "p" Street will have been open
for awhile this will give the Council an opportunity to
consider whether signals are still needed.
Cm Staley stated that he really supports the idea of a traffic
signal at the four-way intersection but would like to request a
continuance because he believes that if the City is going to spend
the money to install a traffic signal, the road should be widened
to Murrieta. Further, he stated that he would question possible
duplication of effort, in other words, will the street be closed
for installing traffic signals and then again closed 2-3 years
later to complete the four lanes? He stated that these are things
he would like to consider before agreeing to installation of the
signals.
em Miller stated that if Cm Staley is proposing to put in four
lanes on Murrieta, at the same time some mechanism should be
considered by which the City can recover, for the rest of the
City, the advantages those adjoining properties have which they
would otherwise have to pay for when they sell their property.
-'
em Staley stated that as he recalls the P.C. was considering a
benefit district for the street development.
CM STALEY MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM FOR TWO WEEKS WITH A RE-
QUEST THAT THE STAFF PREPARE A REPORT CONCERNING THE OTHER TWO
ISSUES RAISED BY HIM. MOTION SECONDED BY MAYOR FUTCH.
MOTION FAILED 2-3 (Cm Turner, Miller and Cw Tirsell dissenting).
Cm Miller stated that adopting the motion on the floor would
mean that it will be considered at the budget session and Mr.
Lee explained that the money is already in the budget for this
year so a motion approving it would mean installation.
This would also include widening to the south of Olivina and will
help relieve the situation considerably. However it will not be
widened all the way to the railroad tracks.
em Staley stated that he is still concerned that the street will
have to be closed twice and Mr. Lee indicated that the City will
make every effort to keep the street open during the construc-
tion for the signal and later on when the underpasses are con-
structed it is possible that traffic will have to detour.
MOTION PASSED 4-1 TO ALLOW SIGNALIZATION AT THAT INTERSECTION,
(Mayor Futch dissenting) .
Cm Miller stated that he believes the concerns mentioned by Cm
Staley about it being less expensive to do everything at once
and the possibility of forming a benefit district is reasonable
and Cm Miller would suggest that if there is enough cost savings
for doing everything at once perhaps there would be an advantage
in putting everything over until next year with the hope that
with additional gas tax money the whole project could be done.
The design will not change and engineers could go ahead with it.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Report From City Mgr.
re Jaycees Annual Air Show
-,'
Mr. Parness stated that the Jaycees have planned a 7th annual
air show and the City would expect them to perform in accordance
with previous years which takes into account filing of insurance,
CM-3l-278
January 26, 1976
(Rpt from Cty Mgr. re
Jaycees Annual Air Show)
policing, traffic control, cleanup, etc. They are agreeable to
these conditions and the Airport Advisory Committee has recommended
that approval be granted, subject to observance of the conditions,
stated by the city.
Report re Project 74-24
Bids - East Ave. Water Line
The Director of Public Works submitted a report noting that bids for
the East Avenue Water Line project were received from 14 contractors.
The low bid was submitted by Great Western Pipeline Company in the
amount of $13,220.20 and the engineering estimate was $13,700.
It is recommended that the bid be awarded to Great Western Pipeline.
RESOLUTION NO. 24-76
A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID (Great
Western Pipeline Co.)
Res. Appointing Election
Officers and Consolidat-
ing Voting Precincts
The Council adopted a resolution appointing election officers for
the municipal election, and consolidating voting precincts:
RESOLUTION NO. 25-76
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING ELECTION OFFICERS,
CONSOLIDATION OF PRECINCTS AND POLLING PLACES,
HOURS TO BE OPEN AND FIXING COMPENSATION OF
ELECTION OFFICERS.
Res. Requesting
Assessed Valuation Est.
The Council adopted a resolution requesting assessed valuation esti-
mates for City property.
RESOLUTION NO. 26-76
A RESOLUTION REQUESTING ESTIMATION OF LOCAL ASSESSED
VALUE.
Res. Auth. Exec. of
Training Agreement
Our City is authorized to receive training instruction from the
California Highway Patrol, the cost of which is paid by the state
and Peace Officer Standards and Training Commission. It is recom-
mended that a resolution be adopted authorizing execution of the
training agreement.
RESOLUTION NO. 27-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE TRAINING AGREEMENTS BETWEEN
THE LIVERMORE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY PATROL.
CM-31-279
January 26, 1976
Res. Auth. Exec. of
Agree. re Title X Program
Funds are available to our City to sustain the Title X Program
for public service employees in the amount of $95,847. This covers
the term of the calendar year 1976. It is recommended that a
resolution authorizing execution of agreement be adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 28-76
-'
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREE-
HENT (County of Alameda)
Summary of Action
for Planning Commission
The Summary of Action of the Planning Commission meeting of
January 20, 1976, was noted for filing.
Payroll & Claims
There were 112 claims in the amount of $86,149.01, and 287 payroll
warrants in the amount of $96,016.21, for a total of $182,165.22,
dated January 22, 1976 and approved by the Director of Finance.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED, WITH THE DELETION OF
THE MINUTES FOR THE SOCIAL CONCERNS COMMITTEE AND THE DESIGN
REVIEW COMMITTEE WHICH WERE REMOVED FOR DISCUSSION.
Minutes
Cm Miller noted that in the Design Review committee minutes
there were concerns about the Consent Calendar concept because
items once on the calendar cannot be changed or modified in any
way. Cm Miller requested the staff to communicate to the Com-
mittee that changes or additions of any kind can be made.
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MINUTES OF THE SOCIAL CONCERNS COMMITTEE AND THE
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE WERE APPROVED FOR FILING.
REPORT RE TRAFFIC
SIGNAL PRIORITY
The Director of Public Works reported that the item concerning
traffic signal priority was postponed from the meeting of Jan.
12th.
The City has a cooperative agreement with the County concerning
the East Avenue project. There has been a delay because of
the establishment of future width lines. The County is establish-
ing the lines at this time and the City frequently inquires about
progress of the project.
When the County establishes the future width lines, under the
terms of the agreement the City will proceed immediately with
the design of the East Avenue/Vasco Road intersection. As soon
as it is designed it is anticipated by the staff that the Council
would place a lot of pressure on the County to move ahead with
this project.
CM-3l-280
January 26, 1976
REPORT RE FORMATION OF
SPECIAL CITIZENS COMMIT-
TEE RE TAX OVERRIDE
It has been suggested that the Council discuss the formation of a
special Citizens Committee for support of the local Public Safety
Tax Override measure that will appear on the March ballot. This
item is considered to be very important and any citizen interested
in serving on this committee would be welcome.
Mayor Futch stated that he would like to suggest the formation of
a Steering Committee of five with each Councilmernber appointing
one person for this Committee. Mayor Futch stated that if the
Council would agree, he would select John Shirley as the tentative
Chairman and that Dr. Shirley has already agreed to serve.
Cm Turner asked where the list of names came from and it was noted
that the list was prepared by the City Manager.
Mr. Parness stated that he believes the important point is getting
citizen envolvement, regardless as to who serves on the Committee.
Cw Tirsell commented that she would prefer not to make a selection
tonight because she hasn't had a chance to speak with anyone about
serving on the Committee.
Cm Staley stated that the object of forming the Committee is to
get a nucleus which people will form around and continue to go from
there.
The following selections were made by the Councilmernbers:
Mayor Futch - Appointment of John Shirley, tentative Chairman
Cm Turner - Appointment of Sharon Heinz
Cm Miller - Appointment of either Judge Lewis or Ann Lewis
Cw Tirsell - Appointment of Philomena Medeiros
Cm Staley - Appointment of Dee Wilson
It was noted that if any of the above mentioned names cannot serve,
other selections will be made.
Cw Tirsell stated that she would also like to mention Mario Pedrozzi
as an alternate selection because he was concerned about the cruising
on First Street on the weekends.
Cm Staley stated that he would suggest that Mr. Pedrozzi be asked
to serve on the Committee also and the Council concurred.
ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE SIX PEOPLE MENTIONED ABOVE WILL BE ASKED TO SERVE ON
THE CITIZENS TAX OVERRIDE COMMITTEB.
REPORT RE APPLICATION
FOR FORMATION OF
AGRICULTURAL PRESERVE
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
A PUBLIC HEARING WAS SET FOR FEBRUARY 2, 1976, CONCERNING FORMATION
OF AN AGRICULTURAL PRESERVE.
Cm Miller noted that he thinks it's great that someone who owns
property in the City is willing to go into the Williamson Act and
the Council supports this action.
Cw Tirsell stated that she also is very pleased.
CM-31-281
January 26, 1976
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Bike Plan)
Mr. Musso stated that there have been a number of comments from
the public wanting to change the Bicycle Plan and if anyone con-
tacts the Council they might be advised that the P.C. is going
to initiate a re-evaluation of that report as soon as possible,
beginning in late February.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Computer pricing
for Grocery Stores)
Cm Turner stated that he wasn't present last week when the Council
discussed the computer pricing in supermarkets and he would like
to mention that he has received comments from a few residents who
have indicated that they want the pricing to appear on the item.
It was noted that this item was postponed and a report and discus-
sion will take place after the current law expires on April I, 1977,
which presently prohibits removing prices from the item.
(Crossing Guard)
Cm Turner stated that people have inquired as to the possibility
of a crossing guard at Olivina and Albatross and he would like a
report from the Director of Public Works concerning this possi-
bility.
(Review of Committees)
Cm Turner commented that the Council appoints numerous committees
and he feels that there should be a review of all these committees
in an effort to determine if they are still necessary.
(Letter to Assessor)
Cm Miller stated that the letter written by the City Manager to
the Assessor was very good but it was his understanding that a
copy was to go to the Grand Jury.
It was noted that a copy was not to be sent to the Grand Jury at
this time~ only to the Assessor.
(PG&E Rate of Return)
Cm Miller stated that he has asked the City Manager to check
into the rate of return for PG&E and would assume that this will
be coming to the Council in the near future.
Mr. Parness stated that he was contacted just today by their
representative and they are being delayed because they want
to include last year..<
-,,,"
CM-31-282
January 26, 1976
(Implementation of
Enviornmental Quality Act)
Cm Miller stated that the Council received information about the
implementation of the Environmental Quality Act and one of the
things that isn't in there about what makes the project, are the words
about a tiny project which is a piece of a much larger one that can
be seen coming down the line as a cumulative effect. As he recalls,
the guidelines said something about cumulative and words indicating
a project in its cumulative effect will be significant should be a
part of the wording concerning implementation.
The City Attorney was directed to look into wording, as suggested.
Also, there was nothing in the draft received to indicate where
the important items are located.
(Parking Enforcement)
em Staley stated that when the Council authorized the addition of a
Police Assistant to help enforce parking regulations, a certain number
of hours were to be devoted to parking regulation enforcement and it
also was to be done before Christmas. Apparently it wasn't. He
would request a report from the Police Department as to how much time
is actually devoted to parking regulation enforcement.
Mr. Parness reported that 48 hours per week are devoted to this task.
Cm Staley stated that according to a number of merchants this is not
the case.
Mr. Parness stated that the 48 hours are devoted to this unless there
are extreme or unusual circumstances which necessitate taking the
assistant from this job to do something else, and even so, this would
be only for a very brief period of time.
(New Ballot voting
System)
Cw Tirsell wondered what could be done to help educate the citizens
concerning the new ballot voting system that will be used during the
next election.
The City Clerk explained that people from the County plan to demon-
strate the new system and they will be in Livermore on Saturday
at the Granada Shopping Center. One of the things they have been
waiting for is the new ballot which will be written in both English
and Spanish.
The system is also on display in City Hall and anyone who would
like an explanation of how it works is welcome to see it and
candidates have been encouraged to display it during campaign
meetings.
Cw Tirsell suggested that one be located at the Library and the
City Clerk noted that the Library will have one for demonstration.
(Chamber's 50th Anniversar~
Cw Tirsell stated that this year is the 50th anniversary of the
Chamber of Commerce in Livermore and would like the staff to
prepare an appropriate proclamation to send to them congratulating
them on their 50th year, AND SO MOVED. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY
CM TURNER AND PASSED 4-0 (Cm Miller abstaining) .
CM-31-283
January 26, 1976
(Watering Medians)
Cw Tirsell stated that medians on Murrieta and Stanley Boulevard
are being watered at night and are flooding and then the water is
freezing on the pavement. Several times last week she noticed
that the sprinklers are throwing water out into the street and
she would like them to be checked because water is being wasted.
--'
(Proposed Corporation
Yard - School District)
Mayor Futch stated that he is concerned about the proposed cor-
poration yard to be located on the administrative site for the
School District.
Mr. Parness stated that the staff has shared this concern but
he has contacted the Superintendent of Schools and will be meeting
with him tomorrow morning at 9:00 a.m. with our City Planner and
City Attorney to discuss what their intentions are, exactly, and
what the building will be like and precisely where it is intended
to be placed.
The City Attorney intends to inform them of what legal process
should be investigated as it would appear that they haven't quite
fulfilled their legal obligations.
(Paving of Underpasses)
Mayor Futch stated that the last thing he has to report is infor-
mation as to when the railroad underpasses are to be paved. The
staff and ~1ayor met with Hensel-Phelps who have indicated that they
will be prepared to pave the underpasses on February 3rd and 4th.
Mr. Lee interjected that late this afternoon he contacted the sub-
contractor doing the paving work and learned that the paving will
commence this week for "P" Street.
ORD. AMEND. RE
GARBAGE, RUBBISH, ETC.
CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATED TO
GARBAGE, RUBBISH, ETC., SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Cm Turner stated that before adopting the ordinance he would like
to know if a copy of the ordinance could be sent to all the shop-
ping center owners in town.
MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
ORDINANCE NO. 877
AN ORDINANCE MmNDING THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 1959 BY THE
REVISIONS OF SECTIONS 10.33.3 AND 10.33.5, OF ARTICLE I, IN
GENERAL, OF CHAPTER 10, RELATING TO GARBAGE, RUBBISH, AND WEEDS.
INTRO. OF ZOo ORD.
AMEND. RE HOFMANN CO.
ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECO'NDED BY CM TURNER AND BY 4-1 VOTE
(Cm Miller dissenting) THE ZOo ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING
THE HOFMANN COHPANY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT WAS INTRODUCED,
READ BY TITLE ONLY, AND ORDERED FILED.
CM-31-284
January 26, 1976
INTRO. OF ZOo ORD. AMEND.
RE MIN. NON-STREET FRONT.
RE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS
ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE ZOo ORD. AMENDMENT REGARDING MINIMUM NON-STREET FRONTAGE YARD
REQUIREMENTS RE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS WAS INTRODUCED, READ BY TITLE
ONLY, AND ORDERED FILED.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Futch adjourned the meeting at 12:50 a.m. to an executive
session to discuss personnel matters.
APPROVE
ATTEST
Regular Meeting of February 2, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
February 2, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:05 p.m.
with Mayor Futch presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Miller, Turner, Staley, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch
Absent: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Futch led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the
audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES - Jan. 19
P. 250, 4th paragraph, 7th line should begin: If one realty company..
.....etc. lOth line should read: and if approximately 1,700 houses
had three or four signs....etc.
P. 250, 5th paragraph, 3rd line should read: equitably enforced.
She would not have removed the signs in the manner Cm Miller did.
However, she believes....etc.
P. 250, second line should read: signs were. The signs allowed
are those signs located at the house for sale, and which everyone
has. etc.
CM-31-285
February 2, 1976
(Minutes - Jan. 19,)
P. 255, 8th paragraph, second line should read: of using a
variation in the plaster for effect, with the Design Review
Committee, rather than the Council...etc.
P. 260, next to last paragraph, next to last line should read:
house and the public probably will accept what they have to say..etc.
ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF JANUARY 19, 1976, WERE
APPROVED, AS CORRECTD. CM TURNER ABSTAINED DUE TO ABSENCE AT
THAT MEETING.
INTRODUCTION OF
VISITORS - PACK 951
Cm Turner introduced leaders of Weblo Pack 951 and its members
who were present at the Council meeting.
It was noted that the boys are working on their Citizenship Badge
and have come to the Council meeting to see how local government
operates.
OPEN FORUM
(Curbs Painted Red
North PSt.)
Steve Thome, 323 North "P" Street stated that the City has painted
the curbs red on both sides of the street in front of his house,
and he would like to suggest that there be less red curbing. He
indicated that there is about 130 ft. of red curbing. On ilL"
Street in front of the stores there is only about 20 ft. of red
curbing.
Mr. Lee explained that it was necessary to make the curbs red in
order to line up the lanes on the north side of Olivina with the
lanes for the underpass. This has been in the plans and there
doesn't seem to be any other way to provide the lanes needed.
em Miller asked the difference between this intersection and First
and "L" Street, and Mr. Lee stated that ultimately First and ilL"
will receive this same kind of treatment.
It was requested that this matter be included in the next agenda
schedule for some discussion.
(Candidate Signs)
Richard Gower, 1450 Helsinki, stated that he has noticed that
there has been pilfering of candidate signs and would like the
help of the Council and the press in notifying people that the
signs have been paid for through contributions from the public
to support a particular candidate and that everyone has the
right to be informed on the various issues and candidates. He
added that hard work and diligence goes into making the signs
and nobody likes their efforts destroyed.
He also mentioned the fact that campaign signs are illegal unless
they specify the committee supporting the candidate as well as
the committee address. Mr. Gower also questioned the late filings
of campaign statements.
The City Clerk explained that as the filing officer for the FPPC form
the law reads as follows: The filing officer may waive late penalties
in instances in which it is believed that late filing was not willful
CM-31-286
February 2, 1976
(Campaign statements)
and that enforcement would not further the purposes of the Act. If,
however, late reports are not received within five days after written
notification that a statement is due, the late penalty is mandatory.
It was stated by the Clerk that, in her opinion, the late filings
were not willful and, therefore, no penalty was attached.
CONTINUED P.H. RE
GENERAL PLAN ADOPTION
Mayor Futch opened the continued hearing on the General Plan adoption.
Valerie RaYmond, 2368 Buena Vista, stated that she would like to
speak to the Council about the General Plan as well as the Sphere
of Influence because the residents of the Buena Vista area see a
relationship between these two things. A number of the Buena Vista
residents signed a petition asking that they be removed from Liver-
more's Sphere of Influence because they were afraid that being in
the Sphere would mean that the Buena vista area could be annexed
without the consent of the property owners. This would mean the
imposition of sewers, sidewalks, and other items.
Buena Vista residents have consistently expressed their desire to
remain rural residential and they recently supported rezoning back
to 5 acres in hopes that this would preclude further lot splitting.
Several of the people who signed the petition attended the last LAFCO
meeting and it became apparent to them at that time that the whole
battle about the Sphere of Influence was over Las positas and that
the LAFCO Board didn't care about the Buena Vista area other than
the fact that the signatures reinforced the anti-Livermore position
being taken by the Las positas property owner.
The Buena Vista residents feel very strongly that property owners
who do want to develop should be within the City's Sphere of Influence
and they do not wish to be used as pawns in order to promote Las
Positas. At the same time it has been difficult for her to convince
the property owners that their fears that Livermore is anxious to
promote development of the Buena Vista area are unfounded, in light
of the current proposed General Plan.
Specifically, the other residents and Mrs. RaYmond are concerned about
two things: I) the designation of half the area and proposed density
of 2-4 houses to the acre, which is the same as the Hazelhorst property.
They feel this is substantially too high and they would like the
entire Buena Vista area shown at the lowest density used by the City.
2) They are opposed to the proposed extension of Mines Road between
Tesla Road and East Avenue.
According to the General Plan consultants the extension of Mines Road
is intended to serve recreational traffic to Del Valle. Not only
do they feel this extension would jeopardize the vineyard and would
require removal of a minimum of 4,000 vines, but they feel it would
essentially destroy the character and tranquility of the Buena Vista
area. They have been told that it is necessary to take the load off
Buena Vista but the property owners feel the cure is worse than
the disease. They would point out that, if in lO-15 years the situa-
tion changes and Buena Vista residents do stop complaining about the
traffic, there is nothing to prevent the City from putting the road
back on the map at that time. At this time, however, they would like
to see it removed and they feel it is not necessary.
Mrs. Raymond stated that she is sure the Council can understand why
the Buena Vista residents feel unwilling to accept that they would
be better off under the Livermore Sphere of Influence in light of
these two aspects of the General Plan. At the same time, however,
they do not wish to do anything to promote development of Las positas
under a separate Sphere of Influence.
The Buena Vista property owners understand that the Council is not
in a position at this time to make any kind of formal motion in the
General Plan hearings~ however, it is her understanding that if they
CM-31-287
February 2, 1976
(Continued P.li. re
General Plan Adoption)
can receive some assurance this evening from individual Councilmembers
of their intention to support the Buena Vista residents with regard
to the aspects she mentioned concerning the General Plan and the
desire to rural residential, that a spokesman for some of the Buena
Vista residents would be willing to speak tomorrow to the LAFCO Board
asking that their names be removed from the petition and indicating
some of the concerns she has raised.
-'
Mayor Futch stated that he shares the concern for extending Mines
Road through the vineyards. He feels the vineyards are extremely
desirable and does not see any long range projections by the City
for extending that road at the expense of the vineyards. Personally
he would be opposed to locating a major road through the vineyards.
Cw Tirsell commented that the consultant can recommend anything
he wishes but in discussing the Task Force Report there were several
Councilmembers and Planning Commission members who worried about
increasing the density for the Buena Vista area since Livermore
has gone to the County several times to support the Buena Vista
residents in keeping rural residential. Also, Cw Tirsell commented
that she expressed concern about Mines Road and believes that
two of the Planning Commissioners questioned the expense as well
as the need for the road to Del Valle. These things have been
questioned in the past by several Planning Commissioners and Council~
members.
Cm Miller stated that it is his understanding that the P.C. has
already recommended that the density for the north half of the
Buena Vista area be reduced to a rural residential density and
he certainly supports this view. He stated that he has a little
more hesitation concerning the road but agrees that the possibility
for building that road with City money is very remote, even if the
City would want it. It would be 15-20 years before money would be
available for this purpose.
Cm Turner stated that the comments made by Cw Tirsell and Mayor
Futch summarize his position but would like to add that this
matter of annexation keeps coming up every week and he is sure
Mrs. Raymond understands the policy concerning any possible
annexation and can probably explain this to the other property
owners.
Mrs. Raymond stated that she understands the City's policy about
annexation but she is sure the concern comes from a Knox bill
which if passed would allow annexation without consent from the
property owners.
Mr. Musso stated that the P.C. did, indeed, instruct the staff
to change the work map but they have not voted as yet. They also
removed Mines Road from the map but they are concerned about pro-
viding a north/south traffic flow. They are not concerned about
providing a road to the reservoir because Vasco Road serves this
purpose. Even in the beginning when the County proposed to extend
Vasco Road to Mines Road the City said they wanted Buena Vista
to extend to Mines Road because it was to be the major street.
Mrs. Raymond stated that she has thought about this matter a
great deal and she simply cannot believe that the traffic load
is as great as Mr. Musso believes. Nevertheless, the Buena Vista
residents feel that the cure of an additional road would be worse
than the disease of the traffic load.
--.
Cm Staley stated that he would agree with the statements made
about there not being a need to extend a major road through the
vineyards in the near future, and 15 years would be the near
future, in his opinion.
David Madis, lOll Geneva, stated that in the first place two of
the Councilmembers who indicated that they agree with Mrs. Raymond
CM-31-288
February 3, 1976
(Continued P. H. re
General Plan Adoption)
will not be on the next Council, as a new Council will be seated
in March. Secondly, the public does not know what the position
of the future Council will be and this Council cannot bind even
itself to any agreement concerning any future development or zoning.
Thirdly, he felt that all of the people who worked on the General
Plan density should be called back if there is to be any change in
density, realign major streets, and rearrange major highways. He
wondered if this is a pre-arranged plan to promise the people of
Buena Vista, something this Council cannot deliver, in order that
they will not appear before LAFCO tomorrow to make known their
objections to the present Council policy, past Council policy, and
what they know will be future Council policy. He stated that he
believes it is only fair to give both sides of the story.
Mr. Madis stated if there is any doubt in the minds of the property
owners the City Attorney should be asked if this Council can bind
this Council for even a week, or a future Council, or people who
will be elected to that Council, as to that General Plan or any other
General Plan or to any zoning. They cannot do so even if they try.
He indicated that he believes it is critically important to the
future of this City that sooner or later this Council and future
Councils, staff, and everyone concerned, recognize that there are
a lot of people who do not like this City, and would suggest that
there is a change of attitude because if there isn't the City will
continue to have problems, as it does with all the other agencies
it does business,with.
Mayor Futch stated that he is sure everyone is aware of the fact
that this Council cannot bind another Council with an agreement
concerning future development, etc. but the Council and the P.C.
are holding a number of hearings on the General Plan in order to
allow public input and the public is invited to attend these hear-
ings. The public is more than welcome and the reference to the
fact that the public is not given a chance to say anything about
plans for Livermore is rather absurd.
Cm Miller pointed .out that Mr. Madis has represented Mr. Anderson,
on the north side, in the past and may be representing him presently
and Cm Miller is sure that this is part of the motivation for the
remarks made by him. Secondly, the Council recognizes that there
are many people who do not like the City and most of them are land
speculators.
John Migliori, Jr., 6271 Tesla Road, stated that he is located in
Livermore's Sphere of Influence area and nobody asked him what he
thought about it. He suggested that the Council not take any action
on the General Plan because a new Council will be effective in March
and the new Councilmembers may think differently than the Council-
members leaving the Council. He indicated that he is not happy
about the fact that you now need 100 acres in order to build a house.
Cm Staley commented that he understood that the 100 acre policy
is a County requirement and Mr. Migliori indicated that Cm Staley
is "passing the buck", because it is a City law. He stated that
he has been trying to get that area zoned rural residential for years.
Mr. Madis stated that he would like the Council to know that he
is representing himself, speaking on his own behalf, but he would
like to know the names and addresses of the people Mrs. Raymond
is representing this evening.
Cm Staley stated that he believes the purpose of the hearing is to
hear comments relative to the General Plan and Mrs. Raymond has
addressed this issue. It is not really important that the Council
know the names and addresses of the people who agree with her.
Mrs. Raymond carne forward to give the names of about half a dozen
property owners who share her ,concern and indicated that she could
name others if necessary.
CM-31-289
February 2,1976
(Continued P.R. re
General Plan Adoption)
Cm Turner stated that the General Plan hearing will take place
again next week and would like to request that the Council have
the opportunity to review the minutes from this hearing with
their agenda packet for next week.
Cw Tirsell also suggested that all testimony from the public
be compiled so this can be reviewed during the last public
hearing before a vote is taken.
_/'
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE GENERAL PLAN HEARING WAS CONTINUED TO THE MEETING OF
FEBRUARY 9, 1976.
P.H. RE REQUEST TO
ESTAB. AGRICULTURAL
PRESERVE (Garaventa & Callaghan)
A request has been submitted by Alwin R. Garaventa and R. M.
Callaghan to establish an agricultural preserve for 226+ acres,
divided into A, B, and C parcels which Parcels A & B are on Vasco
Road and Parcel C on Bluebell Drive.
Mr. Callaghan stated that he believes the Council has all the
necessary documents and the P.C. and staff have submitted re-
ports concerning this item.
At this time Mayor Futch invited anyone from the audience to
speak during the public hearing.
THERE BEING NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY, ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED
BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Cw Tirsell stated that she would be very happy to adopt the resolu-
tion establishing a preserve within the City limits, because it
is the first application to come before the Council to utilize
the Williamson Act Preserve within the City limits as a viable
means of preserving land that is not ready for urbanization. SHE
MOVED THAT THE CITY CLERK BE DIRECTED TO FILE A CERTIFIED COPY OF
THE RESOLUTION, CONTRACT AND MAP WITH THE COUNTY CLERK AND AUTH-
ORIZE THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE LAND CONSERVATION CONTRACT AND TO
INTRODUCE THE RESOLUTION SO STATION. MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Cm Miller stated that with respect to the liability of the owner
on cancellation, he would like to know if this follows the statutes
and the City Attorney stated that he believes it does. The con-
tract was prepared by his assistant from a County contract and
does, in fact, as far as they know, follow the state statute.
Everything they looked at follows the state statute explicitly.
Cm Miller stated that he believes the liability upon cancella-
tion is different than what is mentioned and this is the reason
he is questioning it.
The City Attorney stated that he could make a second check but
is sure everything will be the same because they were very careful
in preparing the agreement and trying to make sure it was consis-
tent with the state statute.
Cm Miller stated that occasionally the County will have unusual
provisions in their contracts. As long as it does follow the state
statute he has no objection but he would like the City Attorney
to make a check.
..-.
CM-31-290
February 2, 1976
(P.H. re Req. to Estab.
Agricultural Preserve)
The City Attorney commented that a resolution still has to be pre-
pared and if the contract does not follow the state statute he will
not prepare the resolution and the item will come back to the Council.
The Council concurred.
'--",_.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 30-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT
(Alwin R. Garaventa)
COMMUNICATION FROM
VCSD RE DEVELOPMENT
& ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECT
A letter was received from VCSD regarding their concern for develop-
ment in the area adjacent to the City of Livermore that may have an
adverse impact on the Valley's environment.
Mayor Futch stated that the VCSD has written the City a letter of
support concerning development and our environment and MOVED THAT
THE CITY WRITE THEM A LETTER OF THANKS, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND
PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
COMMUNICATION RE EIS
FOR LIVERMORE-AMADOR
VALLEY WASTEWATER
r1ANAGEMENT PROGRAM
The City received a copy of a letter written by Fred F. Cooper,
Supervisor, and sent to the Regional Administrator of the EPA
concerning the draft EIS for the Livermore-Amador Valley Wastewater
Management Program.
Mayor Futch stated that he has prepared a comment concerning Mr.
Cooper's letter to the EPA indicating that he is appalled at the
arrogance, absurdity and ignorance expressed in Mr. Cooper's letter,
and that it is unbelievable that he could even suggest to the
citizens of Livermore, Pleasanton and VCSD, who are paying for the
LA~qMA project, that we provide sewage for Geldertown and allow the
Board of Supervisors to finally determine the popoulation to be
served by the proposed project.
MAYOR FUTCH MOVED THAT THE CITY SEND A LETTER TO MR. DeFALCO OF THE
EPA, ON THE COUNCIL'S BEHALF, RESPONDING TO THE POINTS MR. COOPER
MADE IN HIS LETTER TO THE EPA, WITH COPIES OF THE LETTER TO GO TO
URS, THE LAVWMA EIS CONSULTANTS, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, VCSD,
PLEASANTON, ABAG, THE REGIONAL PLANNING COMMITTEE OF ABAG, BAAPCD,
AND THE COUNTY STAFF MEMBER WILLIAM FRALEY. SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Mayor Futch stated that he would like to outline the responses that
should be made to the three points in his letter:
I. The LAmiMA project has been planned to serve those areas
of the Livermore-Amador Valley which are expected to become
urbanized and served by the existing sewage agencies in the
Valley. Both the Regional Water Quality Control Board and
BASSA have adopted policies in opposition to additional
sewer agencies in the Valley.
On several occassions the County has been invited to join,
with the Valley communities, to help plan for the Valley's
future, first through the formation of a Valley Wide Planning
Commission, and secondly by becoming a member of the Congress
of Valley Agencies (COVA). In both cases the County refused.
CM-31-291
February 2, 1976
(Communication re EIS
FOR LIVERMORE-k~DOR VAI.LEY
WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM)
The Board of Supervisors are free to attend and comment
at any time and the EIS was referred to them for comment.
2. With response to the LLL Air Pollution Computer Model,
Mr. Cooper is correct that on July lst for which suf-
ficient data existed for computer analysis it is con-
sistent with air pollution blowing into the Valley from
outside areas. This computer run partially confirms,
and is certainly consistent with all of the previous
studies, such as reports from the Livermore Technical
Committee on Air Pollution, the A.D. Little Report, the
LAVWMA studies, etc.
--'"
The main point is that the Livermore Model and the data
is consistent with three different types of days - one
day is when the peak in air pollution occurs late in
the afternoon. This is consistent with the air pollution
being blown in but on the other 2/3 of the days there is
a peak that occurs earlier in the afternoon that would
be inconsistent with wind velocity such that the air
pollution would not arrive from the outside areas. The
type of day Mr. Cooper is referring to (forgetting to
mention the other 2/3 of the days) is consistent with
the model predicted on those other days for which the
majority of the air pollution would be produced in the
Valley.
Cm Miller added that the first Livermore Sm9t.{, -ReJ,?o}'t ,.,go~ted_,
ou~ there were different kinds of day~ andlSclee"!~1f.'.en:e-:I~ir::A'j-,;/
wh1ch all of the smog could be blown 1n. ~.1t
Mayor Futch stated that this is correct. This is a mU9~1!Or~
elaborate computer model than any of the other models~-it
doesn't necessarily give the best long-range predictions and
in fact the LAVWMA Model may be a more valid model for a long-
range prediction of air pollution effects.
3. The third issue has to do with houses and the cost of
houses. This is clearly an economic problem and the
Mayor felt the staff would be capable of going into
more detail on this item. However, the LAVWMA Project
is really limited by environmental problems and the de-
tails of where the houses are located are really secon-
dary.
Mayor Futch asked that the staff draw up a letter of response
including the above comments, including comments anyone else
may care to make concerning this subject.
Cm Turner stated that he would be curious to know what motivates
Mr. Cooper to make statements concerning this issue and also how
Mr. Murphy would feel about Mr. Cooper getting involved in issues
in his area, which he does not represent.
Cw Tirsell stated that she had the same question in mind. It is
very rare that the Mayor of our City transmits a letter to all
the agencies of the world when something is not the majority
opinion of the Council. She indicated that Mr. Cooper is asking
for studies to be done that would be paid from tax money and there
has been no vote through the Board of Supervisors asking for such
a study. This is an expense of taxpayers money and the Council
might ask that the County Board of Supervisors discuss this item
prior to requesting money to be spent on expensive modeling.
~
MaYOr~tioned that several years ago the Council asked
that . e modeling of the Livermore Valley be done and he
would like the staff to check into the resolution requesting this.
C!1-31-292
February 2, 1976
(Communication re EIS for
Livermore-Amador Valley
Wastewater Mgmt program)
Mayor Futch explained that BAAPCD has the authority for the model
but LLL undertook the scientific work behind it and then it was
turned over to the BAAPCD.
Cm Miller stated that he believes BAAPCD was the lead agency funded
by the National Science Foundation, and LLL did the scientific part
of it. Ames National Laboratory was also involved in collecting data.
Cm Miller noted that the distribution list for the letter written
by Hr. Cooper is very interesting in that people associated with
Geldermann or in support of Gelderville were sent a copy of the
letter. Secondly, perhaps the letter could contain some note of
~1r. Cooper's curious preoccupation with the desires of a private
developer, which are in conflict with Regional Planning and
environmental goals.
Cm Staley felt it would be in order to write to the County Board of
Supervisors asking if the letter is an expression of the majority
view of the Board, or not.
It was noted that a letter to the Board of Supervisors should be
a separate letter.
THE ~10TION WAS AMENDED TO INCLUDE A SECOND LETTER TO BE SENT TO THE
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ASKING IF THE LETTER IS AN EXPRESSION OF THE
MAJORITY VIEW. SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
COMMUNICATION RE
REALTOR SIGNS
A letter was received from Mrs. Paul W. Stroud, 5218 Iris Way,
indicating that she receives ads from realtors at her home,
under the windshield wipers in store parking lots, and hung on
door knobs. She stated that she knows people who have had signs
posted in their yard without permission and they resent this.
She added that when they leave home on trips they receive litter
in the way of ads and unwanted papers which is a means of advertis-
ing that they are not home. She urged that something be done to
alleviate this problem.
Cm Miller stated that the Council discussed the posibility of
not allowing unwanted papers to be thrown on private property
and concluded that nothing should be done.
Cw Tirsell pointed out that the reason the Council decided to do
nothing was because it does not have the statutory authority to
limit distribution of this type.
Cm Miller stated that perhaps there is some measure of control
in the distinction between free speech and the other garbage
that appears on door steps. Perhaps the City Attorney could
take a quick look at this problem.
Cw Tirsell stated that she has no objection to looking at the
problem and discussing it but she knows of no way it could be
policed.
Cm Miller stated that policing would be easy because the people
who advertise have their name on the papers they distribute.
It was noted that the Council would be interested in getting rid
of door advertising but could do nothing about unwanted newspapers.
CM-31-293
February 2, 1976
(Realtor Signs)
Cm Miller suggested that letters be sent to all the realt9rs
in town, from the City Attorney, pointing out that the off-site
signs are illegal because they are off site, whether they are
in the public right-of-way or not. This would include the por-
table signs, the signs on posts, and signs placed on cars.
Cw Tirsell felt this would be a good idea because after the
adoption of the Sign Ordinance the realty companies did com-
ply for many years and did a good job of not proliferating
signs. They would use one sign on the property that was for
sale and that was all. There are many new realty firms in
town who may not be familiar with the ordinance and if one
firm violates the ordinance they can all violate it, and then
we have commercialization in the neighborhoods.
-.
COMMUNICATION FROM
CALIF. WATER SERVICE
RE RATE INCREASES
The City received a copy of an application to the PUC by
California Water Service Company for an increase in rates
of approximately 20.7% for 1975, 5.8% for 1976, 2.6% for
1977 and 3.2% for 1978.
It was noted by the staff that the actual rate increase will
be 12.2% for 1976 due to off-set increases in 1975 granted to
cover Zone 7 and PG&E power costs.
Cm Miller stated that in the past he has questioned the rate
of return for this company, the Franciscan Lines, PG&E and
the Telephone Company, and would suggest that the staff send
a letter to the following effect:
Many public utilities are in the process of aSking for
substantial rate increases. Among these being the Tele-
phone Company, PG&E, California Water Service Company,
and various transportation companies. These are based
largely on increased operating expenses~ however, in the
last 10-15 years there have been substantial increases in
the permitted rates of return which results in increased
consumer costs, independent of increased expenses.
There appears to be a connection between dividends on
utility stocks, the sale of those stocks, and interest
rates on bonds. There is still a question whether lowering
the rate of return might not result in an overall savings
to the rate payers.
Has the PUC studied this question and what is the PUC's
present position on permitted rates of return?
Cw Tirsell commented that she cannot really take a position be-
cause she really doesn't know what a fair rate of return is.
CM MILLER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO SUBMIT A LETTER TO THE
PUC, SIMILAR TO THE ONE MENTIONED ABOVE, SECONDED BY MAYOR FUTCH.
Mayor Futch commented that his understanding is that the rate of
return is different than the net profits because the rate of return
includes capitalization and the rate of return can increase with a
decline in the profits. Because of the complexity of the issue the
Council is not making a recommendation on the rate of return.
CM-31-294
February 2, 1976
(California Water Service
Co. - Rate Increases)
Cm Miller stated that it is true the matter is complex but there is
an interconnection between bond interest rates and dividends on stock
and the relative proportions of capital which are in preferred stocks
and bonds.
Cw Tirsell stated that she would like to mention one other item but
does not want it included in the letter to the PUC, and that is that
the rate of return may be drastically affected if PG&E loses all its
capitalization in nuclear plants because they will have lost the
investment in those and will have to go to other sources. This may
affect the rate of return and if a decision is made before the
initiative is passed or not passed, it may be interferred with.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
COMMUNICATION FROM
FRANCISCAN LINES RE
RATE INCREASE
Action taken by the Council to send a letter to the PUC included
the item concerning the proposed rate increase by Franciscan Lines.
COMMUNICATION FROM PG&E
RE RATE OF RETURN
The communication from PG&E concerning their rate of return was in-
cluded in the discussion concerning rate increases and the letter
to the PUC.
APPOINTMENTS TO
VARIOUS COMMITTEES
The Council discussed an appointment to the Industrial Advisory
Committee and it was noted that Mr. White has a business located
in Livermore but resides outside the City but he would be recom-
mended by Cm Staley.
Cm Turner suggested Dennis Hundoble, and it was noted that while he
lives in Livermore his place of business is in San Leandro.
The recommendation of the Industrial Advisory Committee was Mr.
Duane White.
It was noted that the policy of the City is to appoint someone
who lives in the City.
Cm Staley stated that Mr. ~fuite has had the experience in dealing
with City ordinances, etc. in having a business in Livermore and
he would be willing to make an exception to Council policy by
allowing him to be appointed to the Industrial Advisory Committee.
Mayor Futch agreed that the Committee needs and is looking for
someone with experience who can be of value and benefit in being
able to provide information to the City with respect to industrial
recruitment. He would support Cm Staley's recommendation and that
of the Industrial Advisory Committee.
Cm ~1iller stated that there is a formal written policy stating
that a Committee member must reside in the City of Livermore
and he believes that it is important to preserve this pOlicy.
Apparently there are two very qualified people who can fill the
CM-31-295
February 2, 1976
(Committee Appointments)
vacancy and he would be very uneasy about making an appointment
for someone living outside the City over a Livermore resident.
The City has been trying to replace outside people with residents
as terms expire and resignations are made and he indicated that
he feels this is very important.
CM STALEY MOVED TO APPOINT MR. WHITE TO THE COMMITTEE. MOTION
SECONDED BY MAYOR FUTCH.
Cw Tirsell stated that in the past she has voted in favor of
appointments of local residents to City committees and for this
reason she will not change her opinion. However, she would like
to say that the Industrial Advisory Committee is one committee
for which there should be exceptions because we do not have the
world's market right here in Livermore for industrial expertise.
Cw Tirsell added that she would like to request that the matter
of allowing outside residents to serve on the Industrial Advisory
Committee be briefly discussed as an agenda item, with the sug-
gestion that a certain number of the members be allowed from
outside the City, provided they have special expertise.
CM STALEY MOVED TO TABLE THIS r~TTER FOR THREE l~EKS TO ALLOW A
DECISION AT THE SAME TIME THE MATTER IS DISCUSSED AS AN AGENDA
ITEM. MOTION SECONDED BY MAYOR FUTCH. MOTION FAILED 2-3 (Cm
Miller, Turner and Cw Tirsell dissenting).
Cw Tirsell stated that the reason she did not vote to postpone
this item is because there are two very qualified people to
choose from and if the matter is put over it would look as if
the Council is going to change the policy in order to select
Mr. vfuite. The policy change should be discussed at a time
there are no applications for an appointment.
Cm Staley agreed that this is a good argument.
ORIGINAL MOTION AND SECOND TO APPOINT MR. l~ITE WAS WITHDRAWN.
CW TIRSELL MOVED TO APPOINT MR. HUNDOBLE TO THE INDUSTRIAL
ADVISORY COMMITTEE, SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Cm Turner stated that he would like to comment for the record
that he has no objection to the appointment of Mr. White or
has no doubt about his abilities but feels strongly about the
pOlicy of appointing only Livermore residents to committees.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 31-76
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING DENNIS HUNDOBLE TO THE
INDUSTRIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
It was noted that rather than making another appointment to
the Community Affairs Committee, they should attend a Council
meeting after the new Council is seated to discuss their charges,
etc. The Council concurred.
It was noted that the Council requested suggestions as to appoint-
ments for the Social Concerns Committee but this Committee has
not met since the Council asked for names.
Cw Tirsell pointed out that the Chairman of the Committee was
to have been contacted asking that any alternate wishing to
serve as permanent member furnish his/her name. This will be done.
CM-31-296
February 2, 1976
RECESS
Mayor Futch called for a brief recess after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present.
REPORT RE CHILD DIS-
CRIMINATION IN HOUSING
The Social Concerns Committee reported that they have investigated
the complaint concerning a "growing problem of no rental to children",
expressed by Ms. Billie J. Wilson. The Committee has discussed the
availability of rental housing to families with children and has
concluded that there is difficulty in obtaining adequate rental
housing for larger families and that there is a problem of economics.
Many single parent families have low incomes - a secretary/clerk may
make $550 a month and using public housing rent standards of 25%
of net income that person should pay rent of $l37.50/month. There
are few rentals in Livermore at that price.
Of the nine apartments contacted, only two would allow more than
two children, and two would allow no children at all.
This report item was noted for filing.
REPORT RE MUNICIPAL
INSURANCE PROGRAM
The City Manager reported that the City has retained a private con-
sultant firm to analyze our municipal insurance program and to
make suggestions. A second phase of their work was to prepare
insurance program specifications and proposal forms in order to
permit circularization to the industry requesting competitive pro-
posals for coverage.
It is important that this process be undertaken without further delay
since notice has been received from our present liability carrier
that the existing policy will be cancelled at the end of its one
year term - March 24, 1976. It is recommended that the Council
adopt a motion authorizing solicitation of bids.
Mr. Parness stated that the consultant firm has prepared the speci-
fications which the Council may review if they choose, but they
are very bulky (about 2" thick) and highly complex. The specifica-
tions will go to all the firms that may evidence interest in bidding.
Mr. Don DeVere, representative of Mund, McLaurin & Company, the
consultants, is present this evening to answer any questions the
Council might have concerning the studies that were undertaken by
the firm and their bidding process.
Cw Tirse1l wondered if the staff has reviewed the specifications
and Mr. Parness indicated that they are very complex but the
staff will be looking at them over the next 45 days. However,
they have been written by our agent on our behalf and Mr. Parness
is sure everything is in order.
Cw Tirse11 stated that her only concern would be going to bid and
paying for an insurance policy that is not recommended by the staff.
Mr. Parness stated that our present insurance carrier has reviewed
the cover letter and has asked that Mr. Parness express that he
is in agreement with what the consultants recommendations are.
Mr. DeVere explained that the specifications do not obligate the
City at this point, to any degree, and they are something the staff
usually reviews. After the bid proposals have been received his
CH-31-297
February 2, 1976
(Report re Municipal
Insurance Program)
firm will review them and will make recommendations to the staff
and then the Council will make a selection.
Cw Tirse1l asked if the City would be obligated to take the low
bid and Mr. DeVere indicated that the City would be looking for
the most responsible bidder.
Mr. Parness indicated that at this point the primary concern is
whether or not anr bids will be received. Other sources in the
business have ind1cated that the City may not receive any bids
and this is a concern.
Mr. DeVere indicated that he is optomistic about rece1v1ng bids
because they have always had a response, however, the response
from companies has been less than in the past. He added that if
there is any concern about going outside the area for bids the
staff should be so directed at this time because once the bids
have gone out there would be a certain moral obligation to go
with the bid that expresses the desires of the City in the best
way.
Cm Miller stated that in his opinion the cost of the insurance is
sufficiently high that the City should take the lowest responsible
bid and if he does not happen to reside within the City of Livermore,
the Council is morally obligated to get the most for the taxpayers
money. He stated that he sees no reason to stay within the City
limits or to pay the higher bid.
Cw Tirsell concurred adding that the Council's position has been
that the lowest responsible bidder would receive the bid.
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE STAFF WAS AUTHORIZED TO SOLICIT BIDS.
REPORT RE SCHOOL DIST.
WAREHOUSE STRUCTURE
The City Manager reported that the School District, under their
new building program, intends to build a warehouse-office struc-
true abutting the present district office. The building will
be about lO,OOO sq. ft. in size with an estimated cost of $42l,000
and will be architecturally the same as the existing administration
building.
The EIR was filed with the City, and other interested agencies on
the proposed building program, and at this time the City became
aware of the intent to build a warehouse-administration building
at Las positas and Murrieta Boulevard. Mr. Parness has obtained
copies of the plans to display for the Council and to explain
what they have in mind.
Mr. Parness has met with the School District officials who did
explain their plans which Mr. Parness illustrated to the Council.
The important part is that the architectural design will be ex-
actly the same as the administration building and Mr. Parness
indicated that this point would allay many of the fears of the
residents of that area. It will not look like a warehouse type
building, and will be used to store paper, supplies, etc.
Cm Miller wondered what authority the City has over the School
District development, other than design review, and the City
Attorney commented that the School District has the right to
waive all of the City's zoning and other ordinance requirements
by a 2/3 vote of their Board. This would apply to school build-
ings and warehouses adjacent to presently existing school property.
-'
CM-31-298
February 2, 1976
(Report re School Dist.
Warehouse Structure)
Cw Tirsel1 stated that she believes the School Board has already
voted to waive the City's requirements.
Hr. Musso indicated that this is correct. There is a requirement,
however, that the Board refer a school site to the Planning Commission
having jurisdiction, and they did this at the time they acquired the
site for a high school. Mr. ~~usso stated that he does not know if
it is appropriate for them to change the use after it was acquired
for a high school. The City reviewed the site as a high school site
and gave permission for use as a high school.
The City Attorney commented that the fact remains the School District
owns the entire piece of property which is zoned E which means that
the use is an appropriate public use. It is doubtful that the Council
can raise an issue as to the particular use being consistent with what
the Planning Commission looked at originally. There mayor may not
be areas that can be looked into with respect to the use and the City's
potential ability to control that use but unless the Council is seri-
ously concerned about that he wouldn't really want to suggest which
areas might be subject to attack.
Cm Miller stated that he really dislikes the building and Cm Staley
indicated that it is disturbing to him that a warehouse is going
into a residential area. All private enterprises have been forced
to have their warehouses in an industrial area and he is concerned
about the School District's immunity in that area and using that
immunity to force themselves upon a residential neighborhood.
Mayor Futch stated that as a matter of good relationships between
the City and the School District he would assume that they would
try to conform to the City's requirements as much as possible.
Perhaps the City should request that they comply with City require-
ments.
Mr. D'Ambra, representing the School District, stated that the School
District has every intention of abiding by City regulations but they
have adopted a resolution to allow them to do the things they believe
must be done to perform the necessary operations within the School
District. For example, they may not be able to afford landscaping
and the ordinance requires a certain amount of landscaping. The
City will be furnished with copies of all of their plans prior to
going to bid. People will not be able to tell that this is a ware-
house because of the architectural design and the traffic will be
negligible in terms of the impact in that area. Items that go
into the classrooms will be stored in the warehouse.
Cm Turner stated that he is not sure this would really be in a
residential area and there was a question as to whether there
had been any complaints.
Mr. D'Ambra indicated that one evening was devoted to discussion
concerning development of the warehouse last Wednesday and there
were representatives from the housing area and one person spoke
about certain misgivings on the part of the adjacent property
owners. The representative was going to go back to the property
owners and explain what the School District plans to do. There
was another person who came to speak in opposition to the plans
but once he saw the plans he indicated that he no longer opposed
the proposed warehouse. Notices were handed out to the residents
asking that they attend the meeting and they will conduct another
meeting to inform people about what is happening and answer any
questions they might have.
Cm Miller stated that the School District has an obligation to the
people of the community as well as to people outside the City and
it would seem that submitting plans for design review would be
appropriate.
CM-3l-299
February 2, 1976
(Report re School District
Warehouse Structure)
Mr. D'Ambra stated that the School District has no objection to
asking for advice from the Design Review Committee.
Cm Turner stated that he sees no reason the design should be
submitted to the Design Review Committee.
Cm Miller stated that he feels it should go to the Committee
because the Council is trying to persuade the School District,
on behalf of the citizenry, to submit something for design re-
view and as to how it would appear to the people of Livermore.
The City has no control, but perhaps there are some suggestions
the School District may wish to follow.
Cm Staley stated that the School District does not evidence any
spirit of desire to cooperate with the ordinance to start off by
exempting itself from any City ordinances on the subject of land-
scaping, design review, etc. Secondly, it creates a real problem
when other businesses in the City might want to have the same bene-
fits as the School District in locating their warehouse wherever
they wish.
Cw Tirsell stated that she doesn't believe in subscribing bad
faith to their agency prior to the action. They're doing what,
in their opinion, protects them the most with limited funding
and what they have to do. She stated that she would like to
take them at face value and they said that they would submit
to design review and insofar as possible, comply with the ordi-
nances. Hopefully, they will do their very best to make a good
looking building and urged Mr. D'Ambra to provide some landscap-
ing.
CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ASK THE SCHOOL DISTRICT TO REFER THEIR PLANS
FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND COMMENT IN HOPES THAT THE DESIGN REVIEW
COMMITTEE CAN POINT OUT HELPFUL SUGGESTIONS AND THAT THE CITY
ATTORNEY RESEARCH ANY AUTHORITY THE CITY MAY HAVE CONCERNING
ORDINANCE VIOLATIONS. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED
BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE CONTAINER
LEGISLATION - SB 1384
Mayor Futch has prepared and distributed material concerning
beverage container legislation, including SB l384 relative to
beverage containers, for Council information. The Mayor is
interested in discussing this subject prior to the Mayors Con-
ference, at which time the matter will be fully presented.
Mayor Futch stated that in the material received it was noted that
if beverage container legislation were to pass there would be a
savings in energy equal to 39 million barrels of oil - California
uses something in the area of 45 million barrels of oil a year.
This type of legislation would have a very significant impact on
energy, assuming that the figures reported are accurate.
Mayor Futch has been trying to get someone to speak on the pros
of beverage container legislation and apparently Mr. Parness
has contacted Senator Rains' office and a representative will
be at the Mayors Conference to discuss the bill. In addition.
however, it would be desireable to have a representative from
industries who could also speak in favor of the bill. Since Oregon
has had the most experience with this type of thing he has contacted
the League of Oregon Cities and they recommended a ~~r. Gamble from
the Pepsi Cola Bottling Company.
CM-3l-300
February 2, 1976
(Report Re Container
Legislation - SB l384)
Mayor Futch has contacted the representative from the Pepsi Cola
Bottling Company who supports the bill and he has indicated that
in general, the major bottle companies, such as Coca Cola and Pepsi
Cola, support the bill. It is primarily the independent retailers
who are opposed to this type of legislation because they do not
have the flexibility to go to either bottles or cans.
Hayor Futch asked Mr. Gamble if he would be willing to come to
the Mayors' Conference to speak and he indicated that there is an
agreement within the bottling industry, in Oregon, not to go out
of the state concerning this item. He then recommended that the
Mayor contact a Mr. Lindsey from the Pepsi Cola Bottling Company
located in Bakersfield.
The Mayor then contacted Mr. Lindsey who indicated that he supports
the bill but would rather not speak at the Mayors' Conference and he
then recommended that the Mayor contact the Bottling Company Associa-
tion. The Association indicated that they intend to have a repre-
sentative speak at the Mayors' Conference but they intend to speak
in opposition to this type of legislation.
MayO~ Futch stated that as late as today he has tried to contact ~.
other people who might be willing to help. He contacted the '-/..cf.-'\'-l-rlR.''';)
governor of Oregon but unfortunately there was a conflict wit~
appointments for that date and he couldn't speak either. He did
indicate that he would try to get someone from his staff to speak
but Mayor Futch stated that he is becoming concerned because there
is little time left to get anyone.
Mayor Futch stated that there is a matter of expenses involved and
he would like to request that the Council allow payment of the air
fare if someone comes from Oregon to speak.
The Council concurred and Cm Miller stated that if this legislation
passes there will be a large savings to the taxpayers.
Cm Staley stated that he is a little concerned about the City spend-
ing money for someone to come from out of state to speak. He stated
that he is in favor of support for the bill and would be willing to
personally donate money to help pay expenses but does have concern
about the expenditure of City money for this purpose.
Cm Miller stated that the amount of the money for expenses is not
large and it will be shared by another jurisdiction (Berkeley) who
feels that such legislation would be desirable.
Cm Staley pointed out that he feels this type of legislation is
very desirable but it does not seem that the use of this legislation
is particularly directly related to City affairs that it should
warrant this expenditure of money for air fare for someone in Oregon.
Cw Tirsel1 stated that the City elected to support state legislation
over passing a local ordinance concerning bottle legislation and
the City has the choice of doing nothing or supporting it. The City
has chosen to support it and the only way we can support it is to get
someone to speak. This could be compared to what was done with
respect to the PUC hearings concerning rate increases. The City
does not pass legislation in the City to directly affect PG&E bills
or California Water bil1s~ however, the City can testify and lobby
for what is felt to be beneficial to our citizens.
CM-3l-301
February 2, 1976
(Report re Container
Legislation - SB l384)
Cm Staley felt there was a major distinction between expenditure
of time, as members of the Council, and spending the taxpayers
money to support an expert witness.
Cw Tirsell commented that if the City had a staff member with
this expertise, the staff member would be sent to testify rather
than sending someone from someplace else.
Cm Turner stated that he can understand a little of what Cm Staley
is saying but the Council has to determine where the priorities are.
For instance, would the City willingly spend $200 for air fare for
someone from Virginia to come talk about some type of industiral
development because this would be good for the citizens of Livermore?
CH HILLER MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO PURSUE ARRANGEMENTS FOR
BRINGING SOMEONE TO TESTIFY ON THE BEVERA~E BILL, AND TO CONTACT
BERKELEY AS TO THEIR SHARE OF THE EXPENSE. MOTION SECONDED BY CW
TIRSELL AND PASSED 4-1 (Cm Staley dissenting) .
REPORT RE FIRST STREET
OVERHEAD RAILROAD PROJECT
The City Manager reported that all of the contract docuements and
other pertinent material must be processed through the City and
executed by the two railroad companies for the overhead railroad
project at First Street, in time for transmittal to the state no
later than March 17. This is preliminary to qualifying for a
grant which provides for 80% funding from the state, lO% from
the railroads and lO% from the City. The City's 10% has al-
ready been expended in property acquisition and structure foun-
dation preparation.
The contracts and other materials prepared by DeLeuw, Cather Co.
have been reviewed by the staff and are in order. It is recom-
mended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing execution
of a three party agreement, a resolution verifying availability
of local funding and submission of request for Grade Separation
Funds, and a resolution approving the negative declaration - EIR.
Mr. Parness explained that the draft agreements have been prepared
by the engineering firm and for the most part they are the usual
type of agreements used in work of this nature. It does provide
for certain responsibility for the City and the financial division,
if and when the grant is allocated to us by the state, will be
80%-10%-lO%, as mentioned above.
Just last week the City received the formal PUC order for this
project and as the Council may recall this is the one thing that
held the City up for seven months for the two projects currently
under construction. The City has everything in place and ready
to go with the exception of having the contracts executed.
Mr. Parness stated that photographs have been taken to aid the
City in its appeal to the PUC and hopefully when the time comes
some members of the Council can accompany the staff members to
the hearing. Here, unlike the other projects, the City is ready
to go ahead and everything is in order. All that is needed is
the money.
Cw Tirsel1 stated that she agrees with the relocation proposed
down First Street but is very concerned about several places
the staff indicates stubbing of First Street and would question
if this is really necessary. She stated that this is a serious
problem for people living on Martin Street and it is doubtful
-~.
CM-3l-30s..
February 2, 1976
(Overhead R.R. Project)
that their op1n10ns have been solicited. She stated that she can
imagine the uproar from people who live north of First Street when
they discover that their access to First Street will be stubbed.
She stated that she would like to know what provisions have been
made for these people to observe this project and to comment.
It is important to have citizen support.
Mr. Lee stated that he believes the advantage to the people north
of First Street is being able to have access to town that doesn't
involve crossing a railroad track. In fact, where there is crossing
of the tracks in that area the tracks are askew and it is rather
hazardous because of poor visibility and now there are two tracks
located at the crossing. Also, First Street will be relocated
further from the homes and there will be some improvement with
respect to noise from the street.
Cw Tirsell wondered if there had been a public hearing and Mr. Lee
commented that there was a public hearing concerning the EIR for
the entire railroad project.
Cw Tirsel1 asked if there was notification to the people in the
area and Mr. Lee stated that he doesn't recall that there was
specific notification but all of the legal hearings have taken place.
Cw Tirse1l stated that even though the legal hearings have taken place,
she is sure the people do not know what will take place along First
Street and people might very well support the project if they were
given a chance to review the safety aspects and realize that the
traffic and glare from First Street will be removed. If people
hear, after the fact, that First Street will be stubbed and they
can't get to town, the City has created for itself a real hurdle.
Mr. Parness explained that these plans are very critical to the
design and progress of the entire project. The crossing at grade
is to be vacated in these proceedings and this is the only way
the railroad companies have any inducement to go ahead with the
project.
Cw Tirse1l commented that she understands all of this but she still
believes that the staff and Council can sit here and discuss what
might be best for the City but if the City doesn't know about it,
it doesn't fly.
Mr. Lee stated that the hearings for the railroad project have been
widely advertised, which included this portion, and the fill has
been there for many months. There have also been discussions
about the fill in the newspapers and the future overpass so the
people should be well aware of it, in general.
Cm Miller stated that there has been no discussion in the press
about the stubbing off of First Street and as a former resident
of Martin Avenue he is sympathetic with the idea that the plans
should be circulated and there should be some diagrams as to which
way the traffic will flow. There is an out by going down Callaghan
Street and Junction Avenue or go out Scott Street but those alterna-
tives should be exhibited to the people who live on Martin Avenue
and Scott Street.
Mr. Parness agreed that this suggestion would be appropriate. The
people should be notified and this should be discussed as an agenda
item.
CM-3l-303
February 2, 1976
(Overhead R.R. project)
Cw Tirse1l pointed out that the Martin Avenue, Scott Street area
is one of the hardest working neighborhoods when it comes to
land in their area. The Council has never had a hearing on any-
thing in that area when the people did not turn out in force with
their homework done. It would really be a disservice to them not
to show them the plans for stubbing First Street.
Mr. Lee stated that he would assume the Council would still want
the staff to go ahead with the plans for submitting the contracts
by March l7. The action would not be irreversible. The coopera-
tive agreement between the City and the two railroads would be
subject to the project going ahead. The negative declaration
should also be adopted.
__c
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE THE THREE REQUIRED RESOLUTIONS WERE ADOPTED AND NOTIFICATION
IS TO BE MADE TO THE PEOPLE NORTH AND SOUTH OF FIRST STREET IN
THE OVERPASS AREA THAT THE CITY IS NOT BOUND BY ANY ACTION TAKEN
THIS EVENING AND THAT THEIR COMMENTS ARE WELCOME.
Mr. Lee had suggested that the local newspapers display a sketch
of the plans and Cm Staley felt this a very good idea. This would
probably be more effective than trying to mail notices to those
who might be interested.
em Miller stated that there are people who don't always read the
newspapers and for this reason he would suggest that the press
display the plan as well as mailing notifications to property
owners in the area.
em Turner mentioned, prior to the motion, that one of the resolu-
tions states that the Mayor is authorized to execute, on behalf
of the City, an agreement with the railroads for the construction
of the east First Street overhead. Cm Turner wondered if the Council
should delete this resolution, temporarily, because at this point
the City does not want to get into an agreement with the railroads
for construction.
The City Attorney explained that one of the worst problems encounter-
ed in any kind of railroad grade separation project, is to get an
agreement with the railroads. Basically, the railroads take an
inordinate amount of time to get anything done and most public
entities are under substantial time constraints. There will be
a provision in the agreement which presently isn't there that
says the whole project will be based on the City's getting fund-
ing which still is not positive. However, there is no way the
City can get funding if an agreement is not presented to the PUC
and this is the reason this has to be pushed through now. The
authorization is for the Mayor to enter into it and before he
enters into it the City Attorney would like to talk to him.
Mr. Parness stated that the final commitment the Council will make
is the execution of an agreement with CAL-TRANS whereby funding
will be allowed. Without that funding there is no project.
Cm Miller stated that in this case the wording should be changed
to state that the project is not subject to getting funding but
rather subject to signing an agreement with CAL-TRANS. He added
that his concern is about getting committed so that the City can't
back out.
_cC
Mr. Parness pointed out that without the money from the state the
City cannot proceed with the project.
CM-31-304
February 2, 1976
(Overhead R.R. Project)
Cm Turner stated that if the Mayor signs the agreements and things
haven't been resolved with the people from the Martin Street area
then there may be problems.
Cw Tirsell stated that if the City can get the money but things
haven't been resolved, the City will simply not accept the money.
Cm Turner stated that he, too, is concerned about the City's getting
locked into an agreement that they can't get out of.
Cw Tirsel1 stated that she doesn't want to get out of the project
but she would like to help people understand the project. If people
raise objections the Council hasn't thought of and there is absolu-
tely no citizen support for it, the Council will know it. She won-
dered wondered if any property has to be acquired for this project
and Mr. Parness indicated that everything has been done.
Mr. Lee explained that at the present time, as far as the City
knows, it will have all the property required for the property.
Some of the land has been acquired for the fill and we will be
getting the right-of-way from S.P. They have tentatively agreed
to abandon the old right-of-way which is grant land, to the City,
and Congress provides for this to be given to the municipality.
In addition, S.P. will quitclaim their interest to that strip of
land between the railroad tracks and the subdivision, paralleling
Madeira Way.
Mr. Parness stated that the City feels the 10% contribution by
the City has been represented by what has already been spent but
this will not be known until the final cost has been tallied. How-
ever, even if there is some supplementary amount required on the
part of the City, the 10% contribution by the City would amount
to $l50,OOO and most of this has been put into the project. Any
additional amount required would be paid through gas tax monies.
RESOLUTION NO. 32-76
A RESOLUTION VERIFYING THAT SUFFICIENT
FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE FOR THE EAST STREET
OVERHEAD.
RESOLUTION NO. 33-76
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF LIVERMORE ACCEPTING THE NEGATIVE
DECLARATION ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
AND STATEMENT.
RESOLUTION NO. 34-76
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF LIVERMORE AUTHORIZING THE EXECU-
TION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SOUTHERN
PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY AND THE
WESTERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE EAST FIRST STREET
OVERHEAD.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
Mayor Futch stated that he would like to leave the meeting because
he is not feeling well and requested that the Council move to Matters
Initiated by the Staff and Counci1mernbers.
CM-3l-305
February 2, 1976
("P" St. Underpass)
Mayor Futch stated that he is concerned about the sidewalk on
the west side of the underpass on "PH Street, because there is
a curve as one comes down the hill. Since this is a bicycle
path there is a hazard involved. He stated that he was looking
at the project, went down the hill on his bicycle, hit a curb
where the curve is located and went out into the street where
traffic will be flowing. Perhaps a rail should be installed
along that area.
(BART Meeting)
Mayor Futch stated that he attended the BART meeting which was
a very good meeting and everyone united and tried to get a
commitment from the BART Board Members present that they would
not discontinue bus service to the Valley.
Finally, the President of the BART Board, Mr. Cooper, promised
that bus service would not be discontinued as long as BART
continues to run. Everyone seemed to be happy about the out-
come of the meeting.
Mayor Futch stated that the members agreed to support BART's
legislation for maintaining the sales tax as long as they
would agree to continue the bus service and Mr. Parness has
met with some of the BART Board Members and has prepared an
appropriate resolution.
em Staley stated that before the City supports the extension
of the tax BART wants, we should also have the commitment from
BART that there will be no new expansions of rail service to
the airport or to another county until the areas of this County,
which have contributed to that BART tax, receive service.
Mr. Parness stated that he doubts if anyone would have any objec-
tion to extension of rail service to the Oakland Airport or the
San Francisco Airport if San Mateo County or San Francisco County
were to pay for this extension. The point of the legislation
(AB 829) is that no existing District funds would be used for
such purposes until the Valley and other unserved areas receive
service. Mr. Parness added that if San Francisco Airport received
service, for example, they would have to pay the cost as well as
the annexation fee which includes l4 years of equipment taxes.
em Staley stated that in this case he would have no objection.
(BASSA re Legislation
to Broaden Powers)
Mayor Futch stated that BASSA is proposing a change in the legis-
lation to broaden their powers and he would request that this be
scheduled as an agenda item, as well as the two CEQA bills SB 502
and AB 2679.
(LAFCO Meeting)
It was noted that there will be a LAFCO meeting tomorrow and the
City Attorney commented that the staff is preparing pictures and
maps and rebuttal material and he will probably be the speaker.
Cw Tirse11 stated that with Council permission she will rebut any
a~e~G~ ~ha~ ha.s DeeR misiRformed. The Council concurred.
'~7:VV'VI] "<<.Z"';'L~~"_t'\ ""~ .
C"'~
-'
CM-3l-306
February 2, 1976
(ABAG Meeting)
There will be an ABAG meeting on Wednesday, February 4, 1976, at
2:00 p.m. at the Claremont Hotel. Cw Tirsell stated that she doesn't
know if the City can do anything but rebut because the public hearing
is over but not closed and the Regional Planning Committee will be
dealing with the staff report.
Cm Staley felt he could be able to attend the meeting by 2:30 p.m.
and both Cw Tirse11 and Cm Miller plan to attend.
(LAVWMA Position)
Cm Miller stated that with respect to the position the LAVWMA
representatives propose to take concerning what is our "adjacent"
area with respect to sewers, Mr. Musso has prepared one map showing
the north side and he may have one by now that shows what is on the
south side which corresponds, essentially, with the developable
area.
em Miller stated that he believes Livermore's position should be
that Zone 7 stay out of the sewer business - this is generally
the LAVWMA position and to indicate the minimum the City would
accept.
AT THIS TIME MAYOR FUTCH LEFT THE MEETING WITH CM PRO TEMPORE
TURNER PRESIDING.
REPORT RE CRITERIA &
PROCEDURES FOR IMPLEMEN-
TION OF ENV. QUALITY ACT
The City Attorney stated that he has nothing to add to his report
concerning procedures and criteria for implementation of the Environ-
mental Quality Act of 1970. The effect of what the staff did was to
change "Significant Effect" to reflect the Council's concerns of last
week and changed, categorically, "Exempt Projects" to eliminate all
reference to anything in Appendix A, and they deleted the last
sentence of ministerial projects to delete any reference to Appendix
B.
CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING OBJECTIVES,
CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES, AS AMENDED. MOTION SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL.
Mr. Musso stated that he would like to make one comment that there
is one change different than the one adopted by the Council two or
three years ago. The bulk of the changes were made to comply with
changes in the state guidelines but there was one change the City
had in its guidelines that is no longer included, which is the
requirement for a public project to have a public hearing. It is
not required by law and this has been omitted.
Cm Miller and Cw Tirsell stated that it may not be required by law
but they like that provision.
Mr. Musso explained that the City Attorney's assistant commented
that the Council can have a hearing anyway, if they choose.
Mr. Logan explained that the Council holds a public hearing on
every pUblic project but there is not a public hearing for the EIR.
There can be an EIR hearing without having to go through all the
formal procedures of a public hearing. A public hearing, according
CM-31-307
February 2, 1976
(re Criteria Procedures
for Implementation of
Environmental Quality Act)
to the law, connotes particular things the Council must do such
as publication, etc. The state law does not require it but the
council can have one if they want one but it is not required.
It was noted that Cm Miller, Cw Tirsell and Cm Turner prefer
that the requirement for a public hearing be included.
The City Attorney explained that the Council is not adopting this
at this time - it was given as an early package for discussion
and review so that when they are presented in final form they will
not have to be recopied to pick up various changes.
THE MOTION DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE THE OBJECTIVES,
CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES WITH THE REQUESTED CHANGES PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Res. Accepting Streets
for Maintenance - Hous-
ing Authority
The Council adopted the following resolution accepting streets
for maintenance - Leahy Square housing project.
RESOLUTION NO. 35-76
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING STREETS FOR MAINTENANCE
BY THE CITY (Housing Authority)
Report re Sidewalk
Repairs Along SR 84
The Council received a list of sidewalk repairs to be made along
State Route 84 for informational purposes.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Executive Session)
The City Attorney requested an executive session directly after
the Council meeting to discuss condemnations and litigation.
(General Plan)
The City Manager asked the Council when they would like to meet
with the General Plan consultant concerning the final draft and
he noted that probably the Council would want to meet after the
Council has received the material from the Planning Commission.
It is doubtful that the consultant would be needed after the
introduction of the entire material but perhaps he should be
present during one meeting.
CM-31-308
February 2, 1976
(General Plan)
It was noted that this matter has been scheduled for February l7,
and the consultant will be asked to attend this meeting.
(Ceremony for Opening
of "P" Street)
The City Manager asked if the Council would be interested in having
any type of ceremony for the opening of the underpass on "P" Street
and the Council unanimously expressed their desire for a brief
ceremony.
(Suggestion to Ask
Speakers if They Are
Registered Voters)
Cm Staley stated that when anyone speaks before the Council they
are asked to give their name and address and during the past few
weeks he has become aware of the fact that there are a number of
influential people in the City who often express their opinions
before the Council and who are not registered voters. He stated
that this is a concern of his and he would like to suggest that
the Council start asking people if they are registered voters.
Cw Tirsel1 stated that she would like to have the opportunity to
think about this suggestion because she can see pros and cons to
the issue. She commented that for instance, during a time of an
election, people may feel that comments made by voters might sway
the opinion of those running for a Council seat that particular
year because they want those votes.
It was concluded that the Councilmembers would like to think about
it and come to a decision later.
Cm Staley stated that it is disturbing to find that people who
live in the City limits are not registered voters when they play
a very important part in the community. The purpose of the policy
would be to encourage people to register to vote.
(Pleasanton's Gen. Plan)
Cw Tirsell stated that Pleasanton intends to adopt their General Plan
either this month or the next month and they have reduced the holding
capacity significantly and they have made some other alterations. She
wondered if it would be too late for the City of Livermore to comment
and she asked that the City Manager make an inquiry.
(President's Budget
Message)
Cw Tirsell stated that President Ford's budget message was very
distressing to her in a lot of ways, but one thing she noted very
strongly was that he proposes to reduce the support of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency from about $4,700,000,000. This would
mean losing all the support and funding for studies, etc. that
the City depended upon. She asked that the staff write our legis-
lators to say that we feel this is a drastic cutin service.
Cw Tirse11 requested that the staff write to Senators Cranston
and Tunney and Congressmen Stark and Edwards to emphasize that
this is a serious crippling of the EPA, upon which it will cease
to exist.
CM-3l-309
February 2, 1976
(Bright Residential
Lighting)
Cm Miller stated that he has complaints from people on First Street
who feel the street lighting is excessive for light intensity in
a residential area (across the tracks). Possibly the Council could
ask the staff to borrow a light meter and check into this.
It has also been pointed out that the lights at the sewer plant
seem to be excessive for that need,
Mr. Lee stated that OSHA controls the amount of lighting required
from a safety standpoint, and the City was required to add more
lighting because there are people working there at night. As
far as he knows the City has only the minimum amount required.
He added that he will report back to the Council on this.
Cm Staley pointed out that while they are controlled by OSHA,
possibly the amount of light used is not necessary unless people
are working.
(Suggested Legislation
re Zoning in County)
Cm Miller stated that he was talking to a Councilmember from
Walnut Creek, A1 Ship, who would like to suggest something for
legislation. He suggests that any zoning that takes place in
the County in some supervisoral district, be referendab1e, not
in the whole county, but in that supervisora1 district.
That would mean that if there is a Las Positas, the people in
the Valley of this district can referend it without having to
get all the 1.5 million people in the County to go along with it.
Councilman Ship is asking Senator Nedjedly to propose this legis-
lature and the Senator is waiting for support. The City of Clayton
has already supported it and Walnut Creek will be voting on the
issue. Our City has been asked if they would be willing to sup-
port it.
He then requested that this be placed on the agenda for dis-
cussion, with a request that the City Attorney advise how
loop-holes can be filled.
(Crossing Guards)
Cm Turner stated that the School Board was going to be asked
about the possibility of more crossing guards, and wondered
if the staff has anything to report.
It was noted that the staff has nothing at this time.
(Library Consultant
Report)
A report from the Library consultant has been sent to the Council
and it was requested that this item be discussed on March l, at
7:00 p.m. prior to the regular Council meeting.
CM-31-310
February 2, 1976
(Late Filing)
Cm Turner stated that the Council was told earlier in the meeting that
late charges were not imposed upon candidates who filed late and Cm
Turner felt they should be informed that the new ordinance does not
allow for waivers of late filinq.
(Resolution re
Parcels 38A & 38B
- Railroad Relocation)
The City Attorney requested that a resolution be adopted which deals
with Parcels 38A and 38B for the railroad relocation project. It is
necessary that the law suit be amended to pick up the new property
description and the new resolution is one with the new property
description. The resolution needs to be passed before he can file
a complaint and he intends to file tomorrow.
ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED, AS REQUESTED.
RESOLUTION NO. 29-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING CONDEMNATION OF
FEE SIMPLE ESTATE WHICH THE CITY COUNCIL HAS DETERMINED
IS REQUIRED BY THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY FOR
PUBLIC USE, SAID REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE CITY OF
LIVERMORE, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, LY-
ING WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE GRADE SEPARATION PRO-
JECT/RAILROAD TRACK RELOCATION ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
WITHIN THE SAID CITY. (Parcels 38a and 38b)
ADOPT. OF ORD. AMEND.
RE HOFMANN CO. PDD
ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY A 3-l VOTE (Cm
Miller dissenting) THE ZOo ORD. 1'MEND. REGARDING HOFMANN COMPANY PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT WAS ADOPTED.
ORDINANCE NO. 878
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 422, OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE,
AS AMENDED, RELATING TO ZONING BY THE AMENDMENT OF SECTION 19.1SB,
RELATING TO SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF SECTION 19.15, RE-
LATING TO HOFMANN COMPANY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT OF CHAPTER
19, RELATING TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS.
ADOPT. OF ZOo ORD.
AMEND. RE NON-STREET
FRONTAGE - (Industrial)
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE COUNCIL ADOPTED THE ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RE MINIMUM NON-
STREET FRONTAGE YARD REQUIREMENTS IN INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS.
CM-3l-3ll
February 2, 1976
ORDINANCE NO. 879
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 442 OF THE
CITY OF LIVERMORE, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO ZONING,
BY THE AMENDMENT OF SECTION l4A.72, RELATING TO
MINIMUM NON-STREET FRONTAGE YARD REQUIREMENTS, OF
ARTICLE IV, RELATING TO SITE REQUIREMENTS, OF
CHAPTER l4A.00, RELATING TO INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS.
-'
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Council, the
meeting was adjourned at ll:30 p.m. to an executive session to dis-
cuss personnel matters, and then to a 7:00 p.m. meeting on Monday,
February 9, 1976, for continued discussion concerning personnel.
APPROVE
/k4
ATTEST
~
Mayor
ul~~
'ty Clerk
( Livermore, California
Regular Adjourned Meeting of February 9, 1976
An adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Livermore was held on Monday, Februarv 9, 1976, at 7:00 p.m. in
the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue.
Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Staley and Mayor Futch
Absent: Cw Tirsel1 (excused - illness)
The meeting immediately adjourned to an executive session to
discuss personnel matters and adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
APPROVE
~t1~ ~
Mayor
~'
I ~
~- .'. g -, ..,/
City erk
. . Li ore, California
ATTEST
-'
CM-3l-312
Regular Meeting of February 9, 1976
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore
was held on February 9, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers,
39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at
8:l2 p.m. with Mayor Futch presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Staley and Mayor Futch
Absent: Cw Tirsell (due to illness)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Futch led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the
audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
PRESENTATION TO
CHIEF BAIRD (DeMolay)
Mayor Futch introduced the Amador Valley DeMolay who were present
at the meeting and presented Chief Baird with a Bicentennial flag
for use at the new Fire Station No. 1 on East Avenue.
MINUTES l/26/76
Page 272, prior to last paragraph, add a paragraph to indicate that
Mayor Futch stated it was proper for the Chairman to subdivide a
motion or for any member of the Council to request subdivision of
a motion.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF JANUARY 26, 1976, WERE APPROVED AS
CORRECTED.
OPEN FORUM
(Signs)
A gentlemen from Tri Valley Brokers, asked what types of signs
are allowed on private property.
Mayor Futch explained that the only type of sign allowed would be
one relative to uses pertinent to that particular property. One
cannot place a sign on one lot advertising open house in some other
location. Unless a majority of the Council would want to change
the ordinance, this rule would apply.
The man noted that rules and laws can be changed if the majority
of the people want something changed.
Mayor Futch commented that it would be his opinion that a majority
of the people would not want the Sign Ordinance changed. He then
explained that if people do want something changed they can petition
for referendum but it takes lO% of the voters to get something on
the ballot.
em Turner commented that if this particular aspect of the Sign Ordi-
nance is a problem he would be willing to look at it. He added that
this does not mean he would be willing to change it but he would be
willing to look. Cm Staley concurred.
em Miller stated that he will not be on the Council much longer but
he certainly would not be willing to look at it because the Council
CM-3l-313
February 9, 1976
(Signs)
went to a lot of trouble to get rid of the "eyesores" that people
have to look at. Some of the real estate companies have been put-
ting up these kinds of signs recently but they have been illegal
for 8 years and he added that he believes they have been deliberately
violating our ordinance.
Mr. Robert Gibson, of Tri Valley Realty indicated that a question of
free enterprise is involved and realtors are trying to make a living.
Many people are not familiar with the Livermore area and the signs
help direct them to homes. Also, they are only up for a matter
of about four hours.
Cm Miller pointed out that this provision of the ordinance was
adopted as a result of the objection of the people in the commun-
ity, to having these signs distributed throughout the neighborhoods.
Mr. Gibson stated that their signs cost from $5-$15 and he feels
they really don't look that bad and asked if there have really
been that many complaints about them. He stated that people tack
up garage sale signs and then forget to remove them and the realtors
take care to remove their signs when they are finished with their
open house.
em Miller stated that he has received complaints which he has brought
to the attention of the Police Department. He, personally, is also
offended by the signs and realizes that there is a difference of
opinion and he can appreciate this concern on the part of Mr. Gibson.
Mr. Gibson stated that the ordinance has not been enforced and
since other realtors have signs out he will continue to put his
signs out until all the others comply with the ordinance.
Rich Novatny from Tri Valley Realty, asked about placement of
campaign signs.
Cm Miller noted that campaign signs are not allowed in the public
right-of-way. He added that campaign signs are allowed on private
property because this is a constitutionally guaranteed right, as
laid out by the courts over many years; commercial signs are not.
There is a difference between commercial signs and campaign signs.
Mayor Futch noted that there will be an election for new Council-
members on March 2nd and he would suggest that this item be dis-
cussed after the new Council has been seated on March 9th. There
is not time during the Council meetings left to discuss possible
amendment to the Sign Ordinance because one entire meeting has
been scheduled for discussion of the Livermore General Plan.
Cm Miller explained the two options available for getting the
Sign Ordinance changed: l) Council and P.C. vote to amend,
or 2) a petition signed by 10% of the voters asking that the
issue be placed on the ballot for a vote by the public.
Mary Stu1lich, realtor, stated that she also would like to be
able to put up signs advertising homes on the weekend but if
people do not want signs in the neighborhoods she feels this
should be considered. If people have no objection, fine, but
if people do not want the signs they shouldn't be used.
David Eller, Oregon Way, stated that he is in favor of the Sign
Ordinance and is appalled at the signs displayed during the week-
ends.
--.-/
CM-31-3l4
February 9, 1976
CONTINUED P.H. RE
GENERAL PLAN
Mayor Futch opened the continued public hearing and asked for comments
concerning the General Plan for the City of Livermore.
There being no public testimony, ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY
CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CONTINUED
TO THE MEETING OF FEBRUARY l7, 1976.
COMMUNICATION RE
RECYCLING CENTER
The 1975 Annual Report for the Livermore Community Recycling Center,
was presented to the Council for informational purposes.
em Staley commented that the amount of clear glass has decreased
substantially over the amount for last year and wondered why.
Lois Hill, representative of the Recycling Center, explained
briefly concerning the written report she had submitted in which it
indicated that materials processed through the Center have been steady
and that the Center has a stable program. She also spoke about recycl-
ing of oil and the problems draining oil onto the ground causes in
the way of pollution which is a major source of ocean pOllution.
.4PA~---/t.)
Cm Turner stated that he spoke to JerrYAfrom the Recycling Center
about getting a hole dug for the holding tank for the oil and that
he felt the City could probably dig the hole with its equipment.
Mr. Lee indicated that this could be done but there is the considera-
tion that the Recycling Center is located at a temporary site and
perhaps the tank could be removed if the Center is relocated.
Mr. Parness stated that the temporary location is something to be
considered because at present it would be easy to relocate the
Center but if there is a tank installation the nature of the Center
would become more permanent and difficult to relocate. He added
that he is not saying this is not appropriate for a temporary
location but he would assume the Council would want to look at
it before doing anything. There may be some other site on which
the entire Center can be situated rather than at the present Civic
Center site.
Mayor Futch stated that the disadvantage of relocating the Center
is that everyone is familiar with where it is located and they
are used to going there. He feels that a tank could be put in
and later removed if necessary, without a great deal of difficulty.
Mr. Lee stated that there could be consideration for a tank located
partially above ground.
CM STALEY MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO LOOK INTO PLACEMENT OF
A TANK ON THE SITE AND AS TO HOW THIS MIGHT BE ACCOMPLISHED.
MOTION SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
It was noted that the Recycling Center is in need of sand and
Mr. Musso was asked to talk to the people operating the quarry
to see if they can make a contribution of this nature.
CM-31-3l5
February 9, 1976
SENIORS' CRIME PRE-
VENTION SEMINAR
Notice was received concerning the Senior's Crime Prevention Semi-
nar to be held in the Veteran's Memorial Building in Livermore on
March 9, 1976.
The notice was noted for filing.
/
~
SUMMARY OF MINUTES -
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
PLAN - January 19
The Council received a summary of the minutes for the meeting con-
cerning the Solid Waste Management Plan, on January 19, 1976.
The summary was noted for filing.
COMMUNICATION FROM
COUNTY RE HERITAGE
GUILD'S REQUEST FOR FUNDS
A letter was received from Alameda County concerning the Livermore
Heritage Guild's request for funds ($1,000) for reference materials
pertaining to the history of Livermore and establishing a history
center in the Carnegie building.
Cm Turner asked that this item be removed for discussion at the
meeting of February 23rd.
Mayor Futch felt the County hadn't taken any action and the Council
shouldn't discuss it until they have but Cm Turner felt one of the
choices suggested to the Board was to refer it back to the Livermore
City Council and this is what was done.
Cm Miller stated that his interpretation was that the County
referred it to the Council for their comments and he would like
to comment to the County making a recommendation to them. His
recommendation would be that the County support the Livermore
Heritage Guild's request for a grant and that it should be sup-
ported from the same fund that funds the Livermore-Amador Valley
Historical Society, and that we point out that the Guild is al-
ready involved in fund raising and the City does not and cannot
set aside money for projects that take place outside the City
limits, and several of the Guild's projects are outside the City
limits.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL SEND A LETTER OF RECOMMENDATION
TO THE COUNTY CONTAINING THESE POINTS. MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER
AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
COMMUNICATION RE COMPUTER
STUDY OF AIR POLLUTION
Supervisor Cooper sent a letter to the Council concerning computer
study of air pollution which was noted for filing.
COMMUNICATION FROM MTC
RE BART EXTENSION SERVICE
A letter from N. A. Gage, Assistant Director of MTC, indicated
that the MTC adopted a motion to the effect that MTC considers
CM-3l-3l6
February 9, 1976
(Communication from MTC
re BART Extension Service)
the BART bus extension service in both Alameda and Contra Costa
Counties as being a part of the overall BART regional system.
Cm Turner stated that he would like to commend Mr. Parness and
the Mayor for assemblying everyone and meeting jointly with
the BART people. It appears that we may have the BART service
on a permanent basis.
COMMUNICATION FROM BASSA
RE WTR. QUALITY MANAGEMENT
Cm Miller stated that BASSA has an expansion of powers proposal that
he believes is very unwise and that the City should oppose. Namely,
there is the expansion of their construction and operation powers.
The reason he would oppose this is because he feels BASSA is singu-
larly insensitive to the connection between regional planning for
water quality, energy conservation, and air quality. He also sees
the attempt by certain members of BASSA, who are peculiarly con-
cerned with the private ventures of Mr. Geldermann, being interested
in sewering Geldermann as a BASSA power.
The possibility of creating sewer service areas is
a classic device, which is being successfully used in the L.A. area
for the benefit of developers and land speculators, for setting
up a larger district than is needed requiring all property owners
to pay for it with all the benefits going to the land speculators.
Mayor Futch expressed concern that BASSA could set up a benefit
district including the City of Livermore for funding of a project
external to the City.
CM MILLER MOVED TO SEND A LETTER OF OPPOSITION TO BASSA WITH THE
COMMENT THAT WE WOULD OPPOSE THEM AT THE STATE LEGISLATURE, WITH
COPIES TO ASSEMBLYMEN MORI AND KNOX. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY
CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
It was noted that the Council will review the letter to be sent
prior to sending it.
COMMUNICATIONS RE GRANT
FUNDING FOR RECLAMATION
& COLLECTION SYSTEMS
Letters were received from the California Regional Water Quality
Control Board concerning agencies requesting grant funding for
reclamation plant systems and collection systems.
Cm Turner wondered if these letters pertain to the City's applica-
tion for a 1 MGD expansion and Mr. Lee noted that they are related
to our application.
Mr. Lee stated that the letters are related to the lO year project
priority list that the Regional Board has recently approved and on
which Livermore has a place. The first communication has to do with
those agencies that have a project which includes a collector system
and they are asking for supplemental data to support their request.
Livermore does not have this type of project and therefore the first
communication would not apply to Livermore. Their third letter has
to do with the same thing except it deals with how this would apply
to reclamation projects and they are requesting an engineering report.
We do have some reclamation projects in our request and he would sug-
gest that he be allowed to prepare a report for Council review that
can be forwarded on to the Regional Board and then to the State
CM-3l-3l7
February 9, 1976
(re Grant Funding for
Reclamation & Collection
Systems)
Water Quality Control Board who will be considering the 10 year
priority list around April.
Cm Turner asked if this means that the City would get some word
as to when construction would begin for the 1 MGD expansion, if
Livermore is to be funded.
Mr. Lee stated that the City will get some clue as to when construc-
tion could commence if we are on the 10 year priority list and if we
get the same priority as we presently have on the list. They have
us listed as 1976-77 and if funds are available we might receive
funding but there is no assurance the funds would be available.
Mr. Lee added that he believes the engineering report they have re-
quested will enhance our ability to get this project in 1976-77.
Mayor Futch stated that there was a sub-committee of the Council
for the purpose of discussing the mitigating measures and this
was done for two purposes. One was with regard to the application
for the 1 MGD and the other was for the purpose of answering
letters from LAVWMA. At the last meeting LAVWMA pointed out
that Livermore was late in its response and tomorrow night there
will be another LAVWMA meeting.
Mr. Lee stated that he will get everything together for Mayor
Futch for tomorrow night, if possible.
Mayor Futch stated that with respect to mitigating measures, the
major one was relative to reservation of sewage for industry and
commerce. There were several others felt to be significant but
not major which included provision of bike trails, public trans-
portation, etc. If it meets with the approval of the Council
he would submit this to LAVWMA tomorrow night. The Council con-
curred.
APPT. TO SOCIAL
CONCERNS COMMITTEE
It was decided that appointments for the Social Concerns Committee
would be discussed during a meeting with a full Council present.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE ITEM WAS POSTPONED FOR TWO WEEKS.
REPORT RE KIOSK
DESIGN & LOCATION
Recommendations as to location and design of a kiosk were presented
to the Council by the Livermore Cultural Arts Council.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE ITEM WAS REFERRED TO THE BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE.
CM-31-318
February 9, 1976
PROPOSED POLICY RE PERMIT
REQUIREMENTS RE BUILDING
CONSTRUCTION & SITE GRADING
Mr. Parness stated that this draft is one of several draft pOlicy
statements that has been prepared according to Council instruction
of many months ago. There has been a delay in preparation due to
pressure in areas but Cm Miller requested a couple of weeks ago
that this particular policy be discussed.
This is an important policy and the City has experienced difficulty
in times past with respect to building progress and special appeals
have been made to the staff and Council about exceptions to the
building permit procedures and other standards and laws which are
in effect in the City. Some of the requirements are reasonable and
understandable but there has been no particular guidance. In order
to satisfy that need the policy draft was necessary. The staff has
tried to include the laws specified in the Uniform Building Code
and what would be considered to be the wish of the City Council.
There are events that do occur during progress of work on certain
projects which may justify some exceptions to the strict pOlicy
or programs carried within our ordinances and this is the underlying
philosophy used in the drafting of this pOlicy.
Cm Miller stated that there were amendments in the policy that should
have been made prior to further discussion. He stated that item
"D" on Page 2 should have been deleted and there was a change for
III. A. 1., on Page 3. This item was either deleted or it was to
have been grading "on one acre or less".
Mayor Futch commented that the item was to remain with the grading
on one acre or less.
Mayor Futch suggested that the staff change the draft to indicate
what the changes had been and the Council can postpone the item
for discussion next week.
Cm Miller stated that he would like to discuss some of the questions
voted on before but defeated. He would like to raise some of the
questions and if the Council feels they are unreasonable he will
not get support.
Cm Miller stated that on Page 4, he would like the Council to
consider a deletion of Item "B". He stated that any preparation
of building sites without a grading permit should be an item that
comes to the Council. It could be a Consent Calendar item but the
Council should see it. Either this item should be deleted or it
should indicate that it will go to the Council.
Cm Turner stated that he believes there should be a grading permit
rather than having to decide whether or not it would adversely
affect public or private property. There should simply be a
grading permit.
THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO PREPARE STAFF COMMENTS AS WELL AS
PREVIOUS COUNCIL DISCUSSION CONCERNING A POLICY FOR BUILDING
CONSTRUCTION AND SITE GRADING, FOR DISCUSSION ON FEBRUARY 23rd.
Cm Miller added that both of these items have to do with casual
practices on the part of the City staff in the past, and the next
thing he would like to discuss is the taking of City property without
the approval of the City Council. The instance he has in mind is
Mr. Mehran's use of City property to store dirt without the approval
of the Council and the taking of the City's top soil without approval
from anybody. He believes if there is to be taking of City property
CM-3l-3l9
February 9, 1976
(Proposed Policy re Permit
Requirements re Building
Construction & Site Grading)
in any way, form, shape or size, it should corne to the Council
for approval.
Cm Staley stated that he believes the Council could never get
other important business done if they have to review every appli-
cation for borrowing a bolt cutter, etc. The fact that soil was
taken once does not mean that it will happen again.
em Miller stated that he does not mean that the Council should
have to review everything that is taken from the City, temporarily,
but rather the use of City land.
em Staley stated that he would rather make the Council's desires
known to the City staff and assume that they will see that these
wishes are carried out. He stated that some of these things should
be a matter of policy - not overseeing enforcement of the policy.
em Turner stated that he would have to agree with Cm Staley in that
the authority to carry out something should be delegated to the
staff.
em Staley stated that if there is to be official wording concerning
direction to the staff over borrowing of City property he would
suggest that the wording be prepared by Cm Miller, as he is the
most concerned about this matter.
em Staley stated that he is willing to discuss this item but he
would like to point out that there are only a couple of meetings
left until there is a new Council and if other things take preci-
dence this item will have to be postponed until the next Council
meets. He added that he has no intention of staying up all night
for the next couple of meetings to get all these things taken
care of before the new Council is seated.
em Miller stated that the reason he is anxious to get these things
resolved is because the experience and history of what has led to
problems does exist for some of the Councilmembers who have served
awhile.
Cm Miller agreed that it could be placed near the end of the agenda
and if it is necessary to continue it, fine.
REPORT RE PARKING
RESTRICTIONS "P" STREET
As the result of a complaint concerning parking restrictions on
"p" Steeet, just north of the underpass intersection, the Council
asked that the staff prepare a report concerning this matter.
Mr. Lee reported that the two lanes of traffic at the intersection
of "P" Street and Chestnut Street would not be sufficient for the
large volume of traffic and recommended that the existing striping
plan be continued.
Cm Turner stated that there is red curbing in front of Mr. Thome's
home, the party who complained, and in his opinion this person
should enjoy the same rights as those enjoyed by anyone else in
the City of Livermore living in a residential area or residential
home. He should also be allowed parking in front of his home and
it is the Council's responsibility to provide him with at least
one parking spot in front of his home in the curb area.
CM-3l-320
February 9, 1976
(Report re Parking
Restrictions lip" Street)
The City Attorney stated that he is concerned about creating a policy
where a residential area is directly bordering a commercial district.
There is a major concern over what might turn out to be a dangerous
condition to public property. If a dangerous position to public
property is created and the only way to avoid it is by red lining
to stop parking, there would have to be some concern about the legal
liability of extending a policy that would require one parking spot
for residential use.
Cm Turner stated that he feels the City should have anticipated this
problem.
Mr. Lee stated that the primary purpose of the right-of-way is for
the purpose of travel, even though most people enjoy the right of
parking in that area. However, he would like to say that the use
for traffic takes precedence over the private use of the public
right-of-way. In a case like this, the public benefit outweighs
the use by one or two parties. The safety for those numbers of
people who will be using the street dictates that the right-of-way
be used for traffic.
Cm Staley stated that while he is sympathetic to the statement
made by Cm Turner, he couldn't support a policy to that effect
for the reason that there are clearly residential areas in the
community where this would be supportable. There are some areas
where residential is on the fringe of a particular zone and you
have certain rights on that property that are somewhat fringe rights
because of the adjacent zone. He stated that he believes this is
true for residential property adjacent to industrial areas as well
as commercial areas. In his opinion, in this case the need is so
great for use of that right-of-way for traffic, that the red curb-
ing is appropriate.
Cm Miller stated that he would suggest a compromise - a shorter
red line for the curb on that street, not going all the way to
Park Street, and that the short portion between the houses and
Holiday Court be left with no red line. If it turns out to be
successful it can be painted red but in the meantime the City could
try this approach.
Mr. Lee explained that the red curbing in that area is really neces-
sary because there will be a left hand turning lane and people must
have lOO ft. to move the traffic over. This is following the state
standards for that amount of speed, with 50 ft. for the left lane
slot and a slot which allows for only 4 cars.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ALLOW ONE PARKING SPACE IN FRONT OF MR. THOME'S
RESIDENCE, AS WELL AS THE DUPLEX ADJACENT TO HIS HOME. MOTION DIED
FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
No further action was taken by the Council.
REPORT RE SELECTION OF
ARCHITECTURAL FIRM FOR
MULTI-SERVICE CENTER
The City Manager stated that a written report has been distributed
to the Council concerning the selection of an architectural firm for
the Multi-service Center. with the Council approval architectural
CM-3l-321
February 9, 1976
(Report re Selection of
Architectural Firm for
Multi-Service Center)
firms were solicited from the Bay Area for the type of structure
and design the City has in mind. They were very carefully screened
and several were interviewed and made presentations to an interview
panel which consisted of members mentioned in the report.
From that process, and
before the Council for
Cook, a Berkeley firm.
motion instructing the
documents.
with reference checking, the recommendation is
the retention of Hirshen, Gammill, Trumbo &
It is recommended that the Council adopt a
staff to prepare the necessary contract
~
CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT A MOTION INSTRUCTING THE STAFF TO PRE-
PARE THE APPROPRIATE AGREEMENTS TO RETAIN THE FIRM OF HIRSHEN,
GAMMILL, TRUMBO & COOK. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
Cm Turner stated that Cw Tirsell was involved in the selection
process and he would suggest that this item be continued until
her return.
Mayor Futch explained that he spoke with Cw Tirsell earlier this
evening and she indicated that she would vote in favor of the
firm recommended and asked that if there is a tie vote, someone
from the Council represent her in order to facilitate business.
Randy Schlientz, architect with Associated Professions, stated
that he is present this evening to make two requests of the
Council: l) that there be a re-eva1uation of the selection
process currently in use for awarding commissions for architects;
and 2) that the recommendation be reconsidered.
He stated that he has observed that the selection process presently
used has discriminated against the local firms, such as his. Two
procedures have been used during the l3 years he has worked in this
community and they are direct negotiation with firms and more re-
cently an interview process for a particular type of building.
As a local architect his specialty has not been a particular type
of building but rather providing professional services for the local
community. When professional services have been solicited for
contract by the City their firm has either been ignored or placed
in an impossible competitive position. He believes that the present
system would prevent his firm from ever being selected for a project.
In fact, the fire station design would have gone to an outside
architect if he had not contacted four Councilmembers during the
selection process. He added that he appreciates the trust in
his firm for the fire station contract and that it has been a
very successful project.
The Council has a pOlicy to support and foster local businesses but
from his observation as a local architect he feels Associated Pro-
fessions has been given little or no support and less than equal
chance.
Mr. Schlientz indicated that he believes his firm is the type of
firm the Council feels is desirable in that it employs lO people,
8 of whom live in the City and pay taxes. Professional fees are
returned to the City in terms of salaries, rents, leases, and
purchases. Above all other considerations, they are well qualified
for the job. Though not a specialist in multi-service center designs,
he is a qualified architect with unique insight into the character
and makeup of this community and not adverse to seeking professional
help where it is needed.
CM-31-322
February 9, 1976
(Report re Selection of
Architectural Firm for
Multi-Service Center)
Mr. Schlientz stated that a specialists knowledge is applicable in
the early design stages which account for about l/3 of the standard
architectural contract. No other firm can perform better than theirs
in the remaining 2/3 of the standard architectural contract - the
City could not get better value for its dollars spent. There has
been no other project the City has contemplated that they have been
better qualified to do because of their past experience, skills,
and community involvement.
Mr. Schlientz stated that he could understand the selection of another
firm for some of the unique projects such as Ravenswood and that they
do not expect to be awarded every architectural contract. He then
thanked Don Bradley for the personal manner in which the interview
process was conducted and in the selection of the interview board and
requested that the Council reconsider this matter.
Rin Hartwig, Chairman of the Social Concerns Committee, stated that
she has compassion for this situation. It was very difficult for
her to select someone else after having heard Mr. Schlientz' excellent
presentation at the time of the interview. The Committee never ques-
tioned the quality of his work, in any way, or his devotion to the
community, or the significance of his personal interest in City pro-
jects. As a Committee they were not asked to comment on the selection
process used by the City, or whether or not this is a situation in
which the City discriminates against local concerns. The Committee
tried to concern itself solely with the selection of what was felt
to be the most competent architectural firm to suit the City's special
needs. She added that it is true that there are special areas in
which professional help may be needed but the Committee considered
all of these aspects and elected to choose Hirshen, Gammill.
The Committee looked at four very competent firms and they were very
impressed with all of the firms interviewed. The Committee looked at
whether or not they could design a building that would fit the budget
and whether or not they had an ability to estimate costs in order to
come within the budget, and whether or not a building could be built
in the form that had been designed, including use of materials speci-
fied. They also considered whether or not the architect had an under-
standing of materials that would wear for a long time with a great
deal of use.
She stated that some of the firms presented themselves as being
quite qualified in this manner and one of the firms presented them-
selves as being very qualified in using materials that would keep
maintenance costs very low over a long period of time and this was
felt to be very important for any City building. The Committee was
taking into consideration many different specific things.
Hirshen, Gammill was selected because of their experience with multi-
service centers. The City has specific needs and we do need their
advice. They have worked on l7 different projects applicable to
our needs, including health care centers, child care centers, and
elderly housing. Secondly, consideration was given to quality, and
in contacting people familiar with their work they were given very
good recommendations as to the quality of the work and the attention
given to actual construction all the way through.
Another concern of the Committee was whether or not the firm hired
would be able to work with the Citizens Committee, as some firms
might not like this at all. It is clear that Hirshen, Gammill is
accustomed to doing this. For example, when they built the Gardens
in Pleasanton, they met with a citizens committee to talk about what
was needed in elderly housing and later they had a follow-up program
to find out whether or not they had built the building according
to the needs.
CM-31-323
February 9, 1976
(Report re Selection of
Architectural Firm for
Multi-Service Center)
The Committee was also concerned about design and were quite impres-
sed with the work done by them as shown in slides.
The point that is important to the Council in terms of what Mr.
Schlientz has said is probably that specialists are important
during the first 1/3 of the project and less important during
the later 2/3 of the project. This was something of great con-
cern to the Committee in that they wanted a firm that would design
something and follow it through to the end and Hirshen, Gammill
prides itself on its follow through. It designs a building and
then afterwards checks to see if the design has met the needs that
the community, organization, or City wanted. It is felt that the
type of follow-up done by Hirshen, Gammill means that they have
learned from their experience and the Committee believes this
firm should be hired to do the entire jOb.
------". .
em Turner stated that it is obvious that the committee has done
its homework concerning selection of a firm for the project.8ut
Associated Professions has demonstrated their ability to perform
through their work on the fire station on East Avenue. Associated
Professions is a Livermore firm and he is cQnvingod that they can
handle this project. It is the responsibility of the Council to
support commerce in the City of Livermore and award contracts to
local firms whenever possible. He added that there hasn't been
any testimony to indicate that Associated Professions is not able
to handle this project though he has no doubt that the firm selec-
ted is highly qualified. He urged that the majority of the Council
support local commerce and allow the contract to go to Associated
Professions.
Tom Haratani, 144 Albatross, stated that he is also a member of
the Social Concerns Committee and was one of the people to inter-
view the four firms. without a doubt, any of the four appears
to be very qualified and could probably build a very satisfactory
structure for the City's needs. Three of the firms were represented
by someone who would have been the principle architect, including
Associated Professions. All four have built structures in this
area including the fire station, Chabot College, Kottinger Place
and Hillcrest Gardens, and this has given the Committee the opportun-
ity to see their work. He stated that he has spent considerable
time studying Chabot College which was designed by Hirshen, Gammill,
and they are very highly recommended by the head of Chabot College
in Hayward. Hirshen, Gammill also built Hillcrest Gardens which
he visited, and was told that an elderly person could reach the
highest cupboard without standing on anything and that there were
shower stalls with seats and no bathtubs because there are many
accidents which occur with bathtubs used by the elderly. He stated
that he was very impressed with the careful consideration given
the project in the predefined stages. He added that he believes
anyone of the four firms interviewed could handle the project
but Hirshen, Gammill has an added quality.
Cm Turner stated that Mr. Haratani has also indicated that any
of the four firms could do the job and in his opinion if there
is a qualified local firm, the contract should be given to it.
He believes our tax dollars should be spent locally.
Rin Hartwig commented that any of the four firms could build a
building, that is true, but the Committee wanted more than just
a building - it needs to be functional for a variety of uses.
->
Cm Miller stated that he believes a local firm should not be ex-
cluded from getting contracts but neither should it automatically
get all the contracts. Local firms cannot always provide the most
for the public's money and in his opinion it is incumbent on the
CM-3l-324
February 9, 1976
(Report re Selection of
Architectural Firm for
Multi-Service Center)
Council to make those decisions and to make sure that the City gets
the best possible project with public money. If this means that
occassional1y cars have to be purchased outside of town, or hire
an out of town architect, or whatever, then it needs to be done for
the best protection of the public. In this case it was the opinion
of the Committee, who was very careful in their consideration, that
even though all four could build a quality building, the best quality
came from their ultimate choice. Consequently, he feels it is his
duty to support the Committee's decision because of the reasons they
have given.
Cm Staley stated that he is familiar with the Committee members and
is sure they would not have discriminated against Associated Profes-
sions, in any way, and that their recommendation should be followed
in this particular case. On the other hand he does strongly support
the spending of our tax dollars, when at all possible, with local
firms. He would suggest that there be a review of the policy con-
cerning the selection of professionals and to clearly indicate that
if it is possible, to make use of local services.
Cm Miller stated that in the first place, all things being equal,
there is no question in his mind that a local firm should be selected;
however, if they are not equal it is a more serious consideration.
Secondly, he does not know why Associated Professions feels it is
being discriminated against by this selection process when they have
had many, many contracts.
Mayor Futch stated that he believes the City tries to give a contract
to a local firm, all things being equal. In this particular case,
after very careful consideration, the Committee appointed to recom-
mend an architect has recommended someone else. After hearing their
comments and the discussion this evening he would have to agree with
the Committee's recommendation.
Mr. Schlientz stated that he would like to make it clear that he did
not mean to imply that he had been discriminated against. Secondly,
he does not expect to automatically receive all the contracts in
the City and thirdly, he has received only two contracts with this
process (Airport Administration Building and fire station) and he
firmly believes that he would not have been awarded the contract for
the fire station if he had not struggled to get the job by talking
to individual Councilmernbers. He believes that the process is caus-
ing his firm to be eliminated from projects whether it is intentional
or whatever. He added that if he didn't feel that he was very well
qualified for the project he would not be speaking before the Council
this evening, but he understands the Council's position.
Cm Turner stated that he will vote against the motion to award
the contract to Hirshen, Gammill, because he believes tax dollars
should be spent in town and that Associated Professions is qualified.
Mr. Parness commented that over the past several years there have
been six major projects and Associated Professions has been retained
to design three of them. He believes Associated Professions has been
given ample consideration and certainly without prejudice.
MOTION PASSED 3-1 (Cm Turner dissenting).
(!;(V \!JA/vIALa a.-J..u"",r ~
CM-3l-325
February 9, 1976
RECESS
Mayor Futch called for a brief recess after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present.
PROPOSED BUILDING
SECURITY ORDINANCE
--~
Mr. Parness reported that the Chief of Police has been working
with the Fire Department representatives and Building Department
in drafting a proposed ordinance having to do with building se-
curity. This is a void in our local laws and something that has
been filled in other cities.
This item has been exhaustively researched and it is suggested
that the Council favorably entertain the drafting of an ordi-
nance which would incorporated the material submitted to the
Council. It is not in ordinance form at this time but is sub-
mitted to the Council for its reaction.
Mayor Futch wondered what the cost would be for implementation,
with respect to residential units.
Chief Lindgren explained that first of all it should be recognized
that the proposed ordinance would apply only to new construction
occurring within the City and it would not be retroactive to any
existing residential structure. It is estimated that $40-$50
would be added to the cost of a new home for the locking and
lighting devices recommended.
Cm Turner stated that he knows of someone who added locks to his
home and the cost was about $lOO.
Chief Lindgren stated that this is true, the cost for installing
locks to an existing home would be about $lOO. However, this
is an optional choice with the property owner. The $lOO would
be the cost for securing a front door, a back door, and the
garage.
Cm Staley stated that he is strongly in favor of this and it
is clear that there should be more protection of individual
private property - burglary is one of our major crimes.
Cm Turner noted that he read somewhere that the Appeals Board
would have to approve this and Mr. Parness indicated that this
is true but it would not require a public hearing. It would be
a new section in the ordinance.
Cm Staley noted that the Appeals Board has done nothing for many
years and he would like to suggest that it be phased out at this
time with approval done by somebody else.
A representative from the Appeals Board stated that it has re-
viewed every ordinance that has been adopted, relative to build-
ing code matters, plumbing, electrical, Housing Code, and some
others.
Cm Turner stated that he would not want to vote for the ordinance
if under Violations and Penalties a person can go to jail. He
stated that he goes along with the $500 fine but does not agree
that someone should go to jail.
Cm Staley suggested that this be called an infraction rather than
a misdemeanor and only a fine would be imposed.
Ct<1-31-326
February 9, 1976
(Proposed Building
Security Ordinance)
Chief Lindgren indicated that if it would be legal to specify that
this is an infraction, he would have no objection. The intent is
to comply with the law.
CM TURNER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO DRAW UP THE APPROPRIATE
ORDINANCE FOID1, DELETING THE REMAINDER OF D VIOLATIONS AND PENALTIES,
AFTER "be punishable by a fine not to exceed $500.". MOTION WAS
SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
Cm Staley stated that he believes the issue is whether or not this
should be a misdemeanor or an infraction. If it is a misdemeanor
then it should be worded, as it is. He would like to suggest that
the staff be directed to prepare the ordinance and leave it up to
the City Attorney as to whether this constitutes a misdemeanor or
an infraction.
The City Attorney explained that the Municipal Code says that any
violation of that Code is a misdemeanor, basically, unless otherwise
stated. There are lots of areas where you otherwise state - a park-
ing ticket is an infraction for example. Unless the Council specifi-
cally wants to take exception with this being a misdemeanor, it can
be stated in the Code itself or it can be picked up by the "catch-all
provision".
Cm Staley stated that his only concern would be if a developer did
not do some of the things and then would only have to pay a $500
fine. He might well feel it would be worth it to pay only $500 and
save the cost of doing some of the things required.
Chief Lindgren stated that he has a legal concern that perhaps the
City Attorney could address and that is the rights of the Building
Inspector, building official, or police officer to inspect the premises
if, indeed, the violation is only an infraction. He stated that
he is not sure the building official or police officer would have
the right of access without probable cause to believe there was
a crime being committed. Infraction is not a crime. He stated that
it is also not clear in his mind as to what judicial rights are
maintained by the accussed if, indeed, he chooses to fight the
action. For example he believes that a jury trial is not possible
with an infraction, and there may be other legal actions not access-
ible to the alleged violator. Perhaps these items should be
considered.
MOTION AND SECOND WERE WITHDRAWN.
CM TURNER MOVED TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE S~AFF FOR PREPARATION
OF AN ORDINANCE, MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE HOUSING
AUTHORITY APPOINTMENTS
A report from the City Attorney concerning appointments of tenants
to the Housing Authority was submitted to the Council. He stated
that he has nothing to add to the report, this is the state law.
It was noted that the Council generally does not make appointments
unless a full Council is present.
Cm Turner commented that he would also like to interview people to
be selected and requested that this be an agenda item.
The City Attorney stated that the Council might wish to appoint a
seven member Board and the City Manager added that he thinks this
would be advisable.
CM-31-327
February 9, 1976
(Report re Housing
Authority Appointments)
Cm Staley stated that it is impossible for this Council to try
to do everything before the new Council is seated and suggested
that this item be postponed for 30 days and to let the new
Council make the appointments.
REPORT RE ACQUISITION
OF WALL STREET PROPERTY
--,'
A report from the Planning Commission indicated that consideration
was given to the multiple site at Wall Street and Stanley Boule-
vard and concluded that the best use of this site would be open
space and would recommend that the Council consider purchase of
the site for park/open space use.
Cm Turner stated that he would like to direct the legal department
to report as to whether the City could get clear title to this
property, as this is what the problem seemed to be the last time
this was discussed.
The City Attorney explained that there has never been any question
about the City being able to get legal title to the property. The
only question arising is in taking legal title subject to equitable
servitudes which do not affect title but only affects use.
Cm Staley stated that his only concern is
with an encumbrance upon it, and he would
would have on the price of the property.
discuss this with the owner.
getting title to property
wonder ehat affect this
Perhaps the staff could
Mr. Parness stated that he has an appraisal figure for that property
but he is sure the matter of equitable servitudes was not taken into
account. The amount mutually agreed to between the City Manager and
the owner for referral to the Council was substantially under the
appraised value - $2l,000.
The City Attorney commented that if the City wants to use that
property as a park it should find out if the equitable servitudes
would affect this use.
Cm Staley stated that he believes the property owners in the area
would like to see the City purchase the property, particularly if
it is to be used as a park and he would like to ask the staff to
talk to the property owner once again.
Mayor Futch stated that he is also in favor of acquisition of
the property at this price. This has been to the Council a
number of times and it is clear that it would be very bad
planning to allow this to develop as residential. The City
may as well go ahead and take the initiative to acquire it.
em Miller stated that he feels the property should not be
purchased until the petitions with 200 property owners names
are presented to the City. (The petition signed by 200 home-
owners would remove the equitable servitudes.)
em Miller stated that he also is in favor of purchasing the
property but he really doesn't like the idea of encumbrances
and if the neighbors are willing to do a little work the 200
property owners can be contacted and asked to sign petitions.
The City Attorney stated that he feels he should point out that
the petitions would not necessarily solve the City's problems
because a petition is a meaningless legal document in terms of
restrictions on the deed. The petition is merely a reflection
CM-3l-328
February 9, 1976
(Report re Acquisition
of Wall Street Property)
of the op1n10ns of those people living in that area and if the City
wants to take that risk it can. The only way this can be changed
is to quit claim any rights they have in that particular equitable
servitude. There is a difference between signing a petition and
a quit claim.
'- The City Attorney stated that there is an encumbrance on the property
with respect to any type of building and Mayor Futch stated that he
believes there will be no building on the property, so maybe there
is no problem.
CM TURNER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO NEGOTIATE WITH MR. WILLIS
WITH THE EXPRESS PURPOSE OF PURCHASING THIS PROPERTY FOR AN AMOUNT
NOT TO EXCEED $2l,000. ALSO TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO ASK THE
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AND PARKS DEPARTMENT IF THE WORDING IN THE
EQUITABLE SERVITUDES WOULD CREATE ANY DIFFICULTY AS TO WHAT WILL
BE BUILT. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
The City Attorney stated that he has rendered the legal opinion
that equitable servitudes exist but as a practical outlook he
would doubt if anyone would try to enforce it if this were to be
a public park. However, those are equitable servitudes and if
someone wants to make an issue, they can, if they have grounds.
This is the reason he is concerned about what the City says and
what the plans are for the property.
MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
CONSENT CALENDAR
REPORT RE PROPERTY
ACQUISITION - LOT 4
TRACT 3354 (Elliott)
ON ~10TION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE
THE STAFF WAS INSTRUCTED TO OFFER $lO,OOO FOR LOT 4, TRACT 3354,
H. C. ELLIOTT. This will provide access to the proposed Isabel
Avenue highway.
Res. Auth. Exec. of
Agree. HCDA Project
The Council adopted a resolution authorizing an execution of agree-
ment with Alameda County for the 1976-77 fiscal year funding for
the HCDA Project.
'(
RESOLUTION NO. 36-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREE-
MENT (County of Alameda) .
Res. Auth. Exec. of
Contract for Purchase
of Reeder Property
A resolution was adopted authorizing execution of a contract for
property located in the Springtown area to be used for supplementary
park purposes (Reeder property).
RESOLUTION NO. 37-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF CONTRACT
AND PURCHASE OF REAL PROPERTY (Reeder Develop-
ment Corporation).
CM-31-329
February 9, 1976
Report re Adult
Crossing Guard
(Olivina & Albatross)
A report concerning the suggestion for a crossing guard at Olivina
and Albatross from the Director of Public Works, indicated that
the traffic situation at that intersection is unusual at this time
and inflated due to the closure of "P" Street. The "P" Street
underpass will soon be open and it is suggested that a traffic
count be taken after the underpass has been open for about three
weeks.
~
No action is recommended at this time and no action was taken by
the Council.
Report re Airport
Hangar Construction
A report was submitted by the Director of Public Works on the
new airport hangars. He recommended that the Council authorize
the call for bids for the proposed new hangars. Included in
the report was the method of financing for this project.
The Council authorized the call for bids, as requested.
Report re Operating
Procedures for Alarm
Responses - Fire Dept.
While considering a bike path alignment along East Avenue in the
area of the new fire station, the question arose as to procedures
to be followed during a response to an emergency alarm and possi-
ble hazards to pedestrians or bicyclists.
A report from Chief Baird outlined the emergency alarm response
procedure. The staff was directed to forward copies of this re-
port to Ayn Wieskamp and Don Larsen, Principal of the Jackson
Avenue School.
P.C. Summary of
Action Feb. 3, 1976
The Council received the Planning Commission Summary of Action
for February 3, 1976, and minutes from the Planning Commission
meetings of January 6, and 13, 1976. These were noted for filing.
Payroll & Claims
There were lOS claims in the amount of $63,645.26, dated January 30,
1976, ordered paid as and approved by the City Manager.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED WITH DELETION OF THE
SALARY LEVELS RESOLUTION AND THE DIRECTION TO THE STAFF THAT
LETTERS BE SENT TO AYN WEISKAMP AND DON LARSEN, PRINCIPAL OF
JACKSON AVENUE SCHOOL, CONCERNING RESPONSE TO FIRE ALARMS RE
THE FIRE STATION ON EAST AVENUE.
CM-31-330
February 9, 1976
DISCUSSION RE SALARY
LEVEL RESOLUTION
Cm Turner stated that he asked that the item concerning the salary
resolution be deleted from the Consent Calendar because the City
Attorney sent a memorandum to the Council concerning salary increases
for his department. He wondered if action upon his request should be
included in this resolution.
The City Attorney commented that there are a lot of steps that would
have to be followed if the Council intends to act upon his request
and he would suggest that the resolution be adopted because it is in
accordance with a contractura1 arrangement - the two items should
not be tied to one another.
It was noted that the only change was in the Police Department.
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE SALARY RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED.
RESOLUTION NO. 38-76
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE ESTABLISH-
ING A SALARY SCHEDULE FOR THE CLASSIFIED AND UN-
CLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE,
ESTABLISHING RULES FOR ITS USE, AND RESCINDING
RESOLUTION NO. 214-75.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE INCREASE IN SALARY REQUEST FOR THE LEGAL
DEPARTMENT BE SCHEDULED FOR DISCUSSION ON FEBRUARY 23RD, SECONDED
BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Ravenswood Hearing)
Mr. Parness stated that a Ravenswood hearing has been scheduled for
tomorrow night which the LARPD is sponsoring. Hopefully, some
members of the Council will be in attendance. This is a public
hearing for input as to the intended use of the Ravenswood struc-
tures.
(Citizens Committee
re Safety Tax Measure)
The Citizens Committee is meeting at 7:30 p.m. at Fire Station #2,
and are actively seeking other citizen participation in that Com-
mittee. Hopefully a large number of people will attend this
meeting. The staff intends to have another meeting with the Com-
mittee concerning financial and staff statistics and the need for
passage of the tax override measure.
em Turner indicated that he would be willing to attend the meeting
and make a brief presentation.
(?olid Waste Management
Plan Meeting)
The County has scheduled a meeting for all interested citizens and
in addition, the tTechnical Advisory Committee on the Solid Waste
Management Plan, for next Tuesday.
CM-3l-3Jl
February 9, 1976
(Executive Session)
The City Manager requested an executive session immediately
after the meeting to discuss a personnel addition, and possible
property acquisition in connection with the First Street project.
(R.R. project
Agreement)
The City Attorney stated that there is a technical problem with
respect to the agreements approved by the Council last week
concerning the railroad.
~
The City Attorney stated that he inserted a hold harmless clause
in the agreement and because of the timing problem it is neces-
sary that this be discussed this evening. Three different pro-
visions were imparted in this agreement, two of which are totally
acceptable to the railroads: l) A provision nullifying the entire
agreement if the City doesn't get funding; 2) A provision which
carries over a recital into the working portion of the agreement.
One area that the railroads are in complete disagreement with and
will exert their superior position is over an entire hold harmless
agreement that was included.
Normally a hold harmless agreement is standard for almost any
contract. What it does is hold harmless against anything they
might do in their work or anything else that would affect third
parties, who would in turn sue someone for it. The agreement
is section V of the agreement which he then read to the Council.
Mr. Logan stated that if the Council wants to back out the hold
harmless agreement this would be satisfactory. This is something
he includes with every agreement and he believes it is not reason-
able for the City to follow a policy that would subject itself to
potential liability in an agreement where someone else, that we
have no control over, might cause the liability. However, it is
no more than a policy and is not an absolute legal responsibility
to include the hold harmless clause if the City wants to accept
that potential liability. The question that arises is, if it
isn't included, perhaps this thing won't go at all.
Mr. Lee stated that normally the hold harmless clause is a two-way
item. There is a hold harmless clause for yourself and one for
them. They elected not to include one, and they don't want the
City to include one in the agreement. The railroads are concerned
about this because they do not want to set a precedent. This is a
very standard type of agreement that is used with many communities
throughout the state and the entire line and he has been told that
they absolutely will not sign an agreement with the hold harmless
agreement included, as this would be a departure from their stan-
dard practice. The City could press the issue but Mr. Lee is sure
this would kill the project.
Mr. Parness stated that unfortunately the Council has to be pressed
with this. It is a standard type of agreement that has traditionally
been used and it was acceptable upon prior reading by the railroads
in the form that went to the Council. With the insert of the hold
harmless clause the railroads refused to sign. Unfortunately, if
it is to be submitted for qualification of a state grant it must
be hand delivered to the state no later than next Tuesday. The
entire thing has to go back to the railroads for their review prior
to next Tuesday.
CM-31-332
February 9, 1976
(R. R. Project Agreement)
Mr. Parness stated that this is for qualification of the balance of
funds for 1975-76 and for qualification for 1976-77 monies. They
both are submitted concurrently.
CM TURNER MOVED TO STRIKE THE HOLD HARMLESS CLAUSE AND RESUBMIT THE
AGREEMENT TO THE RAILROADS FOR THEIR SIGNATURE. MOTION WAS SECONDED
BY MAYOR FUTCH. MOTION PASSED 3-l (Cm Staley dissenting).
~~.
Cm'M1ller stated that he was talking to one of the local merchants
who commended Cm Staley and Miller for their suggestion for diagonal
parking for the downtown area and wondered if this could be extended
to "M" Street.
(Diagonal Parking)
With Council permission em Turner would ask the staff to look into
this possibility and report back to the Council on diagonal parking
between Second and Third Street, on "M".
Council concurred.
(Arroyo Dumping)
em Turner stated that he has received complaints that dumping has
been taking place in the arroyo behind the Bible College. The
truck that carries the refuse appears to be coming from the College
with grass clippings, etc. He stated that he would assume this
would be illegal.
Mr. Lee stated that the College does own land that extends quite
a way down into the arroyo, part of which the City is in the process
of acquiring. It is very possible that they are dumping on their
own land. It would not be legal to dump garbage and the staff will
investigate as to what is being dumped.
(Arroyo Road Lanes)
During the past Cm Turner remarked that it is difficult to tell
where the north bound lane happens to be on Arroyo Road when
turning left from Vancouver and he wondered if anyone has checked
this.
Mr. Lee stated that this is County property and they have been
notified. The City has not yet received a response.
(Zone 7/LAVWMA Meeting)
em Miller stated that last week Zone 7
and the Council has received a copy of
Zone 7 and the LAVWMA representatives.
present.
and LAVWMA had a joint meeting
the negotiation results between
Both he and Mayor Futch were
LAVWMA and Zone 7 have signed a Memorandum of Understanding that
the City has been trying to get for some time. Both agencies
compromised a little, and the result is a very reasonable Memorandum
of understanding, particularly with respect to sewering outside our
area.
CM-31-333
February 9, 1976
(Zone 7/LAVWMA Meeting)
At our request, after some discussion, three Zone 7 members
agreed to limit any sewer possibilities they might have in
areas adjacent to the member agencies. He then read the agree-
ment related to this portion of the agreement, noting that the
map showing the area along the Pleasanton agreed upon line would
be the attachment.
-'
Zone 7 has agreed not to sewer in this region, and Pleasanton
and VCSD. This has not been voted upon but the representatives
of Zone 7 wanted to make sure that each of the individual agencies
to LAVWMA were in agreement and this is the reason the item is
before the Council.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING, SECONDED BY MAYOR FUTCH.
It was noted that this is an urgency item and the reason the
Council took action without the item being on the agenda.
The City Attorney stated that he doesn't like the idea of merely
adopting a motion.
Cm Miller explained that the motion is only approving the form
of the Memorandum of Understanding and it will have to be signed
later. The Council is not approving signature.
em Turner stated that he would like to have the opportunity to
read the agreement and asked that a vote on the motion be taken
later in the meeting.
(Newspaper Reports
re Ge1derville)
em Miller stated that the pro Ge1dermann newspapers in the Valley,
the Times and The Herald, have talked about the major defeat that
the City of Livermore has suffered at the hands of LAFCO and they
and some of the candidates have gone on at some length about Liver-
more's "bad image". He would suggest that some comment is suitable
~t this point.
The image of the City of Livermore is very good among those res-
ponsible agencies of government, but a bad image among the
developers, Alameda County agencies and their newspaper spokesmen.
LAFCO, on the other hand has a very good image with the developers,
Alameda County agencies, but is notorious throughout the state as
being one of the two worst LAFCOs in the state. The Orange County
LAFCO and Alameda County LAFCO were singled out as being the worst
in the state. Therefore, to be turned down by Alameda County LAFCO
is a defeat in only a limited sense.
em Turner felt the defeat is on the shoulders of the land owners
in Alameda County - they are the losers, not Livermore. It is very
unfortunate that people who reside outside the Valley make major
decisions for an area they are not familiar with. It is unfor-
tunate we do not have a Valley representative.
em Miller stated one of the interesting things is that the last
time there was an appointment from the Mayors' Conference, it was
suggested there should be a representative from the Valley as a
representative from the Mayors' Conference, and the argument that
was used is that it would be a conflict of interest. He felt the
same argument should apply to the Board of Supervisors, but it
does not.
CM-3l-334
I
February 9, 1976
(Zone 7/LAVWMA Meeting
continued)
A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDER-
STANDING WHICH PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
(Order in Council Rules)
Cm Miller stated that at the last meeting there was a question of
whether the chair has the right to divide a motion. It turns out
that the chair does not have the right to divide a motion although
it did in their earlier set of rules, but it does not in the present
rules which were adopted about a year ago. The rule does not exist
in Roberts Rules of Order - the chair does not have the authority.
Roberts Rules of Order allow a motion to be made by anybody; in our
rules the Mayor could make such a motion, but it would have to be
voted upon.
Mayor Futch remarked that there are certain rules that are divisible
and certain ones that are not divisible in Roberts Rules of Order and
they are discussed in several sections. One other point, it was his
understanding that when they discussed the policy, they still retained
the rules of order they had been using. which had been written ay some
one other than Rober~s.
Cm Miller stated that he had carefully read the section copied by the
City Clerk and if the mayor had been right, he would have apologized.
Mayor Futch commented that in order straighten the matter out, perhaps
they should re-read the minutes.
em Miller replied that he would be agreeable to this. His only con-
cern is that a request to divide a motion is different than an order
to divide a motion.
Mayor Futch stated he really did not see why it should be a problem
because to divide a motion doesn't change the motion, it merely enables
the Council to vote on that portion they are in favor of. He felt
this was reasonable and was a policy that all the mayors who have
served on the Council have had since it was first adopted many years
ago. He felt that the booklet the Council has been using is much
easier to refer to than Roberts Rules of Order.
Cm Staley suggested that at the first meeting of the new Council,
the rules of the Council Procedure be on the agenda, and the other
members of the Council agreed to the suggestion.
(School District Warehouse)
Cm Staley asked what the School Board's decision was concerning the
warehouse at Las positas and Murrieta Blvd. other than to refer it
to the Design Review Committee, and Mr. Musso stated there had been
a hearing on the EIR.
Mr. Parness added that they had adopted the requisite resolution that
would exempt them from any City authority in their building plans,
and that will be on the Council agenda for next week.
Cm Staley asked if there would also be included an analysis from the
City Attorney as to what they have the authority to exempt.
The City Attorney stated that all he could do would be to cite the
law, and let the Council make their own decision. If it was the
Council's desire to have him take an advocate's position, he would
suggest they go into an executive session. If they wanted a general
legal opinion, he would be glad to comply, and Cm Staley stated he
would prefer an executive session.
CM-31-335
In addition he remembered adoption of a new bO~~
by another author to be used for parliamentary procedure, not included in the: ,,t~
Rules of Order booklet adopted by the Council. ,~~_
I
February 9, 1976
(General Plan Amendments)
Cm Staley asked for a copy of the General Plan Amendments so he
could go over it since he would be away for five days, and was told
that every attempt would be made to furnish it for him before he
leaves.
em Turner asked how much time the Council would have to review the
General Plan.
Mayor Futch indicated there would be a study session with the Plan-
ning Commission prior to the regular meeting on Tuesday, February 17.
Cm Turner stated that the Council would try to adopt the General Plan
the 17th of February, and the revised General Plan has been completely
rewritten and edited, and he was concerned that there had not been
enough time to go over it.
Mr. Musso explained that there really are not many major changes,
and a lot of unnecessary words have been edited out.
em Miller added that if the Council can state their differences on
the 17th to the Planning Commission, and have the final adoption
on February 23.
em Turner stated a study session would be very helpful and suggested
they meet on Tuesday at 5 p.m., however after some discussion, it
was decided that there would be a study session with the Planning
Commission at 5 p.m., Monday, and the meeting would be from 5 p.m.
to 8 p.m.
(ABAG Meeting)
Mayor Futch stated there would be an ABAG Meeting on Wednesday and
Thursday, and he would be unable to attend, and Cm Turner offered
to go in his place.
(Guatemalan Situation)
Mayor Futch stated it had been suggested that the City send the
entire field hospital to Guatemala. He was reluctant to do so with-
out discussing the.matter with the Council, but had indicated that
the City would send some supplies. He asked the City Manager for
a list of the available supplies.
Mr. Parness stated that the hospital became the property of the
City last fall. It is a complete unit, functional, which
can care for 200 beds. The only thing it is not supplied with at
the present time is pharmaceuticals because they have expired.
He stated the list contained about six pages of items even down
to X-ray machines. The unit was a gift from the federal government,
and has a value of $45,000. Mr. Parness suggested a division of
some of the supplies, providing some of the items that might be
most useful such as blankets and sheets. The Guatemalan embassy
was contacted and the representative stated they do need, blankets,
sheets and medical supplies that do not require prescriptions.
Mr. Parness asked for some direction from the Council as to what
they should send.
Cm Staley stated that perhaps the staff was more familiar as to
what they have and the needs of Guatemala, and suggested that they
direct the staff to make the selection of needed and effective items
in terms of cost consideration and replacement difficulty and have
the staff transmit that to the Guatemala Counsel.
Cm Turner stated we have the equipment for a purpose, and asked if
it would have to be replaced if it were sent.
CM-3l-336
February 9, 1976
(Guatemalan Situation)
Mr. Parness stated they would only be depleting what is available.
In addition to the 200-bed hospital the City has three first aid sta-
tions which are ours to use in the event of an emergency. They are a
different type of unit than the hospital - just to care for an emer-
gency situation. In the event we do deplete some of our resources
in the hospital we still can rely on the use of the first aid stations.
He did not think it wise to give the entire stock of blankets.
Mayor Futch suggested that perhaps they give one-third of the supplies.
Mr. Parness also asked the Council if they would have any objection
to the use of a City truck to transport these supplies to Alameda,
and the Council felt this would be acceptable.
Cm Staley voiced concern that the hospital was not stocked with a
drug supply, and Mr. Parness agreed it was a concern, but there is no
way to keep a drug supply in proper form. He had spoken to the
pharmaceutical department at the hospital about this and it was thought
that the drugs might be revolved through the hospital, but it was not
practical, and they warned about expiration and suggested they be
disposed of. Cm Staley asked if an agreement with the hospital could
be explored whereby they would augment the regular inventory of drugs
at whatever is normally kept at the hospital so that if there were
an emergency there would be a sufficient number of drugs in the hospital
Mr. Parness did not feel they could add a supply sufficient to
completely outfit a 200 bed hospital upon a moments notice, but they
might add a nominal amount to their usual inventory.
Mayor Futch stated that the ham operators, in particular John Doggett
of Pleasanton, had been very helpful and continuously in touch with
Guatemala in trying to find out about the families of the exchange
students, and suggested that the City do something to show its appre-
ciation for his services.
Cm Miller suggested that a proclamation of appreciation be sent to
him, and the Council agreed.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Council, the
meeting was adjourned at 11:45 p.m. to an executive session to
discuss personnel matters.
APPROVE
ATTEST
CM-31-337
Regular Meeting of February l7, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
February l7, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:05 p.m.
with Mayor Futch presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Absent:
Cm Miller, Cw Tirse1l and Mayor Futch
em Turner and Staley (both seated later)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Futch led the Councilmembers as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES - 2/2/76
P. 306, last paragraph should read: Cw Tirsel1 stated that with
Council permission she will rebut any misinformation. The Council
concurred.
P. 292, first paragraph under indented paragraph should read:
Cm Miller added that the first Livermore Smog Report pointed out
there were different kinds of days and pointed out one for which
all of the smog could be blown in.
P. 292, last paragraph, second word in second line should be
extensive rather than expensive.
P. 292, middle of the page, paragraph beginning Mayor Futch,
second line of that paragraph, next to last word should be but
rather than and.
P. 30l, 4th paragraph from the top, second line should indicate
that he contacted the former governor of Oregon.
ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 2, 1976, WERE
APPROVED, AS CORRECTED.
OPEN FORUM
(re Parking Ticket)
Mrs. Mossbarger, 379 Holladay Court, stated that she received
a parking ticket because her car was parked on the sidewalk
and she doesn't want to pay the ticket. She stated that nobody
parks on the street in her court and everybody parks on the
sidewalk.
Mayor Futch explained that Mrs. Mossbarger's problem is a police
matter and not something the Council should discuss.
Don Bradley commented that once a ticket has been issued it is
out of the City's hands and Mrs. Mossbarger would have to speak
to the judge concerning this issue. However, if there is a
problem involved possibly someone from the Police Department
could check to see if something could be resolved.
CONTINUED P.H.
RE GENERAL PLAN
Mayor Futch stated that the public hearing concerning the General
Plan has been continued to this time and invited members of the
audience to speak.
CM-31-338
February 17, 1976
(P.H. re Gen Plan)
Don Anderson, l072 Camelia, representative of the Chamber of Commerce
read a letter to the Council prepared by the Chamber, requesting
postponement of the General Plan adoption until May. The letter
indicated that people have not had a chance to review the changes,
the new Council needs time to review the Plan, ABAG's review has
not been completed and there needs to be more public hearings con-
cerning adoption of the General Plan. It was felt that the first
four years of the Plan contain critical issues and it would be
best to continue the vote on the Plan until the new Council working
with the Plan is seated.
Mayor Futch explained that this is rather the culmination of many
years of effort and the Citizens Committee spent one year gathering
information from the public at large.
The Mayor added that public input is welcome and this is the reason
for the public hearing tonight as well as in the past. He also
explained that it is not possible to circulate every change made
and the City has taken the Plan that has come to us from the con-
sultant. This Plan was extensively circulated. A copy is available
with changes in wording which can be obtained at City Hall and the
Library.
Dick Ryon, l183 Glenwood Court, stated that he has been looking at
the map relative to the area north of I-580 and he sees on the map
that development is planned up to and past May School Road. He
stated that he is concerned about this because while the plan would
appear to be better than the one proposed by Mr. Ge1dermann he feels
that area should remain open space for agricultural uses. If the
environmental affects of the development by Mr. Geldermann are true
then it would seem that these adverse affects should also apply to
what the City of Livermore might do in that area.
Mr. Ryan stated that as a member of the Zone 7 Board he has asked,
with the concurrence of that Board, that the Corps of Engineers
in their Urban Study, look at the feasibility of establishing
irrigation districts in this valley so that agriculture can be
a profitable way for land owners to earn a living. Since the
map shows a higher density than what is planned for the City he
would suggest that the City consider cutting back on development
and growth for that area. Possibly this area could be annexed to the
City as agricultural preserve and if the Zone can bring water to those
people the farmers would have a profitable use of their land.
Mr. Musso stated that the P.C. has just spent the past 1~ hours dis-
cussing the holding capacity with the consultants and they are trying
to reconcile the numbers in the Plan with the map. They probably will
not be resolved tonight.
Cm Miller stated that he believes Mr. Ryon has a good point in that
there are certain portions north of the freeway which are prime
agricultural land that could be irrigated and if there is to be
any limitation to growth in that area it should be considered
as a no growth or limited growth area.
Don Crawford, consultant with Grunwald-Crawford Associates, stated
that there has been discussion with the Planning Commission this
evening concerning the holding capacity of the Plan and the P.C.
is more understanding of how the consultants arrived at the holding
capacity - it is somewhat higher than the 82,000 but in his op1n10n
this isn't something the Council should discuss tonight. There is
not a wide spread between the 82,000 and the holding capacity of
the Plan but he would suggest that the Council wait until the P.C.
has given the Council its recommendation after their review. He
added that editing was done but there was no substantial change
to the Plan.
CM-31-339
February l7, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
Mr. Musso commented that the Council has received Se~tions I, II,
and III and these are being reviewed and changed aga~n. The P7C.
is going over them now for the t~ird time and,they w1ll ~e com1ng
to the Council this evening to d1scuss a meet1ng concern1ng f~rther
changes. There have been some major policy changes and delet10ns.
Mr. Musso added that at some point the Council will have to go
through the Plan, page by page.
Mayor Futch stated that the Council reserved this meeting for doing
that very thing and he believes the Council should begin going over
each page.
Mr. Musso stated that most of the people are concerned with changes
on the map and perhaps he could describe some of the changes that
the P.C. has been discussing.
Mayor Futch felt it would be best to wait for recommendations rela-
tive to a new map. The Council concurred.
CM TURNER WAS SEATED DURING THE ABOVE DISCUSSION.
Herman Ruth~~ stated that he has attended five public hearings and
study sessions of the Planning Commission because he is interested
in what is planned for property owned by him and others located on
the north side of I-580, north of the airport. He stated that this
property has been owned by his clients for 20 years and is presently
in the County but they consider it within the area of influence and
within the Sphere of Influence for the City of Livermore.
Mr. Ruth stated that the map recommended by the consultant shows
part of this property as industrial use. During the 1960's he was
told by the Council, at the time he was trying to get water for
the Junior College area, that the City had no intention of develop-
ing land north of I-580 and that prospects for his property develop-
ing as residential would be very remote. For this reason he told
Mr. Musso and the consultant that industrial development might be
appropriate: however, after seeing the proposed map he would change
his mind and request that his land be zoned for residential develop-
ment also. He has written a lengthy letter to the City noting the
reasons he feels his property should be residential property and
that there is already excess industrial property in Livermore.
The P.C., since that time, has recommended that the property be
zoned for agricultural use and not zoned for industrial development.
Mr. Ruth indicated that he believes the P.C. possibly has a confused
estimate of what the holding capacity is to be. At the study session
he attended this evening the consultant's text speaks about a popula-
tion of 82,000 but there are other figures mentioned such as l20,000,
and l40,000. He stated that in his opinion the holding capacity
should not be a specific figure but rather a range. He does not
have a recommendation as to what the range should be but he would
assume that the 82,000 is a figure and not a range.
Mr. Musso explained that the 82,000 is a maximum figure range and
three different ranges have been considered - 82,000, l20,000, and
l40,000. He added that the holding capacity was not a factor in
the P.C. deletion of the industrial property north of the freeway,
and for not designating it as residential property. This was
decided prior to ever discussing the holding capacity. Mr. Ruth
had made a convincing argument that the property should be designa-
ted as industrial and that additional residential designation was
not warranted. It was felt that the soil was good and it could
CM-31-340
February l7, 1976
(P.H. re General Plan)
continue as agricultural use for some time. This was really the
factor - not the holding capacity.
Mr. Ruth pointed out that the soil has a Class III classification,
and is not prime agricultural soil - it is not I, or II. He stated
that he would like to suggest that property between Doolan Road
and Collier Canyon Road, north of I-580 on a line with the southern
boundary of the Junior College (approx, 300 acres) could hold 600
families at the designation of the General Plan category - Urban
Low Density. He stated that he is using the middle of the range
recommended by the planning consultant but he was told that this
figure might be low and this might accommodate 900 families, or
approximately 2,500 people. He stated that he thinks this figure
is appropriate.
Mr. Ruth added that if the land on the east side of Collier Canyon
Road can be designated residential with the same geographical char-
acteristics as on the west side, it would be appropriate to designate
the west side as Urban Low Density Residential. He stated that this
is the substance of his request of the Council.
Mr. Ruth then listed the reasons he feels property west of Collier
Canyon Road should be designated Urban Low Density Residential. He
stated that he has already mentioned that the geography is the same
as the west side and there will be an interchange at Collier Canyon
or at the extension of Isabel, and this will improve accessibility
to the area. Sewer and water are already there and can service
this property, and that it should be preferred for residential use.
Cm Turner stated that the Council intends to go over the text, page
by page and the map will also be changed. He would like to suggest
that the P.C. adopt the General Plan, whether it is a draft or in
final form, adopt the map, and then submit everything to the Council
for approval. He stated that he would be willing to take vacation
time with the present Council to spend one day or whatever it takes,
and adopt their report. Otherwise, the public does not get the
chance to review the P.C. final Plan.
Mayor Futch pointed out that this is also true of changes the
Council might make. Anytime some of the wording is changed it
is not possible to have another printing and sent to everyone.
em Turner stated that this is not what he is suggesting. He is
saying that the public will not have the opportunity to review and
comment on what the P.C. finally adopts. The P.C. is making more
changes this evening and there has been a drastic change to the map
submitted by Grunwald-Crawford.
em Miller stated that he believes the P.C. will have something to
say to the Council and this may help the Council determine what
should be done and the best way to accomplish it.
Glen Dahlbacka, 1138 Aberdeen, stated that the P.C. is in the
process of doing text editing changes. The Council has yellow
copies of changes being inserted in the draft plan. Because of
the holding capacity discussion which has not been resolved,
Grunwald-Crawford and Associates explained the nature of their
calculations and the P.C. has a better understanding of how this
was determined. Mr. Musso is going to go over their numbers tomorrow
and the P.C. will consider the numbers and will decide what may have
to be done to the map in order to bring the map into conformance with
the text. Until those numbers are well in hand the P.C. will not
be able to make a recommendation or take final action on the Plan.
The P.C. has gone through the text, entirely, once and this is
being reviewed again and the yellow sheets are also being reviewed
for final text editing ch~nqes. It is anticipated that this can
CM-3l-341
February l7, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
be accomplished tonight or tomorrow night in a small study ses-
sion, at 7:00 p.m. The P.C. will then adjourn to their regular
meeting at 8:00 p.m. and will attempt to adopt the General Plan
if all the map details are available. The public will have ample
opportunity to testify to the Council on the Plan, as submitted by
by the P.C. There will probably be referral back to the P.C. and
at that time there will be additional opportunity for any public
input.
Mr. Musso noted that a corrected draft will be available for
public review at the Library.
em Miller stated that the Council had projected the possibility
of meeting again tomorrow night also but perhaps it would be
worthwhile to postpone the meeting and sit in on the discussion
at the P.C. meeting while the P.C. is considering the draft.
Mr. Migliori, 627l Tesla Road wondered if the designation for
his property had changed from 20 acre parcels to 100 acre par-
cels.
Mr. Musso explained that Mr. Migliori's property is known as
general agricultural and doesn't recall that a specific lot
size was made. He added that the County has a 100 acre lot
size minimum, for their Agricultural Zone, but the General
Plan does not specify a lot size. What Mr. Migliori is
interested in is the present discussion taking place with
the Planning Commission.
Mr. Mig1iori stated that he wants to be able to do something
with his land and he would appreciate it if it could be split
into 5 acre parcels.
CMr. Dah1backa stated that it is the intent of the P.C. to discuss
and adopt the General Plan tomorrow night.
Cw Tirsell pointed out that there is a monumental amount of work
to be done before the General Plan can be adopted. There is no
way the Council can review all of the P.C. changes in one even-
ing. She suggested that the Council go over the General Plan,
page by page, going as far as possible this evening. If there
are other changes then the Council can start over and go through
it again with all the things adopted by the P.C. There is no
way the Council can get the scope of the Plan QY going over it
one time.
em Turner stated that his concern is for those people who testi-
fied at the P.C. on both the Plan and the map. Since that time
the Council has made extensive changes and the P.C. has made
extensive changes and people with vested interests have not had
the opportunity to review a General Plan adopted by the P.C.
which is going to be submitted to the Council.
Cw Tirse1l pointed out that regardless of what the P.C. says
if people have a strong position it should be stated.
CM STALEY WAS SEATED DURING THIS DISCUSSION.
Mayor Futch felt Cm Turner does have a point and he believes
the Council should not discuss the text tonight and that the
Council wait until the Council has received specific recommenda-
tions from the P.C. This information should be available after
tomorrow night. He would suggest that the public hearing be con-
tinued and allow public testimony.
CM-31-342
February 17, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
Cm Miller stated that the P.C. is going to adopt the General Plan
and while the Council won't have the text the P.C. will be discus-
sing a text similar to the one the Council presently has. Conse-
quently, the suggestion that all of the Councilmembers be present
in the audience at the time the P.C. discusses changes and with
copies of the text, would give the Council a running start on the
discussion to take place among the Councilmembers. The Council
intends to meet tomorrow night anyway and in this case the P.C.
can summarize changes to help orient the Councilmembers as to what
the changes have been. This would be going over the text one time
without actually discussing it.
Mr. Ruth stated that he would like to add one comment. That is
that the designation in the present General Plan for his properties
is residential and they approximate the Urban Low Density for the
proposed General Plan.
Mr. Crawford, the consultant, recommended that if the P.C. can make
a recommendation by Thursday or Friday, Grunwald-Crawford should be
given a copy of it as well as the Council and a copy at the Library
for the public so that everyone will have the opportunity to review
it prior to a response from Grunwald-Crawford. He stated that he
would like to suggest that the Council meet a week from Thursday
to begin reviewing the P.C. recommendations.
CW TIRSELL MOVED TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING UNTIL NEXT MONDAY
WITH THE INTENTION OF RECEIVING ANY ADDITIONAL PUBLIC TESTIMONY,
AND TO BEGIN WORKING ON THE PROPOSALS FROM THE P. C. ON TUESDAY
NIGHT.~ MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
S e CL' n rA e. cl 6';1 Cm,'I' u. r () e r
~< .~~ (]..:If&2~
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
RE PROPOSED CLASSIFICA-
TION ADJUSTMENT
The City Attorney stated that he would like to propose a proper
classification for one of his employees, not a salary adjustment.
The classification has been brought to the Council in the past and
it was discussed during the budget hearings in July of last year.
At that time it was felt that there were some questions that needed
answering and certain things were to be accomplished prior to his
return to the Council with any kind of a classification. It was
necessary to determine whether, in fact, there was sufficient work
load to justify the position. In his opinion all of these criteria
have been met and he has prepared a very long and detailed justifica-
tion for asking for the new classification.
It is his understanding that there is a petition being circulated
which is in opposition to his report and recommendation and he
would like to point out that this position, as it is scheduled
in the classification, is entirely legitimate. The position has
encumbent within it, responsibilities that he would give to any
first year legal person he might hire, any law clerks he might
hire to do simple contracts for the City and other mundane duties
required as a result of Council requests and staff requests.
This position relieves attorneys in the office of a greaat deal of
time consuming work which would otherwise have to be undertaken by
them and would take away efforts on areas he believes to be of more
importance to the Council.
He explained that comparisons have been made using other job classi-
fications with pay schedules felt to be comparable. The starting
salary would be less than all of the comparisons listed, except one.
CM-3l-343
February 17, 1976
(re Classification Adjustment)
Mr. Logan added that the comparisons are not a reflection upon
any employee but merely intention to show the functions required
of certain jobs. Many people go beyond what is required of them
and in his opinion the person he is concerned about works well
beyond the function as classified. He would like to assure the
Council that the work being done is paraprofessional and not
clerical in nature. The.clerica1 aspect of the job takes about
20% of the time.
Mr. Logan stated that he believes the position is clearly and
honestly justified and to deny the reclassification would be
a waste of this person's ability.
Cm Miller stated that this item was discussed at the budget hearing
and the Council hesitated on a direct assignment because it wasn't
clear that the responsibilities would be carried out. It was
assumed that they would be carried out but the Council decided
to reconsider if it was determined that the responsibilities
had been carried out and that the person was serving as an
administrative assistant.
CM MILLER MOVED TO CHANGE THE CLASSIFICATION TO REFLECT THE
RESPONSIBILITIES OF THIS POSITION, MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Mr. Bradley, Assistant to the City Manager, stated that he is
sure the City Attorney is making this recommendation in all
honesty and in good faith by giving his best recommendation as
it affects this particular position. He added that he is con-
cerned that the timing of the particular proposal is inappro-
priate. These types of things are generally considered at the
time the budget is discussed. Letters have been received from
an employee as well as a union agency with the implication that
special treatment is being given to a single employee. It would
seem more appropriate that this matter be considered in relation
to other positions of similar work classifications. The relative
comparisons used by the City Attorney mayor may not be appropriate.
He urged that there be a study of this matter and a coordinated
effort to make sure that what is done in one- circumstance does
not come back to hurt the City in another circumstance.
The City will be negotiating, very soon, with the group that
might be most affected by this change and this is a very impor-
tant consideration and one that will be of interest to this group.
He would suggest that there be a coordinated effort and study to
analyze where this position fits in for discussion at budget time.
Cm Miller asked if anyone has ever been reclassified, except at
budget time.
Mr. Bradley stated that he recalls one instance in which an employ-
ee had an offer for employment with another city and in order to
keep that employee, special consideration was given. He does not
recall any changes made mid-year that were not approved at budget
time.
em Turner stated that in talking to one employee it was mentioned
that the concern is for giving someone additional salary mid-year
because unions are very careful to abide by their contract and
to negotiate only when that contract expires. Cm Turner explained
to the employee that this was discussed at budget time and the
request to reclassify this person to a higher position was due
to added responsibility. The employee stated that in this case
he would not object because this was not his understanding of
what was being requested. If an employee assumes additional respon-
sibility it is the Council's obligation to reclassify the person.
CM-3l-344
February l7, 1976
(re Classification
Adjustment)
Cm Staley wondered if work in this position would include the
duties of a legal secretary or would the City consider hiring a legal
secretary because this person has been reclassified to do administra-
tive assistant work? Does the City need a para-legal person in the
City Attorney's office, and if so, do we also need a legal secretary?
If we need both of them what are we doing to get the other person
and if both are not needed would there be a mixture of a para- legal
and secretarial job? In his opinion there is clearly a difference
between para- legal and legal secretarial work. He stated that he
believes he can support the motion but feels these queestions need
to be answered.
The City Attorney responded by saying that the Legal Department is
trying to accommodate a present budget with a case load that could
take an additional $50,000 from the budget. If his department
could afford to have a full-time legal secretary as well as a para-
legal, he would take them both but this is not possible. There
is some crossover between para-legal work and secretarial work.
He stated that he regrets the furor this item has caused, as he
is doing what he thought was direction of the Council during the
budget session, to elevate a person who has more than the capa-
bility into a position that is a professional position and which
his office can use because of the case load and general every day
load of work.
Discussion followed concerning the type of work being done and
Cm Staley's concern for combining the legal secretary and para-
legal classification.
Mr. Logan then explained the category with respect to the pay
scale and there was brief discussion concerning pay.
Mr. Bradley stated that the City Attorney has tried to choose like
classifications; however, the City Attorney is a lawyer and he is
not that familiar with the operation of the City government, and
functions of other positions. There may be other positions, such
as clerical positions, that have just as much responsibility and
he would emphasize coordinating a study of this job and other jobs
and make a decision at a more appropriate time.
Mayor Futch stated that he might be more sympathetic with the motion
if it was discussed at a time everyone else is being reviewed. He
stated that there are probably others in the City who are doing more
than what their job calls for.
Cm Miller stated that he believes the Council committed itself to
a review during the budget session and in his opinion upgrading of
the position should not have to wait until another time. He stated
that of all the women at City Hall who are not elected, there is only
one woman that is not doing clerical work, and that is wrong in prin-
ciple. If someone is doing professional work that is not clerical
then that position should be labeled as non-clerical. The time has
come to separate people who are doing non-clerical from those that
are. All women should not be placed in the same category - that
they will be clerical and paid clerical salaries. This may have
made sense 20 years ago but it does not make sense today.
CM-3l-345
C\JJ,J~~lj)
(re Classification Adjustment) ~l-~
Cw Tirse11 commented that \~~~th this position, out of the
City Attorney's Office, does not preclude review of other positions
that may need to have this same type of treatment. In her opinion
the City cannot meet the requirements of Affirmative Action unless
some of these positions are created because the City is not hiring -
there is not sufficient funding in the budget for more employees.
While she understands that the City is trying to keep things in
balance and not favor one employee over another, she believes the
Council decided last~ that this would be an administrative posi-
tion. '?~ .
Cw Tirsell continued to say that if this person should leave for one
reason or another the City wouldn't necessarily hire another adminis-
trative assistant. The City Attorney might decide to hire three clerk
typists or whatever combination he would want at the particular time.
She noted that she cannot support any salary raise affirmatively at
this time without some very in depth discussion. She is in favor
of upgrading of the position but does not know what the salary
should be. It is very distressing to think that the City will not
ever promote women to any positions of authority unless the Council
creates them. Some people will have difficulty with this philosophy,
but that's how things are.
February 17, 1976
Cm Turner concurred with the comments made by cw Tirse11.
Cm Futch felt everyone should be reviewed and Cw Tirsel1 pointed
out that review of this job doesn't preclude Mr. Bradley from get-
ting a personnel officer on board and reviewing all positions.
Cm Staley stated that he would support the motion for the new
position because he feels what Cm Miller and Cw Tirsell have
said are correct. As part of affirmative action the City needs
to promote women to responsible positions. However, before he
could vote for any salary range he would have to have more infor-
mation concerning what the salary should be, adding that he believes
the salary range for paralegals in private firms begins somewhat
lower than that suggested for this position.
The City Attorney stated that he would be happy to find out what
private firms are paying paralegals and bring this information
back to the Council. However, he would like to comment that he
feels it is not fair to wait until budget time to increase the
salary because if the Council is going to say the job should be
reclassified the person should also be paid more.
Cm Staley stated that the point is that a position of parapro-
fessional can be created and have a salary for that position
legitimately lower than what a person makes at the top level
after 10 or 20 years of experience as a legal secretary. It
is possible that after reclassification this person might
end up with a lower salary than the present classification.
The Mayor stated that he would like to add to the motion that
the staff consider other employees that should be reviewed for
reclassification and Cm Miller pointed out that this was done
during the budget session. ~~.r-nJ . I
Rf.6~~~T~
MAYOR FUTCH AMENDED THE MOTION TO.~ THE STAFF TO CONSIDER
OTHER AREAS IN WHICH RECLASSIFICATION MIGHT BE WARRANTED. MOTION
SECONDED BY CM STALEY. AMENDMENT PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
MAIN MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Bradley urged that the personnel officer be allowed to seek
the paralegal salary information and to do the job analysis.
CM-3l-346
February l7, 1976
(Re Classification
Adjustment)
Cm Miller stated that there is obviously a conflict between one
piece of the City administration and the other. The City Manager
and the City Attorney both work for and report to the Council
separately and the two are in conflict on this particular issue.
The department head of the legal staff is talking to the Council
and Cm Miller is willing to accept his recommendation. If the
City Manager and his people wish to submit other material this
is also satisfactory but he is willing to listen to the department
head that reports directly to the Council. In his opinion the City
Attorney should do the salary survey.
Cm Staley stated that he would disagree because the duties of the
City Attorney fall within the category of legal matters and not
personnel functions. A personnel officer should be in charge of
this responsibility. While it may be true that both the City Manager
and the City Attorney report directly to the Council, from a personnel
standpoint items having to do with personnel should be no less appli-
cable to the City Attorney's department than they are for any other
department. The Council certainly wouldn't expect to have a separate
treasurer and everything for the City Attorney's office. In his
opinion, the recommendation made by Don Bradley is very reasonable.
Discussion continued concerning the item of who should conduct the
salary survey.
Cm Miller felt it would be unfair for the person to have to wait
for an increase in salary while the City is locating a personnel
officer. The job would require more responsibility than before
and the salary should also be adjusted immediately.
Cm Turner stated that he works for a large organizations and there
are promotions within the organization. Most of the time people
who have been promoted have to wait some time for their salary
increases and he, too, is behind in what he should be making. In
his opinion this is part of life.
With respect to who should do the salary survey, Cm Turner stated
that no matter where a promotion is given, everything is done through
the Personnel Department where he works and he feels this is the
appropriate channel.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT DO THE SALARY SURVEY,
SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND PASSED 4-1 (Cm Miller dissenting) .
CONTINUED DISCUSSION
RE PENDING POLICIES
Permit Requirements for
Building Construction
and Site Grading
Cm Miller stated that in the draft the City Clerk has provided
and according to the minutes about building permits, the draft
reflects what was discussed previously but the Council did not
finish their discussions.
CM MILLER MOVED TO: l) APPROVE THE POLICY, AS IT IS DESCRIBED IN
THE PRESENT TEXT; AND 2) ASK THE STAFF TO PREPARE ANY ORDINANCE
CHANGES THAT MAY BE REQUIRED. MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RECESS
Mayor Futch called for a brief recess after which the Council meeting
resumed with all members of the Council present.
CM-31-347
February 17, 1976
CONTINUED DISCUSSION
RE PENDING POLICIES
Benefit Districts
The City Attorney explained the provisions of the Subdivision Ordi-
nance, relative to benefit districts.
Cm Miller stated that he would like to offer the following policy:
The use of benefit districts in the City will not be considered for
any form of private land development.
Cm Turner wondered why Cm Miller is suggesting this and Cm Miller
stated that there is no reason the public should have to pay for
private development.
Mayor Futch commented that this would depend upon whether or not
there would be public benefit by the development of private property.
Cm Miller pointed out that there is a difference between benefit
districts and assessment districts.
Mr. Lee cited incidents in which the public might benefit, such
as the requirement to put in additional public works improvements
over what would normally be required for one reason or another.
Cm Turner stated that he believes there are advantages to consider-
ing this at the time of development, and Mayor Futch stated that
he concurrs with this idea.
THE ITEM CONCERNING BENEFIT DISTRICTS WAS NOTED FOR FILING.
Use of Eminent Domain Authority
for Private Property Development
Cm Miller stated that the Council asked for a change on this
policy in the past and the Council has received the same old
policy. He would like the policy to read as follows:
First paragraph to be exactly as it is.
Second paragraph, cross out however.
In the last part of the first sentence,
the word parcel, insert the following:
of private condemnation for dedication
charge", and delete everything else.
at the end, after
"by the procedure
to the City without
Cm Miller explained that the Council's concern, in the past, was
use of the public's power to condemn property for private persons.
If there already exists another procedure that private parties
can use to condemn those properties without using the public's
authority, it is more complicated for them but it can be done.
It should not be the business of the City to condemn for private
purposes.
em Miller pointed out that the City was in a bind at one time
over condemnation of the Meadows. It was owned by someone else
and City powers were used for getting it condemned for a developer
and there was an uproar over the issue.
Discussion followed concerning whether or not this should be
eliminated.
Cm Turner felt the policy should remain as it is, as the Council
should have the option. However, he would suggest that wording
CM-31-348
February 17, 1976
(Council Policy re Use
of Eminent Domain Auth.)
be included to reflect that the City should determine that the
developer has exhausted every avenue for condemnation of property.
Cm Miller stated that the private land developer who is unable to
get property by persuading someone to sell does not need the City _
he has another alternative.
ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY A 4-1 VOTE
(Cm Miller dissenting), THE POLICY REGARDING THE USE OF EMINENT
DOMAIN AUTHORITY FOR PRIVATE PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT WAS ADOPTED, AS IS.
Property Corner Markers
Cm Miller stated that if property markers are placed on property
lines then people will at least know where the boundaries are
located. He then suggested wording for the ordinance which indicates
that property lines should clearly be outlined by a permanent marker
prior to construction and at the time of final inspection as well
as at the time of the first sale. Also, no permanent marker shall
be used, thereafter, without permission of the City and agreement
of adjoining property owners.
Mr. Lee expressed concerns for the permanent property markers and
stated that this might create an added cost.
Cm Miller stated that in his case he can't put a fence on his
property line without going through a full scale survey because
he does not know where his property line is located and most other
people don't know either. They try to place a fence on the property
line by guessing where it would be.
Cm Turner stated that he would agree with a permanent marker, but
only through final inspection. After that, it is the prerogative
of the property owner to remove the markers.
It was concluded that the Council would agree to an appropriate
permanent stake or clearly marked fence post.
Cm Miller stated that there is one other item the Building Inspector
raised and that is if you are building in an area that has already
been built up and the adjoining parcels have already developed and
property lines are clearly laid out then the requirement for the
property markers could be waived.
The Council concurred.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE FOLLOWING WORDING BE INCLUDED IN THE ORDI-
NANCE, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE:
"...The exterior boundaries of the property shall be
clearly outlined on the ground by appropriate permanent
stakes or clearly marked fence posts or monuments which
shall be in place prior to the start of construction, at
time of final inspection, and at the time of the first sale."
Certificate of Occupancy
Mayor Futch stated that he would like the Council to continue dis-
cussion of this policy because he would like to have the opportunity
to review the report from the Building Inspector.
Cm Miller stated that he would like to mention a few things for
consideration by the Council when they are reviewing this item.
CM-31-349
February 17, 1976
(re Policy - Certificate
of occupancy)
Cm Miller stated that the City has had trouble over people taking
occupancy without everything being done and there have been seri-
ous concerns over occupancy for Gi1lice and others. He would
suggest that the City include dwellings and condominiums for first
occupancy which provides that there be a check that all of the
City's ordinances have been satisfied. Secondly he would suggest
that there be no partial use or temporary occupancy for any class
of building; otherwise the City has to end up suing or nagging to
get everything completed. It needs to be clear that everything
must be done prior to actual occupancy. If there is going to be
any provision for allowing temporary occupancy, then in the first
place it should be discouraged, and secondly it should come to the
Council. Lastly, that occupancy be required before any business li-
cense is issued. This last item is one recommended by the Building
Inspector.
Cm Turner asked that Cm Miller prepare this in writing so the Council
can review it.
THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED UNTIL MARCH l.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Olivina Home-
owners Complaints)
Cm Turner stated that he has had complaints from people onOlivina
who indicate that teenagers climb on their fences, break windows,
make obscene gestures and swear. He stated that he would like
to have this placed on the agenda for discussion to see if this
problem can be resolved.
Mr. Lee agreed to meet with the spokeswoman for the homeowners
who are complaining, and he will report back to the Council.
(Compliment to Mayor
re Mayors Conference)
Cm Miller stated that he believes our Mayor should be complimented
on the excellent job he did at the Mayors Conference on the bottle
bill. He really did a very fine job of presenting the information
and in getting the necessary votes.
Mayor Futch thanked the Council for expressing appreciation.
(BASSA Letter)
Cm Miller stated that in the letter to BASSA which was prepared by
the staff, and under Item l, in the middle of the page, which
is relative to inter-relationships and direct communications.
Direct communications should be changed to direct connections.
He added that he would like a copy of the letter to be sent to
Pleasanton, VCSD, ABAG, Air Resources Board, Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, Regional Water Control Board, State Water
Resources Control Board, Clair Deadrick, Floyd Mori, John Ho1mdahl
and all the other Bay Area Legislators, the Tribune and Norman
Hannon.
CM-3l-350
February 17, 1976
("P" Street Under-
Pass Curve Hazard)
Mayor Futch stated that he is still concerned about the "P" Street
underpass curve which is hazardous for the bicyclists.
Mr. Lee stated that the staff is working on some type of barrier
or rail which will not allow the bicyclist to go out into the
street.
(Rancher Complaint)
.
Mayor Futch stated that he has received a telephone call from a
rancher who has informed him that it is almost impossible to get
hay. The rancher has requested that the local rancehers be given
the opportunity to purchase hay produced on City property near the
airport.
Mr. Lee stated that the hay has always been advertised at the time
of sale and he doesn't know if the City can give local people any
type of preference for purchasing it.
Mayor Futch suggested that the Council be informed when a sale is
to take place so the local ranchers can at least be informed and
have the opportunity to bid.
Cm Miller stated that perhaps there could be an alternative to
ration a certain amount of hay, at the going price, to anyone
who wants to purchase hay.
(Mehran Contribu-
tion to Guatemala)
Mayor Futch stated that he received a letter from Mr. Mehran with
the enclosure of a $500 check for Guatemala. Mr. Mehran stated
that he was sorry he had not sent the check to the Council but
he did not think of it.
The Council felt this gesture was extremely commendable and
requested that the staff prepare a letter of thanks on behalf
of the City with a copy of the letter to the Sister City Committee.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Futch adjourned the meeting at lO:55 p.m. to an executive
session to discuss appointments and condemnation.
APPROVE
~/5~
Mayor
ATTEST
aLw~
iv rmore,CC:~ifornia
CM-3l-35l
Regular Meeting of February 23, 1976
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was
held on February 23, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39
South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:l0
p.m. with Mayor Futch presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Staley, Cw Tirse1l and Mayor Futch
Absent: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Futch led the Councilmembers as we'll as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES - 2/9/76
P. 315, 6th paragraph should indicate that Cm Turner spoke with
Jerry Gerich.
P. 324, 3rd paragraph, line two, put a period after the word
project. Line 7, omit "he is concerned that".
P. 325, last line is a motion and it should reflect that Cw Tirsel1
was absent.
P. 333, under (Diagonal Parking), the sentence should begin with
Cm Turner - not Cm Miller.
P. 335, second paragraph, under (Council Rules) next to last line
should begin: the rules of order they had been using. In addition
he remembered adoption of a new book by another author to be used
for parliamentary procedure, not included in the Rules of Order
booklet adopted by the Council.
CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF FEB. 9,
1976, AS CORRECTED, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND WHICH PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE (Cw Tirsell abstaining due to absence during
that meeting) .
PROCLAMATION - FUTURE
FARMERS OF AMERICA WEEK
Mayor Futch proclaimed the week of February 2l thru February 28,
1976, Future Farmers of America Week, and then read the procla-
mation to the audience.
Mayor Futch asked those members of the Future Farmers of America
to stand for recognition by the audience. He then presented
Rich Hudgins with the proclamation.
STATE OF THE
CITY ADDRESS
Mayor Futch stated that as he prepares to step down from the
responsibilities of Councilman and Mayor he appreciates the
opportunity to discuss, with the Council, some of the activities
of the City and the present "state of the City". He then read
a prepared statement which appears as an attachment to the
minutes of this meeting.
CM-3l-352
~ ~ I r J ' ~~. f' 1. IT? r i; 1 ) T'.l ( H ( r i'
" J 0 .' . '.\' ". ., J
2250 FIRST STREET. lIVERMUfl. CA 94550. (415) 447.2100
.
23 February, 1976
n 'J' A '[' r.
..~~~-- ~--:._~
o r
T 11 E C T T Y
Archer H. Futch
Hy fellow COllncilmernb(~I'S, City Staff, and the people of
Livermore. As I prep.are to step cJmm from the responsibilities
of COllncilman and Mayor, I appreciate this oppor'tunity to dis-
cuss w~th you some of the activities of the City, the present
state of the City, and some of, the 110[1\28 and concel'ns for the
future.
I believe it lS desi.rable to pause once 1n a while to assess
our pas t dccomp 1 ishmcnt~; or fa.i 1 ures and to p Ian fop the future.
The Pl'E'St'nt seems an a ppropr ia te t illw, and I hope that CJ. s rut Ul'e
Hayor's ~) to p clown they aeld to the record word~.3 1:h<'1 t \\' i 11 prov ide
cl continuous nLlrrative of how l'Clch Council viewed its c:ontri-
butions to.the history of our City. I wish thclt we had such
a historical record for our first 100 years aJ a City. It
would. be a valu<lbJ e and illtel'CS ting doclllllent to }Idve thi~; year
as hie celebrate both our City's Centennial and Ollr Nelt-ion's
Bicentennial birthday.
Althollgh the words are m1ne, the. historical record is that
of the Council and is built upon the efforts of preceding Councils.
I believe that illY acc.ount inf, of both facts Clnd tllo\ll~hts repl'csents
thc COllllCi.l.. Tr- not, .1. inv:i.h-: olllcr' Cn\ll1cillll('Jllb'2r'~; to dele! theil'
.word s to the record.
CM-31-352
Attachment A - Page 1
,~ I
The pc1~~t ~)f'veri11 ycaps have DC'cn Y(~<1r's of inlc'nse (lctivit'y
.lnthc phy~)'i\'<ll (1cv\~'lo'pll1/.'nt n!' tile! Ci Iy. }{('l'f'11Lly (hi~~ :,ctjvity
. lhlG, ~:;hil n~<f t'r'olll c11~v,.;lc'pJI'(~lll: of l'c~;:i<l('J)(:i<ll dr'(~d~; to the dcv.~lop-
rrl(~ Ill: nf I']w ('I~III.I'd 1 hll:-; .il1('~;:; d'j~; ll' jet. NOII-I.'I.':: j d\ ~II t .i ,I 1 cun :;1' l'\ll~ _'
t.ioll p)'()ic.'cl'~; (:Oll1p.I\'1 c'd jll 'Lh...' 1,1:;1. ? \/I'L1I'~; '1'1' cln'r'l~Jlf.:1y ulldl'r'
constl'uction total ..:.Grno~;t $23' mi.llion. These pr'ojects LlT'e
sllmmal'ii,ed in Table'I. Of this totc1l, apprOXimi.1tl:>.ly 37% are
pllbl ic pro.i eet ~') . ':1 nc1 G 3 0" d Pc pl'i v d t ':.<1 y fund eel C.)IIlIllC t'c :i.a 1 a lid
inc1ustriCll cl(;I/(~lop1l1(-,lltS.
Clf:,n'ly, the most vi::;i.ble l'ro:i(~ct 1:3 1Jw r,l'('lel\~ ~;el)dl.'dt.i.orl
al1d Lr<lck l'cJOCdtioll pT'oject. Thi~:; l'roje:~l:, \-Jhicll J.G so ('sscIllial
to the safety uncl conveni(~ncc of the pUblic, will have a Ind]Op
.illlP.:.J.Ct 011 the commercial de:v<:'Jopwcnt of ~h()ppj'lIg .fc:lcili1..ie~,.
The i.1clditiollal r'l'Vel)l!l'. fl'olll ~:;dlE;s dnd Jll'olwr.tv tax(':, resultinG
from c{)lJlmerci~d deveJopment of m(ll'(~ than 80 (]C]'l;~~ III lhe (]m'}J]-
to\vfl bllSine~;G clic.;tpict will pT'ovidc .J II\,lJ01' c;OU]'C,' of" JnCOTllC
in the fllt:lIr~. This is cJ(~,lr:lYOn(' of the majol" dccolllplish-
mel1t~) (If the City. The proj ectcertain1y hac] its pr'oblerns,
but VJf~ have succeeded. Tn fact, \"0 have .been informed by our'
py'ojectdesign t;llgineer, Bob Barton of J}eL(~I..lw (\,lthe1', that He
dre theollly c:i. ty in the we stern Un i ted States 'that hc.i s. slice\.? ss-
fuI1y completed a railroad relocation ppojcct of'.this mar.nitucle.
The Jal'f;cs t project in terHlS of cost is the upr;r'dding 'of
the \'latcr Rec lclfna t ion Plan t.. The JIIoeJifica t i01ls vlcre l/lanc1a ted by
the Rcg:ionaJ. \flater' QU(llity Control BoaY'eland SUpPCl}'ted by rederLl]
llnd Stdl'(~ j,'.I'dtll:; -[oP 1371;;y'. of the :~S.2 Jlli11jOll C()~;l. The lIIouifi-
(' a I' i () I I : ; I () . 111 \ ' I ,I d " Ii II cl It" ( . :i III p 1 'l,\ V I . <I i .I II' d I i \II'" d ( , ( . III ( Il' i 11 d f. i llll ,
dll<! convcl'f;ion or nj,tr:i testa n.i.tr"'lte~;.
1',',1")';1:1 1"CVt'lll)t' :;lIdl'.i Ill', rlllltl~; 11.1\'.: IlC\'ll \1:;,." to COII:-;tl'IICI.
iOl
-it
n(~w policc~ <Ifld fire stations. Con:,;tl'lIcliuIl of the police ~-;tc1tion
is completed, Fire Station 111 is J1ei.ll'inl:; compleljun, anu Fire
Station il'! :is in the dc~;ign ]'!'<l:~e while lilJld is hcill!', ,'ICqlljl'cd.
COllstL~lIction co:,;!::; fOT' 1'lw~3(~ fl1lblic :;,II,'I.y lJu.i'lcliIl.I',:; ('()1.i1J.
~';1.28 mi.llioll.
CM-3l-352
Attachment A - Page 2
.-r
Cor.ulleY'"i,,] <icvelopmcnt HI the ri rcd ,,,,d l' ~; \:l'" ot vicinity
tol,ll,~ ''1'J'I'''''' "',' tel Y ,,1 ",UllOll ;\\,d i" iIlCI'",IO il'i> ~,udi tionill
,kv"] "1''''' \\, i" ",d 1 c.j I'" \ed [" 11 OW in~. UI', ",., "ca I j on "I' the
~:;\)\lt1\(~1'l\ \,;\C'i \" i(' " r',l"i"\ \ 1''\\' \.:~\11 i:: :"; Ill" i 1\)',.
1n\".1 CU"I''''''''';''" l'Y'uvid"d Livel'IIl"'" "il1, j,,, fil'''\ "',\JO\'
indUS tl'Y j n thc ] as l ] 0 Y CiIl'S . Ca l' it a1 ~\e ta 1" ""U othel' sma 11
inuustric" in the, Reseal'ch Drive ,,"e" have auuod to the indUS-
trial dE''/(;:~ lopTnent.
pr 0 J" T' l Y for t: her, ,',. \: S tr'<''' t I've.\' pas f' h. IS b,,,'" "'.' '\ u i \' cd
,:\IIU appli c,,,ion ful' a State grant h'''' be"l\ "obm:itt<'u. The "s ti-
mil t cd C(,I'" ':l'uet io\l c'", t i. s. "2 ",i 11 iOI\. Of th is" um, 90'; "i 11
be p,'ovided by the Stat" and the raUI'oad .c<."lll'anies.
constt'I,6!:ion of a comllll\nity SOl"Jio" ConteI' (11\ 11'" Civio
Center "He has beel\ inHiated "itb funds 11'OHl a %'20,000 redel'a)
comm,,,,itv rkvc} O\l\llcnl C,'"n t . 1'110 proi cC t ]F\" I'ccei oed Couuty
appr"val as coqni""d and dn ,n'chihT lua] I il"" has been s"lect,,,\.
Dt hct' S i 1'.1\ if i e,m1: vI'oj ,,c t s inc1 nued i 1\ ']'a b le 1 j nc1l\de
beautification p,'ojcclS totaling $'131,300; air!,Ol'\: hilngal'
c<)n strne I ion $17 S , D 00; r i I'st S tl'eo t I Liv ennol"> ^ venue j n to. 1',,80-
t ion and beautH ication $11'1,000; Nopth Live1'lnm'e ^venne
eoUS tPuc!: ion and llIod j an s $606,000; coct ens i on of 1\1 it j ty 1 iw'"
1:0 the Chcthot ,1 n n i or Co }lei,e ~,it" S]:I 9 ,000; .J lId "on stl'UC 1: ion .
of hi}:t:; t r'd j L; " ~,; S 0,000 .
^ Rood indicalor of eO~llunity d.ve]~pment ,. i11U"~rated
bY the ."pit,' I improvemellt expenditures. J'iguI'e I sM"" the
>:,ro\." h '" c,o pi t,1I j \II pro v elllent r; dUl'i IIp,I:1,. ] n" t ]0 yen 1'00 . It
ooJ",,,](\\1" 1""",01 'h," '\1<' ,..]",,,,,,,,"1" ,.,."iol,'''' i"J ,\<'v,'I"I'''I''II'
hn G I'" i thel' J\\'C< V\'" l "d "OT' S loued "lIe I'd te 01 '''''''''''' n ity develop-
JlIe 1) t .
\-Iii j Ul' il c\d i ti 01'" 0 f I'd l' k ] a I\d", in cl u dill ,', ,II '1'<i Y ,'S ,\l Id other
open S pilCe, hctVC be." aequil'.cj reecnU", by 1he City 'hr'oUgh the
CM-31-352
Attachment
A - Page 3
'I' /\ I \ I ,J
."
NON-HI':~}[[)I':N'L'TA[' CON:, II.IJC'J'TON J'HO<)}:C'I'~.;
CllfTr>n t Projects r\lfit
Grade SeparatJOn and Track Relo~aU('rl
\ofa te l' Rec lama tion Plant Modifica t j()ll~i
rlrc Dcpnrtm(~nt
Station III
St;;ll:.i.on II1I (nCgi.!~;rl(,c1 nnd land nC\jllirc'd)
Po 1 t (' (' ~; t : I Li. t) 11
Beautification Projects 75-76
Multipurpose Se~vice Center
Airport "'I'" Hangar Addition (16)
Enst First street Overpass
Firs t St root-I.j. vermore Avenue Int ersec tion
nnd Dcnutifitutjon
Isabel Avenue -'- IIigh\,<,ay right-:-of-wny acqui.red
Junior College Utj1ily Lines
Bi ]~e Trails
North Ljvermore Ave. Tmprovcmcnts, Portola to
l,'re (~\'<';ty, fv1(>clLan::; :lt1c1 1),0<\ lll:L f.i ca Uon
(Cooperative ~)l'o.jcct wil:11 County & Stale)
Co~nerc~al Development
Southern Pacific Con~ercial Area
\']ard I S
Grossman1s
Industrial ,Development
Intel
(1)
(':\pi l:11 ~h~I.:\I:~
( J '))
J\(~~;l':\I'<:11111'1v(' :flldll:llt'ia.L An)1.l. .,'-
:,j(lUtlWJ'11 1':1<.:1I'j(' Indu:J l: r'ial JJ:I.I'I~
'fOTAL
1. Mnrket Value as of 3-1-75
')
,- .
\of c~ b [: t I:}' fli v .
C()nLI'o.!. ]):It.'l
lc)'7,.III)()
:! 1 () , I " " ;
;'I:},U, '
.IU'I, I
'I (l( , , , '\' '
Jnd. CUllIpJ ex II~)
111 ~\" ^:;:~ \ 1(' .
C!'Jl -3l-352
Attachment A - Page 4
:1; )1,000,000.
1).,200.,000
11?9 , 000 .
1 ,')() , (lOr)
'(00, ()lh)
~?31,300
622,000
125,000 .
?,OOO,000
160,000
100,000
139,000
~)o,ooo
GoG ~ ~'()O
) 511,000
) 467,500
151,000
~) '71 , ~(2'O
2,7'79,860
q(l';,lll)ll
~)'(~), :~Ul)
:' , ()l)() , ( l\ II )
..
:t,li.1 ,512,300
1,701,220
(j '-";')1 r.6)
), (,_ ,) l
22, <nB ,,080
."
-
"-C)
~
~r-"
I
I
I
I
I
.....1
.~~--''--
I . .
,
I
I
I
I
"I . . . . .
~I'" ~.-:
I
I . ,
I" :
~':::~!I:::; ~:.
~--- ---.
. . t , . . I ..
, . .. ;:... .,
I I . . .. ..
I I , .: ..
. . . .. f''''
t' .,
. .
1
" . I
C):._.~ ~._.:~-~
I
I
I
~'
-I
~ .
J
~
.f I
. ;
, i
I ,
I
..
~l-:--~~-
I"
't
I
I
, ; I
. I
..-.............t-~
.. r t "1"
I.
. . I
. ! . ~
. I I . ,
I
I
~-
. I
It' . . .
~
...
-
t .
. .
. .
I .
. I
. .
. , I
, .
I . .
. .
1 t..
I I"
~-i-~
I I
. ,
. . . I
I .
I
~
I
'-'r ~._-
.. . t I ..
.. ....
. ,
I .
. ,
, . ,
t . I.,
'11' ! .
. '~-T
. , .
,., . i
1 .
. ~
'f" "'
.t.. ..
,;
t., f
. . 'f' .
I · .
· I
-+-+--t-
~. \ : ~ : I
. I
, t .
. , .
. .
E;tl'd.?f"i~s
VI
. . . I
. . . I '
:: : : J
-:-::-; I
, , .'
n ~.
. I
.
, .
, I
I I
I
. t.:
t
. t
. t
: ~ I . i .. -, ~ .:
~L~.~t:h 1
I . ., .. ,-....
, t ! . . .. , . t-
, '"
, t
, ,
; I
, ; :
, , .
f . I
I:' . .
t~. :x ~
"'
.,
, ,
, '
.. I
I
T~-~r
-.--~
~ ".' ~ ~
. )
. ,
! I
; ,
j'
".- T'--'-;--
I ' .
,. '11' .
. ... t".. f
, . :. -+-. + '
, . ,. .... I
---.., --
: 1 : ·
1 t J ,t ..; .. ..
1 .
I. .
,.
r ~
: I
t . ,
"'1 1.-
., ~...
'1'
-I I -.. ...
l-.i~T
., t. t. t ., ~
, .
I !
"r- .. ,
. I . I
. t -. ..
:.\
, , 1
, I
~ .: '1 :
~++-
: Ii \ ; I
. . .. .
:.:...:J
, I
I I
. t
.
,
. ,
. ,- f'"
--~
. .
t .,
r
I
, ,
"!
. , t .
. ,
I"
I
! I '
. .
. I
r'
. .. ~
. r-'
., L."1
I I ,
,-
.
-~:-+
, ,
, .
.. ~
t
.-1
r
.I. ~ . t
1 "
.-+-.
j
1'1,
.!+
,.
, f ~
: r; : ~ ~i.; ~ i
I . ~ 't.'!
-r- -- "-1"'
. . . I 1;-'"
. . . , I ' . . .
~ ,.
I
. I
1'1
. t to!,
~ -- "'-~1---~'
"
,. .
... 1 t
t j
'-j---,'
.. . . t ..
"'f r
t-. t
l, ,-I
+-~
. t .. +. t
. .
- t .
.- t
. 1
f--'~ I.
II . r t
,
I
, I
., _ I
.~
I
t l' t I ' t
. ,.. t t I
t 1 f'
CH-3l-352
,~ A"/II;'~.1
~
~ Dolld">,S
.. .
!. ..
, , . '1' . , .
t , " . t- t .
... J " . t . .
-.----- ---
1 . .. t r . .
1'T "0 T'"
. I
I
~
I
I
I
,
I
,. r'- -.-
. , .
I
I
;
. t
. I
. t' .,
.-..... .
I
.,
t I ..
. t .
t . . t t f .
t ..
I
, : . -l:~r=
. I
. t
.. - -.
I ... . .:. I
.t- _._.:....._~
I I
T ,- " l
I r:- -{ ,
.I....j 't'-:.
. I I . . . I . i'P
-:-T~.~n: -: ;--. - . ~I
. t . . . .' t
I ., ..
, . 1 .. .....
-~.:~.+: '~':_T~l!- _ II ~----'- ~
..... ..... .... . ~
',.. .:.. ,. .. I N
I:;. 1 I.: ~
~
I t\
. 'j' .
:.~- -~-:
. I
, .
r----- --
. I .
,
!
. ;
. ,
, ,
I.'
I
I
,.,
I
I
, ,-.
I .
,.
, .
I'
~ '1--'--
. " ....
. ... t t . 4
1
t-.
t t .
t
I.
. I'
.
..t 1
1- ..
-. ...
~
;~
r
,.
, , . t
,-..
t t..
-, , ~.f.
I
.. .. ,
. I
. .
t .
I .
1
t.-.--
I
I
I .
I. .
0' _ ~
, .
. ..
., I
~:':"~:"l
1
..I
I
I
- i
· . t
.:~+:~.
r ~. 'r'
. Lj
t
~.
. , ,
,
.L
. I
, .
I .
, .
. I
t .
I
'\
, ;
I 1
'" .
I'
I t ~
, . I
Attachment A
Page 5
rldoptiulI uf V,II'lUll~: O!'d:i.lldllC'l,~fi llJ)d jloLi.c:i.l::.:. 1{('~;I\(I!Hl.iJ\I~ t.O
111(,: pub L i I.' f~. <1,~: LIT L'll 1)]'c:;I,'/'''/(' t.J'I' dl'l'UY(.':~ .I:;' 11,11111,,,'1 1',11'J::;
:tllll(:(J11I1III11'.i "illj 1>11 I j IlL:;, ('J]I' ('j:/'y I\d:; lI,".',.llll'I',1 ],:1,111:: ..lllll
"('\jIILl"'I! ,1I""'VIl ''''ill:; 1111'<1\1,1',11<1111 lilt! l:i.I'y", ^.! I III 111,' 'IJ'I'li)'ll
!.1 u c II () 1 ) I l '() 11 I', II I II" C"j I Y 11 01,; hi' (' II d c: <t IJ i I' (,',1 \.J i I:J I I J 1(' " :.:' : /' 1> L .i (, 11
of thr: arr:,] Tlol,th of Stan] ey Boulevar'cl. ^ S I:dte f',Y'(lnt i~
anticipated. h) cOlJlpJete tlw C1r:qllisiticlTi of tho:je lanrJs \-JithiTl
the City. Tdhl,' II i~; a ] :i;;t Offhc J>.:1I.'1<: dnd OJWII :;1',)('(' :Lands
d(_~qlJir'('~d hy Lh.~ (~itv rJU1'jng I:hc. ld:;L II YC,jI~:~.
11.lll'y' :illl]iIII'f:iJlII City ilcl:ivit:i,::'; )'1':3ult 'in 11('Ll.l!l~l' I~Oll:;Ll'IlI~-
t:iCJII r.or LJllcJ ilcqui:;it5on:~. ^ lllllllbcl' of pJaTlning [;l:uC!jcs have
l'('Cell!']Y bl',:I' ('nlllplell'cl 01' <11'(' lll:dl'i.ng CUlIlJdvt.iOIl. Thl~~;(~
~~!'ll(lJ.';:'; .11'l' itl.'lId:".cdLll 'l'dhl(~ :ill. The 1I1'W Cl'!](!rill J'1c111 JS
LlH~ fil'f;I.'cunlll]c'l.e pliUl )'evi~~:ion ~;:illC'e l'J~'>9.
'I'll :i :'.; 11101 OJ 0 f' \JlllJ (;)'-,
t,lkillg, .!Je':: 1I('d1':[II)', CI11JIp}Cyt:lOJl, c()nc:llltlc:,; J}(~dl'-ly :l YC'.-ll':;.O[
::'i Llll]Y IIY I JI(~ C-il.i ::(:11:; CUd]:; COIll/lli.l l t~", th,.' l'J.LJli,illg C':)IIl!lli~;[;.i e)J1,
unci the,: C:i ty CUIlTlcil Th(~ !IC~\.J Cener',J] Plan if'> bdG(~d on Lhc
l'ealitif':; of tadoy. 1'01' the fir'~;L tirne, population t',l'o\.]th
l'atL'f;, holcljng c(lp.:lciLjc~-;, CiJpitlll irnprovellll'nL:j, and otlwl'
filcilit.Lcs ;HOl;' based all ccoilOTllic and t~Jlv.i.rOJlIllr.~lIlal constl'dints
dl1d 011 t h,~ <\llolli Ly .ofl.i.fp c.1csj l'C by Llll ul'('a I~; c.i.ti::,,-.;rls inst(~(lC]
(If Oil d ~:::iJIII'LI.' (~:-:tP;.Ipo].jt:i.tJlI of lH'('viu\I:: ])OPllldl i,OIl )',l'o\.Jl:h.
Olhc!' :;i,I~lliJjcClnL p1dllllinp; Sllld:lt.~0 i.IICllldl~ l:ll(~ ilil'POr:t,
th(~ ] ibJ'i1l'Y, t:hc centpa] bu:.;int.!sG cJi~')ty'.lC t:, iil!d pub];ic Ll'dIlS-
I)tlrlillioll. 'J'h(' COllllciT l"_~,-,ugni7.(~~; thc vilal IlC:ed fUl' P1lblic
l1'dn~q)OJ''-dLj()11 ill the /'.ivcl'IIlOPI' Villlc'y dIll! hdS l)("~ll ill:;Lrtlllll~llt<11
i II I' ] 1 I .J i II i III', 1 ',1\ I: 'J" I) 11:; : ; I ' I 'V I ( , I . I (. U II> V d I I,' \' . III . (' ': II II ,/, J. i VI' I 'Ill () J '( .
\'I'I'"-"I:i:'",,j I:Ilt' ::II('l'(':::;llll :lfJIJIlyilll', ,:1 f"I'!: 1,'1' :;111"11'])0111 CCllllllllllli l: i.(~:;
to 1"'('\1('111 l'lll' 11/\1,01' 1\'),11'<1 It'(Hil l"!'III;llcll iIl)~ thi:; 1'::::':111 j,ll ::l.'l'vi('"
1.0 llw Vdll(~y. TlJl~ Coullcil lld:'; indic.ltcd jt~j illl:l~IlLjon to pl'O-
vi.e1e ddd.i.l:iolldJ publjc l1'dI1SJl"I'I'dhoTl withjIl LiVl')'IIIUl'C' ullcl hd~;
l'C(luC'::;t"d thl~ :;ldlf t.o I'I'Cpil. I plilll fot' impll'IJ;CIlLlLioll.
CM-31-352
Attachment A - Page 6
'J':'. [I, L1':1 J
I'll" (~:1
F;l1~l( i)c'di,"lj,ill!1
.... ___.._. __ h__._____. _.__.____..__.____ __...____ _______ _.. ___ _._ ___ _____" ._ _ ._. __..__ ._._. ___ _ .___
,'1).U
~)! I . ')
I '( ..' ~
(.J
'( . l:
i.l . JI
!.'l~'di':il'():: \':11'!\\-.' lY (Ui 11 i('," IX'11:;i ty rl'I':111~;I',-'I')
H..llJ(-II:;~'il.l()(! (;:;\lI'I:;I"j,)
C/'lJltI U;1111:',('L)
r; It)' 1 :; L i:lll:;' 'II (I Ii' V i. I :w q II :1 ?,; j (i : ; : : ( . I I )
(1.1i V 111:\ (II. C .
'-j j-~; t a nc~: IIJ ()1;J ~~
1 ,; I 1 j u Lt, )
( ~: un: j c~ t )
TIj~-:rr
'['r 1 t. '1 I :j
:\}" '; I
..x: l.' ~.!.\__~\_:.::..t ~.i ~~U'_~~'~ ~~.,___.I!_I_ll._I.)~~_\:.'.~ .I_'}J':I~"~I. ~:_______ ____.
j , ~)
)~1 . )1
~ ):..~ . c'
Ii:) .
1 .:~
.I .11
, I
[. i (... I ' it' I ) ;; l' ,J l' 1(\: : 1 y ~ J '. 1111 1 : ~ 0 11 /\ C 'I \ Ii : ' i. 1: if III )
[;["c1c i \'0:, j';ll'!-;\':;1Y Uo J :lll I\Cq',li:.', i L \1>11) .
1';('(/('11"0:; 1':lI'li\'.':LY . \'.O"!'!'('.1 f\CI]\l i ~', i L j ',111
0I'I'iIICL.nV:1I (loll' C()\II'~;I'
!'ur'Lut;] 1';11'k
l'll)lp:(~r' l\drJitioll (1'(~rldiJi1:)
l:()I.)'~r'\. Li \i(:I'ITI()I"~ildili L i (111
I: v' II:: \'J()(j Ll l;'::i 1. () [': \ l. 11 1 I I, ('; i L 1\ j .!\ 1\ j' U)
;, i I':; L :11\(1 j, 1. VI' rlll( Jr" ~
:!', II:' J UOO
~.l '1 , ,) u () I
- !l('lldi Ill';) ~h,). ~)U;}
I ()' i I l,it I;)
;. ~,' -; , '._1, )()
: '1 . I 'iI )()
I).'; , i hll.)
I 'j}, U\)O
.:-'} , I)'. 1()
TV=;~j
'l't) 1,:.1 1
't7TC~\ ,;)
'1'''\1',1.1.: IJJ
._.ni~~~~1...!.!c;..~; 1..\ J( I i~':.;__.._...
( : ' ~ I ; i: r': l .I I' I :'11I
,\ iI' I" 1 1" t; 1'1: III
'I' " ' 11\:~ i t. l' I : II J
J. i \.J 1 ': I '.' ,v PI: III
(; . n . j). P 1 D I)
,I. \'..' '1 'j.',
'I' . . ~. '
. ~.), I .) -",
: ".) 1.)1 J. I
~) t (>.." ',.
I\., , ~ _>.. ,I' ".1
']',1\;:1.1
~'ll~P, Y',')
CM-3l-352
Attachment A - Page 7
D\ll'in$~ thc' 20 YP.cIY':~ of rapid f'csjdentiill f',!'Ov/t:h of the
COIIIIIl\lILity Ct:) !~tl-19 'III ), tll e fJivcl'lIlore ;,chul) J lJi ~;IT.1.(, t ul'c:r.'.'Ilcd
vJ.:i.th :inclcJC?(lllcll:e ~;<.~l]l)ol ]Iou~~ing to ~;t~l.'Vt'. tlw ~;t'lcl(~111: pOl'ulatioll. The
City, cC'<)rll~l'(ll ill[', vlith the: ~;cho()'1 j).i~:tY'ic1 dncl dl"lL~.1')l)(~l'~;, h(L~;
cCl'"LdinJy C0l111~jhul:cd I:u :;olville.t1w j)J'oblelfl, ll]t.hougll ~;chO(l.l
housing in not the C:i.tY'~i pesponsibility. As Cl resutt of this
effort, a $800 fee per' dwelling unit has been iniJ:j.dted,.
Thpough I:h,i~; fee; the ~~chool[; havc received (;S'l3,CSO in ed;,h.
III adclitiC)l1) pOJ:'tl1bJ.<:s \vo1't11 $1~;2,!jOO have oeen dedicdeed to
the ~chool Di::;Yri ct.
Althcl1.I~T,h the Council hus o~~c;n occupied v/ith thephysicaJ.
dcveloplll'_~J\t of the City, .the social lle~cc1s h(]v(~ not been 'for'gotten.
The fOl'lIlutioll of the ~;ociCll COllCCl'nS COfJ1lllittecand the con:;truc-
'tion of the COlnll\unity Se~l'vicc C(~lltCJ' I'l'(lv:i"cll,~ d. "t,.Il't tCl\'Jdl'd
III 0. (~t i 1l1.T.. thc:~ c n (' e d s . An i TI c:r e uS i n g u 111 'J \J II L u r "L j III (' a 11 d 0 f f 0 l' t
HiJ.] be' l'l'Cjuil'(:~cl of J\lL\ll'C City COtlIlCiL; 10 j)l'l"widc tl1(~ C~;-
sential :;ociaJ. services.
Th(~ City Council has added ne\.J stJ'cTlgth .1ncJ V 1.[',01\ to the
City's ]C'PJ1:l tlepLlrtmont. \.-Je lldvc hil,(.d a Ilt~\v C.ity f\tt'Ol'IH~Y
aTld cr'Cll.ll~d new positions of ^s~;ist(Jnt City Attorney Lind ^(]-
lIlini.stl'c3. tivc AS:3istant. Bob Logan and hi::; :.otaf f have done an
excollent job of 'prc1v.i.ding legLllacJvicc ,llle) cl(~fc1\di11g .11w
City fl'Ol11 legCll de t:i.Ol1S. \<!e helve our' Shul'C of legal C>JSCS)
some with StdtE~ and National sigllificiJnce, that ape prilnal'ily
cJSSOCiiltccl \Vith['.I"owth cont1'01 ol'din(ln(~l':J adopted by tlw City
01" by i 1:; cjli;~(~J1~; t:hPO\l$jh the> i.l1i.t.iat:jvC' pJ)UC(~:;:;,
'['Ill' ('(l\llll~i 1 hd~; h(~"1I .Iel.i,v,' .i Tl 1".II1Y (I( hl'l' ,It"'d~:. 1\ \lllllt!ll'I'
of cit i :',('!l,: I ('OIHIlI; ltr'l'[; hilVC !JI!('II hll'lIl<.'d. Thl'~;"~ 'C.'Olllllljt'l''-::(:~:,;
llr'ov.idc illvd.lu,t1dei.lll1uL Lo Lll(_~ C()t1l\ciJ Oil 1'~11.1I I'Thlli,','}l dIll}
nl)lltL~clll\iC,l.l i::';SUC~3. A list' or. conllllittee~3 \vh.ich hdV"l; been
active duping the past 2 YCLll'S is r.;iVL'1l in Tub1c' 1 V.
CM-3l-352
Attachment A - Page 8
't'~ ~J
T^CLf. r v
City COlllln; ttecs
^. Beautification
[J. Des i 911 I{ev i 0\"
C. No; so COlllllli ttee
D. Industrial Advisory Comlllittee
E. Social Concerns Committee
F. Air Pol1ution
G. Golf Course Greens Committee
1'1.'JI1Y ol'rl111."!nces have l)(~C'n adopt:t'c1, too II1(1JIY COJ' c[1ull1cratil)f\
111 l'hi:; l'l'I".>1'I. ~;(lJIIC \...11 i('h hdVf.' ])(;'l'l1 J1 ill/\(','I,.j Ill', ., '.'!',.1 :;1.1 liUI1
fOl' (:iL'il:~: illl!/I]rJ(' paJ'k ucd.i.<.:aliuII, CJIC1'gy COJI:;Cl'\,dl.jll/l, cjl1(]
", r'OI\'I. h c :,',) It 1"'1.,1 l.\I't l.i 11(111' 'I':; .
Th,.: Cil.y 11.1;: jOilll.'d VJi l'll l'll'd:;;ll1l.()11 i111d ViI"II')'C()I/llllllll:ity
~;(,f'ViCl'~; j1istl'ict in the iocmation of ~~t~vCl'a1 imj)01'tant. joint
power agcnc:i.c~; slIch il:j the LivC'1.'1I101'C Amadol' V<111(')/ \.\'astc\\'ater
r.ldn(][',cllwnI f\1~(~llC'/, LAVvn1A, and the Conr:Y'(-~::;G of VaJJcy !.genci('s,
COVA, Th(.'f~l' dgl.'l1cie:; c::crnpLi.fy d f,l".)\.J.1111', :::[111'.11. of ('('Opr'l'dtjon
cllll,)ng the tln',.:('. Vc.dl l~y COlllJlllllli 1:ic~;.
1: ;.: t (' II S i V (.' and t i In e -c 0 n S U Tn in ['; lob b y j i 1 g e f .f (I l' t: S fl d V e bee n
Ill(}clt~ by t:hc j"ll'('Scnt COllnc:i 1. 'J'hE::s'~ incllldc l'tfCYI't:j [0 obtd.in
('Ill d k C' c P B ^ WI' h u :; (' ~ J. nth (: Va 11 e Y d~, d e:3 C J '1 b c d (: d r.l i <: r' . A con-
eel'leu r1l'jv(! l1,I~; bcc~ll 1\li1(l(.' to maintain 1U(','11 contl'oJ llf ~~(,\-JaL'.e
[:pca1.Illcllt p1 un ls in 1:11,: Vd 11 r.:y. 1'01' (.'::(1111p] l.', ',:.' S\lCCC:C;~, fully
oppo~3r.!d llJ(~ C(n'p~j of tnr;i.nrcc)'s inl:l'llc;ioll intu \"a:~1CvJdicr' r.ldl1L1ge-
flle!l!: fOJ' Lh.' Vrllley. S'.:VCl'Cl] trip:; to HLltllilll!,Lon, D. C. \-lel'C'
JIlild.:.' l'l.',f',clrd ing the Corp" Pl'opo:,(!cl p1an::;.
. \\Jj Lhout il clUllbt, the: fllost c1r.'JI\c"\nc1iIlF" tjlllcl-l'on~)l\ll\i.I1LT" and
ill1p01'tdJ)j- i:,:;\IC' rrlcing the City Counc.i.l hd::; be,,'11 'l)lt~ tllt'Cdt to
the' L(]~; Pn:;ll.cls Vi-ILI,'y. 'J'hl! CU\IIltv )\,1:; lI:~'~cl 1I1,1:;:;:i\'1: ,llnC'\lllt:; ur
]>lIl.>J.ic .fllll(l:~ l,c' ~~llr)p()rl: the ]>l'iv,-,tc 1"'(~Il'1 eSlc'll.e 'll'llllJr'I' of r-ll.'.
(;c1dc:rrniJllll. Th(.' City h-1[; rc:~punl.ll.'cl. 1'01' the thir'clt"imc the
CU1.l111:y 'llte! the J.()cdl Agency r()r'fIldt.ioll.Cl)IIIIf\i.~'j~3'lUll II<1v,-, t'hcJll/.',l.'d
L.i\fer'rll()l'el~; ~;pJl':'{'l~ of Jllflllt'nce fOI' t'll'. Ccld"l'Jfldllll':; L(-~llef.it.
LICllillll' 11l<' (' i l V 1\.\:;1 r.~~;1 l r i('c1 t1l1'ulIl',1l <"II (JII!', ~~('I'i t':; t.1f lll'~l~t-
.III!',::. \v i lit I J\l' ,lllllll.ll ('11.111)'." III III<' ~;I.ltt'I'" oJ III I.! \11'111">, Il1l'I'"
L~; :Iitl:l.' )',-'d~~()1l 1:0 br>J.i.cV(: thelL I:h.i:: dct:iUII hol~~. h~,:11 (,olllplcll.'d.
'I'll" el)I)]II\! I:; ('Jldl1l'.(' i,l 111(' Cl'Il<~l'c1J .1'1,111 i (lr' I.h., 1.01:'; I\,:;i. (d~:
Vdlley lIas l>C:'l~11 puled illegul by the ~;ll[JL'r'ior' COllI',". Llvel'lllore
ha~; o]rLd.lrlCd the ^ssoc:iation or Bay ^rc."! Cov(,l'nTIIC~nt::, support 11\
()l'!'o~~ilicn 10 the 1,<1:; 1',):;:iLI~:.'i'nl'IIt'l" -- d ~~i,\~1l11 ie'tlnt tlll'llilll',
j1o.i 11 t. ;l,\:d.i II ~~ L Hr'. Ct~ 1 cknllclll! 1 I
P 1. rlll ~; .
CM-3l-352
Attachment A -'Page 9
~
.
The f'r'c!;cnt lS a time of severe bllclcetar'v ('on:; 1:1.'aint.s for the
City. \'!r~ ,'lJ"'(~ llot 11l1iqlle in t:hj~~ !,;itIJdtioll. h),~ dl'l~ .iJIIl!>i'r.i 1IIIlch
IH:~tt"l' (If'r thcln Jllfll1'y' c:l1.:ic!;. IJnl.ikc IIIdl1Y c.iti.'!:, \.}.,' hd'/(~ beell
ahle' [t'! lJ::,' (1111' ['('<1"1',:11 !~r:J1C'r',1"1 l'('\'t'/I\1I' :;I1.-IJ'i,.l,l', flllld:: f 01' t:'.II~.i tel]
iJrIIH'UVl~IJI[,Jll. ,ill~~t:(,(Jd of LU1' geJlcPdl duy-to-cJCJY opcl'aL:iOJls of the,
City. \h~ ~:;till need mallY capital'ill1pY'()v(~lJlents. /\11 adequate
City Hall and d cOJnllllll1it.y auditorium dl'l2 just. tv-'o l'xamI-'lcs.
The: Ci,.y COllTlCj:1 ['C'C(lgnlzc~s Uli.1t Il1j~; :i!; (I JIlU:j[ difficlIll
filldnci.ll J,..'l'jl"J f<")l' lndllY cit.i:':(:'\l~: (",f !.lIe (:(:>lflllIllJ1,ity. NevCl'lhe-
.lC:j~;, I.i(' hl1v\" f,'Lt it 1I'.'CC:S:jiH'Y
'.,\ .
01' X'C'J'?cl a /.~'-ccnt l,D: lnCJ'(,dS(~
to g1VC you
fur j)uh].i.e
tll(, cho,let: Lo !;UP!J01't"
The ch~ci:;ioll i.~; YOl.lr'~.:; to make, but .\'le f0cl :it e~,;:;('J)t:jdl to
JYr'ovidc you I-J.i Lh d fe\" LJct~; 1'0.1ating tu l)IJJ""' public Sdr~ty
fOl'ce:;. H(~ pl'('GC'ntJy hdvt: O. 9 polic(~ offje~l'i; I'I:J' th(JU~3dlld pOp\l-
Iatj on, C::I~; COlI Lr'(l~; l.ed \-Jiih ~. 1. fny' /'))(' II, S. ,)~; Cl VllJOJ (~. In l\l.d-
me<.l.:! CI)\lllLy, only I'.lcC::l!;~JnLon has il lU\-Jc'f' nUIIlL('I' (\J Office)':;
']1(:1' uni L P()PUliil~iulI. Of tht: 29 (\1:1 ifUl'TI.iL1 cil i(:~; :i n Lh(' P(1)1l1d-
.tiOI) rdl1i~C frortl 3S,OOO to (;S,OOOp(,'op](', Oldy (()lll' hilv<: Cl'V/L'T'
1.1 n i f 0 l' III e d Jj 1:' C. ).H,:. P ~j 0 n n e 1 pet' 1, [) 0 0 t h, l n L1. v to J '1110 C ,:~ .
If thl.: 25-ccnt tax :increase does Ilt)[: pdSS, t]H'11 it mdY be
raeccs:;;u'y to fur-ther' rf~clllce the level of pol. i (.".' cJnd fil'c pY'o-
Lf~etjol1. 'l'hii3 if; .especially true ~~incc l'edt..'1'.I1 [',l'dflL:; !,.:hjch
I'l'f'.s,;,ntly Suprul't tl-.'O ve.'ry irnpor1tant puli.ce !lJ"'(JP,l'<lJIl:; 1-11.11'1,('
tel'minc) tee] lh :ir; yea 1"'.
The~:;(: det') onl Y some of the activiti(~~; of YOl.~r' Ci.ty GovcY'n-
m(~llt. ~;o':\I! ill'c' ('IIV.i.J'C'l1I1K'llld] Clllc1 r'(>~~Olll'l~c~ .1~;~;1IC'~; \vhiel1 affect
:"dfc>"Iy pln'p(l~;e~~.
1.'111' f'Jlli 1'(' ('(1\1111,1''1'
~;lllll(~ dr',' ('Ulli~('I'Il:; IOJ' l'I"'ovid'iJI)'. rl'l'!! !'.llVC'J'II-
Jnelll cOII:;i:;lf~1l1: \..,ith Iht' :idca~; \'Jh:it'h [!)lovidvcl till' fU1Illcl.ll.jUll'[Ol'
o lll' i 1,1 L i U 11 .
In thi~; 0111' b:iccnlcllllial yeLl!', [ think it ,lppl'Opl'i~llc that
\.JC take a f(~H mO/ll(~llts to cons:iclr;r' that cxtrc1ol'dill,n'y gl'IJUp of
^mcl:>icC::.lJl::; \>Iho ld ic1 the. founc1,) 1 i 'lIS foT' lhi::: lLlt iOIl. lk~n like
,John l\d(Jrn~;, ,r(~11ll ILJII<.'Uck, Thom(-j~~ ,1C'f f('r'~;()ll, dllcl P"llCl:i In i 11
l'l"IIIL,li II I,!"},,, !\IIJ('I':i':dll~; Ill' (';':('('1'/ iUllcJI c'd J i l'('J'.
'I'h. '\,' \,!" I',"
IfI.'11 [11 11"'11'.>1' <ltldinl r'I',I'i,ly.
Tilt'.'.' l-.'r'I'(' LIII'_'J Ii ,\,',111 L, h<lI'lJ-
\oJ (, I kill)', , i r Ii I \ ' I", , ) Ill. ' J \ 'j:, dll d c-' () III ''I !', ( , () \I ~: .
/\11<1 I JI':'/ h,ld ,I tll'\'.!111
uf d 1)('\,; IJ.tl.i"l)JI. \':]\l):;C! !'UtlflC].lt:iCIll \'/'1" bd:;(!d 1/1'011 r]'(~,'(k")lll fUl'
the individual. The founddlion:3 of OUY' gOVI.:]'llJn(:ll"l \']l:P(' lu:id
\-lith Stich Cill"t: th,lt 'it hac; sCY'ved\ls ""ell fo1' (lvcr' ?OO Y':c1J'S.
\'Vi": aI'e; no\-" th..' (;ldc.~~;t df:.'1Il0Cl'.'1CY ,lll Llh:\-!or'l c1.
'1']1,-, 1)]'( ::(~lll 1:,; <1
1. ill I: l'J n () 1 '(' . No' CJ 111 Y
r il':;tli In,,~ ^11I(:l,'i Cdl1:,
t illle of Chi~II);(' 1'01' both r)lll' '-~Olllll)',/ ,Cll1d
.I:'; I.h(~ fl'ullli'''1' 1',OIlC, "III.' d'!::._, fur rh.'
ar',-' i)(~gifll1in)~ Ie) l'C'<I] ii',l' t 1l<l1 ,)111' 1'1 ,lll(~t
i~) ~;rnaJJ dIlC.] (JUt' vas t
r'eSOU):'Ct~~; ilJ'(' fiTliL,,~.
\'k h:lve Slll'viveo Cl
I
cri;.j';'S in )_~(Jvcr'JlIncnt,
l:hltcq,;rl. t (:!
Tlw check::; ,lllcl b(~LIllC'C';\ of
OIl]' CUIl:;Lillll i(llldl 1'<"')'111 uf !',OVI'l'lllill'lll. oIJ'I" ::I.i II \"UI'j.:i'l,I',. Illl!.
"mill cl \01(' ~; I:,i 1.1 have Ll::; !Iluch Cl'('L'c!n!ll ,,' i Ihuu I tlll' (kil.i':d I'j Ull ,-..~.
1I1C'n)ikt~ ~;,'jlll }~)'\!,iIl, ^l'chjbClJd Co:{, unrl \J!lclg" ,I,-'J1I] J. ~:,il'ic,-j'!
nUl' IJal:i()Tl, ~~L1ll" alld COJlIIJ1Unil.y sl.jll depend ''II /\llll'l'icd11:~: \-!110
htl V I,' c1bility, Ch;H'dct('r', iIllr.:[',rity, <111(1 cr,.!Il'r'(l,l;\~.
Tn ~,f;v()l:'r]l \v(.'CK:;,
\.;c \..]i11 be going to [:]1\' poll fj 1.1) ~;,-:J(:'ct
hope: that \-J(' wj 1J look l)(e'YOlle! the' J!Il-
ll(:\>!
cjvi('.Ji"d(l('I'~j. ]
JIII~cli"l[(: i,:';~~Ii,c,: or Ill(: Ctilllpajr;ll dllcl ,~;Cll'Cl 1'<'1"1"':;"111.;'.1:1\.'(':: \oJ,1tll
dhj,.lity, .int. !',l'.i I'y, alld CUIICI~rll h) l' thc~ jJllbl ic gOI)'J. The
l::::~UI':; il)'.,' 'iJIll"UI'l,ullt, bill they \..'ill iTlVolvr' '-)111)' il ~;1lt.:1] Jr'dc-
1:.1011 of "hl~ P('Jl ic'y' CJI.~Cif;jljJl:; \'Illich \V.i.]:I be Illdtl" tllll'.ill):: t)H'
'n'~xt II y, ',1 r:: .
'I'll ( , " /1 V i 1 '( lJ 11 11<.' 11 I d ,1 d II d I 'I. . :; PII} 'l' C' I~; : ; II ( , ~ ; h 01 V " h < ' I ' II (' (\ II I r' II _
v. ' I '~; i 01 I, I iI/I I II,')' i II V (' I v I' (. I 'Ill' i 01 I , 1111.' :; Ii, ) I I : : I,ll I \f II iI.' 11
II,IV,'
c1c'pp C(,.,] ,i,J)g:~.
t"]t)ul cl :I:i )..:(' COr' YOI} Ie> 111\(1(~J':; I 0I1111 ~:('"1'~ coj
III Y (' ( ) 11 (', ' I' J I:;, ( '( ) Ill:, ' I 'Il:; \oJ 11 i (' 11
1','<:1 .11.'(' 01.1:;(1 :;holl'.<,! 1,\' 1'11111'1'
11l(~l1lbt-'l':; of I hI: l.'..lUI1C.ll .-lilt! by otlt(~]'~; ,i,IlV0Ivl.)t! jll (llII' ci I'y
euv Cl 'Tillli ~ Ill: .
CH-3l-352
Attachment A ~ Page II
l
TII t'h-j~; l'OII)Y!.]'\" ,1 th'jpc] of.' tlt(~ \....()l'ld'~;.l.C':;,)llr.l"':; d1'(, \I[;Ccl
1>'1 ,)llly I',':, ,>( tll" \vl)J'I<ll:; jl1ljlul.llil)ll.
\VI" :11'(' ill;;!. l"')',illllil\.\l,
to Y'('<,li:'.i' Ih(~ :~i<l(' (,['1(:('1:; <>UI' '::Hlv(lIll~I' '[,.:,:lllIl)'!()!,.\, i:; Ildvill)',
I'll lit" ,'II\'il'llllllll.'III. \VI';I'I',' I ill.l'j'ill/', Ill,' ('.11'111 \villl tll" h'.I:;11'
of OU1' ~jUc.i.~Ly. . 0111' PI~LI'()JC:ll1l1 [.ll'odllCLi.uJl 11,1:3 dl'I.~.l iJlCd 1:'JI'I'Y
yea r sin c c 1 9 7 0 . We h C:i v e a hJ a y s t a ken a bun d ant C I II..' r' r. y for'
granted, but vJe no\-] ape beginning to p(';alizf~ that energy i~3
also J.:irnitecJ - and v(~s't amounts of ener'gy arc cs~eIltLJ] to OU1'
society.
/\llcl so, t.hl..' 1)1"(::3ent.lS d til/\l-: 01 dd~ju"ll/Icrlt to ('he l'c~dJi,tics
of OLlI' nc\-,' \.JClr'.lcl. 'l'h(~ \..;i:;c \lse (tIld OOll[;e'l'vdl:ioJI oj 1.'lll:!'.',:V \'JiJJ
be thl: :;inglc 100::;t ilflpor'tdIltLICLOf' dt'rel~tinl'. .()lIP ful:u['c: Pl'u:3-
perity.
~'h: 111\1:; l ICi'n'll l:o COJI~).:~r'vc' OUI' na LUI',d, 'L'(':~C>\lJ'(~(~:; <tlld to
Haste and pol.lut0 lc~~;~::;.
\'/.::~ ar'p. USilli:', our' r't'~:,()Ul'C(;:; lit ~~l1ch':1
tremen(kJllS J'dll'. Let. Ifl(~ tl'Y l:t') jllll::;l:l'dlt:: Lhi:; !'(dlll h',' :illldgill-
inr; th.1t "[:lll: ;.'ntir'(~ life ~:pan cd ll1l~ Cdl'l:lt \-}t'J'I' (,()Il'l)h::;~;,'d inLu
c1 ::'11-hollP pCl'i.OCl. On this tilll," scale, only ~;irnpl(> ('~:lJ lilt'
<?xi'st-(;cl befor'e 8 p.IIl., only II hOUl'S befoY'(~ our' )/i-ltolll' ~l~l'il)d
ends. At 9;30 p.m., the fir~)t amphibious Choutllr'(~ Ct'<1\110d
(lilt Oflli,: ~;,,:('l lo illjtiati:' 'life on l.:.lfll.l. /\1: ]11 :.I:'l'Ollct~~ 11I.:fu)'I;
lIlicr;i!~ht, I!lall calfl0 llpCl1l the ~)c(~nc. At G/](JOOlJI (~I' d Sl~C(jlld
bi::;iOl','.: mjdIl,L!',ht, the I Ldll:;{l'i<.ll r\,~volut :iOll lW1},llfl. III LI1':
lus l 1/1000 of Ll :"~(lcc)flcl b(~[()r'l:: lll:iclnir,ltt, i-J~ .1\d'/'; U:;t;,J Ill,'>!'" oJ'
our resoupcef; than in a] J pr'CVlOUS tirllc. III this c01l1l Ll'j.', Wt2
hav<.: Il~il'd thl; IIIa=ior'ity of OUI' petroleulI1 r'es(~l'Vc:; ill,] 20-Y<2i:Jl'
.period.
1\:. \v(; ,dlll>l'O.tI'h IlliJllii~11L, \Jl; 11\11::1. h<.: COIII.'IIIl.'" II',), I...L..,
happcn:; duc'ill.I', I:h<.: s(:('und 1""1:;1' JIIjelnil'.hl
CM-3l-352
Attachment A - Page l2
1
February 23, 1976
OPEN FORUM
(Thanks to Council)
Mr. Thomas Raison, Livermore resident, stated that he would like to
thank the Mayor and Cm Miller for serving on a Council that has been
a credit to the City of Livermore and its citizens. During the next
election neither Mayor Futch nor Cm Miller are running for a Council
seat and it is a loss to the citizens. He stated that they are the
kind of Councilmen that most cities are in need of and added that
the word politician is usually an ugly word but this City Council
is so good that the citizens are really spoiled by the type of people
who serve on it. As a private citizen he thanked the men and the
woman on the Council for the job they have done.
(Safety Ordinance)
Bud Farrell, 2827 Marina Avenue, stated that last week the Council
adopted a Safety Ordinance which included dead bolt locks for front
doors. He stated that he is not sure but he believes this ordinance
is in conflict with the OSHA federal safety law.
The Council explained that the staff has been asked to prepare an
ordinance and they then asked that the City Attorney respond to this
point at the time the ordinance comes back to the Council.
(State of City Message)
Gordon Smith, 5262 Irene Way, stated that in the Mayor's state of
the City message there was mention of an $800 building donation
for the School District. As he recalls the $800 was the original
figure and then it went to $850. The $850 is even a couple of years
old and he would hope that the City Council hasn't let this money
get by them. He has heard that there is a 12% increase in cost, per
year, for development, and the donation figure should increase also.
CONTINUED P.H. RE
ADOPTION OF GENERAL PLAN
Mayor Futch stated that the public hearing for the adoption of the
General Plan has been continued in order to receive additional
testimony from the public.
Gloria Taylor, 585 South "L" Street, stated that she would like to
propose that before there is further development south of the City
along Arroyo Road, or in that vicinity, that completion of Concannon
Boulevard should be required. Traffic from the Concannon area filters
through the center of town and the City cannot accommodate it.
The City is working on a historical preservation ordinance and it
is sensless to try to preserve the historical center of town and
also turn it into a freeway.
She stated that she doesn't understand the reasoning behind a General
Plan that will allow a 2% growth rate while at the same time says
that in order to meet air pollution standards the present population
would have to be cut in half. She would suggest that the General
Plan allow for a growth rate that would accommodate a solution to
our pollution problems.
CM-31~353
February 23, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
Barry Shrader, 5651 Oakmont Circle, stated that the Councilmembers
may have read in the Independent, Sunday, that the Tri-Valley Her-
ald is opposed to the present Council acting on the General Plan
and finalizing it.
For the public record the Tri-Valley Herald would like it known
that they disagree with the Council's professed intentions to
adopt a new City General Plan before the municipal election on
March 2nd. Specific reasons will appear in tomorrow's paper.
They have also submitted comments to the City Clerk, in writing,
which have been made previously by them and which they feel should
be made part of the public record, and which he then read to the
Council.
Cw Tirsell stated that she has more seniority than any person in
the City with respect to work on the General Plan. She has been
working on it for three years and she was chairman of the Citizens
Committee which was formed three years ago, this month. That citi-
zens committee worked long and hard and spent thousands of hours on
the plan during which time they begged for citizen participation
and got,lOO citizens to stay with it until the end. There were
lOO citizens who stuck with it, finished up, and turned in a
report to this Council. That represents a lot of man and woman
power for this City or any city. The report was done two years
ago, the consultants have turned in task reports for which many,
many meetings were held in the Council Chambers for citizens,
students, elected officials from any other district or town to
come and participate in. There were notices in the paper and
they never met secretely - every hour was advertised, and people
were invited to attend.
She added that she wrote a letter to the Chamber of Commerce last
June noting that task reports would be coming to the City from
our consultants and invited them to send someone to the Council
because it would be a shame to adopt the General Plan without in-
put from the Chamber of Commerce. No representative appeared at
the meeting. The Committee met and met and they have been meeting
for two years. In November it was said, in public meetings, that
the task reports have been completed and in a timely manner the
General Plan should be adopted before all of the knowledge and
statistics are lost or changed and before all of the reports and
studies done are invalid. In November a timely schedule was adop-
ted with our consultants for sending the General Plan out to the
public for review. This has been done, 60 agencies have commented,
and the City has gone through a rewrite process that every General
Plan goes through. No General Plan is adopted in the form submitted
by consultants.
The consultants are supposedly an independent submission to the
City and as responsible public servants it is the right and the
duty as well as the obligation, to form the General Plan with the
public hearings, and in a timely manner adopted in full public
disclosure. She added that she is tired of the criticism of this
City which is proceeding in a timely manner to adopt a three year
old General Plan. This Council has studied hard and long and
has put in a thousand hours with the Planning Commission in the
last two months and she refuses to see all this work go to waste
at some future time. No plan is chiseled in granite and no study
is ever complete and the Council will never stop meeting in pub-
lic. Everything will always receive public notice for review
and comment. The day after it is adopted it will begin revision
because a Plan is a living Plan and it goes on living as long
as the people of the City want to live with it.
. CM-31-354
February 23, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
em Miller stated that he would be willing to accept the view of
the editor of the Livermore branch of the Hayward Daily Review
somewhat more readily, if their policy on general plan adoption
did not depend on which city they liked or didn't like. What
the Council proposes to do is to follow the same path that P1easanton
has just followed and whose plan has been in the mill longer than
Livermore's. If the Hayward Herald were more consistent they would
commend the City of Livermore, just as they did the City of Pleasanton.
Herman Ruth, Berkeley, stated that he attended the public hearing
last week with suggestions for the planned proposals that would
affect his property. He also attended the P.C. meeting last week
and presented the same information. During the past he convinced
the P.C. that there was a surplus of designated industrial property
in Livermore and that he would like his property changed from this
designation to urban low density residential. The P. C. reviewed
his suggestion and changed the designation, but it was changed to
agricultural. He stated that his property is not prime agricultural
property and gave reasons he felt it should be changed to urban low
density residential.
Mr. Ruth stated that he had a four page letter he would like written
into the testimony but he was asked to submit the letter to the
Council because of the 5 min. speaking time pOlicy.
Cm Miller stated that if Mr. Ruth would like his letter as part of
the record they could be included in the minutes as they are written
up. The letter will appear as an attachment to the minutes of this
meeting.
Mr. Ruth then listed the 9 reasons his land should be left as
it is in the present General Plan - urban low density residential,
which he stated are the captions in his letter. (See letter.)
Mr. Ruth stated that at the P.C. meeting it was decided that the
holding capacity for the Year 2000 should be 90,000, based on a
2% growth rate. This is based on the assumed family size of 3.0
persons per family. The consultants recommended an average family
size of 2.6 which was rejected by the P.C. He stated that this is
a very important item because the number of persons per family, if
the lower figure were used, would permit a higher total population,
up to l20,000. The P.C. used the 3.0 figure and then proceeded to
adjust the map, removing all the residential areas north of I-580
except for a small area around Springtown. They also adjusted other
areas including industrial and other land uses. At the end of the
session the P.C. adopted a General Plan which has been forwarded to
the Council for adoption.
Mr. Ruth stated that as a result of these changes there was no
indication of the resulting distribution of land uses, the resulting
holding capacity, and no substantial evaluation as to whether the
resulting General Plan met realistic goals and policies. The main
objective of the P. C. appeared to be a limitation of the holding
capacity and the rate to preconceive numbers which are not supported
by the facts. The planning consultant was not present and his views
on these major changes were not sought, and the major changes were
not presented at an additional P.C. public hearing. He felt a
change for 3 sq. miles of land is substantial and under other
circumstances such a change would demand an EIR to support it.
He felt the action was arbitrary and capricious and designed to
advance a preconceived notion of how Livermore should grow or more
precisely, how it should not grow.
CM-31-355
February 23, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
Mr. Ruth added that the desire to adopt the General Plan prior
to the March lst city election has diverted the procedure pres-
cribed in the Planning and Conservation law and has also subverted
good planning practice to preconceived end. In addition to the
observations above, his concern is for his property (and his
partners). They look at its use and development in relationship
to its surrounding, and as part of the proposed Livermore General
Plan, and consider the appropriate use to be residential urban
low density.
Mayor Futch stated that he attended the P.C. meeting at which time
they adopted the General Plan and in his opinion all of the com-
ments made by Mr. Ruth ~~~ond with the facts.
Cm Miller stated that he al~o-ittended the P.C. meeting and there
was some discussion relative to the number of people per average
family and the 3.0 was an average between the higher family size
presently used and what the P.C. felt to be an unrealisticly low
family size. Also, the views of the consultants were solicited
and they have responded by way of a letter to the Council.
Mr. Musso pointed out that the P.C. chose a figure of 2.9, which
is exactly what the consultants recommended - there was no dispute
over that figure.
Mr. Musso also noted that the P.c. informed people in the audience
that the public hearings would have to end at some point but they
would still consider testimony up and until adoption of the Plan.
Cm Turner stated that because of the nature of the particular
public hearing he would like to suggest that the 5 minute speak-
ing policy be removed.
Mayor Futch stated that he would like to allow everyone 5 minutes
and after everyone has been given a chance the Council can recon-
sider allowing additional speaking time.
Marlin Pound, representative of LARPD, stated that their concern
is that they have not been able to obtain all the changes to the
General Plan. There may be some change in the General Plan that
they would like to comment on, and they would urge the Council to
delay closing of the public hearing for another two weeks.
Mr. Musso stated that the last of the changes affecting park land
were given to Hal Adams today, consisting of two paragraphs, they
have seen most of the changes. About 75% of what LARPD requested
for the new General Plan was done.
Walt Griffith, 1650 Elm street, stated that he served on one of
the General Plan committees for a few months and it would appear
that there was a rush before the last election to adopt the Gen-
eral Plan and now there is another rush before another election
to get adopted. Regional government agencies have tried to re-
duce the Sphere of Influence for the City of Livermore and Liver-
more's future depends upon the future Council and their rapport
with these higher government agencies. It should be up to the
new City Council to adopt a Plan. It has been 17 years since
the last General Plan was adopted and there shouldn't be such
a rush to get it adopted. He stated that it does have a direct
reflection upon the City of Livermore for years to come - the
Council is moving too fast at the last minute.
CM-3l-356
IIEH/\IAN D. IIUTII + ASSOCIATES
January 12, 1976
City and Ih'gi()n,tf I'Ltnllill~ Consultallts
2150 Dwight Way
D"rk"I!'}', Califorllia 9.170.J . H.J5-7R94
Livermore City Planning
2250 first Street
Livermore, California
Corrunission
94550
Re: General Plan Public Hearing
Gentlemen;
On December 9, 1975, I appeared b(>fore the Planning Commission at the
Public Hearing on the General Plan for the City of Livermore. At that
time I indicated that we were requesting that an approximately 112-acre
parcel fronting on the frontage Road adjacent to Interstate 580, and
across from the airport, be retained as residential in the General Plan.
The present Livermore General Plan designaUon which would be appropriate
is Residential Urban Low, 2.1 - 4.0 dwellings per acre.
This parce>l is one> of several lying bet\veen Doolan Canyon Road and Collier
Canyon Road and has the same character as the fl>sidentially designated prop-
erty east of Collier Canyon Road. If a line were extended from the
southern boundary of Chabot Junior College westerly to Doolan Canyon Road,
south to 1-580, east to Co] lier Canyon Road and north to the Junior
College, it would enclose an area of approximately 300 acres. After streets
and other puhlic uses were removed, there would be approximately 200 acres
for Urban Low Residential use. According to Mr. Donald Crawford, a con-
sultant to the City of Livermore, it would be desirable to pick the mid-
point of the range to determine the probable density and resultant holding
capacity. In this case, it would be three dwelling units per acre, or
three x 200acI "s equals 600 dwelling units, or approximately 1800 persons.
This addition to the 82,000 proposed, \YOuld not upset the General Plan in
any W,lY, and could readily be accommodated. i~e underSL.lnd that it wOIJld
b~ n~cl'ssary to expand the sewage treatment plant to serve this nnd other
residential properties ill and around the City of Livermore and \ve support
the expansion of the sewage treatment plant for this purpose.
An examination of the environmental maps prepared by the consultants,
reveals that the prOpL)rty has no intrinsic charaCLc'ristics which make it
preferable for industrLll over residential lIse. The location of the prop-
erty in relationShip to the airport, or the runway C'xtension to the west,
.in no way prollibits residl'11LLiJ development. The ~l:Jst('r PIan [or the Liver-
more Airport indicates that there ilre no noise, safety, approach or other
airport characteristics tlldt inhibit residential devl>lopment of the prop-
erty. I have discussed tIll' Master Plnn for the Livermore Airport with
Mr. Don Lee, City Engineer.
MJ:Mlln\ AMElIICAN SOCIETY OF CONSUl.TI:-IG PL^NNUh
,
(Attachment B)
Page 1
CM-31-355
Livermore Planning Commission
Jclliuary 12, 1976
Page two
In 1968 and again in 1971 we brought plans for residential de~elopment
to the Livermore City Council. We were told that it was the policy of
the City Council not to permit residentLl1 development north of 1-580.
The proposed ~eneral Plan indicates substantial residential development
north of 1-580. However, residential development extends westerly only
to Collier Canyon Road. Our property is more suitable for residential
dev~lopment than many of the properties so designated north of 1-580.
It is a fact that in 1%8 the City of Livermore solicted us to join in
a Special Assessment District to assist in bringing sewer and water to
the Chabot Junior College site. The City changed its mind and aban-
doned the Special Assessment District.
At the public hearing I attended, I requested certain information. This
informa~ion was for the most part provided'to me by the City's consultant,
Mr. Donald Crawford. In answer to the quest ion of how many acres are in
industrial use, it appears that 790 acres, including more than 300 acres
in quarries, are in industrial use. This mc'nns that there are approxi-
mately 400 acres developed for industrial use. The proposed General Plan
indica\tes 3000 acres for industrial use, oran addition of 2200-2600 nC,res
proposed for industrial development. The General Plan Report indicates
that approximately 300 acres can expect to be absorbed by the' year 2000.
The General Plan shows far more industrial land ,than could be reasonably
be expected to be used within the framework of this General Plan. It also
means that a substantial amount of land is marked for industrial use,
rather than residential use. We understand this was done to satisfy th~
request of a number of property owners who want their property designated
for industrial use'rather than agricultural use, but also to keep it out
of residential development.
The designation of 3000 acres for industrial development in the General
Plan may satisfy the wishes of some property owners" but in no way can
this be considered an adequate basis for the preparation of the General
Plan. The consultants accommodated the wishes of some of the comnllll1ity,
a1 though no professional pJanner would suggest that this. is a reasonable
policy on which to allocate land use.
Another of my questions was: \~hat is the present density of industrial
C'l!lploymcnt? I W!1S inforllll'd it was between 50-60 industrial employees
per acre. However, this is considered to be a very high employee den-
sity attributable to specialized research laboratories and that a lesser
density was used in the Ceneral Plan. The General Plan is based upon 13
employees per acre and reflects a mixture of industrial uses including
warehousing, light industrL.lI and related services. If by chance, Liver-
more were able to develop its industrial lands at 13 employees per acre"
the remaining 2600 acres would produce an additional 33,800 employees.
CM-31-355 (Attachment B)
Page 2
.'
Livermore Pl<lnning Cn/JlllIlssion
J.111U;IrY 12, 1976
Page three
An additional 33,800 indtlstrial workers in Livermore added to the approxi-
m.1tely 17,000 existing employees, would cre<1te more than 50,000 indt~_~rial
jobs in Livermore. Comp.:ne this figure with the 82,000 population holding
capacity for the year 2000. in the General Plan.
The General Plan would create such an imbalance of residents to industrial
jobs which would result in a massive inmigrat.ion into Livermore for f'mploy-
ment in industry. The concern for air pollution has dominated development
planning and policy in the Livermore area. ^ir pollution would become
monumental if the land-use proposals of the Proposed General Plan were to
be fulfilled. It appears th;Jt the Plan has an inherent imbalance of indus-
trial and. residential land uses which would create serious air pollutiori
problems.
Certainly Livermore ~hould create more industrial jobs to reduce Com-
muting~ !lowever, the reduction of the holding capacity from 120,000 which
is permitted in the presellt General Plan, to 82,000, while holding indus-
trial lands at approximately the Si3me as in tlle pre~ent General Plan, is
!lot good planning policy, is not a good basis on which to pn>pare the re-
vised Genera 1 P1 an, and produces an imb.:Jlance ilmong land uses so .:1"s to
defeat the major objl'ctives of tht> r,eneral Plan itse1 f.
Natllrally Ollr principal concern is with our property. . Inasmuch as I am
a pl.:Jnnlng consld tant, I look at the use .::Ind devdopment of our property
in. relationship to its surroundings ilnu as part of the proposed Livermore
General Plan. ~le think the approprL1te use for our property and the
properties to the east and west, is residential. Residential Urban LOt...
is the approp~iate designation for this property. This approximates the
General Plal1 designation in the existing General Plan.
If YOll have any questions or I can piovide you with any additional infor-
mation, please let me know.
LeiY YOU:,,___
xfp~'HJ.J? )ft
Herman D. Ruth, AlP
HDR:bf
cc C1.:lyton- Orr
Arch HacDonald
(AttaChment B)
Page 3
CM-31-355
--+,~----.__._-'_.."~~,'"::,:.~:_.
February 23, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
Lois Elsasser, 4293 Stanford Way, speaking as a past member of the
Steering Committee, she knows that Cw Tirsel1 and Cm Simonen (P.C.)
were on the committee and spent many many hours deliberating on input
to the General Plan, aside from the many committees that were work-
ing on the input for the General Plan and she would rather the
Council not push for adoption at this time since the P.C. has made
additional changes. She would suggest that the Council allow time
for additional public hearings on these changes.
Mr. Pound explained that if LARPD gets material one day they can't
hold a public hearing the next day - they also have to give ample
notice to the public. This is the reason they would like a delay.
Gregg Davis, 316 Ontario, representing the Valley Spokesmen Touring
Club, submitted a letter to the Council related to non-motorized
forms of transit and that Livermore should have a downtown that is
"people oriented" - not "auto oriented".
Mr. Davis asked that the Council not make policies that will limit
cyclists alternatives for safe travel on roads, just because there
is a bike path in the area. At this time cyclists are allowed to
use the roads; and the road:,ystem in California and Livermore is
excellent for bicyclists and the bicyclists do not want their rights
restricted. If bicyclists are to be restricted it should be on the
basis of an unsafe situation.
with respect to the Livermore Route Plan, he felt something should
be done about maintenance of separate bike paths, since one of the
common characteristics of the separated bike path is that it gets
dirty and is not maintained. He would also suggest that included
in the General Plan there be a comment relative to building of
bike paths and that is that it be constructed with a smooth surface,
wide, unobstructed, well drained, and well maintained.
Cm Miller commented that the items listed in the letter to the
Council, have been adopted by the P.C. in the latest draft of
the General Plan, with some minor wording changes. Essentially
all of the items have been covered but not word for word.
Mr. Musso stated that most of the suggestions were included in
the General Plan, verbatim, but the portions relative to cleaning
and maintenance were deleted and the item about limiting their
alternatives was deleted.
Mr. Davis stated that in this case he would urge the Council very
strongly to include in the General Plan that the City should not
use bike paths to limit cyclists' alternatives for safe travel on
roads, because if there isn't a good reason why someone shouldn't
ride on the st~eet, he should be allowed to do so.
Jonn Migliori, 627l Tesla Road, stated that his land has been
designated as lOO acre parcels and wondered if this has changed.
Mr. Musso stated that the City has decided this area should be
a standard of 20 acre lots for our agricultural area, and this
is what the City will promote.
Mr. Migliori commented that the average person cannot afford to
purchase 20 acres of land and he wants his property developed.
He then explained the problems he has encountered in trying to
get 5 acre lots for his property.
r.M-31-357
February 23, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
Mr. Migliori stated that he is in a good area for development be-
cause he is only about one mile from the vineyard Shopping Center
and the Library and people could ride bicycles to do shopping. He
requested that his property be allowed I acre parcels with sewer
and water for 5 acre parcels.
Mel Lagasca, 2476 Fourth Street, stated that he would like to raise
a point of clarification on the General Plan. As a member of the
Social Concerns Committee, for the last six months a study was
done on the service center for the City, and he believes the
wording seems to be in conflict with what the Committee's philo-
sophy of the center is to be.
They have been working on the low income service center as being
a social service but the General Plan refers to it in two dif-
ferent places - one being a social service and the other as
recreation and teen. In their research it has been discovered
that these two uses are not feasible. Either one or the other
has to be selected, and the Committee is currently working on
services type of acitivities such as manpower development and
training and a State Unemployment Office and not having recrea-
tion in the same facility.
Mr. Musso stated that
time but, originally,
Civic Center complex.
Social Service Center
having a dual use.
Cw Tirsell stated that it isn't certain as to what uses will be
in the Social Service Center and it should be referred to as
a social service building because it could encompass many different
uses.
the P.C. did discuss this point at one
this was proposed for a facility in the
As he recalls it was concluded that the
might have the additional advantage of
Mayor Futch felt perhaps specifics related to use of a particular
building might be too specific for inclusion in the General Plan.
Mr. Lagasca stated that the Committee has been working on pri-
orities and at this time it is centered around social services
such as manpower development, social security offices and things
of this nature. He added that their meetings are open to the
public and they would more than welcome attendance by the public.
They meet every Thursday evening and information as to where they
will be meeting can be obtained from Mr. Bradley at City Hall.
Mr. Migliori stated that he would just like to add that if he
gets the zoning he requests he would like to keep it in a rural
atmosphere without sidewalks and other public works improvements.
David Eller, 3797 Oregon Way, read excerpts of a letter sent to
the editor of the Reno Gazette. It indicated that the growth of
a child is measured in not only quantity, pounds, and inches, but
in quality, knowledge and understanding. Physical growth can be
damaging to a child unless he matures mentally to match the physi-
cal development and the physical development of a state can be
just as frightening if unmatched by imprvovement in the quality
of the environment. It is important to remember that growth
includes mental and emotional maturity, not just physical develop-
ment. If growth is to be good for Nevada or Livermore, perhaps
we should begin asking for better growth - not more. On a clear
day you can see forever and this vision can be used to look inside
ourselves and appreciate and protect Nevada and Livermore. Mr.
Eller stated that he agrees with what Gloria Taylor has said
and she is the first person to have come out and state exactly
what a lot of people have felt.
CM-31-358
February 23, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
Mr. Eller stated that in addition to what the P.C. has removed
from the map, he would also like to see the area to the east of
North Livermore Avenue, north of I-580, removed. A lot of Greenvil1e
North and the Springtown area can be filled in within our City limits
without extending all the way over to Livermore Avenue. He also
felt there should be a 1,000 ft. buffer zone between the freeway
and residential development because of air and noise pollution from
the freeway and because he believes freeways should follow a scenic
route and houses, sheds, and other buildings are not scenic. Accord-
ing to the General Plan there is a lot of industfial area designated
near the freeway and he would suggest that it be moved back.
Robert Allen, 223 Donner, stated that he understands that the Council
feels that any delay now could postpone adoption of the General Plan
for months but nevertheless he would like to suggest that something
as important as this General Plan could long be stigmatized if it
were enacted by a "lame duck" Council days before the election.
He stated that there was only one copy of the General Plan available
at the Library Saturday and the numerous strikeovers and write-ins
made it very difficult to follow.
Mr. Allen stated that he would like to comment on two items. One
item is relative to air quality. He feels the General Plan makes
false assumptions that curbing people and auto mileage will auto-
matically improve air quality. He added that it is doubtful the
federal standards have any real significance - certainly not enough
to outweigh all other aspects of public policy.
Mr. Allen then stated that the other item he would like to address
is the Livermore/Pleasanton extension of the BART rail line (LPX).
The BART draft report designates a rapid transit line along the
north side of the Western Pacific tracks, through Livermore. The
west Livermore station would be east of Murrieta Boulevard and
the east station would be east of the proposed extension of Mines
Road. He showed the Council the schematics for the two stations
and explained the plans for the stations which will include about
24 acres of parking for the west Livermore station which covers
most of the area from the Western Pacific railroad from Murrieta
Boulevard to "S" Street. He would therefore suggest that this
parking area be redesignated from present central commercial to
a public institution open space holding category of some type.
In both cases the land has been agricultural and the tax assessor
has shown the full cash value of the west Livermore parking area
at $5,000/acre. Actually the Livermore extension really belongs
more logically between the railroads - not north of the Western
Pacific, as it is being proposed. The design of the future
Murrieta Boulevard grade separation, which is part of the General
Plan, should allow for BART tracks and station between the rail-
roads. A BART line north of the Western Pacific railroad would
wipe out 26 homes - mostly on El Rancho and Ventura. Between
the railroads, the impact would be only reduction in the size
of the parking lot.
There are two grade crossings which would remain closed or
separated when BART comes to Livermore and he would prefer
closing them because there would be a side benefit of less
noise because there would be no warning noises during the night.
He would like to suggest three items for change:
CM-3l-359
February 23, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
l. Some type of public institution open space for the west
Livermore parking area - about 24 acres.
2. A public institution open space for the east Livermore
parking area.
3. Ultimate closing of "L" Street and Junction Avenue.
He stated that he would like to make sure the southern route is
not planned or engineered out of existance. Failure to design
and protect the southern route would lead funding agencies to
reject a track side route and move toward a more northerly route
to service Las Positas Valley.
CW TIRSELL MOVED TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING UNTIL TOMORROW
NIGHT AT 8:00 P.M., 2/24/76. MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF SECOND.
Mayor Futch stated that the Planning Commission has scheduled a
public hearing for tomorrow night in the Council Chambers but
they believe it will be a brief hearing. After the hearing
the room will be available. If the Council would agree, he
would suggest meeting earlier with the P.C. for a study session.
Cm Staley stated that during the testimony given this evening
there have been requests for continuance of the General Plan
and he believes that three very good points have been brought
up: l) This particular draft of the General Plan is very con-
fusing and hard to follow; 2) Not all public bodies have had
the opportunity to review this draft of the G.P. in a public
meeting in order to give input to the Council; and 3) There is
the appearance of a hurry and some type of stigma attached to
the G.P. because of that. For these reasons he would support
continuance of the G.P. until the new Council is seated.
Cm Miller stated tnat he would disagree with continuance be-
cause there are about three years of public hearings, effort
and knowledge devoted to this Plan. It is true that some of
the other agencies have not had an opportunity to review the
final draft but they will get one very soon and the Council is
not proposing to adopt the Plan tonight. He would guess that
the Plan will not be adopted tomorrow night or Thursday night
either but there may be a final decision next Monday night,
March 1st. During that time period the text that LARPD is con-
cerned about can be retyped and, in fact, in that time period
all of the text can be retyped for the March 1st meeting.
He stated that all five Councilmembers have spent a lot of
time on reviewing the General Plan and it really doesn't make
sense to delay it and then have what will amount to a 6 month
delay.
Mayor Futch stated that the Council specifically requested that
the draft not be retyped and that changes be made in the margin
of the text so people would know what changes had been made and
who made the changes or recommended the change.
Cm Turner stated that he feels the overwhelming majority of
testimony given this evening was for delay in adoption of the
General Plan, until the new Council is seated. He would like
to have time to think about this until tomorrow night. He
also agreed with some of the comments made by Cm Staley about
waiting to adopt the General Plan. He added that he would have
CM-3l-360
February 23, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
to ask of himself how he and the other Counci1members would feel
if everything were turned around and LARPD were about to adopt a
General Plan that the Council would like to review.
Cm Miller stated that if things were turned around the Council would
certainly want the opportunity for input. In this case LARPD will
be given adequate time to review matters that concern them prior to
final adoption. The P.C. has been responsive to concerns raised by
LARPD in the past and for this reason the scope of their remaining
comments should be more limited than in the past.
Cm Staley stated that he really is concerned with the characteriza-
tion that could be applied or perhaps has been applied that this is
a "midnight appointment" in trying to get it adopted. He knows
that this is not true but he also knows that the adoption should
not appear to be a "midnight appointment".
Cm Miller stated that the question of "midnight appointments" can
be manufactured by newspapers who are opposed to policies of the
Plan. This is exactly the way the "midnight appointment" rumor
is spread and there is nothing that can be done about it. The
real issue is that this has been scheduled for adoption and every-
body knows that it has been scheduled. If the newspapers who oppose
the Plan are honest they will conceed that it has been scheduled.
This is no secret, the Council has been working on it for a long
time and the deadlines have been known to everybody. The whole
thing has been carried out with the intent to conclude before this
Council leaves. If it isn't, the P.C. will have to go through a
whole series of public hearings again, as will the Council. It
would be an enormous waste of everybody's time. Because this
Council adopts a Plan, it does not mean that it will not be
revised again in six months or whenever the next Council chooses.
Mayor Futch expressed concern that a delay until a new Council is
seated may mean a delay of a year, using Planning Unit #12 as an
example. This was put over for the new Council and it still is
not is satisfactory form.
IT WAS CONCLUDED THAT THE HEARING WOULD BE CONTINUED AND THE COUNCIL
WOULD MEET IN A STUDY SESSION WITH THE P.C. AT 6:00 P.M., TOMORROW
NIGHT, 2/24/76, AND BEGIN THE REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING AT 8:00 P.M.
RECESS
Mayor Futch called for a brief recess after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present.
COMMUNICATION RE
FUNDS TO IMPROVE
CARNEGIE BLDG. & GROUNDS
A request was received from the Livermore Bicentennial Organization
for matching funds for improvements to the Carnegie building and
grounds, as outlined in their letter.
Cw Tirsel1 wondered if the City could lend them in kind services,
such as electrical work done by the City, rather than a cash sum.
Mr. Parness felt this could be arranged, but it would depend upon
how much the Council would be willing to contribute. If people
are assigned there it means that something will not get done for
the City.
CM-31-361
February 23, 1976
(Request for Funds
for Carnegie Bldg.)
CW TIRSELL MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY TO OFFER IN KIND SERVICES,
NOT TO EXCEED THE MATCHING AMOUNT OF $1,500. MOTION WAS SECONDED
BY CM MILLER.
Cm Turner wondered if this would be a normal capital improvement
of that building by LARPD.
Gib Marguth, 1152 Farmington Way, Chairman of the LBO, stated that
LARPD had budgeted $1,500 for capital improvements for the outside
of the Carnegie Building, for this year. Last April when LBO sub-
mitted plans to the Council for the year, one of the items was a
refurbishing of the Carnegie Building project, and LARPD agreed
to pay $1,500 for outside improvements. The refurbishing that
is planned cannot be done for $1,500 and it was hoped that the
City and LARPD would pay $1,500 for materials and that they
would look towards other people for remaining contributions
in the way of money and time. The electrical wiring done by
the Heritage Guild didn't include all the wiring needed in the
whole building.
Cm Turner stated that the motion doesn't really take care of
their request and Cw Tirsell stated that it was the position
of the Council, more than a year ago, not to provide cash for
the Bicentennial Organization projects.
Mr. Marguth stated that the Committee will study what needs to
be done and will come up with cash estimates, but they need to
know what kind of cash support will be coming from the City and
LARPD. The interior work will probably not amount to as much as
$l,500 and if the City wants to furnish supplies for the interior
work, that would be fine. The LBO does not want a blank check for
$1,500 - they want the City to provide materials to accomplish
specific projects which the City will see and concur with before
they are undertaken.
Cm Turner stated that providing additional outlets for the inter-
ior will be beneficial to many of our citizens and for this reason
he would be willing to consider furnishing $1,500 worth of supplies.
Cm Miller stated that the contribution of supplies is equivalent
to contribution of money and the Council agreed in the past that
it would not make any contribution to the LBO. He felt the
Council should abide by their policy. The other aspect of this
is that while the building belongs to the City it is leased to
LARPD who is also responsible for its maintenance and upkeep.
Our offer of labor would be reasonable.
CW TIRSELL MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE DONATION OF
LABOR AND/OR MATERIALs WHICH ARE PART OF THE CITY'S SUPPLY,
UP TO AN AMOUNT OF $1,500, FOR INTERIOR WORK. AMENDMENT WAS
SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Mr. Parness explained that it is doubtful the City has the type
of supplies on hand that would be needed for this type of work
and that purchase of supplies would have to be made. The City
would use whatever stock it has on hand for the job, however.
CW TIRSELL MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE DONATION OF
LABOR AND/OR MATERIALS UP TO AN AMOUNT OF $l,500 FOR INTERIOR
WORK. AMENDMENT WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED 4-1
(Cm Miller dissenting).
MAIN MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM-3l-362
February 23, 1976
APPLICATION RE RATE
INCREASES - TELEPHONE CO.
The Council moved to the item on the agenda relative to the application
of Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company for rate increases and
the PUC hearing regarding this application.
The PUC has given notice of a hearing to all interested parties
and listing various cities in which hearings will take place on
the Telephone Company's application for rate increases.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE THIS ITEM WAS NOTED FOR FILING.
REPORT RE PROPOSED MUNI.
CODE AMEND. RE BUSINESS
LICENSE - ARTICLE I
It was noted that there are people in the audience concerned with
the proposed Municipal Code amendment concerning business licenses
and the Council moved to this item on the agenda.
In accordance with a decision made during the last fiscal year, a
joint committee of the Chamber of Commerce and the City Council
has been meeting regularly to consider business license revisions.
The new schedules, effective on July 1, 1976, would mean an additional
$35,000 in revenues to the City.
Bill Manis, President of the Chamber of Commerce, 2363 Chateau Way,
explained that the Committee was formed in 1975 to study the
a revised business license tax schedule. He stated that the committee
was comprised of two members of the Council, Cm Miller and Staley~
two members from the Chamber, Marshall Kamena, and Annette Morris;
and a consumer at large, Rebecca Hondoble. The Committee set as
its goals, four points:
1) to raise additional revenue;
2) to improve the ability of the tax to grow with the economy~
3) to improve the equity of the tax for all businesses of the
same category~ and
4) to simplify the administration of the tax for both business
and the City.
After eight months of research and study the Committee has approved
the proposed ordinance that will add $35,000 to the City's revenue.
At the same time it will result in more than 50% of the businesses
coming up with a net decrease in taxes. This has been made possible
by closing loop-holes in the old ordinance as well as changing the
rate structure from a declining rate to a straight line rate.
He stated that he would like to personally thank the Committee
that conducted this study because it benefits more than 50% of
the merchants while raising revenues by $35,000, which represents
a job well done. He asked that the Council give this item considera-
tion and he would urge adoption of the new schedule.
Cm Turner wondered if the Chamber board has met and discussed this
proposal, because he hasn't received any comments from merchants.
Mr. Manis noted that the board has not met.
Cw Tirsell stated that she would like to commend the Committee for
its efforts and the introduction. There is a philosophy that is
carried out through the entire report that is very important -
these are equity and benefits to industry and the intent to reduce
the tax for small industry. She stated that if anyone would read
CM-3l-363
February 23, 1976
(Proposed Business
License Tax)
the introduction to the business license proposal, they would
understand the philosophy of the tax completely. It is very
rare that one can get this from reading something. This was
a tremendous amount of work and she finds that she is in agree-
ment with all major portions of the proposal.
em staley stated that one point the members of the Committee and
Mr. Manis were instrumental in achieving is the proposed incentive
for location of major industry and commercial establishments with-
in the City. It was the decision of the Committee that one of the
purposes and one of the desires for having local commerce and indus-
try is first, to raise revenue, and secondly, to provide local jobs for
local people and reduce the number of vehicle miles traveled both
for shopping and for work. with that in mind the Committee recom-
mended to the Council that a certain forgiveness of the first year
business license tax be granted to new industry and commercial
establishments locating within the City of Livermore if certain
conditions could be found.
One of the conditions was that the Council could find that the loca-
tion of that particular business would reduce the number of vehicle
miles traveled and thereby aid our air quality situation.
In the case of a commercial establishment, if it grossed more than
$l million/year a forgiveness of up to 75% would be recommended for
the first year business license tax.
In the case of industrial business, if it employed more than 10 full
time employees and 65% of it's work force from residents of the
Livermore-Amador Valley, then a lOO% forgiveness would be recommended
for the first year business license tax.
The Committee felt that employment of people outside the City of
Livermore, within the Livermore-Amador Valley, is sufficiently
important to our air quality to grant this reduction - even if
employees aren't residents of this City.
Cm Miller stated that the writing of this report was due to the
efforts of Mrs. Hundoble, who should receive credit for this work.
Also, all the members of the Committee contributed to the ideas
which appear in the report and there was substantial discussion
concerning all points of view, and lots of arguments, but it was
a Committee who reached consensus very smoothly and very well
and was one of the best committees he has served on.
Mr. Nolan, the Finance Director, also attended all the meetings
and was a particularly good source of information and he pro-
vided background for the Committee in many areas which the
Committee did not have experience.
em staley felt Marshall Kamena should also be commended for preparing
the first draft of the ordinance.
Cm Staley commented that the Council will not be taking action
on this item this evening because it has not been put in final
form but he would suggest that people from the public give
testimony if they wish to do so.
Mayor Futch stated that grocery stores generally have a low
profit margin and he would like the Council to have the
option of placing grocery stores in a different category than
some of the other businesses.
CM-3l-364
February 23, 1976
(Proposed Business
License Tax)
Cm Staley stated that while this is true about the sale of groceries,
grocery stores no 10nger se11 on1y groceries. Before he wou1d be
willing to allow a change in the category for grocery stores he
would have to hear public testimony which would substantiate the
belief that grocery stores have a low profit margin.
Mayor Futch stated that in that case he would like to ask Cm Staley
how the categories were selected, or on what basis were they selected?
Cm Staley stated that one of the chief concerns was the difference
between a retail category, which has a high cost inventory, and the
service category, which does not. A grocery store, dry goods store
and hardware store all have a cost of inventory. It is difficult
to determine how far you go to define that category. All retail has
been placed in one category.
Cm Miller stated that this issue of categories was discussed at great
length and several times, and whether or not there should be creation
of many categories for different kinds of retail. The thing that
convinced the Committee to have two different categories was the
wide variety of profitability of stores, within their class, as
compared to those in another class. An efficient jewlery store,
for example, has a larger profit margin than an inefficient jewlery
store, and there can be a factor of 3-5 in their profit margin for
the same kind of business, depending upon how good that businessman
operates. There can be so much overlap between the efficient and
inefficient businesses that it seemed easier and simplifies the
administration, to have one single retail category.
Cw Tirse11 stated that on Page 6, "any church or school" should
be deleted, because they fall in the category of benevolent
purposes.
Cm Miller stated that this could be checked but it wouldn't seem
that there would be any harm in mentioning either one.
Cm Staley stated that a school isn't necessarity a benevolent insti-
tution - there are some private schools that are not.
Cw Tirse1l concurred.
Cw Tirsell then noted that under the service category there is no
mention of barbers and they should be included in this category.
Cm Staley stated that someone mentioned to him that pharmicists
and opticians should also be included in the service category.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE STAFF BE DIRECTED TO PREPARE THE ORDINANCE
WITH THE BUSINESS LICENSE REVISIONS, INCLUDING BARBER, OPTICIAN,
AND PHARMACISTS, IN THE SERVICE CATEGORY. MOTION SECONDED BY
CM STALEY.
Cm Turner commented that he is very happy that the Councilmembers
and the Chamber of Commerce are working together harmoniously again.
Cm Turner noted that there is not an escalation clause
ness license tax but inflation will take care of this,
probably the cruelest tax of all.
in the busi-
and.~ i~><_,
~~. z/~.
~h
Section relative to rentals notes that anyone having more than
three rental units is obviously in the rental business and he
would like consideration to be given to anyone renting two or
more units.
CM-3l-365
February 23, 1976
(Proposed Business
License Tax)
em staley stated that the consideration was that if someone
owned a home and moved to a different house but rented the
first house, this would not be considered in the rental
business. The same argument could take place if someone owned
a duplex where someone was living in one half, moved out and
continued to rent both units. This would not be considered
a rental business, and the reason two rentals were allowed.
Cm Turner stated that he believes anyone with two rental units
should be paying a business license tax.
Cm Miller stated that originally he agreed with what Cm Turner is
saying. Cm Miller rents a house that he once owned and he feels
he should pay a business license tax~ however, there are many
people who do rent their former home and there would be the
problem of policing. He feels it is reasonable to allow someone
to have two rentals without paying the business license tax.
Cm Turner stated that in the past he has indicated that he felt
the penalty was excessive, but he no longer feels that it is.
Cm Turner stated that he noticed there was nothing in the business
license tax to take care of outside companies coming into Livermore
to do business, such as Hesketts coming here to lay carpet.
Mr. Nolan stated that the Committee devoted a lot of time and atten-
tion to this issue and basically, the premise that a single isolated
act that's incidental to a business license elsewhere, is not a
suitable subject for municipal taxation. However, once a business
begins conducting business in the City regularly, they are subject
to a municipal tax. In fact there are a lot of businesses located
outside the City that do pay a Livermore tax.
Cm Turner stated that the concerns of everyone on the Committee
was that everyone should pay his fair share of the business
license tax. If it comes to the attention of the City that
someone is not paying their business license tax or does not
have a business license but is doing business in the City, then
the Finance Department should be notified.
Cm Turner stated that his final question has to do with the 75%
reduction in the business license tax for commercial establishments
if they gross $1 million. He would like to know how many of our
present commercial businesses gross $1 million - what percentage
of all businesses1 He would like the Council to consider lowering
the gross amount needed to qualify for the 75% forgiveness.
Cm Staley felt the $l million gross is appropriate because the
whole purpose is to encourage large commerce and industry to
locate in Livermore.
Cm Turner felt a middle sized establishment should also be
encouraged and the 75% forgiveness would probably attract
the middle sized establishment. He added that he believes
this clause $hould be one that is realistic and that can be
used - not just included for the purpose of being in the ordi-
nance.
Mr. Nolan noted that a medium sized business in Livermore grosses
about $300,000.
The Council agreed to think about what a reasonable figure would
be to insure that the clause will be used.
CM-3l-366
February 23, 1976
(Proposed Business
License Tas)
em Miller stated that he would like to make an argument in favor of
retaining the $1 million gross requirement. What the City wants are
stores large enough to have a reasonable variety of stock and merchan-
dise. The problem has been that Livermore has many small stores but
they do not have the variety people are looking for. The whole pur-
pose is to encourage the larger stores. He stated that he will give
this item some thought, however.
MOTION TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE THE ORDINANCE, AS ABOVE
STATED, PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
APPOINTMENT TO SOCIAL
CONCERNS COMMITTEE
Cw Tirsell proposed the name of Mel Lagasca for the Social Concerns
Committee appointment with Jose Cortez as the alternate appointment
for this committee, AND SO MOVED. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM MILLER
AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, WITH THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION:
RESOLUTION NO. 48-76
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBERS TO
SOCIAL CONCERNS COMMITTEE (Mel Lagasca
and Jose Cortez)
REPORT RE EAST AVENUE
BIKE PATH AT ROBERT
LIVERMORE PARK AREA
The Director of Public Works reported that several months ago the
Council instructed the staff to contact the County to request
participation in the financing of the East Avenue bike path improve-
ment. Three additional inquiries have been made of the County and
the City has received no response.
It is recommended that the Council adopt a motion requesting that
LARPD expedite the installation of public works improvements for
East Avenue, and particularly along the Robert Livermore Park
East Avenue frontage.
CW TIRSELL MOVED THAT THIS ITEM BE REFERRED TO LARPD WITH THE
REQUEST FOR A TIMETABLE, AS WELL AS THE REQUEST THAT THIS PROJECT
BE EXPIDITED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER
AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Mr. Lee then explained, for the benefit of the audience, the plans
proposed for the bike path and sidewalk to be installed by LARPD.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Report re Minimum
Bid Requirement
A report concerning the minimum bid requirements was submitted to
the Council as prepared by the City Attorney. The staff was
instructed to prepare an amending ordinance.
CM-3l-367
February 23, 1976
Report re Business
License Tax Charities
At the request of the City Council the City Attorney provided
a report on the limitation of tax exemption for charitable solici-
tation, recommended for noting and filing.
Report re COVA Budget
The Council received a COVA report of the proposed budget for
the 1974-75 and 1975-76 fiscal year. COVA is requesting that
the COVA budget be readopted and that expenditures made prior to
the joint powers agreement be approved. It is recommended that
a resolution be adopted confirming approval of the COVA budget
and approving expenditures.
RESOLUTION NO. 39-76
A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING APPROVAL OF COVA BUDGET
(Fiscal Years 1974-75 and 1975-76)
RESOLUTION NO. 40-76
A RESOLUTION APPROVING COVA EXPENDITURE
Res. Adopting Criteria
& Procedures for Imple-
mentation of Environ-
mental Quality Act of 1970
The Council adopted a resolution adopting criteria and procedures
for implementation of the Environmental Quality Act of 1970.
RESOLUTION NO. 47-76
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING OBJECTIVES, CRITERIA AND
PROCEDURES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT OF 1970, AS AMENDED.
Report re Workmen's Com-
pensation Insurance Rating
A report from the City Manager relative to Workmen's Compensation
Insurance rating was noted for filing.
Departmental Reports
The following departmental reports were submitted:
Airport Activity - January
Building Inspection Department - January
Fire Department - October-December, 1975
Mosquito Abatement District - December
Municipal Court - December
Police and Pound Departments - January
Water Reclamation Plant - January
Payroll & Claims
There were 279 claims in the amount of $240,178.78, and 108 payroll
warrants in the amount of $95,346.16, for a total of $335,524.94,
dated 2/19/76, and approved by the Director of Finance.
CM-31-368
February 23, 1976
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED WITH REMOVAL OF ITEMS
5.4 (FAA Weather Equipment Lease Report), 5.5 (Fee Adjustments),
and 5.7 (First Street Speed).
FAA AIRPORT WEATHER
EQUIPMENT SITE LEASE
A report was submitted by the Director of Public Works, concerning
the Airport Weather Equipment Site Lease Agreement with the FAA.
The FAA would like to install weather equipment 200 ft. south of
the airport runway for the purpose of metering and transmitting
weather information to personnel in the tower. It is recommended
that the Council approve the lease agreement.
Cm Turner stated that the only thing he wanted to say about this
item was that he did not get a copy of the lease and he would like
to know if this will cost the City anything, and if there is a return.
Mr. Lee stated that this will not be a cost to the City, but neither
will there be a return to the City.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE LEASE WAS APPROVED.
RESOLUTION NO. 41-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF LEASE
AGREEMENT (Federal Aviation Administration) .
REPORTS RE ADOPTION OF
VARIOUS FEE ADJUSTMENTS
The Council received reports recommending various fee adjustments,
as follows:
Water Rates and Charges
Sanitary Sewer Connection Fees
Storm Drainage Fees
Park Fees
Residential Construction License Tax
Cm Miller stated that he requested that this item be removed from
the Consent Calendar because he would like to know if the Industrial
Advisory Committee had approved the amortization concept for the
water storage fee. He stated that Mr. Lee had indicated that they
had and if this is satiSfactory to the Committee it would be accept-
able to Cm Miller.
Cm Staley stated that he had asked Mr. Lee, earlier, about the
water rates and apparently the water rates are being raised because
Zone 7 is passing along their increased costs to the City. It was
his understanding that the City had a five year contract with Zone 7,
and that fees could not be raised during the five years.
Mr. Parness stated that it has been some months since he discussed
this matter with the staff but the staff did indicate that in the
agreement it specifies that Zone 7 has the right to pass along costs
to be borne by them, in the ratio specified in the agreement.
Mr. Parness stated that he could get Zone 7's rights clarified, in
writing, for the Council if the Council wishes.
CM-3l-369
February 23, 1976
(Reports re Adoption of
Various Fee Adjustments)
Cm Miller stated that there are two issues at hand. One is that
the Council had imperfect knowledge at the time the agreement was
adopted. It was his understanding at the time of adoption of the
agreement that the City was setting a single five year rate. It
turns out that there was a clause that was never brought to the
attention of the Council prior to adoption of the agreement. If
it had been brought to his attention he would never have voted for
the contract in that form. At that time the Council was already
concerned about what Zone 7 would do to the City about water rates.
The second issue is what they are doing to the City about water
rates and that these increases-rD water rates have Project II built
into them, after they told the City that there would be no increase
in water rates as a result of Project II. He believes the City was
deceived in not getting the full implications of what the contract
meant. Once in awhile some things get by unnoticed, but somehow
the City should have known this.
Mr. Lee stated that the City is still working with the original
Zone 7 agreement.
Cm Miller stated that the original agreement with Zone 7 doesn't
allow them to split the five year rate in pieces, year by year.
As he recalls they did not have that right and the Council agreed
to a five year contract. The change which allowed them to do an
annual change, by our resolution, was something the City would have
had to agree to at the beginning of the renewal term of the contract.
He stated that he may be wrong but he would like to know.
The City Attorney explained that at one point in time the Council
received a proposed amendment to allow Zone 7 to change the rates
each year to reflect increased costs. The five years was from
the beginning of 1974 on, and at that time Zone 7 passed a resolu-
tion setting the rates on a progressively increasing formula for
each of the five years.
Mayor Futch wondered how an agency can set rates over a five year
term when they don't know what cost increases will be?
Mr. Parness stated that the rates are as charged by the state but
he will get this information for the Council.
Cm Staley stated that before he votes on this item he would like
to see something on the City's contractural agreement with Zone 7,
and also on what formula they base their increases, and on what
evidence that costs have gone up.
Mr. Lee stated that the rate change should appear on the next
billing.
Mr. Nolan stated that the billing dates must be arranged on cycle
billing and the Finance Department would prefer to increase the
rate only one time per customer. If the Council wants this deferred
it could be placed in the billing cycle following adoption of the
agreement by the Council. However, if it is not adopted now the
City will lose money.
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, RESOLUTIONS WERE ADOPTED APPROVING ALL THE VARIOUS FEE
SCHEDULES.
CM-3l-370
February 23, 1976
(Various Fee Adjustments)
RESOLUTION NO. 42-76
A RESOLUTION ADJUSTING WATER RATES AND CHARGES, 1976
RESOLUTION NO. 43-76
A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ADJUSTMENT OF SANITARY
SEWER CONNECTION FEES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1976.
RESOLUTION NO. 44-76
A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ADJUSTMENT OF STORM
DRAINAGE FEES FOR 1976.
RESOLUTION NO. 45-76
A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ADJUSTMENT OF PARK
FEES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1976.
RESOLUTION NO. 46-76
A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ADJUSTMENT OF THE RESI-
DENTIAL CONSTRUCTION BUSINESS LICENSE TAX FOR CALENDAR
YEAR 1976.
REPORT RE FIRST STREET
VEHICULAR SPEEDS
A memorandum concerning traffic speeds on east First Street was
submitted to the Council by the Chief of Police. In summary the
Police Department feels the 50 mph in that area (near the Unitarian
Fellowship Hall) is not hazardous due to the type of roadway and
its geographical location.
Cm Turner wondered if the party who made the complaint about the
speed on First Street (Mr. Silverberg) receive a copy of the letter
from the Chief of Police. If not, a letter should be sent to him.
MOTION TO POSTPONE
REMAINING AGENDA
MAYOR FUTCH MOVED TO CONTINUE THE REMAINING ITEMS ON THE AGENDA
(All communications and new business) TO THE NEXT REGULAR MONDAY
NIGHT MEETING, MARCH 1, 1976.
Cm Staley stated that before doing this he would like to say
that he is very concerned about the resolution from the School
District and its blanket exemption of all their building projects
from the City's zoning ordinances.
Cm Staley stated that he would like to make the suggestion that
the School District adopt a pOlicy of working with the Council
on these things. He would not want the District to start making
irrevocable commitments before the Council can talk to them.
CM STALEY MOVED TO DIRECT MR. PARNESS TO CONTACT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT,
IMMEDIATELY, TO INFORM THEM OF THE COUNCIL'S CONCERN,.
CM- 3l-37l
February 23, 1976
(Postponement of
Remaining Agenda Items)
Cm Staley stated that he would like the Council to arrive at a
policy, with the School Board, where they would agree only to
exempt themselves from the application of our zoning and other
ordinances after they have met with the Planning Commission and
efforts have been made to settle differences by negotiation.
He would also like them to repeal the resolution they adopted
because it attempts to be a blanket exemption, and lastly, he
would like to have the School District comment on whether or
not they believe their authority to exempt themselves from our
ordinances extends beyond buildings.
Mr. Parness stated that he believes the questions raised by Cm
Staley are valid but it would be best to wait until the City
Attorney has rendered an opinion before getting into this area.
Cm Staley stated that there was an opinion rendered by the Assis-
tant City Attorney in the Planning Commission minutes on this
matter. The opinion was that the exemption applies to school
buildings and perhaps warehouses and buildings related to immediate
use in that particular school building, but does not apply to main-
tenance yards, bus depots, etc. Is there any reason to believe
that this opinion has changed significantly?
The City Attorney stated that this opinion has not changed and
it is a fairly accurate description of the statutory exemption.
CM STALEY ADDED TO THE MOTION THAT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT BE CONTACTED
BY THE STAFF AND REQUESTED THAT THE RESOLUTION BE APPEALED AND TO
ESTABLISH A POLICY TO WORK WITH THE CITY, REFER A PROJECT TO THE
PLANNING COMMISSION FOR COMMENT, AND ONLY AFTER THEY HAVE BEEN
UNABLE TO RESOLVE CITY/SCHOOL DISTRICT DIFFERENCES, THEY WOULD
ATTEMPT TO EXEMPT THEMSELVES OF THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCES.
MOTION SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
MOTION CONCERNING FIRST
TWO COMMUNICATIONS ON
CONSENT CALENDAR
Cm Miller stated that in order to save paperwork he would like
to make the following motion relative to the first two communica-
tions on the agenda.
CM MILLER MOVED TO ACCEPT THE RESIGNATION OF MRS. TERRY BURNSED
FROM THE GREENS COMMITTEE AND THAT THE TERM OF M. E. KIRSCHBAUM
WILL SOON EXPIRE WITH THE HOUSING AUTHORITY AND SHE DOES NOT WISH
TO BE REAPPOINTED. ALSO THAT LETTERS EXPRESSING THANKS FOR SERVICE
ON THESE COMMITTEES BE SENT TO THESE PEOPLE. MOTION WAS SECONDED
BY CW TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
COMMUNICATION FROM BASSA
RE ZONE 7 AS WASTEWATER
MANAGEMENT PLANNING AGENCY
CM MILLER MOVED TO NOTE AND FILE THE COMMUNICATION FROM BASSA
CONCERNING SELECTION OF THE WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT PLANNING
AGENCY FOR THE UPPER ALAMEDA CREEK, AND THAT A LETTER BE SENT
TO LOREN ENOCH THANKING HIM FOR HIS SUPPORT OF THE CITY'S VIEWS.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
THE REMAINING COMMUNICATIONS AND NEW BUSINESS WERE CONTINUED TO
THE MEETING OF MARCH 1, 1976.
CM-3l-372
I
February 23, 1976
~~J--
~
Cm M~llc~ stated that during the campaign for the upcoming election
there have been many alleged campaign violdations noted in the news-
papers as one at the podium regarding campaign signs. He stated
that in view of the fact the Council would like to prepare and
adopt tough new emergency campaign legislation, recently, it is
encumbent upon the Council to investigate these allegations. This
should be undertaken immediately after the upcoming election and
he requested that the Mayor so direct the City Attorney.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Alleged Campaign
Violations)
Cw Tirse1l stated that she would like to add that the Council would
draw up a specific list of complaints for the City Attorney to review.
The City Attorney stated that if the Council intends for him to
seriously investigate the allegations he would like the authorization
to retain or utilize the services of an investigator. He would sug-
gest that either this service be used or that the Police Department
handle the investigation.
Presumably the Council would not want to hire someone because this
would be costly, and the Police Department is very busy. However,
there may be someone from the Police Department who could work on
this type of investigation.
} {
J (
Cm Miller stated that he believes the candidates should be informed
of the penalty involved with failure to disclose this coming Thursday,
either by the City Clerk or the City Attorney. They have all been
told but they should be reminded.
CM TURNER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO INVESTIGATE ALLEGED ALLEGATIONS
CONCERNING CAMPAIGN VIOLATIONS, AND TO INFORM CANDIDATES OF THE PENALTY
FOR FAILURE TO DISCLOSE THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1976. MOTION WAS
SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Futch adjourned the meeting at 1l:55 p.m. to a 6:00 p.m.
study session tomorrow evening, February 24, in the Council Chambers,
and then to an adjourned regular meeting at 8:00 p.m. the same evening.
ATTEST
/k4 /7LU
Mayor
I ",/", / /"
<~~,~4r--~YL~ ~~,
,'/ c91ty Clerk
blvermore, California
APPROVE
CM-3l-373
I
AFTER MR. STEER'S COMMENTS THE MAYOR ASKED THAT THE COUNCIL
BEGIN DISCUSSING THE GENERAL PLAN AND THE PROPOSED GROWTH
RATE TO BE STATED IN THE PLAN, AND TO REVIEW THE CHANGES r9!n\L I fJ:f1l
TO BE MADE. A..YVIUI'V ,'!.( '"(: It
Adjourned Regular Meeting of February 24, 1976
An adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Livermore was held on Tuesday, February 24, 1976, at 8:00 p.m.
in the Council Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue.
The purpose of the meeting was to discussed proposed changes
for the General Plan, and to receive additional public testimony.
Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Staley, Cw Tirse1l and Mayor Futch
Absent: None
THE COUNCIL IMMEDIATELY ADJOURNED TO A BRIEF EXECUTIVE SESSION
TO DISCUSS LITIGATION AND RETURNED TO THE ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING.
CONT. PUBLIC HEARING
RE GENERAL PLAN
Mayor Futch stated that this is a continued public hearing for
public testimony on the General Plan and asked that anyone who
would be interested in commenting, please address the Council.
Jack Steer, resident of the unincorporated area which is included
in the proposed General Plan, stated that his philosophy is that
the City should not have the right to plan outside its own bound-
aries until such time it annexes land in the unincorporated areas
and accommodations made to these areas.
Mr. Steer added that he is sure many of the people in the unincor-
porated area will be more pleased with what is proposed than was
on the existing Plan. They also appreciate the time the Council
has spent on this item and in working on some of the problems.
Cw Tirsell stated that she appreciates the views of both Cm Turner
and Cm Miller but she believes it is difficult to compromise some
health standards for some other goals which she believes are attain-
able and necessary and yet she doesn't know a number to attach to
reasonable growth estimates. She stated that she knows that zero
is impossible and also that over a 2% growth rate cannot be absorb-
ed by the community. She has worked with the Plan for three years,
has heard all the discussions and is aware of both sides of the
issue.
In light of the population figures and the projected growth, alone,
the City is probably anticipating a growth figure not'that realistic.
The fact that Alameda County has been losing population for the last
three years and the fact that it grows .5% is something the City
must consider in using an ultimate maximum growth rate of 2%. We
are four times higher than the County is growing now.
The City will probably have many commuters in the north community
but nevertheless we owe an obligation to that area for shopping
conveniences and we can't do it without some population over there.
If it can be done without jeopardizing the health of all of us,
then it is a goal that is worthwhile. If those people commute to
town for groceries, it is still better than having everyone commuting
out of the Valley all the time. This would mean that they would com~
mute out of the Valley for jobs as well as shopping. While we may
run the risk of only commuters in the northern community, she believes
it is a goal the City should try to meet. The City needs to get enough
people in that area to make it a viable community which would warrant
a high school and other facilities. It is a fact of life that those
people need to be on their own and not a parasite of the City.
Cw Tirse1l stated that she is going to recommend a compromise
of a 1.5% growth rate as a maximum over the life of the General
Plan. She stated that she cannot support this figure with facts
but it seems that this would accomplish the natural growth rate
the City needs to absorb.
CM-31-374
February 24, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
The 1.5% is more than those cities who are losing population and
are already developed, and it takes into account that our land is
more developable and more apt to develop. We are absorbing popula-
tion from areas that are not as desirable to grow in and yet the
1.5% is a responsible growth rate, in light of environmental con-
cerns.
CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE 1.5% GROWTH RATE AS THE MAXIMUM GROWTH
RATE FOR THE LIFE OF THE GENERAL PLAN. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM
TURNER.
Cm Turner stated that he seconded the motion because he made his
points about supporting a 1.5% growth rate during the study session.
Cm Staley wondered if the 1.5% is to be the maximum for the 30 years
the General Plan will be in effect, and Cw Tirsell stated that this
is correct - a 1.5% maximum in anyone year for the 30 years.
em Staley then asked if Cw Tirsell is taking the same position he
expressed in the study session because of environmental reasons,
only using a figure of 1.5%?
Cw Tirsell stated that this is correct. She is taking exactly the
same position. She stated that her position is based on information
that came from ABAG - it is irrefutable information. It isn't what
may happen, it is what really happened. If we were to stay even in
growth with the rest of Alameda County then we would use a .5% figure.
However, recognizing there are cities that cannot grow and will not
grow, and not knowing what any of the specific numbers are, the best
estimate would be the 1.5%.
Mayor Futch stated that realizing it will be 5-7 years before we
ever get any sewage capacity, and when we get it we have allocated
50% mimum to industry and commerce and 50% maximum for residential
growth; therefore, what would the population projection be in 20
years? The 50% represents .5 MGD, and 5 MGD would service 50,000
which means that .5 would serve 5,000.
Cm Miller explained that 1 MGD serves ll,OOO people so .5 MGD would
service about 5,500 people.
General discussion followed concerning population projections
and it was noted that in l3 years if there is a growth rate of
l.5% per year, there will be an additional l2,000 people, in addition
to the 3,000 that the present sewer capacity will allow. The present
population is 50,000 people and adding the 12,000 that will be allowed
with sewer expansion (l.5% growth) and the 3,000 that could be allowed
on our present system, it means a growth of up to 65,000 people in
l3 years.
Mayor Futch stated that the pipeline hasn't been decided, as yet,
and Cw Tirsel1 pointed out that when it was discussed the disaggrega-
ted E-O funding was for a population of 65,000-67,000. This makes
the l.5% consistent with the pipeline that we have to sign up to
pay for and the increased sewage, if we get it.
Cm Miller stated that he could accept Cw Tirsell's motion if there
were something more explicit about what would control the growth
rate after the 7 years. What would tell the City that it wouldn't
grow at the maximum of l.5%, and what would be any kind of limitation.
If the l.5% were tied to air quality he would feel more comfortable
about the whole thing.
CM-3l-375
February 24, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
Mayor Futch stated
a 2% growth rate.
growth for 7 years
be in l3 years?
that he would like to talk about adopting
If there is to be a 2% growth rate with no
due to sewage problems, what would the growth
The City Attorney interjected that the Council really doesn't need
to be concerned about the arbitrary maximum growth rate figure be-
cause if things change drastically during the seven years another
Council can change the entire General Plan anyway.
It was noted that a 2% growth rate would give a total population
of 68,000, and a l.5% growth rate would mean 63,000 in 1995.
Mayor Futch stated that the City has planned for a growth of up
to 70,000 for the Year 2000, using a growth rate of 2%. If the
Council now intends to change this growth rate to 1.5% it will
mean all the tables in the General Plan will have to be changed
as well as the map, and it would mean a difference of only 5,000
less people It should be made clear that the 2% is the maximum
and that there will be no additional sewage available for 5-7 years.
Cm Turner stated that the Council is working under severe time
constraints to come to a decision on the General Plan and he is
in favor of the l.5% and he is ready to vote on that figure.
Bill Zagotta, member in the audience, stated that the 5,000
people, or the difference in the l.5% and the 2% means 1,500
homes. If ,all of these people are going to have to commute be-
cause of a lack of industry in Livermore then he would urge the
Council to reconsider a smaller figure. Otherwise, the popula-
tion will outstrip the industrial growth. The growth rate really
should take heavy consideration of the industrial and commercial
growth rate, with residential growth pinned to it. In his opin-
ion the l.5% would escalate imbalance in the community.
Cm Staley stated that he would agree with what Mr. Zagotta is
saying, only his solution to the problem would be different.
The goal is to balance the community and to have residential
growth, if at all, which is positive in terms of balancing the
community and achieving other goals. We should not plan to
grow at any given rate merely for the purpose of growth itself.
Given the best of all conceivable worlds, a maximum growth rate
for the next 25 years of 2% would be reasonable. On the other
hand, he is not comfortable with planning to grow at any given
rate. It needs to be written in the plan that the City doesn't
intend to add residential units for the purposes of growth at
all, unless those residential units in the totality of their
existence, achieve a balance in our community.
Cm Miller stated that if the Council must pick a growth rate
this evening then he will vote in favor of a 1.5% growth rate
rather than a 2% rate. However, he believes .4% is really the
figure the Council should choose, and he would hope that a num-
ber is not selected at this time because he hears Cm Staley
saying that there should really be some other way to make these
decisions and these words should be written down and included
in the Plan. He stated that he might even favor the 2% rate
if the 2% were tied down properly. He urged that the Council
consider how the 2% or whatever figure is selected, can be
conditioned.
em Staley stated that his philosophy is that residential growth
should be used onl~ to balance the community but if balance can
be achieved and ot er factors mitigated, under no circumstances
would the residential growth exceed 2% per year.
CM-3l-376
February 24, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
Cm Turner felt this would mean that the City wouldn't grow at all.
He felt the word "balance" should be clearly defined. He added
that he is not saying that the City should grow at 1.5% but that
the City should grow as there is a need to grow.
Cm Turner stated that he believes the 1.5% is the best of both
worlds. This does not mean that we have to grow at 1.5% but he
believes that once the City has the capability to grow the developers
will be fighting for the 1.5%.
Mr. Zagotta stated that in addition to the figure (l.5% or 2% or
whatever) the City should have a goal for a growth rate. The reason
for this is because ceilings have a way of becoming floors as soon as
the market returns. It's easy to say it could remain at a certain
figure because there's no market. The reasons for adopting a maximum
are compelling but there should be a goal for a growth rate. There
should be a tax base balance and industrial and commercial growth
rates should begin to balance our residential tax base. That is
just a qualitative statement and not a quantatative statement but
the 2% will never bring the City into balance.
Cw Tirsel1 stated that Mr. Zagotta is talking about industrial tax
base balance but there are other balances to work for and this is
what Cm Staley is trying to accomplish - balance of geographies and
other things.
Cm Staley stated that there has not been a definition in the Plan
as to what balance in the community really is. There are various
types of balance such as geographical, tax, employment, and other
balance.
Cm Staley agreed to prepare proposed wording which would include
the definition of a balance the City is looking for.
RECESS
Mayor Futch called for a brief recess during which time Cm Staley
prepared the wording. The meeting resumed with all members of the
Council present. The General Plan public hearing continued.
The following is the wording prepared by Cm Staley to be included
on Page III-2, after the second paragraph (below first paragraph
on the right column):
It shall be the residential growth policy of the City to
plan for the maximum residential growth figure achieved
by never exceeding 2% of the then present population in
any calendar year. This figure represents a blueprint
for a maximum and not a goal to be achieved. Any residen-
tial growth, at all, must be consistent with the policy
that particular residential construction must be in the
best interest of the community as a whole, considering
that our goal is to achieve a balance in our community.
Balance shall be understood to mean:
1) A geographical balance of the physical popu-
lation on the terrain;
2) That the adverse impact of the residential growth
on air quality be balanced by factors such as re-
duced vehicle miles traveled because of shopping
facility locations, and local employment of the
residents.
CM-3l-377
February 24, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
3) That the industrial-commercial tax base versus
the residential tax base will become a more
favorable ratio.
4) Absorption of natural growth rate.
Cm Staley stated that he believes these are the policies that
should govern residential growth, and he will now go over the
paragraphs in the General Plan, under population Growth policies
and state how these four items will relate to a particular
policy.
Item 1. still stands, 2. and 3. are incorporated and added to this
goal, (a), and (b), are fine but (c) needs changes.
Mayor Futch felt the wording by the Planning Commission should be
used because it clearly indicates that 2% is a maximum figure,
and the growth rate needs to be consistent with environmental con-
straints.
Cm Miller stated that he agrees essentially with Cw Tirsell in that
1. is alright, 2. is incorporated, 3. is incorporated, in a minor way,
but it should undergo changes in order to make it consistent.
Cm Turner stated that he agrees with what Mr. Zagotta has said in
that the 2% will become the floor. Even though the policy states
that it is only a blueprint, in time it will become the goal to
achieve. In his opinion there really isn't anything of substance
to the wording incorporated by Cm Staley.
CW TIRSELL MOVED TO AMEND HER ORIGINAL MOTION TO ADOPT THE 1.5%
GROWTH RATE AND TO INCLUDE THE WORDING PREPARED BY CM STALEY.
Cm Miller stated that he wouldn't be able to vote for the motion
because there are wording changes necessary in 2. and 3. and there
are other things that have to be included that have not been added,
as yet.
Cm Miller added that the Council has discussed a figure of 82,000
for population which is an arbitrary number chosen because of the
2% but it is not a totally unreasonable upper limit some day;
however, not necessarily within the time period of this plan.
Consequently, there needs to be words associated showing that the
82,000 is a proposed upper limit and not necessarily within the
25 year time period of the Plan, but something the City considers.
Those words would allow the Council not to have to go through and
change 100 pages of the text. The 1.5% brings the City to 72,000
but this means that all the tables would have to be changed. The
72,000 is the goal subject to all the balance conditions within
the time period of the Plan. The 82,000 in the tables is some
other time period further down, assuming everything works out
alright.
Mayor Futch explained for the benefit of the visiting Planning
Commission, that the Council discussed the population projections
using the 1.5% maximum and the 2% and determined that there would
be a population of 68,000 and 73,000, respectively, taking into
consideration the delay in growth because sewage capacity will
be delayed. There would be a difference of 5,000 population if
the maximum is changed from 1.5% to 2%. In his opinion the City
should leave the maximum at 2%.
Cm Staley felt there should also be the inclusion of a statement
to the effect that the City should be able to absorb its natural
growth rate. Also, he agrees eith a 2% growth rate and cannot
support the motion.
CM-3l-378
February 24, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
CW TIRSELL'S AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
CM TURNER CALLED FOR THE QUESTION AND THE MOTION FAILED 2-3 (Cm
Turner, Staley and Mayor Futch dissenting) .
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT A MAXIMUM OF 2% GROWTH RATE, AS RECOMMENDED
BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL.
(l)CM STALEY MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE THE POLICIES AS
OUTLINED BY HIM EARLIER. MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Cw Tirsell suggested that the policies, as outlined by Cm Staley,
be included as a separate paragraph and Cm Staley concurred.
Cm Miller suggested that there be rewording of 2. and 3. to match
the policies outlined by Cm Staley and that this be included in
Cm Staley's amendment.
(2)MAYOR FUTCH MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO ~1END 3. AND (c) AS
FOLLOWS:
Based on the above policy the City hereby adopts
a maximum population growth rate of 2% for any
given year. This growth rate can be averaged
over the two preceding years. The residential
growth rate must meet the goals and policies
stated above.
(c) 5th line - after air quality, substitute the
word may for the word "will".
AMENDMENT MADE BY MAYOR FUTCH WAS SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL.
(3)CM STALEY MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO STRIKE THE SECOND SENTENCE
IN 3. (This growth rate can be averaged over the two preceding
years.) AMENDMENT WAS SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL.
Cm Staley explained that the 2% has the average built into it and
the City doesn't intend to see a 2% growth rate in any given year.
The reason the 2% is allowed as a maximum is to average the lower
growth rate that the City may actually have.
(3)CM STALEY'S AMENDMENT PASSED 4-1 (Mayor Futch dissenting) .
..d:ta.6~ ~ ~l,W...i!t~iEJ.;
(2)MAYOR FUTCH'S AMENDMENT PASSED 4-1 (Cm Miller1disslmting). }J/4.:~~ I
[~~ew<!.-
(l)CM STALEY'S FIRST AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE THE POLICIES AS OUTLIN€D
BY HIM EARLIER WAS AGAIN AMENDED TO INCLUDE A POLICY THAT CONSIDERS
THERE IS A BALANCING FACTOR, THE ABSORPTION OF OUR NATURAL GROWTH
RATE. AMENDMENT SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
(4)CM MILLER STATED THAT 2% IS NOT THE NATURAL GROWTH RATE OF THE
VALLEY AND THEREFORE MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO DELETE 3. (d).
AMENDMENT WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER WHICH PASSED 4-1 (Mayor Futch
dissenting) .
The Council moved on to Page 1II-2b.
(5)CM MILLER MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO CHANGE (e) TO READ AS
FOLLOWS:
CM-3l-379
February 24, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
(e) In consideration of the "fair share" of regional
growth, it must be noted that the S.F. Bay regional
growth averaged .82% over the last 5 years and Ala-
meda County averaged .52% over the last 5 years.
DELETE THE REMAINDER OF THIS PARAGRAPH.
(5)AMENDMENT MADE BY CM MILLER WAS SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL, AND PASSED
BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
(6)CW TIRSELL STATED THAT SINCE THE COUNCIL HAS ADOPTED THE FINDINGS
THE LAST PARAGRAPH WHICH IS THE SUMMARY, SHOULD BE DELETED. SHE
MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO DELETE THE SUMMARY. AMENDMENT WAS
SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Cm Miller stated that before going on/the Council may wish to
discuss the possibility of adding something concerning precedents
for consideration of growth limitations arising from the petaluma
decision, the petaluma ordinance, and the recent Supreme Court
decision, and the Napa 1%.
The Assistant City Attorney commented that from a legal standpoint
wording to this effect would not be necessary but it might be
desirable to include wording to this effect if it is felt that
the decision from the courts and the decisions of the petaluma
and Napa City Councils was reflective of the Livermore City Coun-
cil's thinking This could buttress the ability of the court to
find the intent of the Council in this General Plan enactment.
Mayor Futch wondered if it could have any negative effect.
The Assistant City Attorney stated that this would depend upon
the way the policies were stated and the statements of those
courts.
Cm Miller pointed out that Napa has a growth rate lower than
Livermore's and they are in an area without air pollution.
We have the additional problem of air pollution so it would
seem that we might want to say something which would give some
support to these policies.
em Staley and Cw Tirsell felt wording of this type would be
unnecessary.
em Miller stated that he would like to make one comment and he
would like it included for the record. The changes that have
been suggested by Cm Staley alleviate, in large part, many of
the concerns he had about the draft prepared by the P.C. The
draft that was prepared by the P.C. was done, in his opinion,
with much thought and great care, in view of the priorities they
have. Their priorities are not Cm Miller's priorities, and every-
body is entitled to their own priorities. His priority places the
health aspect of planning and the use of the police power by the
City, at the highest level. To him, air pollution is an overriding
consideration and he believes that overriding consideration is sup-
ported by the California Environmental Quality Act from which he
has quoted. Though there are no court cases on this point, none the-
less it is a major state pOlicy. He believes it is important and
that air pollution is the most important criterion and the questions
of balance which have been raised with respect to fill-ins, if it
CM-3l-380
February 24, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
gives rise to commuters, overrides the health question - not only
for those of us presently living here but for those commuters whose
health is threatened, to move into an area which is already bad and
which they make worse. The question of growth of the community, as
suggested by Cm Staley, would be agreeable to him if there will be
industry that will hire all of the people who move in. That makes
sense to him and he has no quarrel with that philosophy. He would
agree with what Bill Zagotta has said in that industrial and commer-
cial balance is so far "out of whack" that the consideration of resi-
dential, even for the generation of fill-in, does not outweigh the
air quality problem, as he sees it. He expressed concern for what
other jurisdictions might do, and particularly the County. If the
City doesn't list the concerns for public health, wisely, the irra-
tionality of other jurisdictions can no longer be attacked by us
because we wouldn't have the moral credibility we should have.
Cm Miller added that he is disappointed he has not been able to
convince the other Councilmembers that health is an overriding
consideration. / J) //.dt. &~&~,
ma-q 1-'1) Jla~)v ~ i -r:
(6)AMENDMENT TO DELETE THE SU~mRY PASSED 4-1 (em/Miller dissenting).
MAIN MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
The Assistant City Attorney commented that referral back to the
P. C. does not mean the P.C. has to submit another proposal to
the City Council. The only requirement is that they report on any
modification the Council makes in the Plan. The Council can make a
final modification, draft it in final form, and then submit it to
the P.C. They have no power or opportunity to actually change it.
SUMMARY OF CHANGES:
Page 1II-2 Population Growth policies
1. Will remain as is.
2. will remain as is.
INSERT POLICIES AS PREPARED BY CM STALEY.
3. As amended, omitting second and third sentence.
(a) Will remain as is
(b) Will remain as is
(c) word change - may
(d) Deleted
Page III-2(b)
(e) As amended, deleting entire last paragraph.
(f) As amended, adding "of local employment" after the word
problems in line 4.
Summary - deleted.
The Council then reviewed the map and Cm Miller stated that the
map shows up to Year 2000. Because of a seven year time delay
the map should indicate Year 2000 or later. The 82,000 population,
using the 2% growth rate maximum and which corresponds to the map
is based on the assumption that it is beginning right now and we
won't be getting additional sewage for 5-7 years.
The Council concurred.
CM-3l-38l
February 24, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING, SECONDED BY eM STALEY
AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Futch adjourned the meeting at 10:45 p.m. to a meeting on
Thursday, February 26, 1976, at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
ATTEST
~/~r
GL~ 1 ~~
~~re~C~:~~fornia
APPROVE
Adjourned Regular Meeting of February 26, 1976
An adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Livermore was held on Thursday, February 26, 1976, at 6:30 p.m.
in the Council Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting
was called to order at 6:50 p.m. with Mayor Futch presiding.
The purpose of the meeting was the continued public hearing
and changes for the proposed General Plan.
Present: Cm Turner, Miller, and Mayor Futch
Absent: Cw Tirsell and Cm Staley
Mayor Futch stated that this is a public hearing an~ anyone in
the audience interested in addressing the Council concerning
the proposed General Plan should speak to the Council at this
time.
THERE BEING NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY, MAYOR FUTCH MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL
ADOPT THE GENERAL PLAN MAP, AS SUBMITTED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
CM MILLER SECONDED THE MOTION.
Mayor Futch stated that the major change with respect to residential,
is removal of the yellow areas north of I-580 and south of the pres-
ently developed residential section of the City.
Cm Turner stated that he is very disappointed in this procedure and
in the way this is being handled right now.
Mayor Futch stated that there is a motion on the floor and Cm
Turner is welcome to speak to the motion or to make any additional
motion he might wish to make.
CM-3l-382
I
February 26, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
Cm Miller asked what the problem is and Cm Turner stated that he
tried to get the floor and was ignored by the Mayor. Cm Turner
stated that it was his understanding that the motion was to adopt
the Plan and he had a comment.
Mayor Futch commented that he accidentally said the Plan but he
meant the map.
Cm Turner stated that he spent 8 hours talking to people today
who expressed concerns about the General Plan and who have asked
the Council to postpone adoption of the General Plan. This was
the reason he was trying to get the Mayor's attention. He wanted
to comment on his findings from the public before taking any kind
of action as far as adoption of the Plan.
Mayor Futch explained that this subject was discussed earlier in
the week at which time Cm Turner requested that he be allowed 24
hours to think about whether or not he would like to go ahead and
adopt the Plan. After the 24 hours Mayor Futch contacted him by
telephone and Cm Turner indicated that he was ready to meet and to
go ahead and adopt the Plan.
Cm Turner stated that this was before he had spent a day talking to
everybody about their concerns. He added that he feels the motion
is very irregular in view of the fact that more than two people
(Cw Tirsell and Joan Boer) knew that he was interviewing people
today.
Mayor Futch indicated that it was his understanding that the pur-
pose of this meeting was to adopt the Plan and the map.
Cm Turner asked that the Mayor go ahead with the meeting.
Cm Miller asked about the designation of the existing yellow area
on the nap and Mr. Musso explained that the yellow area is that
area which has been changed from residential to agricultural.
The light green was also industrial area that was changed to
agricultural.
Brief discussion followed concerning the map with Mr. Musso illustrat-
ing the various areas, colors, and their designations.
Cm Turner asked that there be a delay in adoption of the map until
Cm Staley arrives and Cm Miller stated that he wouldn't adopt the
map without Cm Staley present.
Cm Turner noted that any discussion that takes place at this time
will have to be repeated for the benefit of Cm Staley since he
does plan to be present but is coming late.
CM MILLER MOVED TO POSTPONE DISCUSSION OF THE MAP FOR 15 MINUTES
TO ALLOW CM STALEY THE OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR DISCUSSION. MOTION
SECONDED BY MAYOR FUTCH.
MAYOR FUTCH WITHDREW HIS ORIGINAL MOTION, AND CM MILLER WITHDREW
HIS SECOND.
Cm Turner stated that the Council is talking about adopting a
General Plan that will affect the City for 25 years. There are
three members of the Council present and it is important that
all members who plan to attend the meeting be present. It is
} )
) )
CM-3l-383
em TUrner later indicated tnat ne nad been misinformed I' '~~' \
at tne librarY concernin~ informatiOn wnicn snould naVe e ,~~,~!~
been toere fOr toe pubUC. Tnis information ~ available tJ'Qu' ~)Jt >
to toe public and all toe revisions were included. ' l
I
February 26, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
very possible that a majority of the Council could adopt the map
or Plan but he believes this would be improper.
The City Attorney stated that one thing that really bothers him
is the Council's separating the map from the Plan. There is no
division of the General Plan - the map and policies are all part
of the General Plan and it is intended that the whole General
Plan be adopted.
Mayor Futch stated that the Council is merely discussing the
map.
The City Attorney stated that the only reason he is raising the
issue is because the Mayor made a motion to adopt the map which
is a separation of the map from the Plan. He does not intend to
interfere with procedures of the Council but he does have con-
cerns because the map should not be adopted until the Planning
Commission has made an official presentation on any amendments
the Council intends to make.
The Council discussed, with the City Attorney, the procedure to
be followed in discussing the map, Plan and changes and it was
noted that it would be satisfactory to amend the motion to say
that the Council is amending the P.C. recommendations; however,
this is not necessary. A report will be going back to the P.C.
with the changes,
CM STALEY WAS SEATED AT THIS TIME.
CW TIRSELL WAS ALSO SEATED AT THIS TIME.
Cm Turner stated that on Monday, the 23rd, there were quite a
few people who requested an extension of time on approval of
the General Plan. Cm Staley made comments to the effect that
there was enough testimony to warrant possible extension. Cm
Turner stated that he indicated he would like to think about
it and specified 24 hours. He decided that he would spend
today in the field and talk to those people that came to the pod-
ium and he wants to share with the Council, the results of those
conversations and a few other things he did.
He stated that he would like this included in the record. He
had some remarks to say about Mrs. Scott but his wife suggested
that he cross them off. He spent most of the day talking to
most of the people who requested a delay in the General Plan,
and also some who didn't.
Remembering that the staff had said a copy of the General Plan
was at the library, he first stopped there. The original draft
from Grunwald-Crawford is at the library with a letter from Mr.
Musso stapled to it, dated December 11, 1975. There was testi-
mony that there was a copy of the General Plan there for the
public to review. There was also a copy of the EIR there. None
of the revisions are at the library, that he was able to find.
He talked to Mr. Nolte and he also talked to the information
clerk. They are not available to the general public.
He then reviewed the Tri-Valley Herald letter dated 23 February,
1976. He felt most of the letter was without substance but their
one point about numerous changes, had some validity. He believes
that their reasons for requesting a delay are very clear if the
letter is dissected.
CM-3l-384
February 26, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
He then went to the LARPD and spoke with Bill Payne, because they
also had concerns. The Planning Commission had stated that there
are no major changes in the Plan but Mr. Payne contends that there
are major changes in the plan that they were not aware of until
February 25, 1976. He has called a special meeting of the Board
for February 27, 1976, tomorrow, to evaluate staff concerns.
Cm Turner stated that Mr. Payne pointed out the changes in the
original Grunwald-Crawford Plan versus what the P.C. has offered.
One is that the P.C. is recommending adoption of the East Bay
Regional Park plan rather than the LARPD plan. One of the concerns
of LARPD is, what will happen to their plan.
LAPRD has some concerns about the City turning over the mini parks
to LAPRD for maintenance purposes. They will make a report to the
Council Monday night, which will be presented by John stroud.
Mr. Payne indicated that if these items are not in the General Plan
there is no problem; however, if they are in the Plan then LAPRD
would want two weeks to prepare testimony for presentation to the
Council.
He spoke with Rudy D'Ambra of the School District who indicated
that they are in favor of the Plan and feel it should be adopted
at this time.
He spoke with Bill Manis from the Chamber of Commerce and because
of numerous changes in the Plan, (and they still feel they are
there because of edification of the Plan) and because by implication
they represent the industrial and commercial areas, it is important
that a review of changes and comments be received from the Chamber.
Walter Griffith has indicated that he feels uneasy about adoption
of the Plan before the affected agencies comment on it but in asking
him about his real concerns, he didn't name anything specific.
Gloria Taylor is concerned about Concannon Boulevard and she believes
the Plan should be adopted.
Cm Turner talked to a couple of people on the street who weren't
interested.
Cm Turner stated that from his investigations he believes the
Tri-Valley Herald didn't have any legitimate claim but that
the Chamber of Commerce and LARPD have legitimate reasons for
requesting a time delay in adoption of the General Plan. Also,
since the Plan at the library is the same as the 1975 General Plan,
the public has not been given ample opportunity for review of changes.
Cm Turner stated that he agrees with Cw Tirsell in that an inordinate
amount of time has been spent on the General Plan but in his opinion
this is not the issue. The issue is that everything should be done
properly in order that this doesn't appear to be a midnight appointment
type of thing. It is difficult to understand the Plan and he would
like to suggest that any action be delayed until at least Monday to
give LARPD a chance to respond.
In summary, there is sufficient time before the election to hear
all the comments and concerns of the Chamber and LARPD and take
action on them and then adopt the Plan.
CM-31-385
February 26, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
Cw Tirsell asked that the City Clerk contact Mr. Nolte at the
library and make sure they are given all the changes that have
taken place.
Cw Tirsell stated that she believes it is perfectly possible to
go through the entire Plan and review the changes and be able
to have it ready for adoption at the Monday night meeting. The
Council can go over concepts this evening.
Cm Staley stated that there was a lot of uproar at the last Monday
night meeting and the Council has met two times since that time
during which there hasn't been a soul here to testify. He stated
that he is abolutely disgusted about that. All those people that
asked that the plan be delayed - where are they now?
There was concern as to whether or not LARPD had received all the
changes that would affect them and Mr. Musso stated that they have
received everything.
Bob Selden, from the P.C. noted that in the LARPD portion, there
is page after page with a lot of crossed out portions but the sub-
stance of the strike-outs are really very small when you review
them in detail. There is a substantial amount of text that, in
effect, is telling some other agency what LARPD will do, in detail.
All of those sections were removed from the Plan. In that sense,
there has been a change. It was also noted in the original Plan,
that LARPD's plan and the EBRPD's plan, would be adopted as part
of the General Plan but the City doesn't adopt the plan of anyone
else with the General Plan. This was one of the concerns of LARPD.
Cm Miller stated that the Chamber's view that they fully repre-
sent business and industry and that things must be referred to
them is something that can't go unchallenged. They do not have
any special right as a Chamber of Commerce that distinguishes
them from any other organization and it is courteous to send
these things to them but they have to respond the same as every-
body else.
Mr. Musso then reviewed the changes on the map which were done to
reduce the holding capacity to something closer to the population
the Plan suggests. The reason for making that decision was in
response to LARPD's request. He mentioned that Hartford Road will
be a rural road instead of a major road.
Mayor Futch wondered if Hartford should be a rural road.
Cm Miller stated that he agrees with this but perhaps setback lines
should be discussed, in case something else would ever happen in
the future.
Mr. Musso commented that with this Plan a lot of our standards
for streets and other things will no longer be in effect.
The City will have to adopt new street standards, probably includ-
ing standards for rural roads which will include setbacks.
Another change in the map was a change in the industrial area to
sand and gravel resources. AB 50 requires that the City recog-
nize this type of resources.
Discussion followed concerning rural residential and what density
should be allowed.
CM-3l-386
February 26, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
Cm Miller stated that 1.5 du/acre allows clustering - the rural
residential is one that does not allow clustering and it is a
minimum lot size ordinance. There has to be one acre instead of
a standard subdivision with open space, and there is a place for
having both.
Mr. Musso stated that a density transfer is allowed in all areas
except rural residential, and it would be allowed there but the
minimum lot size is one acre. It was the intent that the west
side of Vasco Road would be left in a density transferable classi-
fication.
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE AREA WEST OF VASCO ROAD WAS REFERRED BACK TO THE P.C.
TO CHANGE FROM l.5 DU/ACRE TO RURAL RESIDENTIAL.
Mr. Musso stated that another area was the Almond Avenue/Buena
Vista area, proposed for rural residential, in response to the present
property owners' requests.
The property around the Callaghan Mortuary to the Civic Center
site is recommended as medium high density and the area across
from the Civic Center at College Avenue and South Livermore
Avenue will be multiple designation.
Brief discussion followed concerning the multiples and Cw Tirsell
felt it would be advantageous to allow multiples along a major
street when we have public transportation along our major streets; .
particularly for senior citizens who might need this type of service.
~n the area south of Robertson Park, north of Concannon Boulevard
in the Marina Avenue area, the density was increased north of
Concannon Boulevard, with a reduction in density south of
Concannon Boulevard.
The Lomitas area was shown as 3 du/acre and the P.C. has recommended
that this area be rural and the area south of Alden Lane will be
limited agricultural.
The Ensign-Bickford property has had the floating zone removed
(floating multiple) but it is still zoned at 3 du/acre. Neighbors
opposed multiple development on that site.
The Airport Committee recommended no residential in the area east
of the airport. The area in Planning Unit #9 will be open space.
Cm Miller felt if this is Class I soil, it should be designated
agricultural, and Mr. Musso noted that it is Class II soil.
Cm Staley stated that Class I soil should always be designated as
agricultural, and Class II should be given serious consideration
as possible agricultural.
Cw Tirsell stated that she has no objection to industrial development
in the area of the clear zone of the airport because the clear zone
restrictions are very stringent and any use that would be allowed
wouldn't affect residential development which already exists out
by the airport.
The orange area by the airport will remain agricultural, as shown
on the map, with Class II soil.
CM-3l-387
February 26, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
Cm Staley felt all the land around the airport should be agri-
cultural with the exception of some industrial property because
of air service. Primarily, the land should be agricultural.
Cw Tirsell stated that because of testimony she has heard before
LAFCO on the property around the airport, owners are not interested
in what the City wants to do with it. They prefer County designa-
tion.
Mr. Musso stated that there has been a change from the present Plan
to the proposed Plan which is the extension of commercial north of
the railroad tracks to Chestnut Street. This was followed by dis-
cussion and it was noted that it is very difficult to use a street
as the division between commercial and non-commercial because people
argue that if it is allowed on one side of the street it should be
allowed on the other side. People then say the dividing line should
be in the middle of the block.
The City Attorney requested that when Mr. Musso is finished with
the map it should be clearly stated which changes have taken place
and exactly where they are located. Otherwise, the records will
be a jumbled mess.
It was concluded that the Council is not in favor of expanding
the commercial boundaries to the north (to Chestnut) as recom-
mended by the Planning Commission.
It was also noted that the area north of East Avenue should be
filled in. (Hazelhorst property)
The Council discussed Concannon Boulevard and future expansion
from Isabel Avenue freeway to Vasco Road. Concannon is shown
for expansion as a major street and it was felt tha_ this is
appropriate and necessary.
There was some confusion as to how the motion should read con-
cerning changes to the map and referral of the General Plan
adoption to the P.C. The City Attorney stated that he doesn't
care how the Council goes about amending anything but he wants
the Council to refer the whole document (map and Plan) at once.
Mayor Futch, Cm Turner and Cm Miller had all made motions con-
cerning referral back to the P.C. and each motion was withdrawn.
CM MILLER MOVED TO REFER THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE GENERAL
PLAN TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THEIR RESPONSE, AS SOON
AS POSSIBLE. MOTION SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL.
The City Attorney suggested that the motion made by Cm Miller
be done after all the changes have been made.
CM MILLER WITHDREW HIS MOTION, SECOND WAS WITHDRA~m.
MAYOR FUTCH MOVED TO AMEND THE P.C. RECOMMENDATIONS WITH RESPECT
TO THE MAP, REQUESTING THAT MR. MUSSO ITEMIZE THE CHANGES JUST
DISCUSSED. MOTION SECONDED BY CM MILLER.
CM-31-388
February 26, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
SUMMARY OF CHANGES:
1. Area west of the old Greenville tract, from Urban Low density
to Rural Residential.
2. Change of McBride property north of Las positas Boulevard
and half of the smith et al property west of Airport Boulevard,
to general agricultural.
3. Change of Hartman road from a major street to a major rural road.
4. Change in the land use on "L" Street and Junction Avenue,
and the area south of Chestnut Street to the railroad tracks.
5. Area south-west of Alden Lane and Arroyo Road to limited
agricultural.
Cm Miller stated that prior to any vote on the changes he has a
conflict of interest on a parcel between East Avenue and Tesla
Road, on Greenville Road, for which there is a proposal for a
change. He will abstain from voting on this portion.
MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY WITH CM MILLER ABSTAINING ON THAT
AREA IN WHICH HE NOTED A CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
Changes to the text of the General Plan were discussed and the
changes were as follows:
Page 1-1, there was a first listed (top paragraph - right side) but
not a second. The resolution was that the word Second should appear
as the first word in the very last paragraph - right side. The
paragraph will then read: Second, pride of accomplishment...etc.
It was noted that a quotation has been adopted that was not given
a page number. Cm Staley felt that while the quotation from Justice
Douglas is very appropriate there should be a quotation from petaluma
added to the preface of our General Plan.
Page I-2, no changes
Page I-3, deletion of unnecessary wording (pink copy)
Page II-l, no changes (white)
Page 1I-2 (map) (white)
Page 1I-3 (map) (green)
Page II-4a (yellow) Second paragraph, change first word to Most
adult residents moved to Livermore for jobs, reasonably priced
homes, etc.
1I-4b (green) no change
1I-4c (green) no change
II-5 footnote
1I-6, no change (green)
1I-7 no change (white)
CM-31-389
February 26, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
II-8 and II-9, (white); Cm Miller mentioned there is discussion
relative to employment projections on commuting and the results
state that there will be a 50% increase in the number of commuters.
While this may be the case if the growth rates are realized,
as proposed, he would not want the City to commit 6% of our
growth to commuters.
Cw Tirsell noted that this is the determinant - not the goal or
the pOlicy.
Cm Miller stated that the point is, if these are the assumptions
and the determinants, then the pOlicies should be based on doing
something to avoid precisely this. It is unwise to encourage
development which will increase the number of commuters.
Cw Tirsell stated that many times the goals and policies work
exactly opposite the determinants - the determinants are some-
thing the consultants look at and forecast. As far as she is
concerned II-8 and II-9 represent opinions of the consultants.
II-9, second line under Commuting Patterns should show 33% of
all principal and secondary wage earners....etc.
II-lO (white) no change
II-II (green) no change
II-12 (white) no change
II-13 (green) next to last line should read: reasonable distance
from a fault zone will include safeguards to protect against
potential hazards.
II-14, II-IS, II-16 (all white) no change
II-17, insert the following, just before the heading, Hydrology:
More recent studies reported in the LAVWMA EIS
concluded that to meet national ambient air qual-
ity standards between now and the Year 2000, the
population of the whole Livermore-Amador Valley
could not exceed half its present level.
II-18 and II-19 (white); II-20 (green); II-2l (map); II-22 (white);
II-23 (yellow); 1I-24 (green); II-25 (pink); II-25a (green); II-26
(yellow); II-27 (white); II-28 (green); II-29 (white); no changes.
1I-30 (green) under Overriding Land Use Constraints, Item 2, it
should indicate plant expansion is limited due to the designation
of the Valley as a "Critical Air Basin".
1I-3l (green) no change
II-32 (new white) there should be a heading of 1990-2000 in the
Table II-14.
II-33 (white) 1st paragraph, left side, 6th line from the bottom,
should begin as follows: and air pollution, one of the highest
priorities is for a regional transit system.
CM-3l-390
February 26, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
II-33 (white), top paragraph, right side, last sentence of that
paragraph should be: Grading will be for eight lanes. (Delete
remaining portion of sentence)
Second paragraph, line 5 should read: day through Livermore.
The City of Livermore....etc.
1I-34 (green); 1I-35 (white); 1I-36 (white); no changes
1I-37 (pink) strike the paragraph beginning with Using the rule
of thumb. Also after the top sentence, add the following
paragraph:
Beginning: By 1974, the median value had risen to
nearly $30,000. Since the median price is the
halfway price between the cheapest and most expensive,
it's not a surprise that half the people can't afford
the median price; however, many of them can afford half
the houses cheaper than the median priced house.
1I-38 (white), after the first paragraph place a comma after
the last word and continue as follows:
unit, but half the rents are lower.
third paragraph, 4th line should read lower-cost housing rather than
lower-income housing.
third paragraph, right hand side, second line should begin:
lower-priced home in Livermore or anywhere else either.
II-39 (pink) second paragraph, right side, third line from bottom
should read: low income residents, the City proposes to construct
a Community Service Center, described within Part II .....etc.
1I-40 (green); 1I-4l (green); 11-42 (white chart); 11-43 (white);
1I-44 (green); II-45 (green); II-46 (white); 1I-47 (green); 1I-48
(green); II-49 (white); II-50 (white); II-51 (white); II-52 (white));
II-53 (yellow map); II-54 (yellow); II-54a (yellow); II-55 (green);
II-56 (white); no changes.
II-57 (white) second paragraph right side, begin as follows:
A Community Service Center is proposed which will
provide needed office space....etc.
II-58 (white); II-59 (green); II-60 (green); no changes.
1II-2 and III-2b (pink) were discussed and changes made during the
Tuesday, February 24th meeting. See that discussion.
1II-3 (pink); III-4 (green); no changes.
III-5, (yellow) Item 4. on left, 4th line from bottom should read:
Any activity that would have an irremedial adverse impact...etc.
Item 5., right side, line five: The first word (development)
should be deleted with the following sentence: Any extractive
activity that would have an irremedial adverse impact...etc.
III-6, (green) 6., right side: Delete entire last sentence beginning
with the wording: To this end, all levels of government...etc.
III-7 (green), right side, last paragraph, line 2 should read:
funding and construction of public transit through the LAV,
(2) the designation...etc.
CM-31-39l
February 26, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan'
1II-8 (pink); III-9 (green); III-lO (green); III-II (pink);
III-12 (white); III-13 (yellow); III-14 (pink); -III-14 (pink);
III-l5 (green); III-16 (yellow); III-17 (yellow); III-18 (yellow);
111-19 (yellow); no changes.
III-20 (green), top, right side, use the wording adjacent to I-580,
at the top of the page, first line.
III-2l (green); no changes.
III-26 (white) bottom paragraph, left side, Item 2. Should read:
The City shall seek BART service commensurate with the revenue
collected from Valley residents. This is the paragraph in its entirety.
III-27 (green) last paragraph, right side should read: The City may
expand the Municipal Airport in accordance with the Airport Master
Plan....etc.
1II-28 (pink) Goal C should read: It is the goal of the City to
provide our residents with a reasonable choice of sound housing
large enough to accommodate its occupants at a reasonable cost
relative to income. (This is the paragraph in its entirety.)
Goal E. - Delete the entire paragraph.
III-29 (green); III-30 (pink); III-3l (yellow); III-3la (pink);
1II-32 (pink); III-33 (yellow); III-34 (yellow); III-35 (pink);
III-36 (yellow) no changes.
IV-l (yellow) line five under A - right side should begin with
five elements are: Open Space Element; .....etc.
IV-2 (yellow); IV-3 (yellow); IV-4 (yellow); IV-5 (white);
IV-6 (green); IV-7 (yellow); IV-8 (yellow); IV-9 (yellow);
no changes.
IV-II (yellow) no changes.
IV-12 (green) no changes
IV-13 (green) no changes.
IV-14 (yellow); IV-IS (yellow); IV-l6 (yellow); IV-18 (yellow);
IV-19 (pink); IV-20 (yellow); IV-2l (white); IV-22 (white);
IV-23 (white); IV-24 (pink) no changes.
IV-25 (white) right side B. change Medium Range to About 1990
and C. Long Range to Beyond 2000.
Left side under Land Use Element Proposals - correct 26 sq.
miles to what it should be. Possibly l6 sq. miles?
IV-26 (pink); IV-27 (pink); IV-28 (pink); IV-29 (green); IV-30
(green); IV-3l (green); IV-32 (pink); IV-33 (pink); IV-34 (white);
IV-35 (pink); IV-36 (green); IV-37 (pink); IV-38 (green); IV-39
(green); IV-42 (pink): IV-43 (pink) no changes.
Cm Miller stated that he would like to go back to III-2 and
again discuss the growth rate that was discussed last Tuesday,
February 24th. He wasn't feeling well that evening and he would
like to make some points about this section.
CM-3l-392
February 26, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
Cm Miller stated that he accidently voted against 1.5% growth rate
and he could have voted for it because the General Plan wasn't
adopted that night. He would like to suggest that the 2% be replaced
by 1.5% since the majority of the Council seemed to be in agreement
with 1.5% maximum growth at that time.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE MAXIMUM GROWTH RATE PER YEAR FOR THE GENERAL
PLAN BE 1.5% RATHER THAN THE PRESENT 2% LISTED IN THE PROPOSED
GENERAL PLAN.
Cm Turner stated that last week five people voted in favor of
the 2% maximum. At that meeting Cm Miller read a prepared state-
ment to the Council, and Cm Staley had pointed out that the 2%
was only a blueprint. Cm Turner stated that he is satisfied with
the 2%.
Cw Tirsell pointed out that the vote last week was done during a
public hearing in which people were present. They voted in good
faith and this figure has been widely reported.
Cm Miller stated that the reason he voted against the l.5% the
first time, was because he was hoping that Cm Staley's wording
would be furnished, in writing, that the Council could review
and then make a decision at the proposed Wednesday night meeting.
He has reviewed the wording, as prepared by Mr. Musso, and based
on what Cm Staley says he is not quite sure that it is as condi-
tioned as he hoped it would be.
Cm Staley stated that he doesn't want to discuss the maximum growth
rate again but he would be willing to discuss the wording and would
like to know what Cm Miller might suggest.
Cm Miller stated that one of the things he would delete would be,
"absorption of the natural growth". He stated that he is concerned
about this because he does not believe it can be justified.
Cm Staley stated that if the Council will note, he did not specify
what E-O formula would be used - this would be policy. To say that
one of the balancing factors is the absorption of the natural growth
leaves the definition of that natural growth open to the statistics
of the particular time.
Cm Miller asked for permission from the Council to prepare alternate
wording, with the assistance of Cm Staley, over the weekend and if
it is satisfactory with the Council it can be adopted Monday night.
If it isn't satisfactory, it wouldn't be adopted. He made a mistake
in his vote Tuesday night.
Cm Staley stated that he would agree that it might be possible to
alter wording that might be more appropriate but his concern is
that it would then have to be referred back to the P.C. Cm Staley
then suggested that perhaps Cm Miller could meet with the P.C.
tomorrow and discuss wording changes with them.
The majority of the Council felt the P.C. had too much to do to
get involved with additional wording changes and suggested that
Cm Miller not meet with them.
Cm Miller commented that the real major issue for the P.C. to
consider is that there are limitations on what was said by Cm
Staley, which are limitations he appreci2tes; however, how strong
the limitations are is the second order~.~. ffect so perhaps it would
not have to be referred back to the PI n~ Commission.
~~~
CM-3l-393
February 26, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
CW TIRSELL MOVED TO REFER THE GENERAL PLAN, IN ITS ENTIRETY,
BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR REPORTS ON ALL OF THE AMEND-
MENTS WHICH ARE SUBSTANTIVE. MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND
PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Futch adjourned the meeting at lO:45 p.m.
APPROVE
~#'~
'" Mayor
'I, ~.
'~"" ~.. ~.i./...'.' .'
\." / .' ~l-"~) City Clerk
/ Livermore, California
ATTEST
Regular Meeting of March 1, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
March 1, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:12 p.m.
with Mayor Futch presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Staley, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch
Absent: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Futch led the Councilmernbers as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES 2/17/76
P. 346, first paragraph, first line should read: Cw Tirsell
commented that changing this position....etc.
Last complete line in that paragraph, delete Fall and replace
with the word June.
Last motion on that page should read: MAYOR FUTCH AMENDED THE
MOTION TO REDIRECT the staff...etc.
P. 343, motion in middle of page should indicate that it was
seconded by Cm Turner.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF 2/17/76 WERE APPROVED AS
CORRECTED.
CM-3l-394
CM-3l-394
March 1, 1976
OPEN FORUM
(Arbor Day Ceremony)
Ayn Weiskamp, 1413 Lillian Street, and member of the Beautification
Committee invited members of the Council, those retiring from the
Council, continuing with the Council and those to be elected to the
Council, to attend Arbor Day ceremonies which will take place at
Hansen Park this coming Sunday during which redwood trees will be
planted.
(Needs for Youths)
Rusty Neal, owner of the club Rodeo in Livermore, stated that he
sees a need for supervised activities for the young people of
Livermore. They need an old building or someplace in which they
can meet and have supervised activities. There is nowhere in the
town of Livermore, at all, for the young people to go. They have
to go out of town, some of them drink and then have to drive back
to Livermore. He stated that he is willing to work with the other
bar owners of Livermore to get something started for youths. The
policemen have also offered to help back something of this nature.
There must be something for them to do other than to drive on the
main street of Livermore.
Cw Tirsell stated that there are two members of the LARPD Board
present in the audience this evening and LARPD is responsible
for recreation in this City. There is also a Council liaison
committee to LARPD who may be willing to discuss this item and
work together. The Council is very concerned about cruising on
First Street and LARPD is concerned about teenage programs. She
would suggest that the newly appointed liaison committee from the
Council meet with LARPD and Mr. Neal to see what can be done.
(Measure B)
Mayor Futch stated that Measure B, on the ballot, is very confusing
and perhaps it would help if the newspapers would note that a "yes"
vote is a vote in favor of a City ordinance prohibiting front yard
storage and that a "no" vote is a vote opposing the ordinance.
CONTINUED PUBLIC
HEARING RE GEN. PLAN
Mayor Futch stated that the hearing for the General Plan has been
continued to this time and perhaps people wishing to speak could
sign their names and speak in order. LARPD did have changes they
would like to discuss with the Council and he asked that their
representative address the Council at this time.
John Stroud, 4390 Colgate Way, representing LARPD, stated that
his comments are directed at the changed Plan which LARPD received
last week and reviewed briefly.
P. 11-57, it is felt that LARPD recreational facilities should
be acknowledged along with school and church facilities and the
need for a multi-purpose recreational community center should
include a full sized gymnasium.
Cm Turner asked if the Council should respond to each change as
it is mentioned, or what procedure should be followed?
CM-3l-395
March 1, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
It was concluded that P. II-57, under Other Community Facilities,
line 5, after approximately 50, the next sentence should begin:
LAPRD recreational facilities, school multi-purpose rooms and
classrooms, churches......etc.
with respect to a full sized gymnasium, Mr. Musso stated that
this is not the area for proposals. There are some vague refer-
ences to proposals.
Cw Tirsell felt their needs are a part of their Master Plan and
these things will not be reflected in the General Plan, entirely.
II-57, left side, at the very end, add a new last sentence as
follows: The need for a multi-purpose recreational community
center, to include a full sized gymnasium, is recognized by LARPD.
IV-12, the major paragraph on the right, line 7 should read:
the Alameda County. Until such a study is complete.....etc.
Line 9 should begin: only if they lie within larger areas
suitable for recreational use, or have multiple values besides
historic importance.
IV-14, left side, first sentence at the top of the page. Mr.
Stroud stated that LARPD would recommend a change in wording
as follows: THE CITY, Livermore Area Recreation and Park
District (LARPD), and the Livermore Valley Unified School
District (LVUSD) are the chief suppliers of recreation in
the Planning Area, with LARPD playing the primary role.
The Council concurred.
IV-20, right side, 1. a., line 3 should read: community and
regional recreation within its district boundaries...etc.---
Middle of that paragraph should read: City should continue
to work jointly with LARPD...etc.
Line beginning with recreation programs should have and EBRPD
plans deleted. It will then read: recreation programs with
the county.
IV-20 l.b., right side, shall remain as is, with last line
reading as follows: other available means.
IV-24, 2.b., shall read: The district should continue to acquire
park land and should assume responsibilities for development and
management of recreation park areas. (Delete remainder of b.)
IV-43, left side, under Community Park, beginning of sentence
should read: The "Community Park-Civic Center Site" should
provide the following facilities: Items 1 through 10 are
satisfactory but Item 11 should state Park - nothing else.
Right side, second paragraph, second line should read:
Community Service Center discussed....etc.
It was noted that anywhere in the Plan where it states
Low Income Service Center, this is to be changed to Community
Service Center.
It was also explained that there were some changes on the map in
the south-west portion which was suggested as agricultural by
LARPD and this was changed to agree with LARPD's recommendation.
Mr. Musso then pointed out what changes had been made on the map.
CM-31-396
March 1, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
Mike McCracken, Board member from LARPD requested changes and after
discussion the various changes were made, as follows:
IV-15, right side, next to last paragraph should read: The goals
and objectives of EBRPD justly seek to have the district concentrate
on providing regional recreation facilities rather than neighborhood
and community recreation.
Last paragraph will read: The City of Livermore endorses the above
goals and pOlicies of EBRPD.
IV-16, left side, second paragraph will be deleted in its entirety,
ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
IV-19, last paragraph, right side, was deleted. In substitution
the following sentence will be added: The City of Livermore
endorses the policies and objectives of the LARPD Master Plan.
IV-13, left side, paragraph above Woodlands was discussed and it
was concluded that no change would take place for that paragraph.
Mr. Stroud and Mr. McCracken thanked the Council for reviewing and
making the LARPD recommended changes.
Mayor Futch invited other members of the audience to speak on the
items in the General Plan.
Don Patterson, 757 Avalon Way, president of the Valley Spokesmen
Touring Club, stated that Greg Davis addressed the Council last
week concerning the General Plan but was unable to attend the
meeting this evening. Mr. Patterson is speaking on behalf of Mr.
Davis.
Mr. Musso explained that at the last meeting Mr. Davis spoke to
the Council concerning the policy that there would be no restric-
tion of bicyclists using streets when a separate bike path is
provided. Mr. Davis asked that this be left to the discretion of
the bicycle rider as to whether he wanted to use the bike path
or the street.
Mr. Patterson stated that if an unsafe condition exists the
bicyclist should be required to use the bike path; otherwise
he should be allowed to use the street.
Mr. Musso explained that the P.C. considered the recommendations
of the Valley Spokesmen and included almost all of them in the
Plan, with respect to bikeways. This particular subject was
discussed at length and the P.C. felt there may be instances in
which a separate safer bike route may cause exclusion of the
bicyclist from use of the street, using East Avenue as an example.
Therefore, the P.C. didn't go along with this recommendation.
Mayor Futch indicated that the Council agrees with the intent
of the group but the Council would not want to include general
wording that would prevent action, on the part of the City, felt
to be a safety measure in a particular circumstance.
Cw Tirsell stated that there are some areas in which the City
wants all bike traffic on the provided bike trails and not using
the street.
Mr. Patterson stated that he would like to go on record as challeng-
ing the Bike Trailway document, as a reference document in the
General-Plan.
CM-3l-397
March 1, 1976
(P.H. re Gen. Plan)
Ray Herman, 328 Michell Court, wanted to know if there have been
any changes during the past week, up until this evening, for the
downtown area with respect to traffic flow, downtown development,
setbacks, etc. Also, were there any deletions or additions to
the downtown boundaries for the CB-l or CO Zoning?
It was noted that there was no change from what it has been.
Mr. Herman asked what the consultant's recommendation was, and
was told that the recommendation was that there be commercial
from the railroad tracks to Chestnut Street.
Mr. Herman wondered why the City has paid a consultant to make
recommendations and then says, "we will make our own recommenda-
tions".
Mayor Futch explained that there has been discussion among the
Council as to whether the line for commercialization should be
drawn in the middle of a block or at the street, and it was felt
it would be better not to extend to a street because the other
side of the street would insist that they be allowed commercial-
ization also.
Mr. Herman suggested that Fourth street, north of First Street,
and Chestnut, south to First Street, should be used as buffers
with everything in between these streets commercial. He stated
that the whole area should be used to compete with the Southern
Pacific development so that S.P. will not have a monopoly.
Cm Miller pointed out that there are approximately 350 acres of
commercial property in the downtown area at present but only
about half of this property has been developed. Half of it is
vacant or has housing that can be converted to commercial.
Cm Miller stated that the Council felt the downtown commercial
area should be filled in and made more compact rather than to
extend the area to Chestnut.
Mr. Herman stated that the point he is trying to make is that
the present commercial area is selling for $6-$7/sq. ft. and
there is no reason to purchase that property when purchase
elsewhere could be made for $2/sq. ft.
Cm Miller explained that the $2/sq. ft. property is that price
because it is not zoned commercial. If it were zoned commercial
it would also be $6/sq. ft.
Mr. Herman stated that he ha~ commercial properties located in
the CB-l District but they are not useable - they are $2/sq. ft.
properties.
Cm Staley stated that he would be interested in reviewing the
map and seeing the location of Mr. Herman's property and Mr.
Musso stated that he will get the map for em Staley to review
a little later.
One geneleman in the audience stated that the public parking
lot is generally full and tonight he was not able to park in
the parking lot. This should be a consideration in the General
Plan - that the City does not have ample parking in the downtown
area.
CM-3l-398
March 1, 1976
(P.li. re Gen. Plan)
Mr. Steer, 424 Wetmore Road, asked that the City not close any
options to allow the EBRPD to come in. The people out in the
country are paying taxes for recreational services and yet they
aren't receiving any benefits.
Richard Houser, 635 Los Alamos, stated that since the Southern
Pacific Development has taken place, that will become the center
of town and what Mr. Herman has suggested with respect to Fourth
Street and Chestnut Street being used as boundaries for commercial
development has merit and should be discussed.
Cw Tirsell explained that it is the intent that this should be a
concentrated commercial area and it is, in fact, surrounded by
a buffer zoning of professional zoning up to the residential areas.
THERE BEING NO FURTHER TESTIMONY CONCERNING THE GENERAL PLAN, ON
MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Mayor Futch suggested that this item be continued for discussion
later this evening or that the Council meet-briefly tomorrow.
Cm Turner stated that he still has one concern, and that is the
commercial area near Chestnut, and he would like to review the
land use plan. It was noted that this could be discussed later
this evening.
WITH THE CONCURRENCE OF THE COUNCIL, THE ITEM WAS CONTINUED UNTIL
10:30 P.M.
COMMUNICATION RE CONTIN-
UED BART BUS SERVICE
A resolution regarding continuation of express bus service to BART
was received from the President of the BART Board of Directors.
The staff was directed to write letters in support of BART's effort
to secure funding through state legislation and also a letter to
Mr. Cooper expressing the City's thanks for action taken by the
BART Board, ON MOTION OF MAYOR FUTCH, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND
BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Mr. Parness stated that with respect to the first portion of the
motion, he believes it would be appropriate to wait until legis-
lation has been introduced prior to sending letters of support.
ON MOTION OF MAYOR FUTCH, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE COUNCIL VOICED SUPPORT OF SPECIFIC LEGISLATION AT THE
TIME IT IS PROPOSED, AND TO BE REFLECTED IN THE LETTER TO MR. COOPER.
COMMUNICATION FROM
COUNTY PLANNING DEPT.
RE AIRPORT LAND USE
A copy of the letter sent to the County Board of Supervisors from
the County Planning Department concerning legislation regulating
the powers and activities of the Airport Land Use Commission was
noted for filing.
CM-3l-399
March l, 1976
REQUEST FOR ADMIS-
SION DAY CELEBRATION FUNDS
A request for funding in the amount of $100 was received from
the Alameda County Admission Day Celebration Committee.
The request was referred to the Chamber of Commerce, ON MOTION
OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
COMMUNICATION RE SAND
& GRAVEL PERMITS IN VALLEY
A letter was received from the Alameda County Planning Depart-
ment concerning sand and gravel permits in the Livermore-Amador
Valley, and listing active sand and gravel operations.
ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO SEND COPIES OF THIS INFORMATION
TO THE PLEASANTON CITY COUNCIL AND THE VCSD BOARD.
COMMUNICATION FROM
ASSESSOR RE ASSESSMENT
PRACTICES
A letter was received from the County Assessor explaining assess-
ment practices.
Cm Miller stated that he would like the City to send a brief
letter to the Assessor which indicates that the City appreciates
the fact that he is now working on trending for commercial proper-
ties and hopes he will indeed be able to accomplish it for the next
assessment year. However, if assessments stay constant in the next
assessment year the City will also be observing.
Cm Staley stated that he has already expressed the position that
he doesn't like to place threats, implied or otherwise, in letter,
unless there is substantial justification for doing so. In this
case there is not substantial justification but he has no obj~ction
to writing a letter saying the City would like to see changed assess-
ment practices put into force.
There was not a consensus to the effect that any letter should be sent.
COMMUNICATION FROM BASSA
RE WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT
A letter was received from BASSA noting that they had received the
letter from Livermore expressing concerns for the agency to do the
wastewater management planning in upper Alameda Creek.
Cm Miller stated that this is an opportunity for the City to ask
about the sewer plant that appeared on the Water Quality Control
Board's priority list which was placed on the list by the BASSA
staff without informing any local agency board.
Cw Tirsell stated that she intended to bring this item up during
Matters Initiated by the Council. She feels this needs to be
discussed and a firm position taken by the Council.
THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO WORK WITH CW TIRSELL AND CM MILLER IN
PREPARING A LETTER DIRECTED TO THE BASSA BOARD.
CM-3l-400
March 1, 1976
COMMUNICATION FROM
ZONE 7 RE ELIMINATION
OF LAND APPLICATION
PRACTICES - DISPOSAL
OF WASTEWATER
Cm Miller stated that the reason he would like to discuss the letter
from Zone 7 concerning their resolution establishing policy to take
all necessary steps to protect groundwater resources from contamina-
tion and pollution, is because the intentions of the City to protect
water quality were made clear in the proposed LAVWMA/Zone 7 Memorandum
of Understanding which all the LAVWMA agencies adopted and was re-
fused by the Zone 7 Board after their water committee had agreed to
it earlier.
Cm Miller stated that in his opinion, Zone 7, at the same time, made
clear by their refusal, their lack of concern about the important
issue of air quality because they are intending to provide sewage
which could only be for Geldermann. He would suggest that it doesn't
seem useful to discuss these kinds of questions with Zone 7 until:
a) the Memorandum of Understanding that we agreed to is signed by
Zone 7; or b) until after the Zone 7 election, whichever comes first.
Mayor Futch stated that he doesn't agree that their first action
means they intend to sewer Geldermann.
Cw Tirsell stated that she believes all communities in the Valley
are suspicious.
Mayor Futch stated that he believes this is a matter that should
be handled by the next Council. There is not going to be a resolve
with Zone 7 prior to seating of the new Council.
It was noted that the Council shares the concerns expressed byCm
Miller but it was requested that this be placed on the agenda for
the new Council.
CM HILLER MOVED THAT THIS ITEM BE PLACED ON THE AGENDA SHORTLY
AFTER THE NEW COUNCIL IS SEATED, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND
PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
COMHUNICATION RE AIR
POLLUTION CONTROL MODEL
RE LIVERMORE VALLEY
A letter was received from the Bay Area Air Pollution Control
District in response to the City's letter suggesting certain
other scenarios for testing by the BAAPCD computer model relative
to the Livermore Valley.
Cm Miller stated that generally, the tone of the letter doesn't
show much style, in view of the facts that are known. He would
suggest that a letter be sent to Mr. Jelavich and the BAAPCD
pointing out that most of the smog is being generated locally.
This has also been reported in the E.D. Little report for the
VCSD sewer plant expansion and the MTC report on the I-580 expansion
and in the LA~m EIS. It is not just the City of Livermore that is
saying these things. It has been implied by other independent
agencies working on different projects.
Secondly, the District staff has not done a study and it seems
peculiar that they would deliberately ignore the other studies,
to support their own intuition.
CM-31-401
March 1, 1976
(Communication from BASSA
re Wastewater Management)
Mayor Futch stated that he spent the entire afternoon discussing
these very points with EPA, the Air Resources Control Board, the
BAAPCD, and Mr. Fred Cooper. All the points were agreed to with
the exception of the Alameda County staff.
Cm Miller felt it would be worthwhile to keep reminding people of
these things and that a short letter to the Board would be in order.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE STAFF SEND A ONE PARAGRAPH LETTER TO THE
BAAPCD, THE ARB AND MR. COOPER. MOTION SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND
PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE SCHOOL DIST.
CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS
Mr. Parness stated that the City Attorney's staff has been review-
ing the matter of the School District's school construction pro-
jects and draft EIR, and concerning their policy to be exempt from
any City zoning controls. The legal staff is in the process of
forming a proper legal foundation and position to present to the
School Board and their legal staff. Hopefully, a report will be
coming to the Council very soon concerning the results of their
meetings with the School District.
FIREWORKS DISPLAY
Mayor Futch stated that each year the City has provided a fireworks
display for the 4th of July Celebration. The Community Affairs
Committee needs the approval of the City to go ahead with plans
for this program again this year.
Dick Wright, 250 Coleen, chairman of the committee stated that
the City has a choice of providing $1,500 fireworks or $2,000
fireworks. In the past the City has had the $1,500 fireworks
but with inflation the program may not be as good.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE COUNCIL APPROVED A FIREWORKS DISPLAY IN THE AMOUNT OF
$2.000.
Cm Miller noted that this is a City sponsored committee and the
reason the request for funding has been granted.
REPORT RE BIDS FOR
FIRST ST./SO. LIVERMORE
AVE. RECONSTRUCTION
The Public Works Director reported that bids have been solicited
for the reconstruction of First Street-So. Livermore Ave. inter-
section which will be jointly financed by the City and the state.
The project includes the beautification of parcels on the northwest
and southeast corners and it is recommended that a resolution
be adopted awarding construction bids.
CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID FOR THE FIRST
STREET-SO. LIVERMORE RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT, TO TEICHERT CONSTR.
IN THE AMOUNT OF $163,111.40, SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
Cm Staley stated that the figures in the report show a discrepancy;
the double starred figures are different at the bottom of the
report.
CM-3l-402
March 1, 1976
(Bids re First Street -
So. Livermore Avenue
Reconstruction)
Mr. Lee stated that the difference in costs may reflect the
difference in the cost of engineering. The figures were extracted
from the agreement but the actual bid figure is $105,795, which
is less than the budgeted amount for the City's share.
There was only one bid even though many plans were out. Only
three prime contractors were holding plans but only one bid was
received. from Teichert Construction Company from Stockton.
Cm Turner stated that when this item was discussed several months
ago he wondered if the mini parks would be separate from the street
and traffic signals reconstruction. At that time it was noted
that these items would be se?arate. He stated that he would like
to vote in favor of the traffic signals but he would like to
oppose the mini parks.
Cm Turner stated that in order to facilitate business he will vote
in favor of the motion but he does want to go on record as being
opposed to the mini park development at the intersection of First
Street and South Livermore Avenue. In his opinion the expenditure
of tax dollars for this purpose is not the highest and best use
of public funds.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 49-76
A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID
(Teichert Construction)
RES. APPROVING TRACT
3615 - FINAL MAP
It was noted that the Council does not have a copy of the resolu-
tion approving the final map for Tract 3615 (Condiminium at Holmes
Street and Murrieta Boulevard) and the item was continued to the
meeting of March 8, 1976, on MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY
CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT FROM CITY MlL~AGER
RE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
The report from the City Manager concerning the consultant's report
on the Airport Master Plan, was referred to the Planning Commission,
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE UNDERPASS
LANDSCAPING
The Public Works Director reported that a substantial savings can
be realized on landscape work done by the City, rather than the
contractor, for the underpasses. It is recommended that a motion
be adopted authorizing the City to temporarily employ eight
people for a term of three months to do this work.
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL M1D BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED AT THE REQUEST OF CM STALEY, TO
,ALLOW THE COUNCIL Tn1E TO CONSIDER THE PROPOSAL. THE ITEM WILL
BE DISCUSSED AT THE NEXT MEETING ON MARCH 8th.
It was noted that the Beautification Committee will have the
ppportunity to review plans for landscaping of the underpasses.
\See later action also)
CM-3l-403
March l, 1976
RES. APPROVING AMEND.
TO STORM DRAIN CREDIT
(Shaheen Industrial)
The Director of Public Works reported that in July, 1975, the
City approved the Roger Shaheen Industrial Park Map and agreement
which included a $4,627.46 storm drain credit. The amount was
improperly calculated and should have been $7,337.32. It is
recommended that a resolution be adopted modifying the agreement
and including the proper credit.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY C~7 TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED.
RESOLUTION NO. 50-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF M~ENDMENT
TO SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT (R. L. Shaheen Company)
REPORT RE COUNTY
FEDERAL AID URBAN
PROGRAM
ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE REPORT CONCERNING THE ALAMEDA COUNTY THREE YEAR FEDERAL
AID URBAN PROGRAM WAS CONTINUED TO THE MEETING OF MARCH Sth.
REPORT RE ABAG ENVIRON-
MENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
AT THE REQUEST OF THE COUNCIL THE ITEM CONCERNING DISCUSSION OF
A PROPOSED ASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS (ABAG) ENVIRON-
MENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM, WAS CONTINUED TO MARCH Sth.
Cm Miller commented that when ABAG was ultimately adopted as a
208 Planning Agency, it was taken away from LAVWMA. There was
supposed to have been an agreement worked out with LAVWMA with
LAVWMA having a specifically mentioned role which seems to have
disappeared. He would suggest that the City insist that LAVWMA
be specifically mentioned with their role specifically laid out.
Mayor Futch felt this should be requested by letter.
em Miller agreed and added that the City should also request
that there be representatives in the Environmental Management
Program, not only from LAVWMA but also from areas that are affected
or "air impacted". The obvious choice would be someone from Dublin,
Pleasanton, or Livermore on this Air Quality Management Plan rather
than from the smog free areas.
em Miller will meet with the staff to prepare a letter to be sent
which will be discussed at the meeting of March Sth prior to its
submission to ABAG.
APPT. OF REP. TO
COUNTY SOLID WASTE
COMMITTEE
It is necessary that representatives be selected from the Council
to serve on a special interim committee to resolve differences
concerning the County solid waste plan.
The Council concluded that selection of representatives will be
postponed until the new Council is seated.
CM-3l-404
March 1, 1976
RECESS
Mayor Futch called for a brief recess after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present.
MOTION RE LANDSCAPING
OF UNDERPASSES
During the break Cm Staley stated that he had an opportunity to
review the proposal to allow City employees (8 to be hired) to
do the landscaping for the underpasses.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE COUNCIL AUTHORIZED CITY EMPLOYEES (8) TO BE HIRED FOR
A THREE MONTH PERIOD FOR THE PURPOSE OF DOING THIS WORK.
CONTINUATION OF GENERAL
PLAN DISCUSSION TO
TOMORRON NIGHT MEETING
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE COUNCIL REFERRED THE CHANGES MADE THIS EVENING, TO THE
PLANNING COMMISSION FOR REPORT.
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF THE GENERAL PLAN l'lAS POSTPONED UNTIL
TOMORROW EVENING, ~~ARCH 2, 1976, AT 6: 00 P.M.
INTRODUCTION OF BUSINESS
LICENSE ORDINANCE
Mayor Futch invited interested members of the audience to speak on
the proposed Business License Tax Ordinance revision that is to be
introduced this evening.
Dr. Mandeville, stated that first of all he would like to speak
to the Council concerning a letter written by the City which he
finds unbelievable, indiscreet and a little presumptuous in asking
physicians located outside the City to pay a business license tax
for use of a facility (Valley Memorial Hospital) which is a val1ey-
wide facility. He stated that he finds this is unprecedented and
if this is the case why doesn't the City tax outside lawyers for
appearing in our municipal court.
Dr. Mandeville would recommended that this request be rescinded
because he feels this jeopardizes the physicians' position in
offering total medical care to the valley. At this time there is
consideration of major expenditures for hospital equipment and the
action concerning the business license tax may jeopardize this plan.
It is his personal opinion that it is unfair to tax on the gross
income for dentists, lawyers, accountants, etc., because this
would appear to be a type of direct income tax fee rather than
a business license fee. Whether someone works 2 hours a day or
l8 hours a day, has nothing to do with what he should pay to have
the privilege of working in this City.
Cye Beebe, Manager of PG&E, stated that he would like to speak
to the Council about the proposed ordinance that would remove
the "in lieu" payment of the tax by utilities.
CM-31-405
March 1, 1976
(re Business License Tax)
Mr. Beebe revi~w~~ a few figures, briefly, for the Council and
added that he believes the utilities are certainly paying their
share of the cost of taxes in the City of Livermore. He explained
the history concerning money paid to the City in the past and the
reason he feels they are paying their fair share.
Mr. Beebe requested that the same wording in the old ordinance be
included in the new ordinance in view of the way PG&E and its
customers are supporting the City of Livermore.
Cm Turner wondered what the franchise fee is that PG&E pays to
the City of Livermore.
Mr. Parness stated that this is a privilege tax for use of the
City streets, for their use of the public right-of-way, and their
utilities.
Mr. Beebe noted that PG&E is the only regulated utility that pays
a franchise fee - the Telephone Company, Water Company, and T.V.
does not; however T.V. is not a regulated utility.
Cm Miller stated that the Business License Tax Committee talked
about the item at some length and it was finally the unanimous
decision that franchise and business license were two different
things and in that case one was essentially rental for the use
of City streets and the other was a business license tax like all
other businesses pay to carryon business within the City. Con-
sequently, an offset would not be the reasonable thing to do.
It was recommended that the two be separated.
Mr. Beebe stated that this is different than the opinion expres-
sed by em Miller five years ago when this was discussed and Cm
Miller explained that five years ago the situation was that at
that time it was a reasonable compromise. In his opinion it is
not the reasonable compromise now.
Mr. Beebe felt that some of these things are joint privileges
both PG&E and the City enjoy - PG&E uses our streets and the
City gets reduced rates on street lighting.
Mayor Futch stated that it is clear to him that some of the
increases in revenues in the new ordinance to PG&E and some
of the other large food chains will increase the basic costs
to home owners and his concern is primarily for the elderly
and retired. People have to have a certain minimum amount of
electricity and grocery costs. It seems that most of the
additional burden of the proposed increases the ordinance will
create, will be for those types of businesses.
Cm Staley stated that he agrees with what Mr. Beebe has said
about PG&E having paid a lot of money to the City and that the
ordinance will undoubtedly increase the tax bill and the tax
bill will increase from every other source. On the other
hand, the franchise fee is a rental fee for the use of City
property. The goal of the new business license tax was to make
it as fair as possible and to cure past inequities. There is
no reason, in principle, why the City shouldn't charge utilities
a business license tax, just as it does all the other businesses
in town.
Cm Staley added that if every penny of the increase were passed
on to the homeowner it would amount to about 80~ per household,
per year, and in his opinion this would not be a significant
increase to the homeowner.
CM-31-406
March 1, 1976
(re Bus. License Tax)
Cm Miller stated that if someone has a $50 grocery bill this amount
would be equivalent to a 4~ tax which is small compared to other
increases that are taking place. Many items increase 4~ on just
one item every week. While every increase is supplementary, this
increase is very small compared to overall inflation.
Mr. Beebe stated that there seems to be a difference in the use of
the word franchise - delivery trucks and everyone else uses the
same streets to get to their place of business, as does the PG&E
trucks, but nobody else has to pay a franchise fee.
Cm Staley indicated that his understanding of a franchise fee is
for the use of the City right-of-way for the utilities and not for
PG&E trucks to drive up and down the streets.
Mr. Beebe stated that what he meant was that gas and electricity
flow up and down the streets and PG*E is taxed for the use of the
streets for this purpose.
Discussion followed concerning a franchise fee, and the reason PG&E
is charged for using a portion of the street which nobody else uses.
It was noted that PG&E is a business like any other business in town
and it is reasonable that they should pay a business license tax.
Cm Turner stated that he believes the tax is justified and he intends
to vote in favor of the business license tax for PG&E. PG&E is getting
a return from the franchise fee in the form of space and the business
license tax is a separate issue.
Cw Tirsell stated that she believes the Council should address, at
this time, the problem raised by Dr. Mandeville. She commented that
the public is worried about the doctors being taxed because people
believe that the tax will be passed on to them. She has received
telephone calls from people who have expressed this view. The
Council needs to clarify that on a gross of $100,000 means a tax
of $l60, .~ ,ost d09~B pay far less than thio ameant.
J!).).Ue " &~t..e. ~
Cw Tirsell pointea out that with respect to a tax for outside ser-
vices, the City pays approximately $14,000 for ambulance service
for the hospital. The hospital is not a taxable institution. The
City accepted the responsibility of maintaining the ambulance service
for the protection and safety of our citizens and also for the purpose
of making the hospital a viable institution which can support all ser-
vices, including emergency services. At this time the City is looking
at a cost of about $30,000 to provide ambulance services. The City's
costs are going up and the City doesn't differentiate between who
may use the service, where they are located, or which doctors use
the hospital. This is a cost to the City and the hospital has to be
maintained at a certain level.
Cw Tirsell stated that she is impressed with the intent, on the
part of the Cornmitteee and built into this ordinance, to have a
tax that would be equitable. In the past doctors and lawyers from
out of town did not pay a business license tax, and yet many of
our businesses are from out of town. For example, Heskets Carpets,
and swimming pool businesses whose main offices are out of town do
pay a business license tax for doing business in Livermore.
Cw Tirse1l added that she agrees that the doctors have a point in
that it is difficult to separate patient costs - what part of the
fee is for hospital visits, office calls, etc. The fee for pre-natal
care and delivery is one fee which includes office visits as well as
care by the physician at the hospital. For this reason she would
suggest a flat rate for the physicians.
CM-31-407
March 1, 1976
(re Bus. License Tax)
Dr. Mandeville indicated that there is no comparison between the
ambulance service fee, which the City pays, and the business lic-
ense tax because the ambulance fee is shared by other cities of
the Valley community. Dublin, Pleasanton and San Ramon are sharing
a fee for their citizens and Livermore is paying their share for the
citizens of Livermore. Livermore is not paying the total $30,000
for everyone in the Valley.
Dr. Mandeville stated that he views this as a public service and
it has nothing to do with a business license fee.
Cw Tirsell pointed out that the business license tax is a means
of raising revenue for our City and Dr. Mandeville stated that
the City should levy a total citizen income tax if the City needs
more revenue.
Cw Tirsell stated that the City does not have this capability.
Dr. Mandeville stated that physicians with their offices in other
communities are paying a business licenst tax in that community.
It just happens that the City has a monopoly on the location of
the facility in which certain services can be rendered. If the
hospital were moved a little further down the road it would be
in the County and there wouldn't be this problem.
It was noted that if the facility were in the County it wouldn't
receive police and fire protection from the City of Livermore.
It would be County services that would have to be utilized.
Dr. Mandeville cautioned that at this particular time it is
politically unwise to impose a business license tax for physicians
whose offices are located outside of Livermore but who do business
at VMH.
Cw Tirsell stated that she can understand that the doctors are
upset but the City cannot extend exemption of the business
license tax to other businesses from out-of-town.
Dr. Mandeville stated that if this is the case it is only fair
that all of the lawyers who conduct business in the Livermore
Municipal Court and have offices in Pleasanton and other areas,
are also charged a business license tax.
Cw Tirsell stated that she is willing to discuss this with the
other members of the Council, and propose a flat fee.
Mayor Futch wondered if the Oakland ordinance requires a fee
for outside physicians. His point would be what problems have
been encountered with this type of provision.
Cm Staley stated that the current ordinance does not have this
provision in it, specifically, nor does the proposed ordinance.
It was the feeling of the Committee that it should be part of
the fees collected because these people are doing business in
Livermore. He added that he would be willing to discuss a fee
for outside lawyers using the services of the Court because the
Court has the advantage of police and fire protection which the
City pays for.
Cm Miller mentioned that it is more difficult to police the
lawyers using court services because sometimes the appearance
is brief and there is no obvious connection. The enforcement
for physicians is easier because they are listed with the hospital;
however, the principle is still the same.
CM-3l-40S
March 1, 1976
(re Bus. License Tax)
Cw Tirsell asked if anesthetists are employees of the hospital and
Dr. Mandeveille stated that they are under the umbrella coverage
of the hospital, as are radiologists and pathologists. They do
not have an office and they fall into the category of the tax free
institution. He stated in his case there would be a question of
whether he should delete all service done by him in the operating
room of the hospital and claim only the services rendered outside
of the hospital. If he chooses to lie to the Council about how
much was done outside the hospital it would be difficult for the
Council to prove otherwise.
Cm Miller stated that it is his understanding there is not tax
shelter for services rendered by the physician in the hospital.
em Turner stated that he would like the Council to consider the
administrative costs involved in enforcing a tax for outside
physicians and lawyers, etc.
Cm Turner wondered if a proposed flat fee would be based on the
number of times a physician uses the hospital facilities per year
and Cw Tirsell commented that the flat fee would entitle the phy-
sican to use the hospital any number of times - it would not be
based on usage.
Mayor Futch stated that he believes a flat fee would eliminate
a number of problems which might otherwise be encountered in
trying to enforce the $1.60/$1000 gross. It is difficult to
segregate the different costs for the different services.
Cm Staley stated that he is not sure it would be fair to levy
the regular business license tax on local physicians while charg-
ing outside physicians a flat fee.
The City Attorney stated that this might present problems because
the City may be setting up unreasonable classifications. Why should
one physician have to pay a full gross receipts tax while another
class, who lives outside the City but does 100% of his business in
this City, pay a flat fee.
Mayor Futch stated that he would assume the Council would want
both local and outside physicians to pay a flat fee.
CM STALEY MOVED TO ADOPT THE ORDINANCE, AS RECOMMENDED BY THE
CO~1ITTEE. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM MILLER.
Cm Turner stated that Dr. Mandeville has made comments that have
raised questions in his mind and before he votes on the motion he
would like to speak to other physicians about this matter. The
doctor has the option of sending his patient to whatever hospital
he chooses and the City may find that a lot of the out-of-town
doctors will do just this, which will mean a decrease in the number
of patients at VMH. He is very concerned about this possibility.
Rebecca Hundoble, stated that if a doctor said she would have to
go to a different hospital she would refuse. If she has to go
to the hospital she will insist that it be VMH. She felt that
if the Council is going to talk with the physicians they should
also talk to the people about going to other hospitals.
Mayor Futch wondered how the Finance Department could evaluate
what amount should be paid if it isn't done on a flat fee basis
and Mr. Nolan indicated that he believes reasonable estimates could
be made based on past information concerning the local physicians
and the amount of gross receipts in the past.
CM-31-409
March 1, 1976
(re Bus. License Tax)
Mr. Nolan stated that if a physician refuses to pay a business
license tax an estimate is made of the gross receipts and the
amount to be paid and he is sent a notice. If the physician
then refuses to pa~ a suit is filed against him. This has been
done in other instances for other businesses.
Cw Tirsell asked Mr. Nolan what amount the physicians are currently
paying, under the provisions of the current ordinance so he Council
will know what amount is being discussed. The proposed increase
would be about 10~/$100.
Mr. Nolan stated that most of the physicians in town pay about
$100 per year. With the proposed increase it would amount to
only about l6~ per $lOO paid to the city.
Cw Tirsell stated that she believes this is a matter of philosophy
which can never be resolved. The physicians feel they should not
be taxed for using the hospital services, and the City feels they
should pay for using services and doing business in this City.
Mayor Futch stated that a flat fee would eliminate the problems
of trying to determine the amount that should be paid as well
as problems concerning enforcement.
MAYOR FUTCH MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO ADOPT A FLAT FEE FOR
OUTSIDE PHYSICIANS.
Cw Tirsell pointed out that this would not be a fair method of
taxation because there is a great difference between different
services. One physician might have to pay perhaps four times
the amount he should have to pay while another physician would
have his business license tax reduced considerably.
Cm Staley stated that he sees the first problem with the flat
fee as what amount should be levied as the flat fee. Secondly,
the local physicians would be paying a flat fee for use of their
office and the hospital while outside physicians would be paying
a flat fee for use of only the hospital. It would seem that there
is no way this could be done to make it fair.
AMENDMENT FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Cw Tirsell commented that she would like to point out that the
increase to the physicians is very nominal while the cost to
the City in the way of fire and police protection for the hos-
pital and ambulance services has escalated tremendously.
em Turner stated that the motion calls for introduction of the
ordinance and prior to the second reading and adoption he will
talk to the physicians located in the City to see how they feel.
Cm Miller stated that he was really astonished to find that the
doctors have threatened to take their patients to a different
hospital.
MOTION TO INTRODUCE ORDINANCE PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE; READING
OF THE ORDINANCE WAS WAIVED AND TITLE WAS READ ONLY.
LAVWMA POPULATION
AND FLOW PROJECTIONS
Mayor Futch stated that the Council previously adopted the
position of 14.89 with respect to projected wastewater flows for
the three Valley communities and he sees no reason to discuss
this item further.
CM-3l-4l0
Harch 1, 1976
(LAm~1A Population &
Flow Projections)
Mayor Futch briefly explained that in previous discussions it
was decided that the City would receive approxima~ely 45~ in
excess of the present capacity. This would give the City approxi-
mately 1 MGD.
Cm Staley stated that he is not happy about being tied to a 1 MGD
for 20 years. This would be very restrictive.
Cm Miller stated that if the City wants to spend the 1 MGD for
residential growth then it wouldn't be sufficient; however, if
it is to be used for commercial/industrial so that local people
will not have to commute and then use .5 MGD for population,
the 1 HGD would be sufficient.
Cm Staley stated that according to the General Plan, the maximum
population will be 73,000 and it would seem that the 1 MGD would
not be sufficient.
Cm Miller stated that the General Plan did not tie additional
population to a 20 year time period.
Cm Staley stated that he understands this but it doesn't seem
reasonable to prepare a blueprint for which the drain pipe is too
small.
Cm Miller stated that he would like to offer reasons why the pipe-
line should not be too large. If the pipeline is large enough and
if our estimates are inflated and Pleasanton and Dublin are inflated,
there would be enough capacity in the pipeline to sewer Geldermann.
The EPA doesn't care who owns the sewer plant. They only care about
the size of the plant. Ask the question of where the press for
sewering Gelderville comes from - it comes from the Regional Board,
BASSA, and Zone 7. The Regional Board and BASSA have a fair amount
of opportunity to make it impossible for Livermore to get sewage and
yet let Geldermann spray irrigate but restrict Livermore from doing
the same. All of these things are within their power. If the
capacity is in the pipeline there is a substantial probability
and serious concern about who will get the pipeline. The larger
the pipeline, the higher the probability that Geldermann will get
some of it because there will be enough to serve him. Consequently,
over extragavant estimates, in his opinion, are unwise from the
standpoint of who will receive a share and on the basis of air
quality grounds.
Cm Staley stated that he understands the political problems and
he would agree that these are major problems. However, it would
seem to be equally unwise to consider the possibility (not the
goal) that this town could have a maximum population of 73,000
in 20 years while at the same time looking at a sewer capacity
that makes that amount of growth impossible. This is inconsistent.
Cm Miller stated that this is true but the 2% growth maximum is
not necessarily a goal to be attained and furthermore the popula-
tions associated with the 2% growth maximum could be associated
with longer time periods than the 20-25 years. What if the large
pipeline is constructed and the Geldermann problem goes away but
the expansion of the sewer problem doesn't go away. This means
that the citizens will place a lot of money into the ground for
no useful purpose for something that might take place 30 years from
now and may not even be necessary in 30 years because of changes in
technology or methods for handling liquid waste.
CM-3l-4Il
March 1, 1976
(re LA~~ Population
& Flow Projections)
Cm Staley stated that the City has made possible, throughout the
General Plan, expansion of population to 73,000 but this doesn't
mean it will happen. It would seem that if the City is going to
make everything so restrictive that the 73,000 can never be met,
then why not change the goals and talk about what really will
happen. He does not want to change the goals he would rather
talk about how much more would be needed to accommodate 73,000
people.
Mr. Lee explained that the City would need a capacity of 19.05
to serve the E-O predictions and a modest amount of industrial
development.
Mayor Futch stated that when the Council discussed this item the
flows were reviewed and 14.89 was approved. The City went to
all three jurisdictions (to be served by LAVWMA pipeline) and
all three jurisdictions approved a capacity of 14.89. If the
City takes 45% of that excess it would give the City an addi-
tional 2 MGD. There can also be additional capacity gained
by boosting the head pressure and there are other ways there
can be more capacity if necessary.
Mayor Futch stated that everything concerning the pipeline is
so unprecise that when you speak about 14 it is really between
l4 and 20.
There was discussion concerning the table included in the re-
port from Mr. Lee and the Council expressed dissatisfaction
with getting new figures some six months after the item was
initially discussed. The table was prepared by LAVWMA on
February 11th and the Council didn't receive it until now,
which is two weeks after the report was prepared and six
months after it was originally discussed.
Mayor Futch commented that another way to increase the
capacity is to reuse the water, piping out the brine.
Cw Tirsell stated that since Cm Miller and Mayor Futch,
can vote independently, if it would be a better solution for
the Council to give them direction to support the previous
Council position. .
Mayor Futch stated that he would rather support the previous
position of 14.89, and that Livermore should receive capacity
proportionate to the amount of population. Livermore has 45%
of the Valley's population, we have paid for 45% of the cost
of the line and we should receive 45% of the capacity.
Cw Tirsell wondered what size project can be approved by the
LAVWMA Board without going to the voters and it was noted
that the Board can approve up to 13 MGD or up to $l.5 million
cost for the entire Valley LA~~ agencies.
Cm Turner stated that according to his figures 45% of the
capacity would mean another l.9 MGD and the City has applied
for only 1 MGD. It has been said that the City should receive
45% of the capacity.
Cm Miller explained that, originally, there was discussion about
a 6 MGD capacity and Mr. Lee suggested a 1 MGD request by the
City, and this is what was applied for.
CM-3l-412
March 1, 1976
(re LAVWMA Population
& Flow Projections)
~ayor Futch stated that the Council should also keep in mind the
amount that will be funded. The City has been told in the past
that 14.89 would be the fundable amount. It still is not clear
but EPA may not allow funding for this amount.
Cw Tirsell stated that she has no confidence, whatsoever, in the
chart that has been prepared by the LAm~ staff and if the other
agencies have as many questions about it a decision will not be
possible at their Thursday meeting.
Cm Miller stated that if there aren't ponds to average out the
flow for the whole day, a larger pipe is required. The point is,
the City should support surge ponds built to restrict additional
capacity in that line later on. An increase later means an air quality
problem and a Geldermann problem. He would urge that the City not
accept anything but the smallest sized lines consistent with surge
ponds, together with our share of the total and objections to the
chart.
Cm Staley stated that in his op1n10n the City should support the
smallest size pipe consistent with the need for the current Valley
communities. This would exclude sewage for Geldertown. However,
it is also the City of Livermore's responsibility to request a
size that would allow the City to grow to a population consistent
with the General Plan.
Cm Miller explained that there are things that should be accomplished
but have the probability of being inconsistent. If the pipeline is
too large there is a sufficiently probable risk of getting something
the City doesn't want; not only from Geldermann, but from people from
the south and growth in the Pleasanton and Sunol area. The only
reconciliation with the numbers in the Plan and those which the
Council are committed to would be the adjustment of time scales.
The Council has already agreed, in principle, that there is a large
probability that the time scales to accomplish specific population
goals may be extended well beyond the 20 year time period for which
the pipeline is planned.
The safest course, in Cm Miller's op1n10n, in view of having too
much capacity available for misuse and in view of air pollution
problems, would be to endorse a smaller capacity pipeline. After
the 20 year life period other solutions can be examined for dispos-
ing of effluent.
Cw Tirsell stated that the state of the art is that the City can't
look ahead and know what will happen. The fact is that there is
a very slim chance funding could be obtained in the next 20 years
for expansion and now is our one and only chance to ask for the
1 MGD expansion.
em Staley stated he realizes LA~A will be meeting Thursday night
but he just is not prepared to make a decision this evening. The
figures the Council have been given are not accurate and he really
doesn't understand all the implications of all the policies and he
is very concerned about what Cm Miller has said about too large a
line being bad while on the other hand providing a mechanism for
getting what we may potentially need. At this time there is no
solution to these problems and he is unprepared to take a position.
Mayor Futch stated that there is a problem of time constraints.
LAVWMA must make a decision within a few weeks and everything has
been scheduled with mandates from EPA, the Regional Water Quality
Control Board, and we are to have a bond issue on the ballot for
both the Bay Discharge and LAVWMA Pipeline in November. There is
no allowance for delays and this is the reason a decision must be made.
CM-3l-4l3
March 1, 1976
(re LAVWMA population
& Flow Projections)
Mayor Futch added that the LA~~ EIR is very thick and the
figures and material very complex. Even though he and Cm Miller
are probably more familiar with the material than most people,
he would not attempt to analyze the information. In his opin-
ion it was irresponsible that the Council has not received the
necessary information earlier and he is very disturbed by this
fact.
Cm Staley stated that he is sorry the Council didn't have the
necessary information sooner also but he is not about to adopt
something that would affect the City for 20 years simply because
somebody has a timetable. This leaves the Council with three al-
ternatives:
1) Instruct Cm Miller and Mayor Futch to go to LA~1A to work
out a solution to these policies;
2) Inform LAVWMA that the City cannot meet the timetable be-
cause it does not satisfactorily assure the City that the
needs of our citizens can be met; and
3) The Council can take action without his vote.
CW TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL SUPPORT THE DECISION AGREED UPON
BY THE COUNCIL UNANIMOUSLY, LAST SUMMER, TO BE PRESENTED AT THE
LAVWMA MEETING ON THURSDAY EVENING. MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Cm Miller stated that he would also like instructions from the
Council as follows:
1. Reiterate that the City receives approximately 45% of
the capacity.
2. That the pipe size be no larger than absolutely necessary
to carry this capacity.
3. That full use of surge ponds be required.
4. That there not be enough capacity to meet the needs of any
new city.
CW TIRSELL INCLUDED THESE FOUR POINTS IN HER MOTION, SECONDED BY
CM TURNER. MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Cm Staley dissenting) .
CONSENT CALENDAR
Res. Auth. Exec. of
Contract - Elliott
The Council adopted a resolution authorizing execution of a contract
for purchase of H. C. Elliott property for access to the proposed
Isabel Highway.
RESOLUTION NO. 51-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREE
MENT (H. C. Elliott, Inc.)
Res. Rejecting Claim
A resolution was adopted rejecting the claim of Ralph G. Skobielew.
CM-3l-4l4
March 1, 1976
RESOLUTION NO. 52-76
A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF
RALPH G. SKOBIELEW
Airport Advisory
Committee Minutes
The Council reviewed the minutes for the Airport Advisory Committee,
dated February 3, 1976, which were noted for filing.
P. C. Minutes
The Planning Commission minutes for their meeting of February 3,
1976, were noted for filing.
Res. re Canvass
of March 2 Ballots
A resolution was adopted authorizing the City Clerk to prepare
an official canvass of ballots for the March 2, 1976, general
election.
RESOLUTION NO. 53-76
RESOLUTION ORDERING THE CITY CLERK TO
CANVASS VOTES CAST AT. THE GENERAL MUNI-
CIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD AND CONDUCTED
MARCH 2, 1976.
Payroll & Claims
There were 88 claims in the amount of $22,649.0S, and 292 payroll
claims in the amount of $97,031.19, for a total of $119,680.27,
dated February 23, 1976, and approved by the City Manager.
REPORT RE CHARGES,
DUTIES, ETC. OF
CITY ENERGY COMMITTEE
A report was prepared by the City Manager outlining the charges,
duties, and responsibilities of the City Energy Committee at
the time it is established. It is recommended that a resolution
be prepared by the staff adopting the official charge of the Committee.
ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY MAYOR FUTCH AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE STAFF l.vAS DIRECTED TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION'ADOPTING THE
OFFICIAL CHARGE OF THE CITY ENERGY COMMITTEE.
Cm Turner commented that it is his understanding that Contra Costa
County requires that every new building be equipped for solar
energy purposes. If this is true the Livermore committee should
investigate this policy and consider adoption of something similar.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Futch adjourned the meeting at 12:15 a.m. to an executive
session to discuss litigation and to a 6:00 p.m. adjourned regular
meeting on March 2, 1976, to discuss the General Plan.
APPROVE
Mayor
ATTEST
City Clerk
Livermore, California
CM-31-4l5
Adjourned Regular Meeting of March 2, 1976
An adjourned regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was
held on March 2, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39
South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at
6:30 p.m. with Mayor Futch presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Staley, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch
Absent: None
CONTINUED DISCUSSION
RE GENERAL PLAN
Mr. Musso explained that the P.C. had made corrections and if
the Council would like to discuss these corrections they should
refer to pages marked "PCX", Pages III-2a and III-2b. These
were given to the Council last night.
Cm Miller stated that the changes on these two pages have been
discussed many times since the meeting last week when the Council
adopted Cm Staley's wording and he would suggest that since there
will be more discussion perhaps it would be best to discuss the
LARPD items and other P.C. changes prior to discussing these two
pages.
Mayor Futch stated that he would rather discuss the most difficult
items first, before the councilmernbers get too tired.
The following changes were made:
PCX - 1II-2a
Under population Growth policies - left side. Item 1. Line 3:
services, in particular, (commas have been inserted).
1. line 5 - strike the word "supply". Line 5 will read: domestic
water, public parks and recreation, etc.
2. (right side) line 9 will begin: Element Page 11-16, the
regional "fair share" of population growth, with due regard for
ABAG regional plan, energy conservation, and historical growth
patterns. relative to the Bay region and Alameda County, the
natural growth rate of the Livermore-Amador Valley, etc.
3. (right side) line 3 and 4: delete which may be averaged
to include the previous year.
This item was discussed at length as to the meaning of the wording.
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE THE WORDING "which may be averaged...etc", WAS DELETED.
3. (a)--Cm Staley indicated that he believes the P.C. changed the
meaning of his wording for. this item and went back to the orginal
problem of setting a growth rate. He would suggest wording for
the first sentence of this item as follows:, and which was accepted
by the Council:
(a) It shall be the residential growth policy of the
City to plan for a maximum residential growth figure
achieved by never exceeding 2% of the then present
population in any calendar year.
3. (b) no change
(c) changed as follows: Line 5: indicate however the
air quality may not deteriorate with a maximum two
percent growth rate...etc. ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED
BY CW TIRSELL AND A 4-1 VOTE (Cm Miller dissenting) .
CM-31-4l6
March 2, 1976
(Disc. re Gen. Plan)
Page III-2b
The Council had previously agreed to delete (d) on this page
but Commissioner Selden explained the reasons the P.C. felt
it should be included.
Cm Staley stated that there are two alternatives - to delete
it as Cm Miller would prefer, or to adopt other wording.
CM MILLER MOVED TO DELETE (d), SECONDED BY CM TURNER. MOTION
FAILED 2-3 (Mayor Futch, Cw Tirsell and Cm Staley dissenting) .
Cm Staley offered wording for (d) as follows:
Realizing that the maximum EO population projection
made by anyone, that of the State Water Quality Con-
trol Board for the Livermore-Amador Valley, is about
two percent, and realizing that the State Water Quality
Control Board EO projection for Livermore itself is 1.6
percent and realizing further that the Consultant's EO
figure for Livermore is something like 1.3 percent.
CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THIS WORDING, SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
CM MILLER MOVED TO &~END THE MOTION TO INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING
WORDING; AMENDMENT SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
That the EO projections from the Department of Finance
for Alameda County Scaled to Livermore is 4%.
AMENDMENT FAILED 2-3 (Cm Turner, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch
dissenting) .
MAIN MOTION FAILED 2-3 (Cm Turner, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch
dissenting) .
1II-2b (d) will read as follows:
(d) The disaggregated EO population projection of the
State Water Quality Control Board for the Livermore-
Amador Valley is about two percent.
THIS WORDING WAS APPROVED ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY
CM TURNER AND BY A 3-2 VOTE (Cm Staley and Miller dissenting) .
1II-2b (e) will read as follows, ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED
BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE:
(e) last line: and the Livermore Valley averaged 4.8%.
Moreover, for twenty years Livermore has taken between
five and ten times its "fair share".
III-2b (f) will read as follows, ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED
BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE:
(f) Beginning with second sentence: However, 20 years
of experience with City growth rates in excess of 5% has
demonstrated that more growth did not bring proportional
industry and commerce. In addition, half the....etc.
CM-3l-4l7
March 2, 1976
(Disc. re Gen. Plan)
III-2b <g) no change.
III-2b Summary.
CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE SUMMARY READ AS FOLLOWS:
In summary taking into consideration all the
factors, this stated policy satisfies all the
goals and policies of the plan.
MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
III-2b Summary - no change.
CM MILLER NOTED THAT III-2b 4., WHICH WAS A PARAGRAPH PREVIOUSLY
ADDED BY CM STALEY ~mICH HAS BEEN DELETED BY THE P. C . HE WOULD
MOVE THAT IT BE REINTRODUCED AND THAT WORDING (asdshown in (e))
BE INCLUDED. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
Mr. Selden had noted that all policy statements or considerations
were included in the text and this is the reason 4. was omitted.
III-2b, 4. will read as follows:
4. Paragraph.
(a) A geographical balance of the physical population
on the terrain.
(b) That the adverse impact of the residential growth
on air quality be balanced by factors such as re-
duced VMT...etc.
(c) That the ratio of the industrial-commercial tax
base versus the residential tax base will become
more favorable.
(d) Absorption of natural growth rate.
(e) The need to provide more low and moderate income
housing.
(f) Compliance with the goals and policies set forth
in this plan.
5. The City shall encourage and participate in programs in associa-
tion with other communities...etc.
ALL OF THE ABOVE APPEARS IN III-2C - STAFF VERSION - COUNCIL I.
THE ABOVE WAS APPROVED ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM
STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Cm Miller stated that he would vote in favor of the above wording
but there is nothing in the conditions to indicate what Cm Staley
had said about having conditions that would keep the growth rate
from going above 2% if there were problems such as air pollution, etc.
These are good conditions, but they are not as he believes they should
be stated. Everything the Council has done in this section is un-
acceptable, as far as he is concerned, from a public health standpoint.
There is nowhere in the Plan, any consideration of the problems of
air quality and an attempt to take this into account in any specific
way, in setting what the growth rate will be in any given year.
CM-31-41S
l
March 2, 1976
(Dis. re Gen. Plan)
THE COUNCIL REVIEWED COUNCIL I PAGES WITH MR. MUSSO, WHICH l^7ERE
NOTED AS FOLLOWS:
I-I ADOPTED ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE.
II-5 ADOPTED ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY MAYOR FUTCH AND
BY UNANHlOUS VOTE.
1I-9 ADOPTED WITH THE 38% ADDED, SECOND LINE, SECOND PARAGRAPH,
LEFT SIDE, ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER
AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
II-13 ADOPTED - CONSENSUS OF COUNCIL.
11-16 ADOPTED
II-17 CM MILLER MOVED TO LEAVE THIS PAGE AS IT WAS. MOTION
FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Cm Miller's statement just prior to Hydrology has been
deleted and this is what Cm Miller wanted included again.
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY MAYOR FUTCH AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE THE PARAGRAPH ON 11-17 PRIOR TO HYDROLOGY WILL READ AS FOLLOWS:
More recent studies reported in the LAVWMA EIS concluded that
to meet national ambient air quality standards between now and
the year 2000 the population of the whole Livermore-Amador
Valley could not exceed 1/2 its present level, in the absence
of mitigating measures other than automotive emissions control.
II-30 ADOPTED - word limited added by P.C.
1I-32 ADOPTED - year 2000 corrected by P.C.
1I-33 ADOPTED
1I-37 - Mr. Musso explained that the P.C. agreed to delete the rule
of thumb paragraph (right side) but also felt that Cm Miller's
paragraph should also be deleted.
Cm Miller's paragraph: Since the median price is the
halfway price between the cheapest and most expensive,
it's not a surprise'that half the people can't afford
the median price; however, many of them can afford half
the houses cheaper than the median priced house.
MAYOR FUTCH MOVED THAT THE WORDING BE DELETED, AS RECO~~ENDED BY
THE PLANNING COHMISSION. ~lOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE WORDING ON II-37 (right side) WAS CHANGED AS FOLLOWS:
Since the median price is the numerical halfway
price between the cheapest and most expensive,
it is understandable that half the people can't
afford the median price; however, many of them
can afford that half of the houses which are
cheaper than the median priced house.
II-38 (right side) Third paragraph. The poverty-level family
obviously cannot afford even the lower-priced home here
or anywhere else. The P.C. had deleted here or anyWhere else.
CM-31-419
March 2, 1976
(Disc. re Gen. Plan)
The Council agreed that perhaps this wording should be changed and
Cm Miller suggested the following wording:
II-38 (third paragraph) The poverty-level family
obviously cannot afford even the lower-priced
home here or in most other communities.
THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL AGREED WITH THE ABOVE WORDING AND IT
WAS ADOPTED FOR THE FIRST SENTENCE OF II-38, THIRD PARAGRAPH.
AT THIS TIME MR. MUSSO EXPLAINED THE CHANGES WHICH HAVE TAKEN
PLACE ON THE MAP.
Discussion followed concerning properties in the area of the
railroad tracks between "I" and ilK" streets and whether or not
this area should be designated as multiple residential.
Cm Miller stated that if anyone lives within a block of the railroad
tracks they will hear the train anyway and he believes it is impor-
tant to provide housing in an area where people can go to the down-
town commercial area without using a car. It would seem that this
would be an area where multiple residential would be reasonable.
Cm Miller noted that this would mean a consideration of zoning
changes which the Council will not be discussing this evening.
At this time there should be consideration of where the line
should be drawn for commercial development on the General Plan.
THE COUNCIL AGREED TO LEAVE THE MAP AS IT IS SHOWING THE BOUNDARY
BETWEEN COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATION.
Mr. Musso then reviewed the recommendations of the Planning Commis-
sion concerning LARPD, with respect to the text.
IV-19 CHANGES ADOPTED.
IV-16 The P.C. believes the second paragraph (left side) concerning
the EBRPD should remain.
IT WAS CONCLUDED THAT THIS PARAGRAPH WILL BE DELETED.
IV-15 ADOPTED, as recommended by the Planning Commission.
IV-43, ADOPTED.
IV-24 ADOPTED
IV-20 ADOPTED, as recommended by the Planning Commission.
IV-14 P.C. disagreed but Council adopted this as they have indicated.
IV-12 ADOPTED as recommended by the Planning Commission.
There was brief discussion concerning the letter from BAAPCD and
it was noted for filing.
CM STALEY MOVED TO ADOPT THE GENERAL PLAN, MOTION SECONDED BY
CW TURNER.
Mayor Futch explained that vivian Brown asked that the Council not
adopt the General Plan until her group (ABAG) has met tomorrow
evening. It was noted that the staff will be preparing a resolution
adopting the General Plan which can be adopted Monday, March 8th.
CH-3l-420
Harch 2, 1976
(Disc. re Gen. Plan)
Cm Miller stated that he would like to suggest that the City
send a letter to ABAG, essentially, as follows:
Dear ABAG, we appreciate the comments and we
recognize that you have located some of the
same inconsistencies we have, and perhaps even
some others, and that they need to be resolved.
We intend to do that within the next 6 months
or year and the City would like to deal with the
ABAG staff.
THE MOTION ~"lAS AMENDED TO DIRECT TIrE STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLU-
TION ADOPTING THE GENERAL PLAN, SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Cm Miller stated that he would like to know if there would be
any Council support for saying anything about Petaluma and Napa,
and whether or not anything should be said about Livermore's
turnover. No support for this suggestion was expressed.
The Council discussed the possibility of making changes as recom-
mended by ABAG, after the ABAG meeting which is scheduled tomorrow
evening, March 3, 1976. It was concluded that it might be best to
schedule a Thursday, March 4, meeting to consider ABAG recommenda-
tions, if recommendations are made by ABAG.
Cm Staley stated that he would be willing to allow this flexibility
for a major disaster but he doesn't intend to meet again this week
concerning the General Plan.
CM TURNER MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM UNTIL THURSDAY, MARCH 4th AT
8:00 P.M., CONTINGENT UPON ABAG's RECOMMENDATIONS. MOTION WAS SEC-
ONDED BY Cr.! HILLER. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Futch adjourned the meeting at 9:15 p.m. to a Thursday,
March 4, 1976, adjourned regular meeting to discuss possible
recommendations by ABAG.
,.._\
, I
,1
APPROVE
t1
( II( i."/ )
, 'I,"
~..~~- {' - {
ATTEST
CM-3l-42l
Regular Meeting of March 8, 1976
A regular meeting of the City council of the City of Livermore was
held on March 8, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:l0 p.m.
with Mayor Futch presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Staley, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch
Absent: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Futch led the Councilmembers as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES 2/23/76,
2/24/76 and 2/26/76
p. 373, first line, should read Cm Turner, not Cm Miller.
p. 374, prior to Cw Tirsell's statement (middle of page), add
the following new paragraph:
AFTER MR. STEER'S COMMENTS THE MAYOR ASKED THAT THE COUNCIL
BEGIN DISCUSSING THE GENERAL PLAN AND THE PROPOSED GROWTH
RATE TO BE STATED IN THE PLAN, AND TO REVIEW THE CHANGES
TO BE MADE.
p. 381 Amendment (6) passed 4-1 (Mayor Futch dissenting) .
p. 393, next to last line should read order effect, etc.
P. 379, second motion should read Cm Miller, Staley and Mayor
Futch dissenting.
p. 365, next to last paragraph, end of line two should read:
and inflation is probably the cruelest tax of all.
p. 384, prior to last paragraph insert the following new
paragraph:
Cm Turner later indicated that he had been misinformed
at the library concerning information which should have
been there for the public. This information was available
to the public and all the revisions were included.
P. 356, second paragraph, last line should read: comments
made by Mr. Ruth correspond to the facts.
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEE~INGS OF 2/23/76, 2/24/76, and
2/26/76 WERE APPROVED AS CORRECTED.
SPECIAL ITEM - LIBRARY
CONSULTANT STUDY
Mayor Futch stated that the report concerning the study of the
library by the City's consultant has been continued until the
new Council has been seated. Members of the Library Board
have been notified of this change.
CM-3l-422
March 8, 1976
OPEN FORUM
(Recent Election Results)
Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, stated that during the last election
the Junction Avenue precinct cast a majority vote for Mr. Buckley.
This precinct consists of people from the working class and with
low to moderate housing with young renters and older retired people.
He indicated that the votes reflected a concern for jobs, enough
money to have a good time occasionally, and shopping services within
reach. Growth control remains important but he would hope the voice
of the Junction precinct will not be dismissed as a minority voice
out in the wilderness. He urged that the Council consider the work-
ing citizens and to begin with giving our Police Department and Fire
Department first priority during budget session.
(Business License Item)
Milt Codiroli, 586 Escondido Circle, stated that there are many people
in the audience who are interested in the agenda item concerning the
business license tax and he asked if this item could be discussed at
this time.
Mayor Futch stated that this item will be discussed as soon as the
Council can get to it but there are other items on the agenda for
which people have come to the meeting also and these will be discussed
first.
SUGGESTION AWARDS
Mavor Futch presented awards and checks to City employees for
suggestions selected by the Suggestion Award Committee, as follows:
Darleen Byfield, suggestion for curb cuts along Holmes Street, $lO.
Mark Pfeifle, suggestion for attic fans in homes with air con-
ditioners, $25.
Joe Whelan, a mobile power generator for use at site as needed, $25.
Donald Smith, gas driven machine for removing plugs at the golf
courses, and conversion of City equipment by Mr. Smith to do the
job. $100.
SERVICE AWARDS
Twenty year service awards were made to Don Nolte of the Library
and George Serpa of the Street Department. They were given a $25
savings bond, a check in the amount of $20, and a certificate of
appreciation for their service with the City.
REPORT RE STATE HIGH-
WAY SAFETY GRANT FOR
POLICE DEPARTMENT
Mr. Parness reported that the City will be offered a state grant for
personnel and necessary equipment to assist in local traffic and law
enforcement. The program would provide for the employment of two
uniformed traffic officers, a half-time clerk, and two motorcycles.
As a condition of the grant, 50% of the personnel cost must be borne
by the City the second year with 100% of the cost to the City the
third year and thereafter. The annual cost would be about $31,000.
CM-31-423
March 8, 1976
(Rept re State Hgwy
Safety Grant for P.o.)
Cm Turner wondered what the City would have accumulated, as a
result of this grant, if it is discontinued after the two years.
The Chief of Police explained that the City would have the
equipment - the motorcycles, radio equipment, etc. The capital
value of the equipment would be about $10,000 or perhaps a little
more.
~1r. Parness explained that the cost to the City the first year
would be $7,000 which would be the City's share for the nine
month period. The second year the City's cost would be $27,000,
which is half the cost for the program. Thereafter the cost to
the City would be the full $54,000.
Mr. Parness stated that he has extremely divided emotions on this
issue because the advantage must be weighed with the City's finan-
cial capabilities to meet this obligation. His concern is for the
second year's cost to the City which would have to come from the
General Fund only. At this time there is no way the City could
meet the financial obligations being confronted.
Mayor Futch stated that perhaps someone from the STEP Program
could be transferred to this new program if STEP is discontinued.
This program might allow the City to have personnel it would
otherwise have to do without.
Cm Miller stated that it would appear that this is a question of
whether or not the City would trade STEP and HORIZONS for this
traffic program. In his opinion it would be better to spend
this amount of money to retain HORIZONS, which has to do with
reducing juvenile delinquency, and STEP, which is devoted to
reducing burglaries rather than concentrating the traffic enforce-
ment program. He expressed concern that it is not feasible
for the City to financially support this program.
Cm Turner stated that he is counting on additional revenue for the
City from the work that will be done by the new Community Develop-
ment Director in getting industry to Livermore. He also feels
that the City should take advantage of getting a program of this
type for a relatively small cost.
Cm Staely commented that possibly if the City adds two people to
traffic enforcement there could be an increase of revenues to the
City in terms of fines.
The Chief of police commented that the primary purpose of the grant
would be to reduce injury and fatality accidents by concentrating
on hazardous violations in specific locations.
Cm Miller stated that in the past the Council has discussed what
the fine structure should be for parking violations and possibly
revenue could be generated by raising the cost of the fines.
Mr. Parness noted that this is a matter for the Court to decide
but the Council has the option of recommending a certain increase.
em Turner stated that he thinks it's depressing to imply that
the City might be able to raise the funds to pay for two addi-
tional people through fines.
Cm Miller stated that the City needs the money to pay for the
officers enforcing our law, against the violators. In his
opinion this is not unreasonable.
Cw Tirsell added that she believes this is a very practical
suggestion.
CM-3l-424
March 8, 1976
(Rpt re State Hgwy
Safety Grant for P.o.)
Cw Tirsell wondered if there is really a need for this type of
program in Livermore.
Chief Lindgren explained that there very definitely is a need.
The City has shown a trend on the increasing number of accidents,
particularly with respect to injury and fatality accidents. In
fact, the City had to meet a certain criteria in escalation of
accidents to qualify for the grant. The funding is decided on a
priority basis, based on population, accident ratio and injuries
per thousand miles traveled, etc. Three years ago the City did
not meet the requirements but it does at this point.
em Miller wondered what would happen if the City accepts the grant
and later decides that it would not be financially possible to
continue. Could the City withdraw?
Mr. Parness stated that this is part of the contract obligation
that the City must assume. He is not sure what the liabilities
would be and whether or not the City would be subject to suit by
the state.
Cm Staley commented that he believes there is a real problem in
trying to decide what to do but based on the fact that the City
has a need for additional personnel he would be willing to
support acceptance of the grant. He would hope that money can
be derived from fines to help pay the cost of this program.
Secondly, this would allow the City some flexibility in absorbing
personnel from HORIZONS or STEP if necessary. The City met with
a defeat for Proposition A during the last election and this may
necessitate trimming of personnel in June. While this program may
force the City into a worse situation in two years; it does help us
out at this time and most of next year.
Cm Staley added that he believes the City will have to go back
to the voters, educate the voters as to the problems the City is
facing in manning these departments, and ask that they pass a tax
measure on another ballot. Allowing this program would be a
demonstration of good faith on the part of the Council in saying
that we want to keep the police personnel and perhaps expand the
services from this department and that voter support is needed to
pass an override to continue these services.
CM STALEY MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE
GRANT. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Cm Miller stated that in this instance his vote would represent
a lame duck vote and before voting he would like to know how the
majority of the Council intends to vote. He asked Cw Tirsell, who
had not expressed an opinion, to co~e~t. . ~. 'i&.~,
~'-t- ~c-l.l:cyl-LL'-
Cw Tirsell stated that she regretsAto ~in financing our fire and
public safety needs with federal and state grants. This is a trip
the City is starting on that is dangerous, but all of the cities are
in this position. The state and federal governments have a lot of
money and programs and all they request is matching funds. Per-
centage wise, with res~ect. to the City's budget, the matching amount
is a lot of money. ~fll>OPle do not realize the services they get
from the small amou of tax money that goes to the Police and
Fi:e Departmen~s. MOST. peoP.le would spend this amount of money,
gOJ.ng to a rnOV1e. ~~[,~
()l~
C~1-3l-425
March 8, 1976
(Rpt re State Hgwy
Safety Grant for P.D.)
Cw Tirsell added that she is worried about financing one of the
major and pressing needs in this manner but she will support
the motion.
Mayor Futch stated that it is his understanding that additional
personnel would have to be hired because this would have to be
done prior to phasing out of HORIZONS or STEP, in the event they
are actually phased out.
Mr. Parness commented that this is correct.
em Miller stated that it is clear that the majority of the Council
would vote in favor of the motion so for this reason he will also
vote to support it.
Paul Tull stated that he would question the need for additional
traffic personnel because he feels the present number is sufficient
to handle specific needs and he would oppose the City's receiving
a grant for this purpose.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 55-76
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE TRAFFIC ENFOR-
CmmNT PROGRAM FOR THE CITY OF LIVERMORE.
RECESS
Mayor Futch called for a hrief recess after which the Council meet-
ing resumed with all members of the Council present.
COMMUNICATION RE
SOLID WASTE
The Council received a copy of a letter sent to Jack Maltester,
Mayor of San Leandro, concerning solid waste, which was written
by Fred F. Cooper.
The letter was noted for filing.
Cw Tirsell volunteered to serve as the City representative at
the Solid Waste Committee meetings until someone is selected
from the new Council.
COMMUNICATION FROM COUNTY
PLANNING DEPT. RE POPULATION
A summary of the meeting between the cities of Livermore, Pleasan-
ton and the Alameda County Planning Department concerning potential
informal population and Issues Committee for the Livermore-Amador
Valley was submitted to the Council.
Cm Turner stated that he would suggest that th~se meetings be
scheduled on a quarterly basis rather than every two years.
Mr. Musso explained that the meetings have been geared to the
pending amendment of the Livermore-Amador Valley Specific Plan
CW TIRSELL MOVED TO SUPPORT THE ITEM, SECONDED BY CM TURNER WHICH
PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM-3l-426
March 8, 1976
ADOPTION OF
GENERAL PLAN
ON MOTION OF CVJ TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CH TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, A RESOLUTION WAS PASSED WHICH WAS THE ADOPTION OF THE
LIVERMORE GENERAL PLAN.
RESOLUTION NO. 54-76
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE LIVE~10RE
CO~1UNITY GENER~L PLAN 1976-2000.
Cw Tirsell commented that the resolution reflects a two year study
but it was actually a three year study with the first year a citizen
study. This should be reflected in the resolution to accurately
reflect the involvement of the community and this change was made
in the resolution.
Prior to the vote Cm Miller read a prepared statement to the Council
as follm'ls:
I've seriously considered whether I should vote against this
General Plan amendment because of its growth rate policy
and which I believe will be detrimental to public health.
I've decided to vote aye because the overall nature of the
Plan is deserving of an aye vote, but I must ask that the
record reflect my opposition to the majority's growth poli-
cies.
I feel, in my bones, that the growth game is wrong because
the resulting smog is a health hazard. You lose doctors
and we force out people with respiratory diseases. You
will be encouraging steps which not only adversely affect
our own health but that of new people moving in.
He stated that he would like to offer, once again, for future
consideration, what he believes to be the right thing to do.
The growth should not exceed .4% per year until the national
ambient air quality standards are met while at the same time
doing everying to mitigate the present problems as fast as
possible. After that, the 1-2% is reasonable. Assume that
the 10-15% turnover covers the youth who wish to stay and
the transfer of employees. Should these percentages change
in 5-10 years, the matter could be reconsidered. He added
that his intuition is based on experience with all regional,
state, and federal agencies and tells him to warn the City
that the commitment to what appears to be modest growth will,
in fact, open up this Valley to Geldermann and others who
do not care as much as we do about air pollution.
Acceptance of a large population and a pipeline to match is
sure to be taken over by Geldermann. Livermore almost had
the chance to set an example of proper action to protect the
health, welfare, and safety consistent with state and federal
environmental laws and with regional plans and energy conservation,
in his opinion.
Instead, the City has not even gone as far as Napa, even though
our environmental situation is worse. In our final policies
air pollution is downgraded as a criterion and is only one
consideration among many others which conflict with it.
CM-31-427
March 8, 1976
(Adoption of
General Plan)
All of us necessarily have different priorities and different
judgment and all of you have tried to use your best judgment
from the best of motives. What drives me to despair is that
my vision of 1966 is that this Valley could become the "San
Fernando of the north" is reinforced by our actions in 1976
that it will become a San Fernando.
I've been trying to make the case that it would be better
and more conservative and not risk the public health which
will consistently give us worse air quality than other areas
in the Bay region. Unfortunately, I've been unable to get you
to see what I see and to hear the warning bells that ring so
insistently in my ears.
I'm very discouraged and depressed by my failure and perhaps
my intuitions, which have been largely correct over the last
15 years, are faulty this time. I sincerely hope so and I
hope that tonight's decision on growth policy will not be an
irreversible step to be regretted in the future.
Mayor Futch commented that the facts were weighed by each individual
Councilmember and the figure chosen was a compromise with the belief
that it does have the best interest of the community in mind.
Air pollution is a concern to the majority of this Council and the
majority of the Council believe that this is reflected in the Gen-
eral Plan.
ANNOUNCEMENT BY MAYOR
RE ZONE 7 ELECTION
Mayor Futch announced at this time that it is his intention to run
for a seat on the Zone 7 Board.
Development in areas adjacent to existing communities should be
municipal. It is too expensive for the taxpayer of the Valley to
provide duplicative sewage treatment facilities to these areas.
If elected he would support the General Plan of pleasanton and the
City of Livermore.
RE. MUNICIPAL CODE
AMEND. RE BUSINESS
LICENSES
Mayor Futch invited members of the audience to speak to the Council
concerning the proposed business license tax amendment, if they
would be interested in doing so.
Earl Mason, Chamber of Commerce Director, stated that at the last
Directors meeting the final draft of the ordinance was reviewed.
They would ask for a 30 day postponement of the second reading
and adoption to allow their group more time to review the proposed
changes.
Milt Codiroli, 586 Escondido Circle, stated that he helped work on
the ordinance currently in effect and at that time he believed
the City provided an ordinance that was fair to everyone, which
was recommended by their committee. That ordinance was presented
to 160 merchants who approved it. The new proposed ordinance has
not been made familiar to the merchants and they would like to
have the opportunity to make suggestions to the City concerning a
method for increase. He is sure nobody will object to an increase
but they would like to be able to make suggestions.
CM-3l-428
March 8, 1976
(re Business License Tax)
Cw Tirsell stated that she understands the dissension is over the
straight line tax and the graduated tax used in the old ordinance.
She explained that the straight line tax is based on a different
premise - the old ordinance allowed a lower tax for the large gross,
low overhead business. However, perhaps the facts substantiate a
lower rate for the large gross, overhead business. She asked if
Mr. Codiroli and the Chamber would be capable of developing a criteria
to substantiate that kind of statement.
Mr. Codiroli replied that this is what they did last time. He added
that the City is going to spend $30,000 to hire someone that will
encourage business in Livermore and this tax is the type that goes
very heavily against the large department store which Livermore needs.
We need Longs and Safeway, for example, and this type of tax makes it
even harder for them to do business. He stated that he is not opposed
to an increase but he would like the merchants to propose the method
by which the increase should be implemented.
Claude Burdick, 4678 Almond Circle, stated that he would like to
oppose the business license tax for physicians who come to VMH
from outside Livermore. Most of those people who go to VMH and
are sent by outside physicians reside in Pleasanton, and their
physicians pay a tax on their total gross revenue to the City of
Pleasanton. He added that he believes there would be a problem
of enforcement of this tax because some physicians have indicated
they simply will not pay. Others have said they will send their
patients to a Fremont hospital.
Ozzie Davis, merchant, stated that he is a major contributor to
the business license tax in Livermore and that he too is a member
of the Chamber of Commerce but knew nothing about the new tax
schedule. He has contacted other major contributors who have
indicated they knew nothing about the increase, and they would
like a delay to study the issues.
Paul Tull stated that he would agree with the Chamber of Commerce
and ask for the 30 day delay in adoption of the business license
tax ordinance.
Cm Turner stated that this ordinance is going to affect every
merchant in the City of Livermore and he believes they should
have the opportunity to review it.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE ORDINANCE ADOPTION BE DELAYED FOR A PERIOD
OF 30 DAYS. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL.
Cw Tirsell stated that she believes she will not be able to
support anything other than a straight line tax; however, there
may be justification for some category which has not been pursued,
for a differentiation in rates. The ordinance was carefully written
with a great deal of study and Chamber input, and the benefit to the
small merchant in this town is very great. She agrees that the mer-
chants should have the opportunity to review it and think about the
benefits of the straight line tax and she will support the motion.
Cm Miller stated that notices have been around indicating that
changes were being made to the ordinance and a monthly report
was furnished to the Chamber of Commerce. He feels everyone
had the opportunity for input and there is no reason to delay
adoption of the ordinance.
CM-3l-429
March 8, 1976
(re Business License Tax)
Cm Staley stated that in response to what Dr. Burdick has said,
he believes that the ordinance has not been changed in terms
of the application of the tax but rather the interpretation
has been changed and who it applies to. The interpretation is
that anyone doing business in the City of Livermore, regularly,
should pay a business license tax. He would support this posi-
tion and he feels it is justified for attorneys as well as phy-
sicians or any other professional doing business in Livermore
with an office out of town. He would also support the straight
line method.
Cm Staley stated that most new ordinances in other cities are
going to the straight line method and testimony from a repre-
sentative from the City of Stockton indicates that there is
no discouragement of large businesses and basically no impact
on business because of this method.
The Committee spent a great deal of time concerning incentive for
locating business and industry in Livermore and as people may have
noticed the ordinance contains 100% forgiveness of the first year's
business license tax for certain types of industry with a 75% for-
giveness for certain types of commercial development. On the whole,
he views the ordinance as very fair.
He believes the Chamber has had adequate opportunity to review
the ordinance but on the other hand there are people of the bus-
iness community who are not members of the Chamber and may not
feel they were adequately represented by the Chamber. He feels
there would be no damage to the City in allowing a 30 day delay.
Mayor Futch stated that he expressed concern for the new tax
for businesses such as Safeway in which grocery prices will be
passed on to the customers and might have an impact on people
with fixed incomes. However, he does appreciate the work that
has gone into the ordinance which Cm Staley and Miller have
helped to prepare. A request for a 30 day delay is not the same
as aSking that it be deleted and he is sure the next Council will
adopt the ordinance.
The City Attorney stated that a 30 day delay would be permitted.
The only requirement, legally, is that the ordinance not be
adopted for at least 5 days after it is introduced. A reasonable
delay would be satisfactory.
MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Crn Miller dissenting) .
REPORT RE FEDERAL
AID URBAN SYSTEM
The City Manager preprared a memorandum concerning the City's
involvement in the Federal Aid Urban System which the Council
is asked to approve by resolution, with specific projects to
be approved at a later date. The projects are all within our
Capital Improvement Program and have been reviewed heretofore
by the Council and the program will be introduced this Wednesday,
March 10, 1976, at the Mayors Conference meeting.
em Miller stated that the East Avenue project should be higher
on the priority list than #9.
CM-3l-430
March 8, 1976
(re Business License Tax)
Mr. Parness explained that this would be for the easterly portion
of East Avenue. At this time the City is involved in a project
with the County for improvement of East Avenue with the use of gas
tax money from both jurisdictions.
Mayor Futch wondered what the relationship is between the project
with the County and the project through the Federal Aid Urban Program.
Mr. Lee explained that this priority list is for a three year funding
period and the City placed items on the list that could be done in
that time period. The East Avenue project will require acquisition
of property and for this reason it received a lower priority.
Cm Staley noted that the Concannon Boulevard project is not listed
as #5 on the priority list and asked the reason for the change.
Mr. Lee explained that most of Concannon Boulevard is located in
the County and it is estimated that the County will not undertake
this project within the three year time period.
Cm Staley stated that he would suggest changing some of the pri-
orities around to get items done that the Council feels are important.
Mr. Lee explained that if Concannon Boulevard were moved up to the
first priority, it doesn't mean that the project could be done in
the three year time period. This is in the County and the project
will require County cooperation. To move priorities means that
a job will be on the priority list but will not be done.
Cm Staley stated that the gas tax funds are being set aside for the
East Avenue project and he would like to know what happens to the
funds during the interim, or until the project is started.
Mr. Parness commented that the funds accrue and they will still go
towards the project when it does begin.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE PROJECT LIST WAS ADOPTED.
PROPOSED LEGISLATION
RE COUNTY REFERRALS
A report was received from the City Attorney's office which indicated
that Senator Nejedly has Lecently proposed legislation that would
subject county zoning decisions to a referendum brought to the
registered voters of an area to be affected by a zoning ordinance.
This type of legislation is being introduced in response to the con-
cern of various cities about lack of control over zoning decisions
in County territory.
Cm Miller stated that the report suggested a change which essentially
says that you canreferend within the district.affected but only 10%
of the voters of the district would be required rather than 10% of
the whole County.
CM MILLER MOVED TO SEND A COPY OF THE LETTER, WITH A DRAFT OF ALL
OF THIS TO SENATOR NEDJEDLY, AS WELL AS THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS:
Second paragraph, second sentence: Most of the changes
we might suggest have been incorporated in the draft
prepared by Dan Curtin, City Attorney of Walnut Creek.
We have also made some others for clarity.
We strongly recommend your consideration of the attached
draft containing our combined suggestions.
CM-3l-43l
"
'.
March 8, 1976
(re Proposed Legislation)
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL.
CM MILLER INCLUDED IN THE MOTION THAT LETTERS BE SENT TO DAN
CURTIN AND AL SHIP AS WELL AS MAYOR COVAR. MOTION PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE
OCCUPANCY PERMITS
Along with the report from Mr. Street relative to certificate
of occupancy, Cm Miller drafted proposals for Council considera-
tion while reviewing the City's occupancy permit policy.
Cm Miller stated that if there are no objections to the sug-
gestions he has made, he would MOVE TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO
DRAW UP AN APPROPRIATE ORDINANCE AND CODE CHANGES TO REFLECT
THE POINTS MADE IN HIS LETTER CONCERNING OCCUPANCY PERMITS.
MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
Cm Turner stated that he would like Group "J" to be exempt, and
the Council concurred.
CM MILLER MOVED TO AMEND HIS MOTION TO INCLUDE ALL CATEGORIES,
WITH THE EXCEPTION OF "J". MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
Mr. Parness stated that he would like to suggest one variance to
the conditions suggested by Cm Miller, and that is that there
are instances in which there is a request for occupancy of a
building in advance of some rather minor details to be completed
on the construction. Heretofore, the staff has assumed administra-
tive discretion in allowing occupancy and this is not the Council's
intention or wish. Two which have come up recently are the Longs
Drug store and the hardware store near the freeway.
Mr. Parness stated that under this new ordinance advance occupancy
would not be allowed and he would like this to be an item that
the Council can determine at the time of the request. It would
not be something the staff would decide.
Cm Miller stated that in his opinion if everybody is aware of
the rules and they want occupancy, they will see that everything
is done. Once people realize they can't do anything until everything
is finished they will take more care to see that it is done.
Cm Turner felt that Mr. Parness has a very valid point and noted
that people usually work 24-hours a day trying to get everything
done on schedule.
Discussion followed concerning the pros and cons of the philosophy
that everything should be done prior to obtaining occupancy.
It was noted that it has been a long time since there has been a
Council that has been lenient where appeals are concerned.
CM MILLER AMENDED HIS MOTION TO INCLUDE THAT THERE BE A PROVISION
FOR APPEALS TO THE COUNCIL. AMENDED MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Paul Tull commented that there is no law in this Country that can't
be appealed. Also, if an appeal is granted there could be a monitary
fine for non-completion within the specified time.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM-3l-432
March S, 1976
RES. RE INTENT TO PAR-
TICIPATE IN BAY AREA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
A report was received from ABAG concerning the Bay Area Environmental
Management Program, which was continued from the meeting of March 1st.
Mr. Parness stated that the project is a monumental undertaking and
the City's participation is being requested. He has attended two
meetings concerning the formative stages and there are seven differ-
ent studies about to be undertaken under the auspices of the 20S
Study grant. In the 9 Bay Area counties there is a $4.3 million
allocation being given by EPA.
Mayor Futch noted that Jack Maltester's appointment as Mayor is
coming to an end and he has been serving on the Air Quality Maintenance
Task Force. He wondered if there has been a suggested replacement.
Mr. Parness stated that he is sure there will be one from the
nominating committee but he doesn't know who it might be.
Cm Miller stated that Mr. Maltester, as Mayor of San Leandro, serves
on about 6 other boards. San Leandro takes appointments which really
should go to other jurisdictions and it is time that he select one
board on which to serve with other jurisdictions taking the other
seats.
Cm Miller stated that he believes this would be a reasonable position
for the City to take at the Mayors Conference.
Cm Miller added that it would make sense for the City to agree to
participate, but only if we have representation.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO PARTICIPATE,
SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL WITH A 4-1 VOTE (Cm Miller dissenting).
RESOLUTION NO. 56-76
RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO PARTICIPATE IN SAN FRANCISCO
BAY AREA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.
REPORT FROM P.C. RE
CUP APP. FOR RECREATIONAL
FACILITY IN ID DISTRICT
(Robert M. Young, Sr.)
A report from the P.C. was submitted to the Council concerning denial
of a CUP application by Robert M. Young, Sr., for development of a
recreational facility (miniature golf course) in an ID Zoning District.
Denial was based on the findings that 1) site is not adequate in size;
2) the intended use would have an adverse affect on abutting property;
3) it is not possible to impose conditions to protect the health,
safety and general welfare or for development to take place in an
orderly and efficient manner in conformity with the General Plan.
CM STALEY MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE PLANNING COMMIS-
SION FOR DENIAL OF THE CUP APPLICATION, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FIND-
INGS OF THE P.C. AND THE COUNTY OBJECTIONS. MOTION SECONDED BY CW
TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
A RESOLUTION WILL APPEAR ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR NEXT WEEK.
REPORT RE MULTI-SERVICE
CENTER DRAFT EIR
The Council received a report on the multi-service center draft EIR.
ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE COUNCIL ADOPTED THE EIR. THE RESOLUTION WILL APPEAR ON THE
CONSENT CALENDAR NEXT WEEK.
CM-3l-433
March 8, 1976
P.C. REPORT (County
Referral) RE REZONING OF
DISTRICTS TO REFLECT
AGRICULTURAL PRESERVES
The P.C, submitted a report concerning their discussion of a
County referral to initiate rezoning from existing zoning to
A Zoning for properties having an agricultural preserve status.
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE P.C. RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE REZONING WAS ADOPTED.
REPORT RE AIRPORT GROUND
RENTAL RATE ADJUSTMENT
The Director of Public Works reported that the airport ground
lease with the fixed base operator specifies that the lease rate
be periodically adjusted. The adjustment methods were explained
in a written report to the Council.
It is recommended that the Council adopt a motion instructing
the staff to prepare a resolution adjusting the ground rental
rate from the current $0.025 to $0.039, effective April 1, 1976.
Cm Miller stated that the market value of the property at the
airport has increased and it would seem advantageous to the
City to renegotiate as to the rate.
Mr. Parness stated that he believes the City does not have grounds
for renegotiation and this is the reason the escalation was pro-
vided in the agreement.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE STAFF WAS INSTRUCTED TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION ADJUSTING
THE GROUND RENTAL RATE FOR AIRPORT LESSEES.
THE RESOLUTION WILL APPEAR ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR NEXT WEEK.
REPORT RE MULTI-SERVICE
CENTER SITE LOCATION
The City Manager reported that architectural design is about
to be undertaken for the new multi-service center and it is
necessary that a decision be made regarding the site for this
building.
The Social Concerns Committee has expressed its view on the sub-
ject, as has the Planning Commission. A decision may be guided
by the master plan for our Community Civic Center.
It is recommended that the Council approve formation of an ad
hoc building site selection committee composed of representa-
tives from the following:
Councilmember (Chairperson)
Social Concerns Committee (2)
Planning Commission (l)
Public Works Director
Planning Director
LARPD
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE AD HOC COMMITTEE SUGGESTED BY THE STAFF WAS APPROVED,
INCLUDING A MEMBER FROM LARPD.
Prior to the vote Cm Turner had commented that Mike McCracken
from LARPD had contacted him asking that they be represented.
CM-3l-434
March 8, 1976
(re Site for
Multi-Service Center)
Cm Turner also noted that Lillian Snorf from the Senior Citizens
group had requested that they have a representative and Mr. Parness
explained that this is only for the purpose of selecting a site.
Cm Turner then suggested that perhaps it would be worthwhile, in
the interest of saving time, to select the site recommended by
Mrs. Hartwig of the Social Concerns Committee. He noted that he
is happy with her recommendation and would be willing to accept it.
Cw Tirsell explained that the beginning stages of the architectural
design would deal with what the needs are and what kind of a building
would serve these needs. Structural placement would not be considered
initially, at all.
It was at the request of Cm Turner that two representatives are to
serve from the Social Concerns Committee because he felt the City
representatives outweighed the number of local citizens.
Paul Tull wondered why the center has been suggested for location
at the Civic Center site area and Mr. Musso explained that about
six months ago there were meetings concerning where the center
should be located.
REPORT RE UNDERPASS
GUARD RAILS
The City Manager reported that the pedestrian walkways under both
underpasses are not protected by any type of hand rail. This could
be hazardous, and in the interest of public safety it is recommended
that hand rails be installed. Costs estimates have been prepared
with $6,414 for 1,870 lineal feet, and a cost of $7,800 for the full
lineal extension of 2,210 feet.
It is recommended that the Council adopt a motion authorizing instal-
lation of the underpass hand rails for the full lineal extension.
Cm Turner asked where the funds would come from to provide the rail.
Mr. Parness stated that he believes this would qualify for payment
through the gas tax revenue.
Cm Turner wondered if any additional expenditures are anticipated
and Mr. Lee stated that there is a possibility there may be some
lighting problems.
ern Miller stated that he would suggest that the back of the light
faces be painted to direct the light to the area needing light.
This would save the City money.
CM MILLER MOVED TO AUTHORIZE INSTALLATION OF UNDERPASS RAILS,
SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM MILLER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE A REPORT ABOUT THE
ALTERNATIVES FOR TAKING CARE OF POSSIBLE GLARE FROM THE UNDERPASS
LIGHTING. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Report re Leave to
Present Late Claim
The City Attorney reported that the City has been served with an
Application for Leave to File a Late Claim for Jennifer Ann Alarid.
CM-3l-435
March 8, 1976
The City Attorney suggested that the Council docket the appli-
cation with a recommendation to grant leave to file the claim.
Resolutions Approving
Tract Map 3615
The Council adopted the following resolutions approving Tract
Map 3615 and authorizing final acceptance.
RESOLUTION NO. 57-76
RESOLUTION APPROVING MAP OF THE
SUBDIVISION OF TRACT 3615
RESOLUTION NO. 58-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FINAL
ACCEPTANCE OF TRACT 3615.
Res. Establishing
Energy Committee
RESOLUTION NO. 59-76
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING AN ENERGY COMMITTEE
AND ADOPTING CHARGES, DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Cm Miller asked that the resolution provide for not more than 15
members, as this number would allow for the necessary subcommittees.
The Council concurred.
Cw Tirsell asked that it be noted that all interested people should
apply at the City Clerk's office.
Res. of Intention
to Abate Weeds
The Council adopted a resolution of intention to abate weeds.
RESOLUTION NO. 60-76
A RESOLUTION DECLARING THAT THERE EXISTS CON-
DITIONS OF GROWING WEEDS, ACCUMULATED REFUSE,
RUBBISH OR DIRT, ON PRIVATE PROPERTY AND/OR
ADJACENT STREETS, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED
IN THIS RESOLUTION, AND FURTHER DECLARED THE
SAME TO BE A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING
SAID CONDITIONS ABATED.
Res. Rej. Claim
- LaVern Caratti
A resolution was adopted rejecting the claim of LaVern Caratti.
RESOLUTION NO. 61-76
A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM
OF LaVERN CARATTI
CM-31-436
March 8, 1976
Various Minutes
Minutes were received from the following:
Greens Committee - November 5 and January 28
Housing Authority - January 27
Planning Commission - February 10 and 24
Payroll & Claims
There were 110 claims in the amount of $260,250.58, dated 2/27/76,
and approved by the Director of Finance.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED WITH THE AMENDMENT THAT
15 PEOPLE BE ALLOWED TO SERVE ON THE CITY ENERGY COMMITTEE.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Legislative Matters)
Cm Miller stated that two bills were submitted to the Council (SB 502
and AB 2679) which have to do with deleting important portions and
he would ask that the Council write the strongest letter possible
and to oppose these measures as strongly as possible as well as
a letter to Assemblyman Knox asking him, "how come?".
Mayor Futch stated that it is clear the Council would want to
oppose everything suggested by Berryhill but not take a blanket
position on the Knox bill.
Cm Miller stated that the reason for opposing the Knox bill is
because he deletes all the words that are supportive of protecting
the environment. What we should say is that we oppose the Knox bill
and support the present law and wish that it would remain unchanged.
CM STALEY MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL COMMUNICATE DIRECTLY WITH DALY
CITY ON THIS ISSUE, MOTION WAS SECONDED BY eM TIRSELL AND PASSED
BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Cm Miller then commented that there is an attempt in Congress by
homebuilders to "gut" the Clean Air Act and what they are trying
to do is to completely separate and make it an absolute prohibition
of the consideration of air quality, in the allotment of clean
water grants. He believes it would be extremely desirable for
the Council to strongly oppose such amendments to the Clean Air Act
which is in the House of Representatives at this point, but should
be sent to the Senate as well.
He also suggested that copies be sent to the Committee that is
involved in both the House and the Senate and to Congressmen
Stark and Edwards, Senators Tunney and Cranston and a copy to
the EPA in San Francisco.
(Proclamation)
Cw Tirsell asked that Mr. Parness ask the appropriate staff member
to prepare a proclamation for the Planning Director and the Planning
Commission concerning work done by them on the General Plan.
CM-3l-437
March 8, 1976
(League Recommendations)
Mayor Futch stated that he noticed the League has recommended
opposition to SB 1500 and AB 3000 for reorganization proposals
using $30 million to fund new state court cases. He noted that
the League requested urgent opposition and would MOVE THAT THE
COUNCIL EXPRESS OPPOSITION TO SB 1500 AND AB 3000. MOTION WAS
SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Mr. Parness commented that AB 3000 would allow for lifetime
tenure of police officers and this is a concern to him.
(AB 2800)
Mr. Logan explained to the Council the implications of AB 2800
with respect to public utilities to which he has taken a strong
position of opposition.
He stated that the bill will be heard in Ways and Means tomorrow
and that the city attorneys from San Diego, Walnut Creek, and
Los Angeles will attend that meeting to strongly oppose the
bill.
He stated that if this bill passes it will be disastrous for
public utility rates and this is something the Council should be
very concerned about. He asked for council direction - if the
Council would like him to proceed he will contact other Bay
Area city attorneys; otherwise, he will do nothing.
CM MILLER MOVED TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO TAKE ACTION
OPPOSING THE BILL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CITY MANAGER'S
STATUS REPORT
Community Service
Center Building
The City is trying to get confirmation from HUD for the community
service center building as there has been contradictory regula-
tion issued by them. There was every assurance given to the
City that the proposed building would be within the proper
definition and use of the monies. The City ~elieves this is
still the case but confirmation has been requested.
City Insurance
The insurance consultant has filed his report with the City and
is a matter of concern to the staff as to what will be received
or what will not be received this Friday in the way of insurance
bids.
Many sources have alerted the City that there will not be bids
for insurance, and if this is the case the City is in trouble
with respect to purchase of insurance. The consultant has made
a recommendation for partial self insurance by the City if this
becomes necessary.
Budget
Budgets have been submitted and are being calculated and checked
by the Finance Department. Mr. Parness will begin review with
department heads the first of April.
CM-3l-438
March 8. 1976
Doolan Canyon Reservoir
The Doolan Canyon Reservoir is now in service and this is a tremendous
addition to our irrigation program at the golf course. This is a
residual benefit as per agreement with the state but the City feels
this is the primary benefit to the City with 87.5% paid by the state
and federal governments.
Golf Course
The City is planting approximately 600 eucalyptus trees. This new
variety is supposed to be very appropriate for use at a golf course;
they are hearty and fast growing as well.
Fire Fighter position
There was an opening for a fire fighter and out of 200 applicants,
192 were tested.
There were also 120 applications for the personnel officer position.
Fire Station #1
Fire Station *1 will be ready for occupancy on March 17th with
the dedication scheduled for April 2, 1976, at 4:30 p.m.
Building Permits
Mr. Mehran has applied for building permits for 10 commercial
office buildings at Holmes Street and Concannon Boulevard.
Cm Miller wondered if Mr. Mehran has paid the $65,000 he owes
the City and Mr. Parness replied that it is being paid.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Futch adjourned
:::: niq~~;c
the meeting at 11:20 p.m. to a 7:30 meeting,
9, 1976, at 7:30 p.m.
"
,
'--1/7 ~
Mayor
ATTEST
CM-3l-439
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 9, 1976
An adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Livermore was held on Tuesday, March 9, 1976, in the Municipal
Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was
called to order at 7:35 p.m. with Mayor Futch presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Staley, CW Tirsell and Mayor Futch
Absent: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Futch led the Councilmembers as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
CANVASS OF RETURNS
MUNICIPAL ELECTION - MARCH 2, 1976
The City Clerk reported the outcome of the Election held on
March 2, 1976, and certified that it was correct.
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED ACCEPTING THE CANVASS.
RESOLUTION NO. 60-76
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING CANVASS OF VOTES AT THE
GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION OF MARCH 2, 1976
WHEREAS, a general municipal election was held and conducted
in the City of Livermore, on Tuesday, the 2nd day of March, 1976,
as required by law; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 53-76, the City Clerk was ordered
to canvass the results of said election and certify the same to
this Council; and
WHEREAS, it appears that notice of said election was duly
and legally given, that voting precincts were properly established,
that election officers were appointed and election supplies fur-
nished, and that in all respects said election was held and conducted
and the votes cast thereat received and canvassed, and the returns
thereof made and declared in time, form and manner as required by
the general laws of the State of California governing elections in
General Law Cities; and
WHEREAS, THE Council of said City of Livermore met at the
Council Chambers thereof on Tuesday, the 9th day of March, 1976, to
receive the canvass of the returns of said election from the City
Clerk and install the newly elected officers, and having canvassed
said returns, the Council finds that the number of votes cast, the
names of the persons voted for, and other matters required by law
to be as hereinafter stated.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND DECLARED AS
FOLLOWS:
That said regular general municipal election was held and
conducted in the City of Livermore, on Tuesday, the 2nd day of
March, 1976, in time, form and manner as required by law; and
CM-31-440
March 9, 1976
(Canvass of Returns
Municipal Election
March 2, 1976)
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND DECLARED that
there were twenty (20) voting precincts established for the
purpose of holding said election, consisting of a consolidation
of the regular election precincts established for holding the
last general state and County elections as indicated in the
attached listing.
That the whole number of votes cast in said City of Livermore
was 7,938; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND DECLARED that the
names of the persons voted for, the offices for which they were
voted, together with the whole number of votes which they re-
ceived in the entire City of Livermore, are also shown on the
attached, marked Exhibit f1Af1.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND DECLARED, that at
the said general municipal election held in said City on Tuesday,
the 2nd day of March, 1976, the following persons were elected
to the respective offices for the terms stated and until their
successors are duly elected and qualified, as follows:
MARSHALL H. KAMENA was elected Councilman for the full
term of four years;
GLEN DAHLBACKA was elected Councilman for the full term
of four years;
DOROTHY J. HOCK was elected City Clerk for the full term
of four years;
FRED NOYES, JR. was elected City Treasurer for the full
term of four years; and
be it further resolved, determined and declared that at
the said general municipal election held in said City on
Tuesday, the 2nd day of March, 1976, Measure f1Af1 was defeated,
having received the minority of votes cast on said propositj.on,
and Measure f1Bf1 was not adopted, receiving less than a majority
of votes cast on said proposition; the full text of said measures
is shown on the attached, marked Exhibit f1Bf1.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND DECLARED THAT THE
Clerk shall enter on the records of this Council a statement of
the result of the said election showing:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
The whole number of votes cast in the City of Livermore;
The names of the persons voted for;
For what office each person was voted;
The propositions that were voted upon;
T he number of votes given at each precinct to each
person and to each measure; and
The number of votes given in the City to each
person and each measure.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND DECLARED that the
City Clerk shall immediately make and deliver to each of such
persons elected a certificate of election, signed by her and
duly authenticated; she shall also impose the constitutional
oath of office, whereupon they shall be inducted into their
respective offices to which they have been elected.
CM-31-441
MEAS URE "A"
Shall the annual maximum tax rate which the City of
Livermore is empowered to levy upon all property within
the City subject to taxation by the City be increased
by an amount not to exceed $.25 per $100 assessed
valuation to be used exclusively for supplementing the
operation costs of police and fire protection?
MEASURE "B"
Shall Ordinance No. 872 entitled "An Ordinance Amending
Ordinance No. 442, as Amended, Relating to Zoning, By the
Amendment of Section 20.42, Relating to Front Yards, and
the Addition of Section 20.66, Relating to Vehicle and
Trailer Storage, to Section 20.60, Relating to Accessory
Sturctures and Uses, all of Chapter 20.00, Relating to
General Provisions; By the Repeal of Section 21.44 (g),
Relating to Trailer Storage, of Section 21.44, Relating
to Off-Street Parking, of Chapter 21.00, Relating to Spe~
cial Provisions" be adopted?
I
STATEMENT OF ALL VOTES CAST
AT THE
GENERAL MUNICIPAL
ELECTION
HELD
MARCH 2
, 19-1L
IN
CITY OF LIVERMORE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
(When the City Clerk makes the Official Canvass, he must
fill out Certificate on back page.)
1
STATEMENT OF ALL VOTES CAST AT THE
_...~ ..-====:=
U)
t;
z:
c:;
LI.I
D:: t1l
ELECTION A. :>-.
L&. ~ !:l Ql t1l
Ql ~ Ql ~
Q ~ ~ > t.l
PRECINCTS LI.I ~ t.l t1l t1l
~ ::.:: ::.:: :l u ..a
j:Q ~
bO ~ Ql ~
...I !:l ~ '0 !:l
== t1l t1l ~ ~ Q
bO ..s:: t1l Ql
e 4-1 rJl ..s:: :> !:l
~ ~ t.l Ql
0 t1l 'M t1l ~
~1 i ~ I p::j H 0
r=55 ! ..
Garage,2058 Broadmoor A 153 57 13 38 !
Firehouse,1389 Bluebell Dr B 377 65 143 168 42 136
C J
Garage, 5206 Kathy Way 551 33 304 154 56 299
East Avenue School D 514 17 246 151 52 278
Jackson Avenue School E 415 15 204 146 36 209
Garage, 3866 Pestana Way F 400 22 160 170 46 151
Fifth Street School G 411 27 . 156 188 30 156
County Fire House H 306 19 144 150 28 101
Emma C. Smith School I 323 40 . 169 . 83 31 145
Garage, 241 Garnet J 296 23 i 131 75 33 123
.- --~_..--t---_._-
Sonoma Avenue School K 392 20 157 154 42 127
Joe Michell School L 545 15 241 204 55 204
Mendenhall School M 452 25 249 I 115 60 195
Gar age, 1731 Cairo St. H 539 35 310 141 40 247
Residence, lO~J.Aberdeen 0 .... 49~ _ 24 207 115 46 202
....,.... --...-.-.- -~._-- --_._.._..,-~-
Garage, 482 Alameda Drive p 260 31 90 92 32 99
Garage, 426 Brighton Way Q 279 26 126 100 31 117
Marylin Avenue School R 290 39 120 121 31 74
Rincon Avenue School S 433 45 160 187 54 146
Junc:tion A "\[erl\,le Scho()l T 454 36 202 203 29 175
Absentee Voters 143 14 72: 50 6 55
TOTALS 7938 602 ~646 I 2824: 793 3277
.~
. - .~-- _.... -- r-
.-
General Municipal
ELECTION HELD
c::
$-I
aJ
-I-J
-I-J
to
;:;::
c::
to
S
$-I
aJ
::r:
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
,
J
K
L
M
N
o
P
Q
R
S
T
5
11
10
10
4f
3 I
8
1
11
7
8
16
13
8
6
,.
6
11
11
8
9
.-l
aJ
Ul
Ul
.,-l
aJ
~
.
~
-I-J
$-I
aJ
.0
o
p:::
17
23:
27
2~
12
23,
19
20
14,
Lg
2~
40
25,
44
22
32
2~
26
30
28
495
March 2
, 19 76
$-I
aJ
~
o
o
.
r=l
"d
$-I
to
..c
(,)
.,-l
p:::
22
31,
73
27,
27
361
28
19'
I
42
.. _ 49-,-
52
74
48:
721
I
_ __2.2~
33
!
341
42:
56
29..
I
181
,
841!
I
..!<:
(,)
o
::r:
.
....,
>,
..c
-I-J
o
$-I
o I
1~0 I'
208 .
363
335 ;
254
264 i
253
193
215
_ __ 203.
279 ,
322
299 i
346 !
244
.-... --------t.
155 i
165 I
202
288
- - ~.~(j
107
5061
.
$-I
....,
MEASURE MEASURE
"A" "B"
__ 196~
261
314
288i
3281
_.n_~3_~..
151,
163
196;
275,
I
252:
_~_ ~ ___M __+__
Y::I
147 :
277 '
I
259 ;
206j
I
167
155
104
164 I
_ 157.
209,
274 i
220
250
197.
98
124.
93 I
145
L56
N:4 Y:;I No
2171
319i
2591
i
1851
i
162;
193:
110:
154,
159.
142;
236[
2401
I
3441
246!
,
119:
1481
i
lOll
150i
I
lZO~
218
270
243
198..
216
240
191
154
137..
178
261
227
283
204..
158
154
193
274
285_
71
l'
65
90
144
221
223
213
210
187
168
159
128
243
291
194
182
148.
131
127
179
269
262.
,
~
821 52
!
48331
!
3529 4243 379~ 3821
---- .~., '^-
--,--
5
171
--;-"
-I-J
..c
be
.,-l
$-I
~
.
H
"d
$-I
to
..c
(,)
.,-l
p::: 1-
591
97,
103!
136
108
134,
I
125
77:
69 t
93..
146
169
103:
104
_ 1.97.
70,
62
78
130
131
7
I
281
,
21291
t ..
-- ... --,---
10~
-t-
I
CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK
TO RESULT OF THE CANVASS
OF ELECTION RETURNS
State of California, }
C o~tnty of.............Ndi!1!P!.A.............................................. ss.
I) ....................................~~.~.!.~X.J.~....~~.~.~......._.....................................-....................................................._........C ity Clerk
of said City} do hereby certify that} in pursuance of the provisions of
Section 22932.5 of the Elections Code and of the resohttion of the
governing body of said City} heretofore adopted and entered upon
the minutes of said governing body} I did canvass the returns of the
vote cast in said City} at the...........................................................................................................
........................G.~N!';.~..wmJ.gJ.~~..........................................._...................Election held on
....................~.gJJ.......f................} 19..l.9.....} for elective public offices} and/or for
and against each meas~tre submitted to the vote of the voters} and that
the Statement of the Vote Cast} to which this certificate is attached)
shows the whole number of votes cast in said City} and the whole num-
ber of votes cast for each candidate and/or for and against each meas-
ure in said City and in each of the respective precincts therein} and
that the totals of the respective columns and the totals as shown for
each candidate and/or for and against each measure are full} trtte and
correct.
WITNESS my hand and Official Seal this..............9..th.................day 0/
....................~gR.........................} 19...7..2.....
(SEAL)
,- '\.
" / . ..' I '.
C~?~clerk.
By .........................................................._...................._................_..} D ep~tty.
(The above certificate is to be used only when the governing body has ordered the City Clerk to make the official canvass.)
March 9, 1976
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Farewell Message)
In bidding the Council farewell, Cm Miller's comments were as follows:
The building of a city is like the building of a cathedral.
Each decision, no matter how small, is analogous to a brick.
If each decision is not right the future city will not be as
good as it could have been, just as poor bricks lessen the
cathedral's grandeur.
I have tried to not let too many bad bricks get past.
It is amazing how many bricks it takes to build a
cathedral.
I have also discovered that good decisions, decisions
for the public interest, are usually long and hard to
accomplish. Bad decisions are made in seconds.
I have been a part of many decisions in the last ten
years and it would be boring to list what I believe
are the accomplishments during my two years as a
Planning Commissioner and my eight years as a Council-
man.
Of course, these accomplishments could not have occurred
without the votes of other Councilmernbers and without
the support of the majority of our citizens.
Any public official who works for ordinary citizens
has to expect lots of flack from special interest
spokesmen. Despite the flack, despite numerous dis-
appointments on various issues -and despite the increas-
ing effort to keep up with the ever increasing issues
that face the City, it has been rewarding and a pleasure
to work on behalf of Livermore citizens. At the same
time it has been an experience to work with the four
Councils since 1968.
We've had our differences, but in the last couple of
years our arguments have been over the icing on the
cake rather than the cake itself.
Our upcoming Council is one of the best we will have
and I wish you the very best of luck and above all I
wish you good decisions.
I thank the people of Livermore for giving me the
privilege of representing you. There can be no
higher honor. Thank you.
em Staley stated that he would like to say also that it has been a
great pleasure to serve with both Cm Miller and Mayor Futch and
while he is looking forward to working with the new Council, it has
been quite an experience the last eight months.
Cw Tirsell stated that she never tells anyone goodbye and in this
case she believes that she will one day be working again with Cm
Miller and Mayor Futch.
We owe you a debt; not just for your decisions but
for your dedication in this job. Our democratic
process demands so much from those who choose to
CM-3l-443
March 9, 1976
participate and I feel you both have measured up to the
town. Your combined 20 years of experience and your
scholarship is a loss to this Council that we m~st try
to regain, and we will.
Thank you both for your hard work.
I also want to thank Pat Futch and Miriam Miller for their
calm perseverance. They know best what it means to serve in
this office and they have had a difficult role.
I'm not going to say goodbye, so I'll say I'll see you
around.
Mayor Futch stated that he would like to take this opportunity
to thank the staff for their help and dedication during the
past four years. The City is fortunate in having the staff
it does and no city could really operate effectively without the
dedicated staff we have.
There are only two members of the staff that the
Council are responsible for as far as choosing -
one is the City Attorney.
The Council is not always wrong in its decisions and
I think that when we selected Bob Logan that was
certainly one example of when we were right on. We
really appreciate you, Bob.
The second staff person selected by the Council, al-
though this Council cannot take credit for having
chosen the City Manager, we would certainly be happy
if we had been responsible for the choosing of our
present City Manager, Bill Parness.
Bill is well recognized throughout the state as being
an example of an extremely efficient City Manager and
one who is well respected. He has just finished serv.
ing a year as president of the City Managers' Association
of California and we are certainly fortunate in having
someone of Bill's ability. Bill is really responsible
for all of the rest of the staff that we have and I wish
I could take the time to thank each staff member individually.
Dorothy, you are like Abe Lincoln - you are not replaceable.
To the press, with whom it has been a privilege to work,
no council has ever been so well covered, and from every
point of view.
To my fellow Councilmembers, the going has not always been
easy. It has been a hard working Council and each member
has contributed uniquely in his or her own way to form the
record of this Council. It is a record of accomplishment.
Livermore is known as a City that leads the way and stands
up with conviction. It has been a privilege to serve with
each one of you - Don, Dale, John, and Helen.
I see many familiar faces in the audience, and some from
many years back. It has also been a privilege to serve
as one of your elected representatives. Finally, I would
like to welcome the new Councilmembers.
CM-3l-444
March 9, 1976
"
Several weeks ago I commented that I hoped the citizens of
Livermore would look beyond the immediate campaign issues
when they selected their future representatives to the
Council and select candidates of integrity and ability.
I'm convinced that they did exactly that.
As I leave with a happy feeling of confidence in the new
Council, I would like to wish all of you the best of luck.
ADJOURNMENT
ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED SINE DIE.
APPROVE
~1'~~ -7'f1:71~t
Mayor
ATTEST
" i /r\ /' I'
~"i'
, "~' /7/ - .
-' . ., ." \ ~.~{!/{I
C;L ty-,,~ler
,~ erntOre, 'CCr1:'ifornia
----~ -"
CM-3l-445
Regular Meeting of March l5, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
March 15, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:05 p.m.
with Mayor Tirsell presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Dahlbacka, Kamena, Turner, Staley and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirsell led the Councilmembers as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
SPECIAL ITEM -
PROCLAMATION (DeMolay)
Mayor Tirsell announced that the Order of DeMolay members are visiting
the Council meeting this evening. The Order of DeMolay is a character
building organization of young men from 13 to 21 years of age who are
seeking to prepare themselves to become better citizens and leaders
for tomorrow.
This is the 57th anniversary of the Order of DeMolay and Mayor Tirsell
proclaimed March 14th through March 21, 1976, National DeMolay Week.
MINUTES 3/1/76 & 3/2/76
P. 407, 4th paragraph from the bottom, last line, after $160, strike
remainder of that line.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE
(Cm Dahlbacka and Kamena abstaining) THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF
MARCH 1, 1976, WERE APPROVED AS AMENDED, AND THE MEETING OF MARCH 2,
1976, WAS APPROVED AS SUBMITTED.
SPECIAL ITEM - REGARDING
MANPOWER TRAINING PROGRAM
Mayor Tirsell stated that a representative from the Manpower Training
Center from Union City has requested the presence of the Council for
a brief explanation of this program.
Mr. Alberto Cuadra thanked the Council for allowing him the opportunity
to speak, explaining that they serve the entire County of Alameda,
with the exception of Oakland and Berkeley. Funding is by the
Comprehensive Employment and Training Act for the purpose of training
people in different areas.
Many attempts have been made to train people in this area and they
will continue this effort. He added that he will leave written
information for the Councilmembers in pamphlet form. They have
made T.V. appearances and announcements concerning services and
facilities are also made on the radio.
They are supposed to train 20-26 people from the Valley and they
have achieved 70% of this number. Hopefully, by June 30th that
number will have been exceeded.
CM-32-l
March 15, 1976
(Manpower Training>
In answer to questions from the Council Mr. Cuadra explained
that the training is for bilingual clerical and sheet metal skills
which is funded by the Title I funds. They would hope to serve
30 people from the Valley this year and SO% of the people trained
are working.
He stated that the training program for the bilingual clerical is
40 hours a week and for this the people receive $69/week. The
sheet metal trainee receives $92/week and at this time there is
no transportation allowance. Hopefully, a transportation allowance
will be made next year.
People can contact Manpower Training by calling 471-1067.
COMMUNICATION FROM PG&E
RE CONVERSION OF LINES
TO UNDERGROUND LINES
A letter was received from PG&E concerning conversion of overhead
electric lines to underground lines.
Mayor Tirsell wondered if the City's cost for undergrounding is
budgeted as part of Capital Improvements and Mr. Parness indicated
that it is.
The letter was noted for filing.
COMMUNICATION FROM
LIBRARIAN RE SERVICE AWARD
A letter of appreciation was received from Donald Nolte, City
Librarian, for the twenty year awards presented to him at the
last Council meeting.
Letter was noted for filing.
LAFCO RESOLUTION RE
SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
A LAFCO resolution was submitted to the Council, concerning the
new sphere of influence for the City of Livermore now established.
Item noted for filing.
COMMUNICATION RE
REVENUE SHARING
A letter was received from Shirley Sisk, Chairperson for the
Human Relations Commission of the Human Resources Agency, urging
support of revenue sharing.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the City has sent letters of support
to our legislators.
Mr. Parness felt it would be appropriate for letters to be sent
at this time reaffirming support.
CM-32-2
March 15, 1976
(re Revenue Sharing)
CM STALEY MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL REAFFIRM ITS POSITION RELATIVE
TO REVENUE SHARING, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
Cm Staley commented that he would like to add that on the news
Chairman Brooks stated to Congress, this afternoon, that he would
not support the general revenue sharing measure, but he would favor
limited measures for a lesser period of time than President Ford
is asking.
em Staley stated that he would interpret what Brooks would favor
as less money for a two year period.
COMMUNICATION RE
RESIGNATION FROM P.C.
A letter of resignation from the Planning Commission was recieved
from Glen Dahlbacka and was noted for filing.
Mayor Tirsell thanked Cm Dahlbacka for his work on the Planning
Commission and the General Plan. The Planning Commission spent
many hours studying and making recommendations on the General Plan.
REPORT RE STRIPING
AT AIRPORT
Mr. Lee reported that there is a need to paint the striping on
the runway at the airport and it is recommended that the painting
be upgraded on both the runway and the taxiway with precision
instrument painting.
The Lab has agreed to share 50% of the cost for this work.
The Airport Advisory Committee has studied this proposal and they
believe that in the near future federal government may wish to
install instrument landing equipment at the airport and the painting
would be done in conjunction with this. They therefore believe that
at this time the expenditure would be excessive and have recommended
that the basic plan providing for a center line stripe on the runway
and repainting of existing numbers at the runway, as well as the taxi-
way (Plan D) .
Cm Dahlbacka wondered how long the paint lasts and Mr. Lee explained
that it would last for five years and possibly seven.
Mr. Lee couldn't give an estimate as to when the ILS might be
installed (instrument landing equipment) .
Cm Dahlbacka wondered if this would include cross hatches for
practice landings because people try to hit the numbers at times
and this is really dangerous. They should be trying to go down
the airport further.
Mr. Lee stated that this does not include touch-down stripes but
this could be included if the Council wishes.
em Turner wondered if anyone in the City could do this work and
Mr. Lee commented that nobody from the City could do it because
it is a very specialized type of work. Bids have been received
for the work and the low bidder was Asphalt Striping of Martinez
in.the amount of $2,465.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AWARDING THE BID WITH AN
EXPENDITURE FROM THE AIRPORT BUDGET OF $2,465, AND THE AMENDMENT
CM-32-3
March 15, 1976
(re Airport Striping)
TO ADD THE SMALL AMOUNT OF FUNDS NECESSARY TO PAINT THE TWO
TOUCHBOWN STRIPES ON THE AIRPORT RUNWAY. MOTION SECONDED BY
CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 63-76
A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID (Asphalt
Striping of Martinez)
REPORT RE ZONE 7
RATE ADJUSTMENTS
The City Attorney commented that the report and discussion con-
cerning Zone 7 rate adjustments was inadvertently placed on the
agenda. The item should be discussed in executive session.
MAYOR TIRSELL STATED THAT THE COUNCIL WILT. MEET IN EXECUTIVE
SESSION AFTER THE MEETING TO DISCUSS LITIGATION MATTERS.
REPORT FROM LIVERMORE
BICENTENNIAL ORGANIZATION
A letter was received from the Livermore Bicentennial Organization
(LBO) suggesting that the City commemorate the City's centennial
birthday in two ways: l) replacement of the City Hall flag pole;
and 2) participation in the deAnza celebration.
em Turner suggested that the City have a Centennial celebration
at the time of the fireworks display on the 4th of July, which
would be the same time as the nation's Bicentennial celebration.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE CITY CELEBRATE ITS CENTENNIAL ON JULY 4th,
IN ADDITION TO PARTICIPATING IN THE deANZ& CELEBRATION TO BE HELD
ON APRIL 4, 1976, AT THE BARN. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
MAYOR TIRSELL ASKED THAT AN APPROPRIATE PROCLAMATION BE PREPARED.
Gib Marguth, 1152 Farmington Way, representing the LBO, stated
that they would appreciate the presence of the Council at the
April 4th celebration and that the ceremonies will take place
from 5:00-5:30 p.m. on that date.
em Kamena asked what is being required of the City in the way
of participation.
Mr. Marguth explained that the Council would present the proclama-
tion, and dedicating the plaques that will be located at the
library.
MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
APPEAL RE USE PERMIT
- GUNSMITH AT 677 MORAGA
Mr. Musso reported that Mr. John George, 677 Moraga Drive, applied
for a use permit to allow a home occupation as a gunsmith. It was
determined that the applicantion was in compliance with the P.C.
resolution regarding home occupations and the permit was granted.
Residents of the area have appealed the matter to the Council,
requesting denial of the permit.
CM-32-4
March 15, 1976
(re CUP App. - Gunsmith)
The staff has investigated the applicant's premises and found that
no violations of the permit have occurred but issuance of the permit
has been delayed pending the outcome of the appeal.
Lorene Olson, 680 Mojave, stated that she is one of the original
owners of the homes in that area. She lives in a residential area
and she wants it to remain residential in nature.
Mr. Musso explained that there are four ways in which a permit can
be granted and in this case the staff approved it and sent letters
to residents of the area noting that it could be appealed.
Mr. Musso added that at one time a theft was involved where there
was a gunsmith home occupation, and at that time the P.C. was asked
to consider whether or not this type of use should be allowed as a
home occupation. The Planning Commission felt this would be no dif-
ferent than somebody doing similar types of craft work.
Mayor Tirsell commented that this type of occupation is allowed
as long as there is not storing of material on the premises and
as long as people are not coming and going from that address.
em Staley stated that he would believe that people are protesting
the use because this is creating a problem in the neighborhood with
respect to being a business. It would seem relevant to ask what
type of business is being done, and that if there is no basis for
denying the permit there would be no reason for the appeal.
Mayor Tirsell added that the occupation is allowed in the ordinance
but it can be denied on the basis that it has been appealed by
residents.
Mr. Musso then explained the process for denying the permit. He
indicated that it could not be done on the basis of complaints.
There would have to be evidence that there is traffic or that the
applicant couldn't operate without violating the ordinance.
Cm Dahlbacka asked if the Mayor is asking Mr. Musso if there are
certain findings that must be made and Mayor Tirsell commented
that she is asking if findings must be made.
Cm Dahlbacka wondered if there is a written set of findings in
the ordinance and Mr. Musso commented that there are certain
criteria that must be met.
Cm Turner stated that he strongly opposes home occupations for the
reason cited by Mrs. Olson, but in this case there is no overriding
factor to deny the application. This is an authorized use under
our present ordinance and he will move to deny the appeal but will
ask that the item come to the Council for review of the existing
home occupation guidelines.
CM TURNER MOVED TO DENY THE APPEAL BY THE RESIDENTS TO DENY THE
APPLICATION. MOTION SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
Mayor Tirsell pointed out that a home occupation permit is for
a period of one year only, and during this time if there is traffic,
advertising, or disruption of the neighborhood, complaints can be
filed and would be used when the use is reviewed at the expiration
of the permit.
MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Cm Staley dissenting> .
A RESOLUTION WILL APPEAR ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR, 3/22/76.
CM-32-5
March 15, 1976
REPORT FROM RODEO
ASSN. RE FINANCING
OF RODEO PARADE
The Rodeo Association reported that they would be willing to
sponsor the annual Rodeo Parade but this would amount to a cost
of $3,000, $1,500 of which the City is asked to donate.
The intent is to have a parade with a Bicentennial celebration
theme.
Mayor Tirsell asked that this item be postponed for one week but
invited comments from anyone in the audience who might wish to
speak on this item.
John Foscalina, 2935 Reed Avenue, stated that the Jaycees have
a communication they would like to read to the Council.
Bill Archer, 1216 Locust Street, stated that the Jaycees have
helped the Rodeo Association sponsor the parade in the past six
years and they have shared the costs as well. They would like to
see the Rodeo Parade continue and to make this a different type of
Rodeo Parade to the extent that it brings in the Bicentennial theme,
and they are willing to donate time and money to see that it continues.
Dick Christmas, 394 Pearl Drive, stated that he opposes the
City expenditure of any money whatsoever for this purpose.
He stated that the only people to benefit are those from the
Rodeo Association, the liquor stores and bars.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED FOR ONE WEEK.
REPORT RE CITY COMMIS-
SIONS AND CO~1MITTEES
A report has been prepared and distributed to the Council listing
all of the City Commissions, and Committees with a brief statement
as to the charges, membership and appointment dates. ~~t~
Cm Staley wondered if there are any committees which have^met at
all during the past year and it was noted that all committees met.
THE COUNCIL WILL POSTPONE DISCUSSION OF CITY COMMITTEES UNTIL
NEXT WEEK.
The Council then moved to various council Committee memberships
and the Mayor explained that some of the committees require a
yearly meeting, only, and require a vote from the City.
Councilmembers stated their preference as delegates to the
various committees and were chosen as follows:
ACAP/ACTEB - Cm Kamena and Dahlbacka
ABAG - Mayor Tirsell (Cm Staley alternate)
Mayors' Conference - Mayor Tirsell (Cm Turner alternate)
BASSA - Appointed by Board of Supervisors
COVA - Cm Kamena (Cm Turner alternate)
Chamber Liaison - Cm Dahlbacka
League of Calif. Cities - Cm Staley
Investment Committee - Mayor Tirsell
LAVWMA (Joint Powers) - Mayor Tirsell, Cm Turner
(Cm Dahlbacka alternate)
CM-32-6
March 15, 1976
League of Calif. Cities
(City Selection Committee) - Mayor Tirsell
Cultural Arts Council - Cm Kamena and Turner
LARPD Liaison - Cm Dahlbacka and Cm Turner
Sister City Liaison - Crn Staley
Sand & Gravel Committee - Cm Dahlbacka
Suggestion Committee - Mayor Tirsell
CONSENT CALENDAR
Res. Denying CUP App.
(Robert M. Young)
The Council adopted a resolution denying the CUP application by
Robert M. Young, discussed at the March Sth meeting.
RESOLUTION NO. 64-76
RESOLUTION DENYING CUP (Robert M. Young)
RES. ACCEPTING EIR~ -
Community Service Center
RESOLUTION NO. 65-76
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE ENVIRONMEN-
TAL IMPACT REPORT/STATEMENT COMMUNITY
SERVICE CENTER.
Res. Establishing
Seats on Livermore
Housing Authority
The Council adopted a resolution establishing two additional seats
on the Livermore Housing Authority Commission, in accordance with
recent legislation.
RESOLUTION NO. 66-76
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING TWO ADDITIONAL
SEATS ON THE LIVERMORE HOUSING AUTHORITY
COMMISSION.
P.C. Summary 3/9/76
The Planning Commission submitted a Summary of Action for their
meeting of March 9, 1976.
Minutes - Board of
Appeals 2/5/76
The minutes for the Board of Appeals meeting of February 5, 1976,
were given to the Council for review.
CM-32-7
March 15, 1976
Payroll & Claims
There were 176 claims in the amount of $262,738.09, and 282
payroll warrants in the amount of $93,294.10, for a total of
$781,032.19, dated March ll, 1976, and approved by the City
Manager.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE THE FIRST ITEM OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED (Cm
Kamena abstaining) .
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED WITH
DELETION OF THE RESOLUTION FOR THE AIRPORT GROUND RENT LEASE.
(Cm Dahlbacka and Kamena abstaining due to absence when these
items were discussed).
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Dumping Along Arroyo)
Mr. Lee stated that one of the Councilmembers had commented
that there was some dumping taking place behind the Bible
College along the arroyo. The staff has investigated and
found that there is no problem.
(Crossing Guard)
Cm Turner had asked that the City check into the possibility
of having a traffic crossing guard located at Olivina and
Albatross. The City has been waiting to get a count after
the opening of the underpasses, and the count is being done
at this time.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Measure A)
Cm Turner stated that he was hoping discussion for Measure A
would be on the agenda for this week and if the Council intends
to place it on the June ballot it should be scheduled for dis-
cussion soon.
According to the City Clerk the County would have to be notified
by March 26th if it is to appear on the ballot.
It was decided that this item will be on the agenda next week.
(Mayors Conference)
Cm Kamena thanked the City Manager for the splendid job he did
on the reception for the Alameda County Mayors Conference. He
was very impressed by the hospitality and the work that went
into making this a successful event.
Mayor Tirsell asked that the staff prepare a resolution thanking
Philip Chen, owner of the Emperor's Garden.
CM-32-8
March 15, 1976
(Willis Property -
Stanley & Wall Street)
Cm Kamena stated that the matter of the property located at E. Stanley
and Wall Street, owned by Guy Willis, has been referred to the staff
for study.
He would request that this item be placed on the agenda for discussion
by the Council as soon as it is possible.
Mr. Parness stated that the staff has been waiting to hear from LARPD
and the City has just received their response.
(Gen. Plan Standards)
Due to technical problems with the tape, comments made by
Cm Dahlbacka concerning Industrial Standards were not
audible.
The possibility of an Industrial Foundation was mentioned but it
was decided that this suggestion could be held in abeyance until
our Industrial Development Director reports for his position with
the City.
Cm Dahlbacka also inquired about major streets and when the work
will be scheduled for Isabel Avenue, Concannon Boulevard, North
Mines Road, and Murrieta Boulevard to Springton, as well as the
vehicle miles traveled on each.
It was suggested that this matter be discussed at the budget sessions
with respect to capital outlay, and in all probability most questions
will be answered in that discussion.
(Town Meetings)
Cm Dahlbacka stated that during the recent campaign he found that
people were really receptive to the idea of town meetings and he
would like to suggest that quarterly town meetings be held without
any type of business on the agenda but rather a topic for general
discussion with the public.
One primary concern expressed by the citizens was the budget and
he would suggest having a meeting where people could express what
the priorities should be and where the money should be going for
the next budget.
Cm Turner stated that he would also be interested in discussing
this as an agenda item and the Mayor requested that it be placed
on the agenda for discussion.
(Assessments)
em Staley stated that one of the things that bothers him with
respect to the General Plan, is the way certain properties are
assessed, based on potential development.
The General Plan has been adopted and large areas of agricul-
tural has been designated which is adjacent to the City. One
CM-32-9
March 15, 1976
(Assessments)
of the problems is that the Assessor doesn't always agree with
what the City has indicated as the land designation, or which
areas will develop or which areas will remain agricultural.
During the General Plan hearings the Council received a letter
from a property owner who indicated that the taxes are about
five times higher than what can be realized from the property.
In his opinion the City should do what it can to help those
people get lower assessments and he would also like this dis-
cussed as an agenda item. There may be policies and facilities
that the City could make available to help these people receive
reductions in assessments, so they are assessed on the highest
and best use that their property is likely to be in the future.
(School District
Policy re Development)
Cm Staley asked the City Manager about the status of the dis-
cussion with the School District concerning their policy re-
garding development.
Mr. Parness explained that a meeting is scheduled soon and a
report will be made to the Council concerning the results.
(P.C. Application
Deadline)
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Council should select a deadline
date for applications for the vacancy on the Planning Commission.
She would suggest that a deadline date be on a Monday with inter-
views to begin the following Monday.
The Council selected April 5, 1976, at 5:00 p.m. as the closing
date for applications.
Applications are also being received for the Energy Conservation
Committee and the Housing Authority with the same deadline date
as the Planning Commission applications.
Interviews for the Planning Commission will begin on April 12th.
(Pending Legislation
to Dissolve BASSA)
Mayor Tirsell stated that there is a pending bill to dissolve
BASSA into ABAG Executive Committee and she would like this
discussed as an agenda item for Council support because it
cuts the dues.
BASSA is a level of government that is not needed in the
area and it would seem that their phasing into the Executive
Committee of ABAG would be reasonable; however, she would
like to review the legislation.
CM-32-l0
March 15, 1976
(Library Board
Master Plan)
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Library Board has been invited to
meet with the Council to discuss the Library Master Plan and
there is a need to discuss their goals with input from the Council.
She asked that the Council select a date for this meeting.
The Council agreed to meet on April 26th at 7:00 p.m. to discuss
this item with the Library Board.
(Meeting with
Community Affairs Comm.)
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Council should also meet with the Com-
munity Affairs Committee to discuss their goals; where they want to
go and what kind of leadership they would like.
The Council will meet with the Community Affairs Committee at 7:00 p.m.
on April 5th.
(LAVWMA Pipeline)
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would like a report from the staff
as to how precise the engineering is for the LAVWMA Pipeline. She
believes the Council was working only with EO numbers. If she
reads everything correctly there is no room for industrial develop-
ment included.
CITY MANAGER'S
STATUS REPORT
Bids
In a couple of days the City will be receiving bids for the airport
T-hangars.
In the past the City arranged for financing prior to going to bid
but in this case the bids are being called for first. There hasn't
been any interest expressed by any of the local financial institu-
tions for the funding. Payments for the loan will be made from
rents received at the airport.
The City hasn't been able to quote an amount to a lending institu-
tion because the City is unsure as to what the cost will be. This
is the reason the bids will be reviewed prior to negotiating with
lending institutions.
It may be possible that the City will have to go outside of the
City to obtain a loan for this project but the staff will be
reporting back to the Council on this item.
Medians
The medians on Concannon Boulevard have been completed and the
staff believes they are very attractive.
Livermore Arcade Tenant
The Orchard Supply is the new tenant of the old Safeway store in
the Livermore Arcade Shopping Center, which is a building supply
store with their main office in San Jose.
CM-32-11
March 15, 1976
Livermore Arcade
Center Site
There are two sites located on the property of the Livermore
Arcade Shopping Center (at First and "P") which have not been
occupied and the City recently issued a building permit for
Homestead Savings and Loan for one of the sites and a highway
type of restaurant for the other lot.
Meeting with Physicians Union
Representatives from the staff have recently met with representa-
tives from the Physicians Union, which is a newly created organiza-
tion. They are opposed to the new Business License Tax Ordinance
and they have made statements as to what they will do or will fail
to do if the ordinance is adopted.
Taxi Subsidization
Taxi subsidization service in the City is for the older members
of our community (60 years or older). These people are allowed
to purchase tickets with a substantial reduction in the cost of
taxi rides.
At this time there are about 3,600 people from our community who
are eligible for the tic~ets and the staff is trying to meet
with some of these people to see if they could help sell the
tickets because this is more than what the staff can handle.
Insurance Bids
The City's consultant concerning insurance needs for the City
recommended that the City prepare the necessary forms for going
out to bid for insurance.
Preliminarily, four bids have been received, but unfortunately
none of the four qualify, because they do not conform to the
specifications drafted. For example, one of the bidders has
indicated that the coverage would be reduced by 50% with an
increase in the premium nearly threefold. Our present premium
is $65,000/year which means that the City could be approaching
$200,000 for liability insurance.
It would appear that the City may have to consider self-insurance
and this is something that has been investigated.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Tirsell adjourned the meeting at 10:00 p.m. to an executive
session to discuss litigation.
APPROVE
,~~
~ Z/L<J/~
, Mayor
ATTEST
l.ty Clerk
ivermore, California
CM-32-l2
Regular Meeting of March 22, 1976
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore
was held on March 22, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39
South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:10
p.m. with Mayor Tirsell presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Dahlbacka, Kamena, Turner, Staley and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirsell led the Councilmernbers as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES 3/8/76 & 3/9/76
P. 425, last paragraph first line: Cw Tirsell stated that she
regrets having to begin financing...etc.
4th line from bottom: is a lot of money. People do not realize..etc.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF MARCH 8, 1976 WERE APPROVED AS AMENDED,
AND THE MEETING FOR MARCH 9, 1976, WAS APPROVED AS SUBMITTED. CM
DAHLBACKA ABSTAINED FROM THE VOTE ON THE MINUTES.
OPEN FORUM
(Condition of City Hall)
Jim Christmas, 394 Pearl Drive, stated that in 1964 he surveyed City
Hall and found that at time there were spiders and rats in the build-
ing. If it was that bad at that time he is sure the article about
the condition of City Hall which appeared in the March 20th edition
of the Herald and News is accurate. He stated that he cannot under-
stand why the deplorable condition has not been brought to the atten-
tion of the City Council before now.
If the City can spend $4 million for the railroad project and $450,000
for a new fire station, why can't we do something for our City workers?
Mayor Tirsell stated that she believes Mr. Christmas will find that
the Council is very receptive to the idea of getting a new City Hall.
The Council goes in and out of City Hall often and the working con-
ditions are appalling.
Mr. Christmas stated that he just wanted to bring it to everyone's
attention because the people at City Hall are hard workers and
something should be done.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she asked Mr. Parness, just today, what
sources of funding might be available for community buildings, and
apparently there are very few. This would have to go to a bond
issue and she believes this Council will discuss the possibility
of asking the citizens of Livermore to visit City Hall and decide
whether they could stand to work there under present conditions.
CM-32-l3
March 22, 1976
(Free Garbage
Pickup Day)
Ray Faltings, 1018 Via Granada, stated that every year Oakland
Scavanger has a free day for pickup of refuse. It is now Spring
and he would like to know what day has been set aside for the
pickup.
Mr. Parness stated that as he recalls the day has been set for
early in May.
Mr. Faltings stated that many people plant seed this time of year
and as he recalls the time has always been much earlier than May.
Mayor Tirsell asked that Mr. Faltings contact Ray Brice, of the
Beautification Committee expressing his concerns because the
arrangement with Oakland Scavenger was made through the Committee.
COMMUNICATION RE
MEASURE B
A letter was received from Mrs. Jack Bryan which indicated that
she believes many people did not understand whether they were
voting for or against the ordinance in Measure B, during the
last election, because the wording was difficult to understand.
She added that driving in the older areas is very hazardous be-
cause trailers and old cars prevent good vision on the street
and she fears that children may run into the street because they
cannot see the cars coming.
Cm Turner stated that the letter asks for a recount of Measure B.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the outcome of the election was a 30
vote difference between the yes and the no vote and since this
represents a 1% error a recount might be in order.
Mayor Tirsell asked if the Council would be interested in a re-
count, and also what would the staff estimate as to the cost
for a recount.
The City Clerk explained that a recount would amount to a cost
of approximately $125 per day because it is necessary to have a
full board to conduct the recount. If the ballots were to be
counted by hand the people would not be able to work for more
than six hours. She isn't sure what the cost for the count by
automation would be.
Cm Turner stated that he would suggest that the City Clerk report
back to the Council as to what degree of error is involved and
from this the Council could make a determination as to whether
or not they would ask for a recount of Measure B - also what the
cost would be.
COMMUNICATION FROM
LlOYD HAINES RE ENSIGN
BICKFORD PROPERTY (Portola)
A communication was received from Attorney Lloyd M. Haines, repre-
senting Ensign Bickford and the property located in the triangle
at portola Avenue, requesting reconsideration of the Council to
rezone the 6.6 acre parcel to allow a neighborhood shopping center.
The request is based on a recent court decision and the fact that
the developer is willing to dedicate a 15 ft. wide buffer between
the development and the residential units on Scott Street.
CM-32-l4
March 22, 1976
(re Ensign Bickford
- portola Property)
em Dahlbacka asked about the status of the court decision and the
City Attorney explained that at present the Superior Court has ruled
that the rezoning must be considered by the City Council. The case
has been appealed and as far as he is concerned it is a good appeal,
that the City will not lose. The City is under no mandate to act
this evening but if a sufficient number of the Councilrnembers are
willing to do something he would suggest that it be referred back
to the Planning Commission because the buffer strip is a change from
the original request.
Cm Turner asked if the Planning Commission's denial of the request
for rezoning was based on the fact that there was not a buffer strip
and Mayor Tirsell stated that in answer to this it was because it
was considered to be premature rezoning.
Mr. Musso stated that in addition to being premature it was also based
on complaints by the neighbors on Scott Street.
Mr. Haines stated that the issue is approval of the shopping center
which varies, in no respect, from the time it was first brought to
the Council in July of 1975. The only change is the willingness to
place a buffer between Scott Street and the far end of their property.
For this reason he would like consideration by the Council without
the matter going back to the Planning Commission.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the item would have to go to the Planning
Commission if the proposal is to be considered because the Council
does not accept any dedication without comments from the P.C.
Cm Staley wondered if the Council were to take action, would it
still have to be referred to the P.C. and the City Attorney indicated
that it would.
Mr. Haines stated that in his op1n1on, this is not what the law states.
The law states that if there is a modification in the request for re-
zoning then it must go back to the P.C. There is no modification to
the request. It is the same property and the same project proposed
for the Tradewell discount store.
Mr. Logan stated that we are talking about conditions to the rezoning
and one of the terms of the conditional zoning would be the dedication.
Therefore, it would have to go back to the Planning Commission because
the conditional zoning would require that the P.C. look at it and
write a recommendation.
Mr. Musso commented that he was contacted by a number of people today
who were concerned that the Council might make a decision without a
public hearing.
CM STALEY MOVED THAT THE ITEM BE SENT BACK TO THE P.C. FOR RECONSIDERA-
TION. MOTION SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he believes there is no reason for the
Council to reconsider this item because it would be wasting everybody's
time. The item can always go to the Planning Commission but it doesn't
require Council consideration.
Cm Turner stated that the last time the Council discussed this item
his primary concern was for the residents on Scott Street. Now that
the buffer is being proposed perhaps this would make a difference
and he would be willing to reconsider it.
Cm Staley explained that his motion is for the Council to reconsider
this item but it would be helpful to have input from the Planning
Commission before the Council discusses it.
CM-32-l5
March 22, 1976
(re Ensign Bickford
Property - portola Ave.)
The City Attorney added that once something has been referred
to the Planning Commission the automatic movement is back to
the Council again.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she will speak against the motion
because she believes the issues were adequately aired at the
time the decision was made by the Council. The overriding con-
cern of the P.C. was that this development would be premature
because the population in the area is served by a major com-
mercial facility downtown and at this time the fragmentation .A
into further neighborhood development is not wafttc~ ~~~,
~A:.-Ia~~
The other issue was the I-580 group which came in and press~ed
for the shopping center to be built for them, 1 mile away, and
divided by a freeway. These issues were very closely and hotly
debated and in her opinion a set of trees is not a mitigating
circumstance for the ..-01"' AM tJi<t,~j&~.
MOTION PASSED 3-2 (Cm Dahlbacka a~d~or Tirsell dissenting).
COMMUNICATION RE
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
& ANNEXATION - North
Front Road
A letter was received from Barry Spivak of the Spivak Development
Company asking that he be allowed to speak to the Council con-
cern1ng North Front Road Assessment District No.1, and annexa-
tion in that area, and that it be scheduled as an agenda item.
At the request of Spivak Development Company, the item was scheduled
for the agenda of April 5, 1976.
COMMUNICATION FROM
WM. FRALEY RE AIRPORT
LAND USE COMMISSION &
LEGISLATIVE PROJECT COMM.
A letter was received from Wm. H. Fraley, Alameda County Plan-
ning Director, listing members of the Airport Land Use Commission
Legislative Project Committee.
Legislation has been introduced that will grant to County Airport
Land Use Commissions, pre-emptory authority over local agencies on
land use planning matters within the defined local land use patterns.
As soon as information can be obtained on the details of the bill
a further report will be made to the Council.
Mayor Tirsell suggested that this item be referred to the Airport
Advisory Committee asking that they follow the bill and report
back to the Council.
Mr. Parness stated that there may not be time for the Airport
Advisory Committee to become involved. Apparently this would
affect only those cities that have general aviation airports
within their boundaries and it appears to be an incursion
into our authority on land use controls in and around airport
properties. He has just received reports on this item and he
would like to have it digested for the agenda next week.
COMMUNICATION RE MODEL
AGREEMENT - OAKLAND SCAVENGER
A letter was received from Oakland Scavenger concerning the
tentative model agreement between Oakland Scavenger and the City.
CM-32-l6
March 22, 1976
(Oakland Scavenger
Agreement)
Mr. Parness stated that our City did participate, along with 12
other jurisdictions in Alameda County who are served by Oakland
Scavenger service, in a study to bring a sense of order out of
the reporting and analysis system used for evaluating the perfor-
mance of this company; its revenues and expenditures within each
jurisdiction.
A consultant study was done and all jurisdictions were formed into
a joint powers authority for this purpose. The study was conducted
and finished about a year ago and was a very good study. Since that
time it has been the basis for a staff analysis directed towards a
consolidated approach to be used by these governmental jurisdictions
in working with the company in trying to adjust rates for each. Here-
tofore, it was a type of ping pong game.
Nothing has been formalized as yet, in trying to implement this
consolidation of approach and this is the purpose behind the model
agreement. The staff has worked this out and the City of Oakland
served as the lead agency. The model agreement is now in our hands
and has been reviewed by each of the jurisdictions. The request of
the company is to have the Council designate a representative that
can sit down with the company and hopefully corne back with some type
of recomemendation for adoption of the model agreement or amendment
to it.
Mr. Parness stated that he is prepared to do this and he would suggest
that the matter be referred to him so that he can meet with Oakland
Scavenger in the near future with a prepared recommendation.
The only hesitation is that the County Solid Waste Plan is sitting in
the wings and this might affect what the Plan might eventually evolve
to be.
Mr. Corley, attorney representing Oakland Scavenger, stated that
Livermore is different than the remainder of the cities they repre-
sent in Alameda County. In their other agreements there is a require-
ment that they are responsible for collection and disposal. In Liver-
more this problem has been deleted - they are required to dispose of
Livermore refuse in Ralph properties facilities. The concern as to
the Solid Waste Management Advisory report that ultimately will be
the plan for the County, with other jurisdictions, is over what will
happen to the refuse. Who will own it, will it be recycled, etc.
Oakland Scavenger does not have this option with Livermore. He has
a copy of the Solid Waste Management Plan, as recommended by the
Advisory Committee which specifically says to leave the collection
alone. The cities can contract with collectors for collection of
the refuse. This is not saying that the system should be changed.
Oakland Scavenger has had no rate increase in the City of Livermore
since 1971. The contract which expired in 1973 was originally renewed
for six months, waiting the result of the committee's report. ultimatel
on motion made by Cm Turner it was concluded that the City should wait
for three years until a report has been received from the Refuse Rate
Committee. The report from the Refuse Rate Committee is in now and
there is a question of what will happen to their contract so they
believe this is a matter of urgency.
They would be happy to work with Mr. Parness and hopefully there
can be amendments to the model agreement that will fit Livermore.
CM-32-17
March 22, 1976
(re Oakland Scavenger)
As to the Solid Waste Plan for the County, they can conform to
that if Livermore can conform to their 40 year requirement that
they go to the present dump site and they would concur with this.
Mayor Tirsell asked if it is the consensus of the Council to
refer this item to Mr. Parness and the Council indicated that
it is.
COMMUNICATION RE REP-
RESENTATIVE ON DIVISION
TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
- League of Calif. Cities
A letter was received from Shirley Sisk, President of the East
Bay Division of the League of California Cities asking-for names
of people interested in serving on the Division Transportation
Committee.
Cm Staley stated that since one member of the Council is already
serving on that committee the item could be noted for filing.
Cm Turner stated that two committees were mentioned in the letter
and if there are not enough people to serve on both committees he
would certainly be interested in serving on one.
COMMUNICATION RE 208
PLANNING MEETING SUMMARY
The Council received a summary of the results of the 208 Planning
meeting which took place on March 5, 1976.
Mayor Tirsell wondered how the lead agency was designated for the
208 Surface Runoff Management Plan.
Mr. Parness explained that it is a matter of practicality. The
ABAG staff selected by the EPA had served as the coordinating
agent in getting notices out to all the participants who have
met on two occasions. Since this study is confined to Alameda
County it seemed to be a natural thing to ask the County Adminis-
trator's office to serve as the lead agent, with the assurance
by the County Administrator that there would be representation
from each of the public jurisdictions. This would be just
for the Surface Runoff Management Plan and the remainder of the
studies will be conducted by regional agencies.
The item was noted for filing.
COMMUNICATION RE
NOTICES OF INTENT
The Council received a copy of Notices of Intent sent to
all COVA member agencies. This item is informational in
nature, with respect to air quality and land use potentials
in the Livermore-Amador Valley.
Mayor Tirsell explained that Alameda County is applying for
grants in the amount of $45,000 for study of air quality and
land use potentials in the Valley.
Item was noted for filing.
CM-32-l8
March 22, 1976
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
RE PROPERTY ON PORTOLA
AVENUE (E. Lounsbury)
The City received notice of a public hearing to be held by the County
Board of Supervisors concerning the appeal of Ebert W. Lounsbury for
property located on portola Avenue (Parcel Map 1840). The public
hearing will take place on March 30, 1976, at 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Musso explained that Mr. Lounsbury acquired the necessary appli-
cations for building the 7-ll Market which has been completed. In
order to finance that development he is requesting division of the
property into two parcels. The County and City recommended that
public works improvements be installed to include connections to
the sewer system. Not wanting to do this, the subdivision was
denied and Mr. Lounsbury is now making an appeal to the Board of
Supervisors to overrule the Planning Director of the County.
The Council asked that Mr. Musso attend the hearing and express the
concerns of the City with respect to the public works improvements.
Mr. Musso will report back to the Council after the hearing.
COMMUNICATION FROM BASSA
RE WTR. QUALITY MGMT.
Mr. Parness explained that the Council received a letter from a
committee recommending that BASSA be given extended authority which
the Council opposed. A letter was sent expressing opposition.
The Council has just received a letter from BASSA indicating that
the Legislature's intent should not be interpreted as an attempt
by BASSA to gain additional authority and that they plan to continue
planning, construction and operation of water pollution control
facilities with the assistance of local and subregional organizations.
The letter was noted for filing.
COMMUNICATION TO EPA
FROM FRED COOPER RE
VALLEY AIR POLLUTION
The Council received a copy of a letter sent to the EPA by Supervisor
Cooper, concerning air pollution in the Livermore-Amador Valley.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that Livermore has acknowledged that, roughly
1/3 of the days, the pollution does come in from over the hills
but pollution patterns are different on the other days and repre-
sent locally generated emissions to the best knowledge we have
and with the calculations that have been done.
It appears that Mr. Cooper is harping on the 1/3 of the days when
the pollution is blown in from the other side of the hill.
Mayor Tirsell stated that in the discussion at the EPA, Mayor Futch
pointed out that with the model at the Lab, picking the worst con-
ditions with the only day the data was available there was a peak
in the late afternoon which indicates that it blows in. However,
there was a significant number of days where the peak was early
in the afternoon and represents smog generated locally. The
4:00 p.m. peak is the air pollution blown in.
CM-32-l9
March 22, 1976
(re Valley Air Pollution)
Cm Dahlbacka stated that there is also a pattern where the pollu-
tion is constant almost all day long.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the EPA was cognizant of our studies
and all the other studies.
Cm Staley felt it might be worthwhile to write a letter directly
to Mr. Sperling, on whom Supervisor Cooper is relying, and sug-
gest the same things that have been suggested to Supervisor Cooper
- that 2/3 of the days are locally generated air pollution as
well as other things mentioned by Mayor Futch a few weeks ago,
and ask Mr. Sperling for his comments. The Council would be
interested in knowing if this information is incompatible with
his study.
The Council concurred.
Mayor Tirsell stated that every time a new name is added to the
list that Mr. Cooper has communicated with, the facts should be
made known to this person.
Cm Staley felt Mr. Sperling should be asked if the facts that
the City is presenting are inconsistent with his report. In
other words, his report could be perfectly consistent and he
could still arrive at the same conclusion as the Council; namely
that 2/3 of the days have air pollution locally produced. If he
does feel the same as the Council it would certainly weaken Super-
visor Cooper's position.
Mayor Tirsell asked that this be communicated to Mr. Sperling.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that perhaps it could also be mentioned that
Mike McCracke~Vhas done a report at UCRL~aa~ Q9.~1~b~.A~ ucs~
7 ~ ~.AA./ ~/ aJ.-J,.L.'-_
Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, stated that his h~y has been
flying model airplanes and from this the wind direction indicates
that air pollution comes from Tracy as well as the Bay Area.
He would guess that 1/3 comes from the Bay Area, 1/3 from Livermore,
and 1/3 from Tracy.
Mayor Tirsell stated that there are also reports that indicate this
could be the case.
COMMUNICATION FROM
FRED COOPER TO BD. OF
SUPERVISORS RE LAVWMA PROJ.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the City had written a letter to the
Board because the City felt Mr. Cooper was asking for future
studies which would require the expenditure of taxpayer funds
and the City has no indication that the Board of Supervisors
have discussed any of the subjects. It was questioned as to
whether or not Mr. Cooper had been authorized to ask for the
expensive studies.
Apparently this letter from Mr. Cooper is in response to the
letter written by the City to the Board of Supervisors.
Mayor Tirsell stated that apparently the intent of the
written by Mr. Cooper is to delay the LAVWMA Project.
air pollution studies would show that he is correct he
not call for any more studies.
letters
If the
would
CM-32-20
March 22, 1976
COH~mNICA.TION FROM FRED
COOPER TO BOARD RE ENV.
MANAGEHENT PLAN TASK FORCE
Mayor Tirse1l stated that the last letter written by Supervisor Cooper
to the Board of Supervisors deals with the hearing to be held on March
23, 1976. She intends to be there to answer questions concerning the
City and would like to have some specific direction.
Issues to be discussed are as follows:
1. Do we want changes or additions in the Environmental
Management Plan?
2. Do we feel that the Environmental Management Task Force
should review the East Bay Dischargers seqage project?
3. Do we feel that EMTF should review the Pleasanton-VCSD
sewage consolidation?
4. Should the EMTF review the LAVWMA project to export sewage
from the Livermore Amador Valley?
The letter was noted for filing.
REPORT RE REQUEST FOR
RODEO PARADE FUNDS
Mayor Tirsell stated that last week a request was received from the
Rodeo Association and the Jaycees that the City participate in the
funding for continuance of the Rodeo Parade, in the amount of $l,500.
The cost for the parade is estimated at $3,000 and the Rodeo Associa-
tion intends to match the City's $1,500.
The item was postponed from last week because there was no information
for Council review and because Mayor Tirsel1 wanted to have the oppor-
tunity to speak with Mr. Foscalina, Mr. Graham, and the Jaycees repre-
sentative.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would like to clarify that this has
nothing to do with the rodeo dance, and that there will be no permit
issued to allow the dance because of the problems which occurred last
year after the rodeo. This pertains only to the morning parade.
John Fosca1ina, 2935 Reed Avenue, stated that the parade is a
traditional and historical part of Livermore which creates revenue
in the City. He would like to see the parade celebrated in the
Bicentennial year and the Rodeo Association cannot afford to fund
the parade entirely.
In answer to questions posed by Cm Staley Mr. Foscalina commented
that the Rodeo Association sponsors the rodeo and part of the parade
because they feel the parade helps promote the rodeo but the rodeo
is not a profit making event.
profits are offset by the $1,500 spent on the parade.
Cm Kamena commented that Mr. Foscalina has mentioned that the parade
generates revenue for the City and he would like Mr. Fosca1ina to
explain how this is accomplished.
Mr. Foscalina stated that in talking to merchants he has been told
that business on a rodeo weekend increases by 80% over a normal weekend.
CM-32-2l
March 22, 1976
(Rodeo Para~e)
Mel Luna, 723 Via Del Sol, stated that 80% business increase is
a lot of increase and possibly the bars do 80% more business on
a rodeo weekend but his business certainly didn't go up that much.
In fact, he had to spend money to clean up in front of his store
because of the parade and the dance. If his business increased
10% he would be happy and as far as he knows the other businesses
feel the same.
Mr. Luna stated that he is not in favor or opposed to the parade
but he feels the City should know how much profit is being made
by the merchants before they hand out $1,500 for a parade.
Sonny Murphy, 242 Helen Way, stated that the Livermore Parade
has been a community activity since 1918 and for several years
the Jaycees have coordinated the event solely for the enjoyment
and participation of the community. There is no income from the
parade for that organization or any other organization and the
parade represents many man hours of preparation. The Livermore
Rodeo Association has provided money for the parade and each year
the City of Livermore has provided matching funds because it is
a community event by and for the citizens of Livermore. The
Council must decide, not whether it will co-sponsor a parade,
but whether it will co-sponsor a community event. Funds should
be withheld only if residents of the community do not support
and desire a community activity.
The issue is not whether or not a 1976 parade shall be sponsored
but rather whether or not a traditional community activity will
be sponsored or discontinued. A decision should be based on the
desires of the citizens.
Cm Turner stated that he believes the issue is not whether there
should be a parade but rather who should finance the parade, and
whether tax dollars should be spent to promote a parade which will
not benefit the taxpayers. He added that he believes there are
various ways to raise money for a parade and these means should
be reviewed.
__Cm Turner added that the City already provides in lieu services
which amounts to quite a bit of City money - almost $1,500 in
service for policemen and cleanup, etc. He just doesn't want
everyone to feel that the Councilmernbers are scratching the
parade.
Virginia Gregory, l534 College Avenue, stated that she is very
interested in the Rodeo parade and has worked on floats for five
or six years. If it is the bars that are making a profit, per-
haps the Rodeo Association could ask them to contribute towards
paying for the parade. Also, maybe there could be an entrance
fee for floats.
Cm Turner stated that possibly the Chamber of Commerce could
also be asked to help finance the parade.
Joe Serpa, 1534 East Avenue, stated that he would like to make
it clear, as President of the Livermore Rodeo Association, that
the Rodeo Association does not make any money from the parade and
that they are only trying to provide an event for the citizens of
Livermore. The $1,500 they pay into the parade could stay in their
pockets if they didn't want to sponsor a parade for the people.
em Kamena stated that by and large he believes people enjoy parades
and a parade is a community event and a tradition associated with
Livermore. In speaking with the Director of Finance for the City
CM-32-22
March 22, 1976
(Rodeo Parade)
of P1easanton he indicated that funds expended for
since 1967, in terms of cash has been $300 a year.
can't ignore the fact that approximately $1,500 is
City in the way of police services, cleanup, etc.,
still money any way you look at it.
their parade,
The Council
spent by the
and this is
Cm Kamena stated that one of the things he heard over and over during
his campaign was that City priorities need to be realigned and he
would have a hard time trying to justify the expenditure of $1,500
in addition to the $1,377 paid out in services, for the parade.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he believes there is a fundamental principle
involved which is whether the City should sponsor events not really
related to City Committees or things sponsored directly by the City.
With money as tight as it is, it wouldn't be right, in his opinion,
to allow an expenditure of $1,500 for a parade. It is just not in
the realm of City expenditures, in his opinion and for that reason
would make a motion. Also he felt the Jaycees could probably raise
the money needed to finance the parade.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO DENY THE REQUEST FOR THE $1,500 FOR THE RODEO
PARADE. MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
CM STALEY MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE THAT THE CITY PROVIDE
THE IN LIEU SERVICES WHICH AMOUNT TO APPROXIMATELY $1,400, FREE OF
CHARGE TO THE RODEO ASSOCIATION. A.c~ENDMENT ECONDEp B)!' CM T. URNER.
~,,&., .-U/', ifdjJ?ttA.-.l:_
Mayor Tirse1l commented that the City / agree to help the
cost of printing of entry forms, etc., which has amounted to $600 for
the Rodeo Association, in the way of another in lieu service.
Lorenzo Aralia, ll50 Killarney Street, stated that $400 is the cost
for police services and he would like to know if this amount included
the parade as well as the dance last year.
Mayor Tirse1l replied that the $400 was for rodeo parade police
services only.
Mr. Aralia stated that the Jaycees simply does not have the time to
raise the needed money because they need to begin with plans for the
parade by April 1.
Mr. Aralia also mentioned that they have decided not to ask for the
additional in lieu service of printing by the City.
Cm Kamena added that for the Good Times Parade held in Pleasanton
the people selling concessions agreed to pay lO% of the profits
back to the City of Pleasanton and this might be one way of helping
pay for the parade.
This was discussed and it was concluded that this method probably
wouldn't work.
AMENDMENT PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
MAIN MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
RECESS
Mayor Tirsel1 called for a brief recess after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present.
CM-32-23
March 22, 1976
REPORT RE ACQUISITION
OF WILLIS PARK PROPERTY
(Wall & Stanley Property)_
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Council has discussed the possi-
bility of purchasing the Willis property located at Stanley
and Wall Street for the purpose of extending the park, as
recommended by the Planning Commission.
There was some question concerning the deed covenant which
provides that subdivision of the property would require review
by a homeowners committee if any structure is placed on the property.
LARPD's recommendation was requested by the Council and their
response by letter indicates they see no problem with the deed
restriction prohibiting structures on the property and would
recommend acquisition of the property.
The staff recommends that the Council adopt a motion authorizing
the City Attorney to acquire the subject parcel at a purchase
price of $21,000.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO PROCEED
WITH ACQUISITION OF THE PROPERTY. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
APPEAL RE REVOCATION OF
CUP PERMIT - DeVengenzo
A report from the staff indicated that a permit was granted for
the conduct of a wholesale nursery business along Vasco Road.
However, as a condition of the permit a bond was required as
well as an easement for future public works improvements. These
conditions have not been met and the Planning Commission has
recommended revocation of the permit.
Bob DeVengenzo, owner of the nursery on Vasco Road, stated
that the problem is that his insurance carrier is also his
bonding agent and recently informed him that the agreement
prepared by the City Attorney was for too long a period for his
bonding company to accept. He then asked that the Assistant
City Attorney rewrite the agremeent which was done and the bond-
ing company says that it is still not acceptable and they will
not accept it.
Mr. DeVengenzo added that he is busy because he does have a busi-
ness to operate and he simply has not had the time to be concerned
only with this matter even though he agrees it is very important
and should be taken care of. He would urge that the permit not
be revoked until the bonding agent is given the opportunity to
agree to wording in the agreement. Also, he is acquiring the
Phillips 66 property across the street which has all the public
works improvements and he could operate from this property until
his property can be developed as the City requires. The Phillips
property can be used for parking, the building can be utilized,
etc., and the present property can be used for growing grounds.
His concern is that if the insurance carrier will not back the bond
then the City won't accept it and they will have nothing to work with.
If they have the new permit for the Phillips property then the
old permit will not be needed and they intend to use the present
property for industrial use, in time.
Cm Staley asked, for clarification, what is needed by the City
at this time, and it was noted that only the bond has not been
furnished. The public works improvements have been delayed.
CM-32-24
March 22, 1976
(CUP Permit - DeVengenzo)
Mr. DeVengenzo commented that since the agreement was written by
the Assistant City Attorney it has been sitting in his insurance
carriers office for two months.
Discussion followed concerning the agreement and what the carrier
requires before it can be accepted.
Cm Kamena asked how much time Mr. DeVengenzo needs to take care of
this problem.
Mr. Musso commented that it would appear that if Mr. DeVengenzo is
going to abandon the use and move across the street, a short temporary
use should take care of the problem without the bond.
Mr. DeVengenzo stated that he would agree but he would like protection
in the event he is not able to get the Phillips 66 property for one
reason or another.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ALLOW MR. DeVENGENZO A 90 DAY EXTENSION ON THE
APPEAL. MOTION SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Mayor Tirsell explained that Mr. DeVengenzo should appear before the
Council in 90 days if things haven't worked out, because this will
be on the agenda at that time.
DISCUSSION RE OUTCOME
OF MEASURE A - SAFETY TAX
The Council requested that discussion of the Municipal Election
outcome with respect to Measure A be placed on the agenda.
Cm Turner stated that this item is on the agenda at his request
because if this is to be placed on the June primary ballot the
County needs to know by March 26.
Cm Turner stated that the issue was very important and failed by
714 votes. Possibly the timing was wrong in placing it on the
March ballot and that the City could have done a better job regarding
endorsement and in informing the citizens as to the need for its
passage. In his opinion this matter is critical enough to warrant
its placement on the June primary ballot.
Mr. Christmas stated that he voted against Measure A because he
believes the Police Department needs additional manpower but the
Fire Department does not need another station.
Mayor Tirsell explained that the purpose of the override would not
be to provide facilities but rather to allow hiring additional
personnel for both departments. The new fire station will be
paid for through our Revenue Sharing Funds and is completely
separate from the tax override proposal.
Mr. Christmas stated that it was his understanding that the Fire
Department would receive $300,000 and the Police Department would
get $36,000.
Cm Turner commented that there is no clear division of the money -
90% will not be going to the Fire Department with lO% to the Police
Department. Approximately $350,000 would be generated from the
tax override and would be used for emergency service within the
City of Livermore, according to where the need is greatest.
CM-32-25
March 22, 1976
(re Safety Tax)
Mr. Christmas stated that he has spoken to many, many people
who have indicated that if the items were separated they would
have voted in favor of one or the other rather than voting
against the entire measure. He would suggest that the Police
Department be separated from the Fire Department on the measure
for the ballot if it is to be placed on the ballot again.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that the point made by Mr. Christmas is
well taken and during his campaign he heard comments that
people would support one or the other but not both. Perhaps
if there were a more specific breakdown as to the cost that
would be designated for each department, separately, with a
separation of the issues people would be able to consider the
two.
Ray Faltings, stated that part of the reason for the defeat of
the measure was the fact that citizens of Livermore do not have
bottomless pockets. It was anticipated with the defeat of the
measure that the citizens should see a program coming forth from
both the Police and Fire Departments as to how they can operate
with their current budgets. If they cannot operate within their
current budget limitations, what the next step should be. Should
we have a department of public safety rather than a department of
police and a department of fire. Let's put all the facts through.
The City has reciprocal agreements with Dublin, Pleasanton, and
with LLL if fire services are needed and this is one of the factors
which led people to vote against the measure. The true facts are
not being presented to the public.
Secondly, Mr. Faltings stated that there should be, must be, and
are City services that are not as vital as police and fire, and
this should be the major consideration during the budget session.
Mr. Faltings would also be interested in knowing what results have
come about as the result of federal funds for combating crime. At
the time additional funds were received additional personnel was
given to the Police Department for the implementation of the pro-
gram and as yet he has not seen any detailed report as to the
effectiveness or ineffectiveness of that particular program.
It would seem that the City is no better off than it was before
the program was implemented, but the citizens really don't know
because there is nothing to review as a comparison. He urged
that the City give people facts before asking for another vote.
Jerry Wilverding, 4886 Primrose Lane, stated that in the recent
election two new Councilmernbers were chosen, Measure A, and
Measure B were defeated. He would ask if the Council would ques-
tion the wisdom of the electorate who supported the platforms of
two new Councilmembers and these two people must be able to see
the wisdom of the electorate. Proposition A was defeated by
a 4,200 to 3,700 vote - a total vote greater than garnered by
the top vote getter (Cm Kamena). Somewhere in this vote lurks
a message and a reasonable interpretation is that the measure
was placed on the ballot and supported by the City Council but
the electorate must pay the bill and they do not want this tax
override. The Council is a body of elected servants elected to
serve at and for the will of the majority. In his opinion the
people want to be represented and this is not being done if this
item is again placed on the ballot.
Cm Staley stated that he can appreciate the attitude of people
who feel that their taxes are reaching a maximum and therefore
voted against the measure but he would like to explain a few
figures. The City of Livermore pays a tax on its $100 of assessed
valuation, of $1.51 which goes into the General Fund. About 60%
CM-32-26
March 22, 1976
ere Safety Tax)
of the General Fund is used for the Police and Fire Department per-
sonnel, manpower, and equipment costs. The City of Pleasanton spends
$1.81/$100, and the unincorporated area of VCSD spends $1.95/$100,
for a fire department onl~ because they have no police services. The
police costs are paid for by Alameda County.
The point is that it is unfortunate that the only way the City has to
raise money for its General Fund is through the property tax. There
are very few other taxes available other than the business license
tax and a few other taxes. What the City of Livermore residents
receive for their $1.51, surpasses what any of the citizens of
Pleasanton or VCSD receive for the amount of money they pay for the
General Fund revenue. It is also important to realize that the equiv-
alent house is less expensive in Livermore than it is in Pleasanton
or Dublin. You can live in a like house in Livermore but receive much
more for the tax dollar than you could in Pleasanton or VCSD.
As far as Cm Staley is concerned there are two types of taxes that
are oppressive - one is the School District tax which is $6/$100
assessed valuation and this is used to support the School District.
The state legislature is in the process of tryinq to find a way
schools can be supported other than from the property tax rate and
if we did not have to pay $6/$100 for the schools it would be much
easier to support the Police and Fire Departments with 259/$100.
Each homeowner pays $13/$100 of assessed valuation and $3.10 goes
to the County for services received only in the unincorporated of
the areas of the City, such as the Sheriff Department and County
Fire Department. In other words, the property tax is $13/$100
and $9 of this amount goes to the schools and the County.
The City has no place to go for the money and the police and
fire services are needed. In his opinion the Council will have
to go back to the voters asking for the override even though the
increased tax is a burden. People must be educated as to where
the tax dollars go and what is available for the $1.51 paid for
this service.
Mr. Faltings wanted to know why the City doesn't do somthing to
get the money for the City that is being paid to the County for
County facilities that the citizens don't use.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the City keeps supporting this type of
legislation but at present there is no statutory authority to
do anything about it.
Cm Dahlbacka wondered if the Council would be interested in separat-
ing the Fire Department from the Police Department if this item goes
back to the ballot.
Cm Turner questioned as to whether or not the City could legally
separate the two departments.
Mr. Logan stated that the law is not completely clear on the subject
of asking for a tax increase for a specific function within the City.
He would assume that it could be done.
Cm Staley stated that there clearly is a need for support of public
safety and would be opposed to separating fire from police support.
He would tend to believe that what is needed is a discussion as to
expenditure of the funds because apparently it was not clear to many
of the voters that the funds would go only towards additional per-
sonnel and equipment - not towards any type of building.
Cm Staley added that he also would not want to allow this issue
to become a rivalry between the two departments. If people voted
for the Police Department would that mean that they don't support
the Fire Department? There could be all types of problems with
this approach.
CM-32-27
March 22, 1976
ere Safety Tax)
Mayor Tirsell stated that she also would be opposed to splitting
the issue. This is a budgetary item and all budgets must go through
the department with personnel needs and equipment needs identified.
Cm Turner stated that he does appreciate the remarks made by Mr.
Christmas but he would not be in favor of separating the two
departments in asking citizens to vote in favor of a tax override
for the services needed.
Discussion followed as to whether or not this item should be
placed on the ballot and whether or not it should be prepared
in time for the June ballot.
CM TURNER MOVED TO INCLUDE A PUBLIC SAFETY MEASURE FOR BOTH
POLICE AND FIRE PERSONNEL AND EQUIPMENT ON THE NOVEMBER BALLOT.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
Ray Faltings stated that other alternatives for providing the
necessary funding for the additional personnel and equipment
have been mentioned and before a tax override is placed on
the ballot he would like to suggest that the other alternatives
be analyzed. He also suggested that the Police Department and
Fire Department be asked to prepare a program just in case the
tax override measure fails.
Mr. Wolverding stated that it is not a question of what the City
gets for the $1.51/$100. The measure was on the ballot once, it
was defeated and he believes the Council is not listening to
what the people are saying - they do not want to pay for the
additional personnel and equipment. It is the Council's
responsibility to listen to the people and represent their
views.
Bill Zagotta, 5155 Lillian Court, stated that it isn't clear
to him why a tax override would be necessary. Why doesn't
the Coucnil just raise property taxes to cover the costs
needed for adequate public safety?
Mayor Tirsell explained that in compliance with SB 90 the
City must go to the voters for the additional property tax.
Mel Luna stated that he certainly would vote in favor of a 259
override because he feels it is well worth the amount for the
benefit the community will receive.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that his only concern at this time is that
the motion will not preclude separation of the two departments
as a ballot measure later, if the Council decides this is what
they would prefer to do.
It was noted that action would not preclude separation of the
ballot measure at a later time.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
RE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS
The Council discussed a suggestion made by Cm Dahlbacka to
begin holding neighborhood community meetings.
The Council concluded that they would like to hold neighborhood
community meetings and ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY
CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THEY AGREED TO HOLD NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMUNITY MEETINGS ON THE 5th MONDAY OF THE MONTH WHENEVER POSSIBLE.
Ray Faltings had suggested that the first meeting include a dis-
cussion concerning Measure A, and budget priorities. Council concurred.
CM-32-28
March 22, 1976
(Neighborhood Meetings)
Joseph Tilles, Warsaw Avenue, stated that every year his street
holds a block party and he would certainly welcome the Council's
participation and invited the Council to join them.
It was noted that the first meeting would also include discussion
of budget priorities and that Cm Dahlbacka will be reporting back
to the Council concerning the format suggested for neighborhood
community meetings.
REPORT RE MUNICIPAL
INSURANCE BIDS
Mr. Parness reported that bids have been received for City insurance
and the bids have been analyzed, in detail, by our insurance needs
consultant, Mund, McLaurin and Company. Mr. DeVere, representing
the consultant firm is present this evening to explain the bid results.
Mr. DeVere explained that it was his firm's intention to have plenty
of lead time in studying the proposals and making a recommendation
to the City Council four or five days prior to this evening. However,
when the bids were received the liability quotations were not completed
by any of the participating brokers. Therefore, they had to allow
four more days for completion of the proposals in order to present
something to the Council this evening.
Mr. DeVere reviewed the results with the Council explaining that
at present the cost to the City for insurance is approximately
$80,000 for liability and fire coverage. Comparable coverage
for the following fiscal year will go up to $189,OOO - a $110,000
increase for the very same coverage presently enjoyed.
Mr. DeVere explained that cities are involved in a number of things
that private industry is not involved with, all of which has caused
a great deal of loss and concern and increased frequency of claims,
and this has caused many insurance companies to withdraw from the
market entirely. This is reflected in the fact that as of last
week nobody was able to complete their liability quotations. It
took an additional four days to complete them. In the insurance
business things are backed up for two and three months with companies
unwilling to take risks. The number of markets available for politi-
cal subdivision business has been curtailed to just a few insurance
companies.
From an optimistic standpoint Mr. DeVere would suggest that rather
than to look at the problems of $189,000, and the fact that this is
a large increase in comparison to the $80,000 paid last year, the
Council should realize that the $80,000 is greatly deflated. At
that time the $80,000 was a very, very attractive quotation. If
the City uses the present broker, Gene Morgan, he is using the
same insurance market used in the past and there would still be
a $110,000 increase. In comparison, there is the fact that the
largest broker in the united States was unable to corne within $50,000
on the high side, and the coverage is not comparable.
Mayor Tirsell indicated that she is very distressed because the City
does not have $189,000 to pay for insurance coverage.
Mayor Tirsell asked how long the bids are valid and Mr. Parness re-
plied that unfortunately, the timing has caught up with the City
because the bids were incomplete when received. The City's liability
coverage expires on March 25th, which is the umbrella coverage, and
he believes the basic coverage expires in another 30 days. There
is no time for deliberation on this issue, in his opinion.
CM-32-29
March 22, 1976
(re City Insurance)
Mayor Tirsell asked if the separate issue of Workmens Compen-
sation was included in this bid and Mr. Parness indicated
that it was not.
Mr. Parness stated that he has asked Mr. DeVere if the City
could hold the quotations and go shopping for other bids and
everyone has indicated that this would be to no avail - there
is no market for this type of insurance.
Mayor Tirsell asked if this was highly advertised so that if
anyone was interested they were aware of the fact that the City
was aSking for bids.
Mr. DeVere indicated that people in the market are aware but
the market is restricted at this time. Many politi~al subdi-
visions are beginning to panic because most of th~insurance
programs are effective beginning with the new fiscal year.
Mr. DeVere stated that when he comes back to the City with the
Workmens Compensation program it will not be nearly as critical
and the City may even be pleased.
Mr. Morgan, insurance carrier, stated that he would have to
agree with what Mr. DeVere has said in that the City has
had a bargain in the cost of insurance up to this time, but it
has caught up with the City. Even though this is a tremendous
increase, things are changing rapidly and the City really has
no alternative. He stated that he appreciates having had the
opportunity to compete in the bidding and that he originally
disagreed with Mr. DeVere that the City should go to bid but
he would now have to agree that Mr. DeVere's recommendation
was correct.
Mr. Nolan, the Director of Finance, commented that M. G. Callaghan
Insurance Company placed the low bid for the golf course, only,
and he then explained the bid quotations.
CM STALEY MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION
AWARDING THE BID TO THE LOW BIDDERS- CALLAGHAN INSURANCE FOR
THE GOLF COURSE, AND GENE MORGAN FOR LIABILITY AND FIRE.
MOTION SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he is really appalled at the increase
in the insurance rates and that the City is paying for mistakes
made by other people. We should try to seek some type of insur-
ance pooling among cities or political subdivisions. He would
suggest that we write letters of plea to the state legislature
and other political subdivisions (League of California Cities)
and get on with the business to allow alternatives next year.
At this time there does not appear to be an alternative and it
would appear to be an excessively monopolistic system and he
is extremely concerned about this type of thing.
Mr. Parness commented that the League is working on this matter
now.
Cm Turner wondered if some of the items normally covered under
the insurance program could be diverted to self-insurance.
Mr. Parness stated that unfortunately this is not possible because
a company will not write the insurance coverage with any type of
deductable. The attitude of the companies is take it or leave it.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM-32-30
March 22, 1976
ere City Insurance)
Cm Turner stated that it should be clarified that Gene Morgan made
the low bid but he doesn't want the golf course and would suggest
that the insurance for the golf course remain with M. F. Callaghan
Agency.
RESOLUTION NO. 67-76
A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID (E. E. Gene
Morqan Insurance Agency)
RESOLUTION NO. 76-76
A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID
(M. F. Callaghan Agency)
CONSENT CALENDAR
Report re Temporary
Fire Station Housing
The City Manager reported that the fire station located at First
Street and Maple Street will be vacated and the new fire station
on East Avenue will become occupied. In order to afford minimum
travel distance and response time it is recommended that one of
the City's fire fighting units, with the requisite personnel, be
temporarily located at the County fire station until a new fire
station (Station #4) is ready for occupancy which is estimated
to be January 1977.
Res. Auth. Exec. of
Amend. to Taxi Service
Agreement (Subsidized)
The Council authorized execution of an amendment to the agreement
for subsidized taxi service, to include elderly persons who are
disabled, members of a minority-ethnic group, and have low incomes.
RESOLUTION NO. 68-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT (Alameda County)
CM DAHLBACKA ABSTAINED FROM VOTING ON THIS ITEM.
Res. Rejecting C~aim
The Council adopted a resolution rejecting the calim of Jennifer
Ann Alarid.
RESOLUTION NO. 69-76
A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF
JENNIFER ANN ALARID
CM DAHLBACKA AND CM KAMENA ABSTAINED FROM VOTING ON THIS ITEM.
Res. Commending P.C.
Members & Planning Dir.
A resolution was adopted commending the Planning Director and the
Planning Commission for their work on the General Plan.
01-32-31
March 22, 1976
RESOLUTION NO. 70-76
A RESOLUTION COMMENDING THE PLANNING
DIRECTOR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION.
Report re City-County
Modification - Elliott
Property Purchase
The City Manager reported that an agreement modification is
necessary so as to recognize a deed concerning existing sewer and
utility easements intersecting the boundaries of the property.
The easements will in no way deter the use of the land for
highway purposes. It is recommended that a resolution modifying
the agreement be adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 71-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
MODIFICATION NO. 1 OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN
CITY OF LIVERMORE AND COUNTY OF ALAMEDA FOR
PROPERTY ACQUISITION.
Res. re Automatic
R.R. Crossing Device
The Council adopted a resolution executing an agreement with the
State of California Department of Transportation for installation
of automatic gate arms and flashing light signals at the Western
Pacific Railroad crossing at Junction Avenue.
RESOLUTION NO. 72-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
AGREEMENT (State of California Department
of Transportation)
Res. Auth. PaYment
of Storm Drain Credit
~ Livermore Gardens Apts.
The Council adopted a resolution authorizing payment of the storm
drain credit for the Livermore Gardens Apartments.
RESOLUTION NO. 73-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PAYMENT FOR STORM
DRAIN OVERSIZING (Livermore Gardens)
Res. Adjusting
Airport Ground
Rental Rates
During the meeting of March 8th the Council adopted a staff
report proposing an adjustment in the ground rental rate in
accordance with the lease. The increase would be from $.025
to $.039 per square foot.
A resolution was adopted adjusting this rate.
RESOLUTION NO. 74-76
A RESOLUTION ADJUSTING THE BASE
GROUND RENTAL RATE - FIXED BASE
OPERATOR.
CM-32-32
March 22, 1976
Departmental Reports
The following Departmental Reports were submitted for informational
purposes:
Airport Activity - February
Building Inspection - February
Mosquito Abatement District - January
Municipal Court - January
Police and Pound Departments - February
Water Reclamation Plant - February
Res. Denying Appeal
Gunsmith Home Occupation
The Council adopted a resolution denying the appeal by adjacent
residents to John George concerning his home occupation permit.
RESOLUTION NO. 75-76
A RESOLUTION DENYING APPEAL FROM ISSUANCE OF
ZONING USE PERMIT (Home Occupation: John George)
Minutes
The following minutes were noted for filing:
Design Review Committee - March 2nd and 9th
Planning Commission - March 9th
Payroll & Claims
There were 55 claims in the amount of $122,400.64, dated March 12,
1976, and approved by the City Manager.
There were 72 claims in the amount of $135,067.78, dated March 18,
1976, and approved by the City Manager.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED, NOTING THE ABSTENTIONS ~~DE
BY CM DAHLBACKA AND CM KAMENA ON RESOLUTIONS MENTIONED ABOVE.
}~TTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Lounsbury Hearing)
Mr. Musso stated that he has been instructed to attend the hearing
concerning the application by Lounsbury for subdivision of his
property and the County will want to know if the City will allow a
sewer connection since the facility is in existance.
Mayor Tirsell commented that this is a facility that was built against
the City's wishes, and zoned commercial against the City's wishes.
vfuat is the feeling of the Council in granting a sewer connection?
Cm Staley stated that his impulse is to say "no", but he is concerned
that if the City says they won't allow sewer connection he will be
granted the subdivision.
CM-32-33
March 22, 1976
(Lounsbury Hearing)
Mayor Tirsell explained that this is not necessarily the case
because in order to build the facility Mr. Lounsbury would have
been required to have the septic tank to accommodate the facility.
Cm Staley stated that as he recalls the P.C. recommended approval
of the subdivision with the condition that he provide public works,
which included attachment to the City sewer.
Mr. Musso commented that this is correct and this is where the
hang-up is.
Cm Staley stated that if the City says he can't hook up to our
sewer the Board of Supervisors would undoubtedly waive the require-
ment for the public works improvements.
Mr. Musso stated that an alternative would be to deny connection of
sewer but ask that the remaining public works be installed.
Cm Turner stated that the Council's policy in the past is that sewer
connections are not granted to parcels outside the City limits.
Would we consider annexing them to the City?
Mr. Musso explained that the normal procedure is that if a sewer
connection is allowed they must agree to annex to the City when
the City requests.
Cm Staley expressed concern that the facility does exist and is
on a septic tank which is not a very good situation and perhaps
the Council might consider sewer connection with possible annexa-
tion.
Mr. Musso commented that this action would also be a signal to the
County that they can go ahead with commercialization in that area
and can get sewage later.
Cm Staley stated that in that case he would like to say no sewer
connection.
The City Attorney advised that if this is to be pursued the
City do so with a full report and proper evidence.
Mr. Musso explained that this would be only a matter of g1v1ng an
answer to the Board - they would have to come back to the City and
go through the whole process anyway.
Cm Staley suggested that Mr. Musso state, to the Board of Super-
visors, the City's policy and indicate that this particular
application has not been thoroughly discussed.
(Fire Station #1)
Mr. Parness reported that Fire Station #1 has been completed.
Everything was found to be in order at the time of the walk-
through and the building is ready for acceptance.
Everything has been completed with the exception of one item,
the street light, which is the responsibility of PG&E. PG&E
has indicated that it may not be ready for about six weeks.
Mr. Parness stated that as the Council will recall this is one
of the reasons he urged that a variance of policy be allowed in
accepting a structure not technically complete.
CM-32-34
March 22, 1976
(Fire Station #4)
Mr. Parness stated that he believes this facility fully qualifies
for a variance so that it can become occupied. The City would like
to take acceptance of the building so the alarm system can be installed.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION ALLOWING
A VARIANCE TO COUNCIL POLICY, SECONDED BY CM STALEY, AND PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCILMEMBERS
ere Declaration of
Real Property)
Cm Turner stated that the Councilmembers are required to file a
Declaration of Real Property prior to April 15th and the point he
would like to make is that this is required by City Ordinance and
since the Council has already been required to file a Statement
of Economic Interest he would suggest that this duplication be
deleted.
It was requested that this item be scheduled as an agenda item
for discussion.
(Response to School
District re EIS)
Cm Turner stated that the Council received a copy of a letter sent
to the School District by the Livermore Noise Abatement Committee
concerning the EIS for the School District building program.
Cm Turner felt that this type of letter should go through the
Council because it is a response to another agency. Cm Turner
added that the letter implies that Mr. Croce ignored points made
in a letter sent to the School District earlier and that this is
really not proper.
Cm Turner suggested that in the future, committees be requested
to submit letters to the Council if they are to be sent to other
agencies, because the Council is responsible for their actions.
Mr. Musso stated that in this particular case the Planning Commission
asked the Noise Abatement Committee to respond to the letter from the
School District and this is the reason it was composed and sent by
the Committee. After a letter was sent, a draft EIR was received
which was felt to be inadequate and was followed by a second letter.
The Planning Commission wanted the letter sent as a matter of record
and they discussed the issue contained in the letter to be sent.
Cm Turner stated that he would like to go on record as opposing this
type of letter and that he would not want a letter of this nature to
go to an agency from a City committee in the future.
Mayor Tirsell commented that City committees are advisory to the
Council and she believes they should not initiate action such as
this without consulting the Council.
Mr. Musso stated that he would so advise committee members.
(Underpasses)
Cm Turner stated that he has received numerous complaints about
the number of stops that have to be made when using the underpass
CM-32-35
March 22, 1976
(Stops on Underpass Streets)
streets. He would like to know if the stop signs can be removed
along "P" and North Livermore to accommodate through traffic and
to provide a direct route to the freeway.
Cm Turner stated that he would also like to know when the traffic
signals on "P" Street will be complete.
Mr. Lee stated that the lights on Olivina at "P" will be ready in
about three weeks but at Railroad Avenue the stop signs will be
necessary for a longer period of time because of additional rail-
road track work. It may be as long as a couple of months.
(Associated Community
Action Program)
Cm Kamena reported on the outcome of the Associated Community
Action Program he attended last Wednesday and the amount of
money allocated for various projects. .
The Day Care Center received $30,000 but Cm Kamena stated that
they need $47,000 to remain in operation and he is going to
work on getting additional funding for them.
The Senior Citizens Center received $27,000 and they may be
getting additional funding through ACTEB in April.
(Sewer Plant Energy)
Cm Dahlbacka wondered if there is enough gas generated at the
sewer plant to run this facility or if anyone has given this
thought.
Mr. Lee commented that the energy is used to heat the digesters.
The gas is produced from the solids removed from the effluent
but this is a source that cannot be depended upon and there
is not enough produced to run the plant.
(SB 756)
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he attended a meeting of the Sand and
Gravel Committee during which time a presentation was given
concerning SB 756 which requires reclamation of gravel pits.
This legislation was passed and the Sand and Gravel companies
have hired a consultant to work on this item.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he would like to know if there has been
an Attorney General opinion concerning presently owned land that
is being mined - do they fall under SB 756?
Cm Dahlbacka mentioned that this bill also enables the formation
of a nine member committee to oversee all mining operation and
reclamation plans in the state. The appointments are being made
right now by Governor Brown and apparently there have not been
many applications. The bill provides that one person be a repre-
sentative of local government, and nobody who represents industry
or is a consultant to industry can serve on the committee.
CM-32-36
March 22, 1976
(Livermore's
Incorporation)
Mayor Tirsell stated that Janet Newton had telephoned her concerning
research she has done on Livermore's incorporation. Apparently it
was incorporated on April 15, 1876.
Mayor Tirsell asked if Cm Staley would report back to the Council
with a suggestion for something appropriate for commemoration of
that day since this item was first brought to the attention of the
Council by him.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Tirsell adjourned the meeting at 11:26 p.m.
APPROVE
~~
fn
95AAJ1L
Mayor
ATTEST
~
Special Meeting - April 1, 1976
A special meeting of the City Council was called by Mayor Tirsell
for Thursday, April 1, 1976, at 12 noon, in the Conference Room,
City Hall, 2250 First Street, Livermore, CAlifornia.
Present: Cm Staley, Turner and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: Cm Dahlbacka, Kamena (seated later)
The meeting was called at the request of the Bicentennial Organiza-
tion for official recognition for insurance purposes. The Council
discussed whether or not the designation would effect the insurance
rate and it was determined that it would not. Also discussed was
whether or not this designation would imply funding, but it would not.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY, AND BY UNANIMOUS
APPROVAL, THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS PASSED AND ADOPTED.
RESOLUTION NO. 77-76
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE LIVERMORE BICENTENNIAL
CO~~ITTEE AND APPOINTING MEMBERS THERETO
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 12:20 p.m.to
executive session to discuss possible and pending litigation.
APPROVE
ATTEST
Clerk
California
CM-32-37
Regular Meeting of AprilS, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
AprilS, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:05 p.m.
with Mayor Tirsell presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Dahlbacka, Kamena, Turner, Staley, and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirsell led the Councilmembers as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES
3/15)76 and 3/22/76
P. 6, second paragraph under Committees, first line should read:
Cm Staley wondered if there are any committees which have not met..etc.
P. 16, second paragraph, last line, last word should be warranted.
P. 16, third paragraph, last line, last word should be decision.
P. 20, middle of page, beginning with Cm Dahlbacka, last line should
read: Mike McCracken of LLL has done a report at UCRL which is avail-
able at LLL.
P. 23, 6th paragraph, first line should read: Mayor Tirsell commented
that the City might agree to help the cost of printing...etc.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY, THE MINUTES OF THE
MEETINGS OF March 15, and March 22, 1976 WERE APPROVED AS AMENDED.
OPEN FORUM
(Campaign Contri-
bution Ordinance)
Larry Bakken, 765 Lido Drive, stated that he would like to address
the Council concerning Ordinance 875 with respect to election
campaign contributions. He stated that he believes there may be
a violation of the Constitution involved and he has written a
letter concerning this issue to the Director of Finance with a
copy to the City Attorney.
The circumstance arose in which one of the candidates was asked
to go to the Police Department and explain certain activities
and he intended to give legal counsel to this person when talking
to the police.
The list of contributions includes services and under the ordinance
services given after 5 days prior to the election have to be given
to the General Fund of the City. This raises the problem of a
candidate not being able to have legal representation, and he would
ask that the Council investigate this aspect.
He also added that one set of forms is required for the County with
another set for the City and he would suggest that one set be suf-
ficient for both agencies. At present, two sets of forms are required
on two different days and the bookkeeping is very difficult.
Brief discussion followed concerning the forms required and the staff
was asked to place this item as well as discussion on the particular
ordinance as an agenda item.
CM-32-38
AprilS, 1976
(Campaign Contribution
Ordinance)
Cm Staley stated that he would like to comment that in his opinion
service as an attorney in quasi-criminal proceedings is not a cam-
paign contribution but rather service given to the individual involved.
Mr. Bakken stated that this is true, except when they are rendered
by the campaign treasurer, who is also an attorney.
(Diagonal Parking)
John Chapman, 351 Turnstone Drive, stated that he would like to
propose diagonal parking along "K" Street and Fifth Street near
the Presbyterian Church because additional parking is needed for
people attending Sunday School, church services, and nursery school.
The Council referred the matter of possible diagonal parking to the
staff for later report.
(Commercial Development
- HEXCEL Corporation)
Mr. Cornelius Meyer, stated that he is speaking to the Council on
behalf of the International Chemical Workers Union, Local No. 422 in
Livermore.
At present they have a contract with the HEXCEL Corporation located
on Trevarno Road. HEXCEL is planning to shut down their ski fabri-
cation operation in Livermore and move to Reno. The reason for the
move is because they had difficulty in renewing the lease on the
buildings owned by Ensign-Bickford but HEXCEL now plans to purchase
the land and the buildings.
He would like to suggest that HEXCEL now build in Livermore because
the land would be available and development for this type of operation
could take place. If HEXCEL moves to Reno approximately 150 jobs
would be eliminated and it is estimated that in time a total of
250 jobs would be eliminated due to a move.
The Union would like to know what the Council and the community can
do to save these jobs for Livermore.
Mayor Tirsell stated that this item has been discussed by the City
and she asked Cm Turner to explain the results of the meeting con-
cerning HEXCEL.
Mr. Parness explained that the Chamber of Commerce arranged for a
meeting to take place with representatives of HEXCEL and the City
Staff as well as the Chamber. It was disclosed during this meeting
that there were many considerations taken into account in the decision
of the company to plan the move. Primarily the major consideration
was site location and the cost to build. They did assure the City
that they have no intention of vacating Livermore and that they plan
to maintain and utilize the present building located in Livermore for
product development purposes. Also, they are 'interested in some
type of expansion and possible connection to City sewage.
em Turner stated that it was his understanding from the conversa-
tion in the meeting that the overriding factor in their decision
to move was construction costs in the Valley. However, in his
opinion the issue is not dead because Mr. Witt from HEXCEL did
ask Mr. Parness for information that might be helpful to them.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the City is interested in keeping the
jobs here in Livermore and they will continue to contact HEXCEL
concerning this issue.
CM-32-39
AprilS, 1976
(Measure A)
-..... ..
Jerry Wilverding, 4886 Primrose Lane, stated that he believes
"justice for all" is not being accomplished when the will of the
majority is not represented as substantiated in placing Proposition
"A" back on the ballot, in direct contrast to the will of the people.
Mayor Tirsell stated that legislative bodies have the right to
appeal to the electorate for funding at any time they feel it is
necessary. The School District, for example, continually goes back
to the voters for support and they rework and rearrange their items
for placement on the ballot and prove to the electorate that money
is needed.
Mr. Wilverding stated that prior to the election there was no
money for additional pOlice personnel and yet after failure
of the measure to pass, the City did hire additional personnel.
Mr. Parness explained that the City received a grant from the
state, after the election, that enabled the City to hire two
people for the Police Department.
Mr. wilverding stated that he cannot understand why the City
is fighting with Mr. Lounsbury concerning commercial develop-
ment of his property when the City wants people to be allowed
to walk to shopping areas rather than drive.
It was pointed out that Mr. Lounsbury is not located in the City
and the Council wants concentration of commercial development in
one area. They are not opposed to grocery stores in neighborhoods.
COMMUNICATION RE
BUSINESS ON FIRST
STREET (Bedford & Jones)
A letter has been received from Robert J. Bedford and Leslie R.
Jones concerning business located at 2891 First Street and the
barricades resulting from the railroad track relocation, as well
as proposals for future installation.
ON MOTION OF eM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE ITEM WAS REFERRED TO THE STAFF FOR REPORT.
Cm Turner wondered if work will be accomplished in the area of
the barricades during the time the staff is working on a report.
Mr. Lee commented that work will not be done and that the PUC is
holding a hearing concerning this matter.
COMMUNICATION REQUESTING
LOT SPLIT (G. R. Duterte)
The request for a lot split for property located on Hillcrest
Avenue was received from G. R. Duterte in a letter which indi-
cated that the property is served by sewer and water facilities.
C m Dahlbacka stated that he is concerned about the City's present
policy of reserving sewage capacity for lots of record and he
would hope that there is sewer capacity for any industrial/commercial
development that the City might get. It would seem that allowing
lot splits would be a sure way of diminishing our sewage capacity.
em Turner stated that Mr. Musso has pointed out, in the past, that
there are probably a dozen lots in the City that would require a
lot split, such as the one Mr. Duterte is requesting. In his
opinion this is a reasonable request and one the Council should
grant. Also there should be sufficient commercial/industrial
sewage available until the Valley receives the additional 1 MGD.
He added that he is not talking about allowing lot splits for
40, 80, and 100 acre lots.
CM-32-40
AprilS, 1976
(Lot Split-G.R. Duterte)
~dt~
. ~~~'h .-.
em Staley stated that he would agree w1th Cm M1ller 1n t 1S case
because allowing a lot split in this instance would fulfill two
policies of the General Plan - it would fill in a residential area
and since they are relatively small lots it enables development of
homes that would hopefully sell for less money.
Mr. Musso stated that as he recalls, during the last time this was
discussed the Council concluded that there would be no exceptions
to lot splitting.
Mr. Duterte stated that he feels this is different than a 40 acre
lot split because this is already zoned and has sewage and water
connections.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that if it is the intention of the Council to
consider lot splitting for a few lots he would suggest that it be
referred to the Planning Commission for consideration.
Mayor Tirsell stated that it is her understanding that in addition
to lots that could be split two ways there are many lots that are
large lots which are already lots of record.
Mr. Musso stated that this is true - there are many lots of record
which are very large and are also already zoned.
CM TURNER MOVED TO MAKE AN EXCEPTION TO THE COUNCIL POLICY REGARDING
LOT SPLITTING, TO ALLOW SPLITTING OF THE LOT. MOTION SECONDED BY
CM STALEY FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES.
Cm Staley stated that even though he seconded the motion he believes
that the motion really should be to refer the matter to the Planning
Commission for discussion because the item has to do with setting a
policy, and in his opinion it deserves substantial discussion.
CM TURNER WITHDREW HIS MOTION AND THE SECOND WAS WITHDRAWN.
CM TURNER MOVED TO REFER THIS ITEM TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR
DISCUSSION AS TO HOW LOT SPLITTING CAN APPLY TO SMALLER LOTS WITHIN
THE CITY IF IT IS DETERMINED THAT LOT SPLITTING IS ADVISABLE. MOTION
SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
Cm Staley stated that two questions need to be answered by the P.C.
1) Is it advisable to allow lot splitting; and 2) is there a way
it can be implemented without opening the doors to the problem of
40 acre parcel splits.
Mayor Tirsell explained that unless there is support for the old
motion, the Council wants the P.C. to look at the specifics of
granting Mr. Duterte an exception and whether or not this would
mean dissolution of the policy.
MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
COMMUNICATION FROM
VCSD RE APPT. TO
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGE-
MENT TASK FORCE
A letter was received from the Board of Directors of VCSD expressing
concern that of the 44 membership Environmental Management Task Force
Committee, no elected official from the Livermore-Amador Valley has
been included.
Mayor Tirsell stated that a letter from ABAG indicates that they are
not anticipating increasing the number of members for the Task Force
but she would like authorization to write to the Executive Board of
CM-32-4l
AprilS, 1976
(Re Appt. to Environmental
Management Task Force)
ABAG aprising them of the fact that the Livermore-Amador Valley has
no representation and that we would very much like to have repre-
sentation.
COMMUNICATION RE PRO-
VISION FOR SECURING
BICYCLES DOWNTOWN
A letter was received from the San Francisco Bay Chapter Sierra
Club indicating that there is a need for local government to pro-
mote use of the bicycle and that more attention should go towards
the provision of secure bicycle parking in the downtown areas, etc.
The letter was referred to the Planning Commission, the Valley Spokes-
men, and the Bikeways Association.
COMMUNICATION RE
APPOINTMENT TO ADMIN-
ISTERING BOARD FOR ACAP
Mayor Tirsell commented that Cm Kamena is the Council representative
to the Board and it is required that there are four appointments from
the Valley for the Advisory Board and the Manpower Advisory Board.
It has been the duty of the Councilmember representative to find mem-
bers to serve on the advisory boards and then come to the Council for
confirmation of these people. Cm Kamena will work on this project.
COMMUNICATION RE
LAVWMA PIPELINE
A letter was received from Supervisor Cooper informing the Council
that the Board of Supervisors will be discussing the size of the
LAVWMA pipeline and pumping plant and mitigation measures required
by EPA for funding of the pipeline and pumping station. The
meeting is scheduled for April 13th at 2:30 p.m.
em Turner stated that he would like to attend the meeting along
with Mayor Tirsell.
AGENDA ITEM RE
ADOPTION OF BUSINESS
LICENSE TAX ORDINANCE
Mayor Tirsell stated that there are people in the audience who have
come to speak to the Council concerning the proposed amendment to
the business license ordinance and asked that this item be discuss-
ed at this time.
Bill Manis, 2363 Chateau Way, representative of the Chamber of
Commerce, thanked the Council for allowing a 30 day extension in
adoption of the ordinance. unfortunately, the Chamber had a
difficult time in coming up with solutions to all the problems
conected with the business license tax. They would like to request
an additional 30 day delay to allow them further study.
Mayor Tirsell asked the Director of Finance the date the ordinance
would have to be adopted in order to prepare for the new tax year.
Mr. Nolan explained that in the past the merchants have been re-
quired to file a statement by April 15th in order for the City to
determine the tax for the following year; however, the new ordi-
nance proposed would provide for a simplified tax which would
eliminate the need for filing of a statement in April. The filing
would be made in July along with a check for the business license.
This helps eliminate handling and mailing.
CM-32-42
AprilS, 1976
ere Bus. License Tax)
Assuming a proposal is agreed upon which is similar to the one
drafted, June 1st would be a reasonable time for implementation
of the ordinance.
em Kamena stated that looking at the overall picture, he would have
to say that three weeks would be the maximum extension that could
be allowed.
Mr. Manis indicated that they could certainly work within this time
scale and the delay would be appreciated.
CM TURNER MOVED TO DELAY ADOPTION OF THE BUSINESS LICENSE TAX ORDI-
NANCE UNTIL APRIL 26th. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
Cm Staley stated that he would suggest that rather than placing this
item back on the agenda the 26th, it should be referred directly to
the Business License Tax Advisory Committee with a hearing to follow.
Mayor Tirsell commented that the Chamber will be meeting now, knowing
that it will be on the agenda of the 26th, so they can have something
for the joint committee to consider and everything should be ready by
April 26th.
Mr. Manis indicated that this is correct.
Cm Turner wondered if there would be an advantage to the Council
Committee working with the Chamber during the three week period
and possibly extending the three weeks to five weeks to allow the
two committees to work together.
Cm Turner stated that, hopefully, the joint committees can provide a
formula that would be acceptable to the' Chamber as well as the Chamber
governing body and the City Council. Otherwise, if each committee
considers the ordinance separately, it would result in nothing more
than a delay.
em Staley stated that he sees the delay as the opportunity for
merchants who are not members of the Board of Directors of the
Chamber of Commerce, to review the ordinance and make comments.
Don Miller, member of the committee, stated that he would like to
say that one of the things agreed upon last week by those present
was that the Chamber would meet for three weeks, and the concept
they had been formalizing would be exchanged with the Council/Chamber
Committee. This would give committee members a chance to become fa-
miliar with the concept of the proposals made by the Chamber. Prior
to the deadline, which apparently will be April 26th, the committee
would review everything, inclllding the Chamber's input and come back
to the Council with a recommendation.
Mayor Tirsell commented that in order to be consistent Mr. Miller
would have to give up his spot as a member of the committee but
invited him to attend all meetings because they are open and public
input is welcome. The Council will have to discuss constitution of
membership.
Cm Turner suggested that the Council discuss membership at this time.
Cm Staley stated that since Cm Kamena had been the President of the
Chamber of Commerce at the time this ordinance was prepared he would
suggest that Cm Kamena serve as one of the two Council representa-
tives.
Cm Kamena stated that Cm Miller attended the meetings and he would
hope that if he is replaced by another Councilmember, that he would
continue to attend the meetings because he has valuable background
information and knowledge of this item. Also, he would prefer that
someone other than him act as a representative to allow fairness in
discussion of the ordinance.
CM-32-43
April 5, 1976
ere Bus. License Tax)
Cm Turner stated that he would like to serve as a representa-
tive and even though Councilmembers generally step down from
representation on a committee, because of the timing involved
he would suggest that Mr. Miller continue to attend all the
meetings as a representative as well as selecting an additional
Councilmember. The Chamber of Commerce may also select an addi-
tional representative if they desire to do so.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he believes this recommendation is
reasonable because it provides for continuity and additional
representation.
Mr. Manis stated that it is true that he became President of
the Chamber of Commerce in January and he was not involved in
the details concerning the business license tax. However, there
were people who worked on this item in the past, in 1970 and 1972,
who were not invited to be representatives on the committee. He
stated that since the committee is being expanded he believes
their input would be valuable.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, TO CONTINUE ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE.
CM STALEY MOVED THAT THE COMMITTEE BE CONTINUED, AS IT WAS
CONSTITUTED AT THE TIME OF THE ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION, WITH
THE SUBSTITUTION OF eM TURNER AS THE SECOND COUNCIL REPRE-
SENTATIVE. THESE MEMBERS WILL BE CM STALEY, CM TURNER, BILL
MANIS, ANNETTE MORRIS, REBECCA HUNDOBLE, AND DON MILLER. MOTION
WAS SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE SPIVAK DEVELOP.
CO. RE ANNEXATION
At the request of the applicant the Spivak Development Company
annexation item was continued.
REPORT RE PROPOSED
PURCHASE OF WALL
STREET PARK
The City Manager reported that a purchase price for the Wall
Street/Stanley Boulevard property was negotiated several months
ago and the City has agreed to its purchase. However, the owner
now wishes to decline offer of purchase and is seeking a higher
price for the property.
It is recommended that the Council adopt a motion reiterating
its willingness to purchase the property at a price of $21,000
representing a final offer.
Mr. Guy Willis, 2628 Kennedy Street, owner of the property
stated that the City has blocked any attempt he has made at
selling this property and he would like the Council to allow
him to obtain a fair market price for his property.
Mr. Willis stated that in March of last year he did agree to
a price of $21,000, under very trying circumstances. At that
time the City declined to participate and as far as he is con-
cerned that negotiation was terminated. At that time the price
represented a loss to him and because of increased costs the gap
is now even wider. At that particular time he had become owner
of the property only a short time and because of the problems
concerning sewage he lost two potential developers and was told
by the City that the property had no value other than to the City.
CM-32-44
AprilS, 1976
(Wall Street Property)
Mr. Willis stated that since then it has been determined that sewer
and building permits for apartments are available and the property
does have some value and potential. He has had an offer of $42,000
for development of apartments which changed to $36,000 when a developer
decided to place single family dwelling units on the property. The
property was not suitable for single family dwelling units because
of the size of the lots and following this matter the City reopened
the subject of purchasing the property.
Otto Eckert, Wall Street resident, stated that he has helped to cir-
culate the petition signed by 99 residents of the area asking that
the Council do whatever they can to purchase this property to extend
Pioneer Park. At the time he circulated the petition he showed people
an article which indicated that Mr. Willis had agreed to sell for
$21,000 and he believes that this is the reason many people signed
the petition.
Cm Staley stated that the reason the City agreed to pay $2l,0~O for
the property was because of the fact tha~lear ~o tho title~ the
property could not be furnished by Mr. Willis. The purpose of Mr.
Eckert and many of the Wall Street residents to sign the petition
was in an attempt to show the City that they would not object to
some of the covenants in the deed. In his opinion the property
could not have appreciated in value over this 10 month period when
the restrictions are still present.
CM STALEY MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE STAFF TO SUBMIT
A FINAL OFFER OF $21,000 FOR THE PROOPERTY. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY
CM DAHLBACKA.
The City Attorney advised that if the City is making an offer there
are procedures that must be followed which have not been followed.
If the Council, on the other hand, is accepting an offer these
procedures are not required.
CM STALEY RESTATED THE MOTION TO ACCEPT THE OFFER AS ORIGINALLY
MADE, FOR $21,000, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA. .
Cm Kamena stated that it is his underst~~~~~~~~fer is
not being made to the City by the ownerjana~yt~BSems senseless to
vote on a motion accepting an offer not being made.
Mr. Willis stated that he really has no choice in this matter
because the City determines the use and ultimately the price
for the property.
Mr. Musso stated that for the records he would like to make it
clear that single family residential units are allowed on this
property but the Council denied a variance concerning setbacks
and the developer withdrew his request even before they were denied.
~J?, tll-1feu~
Mr. Willis stated that he woul~o11er tHe property at $21,000 with
24-hours to reconsider his offer.
Mayor Tirse1l stated that if this is the case she believes the
proper procedure would be to withdraw the item from the agenda
and wait for an offer from Mr. Willis.
Cm Staley stated that implied in the motion is that the City would
accept the property for $21,000, with the title as it is, and that
Mr. Willis would have a reasonable length of time to consider accept-
ance of the offer.
CM-32-45
April 5, 1976
(re Wall St. property)
Mr. Logan commented that if Mr. willis intends to make another
offer to the City he would suggest that it be done through the
staff so the loose ends can be taken care of before it comes to
the Council.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she believes this item should be tabled
pending action by the applicant.
CM TURNER MOVED TO TABLE THIS ITEM, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA, AND
PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE COMMUNITY
AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
JULY 4th CELEBRATION
The City Council agreed to participate with the community Affairs
Committee for a 4th of July celebration in the amount of $2,000
and the community Affairs Committee asked for clarification as to
whether or not the $2,000 would be inclusive of $500 for associa-
ted costs.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the City met with the Community Affairs
Committee to review their budget. The budget provides for $500
to pay for the cost of entertainment at the 4th of July picnic.
CM TURNER MOVED TO CLARIFY THE COUNCIL'S ORIGINAL MOTION TO ALLO-
CATE $2,000 FOR THE 4th OF JULY CELEBRATION, AND TO INCLUDE $500
FOR MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS, GIVING THE COMMUNITY AFFAIRS COMMITTEE A
TOTAL OF $2,500. MOTION SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
Mayor Tirsell pointed out that this is the last year the City will
be allowed to provide 4th of July fireworks because of recent
legislation prohibiting them.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
DISCUSSION RE COMMUNICATION
FROM MRS. BRYAN CONCERNING
MEASURE B
Mayor Tirsell stated that a letter was received from Mrs. Bryan
suggesting that perhaps a recount of Measure "B" would be in
order. The item was contined from the meeting of March 22nd.
The City Attorney has indicated that the item is not appropriate
for a recount because the council has already certified the elec-
tion and a complaint must be filed within 30 days of the election
and this was not done.
CM STALEY MOVED TO TABLE THIS ITEM, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND
PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Mayor Tirsell asked that the staff write a letter to Mrs. Bryan
explaining the reason for the Council's action, including the
opinion written by the City Attorney and the City Clerk.
RECESS
Mayor Tirsell called for a brief recess, after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present.
CM-32-46
AprilS, 1976
REPORT RE LA~~ PROPOSED
FLOW PROJECTIONS FOR
WASTE WATER FACILITIES
Mayor Tirsell stated that there are people in the audience who have
come to speak on the item concerning the LAVWMA proposed flow pro-
jections for waste water facilities and asked that the Council move
to this item on the agenda if there are no objections.
Mayor Tirsell stated that a lot of correspondence has been received
from LAVWMA with respect to the flow projections for the wastewater
facilities program and she would like the Council to review this
correspondence because she needs instruction as to what should be
said at the Board of Supervisors meeting on April 13th, as well as
the LAVWMA Board meeting on April 22nd.
The Council reviewed the motion by the Board of Directors of LAVWMA
which indicated a majority vote favoring an 18.2 MGD total with 2.22
MGD reserved for industrial development and .14 MGD for the Pleasanton
Fairgrounds and a size of pipeline for average daily flows with surge
facilities.
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that in Table 2, there are figures discussed
by the Council and sent to the LAVWMA Board for their meeting. Her
concern at that time was that Livermore was requesting an additional
1 MGD with nothing allowed for industry. She asked that the Council
review this and specifically to review our segment of the line. In
reviewing our segment of the line we find it is being sized and
engineering is being done separately from the main line which will
go over the hill. In her opinion it would be helpful if the Council
would bear in mind that this project possibly has two parts that need
to be discussed - sizing and capacity of our lines which will connect
to the VCSD plant, and the project which is the sizing of the pipeline
over the hill.
Dan Murphy, project manager for LAm~, stated that the 1 MGD did
not include Livermore's end of the pipeline nor the segment of the
pipeline over the hill.
Mayor Tirsell pointed out that the engineers have pointed out that
it is included in our section of the pipeline.
Mr. Murphy stated that he believes Mr. Knopf, of Carollo Engineers,
is design1ng on the basis of expected action to be taken by LAVWMA
which would include the 1 MGD, rather than any formal action taken
by LAVWMA.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that perhaps the Council should discuss our
section of the line first.
Cm Staley stated that he would like to know the size of the pipeline
from Livermore to the VCSD plant.
Mr. Knopf indicated that there is enough elevation between here
and VCSD to allow flow by gravity which would not require a pump
station, and they have looked at a 33" diameter pipe to accommodate
storm drainage flow and the other size is a 27" diameter line built
in conjunction with the surge pond which would be designed to store
peak flows and the pipeline would carry average flows. These are
the two alternatives evaluated with respect to cost and it was
determined that the cost is relatively the same.
Mr. Knopf indicated that a 27" pipe would carry a flow of 10.2 MGD.
A 33" pipe would carry 17.4 MGD, with maximum flow, and a pumping
station built later would not increase the flow - a different pipe
would be required to increase the flow.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that it is his understanding that with a
33" pipe, a surge pond could be built in the future also.
Mr. Knopf indicated that this is correct.
CM-32-47
AprilS, 1976
(re LAVWMA Pipeline)
Cm Turner wondered khow large the surge pond would be and Mr. Knopf
indicated that it would be designed to store daily peak flows and
it is not as large as the pond located at the sewage plant which
holds six day's storage.
Cm Staley stated that he would like to know what the City requires
in terms of MGD to meet the requirements of the General Plan re-
cently adopted.
Mr. Lee stated that a population of 82,000 would require approxi-
mately 8 to 8.5 MGD without a higher proportion of industry. If
we get a higher proportion of industry he would estimate a need
for 10 MGD. The 10.2 MGD that the 27" line would accommodate would
come only from Livermore or that sewage which passes through the
Livermore sewage plant.
Cm Staley stated that this means a 27" pipeline could satisfy
the requirements of the General Plan through its lifetime includ-
ing major expansion of our industrial and commercial base.
Mr. Lee stated that this is true if a surge pond is included.
He added that if there is no difference in cost he would recom-
mend the 33" line because a surge pond would not be required and
it would take care of peak flows as well.
There was discussion concerning E-O funding and Mr. Lee explained
that a 24" line will not accommodate Livermore's needs and if it
is determined that a larger line is necessary he is sure they will
participate in the funding of the larger line.
Mr. Knopf stated that this is true - just because a pipe can carry
more, is just coincidental.
Mr. Murphy stated that if there is an additional 1 MGD industrial
flow in the pipeline it is possible that the state Board could not
fund that capacity if it is a question of industrial flow requiring
a larger pipe. There may be some question as to the size of pipe
they will fund.
Mayor Tirsell stated that in other words, if the City goes to a
vote of the people for the additional 1 MGD for industry and it
is not supported, the lower sized pipe may be used for the project
- the 24" pipe.
Mayor Tirsell stated that if we have to use a 24" line a small
surge pond would be required for the amount that goes over the
hill and she would like to know if we would receive credit for
the surge pond if it becomes necessary.
Mr. Knopf stated that this has not been discussed because the
design has not progressed to this stage - facilities and cost
sharing, but it is certainly something that will have to be
considered.
It was noted that the 24" line would serve 7.4 MGD.
Mr. Knopf clarified that there is no difference in the cost of
a 27" line with a surge pond and a 33" line without the surge
pond.
Mayor Tirsell stated that in talking with Lila Euler, she indicated
that when they talk about the project and the size of the project
they are talking about the other side of the valley and the pipe
over the hill. They really have not addressed the matter of the
size of the pipe for Livermore.
CM-32-48
April 5, 1976
ere LA~~ Pipeline Size)
Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, stated that if the pipe is buried
deep enough and they have sufficient right-of-way, another pipe
can be placed on top of the old one if it becomes necessary.
Don Miller, 2862 Waverly Way, stated that he would like to bring
to the attention of the Council, the magnified numbers being spoken
about with respect to industrial. The City presently has 4.5 MGD
for its population which corresponds roughly to 1 MGD for every
11,000 people. There is another .32 MGD assigned to industrial
and if everyone in the City had local jobs instead of commuting,
the .32 would turn into .64. If there is a population increase
of 20% or 30%, there would be a total requirement for industrial
in the order of 1 MGD, of which a portion already exists in our
sewer plant. This means that the additional amount required to
have everybody working locally, would be approximately 1 MGD.
What it takes to serve 82,000 people, which is something less than
the final number in the General Plan, the total sewage requirement
for the General Plan would be 7.4 MGD with a 24" line. If the
population is 72,000, 6.4 MGD would serve this population. It is
possible, if the General Plan is followed, that 7.4 MGD could satis-
fy the total population with everyone working in the City of Livermore,
and the necessary industrial development.
M~ Miller pointed out that the reason there would be sufficient
sewage for industrial development is because large sewage users
should be unacceptable on the basis of other grounds, such as water
pollution.
Mr. Wilverding indicated that the City is launching a program to
attract industry to Livermore and it would seem that if the 33"
line were used which requires no surge pond, no maintenance, and
no extra land required, it would seem foolish to go to the smaller
line requiring these additional items when there is no extra cost
for the 33" line. If the 33" line were used all the possible
allocations for any type of development could be satisfied.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the City is looking at projections that
would be funded by the state in addition to the fact that the City
may receive credit on the rest of the project for the use of the
surge pond, and this is the reason the smaller line may be chosen.
Mr. Wilverding stated that he heard in the conversation that the
24" line would not be satisfactory and that the City would have to
go to at least a 27" line. If this is the case it would seem reason-
able to go ahead with the 33" line without the surge pond, and at
the same cost.
Archer Futch, 1252 Westbrook Place, stated that he understands
the cost of the three l1nes are relatively the same, but up to
this point nobody has offered what price range is being considered
in the three different sizes.
Mr. Knopf stated that the cost of the 24" line was not evaluated
but the 27" line with the surge pond would be about $3.1 million
and the 33" line without the pond would also cost $3.1 million.
The 27" line without the !;urge pond would be $2.9 million, or
about $200,000 difference between just the lines only.
Cm Dahlbacka wondered if the size of the surge pond could be
increased and therefore integrate out the flows over longer
periods of time and go to the smaller line.
Mr. Knopf indicated that the surge pond deals only with daily
variations in the flow so a larger pond would not satisfy the
problems associated with a smaller line.
CM-32-49
AprilS, 1976
(LAVWMA Pipeline Size)
Discussion then followed concerning typical wet weather flow
and the maximum flow during wet weather.
Cm Dahlbacka commented that he believes a larger surge pond
would work with the smaller line because the pond holding
variations are based on climate changes and not population.
Mr. Knopf stated that what Cm Dahlbacka has said is true but
if there were no variations at all in the flow, the pipe would
still have to be designed to handle the flow that comes to the
plant. Unless water is to be stored infinitely, the pipe can
not be smaller than what the average daily flow requires.
Mr. Lee added that impoundment of water is very expensive and
the type of terrain being dealt with makes it very difficult
to impound the water, since digging and diking would be required.
Cm Dahlbacka felt a surge pond could be designed to handle more
frequent peaks and have a different plain, for example, that
can have all other uses associated with it to handle the very
large flow expected only once in awhile and that ~t is not # .
necessary to design a system, t;, ~/' ~dIO~~d.l ~
o&4~1 ~
Mayor Tirsell commented that she doesn't unde tand the advantage
of this suggestion.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that the advantage would be that a system is
not being designed which is much larger than is necessary and if
larger storage ponds are designed the City might receive credit.
Mr. Lee explained that it may be necessary to provide for six
weeks of rain or 45 million gallons, and this amount could occupy
40 acres. The earth work for that terrain could be quite sub-
stantial, and if a 1.5 MGD surge pond would cost $200,000, the
45 million gallon surge pond could be greatly escalated in cost.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he is still not satisfied that something
else can't be done with the surge pond, such as agricultural use,
and that it could be diked very easily. In his opinion a surge
pond is not a major problem.
Cm Turner wondered if the $200,000 quoted for the surge pond
would include the cost of the land, and Mr. Knopf indicated that
it is included in the cost.
Mr. Knopf stated that this is based on 1.9 acres at $ll,OOO/acre.
A surge pond requires about 2 acres and would be located in the
area of the airport.
Cm Turner stated that it would seem reasonable to use the 33" pipe
and save the two acres of land needed for the surge pond and to
use the land for another use, rather than using the smaller line
requiring the surge pond.
Cm Staley stated that as he understands it, without industrial,
E-O funding would be provided for the 24" pipe and this may mean
that a 27" pipe financing would have to be borne by the City.
Mayor Tirsell asked if the City would be required to pay the differ-
ence in the size of the pipe from the 24" to the 27" or 33" pipe,
and Mr. Murphy stated that this is a gray area and he just isn't
sure.
Brief discussion followed, concerning cost of pipe line and Mr.
Murphy explained that if there is some error in the estimated
population growth or potential industry, it may be possible that
CM-32-50
AprilS, 1976
ere LAVWMA Pipeline Size)
the City might have to pay the entire cost of adding additional
facilities to accommodate these services.
Cm Staley wondered if the 24" line with a surge pond would be
sufficient to accommodate peak flows previously experienced in
the plant.
Mr. Knopf stated that he would like to clarify the matter in this
way: A 33" pipe with no surge pond will carry the maximum peak
flows anticipagedi the 27" line will accommodate 10.2 MGD but
this has nothing to do with the flows estimated to go through the
plant. The 24" line handles 7.4 MGD and since there is more than
7.4 MGD going through the plant at this time the surge pond would
be required to hold the excess. The next size line is 27" which
just happens to be more than what is needed but is the next size.
The reason the surge pond is needed with the 27" line, even though
it would handle excess, is because the line is not quite large enough
to handle peak flow by gravity - some of the water would have to be
stored.
em Turner wondered how the City intends to handle its portion of
the financing, and Mayor Tirsell stated that this has not, as yet,
been determined. ,~~~_
Cm Kamena stated that ,~- the 24" line is too small, the City
must go to a larger size. He wondered if funding would be allowed
the same for either the 27" line with the surge pond or the 33" line
without the surge pond.
Mr. Knopf stated that according to the state evaluator, the cost
trade-off would be the same and would be allowed.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he feels he really needs more information -
for instance, how often would a surge pond be used if we have a 27"
line. Also, what would be the maintenance costs for the pond -
would they be related to the number of times the pond is full?
Mayor Tirsell stated that she needs direction for the meeting she
will be attending the 13th and suggested that if the Council is not
ready to make a decision this evening perhaps it could be discussed
again the 12th with the intention of making a decision at that time.
Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, stated that as he recalls, a portion
of the sewage plant could probably act as the surge pond being
discussed.
Mayor Tirsell explained that the ponding occurs in the middle
of the process and the plant could not be used.
Don Miller stated that there is an unspoken issue behind these
considerations concerning pipeline size and that is, could the
pipeline be used to provide capacity for Geldermann and whether
the City wants to do this or not. The answer to this could be
"yes", because the state has a Fair and Equitable doctrine which
could be used to require the use of any excess capacity for some
other property which then becomes developed. Perhaps this matter
could be explored prior to making a final decision.
Mr. Miller stated that it would seem unwise to go much beyond the
bare minimum required to accommodate our General Plan.
CM TURNER MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO THE MEETING OF APRIL 12th,
SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM-32-5l
AprilS, 1976
REPORT RE SCHOOL
DIST. BLDG. PROGRAM
A report from the City Manager indicated that in accordance with
Council direction the staff has met with representatives of the
School District to discuss establishment of a formal procedure
concerning City review of proposed School District construction
projects. A policy is being drafted and will be submitted to the
City Council and the School Board within the next two weeks.
Cm Staley stated that the questions originally posed by him were
related to the fact that the City and School District needed a
policy concerning the School District's building program in an
attempt to conform to the zoning ordinances and requirements of
the City. He also asked that the School District rescind its
resolution exempting the School District from application of the
City's zoning ordinance. If negotiations could not be made
satisfactorily, the School District would exempt itself from
zoning ordinances of the City, etc.
Cm Staley stated that he does not know what questions he would
have to ask and it is his understanding, at this point, that
the building of the warehouse on Las positas and the maintenance
depot, which is in a residential neighborhood, are being undertaken.
The maintenance depot, which houses busses, exceeds the allowable
decibellellevels for residential areas and he is concerned about this.
Cm Turner stated that the problem of the maintenance depot is that
this is a type of commercial business in a residential area and
the Council is trying to discourage encroachment of this type of
thing into residential areas. Hopefully the School District and
the City can agree to some type of policy concerning these items
because they are of importance to both sides.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the School District has agreed, and has
met with the Design Review Committee concerning design projects,
including the warehouse on Las positas. The Design Review Com-
mittee has not found problems concerning design.
Mr. D'Ambra, from the School District, stated that they do not
anticipate the noise level indicated in their EIR for the
maintenance depot and they are proceeding to effect all of the
recommendations in their EIR, one of which was to engage a sound
expert for the development in the residential area.
Mr. D'Ambra stated that the noise at 6:00 a.m. is the starting
of the busses and this is already being done. The project
amounts to nothing more than moving that activity across the
street and for all practical purposes would be further away
from the nearest residence.
Cm Staley wondered why housing for the busses was decided to
be located in an area not appropriate for the use.
Mr. D'Ambra indicated that it really isn't inappropriate be-
cause this is where their corporation yard is located and it
it much like the City's corporation yard with all of the same
material - it has been there for years.
Cm Staley stated that he believes it is just not appropriate to
have that decibel level in a residential neighborhood at that time
of morning.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she believes the point is that it is
already there and it has been for some time. It would seem that
since the School District was successful in getting a tax override,
they couldvrelocate this type of operation.
.~
CM-32-52
AprilS, 1976
(Report re School
Dist. Bldg. Program)
Cm Dahlbacka indicated that he would agree.
Mr. D'Ambra stated that the corporation yard is located next to
the railroad and has been there for years. There has never been
any objection to its existance and it seemed an appropriate place
for this use at the time.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she believes the trouble began when the
School District decided to exempt themselves from City regulations
at the beginning of every ~q~i~ Ef...<?j~~c;t~ ~chool District,
because of this, does not ems~rves of the Council's concern
on noise, location, setbacks, and non-conforming uses. We have
school buildings too close to houses because the School District
exempted themselves from City advice, and even though the School
District says some of the schools are only temporary the public
knows that they are permanent. She would like to strongly emphasize
that the Council does not appreciate~tp~ exemption at the beginning
of a school construction project an~sregard for City expertise
and concerns for neighborhoods.
Mayor Tirsell stated that as far as the tax override is concerned
it is too late to do anything, because everything was spelled out,
specifically, as to what the money would be used for.
CM STALEY MOVED TO ASK THE SCHOOL DISTRICT TO RECONSIDER LOCATION
AND OPERATION OF THEIR MAINTENANCE FACILITY TO A SITE WHICH WOULD
BE MORE IN CONFORMANCE WITH OUR ZONING REGULATIONS. MOTION SECONDED
BY CM TURNER.
Mr. D'Ambra stated that the ballot also called for development
of the transportation building at that site; therefore, if bond
money is to be used the building has to be constructed on Ladd
Avenue.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she will vote against the motion because
as a taxpayer she pays school taxes and has every opportunity, as
a citizen, to look into placement of buildings when voting for an
override.
MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Mayor Tirsell dissenting) .
REPORT RE HERITAGE SITE
DESIGNATION - TREVARNO RD
The Council received a resolution from the Planning Commission
asking that the Council designate the area commonly known as
"Trevarno Road" as a heritage site.
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE COUNCIL DIRECTED THE STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION DESIG-
NATING THE TREVARNO ROAD AREA A HISTORICAL SITE.
THE RESOLUTION WILL APPEAR ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR.
REPORT RE PROPERTY
PURCHASE FOR FIRE
STATION NO. 4
The City Attorney has negotiated some property purchase terms
with Sunset Development Company for housing of Fire Station No.4.
The terms and conditions have been carefully reviewed by the
staff and found to be acceptable. It is recommended that a
resolution ratifying the letter of understanding be adopted.
CM-32-53
AprilS, 1976
(Report re Property Purchase
for Fire Station No.4)
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED.
RESOLUTION NO. 78-76
A RESOLUTION RATIFYING LETTER OF UNDER-
STANDING (Sunset Development Company)
Mayor Tirsell commented that there is an outstanding billowed
to the City by Sunset Development Company. If there is to be money
involved in the purchase of this property the books should be cleared.
Mr. Parness stated that the payment for the signalization at Con-
cannon and Holmes Street is due, under the ordinance which estab-
lished the zoning on that corner property. The City Attorney has
been working with the attorney for Sunset Development Company in
getting the money.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would like to discuss this at the
end of the meeting because she wants some answers as to where the
money and how much is going to be paid.
REPORT RE AB304l
- DISSOLVING BASSA
CM TURNER MOVED TO EXPRESS SUPPORT OF SB 3041, WHICH ESSENTIALLY
DISSOLVES BASSA. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
MAYOR TIRSELL AMENDED THE MOTION TO INCLUDE THAT A LETTER BE
SENT EXPRESSING CONCERNS FOR THE SPECIAL DISTRICT ON THE ABAG
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE. AMENDMENT SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
Cm Staley stated that he feels he is not well versed on the
operations of either BASSA or ABAG to take a position either
way and he would prefer to abstain from the vote.
AMENDMENT PASSED 4-0 with CM Staley abstaining) .
MAIN MOTION PASSED 4-0 with Cm Staley abstaining.
REPORT RE COUNCIL
PUBLIC ADDRESS SYSTEM
Mr. Lee stated that concerning the microphones provided for
the Council, the microphone being tested by Mayor Tirsell
works exceptionally well. It is being recommended that the
microphones be replaced with the type being used (lapel type)
this evening by Mayor Tirsell, for all of the Councilmembers.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he would prefer not to spend money
for this type of microphone.
Cm Turner stated that as far as he is concerned the minutes
represent the official record of the Council meetings and it
is very critical that all of the information is recorded. He
stated that unless they speak directly into the microphone they
cannot be heard and great amounts of testimony cannot be heard.
In his opinion it is worth the expenditure of $150 per item to be
sure that the official records are complete.
Mr. Musso commented that the persons typing the Planning Commission
minutes complain of the same problem.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she believes there may be a lot of staff
time spent in trying to dig up what has been said and relistening
to conversation in trying to get something which was not audible.
CM-32-54
I
AprilS, 1976
(Public Address System)
Mr. Lee added that when one compares the cost of the entire P.A.
system, the cost for the five new microphones is relatively minor.
Also, they are used by the Council as well as the Planning Commission
twice a week about 50 weeks a year.
CM TURNER MOVED TO INSTRUCT THE STAFF TO PURCHASE FIVE LAVELIERS
AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $ISO PER UNIT. MOTION SECONDED BY CM
STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
POSTPONEMENT OF
AGENDA ITEMS
The items on the agenda concerning "M" Street parking and the
underpass traffic were postponed to next week.
INCORPORATION OF
LIVERMORE CELEBRATION
Mayor Tirsell stated that the City will be celebrating Livermore's
incorporation on April 15th, at 12:00 p.m., at Carnegie Park and
the City Manager's secretary has a copy of the invitation that will
be extended to everyone for a community picnic.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Report re Community
Development Director
A report was presented by the City Manager outlining the responsi-
bilities of the new Community Development Director.
Report re Acceptance
of East Ave. Water
Main Project
A report was received from Mr. Lee indicating that the work for the
extension of the East Avenue water main from Buena Vista to Mitra
has been completed and recommends that it be accepted for maintenance.
RESOLUTION NO. 80-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF WORK AND AUTHORIZING
AND DIRECTING THE RECORDING OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION RE
East Avenue Water Main Project
Res. Auth. Occupancy
of First Station #1
A resolution was adopted authorizing occupancy of Fire Station #1.
RESOLUTION NO. 81-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING OCCUPANCY OF FIRE STATION NO. 1
Various Minutes
The following various minutes were submitted for informational
purposes:
Social Concerns Committee - February 19
Housing Authority - February 24
Airport Advisory Committee - March 2
Design Review Committee - March 16
Planning Commission - March 23
CM-32-S5
AprilS, 1976
Payroll & Claims
(March 22, 26, 31)
There were 69 claims in the amount of $76,346.76, and 291 payroll
warrants in the amount of $96,295.33, for a total of $172,642.09,
dated March 22, 1976, and approved by the City Manager.
There were 81 warrants in the amount of $84,150.39, dated March 26,
1976, and approved by the Director of Finance.
There were 100 warrants in the amount of $302,909.92, dated March 31,
1976, and approved by the City Manager.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED WITH DELETION OF THE
FIRST AND THIRD ITEMS WHICH WILL BE DISCUSSED AS FOLLOWS.
COMMUNICATION FROM LLL
RE EAST AVE./VASCO R.
TRAFFIC SIGNALS
A letter has been received from J. L. Olson of LLL inquiring
about the status of the traffic signals at Vasco Road and East
Avenue.
This project is first on the City's priority list and engineering
studies have been under way by the County. It is recommended that
the Council instruct the staff to tranmit the appeal made by Mr.
Olson to the County in an effort to expBdite this project.
Cm Turner stated that Mr. Olson has indicated that the need for
signalization is because of the amount of LLL traffic and for
this reason Cm Turner would suggest that perhaps LLL be asked
if they would like to go ahead and fund the project since it is
not anticipated to be complete until 1977. Reimbursement could
be made to the Laboratory after the project has received the
funding requested for the project.
Mayor Tirsell commented that she believes this suggestion is
very good and she would recommend that this suggestion be forwarded
to Mr. Olson, along with the time schedule for the project.
Mr. Lee stated that the City is ready to begin with the project
as soon as the County has done the engineering. At this time
funding should be forthcoming.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she believes a letter could be sent to
Mr. Olson indicating that the City is waiting for the County to
finish their work but if things do not proceed as anticipated this
is an alternate suggestion the City would like to make.
REPORT RE ARCHITECT
CONTRACT RE MULTI-SERVICE BLDG
The City Manager reported that the firm of Hirshen, Gammill, Trumbo
& Coo~ has been retained for design of the multi-service center
building. The contract has been netotiated and reviewed by the
City Attorney and found to be in order. It is recommended that a
resolution be adopted authorizing execution of the agreement.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she asked that this item be removed from
the Consent Calendar because she would like to know if the contract
includes unlimited trips to the City or if they will have to be paid
for going back and forth.
Mr. Parness stated that the contract provides that they make themselves
available for at least six public meetings. It is felt that this
number would be sufficient because the need for their attendance
would be necessary only until the design stage has been completed.
CM-32-56
AprilS, 1976
(Report re Architect
Contract re Multi-Service
Center Building)
Cm Turner noted that at the time there was a vote authorizing the
staff to negotiate a contract with this architect, he made the
argument that a local architect should be retained for the job.
There was a lot of testimony presented by Mrs. Hartwig, from the
Social Concerns Committee, at that time as to why Hirshen, Gammill
had been recommended for the job. Apparently there is an architect
in Livermore who is as qualified as Hirshen, Gammill, and he would
like to suggest that the Council rescind the contract award.
Mayor Tirsell stated that even though the agreement has not actually
been executed by Council direction, Hirshen, Gammill was employed.
Cm Turner stated that he believes he has the prerogative to make
the plea one more time. He stated that the Council consistently
talks about supporting commerce in the City of Livermore, and he
finds it distressing that when a local architectural firm is avail-
able that the City would hire an outside firm.
CM TURNER MOVED TO DENY ADOPTION OF THE RESOLUTION, SECONDED BY
CM KAMENA.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he would sympathize with the comments made
by Cm Turner but he was not in on the discussion at the time an
architect was selected and also it would seem a little late to
change selection of firms. The timing may be off schedule if the
Council were to make a change at this time.
Cm Staley commented that as he recalls it was not a question of
whether or not the local firm was highly qualified, but rather that
Hirshen, Gammill had the same qualifications in addition to superior
experience in this field, according to testimony from representatives
of the Social Concerns Committee.
Cm Kamena wondered if this item went through the bid procedure and
it was noted that architectural firms do not make bids, per se,
but they indicated a range and everyone who bid fell within the
same range.
Cm Kamena stated that he is also very sYmpathetic to what Cm Turner
has said when bids appear to be equal and qualifications are also
equal. However, he also feels to deny a contract, after the fact,
would not be appropriate.
MOTION FAILED 1-4 (Cm Dahlbacka, Kamena, Staley and Mayor Tirsell
dissenting) .
CM STALEY MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA,
and WHICH PASSED 4-1 (Cm Turner dissenting) .
RESOLUTION NO. 79-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION
OF AGREEMENT (Hirshen, Gammill, Trumbo
& Cook)
COMMENT RE SUBDIVISIONS
- REFERRAL TO P.C.
The staff has recommended that the Council introduce an amendment
to the Municipal Code relative to subdivisions. This is a major
law for the City which takes into account several recent state
statutory changes. It is recommended that the ordinance draft
be referred to the Planning Commission, accompanied by staff
statements noting the provisional changes, with a request that
the P.C. transmit its recommendation to the Council within 60 days.
CM-32-57
I
The staff indicated that they would continue to watch the area '", I, '
and would report back to the Conncil. e- ~'-J.~~,~t0'i1(-
I
AprilS, 1976
(Comment re Subdivisions
-Referral to P.C.)
CM STALEY MOVED TO REFER THIS ITEM TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH
THE REQUEST THAT THEY RESPOND WITH A RECOMMENDATION IN 30 DAYS IF
POSSIBLE, BUT NO LONGER TlmN 60 DAYS. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Money OWed to City
by Sunset Development)
Cw Tirsell stated that she would like an answer to the question
of where the money is that is owed the City by Mr. Mehran.
Mr. Lee stated that this is a legal item and he really couldn't
offer information. At this time all he can say is that the City
can refuse to issue a building permit for Mr. Mehran until the
money has been paid.
It was noted that because of the share paid by the state Mr.
Mehran's share of the cost is estimated at $46,000.
Mayor Tirsell asked that there be a complete report from the
staff concerning this item next week.
(CBD Plan)
Mr. Parness stated that the consultant is ready with the CBD
Plan and would like to meet with the Council either on the 20th
or the 21st.
The Council agreed to meet with the consultant at 7:00 p.m. on
April 20th.
(Stop Sign Removal
at Guilford & Madison)
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he has had a complaint about removal
of the stop sign at Guilford and Madison. The person was con-
cerned about speed and wondered why it was removed.
Mr. Lee explained that the staff received complaints about it
being a stop which was not necessary, and many people were not
stopping there but rather going right through the stop sign. It
was felt it would be better to place buttons on the street and
eliminate the problem of cutting across the intersection, and
.removing the sign.
(re Business License
Tax Surcharge - Mall)
Cm Staley stated that in October he asked about the CBD study because
the City discussed the concept of applying the business license
tax surcharge to the mall, for the benefit of the parking lot.
A formal public hearing was never scheduled.
Mr. Parness stated that a hearing has not been scheduled but it
is on file and will be brought to the attention of the Council
between now and July 1, the effective date of the new surcharge.
(Murrieta/Portola Ave.
Traffic Situation)
Cm Kamena stated that when the traffic is coming towards Murrieta
from I-580 going down Portola Avenue, it seems that basically the
same type of problem exists (in miniature) as was present prior
to construction of the overpass. He wondered if this is City
property or is located in the County.
CM-32-58
AprilS, 1976
(Traffic-Murrieta/Portola)
Mr. Lee explained that the City owns a portion
does not own property up to the intersection.
requested of the County, that a traffic signal
City would agree to pay 1/3 of this cost. The
a report for the Council on this item.
of that area but
The City has, however,
be installed and the
staff will prepare
(Appreciation Dinner
Attendance of Spouses)
Cm Turner stated that he has told his wife that she would not be
going to the appreciation dinner and he believes there is not
sufficient space to accommodate everyone. He would suggest that
only the people who are on committees and the Councilmembers themselves
attend.
Cm Staley stated that there is a problem of space involved and it
would be very expensive for every committee member to take their
spouse. Also, it would not be fair for the committee members to
leave their spouses at home and allow Councilmembers to make
reservations for their spouse.
Cm Staley stated that on the other hand, it is very difficult to
ask a committee member to attend a dinner in their honor and
request that they again spend an evening away from their spouse.
He believes that in the future the City should make it optional
for spouses of committee members to attend, or there should not
be a dinner.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she disagrees with this suggestion.
Cm Kamena stated that he would have to agree with Cm Staley be-
cause in many cases the spouse works right along with the committee
member on committee projects. Last week he spoke with two committee
members who plan to not attend the dinner simply because their spouses
were not invited and they felt their spouses had made contributions
to their efforts throughout the year. In his opinion it should be
done properly, or not at all, which is basically what Cm Staley has said.
-
Mayor Tirsell stated that the point of having the dinner is to honor
those people who have volunteered time and effort to the City. If
the spouse wants to help, they can also serve on a committee.
Cm Kamena asked if the problem was the space or the money, and
Mayor Tirsell stated she though~. they could solve the space problem.
Cm Kamena stated the two choices proposed by Cm Staley were severe,
and felt there might be some common ground in between and suggested
that if the space problem can be solved why not at the option of the
person attending, if it is important enough for them to have their
spouse accompany them, they could pay to have them come.
Mayor Tirsell acknowledged she could understand that if they do not
want to attend without a spouse, the City would pay for one, and the
person would pay for the other - she would support that. The intent
of the party is to honor those who are strictly designated by the
City and set apart as part of an official committee - they have a
charge and a duty and have been formally accepted by the Council as
members. Whenever anyone volunteers time, there is someone backing
them up at home.
Cm Turner suggested that this be discussed as a budget item, and
the Council concurred.
(Protocol re Communications)
em Turner stated he has been reminded by the Mayor that he erred in
sending correspondence directly to the City Manager asking that
certain things be done - it should have gone to the Council. But
CM-32-59
April 5, 1976
(Protocol re Communications)
as long as the City Manager has already started on the items he
would hope that he could continue and asked if the Council would be
agreeable. The Council concurred it would be alright under the
circumstances in view of the fact that the Council had been fur-
nished copies of letters written by the City Manager.
(Lumber Company)
Cm Turner mentioned that a lumber firm had decided not to locate in
Livermore for a number of reasons, some of which were not correct.
There have been several people who have expressed disgust at this
change in plans, but obviously they did not know all the reasons,
except what they read. He felt there was more reason than just
the fees. em Turner suggested that since the City now has a Direc-
tor of Community Development, the City Council pursue some other
method of collection of fees to place the City in a more competi-
tive atmosphere.
em Turner suggested that perhaps as one of Mr. Gorland's first
official acts for the Council could be to investigate the fees,
and the staff was directed to check into the fee schedule and the
method of collection.
(Council Calendar)
Cm Turner stated that he and Mayor Tirsell had discussed a Council
Calendar, and the Mayor explained there are events in the community
that the Council should be attending and those they are mandated to
attend and they have conflicting commitments, and they wondered if
they could ask Ms. Whitlow to keep a council calendar, and each
week in the City Manager's report if he would go down the council
calendar. Sometimes the public would like to attend if they know
that the council is participating. Also if there is an event being
sponsored by an official committee of the City, that should be in-
cluded. Cm Turner mentioned the de Anza celebration held on April 4,
followed by a barbeque which he was not even aware of.
Mayor Tirsell suggested that perhaps they should place this item
on the agenda for discussion and decide what kind of events they
would like to be advised of in the future.
(Planning Commission
Interviews)
Mayor Tirsell suggested that the interviews for the Planning Com-
mission begin next week at fifteen minute intervals. The Council
discussed whether or not to have the interviews prior to a meeting
or on another night. The final decision was to split the interviews
and begin at 7:00 p.m. on April 12 and at 6:45 on April 19.
(Committee Appointees)
Mayor Tirsell stated there is a Green's Committee member needed,
and also Beautification Committee members and asked the Councilmembers
if they could come up with some names. There is also an alternate
to the Social Concerns Committee that should be appointed.
(Corps of Engineers Study)
Mayor Tirsell asked what the status was of the Corps of Engineers
study and asked the staff that a letter be directed to the Corps.
CM-32-60
April 5, 1976
(Low and Moderate Income
Study)
Mayor Tirsell asked if the Low and Moderate Income Study could be
referred to the Housing Authority and the Social Concerns Committee.
The Council concurred with the suggestion.
(Calif. Environmental
Quality Act Review)
Mayor Tirsell asked the Council's concensus to referring the California
Environmental Quality Act Review to the Planning Commission and
the Council concurred.
(Trevarno Road Proposal)
Mayor Tirsell suggested, with the Council's concensus, that when
the Trevarno Road proposal is presented to the Council, that they
also be given a report concerning the railroad crossing and the
truck access from Trevarno Road.
ADJOURNMENT
The Council meeting was adjourned at 12:20 a.m. to an executive
session concernini )LAFCO. c:t?'::
APPROVE ~.J!.q~ ----1J\ ~a~~: J t y ..
ATTEST
CM-32-6l
Regular Meeting of April 12, 1976
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was
held on April 12, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:08 p.m. with
Mayor Tirsell presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Absent:
Cm Dahlbacka, Kamena, Turner, Staley, and Mayor Tirsell
None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirsell led the Councilmembers as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
PROCLAMATION
Mayor Tirsell proclaimed the week of April 26th through April 30,
1976, Public Schools Observance Week.
OPEN FORUM
(Preservation of Gas
Station on "L" Street)
Janet Newton, 2131 Chateau Place, representing the Livermore Heri-
tage Guild, stated that they would like to ask that the gasoline
station located on North "L" Street be preserved as a historical
site. She stated that it was built in 1915 during a time there
were few cars and added that in San Francisco a gasoline station
such as this was turned into a museum. Livermore has the same
opportunity to preserve something that was a part of our lives.
Mr. Parness indicated that the City has purchased the property
and the land and the City had intentions of clearing the land.
There is an old residence located on the easterly property and
the Fire Department has been notified to work with the BAAPCD
in setting a day for burning the structure as a practice exercise.
Mayor Tirsell suggested that this be scheduled as an agenda item
in about a month.
Cm Turner stated that he would suggest that nothing be done to
anything on the site until the Council has had the opportunity
to review this issue and discuss it.
Mr. Parness stated that the structure the City plans to burn is
not the same as the structure mentioned by Mrs. Newton. It is
located on North Livermore Avenue and is of no use whatsoever.
Mrs. Newton agreed that this is not the residence she had in
mind and the Heritage Guild would not object to its burning.
The item will appear on the agenda in a month.
Cm Dahlbacka wondered if the garage had been included under Historical
Sites, in the General Plan and Mr. Musso indicated that the Historical
Society had recommended that it be included in the General Plan
but it was not included. The old Richfield station, however,
further down near the R.V. center, was included. This does not
preclude adding the garage mentioned, however.
CM-32-62
April 12, 1976
(LAVWMA Pipeline)
Mr. Miller, 2862 Waverly Way, stated that he noticed the LAVWMA
pipeline size is not scheduled for discussion.
Mayor Tirsell stated that it will probably be discussed along with
the letter from Supervisor Cooper.
(Railroad Relocation
Proj. Petition)
Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, stated that he believes the Council
should have accepted his petition concerning the railroad relocation
project, and read portions of the Code concerning this item.
Mayor Tirsell stated that at the time Mr. Tull brought the petition
forth, it did not conform to the regulations and the Council is not
about to discuss an old petition that did not conform or qualify as
an initiative or referendum. She asked that Mr. Tull speak with the
City Attorney concerning the item.
COMMUNICATION RE
RECREATION FACILITIES
A letter was received from Sheri Thomas expressing the concern for
lack of recreational facilities for active teens in Livermore.
The matter was referred to LARPD, with the consensus of the Council,
and Ms. Thomas is to be informed of this action.
COMMUNICATION RE
TAX OVERRIDE ISSUE
A letter was received from Richard W. Hill, indicating that he feels
the City has mixed up its priorities and that the police and fire
services should be at the top of the list during budget time. He
requested that citizens be asked to vote for extras for the City
rather than essentials.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she knows Mr. Hill and has written a letter
to him on this matter. She will include the first five pages of the
budget for his perusal.
Council concurred.
CO~1UNICATION FROM
LANDECK AVIATION CORP.
A communication was received from Landeck Aviation Corporation request-
ing that they be given the right of first refusal to assume the master
lease on the FBO site at 550 Airway Boulevard.
Mr. Parness stated that he can understand the efforts on the part
of Mr. Landeck but this is not a matter that is in the hands of the
Council. The City has a lessee and if Mr. Landeck wishes to lease
the property or to have the lease changed over, he would have to
make this arrangement with the present lessee.
Item was noted for filing.
This will be communicated to Mr. Landeck at the request of the
Council.
CM-3l-63
April 12, 1976
COMMUNICATION FROM
NAT. SAFETY COUNCIL
RE SUPPORT OF PROGRAMS
A letter was received from the Eastbay Chapter of the National
Safety Council asking that the City help support their plans
for an 8-hour Defensive Driving Course. Records indicated that
persons aged 16 through 24 are killed most often by the automobile.
They would like to request $25 per 1,000 popUlation.
Cm Dahlbacka wondered if a small increase in the amount of fines
could be collected to help pay for something like this.
The item was noted for filing.
COMMUNICATION RE
BULK POSTAGE
A letter was received from the Hayward Area Recreation and Park
District indicated that they have discovered that it is not possi-
ble for a public agency to be eligible to enjoy the most favorable
postage rate charged by the Postal Service.
At present pUblic agencies, including local, municipal, county and
state agencies, must pay 7.7~, while religious, educational, and
other organizations, must pay only 1.89 under the bulk rate category.
They would like to request support from the City in seeking federal
legislative changes to this regulation and would appreciate a
letter or a resolution supporting this request.
CM TURNER MOVED TO SUPPORT THE HARPD IN THEIR LOBBY FOR LOWER
BULK RATE ALLOWANCES, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA, AND PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE.
COMMUNICATION FROM SUPER-
VISOR COOPER RE LAVWMA
PIPELINE AND MITIGATION
MEASURES
The Council received a copy of a letter sent to the EPA from Super-
visor Cooper concerning air quality studies for the Livermore-Amador
Valley relating to mitigation measures and the size of the LAVWMA
pipeline.
Cm Turner stated that this item was not scheduled on the agenda
(pipeline size) and he really is not ready to discuss it.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she is attending a meeting tomorrow
with the Board of Supervisors and she really needs to have dir-
ection from the Council.
Mayor Tirsell stated that Mayor Maltester has suggested that the
Eastbay Discharges project be allowed to proceed and that the
LAVVrnA project be oversized, as well as oversizing of the pump ~
station, to accommodate some amount of county growth. The CityQ~ ~
has opposed the oversizing of the line,aBQ Ras ea~portca ~a~ S.O~ -
The old Council supported an average flow pipe with use of a surge
pond which is contrary to Mayor Maltester's proposal.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he believes a line should be designed to
handle exactly the amount of sewage anticipated to be generated
in the Valley. He would support the position of the previous
Council.
CM-32-64
April 12, 1976
(Comm. from Supervisor
Cooper re LAVWMA pipe-
line and Mitigation)
Cm Kamena stated that he wonders if it really is necessary to go
to the Board of Supervisors meeting with a number in mind. Perhaps
the philosophy could be expressed without a decision on the size.
This information would have to be available for the LAVWMA meeting
but this would give the Council an opportunity to discuss numbers
later.
Mayor Tirsell stated that this certainly is a possibility.
The majority of the Council felt they needed more information and
discussion to make a decision concerning size of the pipeline.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO SUPPORT THE FORMER COUNCIL POSITION, TO SUPPORT
AN AVERAGE FLOW PIPELINE FOR BOTH SEGMENTS OF THE PROJECT WITH THE
USE OF SURGE PONDS. MOTION SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA. MOTION PASSED
BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Jerry Wilverding, 4886 Primrose Lane, asked that the Mayor explain
the average flow, which the Mayor explained.
Mr. Wilverding also asked why the surge ponds are supported rather
that a larger line, and the Mayor explained that there may be some
savings involved with use of surge ponds, as well as a controlling
factor as to how much goes into the pipeline.
Mayor Tirsell explained that at this time the Council is not planning
to discuss size of the pipeline but Mr. Wilverding is welcome to corne
back at a time it is discussed to take part in the discussion. At
this time the Council is agreeing only to the concept.
Sizing of the line will be discussed as an agenda item next week.
REPORT RE CLOSURE OF
CAR WASH ENTRANCE -
FIRST STREET
The City has received a letter of protest from owners of the car
wash on First Street, concerning control of access to their business
property. The City of Livermore has not taken such action and
their protest should be directed to the PUC. The PUC has set a
hearing for May 3rd and 4th to hear comments concerning access
control plans.
Mr. Parness indicated that he believes the appeal being made by the
property owners of the car wash is very understandable. However,
since this item will be heard by the PUC he would suggest that the
City do nothing until a decision has been made by the PUC.
Cm Kamena stated that he is happy to see from the report that there
will be representation from the City because while the best of the
interest of the City is involved he would like to make sure the
people do not lose the car wash operations.
Mr. Parness indicated that the PUC would be able to accommodate
the owners of the car wash business and that they will hear all
the evidence and make a decision accordingly.
Cm Turner stated that he went to the car wash area and observed
where barriers are to be located. If they are placed where they
have been proposed, it would be very difficult for campers, etc.
to get into the car wash area.
CM-32-65
April 12, 1976
(Rpt re Closure of Car
Wash Ent.-First St.)
Leslie Jones, 2359 Hampton Road, one of the owners of the car wash,
stated that he doesn't understand why this item is to be heard by
the PUC because the barricade will be on City property and the
gate will be City property.
Mayor Tirsell stated that this apparently is an item beyond the
control of the City Council but City representatives will attend
the meeting and will try to assist Mr. Jones.
Mr. Jones indicated that he can understand this but he would like
to say that they are being left out of everything and they were
not notified of the change in the right-of-way.
Mr. Lee explained that the
of discussing the crossing
what the outcome might be.
owners were not notified -
PUC called a meeting for the purpose
situation and the staff had no idea
This is the reason the property
the PUC did not invite them.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would like it expressed to the PUC
that the next time they are considering closure of somebody's
property, they should be asked to attend the meeting.
Mr. Jones stated that it is his understanding the City will take
7 ft. of frontage from his property for the right-of-way and
that property to the back of them will be purchased by the City
for access to the oil company. He stated that they have been
looking into the purchase of the back property for two years
and Mr. Lee has indicated that he does not know what will happen
to the back property. Mr. Jones and his partner are 'still pur-
suing purchase of the back property but it would appear that
their hands may be tied and the City may take it.
Mayor Tirsell stated that disposition of land around the car wash
property may depend on the outcome of the PUC hearing and the
Council will wait to hear the outcome of the hearing.
REPORT RE PROPOSED
SOLID WASTE MODEL
AGREEMENT
The City Manager reported that a consolidated regulation system
for solid waste collection and disposal among the 12 public agen-
cies in the County being served by Oakland Scavenger Company is
ready for implementation. The Council has received a copy of
the draft report, the agreement has been reviewed by the staff
and found to be in order and it is recommended that the Council
direct the staff to prepare the formal agreement and resolution.
The last rate increase imposed by Oakland Scavenger was in 1971
and they are anxious to have a rate adjustment.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the position of the former Council was
that the Council should await the outcome of the disposition of
the Alameda County Solid Waste Management Plan. There is a Solid
Management Interim Committee that is meeting, which she has served
on, and some of the difficulties should be resolved in 45-60 days.
Cm Staley indicated that this is a very important item and he believes
the Council should wait to make a decision after the report has been
received from the Interim Committee.
CM STALEY MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM, UNTIL THE REPORT HAS BEEN
RECEIVED.
CM-32-66
April 12, 1976
(Rpt re Proposed Solid
Waste Model Agree.)
Mayor Tirsell commented that this is the rate setting process which
is the result of a different study than the Alameda County Solid
Waste Management Plan; however, embodied in the rate study and the
model agreement in front of the Council, are some long term commit-
ments. This is one of the reasons the Council felt a decision should
not be made until the County has adopted a plan.
Mr. Parness stated that the attorney for Oakland Scavenger, Mr.
Corley, has requested that this item be postponed until he gets
to the meeting.
Lou Alberti, representing Oakland Scavenger, stated that the Alameda
Solid Waste Management Plan may be as far away as six months. These
are really two different items, as Mr. Corley explained in the past.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she can appreciate Mr. Alberti's concern
for waiting for the entire Plan, but if the City signs a long term
commitment we may have precluded our part in the Plan.
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE ITEM WAS TABLED UNTIL MR. CORLEY IS PRESENT.
Mr. Miller stated that there are at least four items the Council
should consider in the contract, during this time period, as
follows:
I) title for the rubbish; 2) term of the contract; 3) franchise
fee; and 4) exemption from the business license fee.
Mr. Miller stated that he has a copy of an opinion from the Attorney
General concerning who owns the trash, which essentially says that
Oakland Scavenger owns it unless it is written into the contract
that the public jurisdiction owns it.
v
REPORT RE PARCEL
MAP 1666 - FIRST
STREET AT TREVARNO RD.
The Planning Commission has reported that the property owner of
Parcel Map #1666, on First Street at the intersection of Trevarno
Road, has requested approval of the City to allow formation of an
assessment district to provide the financing for the required public
works improvements.
Cm Turner stated that Item 5.1, which is a resolution establishing
Trevarno Road as a heritage site, deals with the same property and
perhaps the two items should be combined in discussion.
Item 4.2{a), which is a report from the Public Works Director,
relative to access means of the Trevarno Road property also should
be discussed in conjunction with the other two items as well.
Mr. Musso stated that the P.C. has been discussing this item for
the past seven months and they have concluded that with respect
to land use, it should be designated as permanent residential. This
includes not only the existing lots but the two vacant lots.
The P.C. felt it should remain residential because the building costs
make it difficult to develop in that area and also because this would
minimize the need for public works improvements. At present the
primary need is for street improvements.
CM-32-67
April 12, 1976
(Rpt re Parcel Map 1666
First St. at Trevarno)
Another item which was reviewed by the P.C. was access for
industrial traffic, which has been covered in the report
prepared by Mr. Lee.
Cm Dahlbacka asked about what justification was given for allow-
ing two new lots in an area with historical interest.
The assumption is that if it be zoned residential or industrial,
the developer would be entitled to it. The question would be
whether he would be justified in developing. Also, under the
Heritage Ordinance, any new building could be required to be
compatible with any existing building.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would like to have the minutes
from the Planning Commission prior to discussing the item.
Mr. Lee stated that in the Heritage Site resolution, the P.C.
has recommended that the highest residential street standards
be used for the design of the street. This would be for a
traffic index of 6. The City policy for an industrial street
is 8.5, and the staff prepared a recommendation on the basis
that Trevarno Road will function for an indeterminant period
of time as an industrial street. The load on such a street is
the critical element in calculating. He would suggest that the
street not be under-designed with problems the City would be
responsible for later on.
Mr. Lee reviewed his recommendations with the Council, and
noted that on Page 2, of the resolution, item c) calls for
deletion of full reconstruction. He stated that there is no
evidence that the City could accept Trevarno Road if it is
not fully reconstructed.
Mr. Lee would also recommend against restricting undergrounding
of utilities of First Street (e). The sanitary sewers in that
area are in a state of disrepair and it would be a liability
to the City to reconstruct them on the rear lines because there
would be a problem of maintenance (f).
Item (g) may be satisfactory - it is not certain at this point.
He would recommend that the third paragraph under "Sanitary
Sewers" not be deleted (h). Item (i) has to be done with
scheduling of the work, and utilities should be installed
prior to reconstruction. Item (i) assumes there will not be
reconstruction.
Item (j) 2. Reference is not made to the LS-1B Schedule and
this makes a difference as to how much the City's bill would
be in maintaining the lights.
Under the BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED section, the last line,
"constructed andll; again relates to the issue as to whether or
not the street should be reconstructed.
Cm Turner stated that he attended the P.C. hearing and during
this time there was brief discussion concerning the matter of
the highest residential street standards to be used, and there
was talk of extending Mines Road to divert truck traffic from
HEXCEL Corporation and Cost Manufacturing so they would not have
to travel down Trevarno Road. This is an excellent idea but he
would like to know if it would still be necessary to design the
road to handle large trucks.
CM-32-68
April 12, 1976
(Rpt re Parcel Map 1666
First St. at Trevarno Rd)
Mr. Lee stated that if trucks could be diverted from Trevarno Road
the traffic index of 6 would be acceptable to the Public Works Depart-
ment, but this should be a condition of the tract. The developer
should either isolate the trucks from Trevarno Road or provide for
trucks in the standards.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the staff report indicates that it would
probably be many years before the trucks would be diverted from
Trevarno Road because of the expense of providing a different access.
Cm Turner stated that he would agree with this but he believes the
Council should discuss what efforts the staff have gone to in deter-
mining that decision.
David Madis, 1011 Geneva Street, the applicant, stated that he could
foresee thousands of years from now when archaeologists dig up the
City of Livermore, they will find all the houses and buildings gone,
but they will find streets, curbs and the concrete. The city should
cast some bronze identification plates in all these concrete monuments
to the city of Livermore so they can understand these were built
as a tribute to Dan Lee. Mr. Lee wants equivalent to interstate 580
a street that is 871 feet long and comes in perpendicular to the state
highway. Any traffic coming from the highway has to make a 90 degree
turn, travel 871 feet and then stop at the tracks. A traffic index
of 8.5 is for freeway trucks traveling at high rates of speed in a
continuous flow of traffic. You can sit on Trevarno Road day after
day and you won't see one semi-trailer going through because HEXCEL
owns all the property across the track that is serviced by them.
All that traffic is primarily serviced by railroad car unloading,
and all the property within the perimeter of the cyclone fence
has recently been purchased by HEXCEL from Ensign Bickford and
they own all the industrial area, including all the abandoned
industrial buildings. Anyone going across that track is going only
to HEXCEL Corporation since there are no other owners and no one
else has permission to cross the track. The crossing across the
track is subject to a right of the railroad to give a 30-day written
notice and terminate all tracks, including HEXCEL Corporation. That
is the condition and he has checked into that several years ago at
the request of the Ensign Bickford Company. He was advised by the
engineers of the So. Pacific Railroad that 1) they would not recommend
any changes in any grade crossings, 2) PUC will not grant any changes
or modification of any grade crossing. It is a private crossing
and the right to cross it vests only in the HEXCEL Corporation.
Mr. Madis continued that they feel they are doing a sufficient amount
of work and benefit to the city and when they corne in they will
construct, to all city standards, the frontage on the state highway -
installation of curbs, sidewalks, fencing and whatever else the
city requires. However they cannot understand the city's requirement
to reconstruct a street to the standards of the interstate highway
of 8.5. He referred to the streets in Ed Hutka's industrial develop-
ment none of which meet the 8.5 standard. Their soils engineer
has submitted a report to the City Engineer indicating that the top
of the street is clean, the five inches of existing concrete pavement
is properly sealed and there is a 2-inch overlay of asphalt applied.
The traffic index will be between 6.5 and 7.5 which he indicates as in
excess of what is required for the minimal amount of travel on that
street.
Mr. Madis stated that if the city wishes to preserve the area as
an historical area and see it converted to private ownership which
will result in a substantial improvement as far as the painting and
maintenance of the property that single owners cannot undertake
CM-32-69
April 12, 1976
(Rpt re Parcel Map 1666
First St. at Trevarno Rd)
because of the prohibitive cost, then he would urge the Council to
concur with the request of the Planning Commission. Their condi-
tions will not be economical to comply with, but they will not be
so expensive as to prohibit the development. If the Council is
going to require them to put in the 8.5 street section the engin-
eering department wants, plus the improvements on First Street,
they would not be able to proceed with the map, as it would not be
economically feasible, and they will not be able to convert the
parcel to multiple ownership.
Cm Staley asked who the owner was of the parcel, and Mr. Madis
replied it was owned by him and his wife.
Cm Turner stated it had been mentioned that 8.5 was a freeway
standard and that Ed Hutka was not required to put in a street to
that standard and he asked if Mr. Lee if he would comment on these
remarks.
Mr. Lee replied that Mines Road is designed at the 8.5; however,
if a street has not been designed properly in a shopping center
the surface falls apart. If a lot is broken up in a shopping
center it is something the City doesn't have to worry about and
this happens all the time. Internally, many times people do not
use the same standards used by the City so you will find bad
surfacing in many places on private property.
Cm Turner asked if it is true that the 8.5 is a freeway standard
and Mr. Lee indicated that perhaps in some places, but in freeways
there are different standards based on location. It makes a dif-
ference if it is a truck lane, a center lane, or on a hill. Dif-
ferent conditions in different places call for different standards.
If there is to be heavy traffic on a street with heavy loads there
should be something in the order of 8.5, as is generally used for
an industrial street.
Cm Turner wondered if it would be necessary to have the standards
required for an industrial street if trucks will be going only
15 mph.
Mr. Lee stated that he still believes what he has said is true
with what the standards should be for an industrial street; however,
if the Council believes this would be only a temporary situation
and within five years there will not be any industrial traffic on
Trevarno Road, perhaps the lower standard is a risk the City could
take.
Mr. Lee then explained the means for calculating the standards
necessary with respect to weight distribution of the load, etc.
Mr. Lee noted that the present Trevarno Road was built about 1914
which is an old concrete slab street which has been capped with
asphalt. It has shown stress and there are cracks showing through
it now. It may be possible to use the standard of 6, but there
has been no supporting evidence to indicate that the 6 would be
sufficient.
Mr. Lee stated that he would like to comment about "Dan Lee's
streets". He would hope that they are here 100 years from now
and according to the new budget, the bare minimum needed to repair
our streets, which happen to be in good shape, comes to $200,000.
If our streets were underdesigned, this amount could rise astro-
nomically. Neighboring communities do not have the funds to main-
tain their streets.
Mayor Tirsell added that our taxpayers have actually saved money
due to the perseverance of Dan Lee.
CM-32-70
April 12, 1976
(Rpt re Parcel Map 1666
First St. at Trevarno Rd)
Cm Staley stated that in terms of traffic and construction of streets,
he would like to know if it is true that one of the most abrasive
actions a street can withstand is stopping, particularly stopping
of large trucks.
Mr. Lee stated that stopping and starting creates a strain and stress
on the street as well as loads moving on the street. Studies indicate
that moving loads is a great stress. A unit load must be low enough
that the street structure can maintain it. If the unit load is
exceeded in addition to movement, the surface starts breaking.
Cm Turner stated that he believes it just is not necessary to require
the 8.5 standard for Trevarno Road.
Mr. Madis stated that it is not true that the report can not be
substantiated. He hired a soils engineer to test the subsoil as
well as the concrete on Trevarno Road and submitted a report as a
result of his findings. He added that he talked with Mr. Kerin 25
times and requested that he contact the soils engineer to discuss
his conclusions so that the City could have any information they
might want. To his knowledge the City has never once made an attempt
to contact the engineer.
Bill Zagotta, 5155 Lillian Court, stated that as a matter of philosophy,
during the time he has been in Livermore, some eight years, that area
is continually going down hill. Something is going to have to be done
with a very delicate touch. Following impersonal engineering recom-
mendations is not the way to preserve Trevarno Road. The Council is
going to have to walk up and down the area to get a feeling for the
area and then try to save it - piece by piece. Find out what makes
it important historically and to make it as beautiful as it must have
been at one time. These things should be saved and in order to do
so, there may have to be a compromise for some of the less aesthetic
items. A decision cannot be made by sitting in a paneled room. A
careful study should be made of the area with picking and choosing
of objects.
Mr. Zagotta stated that he would like to suggest that no subdivision
be allowed until industrial traffic has been totally eliminated from
Trevarno Road. In time there may be thriving business in that area
and Livermore does not want traffic going up and down that street
which may have children playing in it. There is no park in the area
and the whole complex is a park type of atmosphere for children.
He would even go so far as to suggest that LARPD have a back door
type of traffic so that the traffic would not have to go up and down
Trevarno Road. This would mean that industrial standards would not
have to be required.
Mr. Zagotta indicated he would also suggest that the utilities
not be undergrounded. They are located on the backs of the lots
at present and the installation of a few utility poles shouldn't
spoil the appearance of the area. There is rumor of development
on two lots and if anyone plans to squeeze in an economically
feasible house it will really ruin the appearance of Trevarno Road _
to do it twice is even worse.
David Madis stated that there are 15 lots in the area and
the smallest lot is 17,000 sq. ft., of those lots with houses
on them. The largest lot is almost 3/4 acre.
CM-32-7l
April 12, 1976
(Rpt re Parcel Map 1666
First St. at Trevarno Rd)
Mayor Tirsell stated that the size of the lot or home is not
in question, the discussion is maintaining the integrity of
the area.
Mr. Madis stated that it has always been his intention that
the two lots will be built in conforming style. There will
be no development of industrial or any of the other items
restricted from the better subdivisions. There will also be
prohibition of any changes in the design of the street as far
as any structures are concerned. He stated that the smallest
home is 1,000 sq. ft. and the largest house is 6,250 sq. ft.
The homes would conform with the same design and architectural
form.
CM TURNER MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM FOR TWO WEEKS, SECONDED
BY CM STALEY.
The City Attorney indicated that if the Council intends to
postpone this item the applicant would have to give permission
to waive the statutory time period during which the Council
must act.
Mr. Madis agreed to waive the time period.
It was noted by the City Attorney that if the Council continues
this item just until next week they would still be within the
time period.
CM TURNER AMENDED THE MOTION THAT THE ITEM BE CONTINUED FOR
ONE WEEK, SECONDED BY CH STALEY.
Mr. Zagotta stated that there is no house that could be built
that could conform with both the house on its right and the
house on it's left.
Cm Turner requested that this discussion be included in their
agenda packet for next week.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CONTINUED DISCUSSION
RE PROPOSED SOLID
WASTE MODEL AGREEMENT
The Council had continued discussion of the item concerning
the proposed Solid Waste Model Agreement with Oakland Scavenger
until Mr. Corley, Oakland Scavenger's attorney, was in attendance.
Mayor Tirsell explained that there was a motion on the floor that
because of prior Council position, the City would not sign a con-
tract until the outcome of the Interim Solid Waste Management
Committee is known. The motion was tabled.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO TAKE THE MOTION FROM THE TABLE, SECONDED BY
CM STALEY, ~mICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
John corley, representing Oakland Scavenger, explained that Oak-
land Scavenger deferred any request for a rate increase until
a formal resolution could be made by the Joint Refuse Rate Com-
mittee as well as a model agreement. The model agreement has
CM-32-72
April 12, 1976
(Continued Discussion re
Proposed Solid Waste
!-10del Agreement)
been prepared and the Joint Refuse Rate Committee has done their
work. If the Council plans to do nothing on the model agreement
for the Joint Refuse Rate Committee, as modified by the City Manager,
they would then like to make a formal application for a rate review
on their current contract.
Mr. Corley added that this would give the company an opportunity
to survive and that this has become a very serious problem because
Oakland Scavenger has been eager to corne to an agreement with every-
one. They have cooperated fully and the delay has not been their
doing. They would have appreciated it if this had taken place two
years ago and they anticipated that it would. They are prepared to
fulfill all of their obligations under the model agreement which
would include a review of their records and an audit, if necessary.
They would like to meet with the staff to propose a rate that would
be justified for the collection of waste in the community.
Mayor Tirsell commented that it is about 45 days before the Interim
Refuse Rate Committee will be reporting.
Cm Staley felt the request made by Mr. Corley is very reasonable.
Cm Dahlbacka suggested that if the Council is to continue discussion
on the agreement and if Oakland Scavenger is going to make a proposal
for a rate increase, then perhaps the Council should continue the item
without a time limit and the rate increase issue could be discussed
separately.
CH DAHLBACKA MOVED TO CONTINUE, SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Mr. Parness stated that he believes Oakland Scavenger would like some
direction as to whether or not the Council would favorably entertain
the idea of reviewing a rate application or if the Council intends
to wait until the model agreement has been signed.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that his motion is simply to continue, but he
would be willing to listen to a proposal for a rate increase.
Cm Staley indicated that the rate application procedure and intention
of following the model ordinance concept would give the Council an
ideal opportunity to see how the model ordinance will work in the
rate setting structure. If it appears to be as successful as they
have indicated, it would make adoption of the model ordinance easier.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RECESS
Mayor Tirsell called for a brief recess, after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present.
REPORT RE REZONING
APP. FOR 5 ACRES AT
END OF LASSEN RD.
Mr. Musso explained that the staff has received an application for
rezoning of property located in the County from CN to A District.
This property is located at the end of Lassen Road adjacent to
a neighborhood commercial site and a gasoline station.
CM STALEY MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COM-
MISSION TO REZONE THIS PROPERTY FROM CN TO A DISTRICT. MOTION
SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
CM-32-73
April 12, 1976
(Rpt re Rezoning Application
5 Acres at End of Lassen Rd)
em Turner stated that one of the reasons the property had been
zoned CN was because the City wanted an area for a shopping
center. Obviously this has not corne to pass but in the General
Plan one of the items discussed was that this is an area that
the City would like filled in with residential. In his opinion
to rezone this may be premature. The owner has had the CN zoning
for only two years and possibly this has not been sufficient time
to allow commercial development. For this reason he will vote
against the motion.
Cm Staley commented that the property may not be developed for
many years and if it remains CN zoning the owners must pay higher
taxes for the property.
MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Cm Turner dissenting) .
P.C. RECOMMENDATION RE
POSTING OF TRUCK ROUTES
It was reported by the Planning Commission that by unanimous
vote they would like to suggest that the adopted truck route
for the City be posted at all entryways and to the entry points
of the adopted individual streets, with the request that the
City implement this suggestion.
Mr. Lee stated that he has a recommendation to present to the
Council as to how the routes should be posted and would like
the item continued to allow him time to make a report.
Cm Turner asked that in the report he would like an estimate of
the cost for implementation and where the money will come from.
P.C. SUMMARY OF
ACTION 4/6/76
The summary of action taken at the Planning Commission meeting
of April 6, 1976, was submitted to the Council.
Cm Staley appealed the action taken by the Planning Commission
to approve a Home Occupation for a Paint Contractor's Office at
3026 First Street, and a Home Occupation for a Photo Type Setting
Service at 5221 Roxanne Court. These matters will be heard before
the Council at a later date.
REPORT RE BUILDING
LEASE MODIFICATIONS
(Las positas Restaurant)
Mayor Tirsell asked that the Council move to the agenda item
relative to the Las positas restaurant building lease modification,
(4.8) because there are people in the audience interested in speak-
ing on this item.
Mr. Parness stated that he has been in contact with the restaurant
facility owners at Las positas Golf Course. Regrettably, it has
been due to a number of problems that it is agreed some changes
must be made in the general operations and conditions that prevail.
CM-32-74
April 12, 1976
(Bldg. Lease Modification
Las Positas Restaurant)
Mr. Casey, the owner, is present this evening and would like to
submit a request to the City Council that an application be allowed
for the issuance of a sublease by him. Permission for a sublease
is required in the terms of the lease. Mr. Casey would like to
explain his plans as well as introduce, to the Counil, the person
he would like to award the sublease to.
Mr. Casey stated that many things have been done right out at the
restaurant, but at the same time many things have been done improperly
and wrong. He is not particularly happy with the management of the
restaurant which serves this community. He stated that he has spoken
with Mr. Parness on many occasions and he believes a solution has
been found in the way of a proposal for new management. The restaur-
ant has been in operation for over four years now and there must be
great improvements and changes made. He would like to introduce
Mr. Bric Haley, from the Hatch Cover Restaurant in Stockton, the
proposed sublessee.
Bric Haley, stated that he would like to pick up a sublease for
the Las positas site. Currently he is located in Stockton, has
been located there for a little over two years during which time
they have been successful. For the past couple of months thay have
been looking for expansion and have come to terms with Mr. Casey
hoping that they could come to terms with the City Council as well.
Hr. Haley explained plans for renewing equipment, etc., which will
cost them approximately $50,000. Jeff Walters will be the resident
manager and will be the third equity owner. Mr. Walters will be
on the premises every day.
Cm Turner wondered if any of the cost for remodeling and renewal
of equipment will be the responsibility of the City, and Mr. Haley
indicated that it would not. The cost would be borne entirely by
the restaurant owners.
Mr. Parness indicated that the only problem with the remodeling
and new plans for the restaurant is that it would have to be closed
for about seven weeks and the City's percentage of the gross is at
stake. However, he has been assured that once the new improvements
have been installed and the restaurant reopened the loss in gross
would be more than recovered.
em Dahlbacka wondered if the provision for dancing will be continued
and Mr. Haley indicated that this would be omitted and that this
area will be converted to dining facilities.
Mr. Parness noted that if the Council approves the sublease it will
become effective tomorrow morning.
Mayor Tirsell asked if the current lessee has paid the City what
is owed to the City and Mr. Parness indicated that it has been
paid.
CM TURNER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION ALLmnNG
THE SUBLE1\SE, TO APPEAR ON THE CONSEUT CALE~mAR NEXT WEEK. ~10TION
SECONDED BY ~YOR TIRSELL.
Mr. Parness ex?lained that Mr. Casey is with Berkeley Science Corpora-
tion, and the present lessee is under the employ of Berkeley Science.
The present sublessee will merely be replaced by the new sublessees.
Cm Staley stated that he will abstain from further discussion and
a vote on the motion because he has served as an attorney for the
present manager and lessee of the restaurant.
CM-32-75
April 12, 1976
(Las positas Restaurant)
MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY (Cm Staley abstaining due to conflict
of interest).
REPORT RE TRAFFIC SIGNAL
PAYMENT (Holmes/Concannon)
At the request of the Mayor, the Public Works Director submitted
a report concerning payment for the traffic signal at Holmes Street
and Concannon Boulevard, by Sunset Development Company.
Item was noted for filing.
The City Attorney indicated that in talking with the attorney for
Mr. Mehran, today, he mentioned the matter of the money owed the
City for the traffic signals. The attorney indicated that Mr.
Mehran will be paying for the traffic signals at the time he ob-
tains permits for development of the commercial property at Holmes
Street and Concannon Boulevard and the permits are ready at this
time. The check should be received soon.
It did not vest in him by the mere paYment for the improvements. It
does vest with the issuance of a building permit and this is why he
has not made the paYment, at the advice of his attorney.
Mr. Lee stated that he was contacted by the developer today and
was told that the building permits would be obtained from the
City very soon and that a check for the signals would accompany
the check for the permits.
REPORT RE OLIVINA/
ALBATROSS CROSSING GUARD
A report was received from the Director of Public Works concerning
a crossing guard for Olivina Street at Albatross.
Cm Turner stated that this was an item he was concerned about and
he had requested that there be a check next fall to determine
if a crossing guard is needed since the underpasses have been
completed. The item will be discussed again in October.
RES. RE LIVERMORE AVENUE
UTILITY UNDERGROUND DIST.
The staff has recommended that a resolution be adopted declaring
the intent to call a public hearing to notify property owners
of the Livermore Avenue Utility Underground District formation.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he would be interested in knowing where
the City's share of funds for the undergrounding of utilities for
undergrounding will be coming from.
Mr. Parness stated that the funds will corne from gas tax monies
and these funds can be used only for projects having to do with
major street reconstruction work.
Mr. Parness indicated that this project was approved by the former
Council and this resolution is just one step in the procedures.
He added that it is part of the Capital Improvements budget and
in order to qualify for funds from PG&E a certain amount of money
must be paid by the City.
CM-32-76
April 12, 1976
(Underground Utility Dist.)
Mr. Parness stated that PG&E is required to post, in trust for our
City, 2% of the gross proceeds from all electric distribution sales.
This began about six years ago and with the amount accumulated and
what the City has contributed, the undergrounding of First Street,
Second Street, and some of the interim streets has taken place. The
Livermore Avenue undergrounding is next in line according to the
priority list adopted by the Council about three years ago.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he cannot vote for this until he has had
a chance to review the plans, the priorities, and discussion as
to what else could be done with the money.
em Turner stated that with the underpass projects there has been
a lot of traffic disruption and perhaps it would be better to
postpone this project until the underpasses are complete.
~1r. Lee indicated that there would be a minimum amount of traffic
disruption with this type of project.
Cm Turner wondered if this money could be used for the traffic
lights at the North Livermore Avenue underpass with a delay of
the undergrounding.
Mr. Lee stated that he is sure the $25,000 could be used for traffic
lights.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she is in favor of continuing with this
project because there are very few funds available for projects
for aesthetic purposes. The City has had a lot of trouble in
getting undergrounding in industrial districts, and it always
costs the City a tremendous amount of money for this type of
aesthetic project. In her opinion it is worthwhile to get the
lines and wires out of the downtown area which is part of the
package of making the downtown business district as attractive
as possible.
MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO SET THIS ITEM AS A PUBLIC HEARING, IN
RESOLUTION FORM. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he would like to make sure a vote for the
motion will not preclude the staff report that will be coming to
the Council, or normal action during a public hearing.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 82-76
RESOLUTION DECLARING INTENTION TO CALL
PUBLIC HEARING FOR REMOVAL OF POLES AND
OVERHEAD WIRES FROM PUBLIC STREETS AND
DIRECTING CITY CLERK TO NOTIFY PROPERTY
Oh~ERS, UTILITY USERS AND UTILITY COMPANIES.
REPORT RE PROPOSED
DIAGONAL PARKING FOR
SECOND & THIRD STREETS
A report was submitted by the Public Works Director concerning the
proposal for diagonal parking along Second and Third Street. The
report indicated that two additional spaces would be added with
the diagonal parking.
Cm Turner stated that his calculations indicate an additional 3 spaces
and Cm Staley stated that he also calculated 3 extra spaces.
CM-32-77
April 12, 1976
(Diagonal Parking)
Mayor Tirsell asked about the cost of restriping the lines
for diagonal parking and Mr. Lee indicated that this would
be in the area of $200-$300.
Cm Staley stated that the CBD study will be coming to the Council
shortly and perhaps discussion concerning possible diagonal park-
ing should be postponed until the report has been received.
The item was noted for filing.
REPORT RE UNDERPASS
TRAFFIC
Mr. Lee submitted a report concerning the underpass traffic
for informational purposes.
Cm Turner stated that about two weeks ago he asked the staff
to look into the problem of the four-way stop signs at lip"
Street. He stated that he believes most of the major streets
should be through streets.
Mr. Lee stated that the staff did try to eliminate the four-way
stops at both Chestnut and "P" as well as Railroad Avenue and "P"
Street, and it was felt that this is too hazardous.
He stated that along North Livermore Avenue at Chestnut and at
Railroad there will be traffic signals, as well as at Railroad
Avenue and "p" Street, and this area will have to be widened
along the shopping center before the signal can be installed.
Mr. Lee stated that this will take some time because the Council
hasn't decided on the layout of Railroad Avenue between "P" Street
and Railroad Avenue, as yet.
Cm Turner stated that this whole project seems to be piecemeal
and goes on and on. He hasn't been presented with any type of
schedule and he does not know how long this is going to go on.
Mayor Tirsell stated that one of the problems is that people
tend to believe that the day the underpasses opened the railroad
project was over. That is not the case - it was just the opening
of the underpasses and the trains were not even running on the
parallel tracks at that point and there is a lot of work invol-
ved. She stated that the Council needs a track relocation time
schedule to review.
Cm Turner stated that another item that concerns him is that the
cost of the signalization must be borne by the City and he be-
lieves this should have also been included as part of the entire
project.
Mr. Parness indicated that this same type of criticism could
be made of any of the City's capital improvement projects - for
instance, the piecemeal fashion of the widening and improvements
for East Avenue as well as Second Street, Olivina, and other
projects. As Mr. Lee tried to explain it was not anticipated
that signals would be needed at North Livermore Avenue but now
that the underpasses have been opened perhaps they should be
reviewed by the Council during the budget process and priorities
placed higher than originally planned for that area. The signals
were planned for the intersection of lip" and Railroad Avenue and
they will be installed.
CM-32-78
April 12, 1976
(Underpass Traffic)
Mr. Lee stated that he would like to add that originally the traffic
signals at Livermore Avenue and Railroad Avenue were planned but due
to the escallated costs of the railroad project the Council decided
to eliminate them from the project.
Cm Turner stated that he would still like to have a written time
schedule.
Mayor Tirsell asked that the Council have a progress report as was done
in the past because people think the project should be done and they
are asking the Councilmembers about the project.
REPORT FROM AIRPORT
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
RE PROPOSED LEGISLATION
The Airport Advisory Committee reported that state legislation has
been proposed which would grant extensive planning powers to the Air-
port Land Use Commission, over cities operating public airport facili-
ties. At present the City can overrule an advisory ALUC directive
on prospective land use proposals abutting airport facilities by a
4/5 vote of the local legislative body. The proposed legislation
would remove that overruling prerogative and it is recommended that
the Council adopt a motion opposing this legislation.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KN1ENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE COUNCIL EXPRESSED OPPOSITION TO THIS TYPE OF LEGISLATION.
REPORT CONCERNING THE
MULTI-SERVICE CENTER
SITE
A report has been submitted to the Council by the Multi-service
Center Site Committee concerning selection of a site for the
Center.
It was noted that the Council will discuss this on the meeting of
April 19th and requested that the staff ask for comments from the
LCAC, the Beautification Committee and the Planning Commission.
REPORT RE GREE~NILLE
NORTH SWIM CLUB
The City Attorney reported that representatives of Reliance Industries,
owner of the swim club in the Greenville North area, have contacted
the City offering sale of the facility to the City. The offer was
referred to LARPD who indicated that the facility would be of benefit
but because of financial reasons they are not able to acquire the
swim club which is offered at $100,000. The Park District is willing
to assume the $20,000-%25,000 per year operating and maintenance obli-
gation if the City will purchase the club.
The staff has recommended that the Council adopt a motion declining
offer of sale for financial reasons.
CM STALEY MOVED TO DECLINE THE OFFER OF SALE FOR FINANCIAL REASONS,
SECONDED BY CH Kfu"1ENA.
Mr. Parness stated that the owners were asking $140,000 for the swim
club but inferred that they would accept $100,000 if the City would
be willing to purchase it. He stated that if the City intends to
consider purchase, the property should be appraised.
CM-32-79
April 12, 1976
(Greenville Swim Club)
The City Attorney stated that he has been speaking with their
representatives and that the $100,000 is not a firm price. He
added that their attorney admitted, after walking through the
property, that it wasn't worth nearly $100,000 in value. They
are willing to negotiate and they are even willing to share the
cost for an appraisal.
Elinore Martinez, 2335 Bluebell, representative of the I-580
group, stated that they know $100,000 is a ridiculous price
for the swim club but they had asked the LARPD if there would
be a way they could lease the club from the City since they have
no facilities in that area for their children. LARPD indicated
that if the City would purchase it they would be willing to main-
tain it.
MOTION AND SECOND WERE WITHDRAWN AT THIS TIME.
CM STALEY MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS MATTER UNTIL THE BUDGET SESSION
TIME, AND DURING THE INTERIM ASK THE STAFF TO PURSUE THE MINIMUM
COST OF ACQUISITION. MOTION SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE.
MAX BAER PARK
ADDITION
The City Manager reported that some time ago LARPD recommended
that a small parcel of property adjacent to Max Baer Park be
acquired. The City Council approved purchase of the parcel
which has been appraised at $15,000. It is recommended that
a resolution be adopted authorizing purchase.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would like to know where the
money for purchase of the property will come from.
Mr. Parness indicated that this would come from the Park Fund
and that the property consists of about two acres.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE
OF THE PROPERTY ADJACENT TO MAX BAER PARK. MOTION WAS SECONDED
BY CM DAHLBACKA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 83-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF REAL
PROPERTY AND EXECUTION OF CONTRACT (Harry
Soe and Rose Y. Soe)
REPORT RE SPRINGTO~m
GOLF COURSE PROPERTY
The staff qas recommended that the Council adopt a resolution
authorizing appraisal of two parcels of property adjacent to
the SpringtQwn Golf Course site, to be acquired for planned use
as additions to the facility - clubhouse and driving range.
If the City is to proceed with purchase for this purpose an
appraisal must be conducted.
Mr. Parness commented that when the Council discussed this item
during the budget it was determined that it should come from the
Golf Course Fund rather than the Park Fund.
CM-32-80
April 12, 1976
ere Acquisition of
Golf Course Property)
Mr. Parness stated that the reason the staff would like to pursue
purchase of the property at this time is because the owner intends
to sell the property for residential development and this would be
in an area located in the middle of the driving range planned for
the golf course.
Mr. Wilverding, Livermore resident, stated that he believes the
Council should start re-evaluating priorities and rather than to
vote for an item such as this he would suggest that a fund be started
to build a new City Hall, which would be of benefit to everyone.
Mayor Tirsell explained that it is sometimes difficult for the public
to understand that the Council is working from five different funds
in the budget and according to the statutes money from each of these
funds can be spent only for certain things. t10ney cannot be taken
from one fund and placed in another fund to take care of shortages,
for instance. If the Council can find a fund for a City Hall they
will do it.
Mr. Wilverding stated that in this case, why not lower the tax rate
and increase the general City tax rate.
Mayor Tirsell explained that under SB 90 the City cannot alter the
tax rate - it can be lowered, but there cannot be an increase.
HAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE STAFF TO OBTAIN AN APPRAISAL
FOR THE PROPERTY. MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY THE
FOLLOWING VOTE: Ayes: Cm Kamena, Turner, and Mayor Tirsell,
Noes: None; Abstain: Cm Dahlbacka and Staley.
Cm Dahlbacka and Staley indicated that they abstained because they
felt they did not have enough information to make a decision.
RESOLUTION NO. 84-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPRAISAL OF REAL
PROPERTY (Leo J. Parry, Jr.; Great Western
Savings & Loan)
POLICY REGULATIONS RE
LOST AND FOUND ITEHS
The policy concerning regulations for lost and found items turned
into the Police Department was postponed to a time when the agenda
is light.
REPORT RE REPRODUCTION
OF GENERAL PLAN MAP
A report was received from the Planning Director concerning reproduc-
tion of the General Plan map. It is recommended that the Council
adopt a motion authorizing reproduction by zipatone process rather
than multi-color.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAHENA AN BY UNANHlOUS VOTE,
THE GENERAL PLAN MAP WILL BE PRODUCED BY ZIPATONE PROCESS.
REPORT RE EMERGENCY
MEDICAL SERVICES PLAN
The City Manager reported that the County emergency medical services
plan is the result of about two years of study, was funded by a grant
CM-32-8l
April 12, 1976
ere Medical
Emergency Services)
and copies of the plan have been distributed to the Councilmem-
bers in the past.
The primary concern to our city is the centralized radio dispatch-
ing of emergency ambulance services and the paYment of uncollectable
ambulance bills, and these items are worttvof our support. It is
recommended that the Council adopt a motion supporting the County
emergency service plan.
Mr. Parness stated that he is satisfied that the Plan is a good
one. It was under study for about two years and a highly qualified
staff was hired for conduct of the study. The Plan was based on a
grant of $666,000, and the City was represented and received regular
progress reports. In his opinion it would be a good service to have
instituted in this Valley.
Cm Kamena asked if this plan will include the 911 dial system.
Mr. Parness indicated that the centralized dispatching plan is
being designed in conjunction with the eventual 911 dial plan.
CM KAMENA MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL EXPRESS SUPPORT OF THE PLAN,
SECONDED BY CH DAHLBACKA, AND PASSED BY UNANIHOUS VOTE.
Cm .Dahlbacka wondered if this would include an emergency helicopter
pad adjacent to Valley Hemorial Hospital.
Mayor Tirsell commented that the emergency helicopter lands there
now for pediatric emergencies that require use of Children's
Hospital facilities.
REPORT RE RECLAIMED
WATER AGREEMENT (Jr. College)
Hr. Lee reported that the City and the Jr. College District entered
into an agreement in 1970 providing for the City to furnish reclaimed
water to the College District for irrigation purposes at the Valley
Campus. Conditions have arisen which make it desirable for the
City to enter into a new agreement and it is recommended that the
Council adopt a resolution authorizing execution of a new agreement.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE A RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT.
RESOLUTION NO. 85-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT
(South County Joint Junior College District of California)
CONSENT CALE1'TDAR
Res. Establishing
Heritage Site
The resolution establishing the Heritage Site for Trevarno Road
was removed from the Consent Calendar at the request of Cm Turner.
Report re 1975-76
Street Resurfacing
A report was submitted by the Director of Public Works for the
1975-76 street resurfacing program and requested permission to
solicit for bids.
CM-32-82
April 12, 1976
Salary Resolution
The Council adopted a salary resolution, as amended, and recommended
by the City Manager.
RESOLUTION NO. 86-76
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE ESTAB-
LISHING A SALARY SCHEDULE FOR THE CLASSIFIED
AND UNCLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF
LIVERMORE, ESTABLISHING RULES FOR ITS USE,
AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 38-76.
Report re Assessment Dist.
The Council adopted two resolutions which are routine amendments re-
quired due to property segragation upon sale.
RESOLUTION NO. 87-76
RESOLUTION DIRECTING ENGINEER OF WORK TO PREPARE
AND FILE AN AJ1ENDED ASSESSMENT, ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
NO. 1962-2, NORTHERN WATER ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, CITY
OF LIVERMORE, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
RESOLUTION NO. 88-76
RESOLUTION DIRECTING ENGINEER OF WORK TO PREPARE
AND FILE AN A...~1ENDED ASSESSMEnT, ASSESSHENT DISTRICT
NO. 1962-1, NORTHERN SANITARY SEWER ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT, CITY OF LIVERMORE, ALkMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON HOTION OF CM. TURNER, SECONDED BY C~1 STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSEllT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED v'7ITII DELETION OF THE
HERITAGE ORDINANCE.
~mTTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Complaints re
Political Signs)
Mr. Musso stated that he has received complaints from people who
have noticed political signs posted. People believe the signs
are premature. He has contacted the people who posted the signs
and they have agreed to remove the signs and comply with the rules.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCILMEHBERS
(Dogwood Park)
Cm Turner requested that an item concerninq Dogwood Park be placed
on the agenda because he has some concerns regarding this park.
(Proposition 15)
Cm Turner stated that the Council indicated that they would provide
the public with information concerning Proposition 15, and that
this information would be available in public places.
CH-32-83
April 12, 1976
ere Proposition 15)
ern Staley commented that he remembers urging the public to
inform themselves about Proposition 15 but he doesn't remember
agreeing to provide information.
Mayor Tirsell stated that if anyone brings anything into the City
the City is responsible for seeing that it is placed in public
places, such as the Library.
Cm Turner stated that he believes the resolution said something
different and he would like to see it again.
Mr. Tull stated that he believes it is unlawful to place political
information in any public building.
Mr. Logan was instructed to review the ordinance to find out if it
is lawful to place informational material in the Library, etc.
(Calendar of Events)
Cm Turner asked that a Calendar of Events be scheduled as an agenda
item and Mr. Parness indicated that it may be on the agenda next week.
(ABAG Letter re
General Plan)
Cm Dahlbacka stated that a couple of weeks ago the Council received
a letter from ABAG responding to our General Plan which he would
like referred to the Planning Commission.
(Industrial Develop-
ment Corporation)
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he would like to see an investigation of
an Industrial Development Corporation and he would like staff work
to begin on this now that Mr. Goreland is here.
General Plan consultants were to provide information concerning this
matter but nothing has been done.
Mr. Parness stated that he spoke with the General Plan consultant
on two occassions and he was told that this material had been given
to Cm Dahlbacka.
(Brass Band)
Cm Staley stated that nobody has been able to find a brass band
to play at the City's Centennial picnic this Thursday. If any-
one knows of someone to contact it would be appreciated if they
would inform people at City Hall.
(Staff Directory)
Cm Staley stated that he believes the Council should have a staff
directory listing telephone numbers of people the Council might
need to contact after hours.
The Council agreed that this would be a good idea, and the City
Manager indicated that this information would be forthcoming.
CM-32-84
April 12, 1976
(Memorandum of Under-
standing re LAVWMA)
Mayor Tirsell asked if the Memorandum of Understanding for LAVWMA
and Zone 7 could be placed on the next agenda so that she and Cm
Turner could have a position of the City to express at the next meeting.
(Pipeline Sizing)
May Tirsell requested that the pipeline sizing be placed on the
Council's agenda for next week.
(Air Pollution Seminar)
Mayor Tirsell reminded the Councilmembers to make individual reser-
vations through Betty Meyer for the Air Pollution Seminar. The City
!1anager was requested to contact the members of the Air Pollution
Committee concerning the meeting, in case they care to attend; also
the Planning Co~nission.
(Society of American
Indians)
Mayor Tirsell announced that the Society of American Indians are
having their Indian artcrafts display on Saturday, May 1, at
11arylin Avenue School, and the Councilmembers have been invited
to attend.
(Traffic Speed on
East Avenue)
Mayor Tirsell stated she had received a communication from a con-
cerned citizen regarding children who were hit on East Avenue, and
she would ask the staff to direct the Police Chief to give particular
attention to the traffic on East Avenue.
Mr. Parness indicated that whenever this is done, there are no
violations, however he would ask that the speed limit be monitored.
(Appointments to Various
Committees and Boards)
Mayor Tirsell asked if the matter of appointments could be placed on
the Council agenda for the next meeting. She felt that they should
complete the appointments to the Energy Committee first. They would
finish the Planning Commission interview next week.
Cm Turner reminded the Council that it had been their intention to
interview Housing Authority applicants.
Mayor Tirsell agreed, however since there are so many appointments to
be made, she suggested that they make the appointments and then give
some thought to an interview process.
(Community Picnic)
Mayor Tirsell reminded the Councilmembers and staff about the Com-
munity picnic to be held at Carnegie Park, and stated that people
are asked to corne in appropriate costume if they wish and to bring
a picnic lunch. In case of rain, they have reserved the presbyterian
Church fellowship hall. The picnic will be held at noon on April 15.
CM-32-85
April 12, 1976
ORDINANCES - CONTINUED
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, THE ORDINANCES LISTED
ON THE AGENDA WERE CONTINUED TO THE MEETING OF APRIL 19, BY A 4-1
VOTE WITH CM DAHLBACKA DISSENTING.
The Councilmembers were requested to retain all the ordinances for
the next meeting so that they would not have to be reproduced again.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 p.m. to an executive session for
discussion of pending litigation.
APPROVE
~ VJ .;zz;;.JIJ.(~-f.-
Mayor
ATTEST ~ t}?f~b
City Clerk
ivermore, California
Regular Meeting of April 19, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
April 19, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:08 p.m.
with Mayor Tirsell presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Dahlbacka, Kamena, Turner, Staley and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirsell led the Councilmembers as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES
4/1/76 & 4/5/76
P. 41, Top line should read: Cm Staley stated that he would agree
with Cm Turner...etc.
P. 50, 5th paragraph, last line should read: necessary to design
a system to handle only diurnal variations.
P. 58, under item concerning removal of stop sign, add an addi-
tional paragraph as follows: The staff indicated that they would
continue to watch the area and would report back to the Council.
P. 45, 3rd paragraph, 2nd line should read: the property was because
of the fact that a clear title to the property...etc.
CM-32-86
April 19, 1976
(Minutes con't)
P. 45, 6th paragraph from the bottom, line two should read:
not being made to the City by the owner for $21,000 and it seems..etc.
P. 45, 3rd line from the bottom, first line should read: Mr. Willis
stated that he would now offer the property...etc.
P. 51, 5th paragraph, first line should read: Cm Kamena stated
that if the 24" line is too small, ...etc.
P. 52, last paragraph, last line should read: they could not relocate
this type of operation.
P. 53, second large paragraph, 4th line should read: because of
this, does not acquaint themselves...etc. Same paragraph, next
to last line should read: of a school construction project and
the disregard for...etc.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETINGS OF APRIL 1ST, AND APRIL 5TH,
WERE APPROVED, AS CORRECTED.
OPEN FORUM
(Street Planning)
Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, stated that it has recently come to
his attention that one must hire a lawyer to obtain plans, past or
present, for a street in front of a residence or a business.
Mayor Tirsell commented that all information of this nature is public
information and can be obtained from City offices.
COMMUNICATION RE FLAG
CEREMONY TO HONOR FLAG DAY
A letter has been received from Todd Thomas from the Twin Valley Scout
District requesting permission to have a flag ceremony at the Livermore
Library on Sunday, June 13th, in honor of flag day.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO SEND A LETTER OF APPROVAL TO TODD THOMAS.
COMMUNICATIONS RE
PROPOSED RATE INCREASE
Two letters were submitted to the Council by PG&E concerning pro-
posed rate increase.
The letters were noted for filing.
Cm Dahlbacka commented that there seem to be a number of important
items that corne before the PUC and the staff attends some of the
hearings but many hearings take place without any City representation
at all.
Mr. Parness noted that representation, on behalf of consumers, is
performed by the PUC staff and they are very highly qualified people.
Any application of this nature is highly contested by the PUC staff.
The City Attorney added that any major increase proposal draws testi-
mony from Los Angeles, San Diego and San Francisco. The hearings can
be very lengthy and the last one he was involved in took 68 days.
CM-32-87
April 19, 1976
COMMUNICATION RE EAST
FIRST STREET OVERHEAD
A letter was received from Robert M. Barton, P.E., Chief Civil
Engineer for DeLeuw, Cather & Company, concerning the east First
Street Overhead project. The letter was informational in nature
and was noted for filing.
COMMUNICATION RE
AIR QUALITY PROBLEMS
A copy of a letter sent to the executive director of ABAG from
Supervisor Cooper concerning a computerized review of the air
quality problem in the Livermore-Amador Valley, was submitted
to the Council for informational purposes. Noted for filing.
Cm Staley noted that the last sentence in the first paragraph
of Mr. Cooper's letter is clearly misleading.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she is sure the ABAG executive committee
is familiar with Mr. Cooper and his position.
DISCUSSION RE PARCEL
MAP 1666 (Trevarno Rd.)
With the permission of the applicant, Mr. Madis, who was present,
the discussion concerning Parcel Map 1666 (Trevarno Road) was
postponed until April 26th.
REPORT RE TREVARNO
RD. ALTERNATE ACCESS
The report concerning an alternate means of access to Trevarno
Road was postponed to April 26th.
RES. RE TREVARNO RD.
HERITAGE SITE DESIGNATION
Cm Dahlbacka stated that the reason the P.C. felt strongly about
designating the Trevarno Road area as a heritage site was because
they were aware that an industrial subdivision would be developed
with substantially reduced public works standards from what is
normally required, because of the historical value of the area.
It was imperative, at the time, to make sure that an industrial
subdivision would not be approved with much lower standards un-
less there would be some way to enforce the fact that the area
would be turned into a historical preservation area. The heritage
site ordinance would allow the City about 120 days to take any ac-
tion once a building permit is taken out.
Cm Staley commented that the application is for a subdivision for
residential purposes but the land is zoned industrial and could,
in fact, be used for industrial purposes.
Mr. Musso commented that anyone of the residential units could
be converted to industrial or commercial use also. They would
have to provide the off-street parking, etc., but it could be done.
em Turner stated that in talking with Cm'Dahlbacka he is convinced
that the Council should go ahead and adopt the heritage site portion
of the P.C. recommendation.
CM-32-88
April 19, 1976
(Res. re Trevarno Rd.
Heritage Site Designation)
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION DESIGNATING TREVARNO
ROAD AS A HERITAGE SITE. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Mr. Gorland, Community Development Director, stated that he sent
a memorandum to the City Manager today which indicated that the
adoption of the heritage site resolution would be ineffective
with the content of the present ordinance. He recommended that there
be a change in the ordinance.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that the P.C. is undertaking a revision of the
Historic Preservation Ordinance and he is sure Mr. Gorland's input
would be welcomed by them.
Mr. Gorland noted that
and not to buildings.
the ordinance does not
to the buildings.
the present ordinance applies only to land
Very little can be done to the land and yet
preclude any action being taken with respect
Mr. Logan stated that the Council does not want to overlap what the
P.C. is doing, because what the P.C. is talking about is the floating
zone. The heritage ordinance is only a stay provision for 90 days.
What Mr. Gorland has said is partially true, there are some confus-
ing areas that should be cleared up but nevertheless it is still an
effective ordinance to stay the issuance of any permits or any other
entitlements as to any improvements for both building and land.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 89-76
A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING A HERITAGE SITE
(Trevarno Road)
Mayor Tirsell explained that the Council would like to review the
comments from the P.C. prior to making a decision concerning this
parcel and this is the reason it is being continued one more week.
Earl Mason, with Associated Professions, stated that their soils
engineer has indicated that Trevarno Road would support a traffic
index of 6 to 6~ which is equivalent to the City's standard for a
collector street with a lot of traffic expected on it. There could
be 1,000 vehicles per day, 10% of which could be trucks; or there
could be 500 vehicles, 20% of which could be trucks. The index is
related to the estimated truck counts and traffic counts and the
axel load anticipated. They have done such an estimate for Trevarno
Road and he will be furnishing copies of his report to the Council.
Mr. Lee explained that if Trevarno Road is to function as an indus-
trial street it should have an 8~ traffic index. If the Council
feels that there will be an extension of Mines Road and eventual
closing of the crossing that will function as a collector or resi-
dential street then the lesser traffic index is perfectly reasonable.
Mr. Mason stated that 8~ is what is used for First Street which
receives a lot of traffic and is certainly a different situation
than the traffic that would occur on Trevarno Road which is a
dead-end street going to HEXCEL. They will furnish information
to the Council to review along with what the staff prepares and
then everyone can discuss it again next week.
Mr. Madis commented that the chart Mr. Mason is speaking of has been
accepted by the League of California Cities as the standards for roads
in California. An index of 8~ will provide for 3,000 trucks and 97,000
cars.
CM-32-89
April 19, 1976
REPORT RE RESULT OF
P.C. HEARING RE
ENSIGN-BICKFORD PROPERTY
Mayor Tirsell stated that with respect to the report from the P.C.
concerning their public hearing on the Ensign-Bickford property and
the request for rezoning to CN, the Council can do a number of things.
They can take no action and support previous stands~ public testimony
can be taken~ or it can be set for public hearing before the Council.
em Staley commented that the status of the litigation involved in this
item is a concern and it would seem that the least expense to the
City and the most reasonable course of action would be to set the
matter for a pUblic hearing which would then obviate any necessity
of appeal and litigation.
CM STALEY MOVED THAT THIS ITEM BE SET AS A PUBLIC HEARING ON MAY 3,
SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she will speak against the motion because
the Council has reviewed this in the past and the P.C. has voted
unanimously to support the Council position. In her opinion there
is no need to set another public hearing which would require that
everyone involved would have to attend again. The findings of the
P.C. were very definitive.
Mr. Logan commented that he would like the Council to clearly under-
stand that they are under no obligation to do anything at this point.
The only reason he is concerned about the time constraints is because
the City is in the process of appealing and he doesn't want to go
through this process unless there is a necessity. If the Council
determines at the time of the public hearing not to grant the rezon-
ing, then the City will have to appeal anyway. If the Council makes
the prior action moot they will have to bring new cause of
action to Superior Court.
MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Mayor Tirsell dissenting).
REPORT RE MULTI-SERVICE
CENTER SITE SELECTION
Mayor Tirsell commented that a committee comprised of representa-
tives of the P.C., LARPD, the Social Concerns Committee, the staff,
the Mayor, and the architect, met to discuss site location for the
multi-service center.
The Social Concerns Committee preferred a site on Livermore Avenue
because of its access and visibility as well as transportation that
might be available. In looking at this site, however, the architect
raised questions concerning grading of the site, etc. It was con-
cluded that the meeting would be postponed and there would be a second
meeting to consider this item.
In the meantime the architect has walked the area of the site. At
the time he reviewed the site he saw the Barn and remembered that
people had commented that they would like the Barn to remain in its
present location and that people are very fond of it and want it
preserved. He would therefore propose that the Barn and social
service building be used in conjunction with one another because the
social service building would have a kitchen and areas that could be
compatible with uses in the Barn. He has also suggested that in the
future the barn be remodeled so doors can be opened and provide some
flexibility of use.
CM-32-90
April 19, 1976
(Rpt re Multi-Service
Center Site Selection)
The architect has suggested that trellis work and ivy be provided
at this time to allow greenery for the Barn as well as outdoor use.
This area is known as Site "A".
Cm Turner stated that in looking through the letters received, he
noticed that there is 1 vote in favor of site "A", 2 votes against
Site "A", and 1 undecided. He would like to hear comments from those
who voted against this site and their reasons for not wanting this
site.
em Dahlbacka stated that he would like to know the time scale on this
project and how it might fit in with the existing plans for the
Civic Center site - they really haven't been integrated as far as he
knows.
Mayor Tirsell commented that it is not imperative that the Council
make a decision this evening but the architect cannot begin until
a site has been selected.
Cm Dahlbacka felt that perhaps the Council should wait until the
P.C. has reviewed the recommendations and can report to the Council.
Mr. Musso indicated that the committee reviewed the uses that would
actually be going into the Civic Center site and which uses would
be compatible in this area. It was concluded that a use such as
a multi-service center would be appropriate in a location such as this,
and would not pre-empt development of other uses planned for the area.
Mr. Lee explained that the intent of the suggestions made by the
architect is to preserve all of the uses at the barn as well as
enhance the appearance.
Cm Turner wondered if the committee will actually make the selection
for the site or if this will be the responsibility of the Council.
Mayor Tirsell commented that the committee had representation from
various groups and public testimony will be taken concerning the
proposal made by the architect with the ultimate decision to be made
by the Council.
Kris Aaland, 3934 California Way, stated that the Council cannot
consider site location without considering how the building will
be constructed. He added that if we are to receive funds from the
government for development of the building and it is to be maintained
by the City that it should be designed to be relatively maintenance
free. Mr. Aaland stated that he has submitted a design that the
City is familiar with which would be constructed underground.
Bobbie Baird, representative of the Design Review Committee stated
that they would totally disagree with location "A"; first, because
it doesn't have compatible use with the Barn and takes away uses
that have been placed there. They also feel that open space is
important. Unfortunately, they do not know what will be in the
new building and they are assuming that it will be offices.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the new building will have offices, a
kitchen and meeting room. Some of the areas can be open spaces
and can be flexible.
Bobbie indicated that the Design Review Committee would really
prefer selection of location "B".
CM-32-9l
April 19, 1976
(Rpt re Multi-Service
Center Site Selection)
Ayn Weiskamp, representing the Beautification Committee, stated
that they believe an updated master plan for the Civic Center site
is necessary before any building is constructed in that area. They
would prefer that nothing is developed until this is done because
it may mean that everyone will have to work around it. The Barn
is already there and everyone has to work around it but this is
fine because everybody has a certain feeling about the Barn. The
Beautification Committee tried to consider all three sites and the
beautification aspects and this is very difficult. They had the
same problems as did the Design Review Committee because they did
not know what is planned for the Civic Center area, exactly.
Rin Hartwig, Chairman of the Social Concerns Committee, stated that
one of the problems everyone has had with this item is the lack of
understanding concerning the use of the services building. The
Committee would hope that it will have general use for many organi-
zations in town. They have sent out questionnaires to about 200
organizations and received 35 positive responses listing various
uses that they might be interested in. As a result of the responses
they charted what types of rooms and offices would be needed and
they hope the architect can help provide. They feel about 20
offices will be needed with various rooms to accommodate a certain
number of people. Hopefully there can be joint activities and there
will be a kitchen which should be very useful for many of the things
that already take place at the Barn.
Originally the Committee was in favor of Site "c" because of visi-
bility and accessibility and because of the fact they were concerned
that location on Pacific Avenue would mean improvement of that street
which they could not afford. Since that time they have found
that improvement of Pacific Avenue would not have to come from these
funds but they do not want the building this close to the Barn.
The architect still has to meet with the Social Concerns Committee
and they would like to suggest that placement of the building be
located along the other side of the pepper trees and not so close
to the Barn.
Mr. Lee illustrated the Civic Center site area, the location of the
Barn, and where the architect is proposing the location for the
multi-service center. Discussion followed concerning where many
of the people feel the service building should be located, on the
other side of the peoper trees.
Lois Hill, representative of the Recycling Center, stated that she
did attend a meeting during which the architect was making proposals
for a building that could be used in conjunction with the Barn. She
was very favorably impressed with his creative ideas. In the first
place she liked the idea of tying the style into the style of the
library and making a new exterior for the Barn which would also
tie into the style of the library with arches and ivy, etc.
Lois indicated that the Recycling Center is anxious to begin the
recycling of oil but a tank must be buried and this cannot be
done until a decision is made regarding the location of the new
service building. If they are going to have to make a move they
would like to know so they can get going with relocation and get
their oil recycling program started.
Jim Doggett, 1317 North "P" Street, representing the Livermore
Cultural Arts Committee, stated that they become very emotional
whenever anyone starts talking about the Barn. They were also
very disturbed about the close proximity of Site "A" but they
are not concerned about sites "B" and "C". They do believe that
having additional facilities at the Civic Center site would be
very valuable to the City.
CM-32-92
April 19, 1976
(Rpt re Multi-Service
Center Site Selection)
Cm Kamena wondered if the position of the senior citizens of
Livermore has been adequately represented.
Lillian Snorf, representative from the Senior Citizens Center, stated
that she has been on the committee since its conception and she has
talked to many senior citizens. They seem to be happy where they
are presently located, in the recreation building, and she is sure
they will be more interested in its services once the building has
been completed. Personally speaking she would prefer that it not
be too close to the Barn because the uses are totally incompatible.
Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, commented that in Vancouver, B.C.,
there is a college built exactly as Mr. Aaland has suggested and
it works very well in an area that gets very cold. Livermore might
have the same success with a building in an area that gets very hot
in the summer.
Cm Kamena stated that he would agree there should be a conceptual
design for the entire Civic Center site area and perhaps if the
architect could work with the Social Concerns Committee the building
could be located in Site "A" with modifications so that it would not
interfere with the Barn.
Ayn Weiskamp stated that she believes it would be great to have a
barrier from the wind and to have a smooth surface outside and
perhaps this could be accomplished by working with the architect
and swinging the building around and yet be located on Site "A".
If the kitchen could be used by the Cultural Arts Committee for
their events this would be marvelous.
ern Dahlbacka stated that the P.C. is going to discuss this issue
tomorrow night and he would like to know what they have to say before
making a decision.
Cm Turner concurred AND MOVED THAT THIS ITEM BE POSTPONED FOR ONE
WEEK, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Kevin Smith stated that he believes it is very foolish to begin
development in the Civic Center site area when there has not been
community input as to what will be done with the entire Civic Center
project. In his opinion, placement of the multi-service center
building in this area would be premature.
Mayor Tirsell explained that a lot of time and thought has gone
into what will be located at the Civic Center site and even though
the buildings may not be built for years, as development occurs,
each Council will review plans for development and what should go
into the area.
Mayor Tirsell commented that the chairmen are present from the
different committees and she would like to encourage them to get
input from their committees and to work with Mr. Lee on updating
the maps.
RECESS
Mayor Tirsell called for a brief recess after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present.
REPORT RE REQUEST
FOR DIAGONAL PARKING
A request has been received for diagonal parking spaces on "K"
and 5th Streets adjacent to the Presbyterian Church property.
CM-32-93
April 19, 1976
(Rpt re Request
for Diagonal Parking)
Cm Turner commented that he would be in favor of granting the
request for the diagonal parking to provide additional spaces.
Mr. Lee had mentioned that there would be problems if the park-
ing designation were: changed but in reviewing the proposed changes,
it would appear that most of the use would take place on a Sunday
when the normal business traffic is not present.
CM TURNER MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR DIAGONAL PARKING ON
"K" STREET AND FIFTH STREET. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
Gib Marguth, representing the Presbyterian Church, stated that he
is an elder at the church and the Church also made a request for
a designation of two parking spaces next to the driveway on Fifth
Street for handicapped parking. He would request that this be
included, as well.
Mr. Marguth explained that this would be designed exactly as the
other diagonal parking but there would be designation indicating
that only the handicapped could park in that area.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE TWO PARKING SPACES
DESIGNATED IN THE DRIVEWAY AREA FOR HANDICAPPED PARKING. AMEND-
MENT WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she will abstain from voting on the
motion because she is a member of the presbyterian Church.
AMENDMENT PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE (Mayor Tirsell abstaining).
MAIN MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE (Mayor Tirsell abstaining) .
REPORT FROM BEAUTIFICATION
COMMITTEE RE NAMING OF
FIRST STREET PARKS
The Beautification Committee has suggested that the parks at the
intersection of First Street and Livermore Avenue, be dedicated
and named on July 4th as part of the Bicentennial ceremonies.
The Committee has offered to coordinate the event and would sug-
gest that the parks be identified with historically significant
names - Lizzie Fountain, after Aunt Lizzie Oliver, and Mill
Square, as the intersection was once identified.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she really appreciates the type of
research that was done in suggesting names for these parks.
Cm Turner stated that he would like to comment that the Beautifi-
cation Committee does a fantastic job, as do, many of the City
committees in Livermore.
ON MOTION OF MAYOR TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE WERE
ADOPTED.
REPORT RE LA VWMA
PIPELINE SIZE
The City Attorney read the "fair and equitable clause" concerning
the LAVWMA pipeline allocations and discussion followed concerning
the clause.
Mayor Tirsell asked if the City Attorney would paraphrase what he
had read.
CM-32-94
April 19, 1976
(Report re LAVWMA
Pipeline Size)
Mr. Logan stated that basically the clause says that outside agencies
can hook up to the regional line and the conditions for coming onto
the regional line would be that they furnish their own cost of getting
to the line. At that point there is a certain allocated amount of
costs they have to pay which is fair and equitable in terms of what
everybody else has paid for the cost of that line.
The clause does not answer some real concerns, such as where the
boundaries for a region are drawn. It would appear from the guidelines
that they have a fair opportunity to get in. His concern is that he
checked with one of the attorneys and asked specifically about a
situation like Las Positas, and the attorneys took the position that
when a project is originated and the contract for the grant funding
takes place, there are certain boundaries drawn for that regional
project and an outside entity might have a problem because of the
costs to the cities which originally were included in the project,
but nobody has ever tested this. That was one attorney's opinion
and Mr. Logan stated that he tends to believe that the fair and
equitable clause could do almost anything for anybody, after reading
the guidelines. It would seem that the deciding factor would be
how much capacity is made available and how much is allocated to
a particular area. If you have additional capacity, obviously some-
one from outside could come into the line,.under the guidelines.
em Dahlbacka mentioned that in the table showing cost distribution
and the various pipe sizes, there is a total cost column with a star
above the three pipelines with a surge pond. The star refers to a
higher pressure, reinforced concrete pipe. His question would be,
how much over pressure would this take and can flow be pumped
through the higher pressure concrete?
Mr. Knopf, from Carollo Engineers, indicated that basically it is
a gravity pipe, so the answer would be, no.
Mayor Tirsell asked if the project is designed for 19.12 MGD or
18.12 MGD at this time.
It was noted that it should be 19.12 - the 18.12 was an arithmetic
error.
Mr. Knopf stated that the 1.4 MGD fundable, represents the increase
in population at 87 gallons per capita, per day, between now and
1998. It does have a bearing to the E-O population chart, which he
explained.
Cm Dahlbacka commented that the Council adopted a resolution support-
ing use of surge ponds and it would seem that this would eliminate
discussion of the 33" pipeline because the 33" line would not require
the use of a surge pond.
Mayor Tirsell commented that her understanding of what was discussed
before was reaffirmation of the Council's position on the project
which was to use average flows and a surge pond.
em Dahlbacka stated that it seems there are two major pOlicy decisions
to be discussed this evening. The first major policy decision is how
much the voters will be asked to pay, if the pipeline is constructed,
and secondly, what population projections would be allowed with the
construction of the pipeline.
In reviewing this information, and considering it in technical
detail, Cm Dahlbacka has come to the conclusion that a 24" pipeline
with a surge pond would be consistent with the General Plan through
CM-32-95
April 19, 1976
(Report re LAVWMA
Pipeline Size)
the period of time planned for - through 1998. The population
projections used in the report from LAVWMA are consistent with
the fact that we have no additional sewer capacity for the next
5-7 years, and with a 2% maximum growth rate, comes to approxima-
tely 68,000 population. Taking into consideration that our exist-
ing sewage does include industrial use, and taking into consideration
expanded commercial uses, he concludes that the 7.4 MGD is adequate.
em Dahlbacka stated that the surge pond studies indicate that the
surge ponds would be used heavily but from his investigations he
has not been able to find any reason why a larger surge pond can't
be built.
em Dahlbacka stated that if the City chooses a 27" pipe this would
provide for an additional 25,000 population, and on the basis of
what the City Attorney has just said he has a great deal of concern
that 25,000 is a start towards an excessive amount of residential
development in the Valley. The other consideration is cost, and
the cost consideration is equivalent for either and, in fact, the
cost is somewhat less for the 24" line. The 7.4 MGD is consistent
with our General Plan and the 10.2 MGD is not.
em Dahlbacka added that sewer technology is changing all the time
and he would not want to install a line larger than is necessary
because, for example, a larger line was installed to service the
Junior College, and the taxpayers are paying for an oversized line
that may never be used to its capacity. In his opinion we will not
be using the same sewer technology in 25 years.
em Staley commented that the additional cost of the 24" line with
surge pond and the 27" line with surge pond is very little differ-
ence in cost - 1.5% of the total cost, and if the 24" line with
surge ponds is chosen it means that there can be no growth beyond
the planned period.
Cm Staley stated that the point he is trying to make is that there
is little difference between the cost of the 24" line and the 27"
line with surge ponds and the 24" line would restrict Livermore
to a population of 68,000 over the General Plan period, while the
calculations indicate that the population may reach a maximum of
73,000. The maximum was estimated at 82,000 but because of the
5-7 year delay in getting additional capacity the maximum could
not be more than 73,000, allowing a 2% maximum growth rate in any
given year.
The 24" line will not allow expansion to 82,000, and the General
Plan provides only for 20 years. If, in 20 years Livermore decides
to continue to grow at a maximum of 2%, there would be no capacity
and the entire project would have to be done allover again, assum-
ing the same technology is in use.
em Dahlbacka stated that what Cm Staley is saying is true but on
the other side of the coin, if the 27" line is allowed, it opens
the door to an additional 25,000 population beyond what is called
for in the General Plan.
Cm Turner stated that he would have to agree with what Cm Staley
has said because it is possible that Livermore could become the
center of industry for the Bay Area and he would not want to be
locked into a situation where we couldn't take advantage of that
opportunity. A 24" line will not likely allow us to take advantage
of opportunities that could be of benefit to the community.
CM-32-96
April 19, 1976
(Report re LAVWMA
Pipeline Size)
Cm Kamena stated that he understood, according to Mr. Knopf, that
the 24" line would not be adequate and wondered if this is correct.
Mr. Knopf, stated that basically their recommendation was that the
24" line was too small and would not be an alternative. The alterna-
tives were a 27" line with a surge pond and a 33" line without the
surge pond.
Cm Kamena noted that with the 27" line there is $52,000 that is not
eligible, but in the 33" line this is not the case. He wondered
why.
Mr. Knopf explained that future industrial flow is not fundable.
EPA will approve it as a concept as a mitigation measure but they
can still not allow the City to use federal funds for providing the
capacity. He also added that they found an error in their calculations
and there is actually a 10% reduction in the estimated costs for the
27" line.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE 24" LINE WITH THE
SURGE POND. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Mayor Tirsell stated that according to LAVWMA calculations, the
27" pipe will handle 14 MGD, average flow, and the 30" pipe will
handle 17.5 MGD, so they have had to go to the 33" to accommodate
the 19.12 reserve capacity. Livermore has been in the project for
6.62 which would leave 1.88 MGD in the 33" pipe. The City is con-
cerned about the sizing of the pipe to allow excess population, and
yet Livermore isn't in the project for any industrial reservation
at all. Unfortunately, the industrial reservation is not to be
funded through a grant. Livermore would not have to go to the 33"
line unless the total capacity (19.52) is reserved.
If you take Livermore's 6.62, add the 1.88 for industry you come
up with 8.5 and if you subtract the 8.5 from the 10.2 flow that
the 27" line accommodates, it will leave only 1.7 MGD uncommitted.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the one thing the City does not want to
do is to.~~the big line over the hill to a new pipe size.
It is apparent that Pleasanton has put in 2 MGD for industry and
Livermore had none included, and these would have to be funded
independently. If there is no independent funding for the 4 MGD reserve
for industry in the big pipeline it thenv'falls aown to the 30" pipe
over the hill. de~/U~.~ ~
~~L ee.-r.-~~~
.1", 7" I
Cm Dahlbacka stated that basically it is the 2 MGD that Pleasanton
has reserved for industrial that is causing the increase over the
17.5.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the 27" line with the surge pond seems to
provide an adequate amount for Livermore's General Plan and certainly
is adequate for industry.
Mr. Knopf indicated that in doing additional arithmetic there is a
$24,600 difference between the 27" line and the 33" line and the
net cost for the 27" line would be less money to come from the
taxpayers.
Cm Turner stated that the 33" line will handle 8.3 MGD and it would
seem that it might make more sense to approve this size line rather
than the 27" line with the surge pond that will take up two acres of
land and will require maintenance.
CM-32-97
April 19, 1976
(Rpt re LAVWMA
Pipline Size)
Mayor Tirsell stated that the 33" line would accommodate the maxi-
mum and not~that any of it will go for industry - it could
all go for- . This is not true with the 27" line because
a certain amount would be specified in the grant conditions, would
be contracted for, and would have to be signed. If the 1.88 for
industry is applied for, it would have to be reserved for that use.
Cm Turner felt that if the 1.88 is to be reserved for industry,
according to the grant, some 5-10 years down the road, someone can
come up with reasons to change this agreement. In other words, any
agreement is subject to change. Therefore, having a 27" line with
little additional capacity is no more protection against allowing
someone outside to hook up to the system than having the 33" line
with substantial capacity.
Cm Turner stated that in order for Las positas to hook up to the
line they would have to have a treatmentvfor pumping the effluent
into the pipeline. ~
Cm Kamena stated that Livermore has the same problem - we may need
to expand our own treatment plant. If we get the 33" pipe, for
example, we still have limited sewer capacity of approximately
5 MGD because of our present treatment plant. A larger line does
not mean that we will automatically have 10.2 MGD, for example, it
means only that we no longer will dump the effluent into the creek.
em Kamena stated that it is the City's obligation to provide for
sewage to 1998, and it is also clear that the 24" line is not large
enough and is not recommended by the professional engineers. Also
the 33" line has the capacity to serve 200,000 people and it is
inconceivable to him that Livermore could support 200,000 people
in 20, 25, or even 50 years. The 27" line appears to be consistent
with our philosophical support of flow, as well as our General Plan.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO ACCEPT THE 27" PIPE WITH SURGE POND, SECONDED
BY CM STALEY.
em Staley stated that if the pipe size over the hill is 33" and
it is totally committed, it doesn't make any difference then if
our line is 33" or 27", in terms of a threat to providing sewer
facilities for another city.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she thinks it makes hook up a little
more difficult if the large pipe is Se'tiiCa up--,~. j
,/UA.-R~' ~u.L-
Cm Staley stated that he cannot understand why the 3" line over
the hill can accommodate more effluent that the same size line
in our area. It was noted that our line is basically a gravity , I
line and that over the hill will be pressure driven, and ~~~~~
reason it will carry more flow. ~~
Mr. Parness stated that he would like to know if the whole discus-
sion by the Council is really academic because a decision will first
be made by the Council, then LA~~, the Board of Supervisors, the
208 Planning Agency, the EPA, Regional Board and the State Board.
He would be interested in knowing what would happen if some of the
other agencies, and particularly EPA, would say the line selected
by the Council is not adequate, or that it is too large, and pre-
empt the Council's decision.
Mr. Knopf stated to the best of his knowledge the indication is
that an E-O system would be supported, and this is basically what
the Council is discussing.
CM-32-98
April 19, 1976
(Report re LAVWMA
Pipeline Size)
Mayor Tirsell stated that if someone else decides to size the project
there will be three angry communities who have spent about $100,000
each on this project. Everyone has been working very diligently for
about two years and if someone else comes along and makes changes at
the end then there will be some very angry people to contend with.
Cm Staley commented that there has been some discussion about the
size of the line being 39" over the hill and it may be that if we
change our position from 27" to 33" this might add a tremendous
argument for those who are trying to increase the pipe size from
33" to 39" over the hill.
Cm Karnena called for the question at this time.
em Turner commented that he had a few items to discuss and Cm Kamena
withdrew the call for the question.
Cm Turner wanted to know the expected life of a pipe and Mr. Knopf
indicated that the life span is from 50-60 years. Cm Turner stated
that this means we will have to live with the size we choose for about
50 years and he would hope that the Council will not make a decision
for the 27" line based on the fears that a larger size would allow
Las positas the sewage they need. He believes that the 33" line
would eliminate the need for the surge pond and that this would be
the reasonable way to go.
David Eller, 3797 Oregon Way, stated that there might be a problem
in selecting a 33" line if surge ponds could be added later because
this would increase the potential capacity and might help encourage
a population of 220,000 for the Valley. This Valley has a lot of
open land and there is great potential for residential development.
He is very concerned about the pipe size in relation to Las Positas,
and would urge support for the 27" line with the surge pond as a
maximum, but would actually prefer the 24" line.
Jerry Wilverding, Livermore, stated that there is a minimal amount
of money involved between the 27" line and the 33" line and the City
would be defeating the additional amount of gain for the difference
in money. There is nothing to say that the plan will be adhered to.
We are embarking upon an industrial increase for Livermore and it
would seem that there should be capacity for any potential industrial
development.
Mr. Tull stated that 200,000 people is a drop in the bucket compared
to what could be accommodated in the Valley if they continue to grow
at the rate of the past 10 years.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he still believes that the City would be
making a mistake in voting in favor of the 27" line. The 24" line
would be consistent with our General Plan and provides enough sewage
capacity to take care of industrial development that we want as well
as the commercial development desired. He will vote against the motion.
MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO ~1END THE MOTION TO INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING
FINDINGS:
I) Livermore supports averaging the flow and use
of surge ponds;
2) Livermore should receive credit in the main line
for our surge pond because we will be delivering
an average flow;
3) Livermore's E-O population of 65,000 in the Year
1998 reflects urbanization in only those areas
designated in the 1976 General Plan.
AMENDMENT SECONDED BY CM KAMENA. AMENDMENT PASSED 4-1 {CM TURNER
DISSENTING.
CM-32-99
April 19, 1976
(Report re LAVWMA
Pipeline Size)
MAIN MOTION PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: Ayes: Cm Kamena,
Staley and Mayor Tirsell. Noes: Cm Dahlbacka and Cm Turner.
REPORT RE ZONE 7
MEMO. OF UNDERSTANDING
The Council received a copy of the Memorandum of Understanding
proposed for adoption between LAVWMA and Zone 7. Mayor Tirsell
would like the Council to discuss the memo and receive direction
for the next LAVWMA meeting.
em Dahlbacka stated that in his opinion this memorandum is not
acceptable as an understanding at all.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO INSTRUCT THE DELEGATE TO LAVWMA TO VOTE
AGAINST THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN ZONE 7 AND LAVWMA.
MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Cm Turner stated that he has spoken with two members of Zone 7
who also feel the memorandum is not acceptable.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE APPLICATION
TO RENEW SEWER AGREE-
MENT (H. C. Dhont)
The Planning Director reported that an application has been re-
ceived for permission to renew a sewer connection contract for
H. C. Dhont (AABBCO Laboratory), 6491 Southfront Road.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THIS ITEM BE POSTPONED, PENDING MORE INFOR-
MATION FROM THE STAFF CONCERNING THIS ITEM. MOTION WAS SECONDED
BY CM KAMENA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Cm Turner stated that he would like to know whether or not the
hook-up is illegal or legal, and whether or not an agreement
has been previously signed, as well as why Mr. Dhont wants to delay
certain improvements.
Cm Staley stated that if this person is outside the City limits
he knows of no reason the City should allow the hook-up. We
need that additional sewer capacity for people inside the City.
COUNCIL DISCUSSION RE
DOGWOOD PARK
The Council has requested discussion concerning the current
status of Dogwood Park, which is a parcel situated between
Olivina Avenue and Nightingale Street. It was purchased by
the City about three years ago.
em Turner stated that he would like the staff to contact the
people who back up to Dogwood Park to determine whether or
not there really are vandalism problems as mentioned in his
letter to the Council, as well as to hear their feelings about
the park. LARPD has indicated that they do not want it and
Dan Lee has stated that there are no plans for development
as far as the City is concerned.
CM TURNER MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM UNTIL THE QUESTIONS
MENTIONED ABOVE HAVE BEEN ANSWERED. MOTION SECONDED BY CM
DAHLBACKA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM-32-l00
April 19, 1976
REPORT FROM LARPD RE
PARK PRIORITY LISTING
The Council received a copy of LARPD's annual park acquisition priority
list for informational purposes.
The list was noted for filing, and will be considered at budget time.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he believes placing the bikeways and trailways
as well as the bike plan items in second priority is a real mistake
because these things are needed now.
CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION
RE VARIOUS ITEMS
Real Property Declaration Requirements
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED UNTIL SEPTEMBER, 1976.
Ord. re Campaign Disclosures
- Reporting Requirements
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THIS ITEM WAS ALSO CONTINUED UNTIL SEPTEMBER, 1976.
Zoo Ord. re Home Occupations
Cm Staley stated that he would like the matter of home occupations,
as outlined in the ordinance, referred to the Community Development
Director for a report as to the affect on commerce and industry in
Livermore. The ordinance probably needs revision that he does not
want to discuss this evening. Perhaps the Community Development
Director has some recommendations.
Cm Turner commented that he noticed there are a
in which an individual can work out of his home
himself a firm he must have an office downtown.
rather inconsistent and an unfair advantage for
doing business.
lot of instances
but if he calls
This seems to be
the individual
Ord. re Campaign Disclosures
- Reporting Requirements
Inadvertently, there was a motion to continue this item until
September, and Cm Turner stated that he would like to discuss
it now.
Cm Turner stated that in reviewing the ordinance relative to
campaign disclosures and reporting requirements, it seems to be
a tremendously encumbersome piece of legislation.
em Dahlbacka stated that he believes the most difficult part and
a lot of duplication can be omitted but the largest problem for
candidates was trying to understand what they had to do. Once
people understand what is going on and once paper work is minimized.
He felt that overall, the spirit of the ordinance is good.
Cm Kamena stated that he had to comply with the regulations of the
ordinance recently and found a few things objectionable. One of
these was the fact that the same information was required on two
different forms but for different dates which meant that they could
not be duplicated but had to be done separately because the figures
would change from one date to another.
CM-32-l0l
April 19, 1976
(Ord. re campaign Disclosures
- Reporting Requirements)
The city Clerk stated that there were so many different dates
that it would really help of the recording dates could be
coordinated, even if the information is required on different
forms.
Mayor Tirsell stated that another objection was trying to find
out occupations of those who contributed al'ui ~eeple -,161:1.la li]to
-to see thia rcquiremeB~ dele~ea.
Mayor Tirsell suggested that Cm Kamena and Turner meet with the
City Clerk, review the ordinance and select items that should be
discussed specifically, then come back to the Council for further
discussion.
General Requirements
re purchasing
Cm Turner stated that he read that the City Manager has right to
spend $5,000 without going to bid. In hi!! 6pinioft 'the City HaBaEj'cr
;::~ :: ab~8.:e PQ~eRa88 me~gRaaQ188 fer ~8 ~i~ ~f L1ve~re.
af-~i~e~ ~~ :~:a~:!8:::::r:V:~YR~.::~::;~;~~kY
In the ordinance there is a clause about a 5% differential up to
$500, and Cm Turner believes this should not be restricted to
$500 but should be unlimited.
Mr. Parness stated that this was a policy matter that was discus-
sed at length by former City Councils and preferential purchasing
for local vendors. It was concluded that more nominal amounts -
$500 or less, should be given preferential treatment and should
be given a 5% preference. Above $500, the purchase is too much
and the dollars are too great in volume so as to maintain this
preferential treatment. This was the basis for this policy.
em Turner stated that he would like to give an example of the
problem with purchasing outside the City. If you allow 5% of
$500, this is only~and sometimes if some equipment breaks
down you can wait t~e€e days for repair service from out-of-town.
You may lose the ~KYou saved on a purchase in waiting for
someone to come ou~~~o repair the equipment.
f)t.! ~, &:tif~.
Mayor Tirsell stated that an arbitrary figure of $500 was selected
and she would be willing to discuss another figure if Cm Turner
wishes. However, the City is supposed to get the most for its
money because it is taxpayer money, and you can't always get the
best buy locally.
The staff was requested to come back with a report concerning a
proposed revision.
REPORT RE OFFICE
RELOCATIONS
The City Manager reported that the estimated cost for modifications
to permit the printing and reproduction services to remain in the
basement of city Hall would be expensive and the structural
changes needed would be prohibitive.
Alternate plans have been analyzed and a conclusion made that
to resolve the current problems, the printing and reproduction
services should be moved to the soon-to-be vacated Fire Station #1
quarters.
CM-32-102
April 19, 1976
(Report re Office
Relocations)
This service is under the superv1s1on of the Purchasing Agent and
can operate without direct personal communication between the other
municipal services and it is intended that the purchasing office
will be relocated to this new location as well.
It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing
an expenditure of up to $2,000 for renovation and remodeling to
accommodate the purchasing department and the printing office.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, A RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED APPROVING AN EXPENDITURE OF UP
TO $2,000 FOR RENOVATION AND REMODELING OF THE FIRE STATION, AS
RECOMMENDED. THE RESOLUTION WILL APPEAR AS A CONSENT CALENDAR
ITEM NEXT WEEK.
REPORT RE ENGINEERING
SERVICES PAYMENT -
RELOCATION PROJECT
Mr. Parness reported that in our track relocation project there has
been some concern on his part as to engineering problems encountered
early in the project having to do with time delays in getting property
descriptions filed with the City Attorney's office, and also there
were some problem areas in the engineering design as to what the
on-site conditions were.
Because of this, the City Manager instructed the Finance Department
to withhold any paYment to the design engineering firm, DeLeuw, Cather,
and Company, until the matters could be cleared.
The problems center around two major items. One had to do with the
preliminary nature of the engineering design done by DeLeuw, Cather
for the institution of the project, because there was an assessment
district involved. The City did not want complete engineering plans
and specifications done by them prior to the assessment district for-
mation because there was no way of knowing that the assessment district
would succeed. This is common practice, was highly advised by them,
used by them, and accepted by the Council as the proper course.
The plans prepared were good enough to get construction bidding;
later, however, there were problem areas discovered with those
engineering designs - fencing, utility line locations, manholes,
etc. Revisions had to be done and some were done by the City staff
with others done by DeLeuw, Cather and Company.
The second problem area had to do with the preparation of the
descriptions for the property that had to be acquired. DeLeuw,
Cather and Company, did the work and they did consult with the
title companies and received preliminary reports on the work but
some of the descriptions were faulty to the extent that they had
to be revised, and on some occasions two or three times. The
City inspection crews found that the lines did not tie.
The City Manager asked the staff to prepare numerous reports and
they have been quizzed often on this matter and just as recently
as six months ago he met with DeLeuw, Cather and Company, with
one of the Councilmembers as an ad hoc committee to go over these
items. They met on four occasions to discuss these things and the
City Manager is not sure they were completely satisfied but he was.
The matter was not settled by that group because a new Council was
seated and he requested that a couple of the Councilmembers
sit with him to discuss the problems, which was done.
CM-32-l03
April 19, 1976
(Rpt re Engineering
Services Payment -
Relocation project)
In summary, the City Manager has spent a great deal of time looking
into the matter and the firm of DeLeuw, Cather and Company has been
patient with the City. Overall, they have done an outstanding job
for the City in their engineering design work and in representing
the City in this very complex program. If it were not for their
dedication to the job it certainly could not have been accomplished.
The work that had to be corrected was very nominal and the staff
found that work that had to be done by them was offset by work
that was done by DeLeuw, Cather. All in all, it is not fair to
continue to withhold the payment.
In connection with what recourse the City would have in the event
later, we may be charged with causing delays to the progress of the
work. He has asked for an opinion from the City Attorney if we
pay DeLeu, Cather, and has been advised that the City always re-
serves the right to bring a cause of action against anyone in the
event it decides there is a fault somewhere.
Mr. Parness recommended that the City Council adopt a motion allow-
ing the staff to reimburse DeLeuw, Cather.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, TO MAKE THE
PAYMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATION, AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Resolution Rejecting
Claim - Hollyce c. poag)
A claim from Hollyce C. poag alleging injuries was rejected by the
following resolution:
RESOLUTION NO. 90-76
A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF HOLLYCE C. POAG
(Council Calendar) - ~~
~~~~d~
Cm ~ had requested that a calendar be prepared reflecting
the meetings of the Council and Council-appointed or Council-
attended Committees. This had been prepared by the City Manager's
Secretary.
Cm Turner remarked that the calendar which had been prepared was
very nice, however he would like to have it done on a regular basis,
and left at the City Hall switchboard so that the Councilmembers
could call in and update it.
The City Manager commented that this could be done, however in the
past the Councilmembers have had to be reminded, however if they
would call in, it would be great.
The decision was to have one prepared for the month, which could be
left at the switchboard to be updated, and copies would be given to
the Councilmembers.
CM-32-l04
April 19, 1976
(Report Airport Hangars
Phase III)
Cm Turner remarked that he did not see any local contractors who
had bid on the Airport Hangars.
The Public Works Directors explained that any local contractors who
were interested would have been notified, but perhaps none were
interested.
(Sublease of Restaurant
Las Positas Golf Course)
The sublease of the Tailwinds Restaurant located at the Las positas
Golf Course was discussed at the meeting of April 12, and the staff
was directed to prepare a resolution authorizing the sublease.
RESOLUTION NO. 91-76
A Resolution Authorizing Sublease of Restaurant
(Haley, Hibler, and Walthers)
(Report re Handball
Backstop -Granada High
School)
A report was received from the Noise Abatement Committee by way
of a letter referral to LARPD regarding a proposed handball backstop
at Granada High School. The letter was approved for sending.
Minutes - Greens Comm.)
Minutes of the Greens Committee meetings of January 28 and
February 26, 1976 were received by the Council.
(Departmental Reports)
The following Departmental Reports were received:
Airport - actiVity and financial - month of March and
quarter ending March 31
Building Inspection - March
Emergency Services - January-March
Financial Report - Revenues and Expenditures _
nine months ending March 31
Las Positas and Springtown Golf Courses
Library - January - March
Mosquito Abatement - February
Municipal Court - February
Police and Pound Departments - March
Water Reclamation Plant - March
(Payroll and Claims)
There were 144 claims in the amount of $271,556.93, dated April 9,
and one claim for $28,595.61 dated April 13, and 292 payroll warrants
in the amount of $94,841.85, dated April 2, ordered paid as approved
by the City Manager.
APPROVAL OF CONSENT
CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA, THE ITEMS ON THE
CONSENT CALENDAR, INCLUDING THE RESOLUTIONS WERE APPROVED UNANI-
MOUSLY.
CM-32-l05
April 19, 1976
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Res. re Signature
on city Checks)
The City Clerk stated that a new signature plate has been received
with the signature of the new Mayor and it would be necessary to
adopt a resolution providing for the names of the officers author-
ized to sign the checks.
RESOLUTION NO. 92-76
A RESOLUTION PROVIDING THE NAMES OF
THE OFFICERS AUTHORIZED TO SIGN CHECKS
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE ABOVE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED.
(SB 1714 re Schools)
The City Manager stated that he has been contacted by Senator Smith
who would like the City to support his bill, SB 1714, which would
erase from the statutes the authority of the School Districts to
pre-empt zoning controls of local government.
Senator Smith found out that Livermore had a problem that could
be used as an example of what the School District can do and that
San Jose also is having a problem. Senator Smith would like some-
one from the City to testify and would like support from the City.
Cm Staley felt it would be a good idea to review a copy of the
bill prior to taking a stand because it may deal with other items
as well.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Safeway Store
Traffic Problem)
Cm Turner stated that he had contacted the manager of the Safeway
Store concerning the traffic problems in the parking lot. He has
recently received a letter from the manager as well as the archi-
tect who indicate that the traffic, along the street as well as in
the parking lot, is traffic that would be expected with high volume
retail stores.
Cm Turner stated that his question in his letter was that he would
like to know what can be done about the problem - he realizes there
is a problem.
Mr. Musso stated that the staff is looking at the situation and
trying to come to a resolution of the problem. Also there is
another problem that the Council will be aware of soon, which
relates to the new restaurant in that area. The Council will
be informed by the staff of the new problem so that it can be
discussed.
CM-32-l06
April 19, 1976
(Proposal to Prohibit
Drive-up Windows)
Cm Turner stated that apparently the Design Review Committee has sug-
gested that the Planning Commission develop an ordinance that would
prohibit drive-up windows in Livermore. He would like to suggest
that he be allowed to meet with the Design Review Committee to dis-
cuss their documentation as to what brought them to this decision.
He stated that this is a rather major decision because there are
a lot of businesses in the City who depend heavily upon drive-up
windows.
Cm Kamena stated that he is not sure the Design Review Committee
has the authority to ask for legislation concerning existing busi-
nesses. Possibly they could ask that this be applicable to new
structures but he would like a copy of what their charge is.
(COVA - Air Quality
Forum 5/20/76)
Cm Kamena stated that COVA has scheduled an Air Quality Forum for
May 20, 1976, which is an extremely important event and one which
he would like to attend. Reservations must be received by the 13th
and he would like to know which Councilmembers would like to attend.
(BART Stops)
ern Kamena stated that one of the agenda items for the COVA meeting
will be the BART stops, and specifically in Livermore. He would
like recommendations as to a preferred bus stop for BART. One
recommendations was for a stop at the Chabot Valley Campus.
Mr. Parness stated that the BART people are very reluctant to add
stops, and the only reason they agreed to go the Lab was because
there were a number of patrons already going out there.
(E. Bay League of
Calif. Cities Meeting)
Cm Staley stated that he attended the East Bay League of California
Cities Transportation Committee meeting in Los Angeles. He will
have something to report to the Council later concerning a State
Transportation Plan, but would like the Council to know that they
discussed several bills that deal with some of the basic problems
concerning their formulation of pOlicy, gas tax funds, and public
transportation.
(Livermore Becoming
a Charter City)
Cm Staley stated that there would be some advantages as well as
disadvantages to Livermore's becoming a Charter City and he would
like the Council to ask the staff for a report on both the advantages
and disadvantages, as well as the mechanism for becoming a Charter City.
ern Staley commented that he realizes this would take some time to
prepare and that the voters would have to vote in favor of becoming
a Charter City if it is decided that it would be advantageous to
make the request.
CM-32-l07
April 19, 1976
(Industrial zoning
- East First Street)
Cm Staley stated that the Council has emphasized in
they do not want the industrial area out along East
to become strip commercial, or de facto commercial.
clear that this was to be industrial.
the past that
First street
It was very
In looking at the Trevarno Road area the other day he drove through
the industrial area and noticed that there is a boat sales service
located in the industrial area, a professional cleaners, and a
transmission repairing service. He would like to know if these are
conforming uses and if they are not, appropriate steps should be
taken to make the uses conforming.
(Cranston Representative
Arriving May 6th)
Mayor Tirsell stated that Senator Cranston is sending a representa-
tive to Livermore May 6th, and a luncheon is scheduled for that day
at the Emperor's Garden. He will be meeting with the City Manager
and the Councilmembers.
(Building on
First Street)
Mayor Tirsell stated that a new building is being constructed on
First Street that looks like an apartment building.
Mr. Musso commented that it is an office building for general type
offices.
(Appointment)
Mayor Tirsell stated that Dale Turner was appointed by ABAG to the
Carbn.'JQ C9HlR\it:t:8e. ~. td~~>J?~~.-r7J~ ~~~.
JJ.k' -..tJ.vI.I8(j/ (/j;:. L!.(:-<<..~.
,
Mayor Tirsell stated that appointments must be made to the P.C. as
well as other committees and wondered when the Council wants to make
them.
Cm Staley stated that he would be willing to meet at 7:00 p.m. next
Monday evening to discuss appointments prior to the regular meeting.
The Council concurred.
ORDINANCES
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE
THE ORDINANCES INTRODUCING A MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT RELATING TO
SURVEYS, CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY, AND GRADING PERMITS WERE INTRO-
DUCED AND READ BY TITLE ONLY.
THE INTRODUCTION OF THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATING TO SECURITY AND
THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATIVE TO CN DISTRICT WAS POSTPONED UNTIL
APRIL 26, ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Cm Dalhbacka felt the wording concerning surveys should be made
more clear, and there was discussion concerning this portion of
the ordinance. Clarification will be made to the ordinance by
adding the word "single" in front of the word lot in the last
paragraph.
CM-32-l08
April 19, 1976
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Tirsell adjourned the meeting at 12:15 a.m. to a 7:00 p.m.
meeting on April 26, 1976.
APPROVE ~ '-1h ~",d,
" Mayor
ATTEST ~~~~~~~~~
ive ore, California
Adjourned Regular Meeting o~ril 26, 1976
An adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Livermore was held on Monday, April 26, 1976, at 7:00 p.m. in
the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue.
The purpose of the meeting was to make appointments.
Present: Cm Dahlbacka, Kamena, Turner, Staley, and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: None
Mayor Tirsell read the charges and duties of the Energy Conserva-
tion COmMittee, prior to considering appointments.
Cm Turner stated that in considering the applicants for the Energy
Committee he placed each applicant in an occupational category in
order to try to make a selection that would cover various interests.
By majority vote, the following people were selected for the
Energy Conservation Committee:
Larry D. Beard
6250 N. Front Road
Burt R. Gasten
564 Tyler
E. D. Bona
c/o PG&E
968 Murrieta Boulevard
Bert Graf
1332 Anza Way
Joseph H. Cherb
1264 Hillcrest Avenue
Hary Ann Hannon
309 Pearl Drive
Richard A. Corallo
845 Leland Court
Barbara A. Hartley
513 Briarwood Court
James A. Bt8. D~
745 Cardinal Dr1ve
Allan Hyne
792 South "I" Street
Jackie Fitzgerald
746 Grace Street
Herbert Newkirk
1141 Madison Avenue
James R. Gaskill
875 Estates Street
Ronald L. Ritschard
572 Leona Drive
George J. Thomas
1274 Lomitas
CM-32-l09
April 26, 1976
(Committee Appointments)
It was noted that several appointees are already members of
another city committee or board. Since it is council policy
that only one appointed position may be held at any given time,
it was directed that each person be given the choice of remain-
ing in the current position or resigning in favor of appoint-
ment to the Energy conservation Committee.
The city Clerk will report the responses to the city Council
when they are received.
community Affairs Committee
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY eM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, BETTY ARCHER WAS APPOINTED TO THE CO~1UNITY AFFAIRS
COMMITTEE.
Housing Authority
Mayor Tirsell commented that the Housing Authority Board made
official notification to the council that they must expand the
Board to include residents of Leahy Square.
Three appointments are to be made at this time, two of which
must be residents of the housing unit.
CM TURNER MOVED TO APPOINT MARIE HEISTER BECAUSE SHE HAS LIVED
IN THE HOUSING UNIT FOR OVER 15 YEARS AND BECAUSE SHE IS A
SENIOR CITIZEN. ALSO HE WOULD MOVE THAT HAZEL ASHWORTH BE
APPOINTED BECAUSE SHE IS ALSO A RESIDENT OF THE HOUSING UNIT
AND SHE HAS PARTICIPATED ON COMMITTEES BENEFICIAL TO HER AREA.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
Cm Kamena requested that each nomination be made in a separate
motion.
CM TURNER MOVED TO APPOINT MARIE HEISTER TO THE HOUSING AUTHORITY
BOARD, MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
eM TUIDiER MOVED TO APPOINT HAZEL ASHWORTH, LEAHY SQUARE RESIDENT,
"'0 THE Hm'f~P1G AUTHORITY BOARD, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
MOTION TO APPOINT HAZEL ASHWORTH PASSED 3-2 (Cm Kamena and Staley
dissenting) .
CM STALEY MOVED TO APPOINT DIANA L. GREE~ AS THE MEMBER AT LARGE
REPRESENTATIVE, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Social Concerns committee
Mayor Tirsell commented that there is a need for an alternate member
for the Social Concerns committee and perhaps the Councilmembers
could ask people if they would be interested in serving.
Beautification committee
Elizabeth Mondon has resigned from the Beautification Committee
and this vacancy needs to be filled. Ann Bradley has indicated
that she would like to continue serving on the Committee.
CM-32-ll0
April 26, 1976
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Tirsell announced that an 8:00 p.m. meeting has been scheduled
and adjourned the meeting at 8:00 p.m. The Council will continue
with the appointments at the end of the 8:00 p.m. Council meeting.
APPROVE
--tf~ --17) %..uLR.
./ Nayor
1
ATTEST ~tJ-Uk
, ~~~LL
C1ty Clerk
Livermore, California
Regular Meeting of April 26, 1976
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was
held on April 26, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meetinq was called to order at 8:07 p.m.
with Mayor Tirsell presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Dahlbacka, Kamena, Turner, Staley, and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirsell led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the
audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES - 4/12/76
P. 64, next to last paragraph, 5th line should read: has opposed
the oversizing of the line. (strike remainder of line)
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF APRIL 12, 1976, WERE APPROVED,
AS CORRECTED.
OPEN FORUM
(Jaycees Air Show)
Skip Claeson, 370 Pearl Drive, stated that he is representing
the Livermore Jaycees this evening. The Jaycees would like
final approval of the air show and the insurance policy from
Shannon and Lucas, of Washington, D.C.
CM-32-lll
April 26, 1976
(Air Show)
Mr. Claeson stated that a letter has been given to the Council
which was prepared by the City Attorney listing concerns the
City has regarding this item.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Council received the letter only
this evening and that it is very difficult to review something
of this nature the same evening it is presented. It really
should be an agenda item for discussion.
Mr. Claeson explained that the matter was brought to the atten-
tion of the City Manager too late for scheduling on the agenda.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL DENY THE REQUEST, BASED ON THE
LETTER FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY.
Mr. Claeson stated that the policy is basically the same as the
policy the Jaycees have had for the past six years, with the ex-
ception that it is with a different firm.
Mr. Logan's letter indicated that the insurance for this year is
the same as last years - the insurance last year was different
than the previous five years.
Mr. Claeson stated that he would have to take the City Attorney's
word that it is different this year and that it was different
last year but he wasn't aware that there was a difference.
Cm Kamena wondered if it would be possible to get a policy
similar to the one they had last year and Mr. Claeson stated
that it would be possible but it would take two to three weeks
to obtain and it would be substantially more expensive - from
$1,000-$3,000 more. The Jaycees do not have the funds available
to afford a more expensive policy.
Hayor Tirsell commented that the City's policy specifically ex-
cludes air shows; therefore, the liability for the City would be
tremendous.
Mr. Claeson explained that the policy would cover everyone except
those participating in the air show. All bystanders would be
covered under the policy.
Mr. Logan noted that an example of approximate cause would be
if there is a dangerous condition of public property that is
proven at the airport, and as a result one of the planes taking
off loses a wheel because of that dangerous condition, that is
cause for his crash and if he is killed the City is liable.
Mr. Claeson stated that the air show is their largest fund raising
event of the year and provides the most entertainment for the com-
munity by their organization each year. They raise funds to help
provide numerous community activities or improvements which he
listed. The air show is scheduled for May 9th.
The City Attorney explained that the problem is not payment that
would be incurred by the death of one pilot but rather possible
defense in a law suit over the death of someone. Legal fees
could amount to $30,000 if something like this occurs.
CM-32-ll2
April 26, 1976
(Air Show)
Cm Kamena wondered if it would be possible to get a rider to cover
the air show and the City Attorney stated that he is sure it would
be possible but it would still cost the Jaycees at least $1,000 at
least this is what he would estimate.
Crn Staley stated that since the air show has a large coverage perhaps
a rider could be obtained for much less since it would apply to a
single activity.
Cm Staley added that he would have to agree with what the City Attorney
has said. If someone were injured or killed, the City and everyone else
would be named in a law suit that might cost thousands of dollars, even
if the City were cleared in the end. During the interim it would cost
a great deal of taxpayer money for the legal fees. The way the policy
is written there is just too much risk to the City and he wouldn't be
able to vote in favor of it. He would hope that they could obtain a
rider to cover that event.
CM TURNER WITHDREW HIS MOTION AT THIS TIME.
Cm Turner asked if a rider to cover the air show would cover the cost
of legal fees.
The City Attorney stated that if the Jaycees obtained a rider the City's
insurance would cover the legal fees.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that considering the fact that the pilots are the
only people involved in the coverage and the probability of an accident
would be exceptionally low, he would disagree with the majority of
the Council.
CM STALEY MOVED NOT TO ACCEPT ANY INSURANCE POLICY THAT DOES NOT COVER
THE CITY FULLY, AND REQUEST THAT THE STAFF SECURE A BID FROM OUR IN-
SURER FOR THE COST OF ADDING A RIDER WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE
COST WOULD BE DEFERRED BY THE JAYCEES IF A RIDER IS AVAILABLE. MOTION
SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL.
Ken Johnson, 556 Bristol Court, stated that he is the immediate past
president of the Jaycees and was in charge of the insurance for the
air show for the past two years. Last year the City did not receive
the insurance policy until the day of the air show or the day after
the air show and this is the reason nobody was aware that the exclusion
was not in the policy; even at the time the air show was being held.
It was just pointed out to him today that the exclusion was not in
there last year and they do not know why but possibly there was a
typographical error. In talking with the insurance carrier the last
two years and Shannon and Lucas this year, they are one of the largest
insurers of air shows in the United States and they have never had a
policy written which included the pilots. They felt it was peculiar
that this question would arise. The pilots are highly trained pro-
fessionals and they carry their own insurance. However, as the
City Attorney pointed out they are covered by their insurance for
what they do, not what is done to them.
MOTION PASSED 3-2 (Cm Dahlbacka and Kamena dissenting) .
Mr. Claeson stated that assuming the Jaycees can get the rider for
the coverage, he would like permission to place six signs on City
property advertising the air show which will be posted Saturday
and will be removed on the following Sunday, May 9th.
CM-32-ll3
April 26, 1976
(Air Show)
CM KAMENA MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL GRANT THE REQUEST FOR PLACE-
MENT OF THE SIGNS AT THE LOCATIONS REQUESTED, PROVIDED THEY
ARE REMOVED WITH THE PREMISES IN THE SAME CONDITION AS THEY
WERE BEFORE THE SIGNS WERE PLACED THERE. MOTION SECONDED BY
CM STALEY.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she will speak against the motion
because use of the fire stations and public parks for adver-
tisement would be setting a bad precedent. She stated that
she belongs to three organizations who would like City-wide
publicity also and public facilities should not be used for
this purpose.
Mr. Claeson stated that they are requesting use of the parks
for this purpose because it is his understanding that signs
cannot be posted on private property.
Mayor Tirsell explained that a sign can be placed on private
property if the owner gives permission and signs can be lo-
cated on commercial property as long as it does not exceed
a size of.2~ x 4'. ~M-,~ ~ ~~tYpt~
Cm Dahlbacka stated that signs on private property can be
no larger than 2' x 2'.
Cm Turner stated that he would have to agree with what Mayor
Tirsell has said about setting a precedent for placing signs
in parks. He belongs to Rotary and they post signs in com-
mercial offices of the people who belong to Rotary. He is
sure the Jaycees have businessmen in the club who can place
them in their offices and he offered to place one in the bank
for the Jaycees.
r1r. Claeson stated that now that he understands what can be
done about the signs he would withdraw the request, and he
will contact the Planning Director concerning the signs.
MOTION AND SECOND WERE WITHDRA~~.
(re Reduction in
Amount of Bonding
Required - Kamps)
Harold Kamp, 3695 First Street, stated that he would like to
request a reduction in the amount of bonding for the improve-
ments for the rear portion of his property on First Street.
Originally, the bonding was to cover both the front and the
rear areas and they have taken care of the existing First
Street improvements. He would request a reduction to $5,000.
Mayor Tirsell asked if this matter is urgent and Mr. Kamp indi-
cated that it is because he just found out that his gas will
not be turned on until the bond is submitted. Hopefully, if
the bond is reduced rather than eliminated it will be satis-
factory to everyone.
Cm Staley stated that he would assume that if the Council would
go along with the reduction in the bond it wouldn't include any
exoneration of his obligations to do the improvements required
at a later date.
The City Attorney stated that this is correct, the agreement
would be amended to reduce the amount of security.
CM-32-ll4
April 26, 1976
ere Bond - Mr. Kamp)
Mr. Kamp explained that in his opinion he has been asked to bond
for more than is adequate, according to what has been estimated to
be his share of the cost for the improvements and this is one of
the reasons he is requesting the reduction in the amound of bonding.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST r~DE BY MR. KM1P, SECONDED BY
CM STALEY.
Mayor Tirsell wondered if the City would have the right to change the
bond in the event ownership of that property changes.
The City Attorney stated that he can't answer this specifically without
seeing the contract, but he would assume that the bond could be reim-
posed.
Cm Staley commented that possibly a personal surety bond could be
posted for one portion with the regular corporate bond for the other
portion of the property.
}1r. Logan stated that this is correct and the City could also place
something in the amended agreement that would obligate or allow the
City to increase the bond if the property is sold or changes ownership.
MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO
THE CONTRACT TO ALLOl1 THE CITY TO REIHPOSE
IN THE EVENT THERE IS CHANGE OF OvlliERSHIP.
KAMENA.
DIRECT THE STAFF TO CHANGE
THE BOND, IF NECESSARY,
AMENDMENT SECONDED BY CM
AMENDMENT PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, AND MAIN MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
(City Budget Meetings)
Ray Faltings, 1018 Via Granada, stated that Cm Dahlbacka has sug-
gested that the Council begin holding community meetings to discuss
various items with the public and one of these was to be the discus-
sion of the budget.
The budget deadline is approaching and he would appreciate any infor-
mation as to when a meeting concerning the budget is planned and
whether or not the budget and methods for budgeting will be included
in the discussion.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Council concluded that they would hold
community meetings on the months that have five Mondays. The meetings
will take place on the fifth Monday. Unfortunately, the next month
that has five Mondays is May and the fifth Monday is on a holiday
when people will be out of town and the Council will probably not
meet on that particular Monday. The City Manager will probably
review the budget procedures as set by the former Council.
Mr. Parness stated that this Council has decided that the preliminary
budget hearings will be held in two phases. The first meeting will
be to consider the operating budget and the second meeting will be
for consideration of capital outlay. The budget document should be
ready for distribution to the Council the later part of May and the
Council will then have the option of selecting a couple of days for
budget sessions - probably June. In addition, the Council may wish
to hold an informal community meeting to have the staff explain the
budget process, etc.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he was supposed to meet with the City
Manager to discuss the informal meeting on the 5th Monday but
ran into the problem of the holiday. He would still like to hold
an informal community meeting sometime in May. He will talk with
the City Manager and make a recommendation next week on this item.
CM-32-ll5
April 26, 1976
(Budget Meetings)
Mr. Faltings stated that he is concerned about the proposed budget
and the proposed expenditures assuming that the fiscal year begins
July 1. Hopefully the City will delete the underground meetings in
the Fire House the Saturday prior to the Monday the budget must be
approved.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the City Manager has just indicated that
the budget will be ready sometime in May and the Council will set
public hearing meetings, as required by law. She stated that if
they hold meetings during the week people say they work and cannot
attend and if the Council uses their time on Saturdays to meet, people
do not attend anyway.
Mr. Faltings stated that people do go to the Saturday meetings but
generally the input is considered to be too late for modification
of the budget. He would request that the budget be presented early
enough so that it is no longer set in concrete and that input from
the public may be given consideration. He stated that he objects
to the budget session being held in an area that is not readily
accessible to the public and would like it held in the Council
Chambers or in one of the schools.
(Clean Water - Zone 7)
Dick Christmas, 394 Pearl Drive, stated that he is concerned that
Zone 7 isn't doing its job of providing clean water and now they
are going to get into the business of sewage management.
He stated that when it rains, water stands a foot high over the
garbage at the dump on Vasco Road and all of this drains into
our Valley. The City should look into this and in his opinion
Zone 7 should not be interested in sewage management.
He also expressed concern for the garbage dump located in the
Altamont and the proposal to send all the garbage from the County
to that area. He stated that the water that drains from that dump
during the rainy season also drains into the Valley and he would
urge the Council to look into these things.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Alameda County Planning Commission
is holding hearings concerning the Altamont dump at this time and
Mr. Christmas might like to make his feelings known to them. Also,
Zone 7 meets the 3rd Wednesday of each month if Mr. Christmas would
want to attend one of their meetings.
With respect to Livermore's dump, perhaps Mr. Lee could give the
Council a verbal report concerning the grading of the dump and
how far it is above the water table.
P.H. RE WEED ABATEMENT
Mayor Tirsell opened the public hearing to receive protests con-
cerning posting of properties on which weeds must be abated.
There have been 675 properties posted and the owners have been
notified by mail that weeds must be abated.
Keith Fraser, stated that his firm owns property on Fifth Street,
Fourth Street, and "K" Street, and he objects to plowing the weeds
because several years ago there were old buildings located on that
property and the Fire Marshall asked that they be demolished. They
were. Since that time they have been plowing the fields about twice
a year. They have seeded the property with wild flowers and many
poppys are blooming at present and each year they hope to re-seed.
CM-32-ll6
April 26, 1976
(P.E. re Heed Abatement)
Mr. Fraser would object to plowing of their wild flowers and would
ask that the Council give consideration to letting the flowers grow
on the three lots.
John Regan, 672 South "Nf! Street, stated that earlier in the year
when properties were posted there were signs posted on properties
that had previously been treated with weed killer. He would assume
that assessment vJill be levied only if work is done on property be-
cause there are no weeds on his property at this time.
It was noted that this is correct.
Cl'-'1 DAHLBACKA HOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, SECONDED BY Cl'1
STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANDlOUS VOTE.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTIONS CONCERNING ABATEMENT
OF WEEDS, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND PASSED BY UNANIHOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 93-76
A RESOLUTION ORDERING THE ABATEl'1ENT OF A
PUBLIC NUISANCE AND DIRECTING THE SUPER-
INTENDENT OF STREETS TO CAUSE SAID PUBLIC
NUISANCE TO BE ABATED.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION OVERRIDING THE PROTEST OF
HR. FRASER AND THAT THE FIRE MARSHALL BE AUTHORIZED TO MAKE THE
DETER}1INATION AS TO lVHETHER OR NOT THE POPPIES CAN STAY. MOTION
SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 104-76
A RESOLUTION SUSTAINING PROTEST TO
ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC NUISANCE.
CO~~UNICATION FROM
ELIZABETH MONDON RE
RESIGNATION FROl'1 COm1.
A letter of resignation from the Beautification Committee was received
from Elizabeth Mondon.
The staff was asked to send Hrs. Mondon a letter of thanks for serving
on the Beautification Committee.
CO~~UNICATION FROM
E. LOUNSBURY RE SEWER
CONNECTION
Mr. Lounsbury stated that he has requested sewer connection from the
City for portola property located in the County adjacent to the City.
He has received a request from the County Health Department that his
4 acres be serviced by City sewage.
The Council reviewed a map of the area for which sewage is requested
by Mr. Lounsbury, and Mayor Tirsell asked Mr. Lounsbury if he is
familiar with the City's sewer agreement.
Mr. Lounsbury indicated that he is not really familiar with the agree-
ment because it changes from day to day.
CM-32-ll7
April 26, 1976
ere Request for Sewer
Connection - Lounsbury)
Mayor Tirsell explained that the sewer agreement has a clause
which has always been contained in the agreement requiring
annexation, upon demand by the City.
Mr. Lounsbury stated that he understood that if property is
within 200-300 ft. of the sewer line, property would be re-
quired to annex.
Mr. Musso noted that the County requirement is that if property
is within 200-300 ft. of an existing sewer line the property
must connect to it - they cannot have a septic tank, and if
connection is denied then no sewage is available.
CM STALEY MOVED THAT THE CITY ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH MR.
LOUNSBURY FOR SEWAGE, USING ALIGNMENT "A", AND HAVING THE STAN-
DARD AGREEMENT THAT ANNEXATION WILL TAKE PLACE AT THE REQUEST
OF THE CITY. THIS WOULD BE FOR THE ENTIRE 4 ACRES OF PROPERTY.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL.
Mr. Lee commented that the Lounsbury property is surrounded
on both sides by City property and the City may wish to go
ahead and require annexation at this time.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would prefer that the City re-
quire annexation at this time.
CM STALEY AMENDED THE MOTION TO REQUIRE ANNEXATION AT THIS
TIME, SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
A resolution will be prepared by the staff and submitted to
the Council later.
Mr. Lounsbury stated that in order to obtain financing for
his store which is located on part of his property the County
Health Department has required filing of a parcel map of the
17,500 sq. ft., and a sewage agreement must be granted by the
City for the entire property. He stated that he is not request-
ing annexation at this time.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Council is proposing that Mr.
Lounsbury annex at a time the City requests annexation.
~1r. Lounsbury stated that the requirement is that if property
is not within 200-300 ft. of City facilities, it is not re-
quired that the property annex to the City. His property is
about 1,800 ft. from the sewer line.
Mr. Musso commented that sometimes property is not asked to
annex for 20 years or more. There are old properties using
City sewage that are still located in the County and have not
annexed.
Cm Turner stated that his understanding of the policy regarding
sewer connections is that the property owner must be willing
to annex to the City. He asked Mr. Lounsbury if he is willing
to annex.
Mr. Lounsbury stated that if this is the City's requirement he
is sure he will have to look at the resolution.
Cm Turner stated that his vote will depend upon whether or not
Mr. Lounsbury says he is willing to annex and also Cm Turner
indicated that he is not prepared to allow sewage for the entire
4 acres.
CM-32-ll8
April 26, 1976
ere Request for Sewer
Connection - Lounsbury)
Mayor Tirsell explained that the connection would be for one parcel
which happens to consist of 4 acres but this would be authorization
for only one hook-up.
Cm Turner stated that he is assuming Mr. Lounsbury wants more than
one connection for that many acres.
Mr. Lounsbury stated that he has no reason to want more than one
hook-up for the 4 acres at this time.
Mr. Musso stated that if Mr. Lounsbury were to annex to the city he
would be allowed connections, except for residential, because they
would be lots of record.
Mayor Tirsell commented that the reason the matter has to be decided
this evening is because the Board of Supervisors is meeting tomorrow
and this item will be on their agenda. They cannot make a decision
until the Council has made a recommendation.
CM STALEY &~ENDED HIS MOTION TO READ AS FOLLOWS: THAT THE CITY
ACCEPT ANNEXATION OF MR. LOUNSBURY'S PROPERTY IN THE CITY AND PRO-
VIDE IT WITH A SEWER CONNECTION, AS HE IS REQUESTING, ALONG ALIGN-
HENT "A". MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Cm Staley stated that he would like this information conveyed to
the County Board of Supervisors, ~iit~~o .~. ~ti?ularo mentioned.
~k1-t . c.:.qcf.uk-
The City Attorney stated that after reading the sewer connection
agreement, Mr. Lounsbury may decide that he does not want to sign.
Perhaps the motion should be voiced in terms of approving the sewer
connection, subject to his entering into a standard sewer connection
agreement with the City.
Mayor Tirsell explained that this is implied in the motion. Mr.
Lounsbury has the right to refuse but he will not be allowed the
sewer connection in that case.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
COW1UNICATION RE
SUPPORT OF REVENUE
SHARING - Sen. Tunney
The letter from Senator Tunney thanking the Council for support of
a revenue sharing program was noted for filing.
conTINUED DISCUSSION
RE BUSInESS LICENSE TAX
The matter of the business license tax proposal was postponed from
the meetings of March 1, 8, and AprilS, at the request of the
Chamber of Commerce who asked that they be given the opportunity
to review the proposed ordinance draft. Copies of the Chamber's
recommendation have been distributed to the Council for informa-
tional purposes.
Cm staley stated that a joint committee composed of the Chamber
of Commerce and City staff, met last week and heard a proposal
from the Chamber Board of Directors concerning the business license
tax proposal. They also met this afternoon to discuss some of the
proposals and will be meeting again tomorrow at 3:30 p.m. The
committee would like to request another extension concerning a
Council decision, so they can finalize a position and render the
position, in writing, to the Council.
CM-32-ll9
April 26, 1976
(re Business License
Tax Discussion)
CM STALEY MOVED THAT THE ITEM OF THE BUSINESS LICENSE TAX BE
CONTINUED FOR ONE WEEK, SUBJECT TO ANY TESTIMONY THAT MAY BE
GIVEN AT THIS MEETING. MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Mel Luna, 723 Via del Sol, Livermore, stated that he would like
to know if all the merchants will be paying a fair share and he
would also like to know if businesses in the past have been pay-
ing the same rate - high gross paying 23~ with low gross paying
$1.50. In his opinion the high gross businessman has not been
paying his fair share in the past and with the new proposal it
would seem that the City is trying to make a fair tax for every-
one but he would like to know what would be considered fair.
Would a 20% increase on the old tax rate for everybody be fair?
He stated that he has talked to a lot of merchants and other
people about this matter and nobody seems to know what is going
on. There are curves and straight lines and diagrams, and no-
body knows what is happening.
Mr. Luna stated that he believes what the small businessman is
paying at present is fair. The small businessman pays $1.50 per
$1,000 but he cannot understand why someone making $10 million
pays only 23c per $1,000. He added that if he starts making
$10 million he will be happy to pay the City more.
Cm Kamena stated that if the motion passes and the item is con-
tinued he believes it would be appropriate for Mr. Luna to give
his input at the meetings which have been scheduled for con-
tinued discussion of this item. He stated that the last time
he made a motion that April 26th be the deadline, it was with
the intent that the Chamber Committee could give input and
not necessarily that the ordinance be introduced or adopted
tonight. The Business License Tax Committee will still be
reviewing the recommendations and input by the Chamber.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
~ CONTINUED DISCUSSION
RE TRACT 1666 -
TREVARNO ROAD
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would like to make a statement prior
to a motion concerning Parcel Map, Tract 1666 (Trevarno Road) con-
cerning the request by David Madis for approval from the City to
allow formation of an assessment district to provide the financing
for the required public works improvements, and the discussion as
to the standards for the street.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she believes the Council is faced with
some problems. If the City requires the area to upgrade to the
standards we deem necessary, the cost for the area will be esca-
lated and will not be able to be sold. It is the intent of the
Council that this area be maintained as a non-conforming residen-
tial use because of the lack of schools and parks to service it.
Under these conditions the houses may be sold but the burden of
the public works improvements, which are necessary now or some-
time in the future, should not fall upon the City, as a whole.
The City also should not accept responsibility for maintaining
an area that will need attention beyond that of our normal re-
quirements in a comparable area in the center of town.
CM-32-l20
April 26, 1976
(re Tract 1666
- Trevarno Road)
MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ACCEPT THE INDUSTRIAL TRACT
MAP EXCEPTING THE CREATION OF TWO NEW LOTS: THAT THE CITY DOES
NOT ACCEPT THE PUBLIC WORKS: THAT THE DEED WILL SHOW A COVENANT
MAINTAINING RESIDENTIAL USE: THAT WE REQUIRE A PRIVATE ASSESS-
MENT DISTRICT FORMATION FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION AND MAIN-
TENANCE; AND THAT THE CITY REQUIRES THE OFF-TRACT IMPROVEMENTS
ON FIRST STREET.
Cm Dahlbacka wondered if the motion made by Mayor Tirsell re-
flects the recommendation of the Planning Commission and the
Mayor explained that essentially it does, with exclusion of
the acceptance of the public works improvements.
with respect to the status of Trevarno Road, she would recom-
mend that it continue to be used and a private assessment
district formed for construction of public works improvements
and maintenance.
MOTION SECONDED BY CM KAMENA FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he would agree with the motion with
the exception of acceptance of the creation of two new lots.
Mayor Tirsell explained that the motion was EXCEPTING THE
CREATION OF TWO NEW LOTS.
Mr. Lee explained that he is concerned about the creation of
a private street because of the nature of it - the design and
the width and the number of units it will service. Whether
or not it is a public street, it will appear as a public street
to the public. If the street is not maintained adequately it
would be a reflection upon the City. Also, often there is
pressure upon the City to accept a street, and a fence is to
be maintained which would be visible to the public. The fence
is to be maintained by a homeowners group and because of vari-
ous problems they are not always maintained and sometimes the
City is requested to accept it for maintenance. In his opinion,
it would be proper to accept it as a street because if they
are going to be reconstructing it to City standards there is
no reason why it shouldn't be maintained by the City.
Cm Staley commented that perhaps the City might want to
leave Trevarno Road as a private street, as Mayor Tirsell
has suggested until such time as the industrial uses of the
street terminate. At that time, if the street is in good
repair there would be no reason for the City not to accept
it. The key question in the argument really revolves around
the developer's unwillingness to develop the street to indus-
trial standards because of the question of whether or not it
would really be used as industrial the entire time.
em Staley felt the sense of the Mayor's motion is to not require
the developer to develop to industrial standards but at the same
time not place the risk of that street being inadequate upon the
City's shoulders.
Mayor Tirsell stated that if the street is going to be reconstruc-
ted they may as well do the curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and sewers
at the same time.
Mr. Lee felt it would be virtually impossible to reconstruct the
street if there is multiple ownership within that tract. It
would be impossible to get the owners together to reconstruct.
In his opinion it should be decided, at this point, whether or
not it will be industrial or whether it will be residential. If
it is not going to be industrial then less standards would be
acceptable. However, it if is ever to be used as industrial
there will never be another chance to have it reconstructed.
CM-32-l2l
April 26, 1976
(re Tract 1666
- Trevarno Road)
Cm Turner stated that his concern is not with the street but
rather with the two lots. Mayor Tirsell mentioned covenants
and he would like the motion explained with reference to these
two lots.
Mayor Tirsell explained that the filing of this subdivision map
creates two lots that are not there presently. She would like
to accept the subdivision map excepting the two lots.
Cm Turner wondered if there would be any way to accept the two
lots.
Mayor Tirsell stated that each time the Council has heard testi-
mony concerning the two lots she decided that there would be no
way to preserve the area if the two lots were accepted.
Cm Turner stated that he doesn't necessarily want to accept the
lots for development of houses and wondered what the City intends
to do with the two lots if they are not accepted as part of the
tract map.
Mayor Tirsell stated that they are already part of other lots -
the developer is taking large lots and cutting them.
Cm Turner stated that this is not correct - they are not part
of anything, they are just part of the tract.
Mr. Madis indicated that this is true and something has to be
done with them.
Mayor Tirsell stated that they could be left as they are at
present.
Mr. Madis stated that he intends to place permanent restrictions
on the tract that would prohibit the use of the property for
anything except the present non-conforming use, which is the
residences. Further, he intends to place language in the covenants,
conditions, and restrictions, that would prohibit the changing of
the use or alteration of the structures to destroy the present
appearance and effect.
Mr. Madis continued to say that under Article VII of the
Covenants and Restrictions, there would be a restriction
of the property for any use other than residential. This
is a covenant that would run with the land regardless of
who owns the property, and it is permanent on the property.
There is also a provision in the covenants, conditions and
restrictions which allows the City of Livermore to be a
beneficiary to that covenant and to take whatever action
deemed to be necessary to prevent any alienation or change
in that restriction.
What they are asking for on the two lots is that they be
created as separate lots but with restrictions that the lots
could not be utilized unless they have the same architectural
style and in the same manner of construction and appearance
as the existing homes on the street. They will not conflict
with the existing area.
Lot #13 was intended to be used as an inducement to buyers in
the way. of a park because it is not really suitable for a
building because there is a difference in configuration and
there is not sufficient depth. He would like to deed Lot #13
to all the owners, in common, as a type of public park.
CM-32-l22
April 26, 1976
(re Tract 1666
- Trevarno Road)
Mayor Tirsell stated that the entire area is already like a
park and this is the advantage of the whole Trevarno area.
She wondered why Mr. Madis would not be willing to include
Lot #13 with Lot #14.
Mr. Madis stated that this would mean the owner would have
to pay taxes on a 9,500 sq. ft. of real property which would
be of no particular use. The owner of Lot #14 would have to
pay, maintain it, but would have no right to occupy or use it.
There are several huge trees located on Lot #13, and there is
no indication that there was ever any type of dwelling unit
on it and it wouldn't be fair to try to sell someone Lot #14
and tell them that they also own Lot #13 which is a park that
everybody else will use but will not pay taxes on.
ern Dahlbacka felt the homeowners could corne to some type of
agreement concerning Lot #13 at some future time.
Mayor Tirsell stated that if she lived in that area her lot
would be tree shaded and would be like a park and she would
have no interest, whatever, in paying taxes for a park down
the street. In her opinion, there would be no advantage to
the homeowners to have the park.
Cm Turner stated that if Mr. Madis' intention is to have Lot #13
a park, the problem could be solved by designating it as open
space.
Mr. Madis stated that he has no objection to designating the lot
as open space but he would like to segregate it. If it were
designated as open space it would be a positive benefit because
it could be taxed differently. He stated that he does object
to Parcel #3 which is the lot created where the tennis courts
are located. It does not make any sense to remove an existing
tennis court which is on a lot of 460 sq. ft. Parcel #4 is
17,800 sq. ft. and Parcel #2 is 19,580 sq. ft. Those are half-
acre lots and are much larger than the average lot in the City
and there is no reason to attach the tennis court.
Mayor Tirse11 suggested that if Mr. Madis really wants to do
something for everyone in that area, he should give them the
tennis courts instead of the park.
Mr. Madis stated that this would be too expensive. There are
a lot of expenses involved in this development and they are
talking about putting in State Highway 84, water, sewage, and
other expenses related to the highway.
CM TURNER MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO DESIGNATE LOT #13 AS
PERMANENT OPEN SPACE. AMENDMENT DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE CITY AND THE OWNER ENTER INTO AN
AGREEMENT THAT LOT #13 BE DESIGNATED AS PERMANENT OPEN SPACE.
AMENDMENT DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
CM TURNER MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION THAT LOT #3 BE DESIGNATED
AS SHOWN IN THE SUBDIVISION AND THAT THE OWNER ENTER INTO AN
AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY CONCERNING THE BENEFICIARY STATEMENT
THAT THAT LOT MUST BE DEVELOPED IN THE SAME ARCHITECTURAL
DESIGN AS THE EXISTING HOMES IN THE AREA. AMENDMENT DIED FOR
LACK OF A SECOND.
Mr. Madis asked for restatement of the motion.
CM-32-l23
April 26, 1976
ere Tract 1666
- Trevarno Road)
MAYOR TIRSELL REPEATED THE MOTION AS FOLLOWS: THAT THE CITY
ACCEPT INDUSTRIAL TRACT MAP 1666, EXCEPTING CREATION OF THE
TWO LOTS (3 and 13); THAT THE CITY DOES NOT ACCEPT THE PUBLIC
WORKS; THAT THE DEEDS WILL SHOW A COVENANT MAINTAINING RESIDEN-
TIAL USE IN PERPETUITY; THAT THE CITY REQUIRES A PRIVATE ASSESS-
MENT DISTRICT FORMATION FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION AND MAIN-
TENANCE; THAT OFF-TRACT IMPROVEMENTS BE REQUIRED FOR FIRST STREET.
l)MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO AMEND HER MOTION HAVING TO DO WITH THE
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT: THAT THE CITY SERVE AS A NON-PAYING MEMBER
OF THE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT. AMENDMENT SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
MAIN MOTION HAD BEEN SECONDED BY CM KAMENA FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES.
Cm Kamena stated that he would like to know why Mr. Madis is not
happy with the present motion.
Mr. Madis explained that the problem lies with the two lots,
basically. He is not certain how the assessment district would
work out. Is the motion saying that the work must be done now?
Mayor Tirsell stated that she believes the City would wait for
the establishment of the private assessment district. The for-
mation of public works, construction and maintenance does not
indicate when.
Mr. Madis stated that basically his argument is with the two lots
and the balance of the motion he could accept.
Mayor Tirsell stated that some time ago Mr. Musso had reported
on the private assessment district for maintenance and she wondered
if he would like to say something at this time.
Mr. Mussso stated that it was discussed in conjunction with a
homeowners group but he really can't remember what was said at
that time.
Mayor Tirse1l stated that she believes there is some liability for
the City which is that this is a street which probably will continue
as it is without the improvements. The Council is making a conscious
choice that this area will not, at this time, be required to
put in the public works improvements. If the improvements
were required the estimate reached several years ago indicated
that the cost of the houses would be prohibitive.
The City Attorney stated that the City can enforce the require-
ment that each deed have so many covenants, conditions, and re-
strictions, to restrict the use of the property and the buildings.
Those would be enforceable by the group which has the deeds.
Whether the City can enforce the restriction, as a third party
beneficiary, is still another question. It is possible, unless
we can enforce it as a third party beneficiary, that each of those
parties who enters into the equitable servitudes, can thereafter
agree to use their property for its industrial zoning. In essence,
the City may not be able to enforce, as a third party, the coven-
ants and conditions which means that it is possible that those
parties who have the equitable servitudes could sit down and de-
cide to utilize their property with its present zoning, which is
industrial. This would bring him to the question of why not just
rezone it residential?
Mr. Madis stated that he believes the City Attorney is wrong. He
believes that if the City is the owner of one of the lots it can
enforce the equitable servitudes. The City owns Lot #1, which is
a portion of First Street and Highway 84 - the City has an interest.
CM-32-l24
April 26, 1976
(Tract 1666
- Trevarno Road)
Mr. Musso wondered if the assessment district is for maintenance
of the existing facilities.
Mayor Tirsell stated that this is correct as well as for construc-
tion - new construction.
Mr. Musso stated that the P.C. is in the process of a General Plan
amendment which might help the Council make a decision concerning
the possible rezoning.
Mayor Tirsell stated that her intention is that the Council would
not rezone the area residential because of the lack of schools
and parks for that area. This was listed as one of the whereas
clauses.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that in his opinion, the solution would be
to eventually rezone the area to residential. This does not
affect the motion made by Mayor Tirsell.
Mr. Parness stated that he is concerned about the formation of
the maintenance districts because they are problem areas that
would be a constant drudge to the City. The City would have to
be the administering agency and this would require the emploYment
of people with the problem of perpetual maintenance. The City
would never be recompensated for the costs of the obligations.
Even the formation of an assessment district for the installation
of capital outlays is bad enough, but sometimes financial restraints
require this. If anyone were to ask him about it he would have to
say that this would be an appropriate time to use the 1911 Act, spe-
cifically, as Mr. Madis has suggested, and in contrast with what
the City has used in the past.
The maintenance district has not been used in Livermore even though
they have been researched and found to be workable; however, he
is not sure it would be appropriate in this instance and it would
be a very big obligation on the part of the City.
Mayor Tirsell wondered who maintains the area now and Mr.
Parness stated that the individual property owners maintain
the area but he believes there is no maintenance of the street
at this time.
Mayor Tirsell wondered if a district could be formed striking
the wording "maintenance" and restrict it to capital improve-
ments.
Mr. Parness stated that this would meet with his satisfaction.
2)MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO STRIKE THE WORD
"MAINTENANCE" IN ITEM 4, AND RESTRICT IT TO CAPITAL IMPROVE-
MENTS. AMENDMENT SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
Cm Turner stated that this is an industrial area and he is
sure that if the applicant had an offer from a major industrial
firm, he could sell the property to that firm, demolish all the
houses and develop a large factory. The City is interested
in trying to preserve the area and it is true that exceptions
have been made in that area but the applicant has agreed to
leave one lot as open space but would like to build a home
on the other lot. The Council doesn't appear to be willing
to listen to the issue or give the applicant any consideration.
It would seem that when this area is involved the Council is
not flexible at all. It would seem reasonable to allow develop-
ment of the lot for a home similar to those existing homes.
CM-32-l25
April 26, 1976
(Tract 1666
- Trevarno Road)
Cm Dahlbacka stated that one point is that the City has not
drawn new lines on the subdivision map and perhaps the lots
which were excluded in the main motion should be included in
other lots.
Mr. Madis stated that if the Council intends to eliminate lots
he would request that the parcel map be approved and eliminate
the lot lines between parcels #2 and #3, with a note that it used
to be Parcel #3, and eliminate the line between #13 and #14, and
delete the word Parcel #13 from the map.
3)CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO DELETE LINES BETWEEN
LOTS #2 AND #3, AND THE WORD "PARCEL 3"; ELIMINATE THE LINES
BETWEEN PARCELS #l3 AND #l4, AND ELIMINATE THE WORD "PARCEL l3".
AMENDMENT WAS SECONDED BY CM KAMENA WHO INDICATED THAT HE WOULD
SECOND THE MOTION ONLY IF THE PARCELS WERE TO BE RENUMBERED.
The staff indicated that they would be renumbered.
Cm Kamena asked Mr. Madis if the new amendment resolved the
conflict Mr. Madis had with the main motion.
Mr. Madis stated that this does not solve the problem. He
objects to losing the two lots but he would rather know what
is going to be done with the two lots rather than for them to
be left in limbo.
Cm Kamena asked Mr. Madis to explain exactly what it is he
wants.
Mr. Madis stated that he is willing to leave #13 as an open space
area but he wants #3 as it is shown on the map - created as a
separate lot for development of a home when a building permit
is available from the City.
em Kamena stated that if the City finds that Parcel #13 is
going to be open space and the rest of the map is approved,
including Parcel #3, would it then be possible for Parcel #3
to have some type of industrial use on it while the rest of
the area is residential, inasmuch as it is industrial zoning.
Mayor Tirsell stated that this is true.
The City Attorney stated that he is sure the answer is yes, and
he does not know how Parcel #13 can be tied into open space.
em Kamena stated that what he is getting at is that Parcel #3
could be developed for an industrial use in a residential area.
The City Attorney stated that under the covenants, conditions
and restrictions, if they can be enforced, development would have
to be done in accordance with the rest of the architecture in
the area for both lots. Effectively, what the Council is doing
is creating two new lots for development. If the C.C.R. turns
out to be unenforceable or the owners agree to allow industrial
development, this could be done. At present he is not sure if
the C.C.R. can be enforced and he doesn't know about the City
owning Parcel #1, as mentioned by Mr. Madis.
Mr. Gorland, the Community Development Director, stated that
with respect to the restrictions, if the basic object is to
maintain the character of the area this is not inconsistent
with what has happened with many similar historical areas.
CM-32-l26
April 26, 1976
(Tract 1666
- Trevarno Road)
For example, the French Quarter in New Orleans has new build-
ings that have been built to conform to the old architectural
styling. They have restrictions which make any development
conform to a certain style and character of the buildings.
This has also been done in the old section of the Philadelphia
area and it is very difficult to tell which buildings were the
old buildings and which are the new buildings. This has also
been done in Georgetown, in Washington, D.C. If there were a re-
striction placed in the deed, the only way the lot could pro-
perly be developed would be in character with the other type
of buildings in that area. The only question is, who would
be the reviewing agent. He would assume that in the normal
process of approving the property by the City there would be
the question of whether the style would be in keeping with
the present character of the buildings. It would be desirable
to provide a lot on which construction can take place rather
than to allow an isolated lot with no potential use or develop-
ment.
The City Attorney cautioned not to get this item confused with
legislative restrictions such as, "Old Philadelphia", Georgetown
and Old Town in San Diego. Those have legislative restrictions
through the zoning area of the city, and this does not. This
is not even a large area such as those and it would appear that
this is an issue similar to mixing apples and oranges.
3)AMENDMENT MADE BY CM DAHLBACKA CONCERNING DELETION OF THE LOT
LINES PASSED 4-1 (Cm Turner dissenting) .
2)AMENDMENT TO DELETE "MAINTENANCE" FROM THE WORDING PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE.
l)AMENDMENT THAT THE CITY BE A NON-PAYING MEMBER OF THE ASSESS-
MENT DISTRICT WAS WITHDRAWN. SECOND WAS WITHDRAWN.
Mr. Parness stated that if you are talking about an assessment
district for the purpose of the installation of capital improve-
ments, the City becomes the agent, automatically.
Mayor Tirsell stated that this is okay, she was just concerned
that they would be part of the assessment district.
City Attorney: I didn't know before that we were Parcel #1, but
if we are a parcel we will be assessed along with everyone else,
unless we specifically exempt ourselves. Could I also suggest
that we bring this back in a resolution - there are so many
factors. We will bring this back to you in a resolution.
Mayor Tirsell stated that this would be fine. The Council is
asking the City Attorney to prepare the resolution but the
Council is clarifying what they are doing.
4)MAYOR TIRSELL AMENDED THE MOTION TO EXEMPT OURSELVES FROM
THE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT. AMENDMENT SECONDED BY CM KAMENA
AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
MAIN MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Mr. Musso asked if there are any requirements for improvements
to Trevarno and the Mayor explained that no public works will
be accepted until the City receives an application.
All the things will be in the resolution.
,//
RECESS
Mayor Tirsell called for a brief recess after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present.
CM-32- 127
April 26, 1976
CONTINUED DISCUSSION RE
MULTI-SERVICE CENTER
SITE LOCATION
The item concerning the location for the multi-service center
building was postponed from the meeting of last week for con-
sideration by the Planning Commission. The Council wanted to
obtain a recommendation from the P.C. prior to making a final
decision.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that the recommendations from the P.C. have
been included in the agenda and asked that Mr. Lee place the map
that the P.C. considered on the board so the Council could look
at what they reviewed.
Mr. Lee explained that the design of the building was revised
in order to shift it to the east to move it away from the Barn.
It will also be built around the clump of pepper trees, as sug-
gested in previous testimony, and a patio area will be reserved
to accommodate outdoor activities. The architect felt this
would be an acceptable alternative compared to what was first
recommended. Mr. Lee stated that he would like the Council to
keep in mind that this is very preliminary and that the shape of
the building and precise location is still conceptual. Precise
location and shape of the building will be based on the functional
design necessary as well as architectural considerations after fur-
ther discussions.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO ADOPT THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN "A", AS ILLUSTRATED,
AND RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. MOTION WAS
SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
Cm Turner stated that in his opinion, the building is still not
a compatible use with the Barn. First of all the City originated
a Social Concerns Committee to help make these decisions and now
the Council intends to take the recommendation of the P.C. He
stated that he would like to know what the Social Concerns Com-
mittee would like to do since various social need organizations
will be using the building.
Mayor Tirsell explained that this is also the site preferred by
the Social Concerns Committee, as well as the configuration
recommended.
Mr. Parness commented that he is not sure conceptual configura-
tion "A" was the recommendation of the Planning Commission.
Mr. Musso stated that the P.C. did not adopt either site - they
did disagree with the revised plan because they felt it was still
too close to the Barn.
CM KAMENA WITHDREW HIS MOTION TO RESTATE IT. SECOND WAS WITHDRAWN
ALSO.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO ADOPT CONCEPTUAL PLAN "A", AS OUTLINED ON THE
MAP IN ORANGE. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL.
Mr. Musso stated that people from other groups testified at the
P.C. meeting and they felt the orange drawing was too close to
the Barn. They would like the uses to be integrated without
encroaching upon one another. It was felt that with these
criteria the architect could select a suitable site.
Mr. Lee felt that by accepting location "A" there would be flexi-
bility to accommodate the various uses. These comments will be
passed on to the architect for the purpose of obtaining a pre-
cise design.
CM-32-l28
April 26, 1976
(re Site Selection -
Multi-Service Center)
Cm Kamena stated that his motion indicates that it is only a
conceptual design and that this would still allow flexibility
for the design, etc.
CM KAMENA INCLUDED IN THE MOTION THAT THE P.C. COMMENTS AND
OBJECTIONS BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
Cm Turner stated that he will vote against the motion because he
still believes the use is not compatible with the Barn and there
were concerns expressed by people from other organizations to
support his opinion. Also, the City may decide to one day redesign
the Barn and there should be enough area left in the site for any
type of redevelopment.
Mayor Tirsell stated that there are many groups in town who want
to make sure the Barn is never destroyed and this was one of the
concerns considered in the plan.
Cm Kamena asked Cm Turner what he would recommend and em Turner
tstated that he doesn't have a specific recommendation but he
feels the site which has been chosen is inappropriate.
MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Cm Turner dissenting) .
APPEAL RE CUP APP.
FOR AUTO REPAIR
WEST OF 4019 FIRST ST.
The Planning Commission denied an application by Vithun
Tantivongsathaporn,. for an automotive repair business in the I-I
District located adjacent to and west of 4019 First Street, on
the south side of First Street. The applicant has appealed
the P.C. decision to the City Council.
Cm Turner stated that it is his understanding that Mr. Tantivongsatha-
porn has a place of business located in the downtown area.
Mr. Haines, the attorney representing the applicant, stated that
he is presently leasing space in the downtown area but it is not
sufficient for the needs and the equipment needed to carryon the
Datsun repair service.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE APPLICATION FOR AN
AUTO REPAIR SERVICE, BASED ON THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND
FINDINGS MADE BY THE STAFF. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he read the arguments of the P.C. and he
is concerned about the increase in commercialization along that
area also, and the P.C. did approve a CUP for a garage in an
industrial zone on Research Drive a couple of months ago, but
that use did not front on the main street and didn't add to
the appearance of strip commercial which the area out on First
Street is beginning to look like. From reading the minutes of
the P.C., their primary concern was that there was an industrial
area fronting on a major street and that there will be increase
in traffic congestion. The best way to design an industrial area
is to back it on a major street and the uses and traffic generated
by that use should be carefully considered. There was at least
one P.C. member who would have been in favor of the application
if it had been requested for the interior of the industrial area.
Mr. Haines stated that this item is concerning an automotive
repair and not a gasoline station or anything of this nature.
The conditions that were laid down by the staff indicated
CM-32-129
April 26, 1976
(re CUP App. re
Auto Repair -
Tantivongsathaporn)
that all the work and activities would be interior to the
building and there would be no allowance of any exterior
storage, towing facilities, or anything of this nature.
This would be a business with a clean, neat exterior.
Mr. Haines stated that also, there would be a limited num-
ber of cars that would be repaired on any given day and
this is not the type of traffic that would be in the order
of 200-300 cars. Perhaps there would be 15-25 cars at the
most in one day.
em Dahlbacka stated that a use such as this in an industrial
area requires a CUP which would indicate to him that there
would have to be a very clear indication that there would be
no problem.
Mr. Haines indicated that the staff has reviewed this matter
in great detail, and he believes it is terribly inequitable
that on February 24th someone is given a CUP and then on
April 6th someone is denied.
Cm Staley stated that this area is supposed to remain an
industrial zone and there is commercial space available in
the City for a business such as this. The problem with allow-
ing a commercial use such as this to go into an industrial
zone is that it deprives people in the City who have property
properly zoned for commercial services, of the opportunity to
market their land. Secondly it confuses the planning of the
City because it places land that is industrial use into com-
mercial by de facto uses. This is the biggest problem the
City has along First Street.
The policy of the City has always been to try to eliminate
the problem of strip commercial out along First Street, and
this is exactly what is going to happen by allowing this par-
ticular application. For this reason he cannot support the
application.
Mr. Haines stated that he can appreciate em Staley's concern
but the Council should realize that this would mean construc-
tion of a business in Livermore and would mean additional jobs
for people in Livermore.
em Staley commented that nobody has said there are not sites
available for the construction job and the building. The
only thing he knows that is being suggested is that this
particular site is unappropriate.
Cm Kamena stated that he would agree with what Cm Staley has
said in opposition to strip commercial along First Street.
However, he believes that the applicant is applying for a
particular type of business operation that would seem to
be compatible with the existing businesses in that area.
As far as he knows, the other businesses have received the
necessary permits - they are not there illegally.
Mr. Musso stated that he discovered some uses there last week
that may not have the required permits.
Cm Kamena stated that it would appear that this operation
would still be compatible with those legal establishments
located in the complex.
CM-32-l30
April 26, 1976
(re CUP App. re Auto
Repair - Tantivongsathaporn
Mayor Tirsell stated that the spirit of the ordinance is that if
you comply with the setbacks, the landscaping requirements, etc.,
and can fulfill the requirements of the CUP, you can be in the
Industrial Zone. There was a provision included in the CUP for
uses which might find their way into the area for one reason or
another, and would be compatible in an Industrial Zone.
Mayor Tirsell stated that in her opinion the staff conditions are
quite stringent and she would ask that the site plan approval go
to the Design Review Committee. She does feel compassion for the
P.C. concerns because First Street is becoming a strip. She added
that she will vote in favor of the motion and would ask that the
site plan approval be given particular attention in making it com-
patible with the area.
CM DAHLBACKA STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO
INCLUDE THAT THE DESIGN BE GIVEN CONSIDERATION TO NOT ALLOWING
NOISE AND THAT THE BAY DOORS WHICH WILL BE OPEN WILL NOT FACE THE
RESIDENTIAL AREA, TO MITIGATE AGAINST THE IMPACT OF THE USE ON THE
IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL AREA. MOTION SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
Mr. Madis stated that since he is the
adjacent to this proposed use, he has
asked that they erect a solid masonry
their property and they have agreed.
a condition of the CUP.
owner of a 32,040 sq. ft. lot
spoken with Mr. Haines and has
wall between his property and
He would ask that this also be
Mr. Haines indicated that they didn't really agree to a solid masonry
wall, but they would agree to some type of wall.
CM DAHLBACKA RESTATED THE MOTION TO ASK THAT IN THE DESIGN REVIEW
PROCESS OF THE BUILDING, STRONG CONSIDERATION BE GIVEN TO MITIGAT-
ING THE NOISE IMPACT OF THE USE ON THE ADJACENT RESIDENCES. MOTION
WAS SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
Mr. Lee indicated that he doubts if the Council could require a
masonry fence at the time of design review.
SECOND WAS WITHDRAWN AT THIS TIME.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO REQUIRE THAT A MASONRY
FENCE BE BUILT OR THAT THE BUILDING BE DESIGNED SO THAT THE DOORS
OPEN AWAY FROM THE RESIDENCES BECAUSE EITHER ONE OF THESE WOULD BE
MITIGATING MEASURES AGAINST NOISE FACTORS. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY
MAYOR TIRSELL.
Cm Turner stated that this is going to go to the Design Review Com-
mittee and perhaps they would make this recommendation.
Mayor Tirsell commented that they cannot make conditions - they can
only make suggestions.
<211\ Turner ot;lted that seoondly, the une uould be alloued and is not
in conflict with the Cenaral rlan, and for these reasons he fa70rs
allowing tho UGe.
Cm Kamena mentioned that the City staff has also recommended in
favor of allowing the CUP.
Cm Staley stated that while the staff recommended approval, the P.C.
recommended denial for a very good reason. The good reason is that
if the Council approves the use, this evening, it opens the door to
strip commercial on First Street. Personally, he is against this and
believes it would be a mistake to allow more commercial in that area.
The Council zoned it light industrial in the hopes that commercial
could be eliminated and the Council would be agreeing in a de facto
rezoning of First Street.
CM-32-l3l
April 26, 1976
(re CUP App. re Auto
Repair - Tantivongsathaporn)
Mayor Tirsell stated that the area was not zoned light indus-
trial - it was zoned Industrial and the setbacks are greater than
in any other area and the landscaping requirements are the most
stringent. A car factory could be allowed in anyone of the
zones if the requirements for the landscaping, etc. could be met.
David Eller, Livermore, stated that he would have to agree with
em Staley and Cm Dahlbacka. He is not in favor of commercial
in that area and in his opinion Smorga Bobs should never have
been placed in that location. Trevarno Road should be taken
into consideration which hopefully will be adopted as a heritage
site, and this area must be protected. He would agree with a
masonry wall and hopefully new structures will be compatible
with the Trevarno Road area.
AMENDMENT FAILED 2-3 (Cm Turner, Staley and Kamena dissenting).
Cm Dahlbacka wondered what the standards are for the lighting
in that zone and what possibility there would be for excessive
glare from high lights into that residential area. He stated
that in walking down Trevarno Road one evening he noticed a
great deal of glare coming from the storage area into the resi-
dential area and he would not want the glare increased.
Mr. Lee stated that if it is determined there is excessive glare
there could be shades installed on the light fixtures.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE THAT IF LIGHT-
ING IS PROVIDED THAT WILL GLARE UPON THE ADJACENT RESIDENCES,
THE COUNCIL REQUIRES THAT IT BE NON-GLARE LIGHTING. MOTION
WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
MAIN MOTION PASSED (Cm Dahlbacka and Staley dissenting).
APPEAL RE HOME OCCUPATION
PERMIT FOR PAINTING CON-
TRACTORS OFFICE - 1ST ST.
Cm Staley stated that he generally is opposed to home occupa-
tions and he appealed the P.C. decision approving the applica-
tion of William Sprinkle for a painting contractors office at
3026 First Street.
Cm Staley stated that after reading the findings of the P.C.
and reading the report and their recommendations he no longer
wishes to appeal approval of this permit.
Item was noted for filing.
REPORT RE CARL'S JR.
RESTAURANT - lST & "P"
A report was submitted to the Council concerning Carl's Jr.
Restaurant which has been approved for development at the
corner of "P" and First Street. The Director of Planning
mentioned in the report the concern by the staff for traffic
problems which are anticipated as the result of people waiting
in line in their cars at the drive-up window for food service,
because of the already existing traffic congestion in the
Shopping center.
CM-32-132
April 26, 1976
(re Carl's Jr. Restaurant)
Mayor Tirsell stated that Cm Turner has already contacted the
manager of the Safeway Store concerning the traffic problems
in the Safeway parking area and this type of restaurant use will
compound the problems. She stated that three women have told her
that they have discontinued shopping at Safeway because of the con-
gestion. She would like to somehow impress upon the merchants that
something definite must be done.
em Turner stated that Mr. Musso has indicated that the City's exper-
ience with Jack-in-the-Box and banks, with respect to drive-up win-
dows is that there have been problems. Cm Turner stated that there
has been a problem only with one bank in town and as far as drive-up
window uses are concerned he feels problems can be eliminated as lopg
as they are designed properly. }
Cm Turner stated that in looking at the Carl's restaurant it would
appear there is going to be a huge problem with the drive-up window.
Mr. Musso stated that the reason he anticipated a problem with the
restaurant is because in looking at the Jack-in-the-Box situation,
if it were located on the Carl's site the City would have a real
problem. This is the reason the matter has been brought to the
attention of the Council.
Mr. Musso stated that the applicant maintains that their drive-in
business is secondary and that they try to urge patrons to eat
inside. Apparently, the only reason they will have a window at
all, is to compete with other drive-in restaurant type businesses.
em Turner stated that he objects to the statement that drive-up
window business creates problems, primarily where banks are con-
cerned, because this leads to banning them and they are an intricate
part of the business. He would also like to point out that the
traffic problems around this shopping center must be recognized
now with methods to control them implemented soon. The left hand
turning lanes are not proper methods for controlling the problem.
Mayor Tirsell suggested that the item be noted for filing and
that the Council again express its concerns to the manager of
the Safeway store.
Cm Turner stated that he would like for Mr. Lee to corne up with
an engineering design that will solve the traffic problems on
First Street and ~P" Street.
em Kamena noted that last week he had the opportunity to go to
the San Diego area and personally inspect Carl's Jr. Restaurant
and found that, indeed, their main use is indoors.
Item was referred to the staff for solution to the traffic pattern.
REPORT RE TWILITB
ZONE RELOCATION CUP
The Council received written testimony concerning the public hearing
for a CUP application to permit a cocktail lounge in the CN center
at l837 Holmes Street. The applicants, Don Kumpf and Bill Peluso,
have requested moving the Twilite Zone around the corner within
the same Shopping center.
CM-32-l33
Cm Turner noted that after conferring with the City I ~. t/
') Attorney it was concluded that he does not have a (J'\~;(I~I?
. conflict of interest concerning the Twilight Zone U' ~~~~
application. I
,..
I
April 26, 1976
(re Twilite
Zone Relocation App.)
By unanimous vote of the Planning Commission the staff report
was accepted and they have recommended that the Council approve
the application based on findings listed in their report.
Cm Staley indicated that prior to any discussion on this item
he will abstain from any discussion and vote.
Cm Kamena asked for clarification as to whether or not an absten-
tion is considered a "no" vote.
Mr. Parness stated that he believes in the case of a tie vote
the abstention'is counted as a "no" vote.
CM TURNER MOVED TO SUPPORT THE P.C. RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE
THE CUP. MOTION SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE (Cm Staley abstaining) .
P.C. SUMMARY
OF ACTION 4/20
The Planning Commission Summary of Action for their meeting of
April 20, 1976, was noted for filing.
REPORT RE TRACT 3607
- GREAT AMERICAN LAND
OFF OF MURDELL LANE
A report was submitted by the Director of Public Works relative
to Tract 3607 (Great American Land) off of Murdell Lane, recom-
mending adoption of a resolution accepting the agreement and bonds;
a resolution authorizing execution of the deed for the park property;
and a resolution approving the final tract map. All required bonds,
insurance and deposits have been filed.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT ALL THREE RESOLUTIONS, AS RECOMMENDED BY
THE STAFF WITH THE NOTATION THAT THE LETTER FROM THE SCHOOL DIS-
TRICT HAS BEEN EXECUTED AND IS A PART OF THIS PRESENTATION. MOTION
WAS SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA, AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 94-76
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING AGREEMENT AND BONDS
FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO TRACT 3607.
RESOLUTION NO. 95-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
DEED (Clarence P. Overaa)
RESOLUTION NO. 96-76
RESOLUTION APPROVING MAP OF THE SUBDIVISION
OF TRACT 3607
CM-32-l34
April 26, 1976
(re Twilite
Zone Reaocation App.)
By unanimous vote of the Planning commission the staff report
was accepted and they have recommended that the Council approve
the application based on findings listed in their report.
Cm Staley indicated that prior to any discussion on this item
he will abstain from any discussion and vote.
Cm Kamena asked for clarification as to whether or not an absten-
tion is considered a "no" vote.
em Parness stated that he believes in the case of a tie vote
h}At~. ,- ~tention is eounted as a "no" vote.
.) - C 1>y
c0~ o<>Q <>-'>. MOVED TO SUPPORT THE P.C. RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE
aJ.;..( <x>'(l ~ ~<> '~TION SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS
VI.... (l~c C 0 x>'c Qoc 'ey abstaining) .
;(0 '<' ~ (3lQ'
~. ..(Q ~~ C
P.C. S... c(3l (l ;Qc$l
OF ACTIt. ;n~ O-Q(l c ~
~c ;,;~ :COc
The Plannin~ (l0Q'(3lQ'(3l~ ~ Summary of Action for their meeting of
April 20, 19 I ~(l C (l -l for filing.
~~.A ;Q~ o-Q~
'~x>' c ~
REPORT RE TRACT 3\. ~ Q(3l <><>..(
_ GREAT AMERICAN LA. c~ Q'o ~
OFF OF MURDELL LANE ~ ~ (3l~ ~x>'
7px>' Q cQ
A report was submitted b. <x>'oc AC~ ~or of Public Works relative
to Tract 3607 (Great Amer~ ~Qc~~~~ 'ff of Murdell Lane, recom-
mending adoption of a resol, ~ ~ Ox>' ~ing the agreement and bonds;
a resolution authorizing exec 0-'>. ~ ~ ~ deed for the park property;
and a resolution approving the (3l .. '. map. All required bonds,
insurance and deposits have been ~/,
4.f#8~
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT ALL THREE ~ ~~.L
THE STAFF WITH THE NOTATION THAT THE. 'f '-C.~---...
TRICT HAS BEEN EXECUTED AND IS A PART L
WAS SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA, AND PASSED
AS RECOMMENDED BY
, THE SCHOOL DIS-
rtESENTATION. MOTION
...cl'ANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 94-76
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING AGREEMENT AND BONDS
FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO TRACT 3607.
RESOLUTION NO. 95-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
DEED (Clarence P. Overaa)
RESOLUTION NO. 96-76
RESOLUTION APPROVING MAP OF THE SUBDIVISION
OF TRACT 3607
CM-32-l34
April 26, 1976
(re Tract 3607 -
Great American Land)
Mr. Schwarer, the developer, asked if he could take building
permits out in lots of lO, and to receive the total 40 permits
within six months.
Mayor Tirsell stated that Great American Land has already received
one extension for getting the building permits.
Mr. Schwarer indicated that his problem lies in the fact that the
bank will not finance more than 10 building permits at a time.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ALLOW PERMITS TO BE OBTAINED IN LOTS OF 10,
WITH A TIME PERIOD OF l80 DAYS TO OBTAIN THE TOTAL 40 PERMITS,
FROM THE EXPIRATION OF THE LAST 90 DAY EXTENSION WHICH WILL BE
APRIL 29, 1976. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Mr. Schwarer felt the l80 days was ample time and that he would
try to obtain the permits within this time period. If he is not
able to do so he will come to the Council to explain why.
REPORT RE PARCEL MAP
l783 (Cassel Montgomery)
LOTS ALONG HAYES STREET
The Director of Public Works reported that the developer of Parcel
Map 1783 has completed the final map in accordance with the condi-
tions of the tentative parcel map. A cash performance bond has been
submitted and is filed in the Bond and Trust Fund Account.
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution approving
Parcel Map 1783 (Cassel Montgomery) - 2 lots east of Hayes Street.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTIONS WERE ADOPTED:
RESOLUTION NO. 97-76
A RESOLUTION APPROVING PARCEL MAP 1783
RESOLUTION NO. 98-76
A RESOLUTION ABONDONING A NON-ACCESS
STRIP AND ANCHOR EASEMENTS (Parcel Map
1783 - Former Tract 2731)
REPORT RE HENSEL-PHELPS -
RETENTION OF MONIES
The Director of Public Works reported that Hensel-Phelps, contractor
for the Railroad Relocation Project, has requested that the City reduce
the amount of money which the City has retained (part of the money
owed to Hensel-Phelps for the construction work) as an assurance of
satiSfactory work progress.
The contractor made this same request in August of 1975 but when it
was found that there was defective concrete work on the project he
withdrew the request. He is again making the request.
The staff feels that the retention should not be reduced below 5%. At
present the City is retaining $206,822, which is lO% of the work comple.
ted, to date. The job is approximately 99% complete and a 5% retention
should be adequate.
CM-32-135
April 26, 1976
(re Hensel-Phelps -
Retention of Monies)
Cm Turner stated that the letter from Mr. Lee indicates that
the City has performance bonds in the full amount of the con-
tract which also assures completion of the project. This is
not the purpose of the lO% retention - the purpose of the 10%
retention is to protect the City against any possible liens
that might come up later against Hensel-Phelps.
CM TURNER MOVED TO DENY THE REQUEST FOR THE REDUCTION IN THE
AMOUNT OF MONEY RETAINED BY THE CITY, AND HOLD HENSEL-PHELPS
TO THE PRESENT CONTRACT. MOTION SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES.
Mr. Parness stated that when the council discussed this item
last fall an appeal was made by the contractor for the reten-
tion amount to be returned to them at the time 50% of the pro-
ject was completed. At that time work was progressing slowly
and the forecasted opening of the underpasses was that it would
not be done by December 1st, the appointed date. The Council
at that time told the contractor that consideration would be
given to the reduction of the retention at such time as the under-
passes were open for public use, and it was implied that favorable
consideration would be given to a reduction. To the best of his
knowledge our City has never used a retention clause in a con-
struction project in the past and the reason it appears in this
one is because the City adopted state specifications.
Generally, the state reimburses 100% of the retention when 50%
of a project has been completed. Mr. Parness stated that he
feels it is in order to grant this request. The City does
have performance bonds and bonds that would cover the kinds
of claims Cm Turner has mentioned.
Mayor Tirsell wanted to know if both railroad companies have
accepted the underpasses, in writing.
Mr. Lee stated that he doesn't recall that the City has received
written statements that they have been accepted because we are
not at the point where they are to be accepted by them.
Mayor Tirsell pointed out that at one time the City was waiting
for acceptance of the problems that had been corrected.
Mr. Lee stated that they have made inspections of the whole job
and they are satisfied and they are running their trains over
the structures. At one time they did have reservations about
allowing the trains to go over the structures. What Mr. Parness
has said is true - there are labor and performance bonds that
would cover any problems.
Cm Staley stated that as he recalls the Council did indicate
that if the work was done satisfactorily the Council would favor-
ably reconsider. In his opinion the 10% retention is not
significantly higher than 5% in the way of a safety factor.
The City has had problems with Hensel-Phelps and the City will
not really gain anything by holding the additional 5% and per-
haps the good will a reduction would engender would be worth it.
em Turner stated that he does not agree with returning 5% because
in the first place 10% retention is part of the agreement, secondly,
it is in there for a good reason, and thirdly, something may happen
that the City can't get final clearance from the Title Company.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the 10% retention cannot be used for
insurance for this type of thing.
CM-32-136
April 26, 1976
(re Hensel-Phelps -
Retention of Monies)
em Turner stated that the difference between 5% and 10% is $103,000
and in his opinion this is a significant amount of money.
MOTION FAILED l-4 (Cm Dahlbacka, Kamena, Staley and Mayor Tirsell
dissenting) .
CM KAMENA MOVED TO AUTHORIZE REDUCTION OF THE 10% TO 5%. MOTION
WAS SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
Cm Turner stated that he cannot understand how the City can give
up $103,000 worth of protection based on something the state nor-
mally does. He added that he does not know how the Council can
make this justification.
em Kamena asked if Cm Turner is implying that this is taxpayer
money and ern Turner stated that he is not implying that it is
taxpayer money but the taxpayers could be responsible if the City
has to corne up with money to pay liens, etc.
Cm Kamena stated that he assumes from the discussion that the
City is covered by performance and labor bonds and Mr. Parness
stated that the staff believes the City is covered adequately.
Mr. Parness added that Hensel-Phelps has exhibited a lot of coopera-
tion concerning this project and it is reasonable to return 5% of
the money to them.
The City Attorney stated that it is true the City is covered with
respect to material, labor and performance. However, there is no
insurance for property acquisition and other items but this would
not have anything to do with Hensel-Phelps. The other items not
covered would not be relevant to this matter.
Discussion followed concerning whether or not a reduction should
be made in the 10%, and the purpose for requiring the bonds.
MOTION PASSED 3-2 (Cm Dahlbacka and Cm Turner dissenting) .
REPORT RE DIAGONAL
PARKING ADJACENT TO
RECREATION CENTER
At the request of the LARPD Board, the item concerning diagonal
parking adjacent to the recreation center was postponed.
REPORT RE RESTRICTED
PARKING ZONES
A report was submitted by the Director of Public Works concerning
restricted parking zones in various areas in the City. A resolu-
tion will be prepared effecting parking restrictions as recommended
by the City Council.
Mr. Lee explained that the only recommended changes are those
mentioned in his memorandum to the Council dated April lS, 1976,
and consist of four locations. These would be added to the total
list of parking zones which have already been in effect for a long
time.
Cm Staley stated that included in the old list is "I" Street,
between Third and Fourth, and he would like to know about this
area because a parking limit was imposed only beginning last
summer.
CM-32-l37
April 26, 1976
(re Parking Zones)
Mr. Lee stated that he can't answer this because the list is
an up-to-date list. He would have to look into the "I" Street
restrictions and report back to Cm Staley on that one.
MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FOUR
ADDITIONAL PARKING RESTRICTION ZONES, SECONDED BY CM STALEY
AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Resolution will appear on the Consent Calendar next week.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Report re Track Reloca-
tion Work Progress
A progress report was submitted to the Council for informational
purposes concerning the Track Reclocation project, by the Director
of Public Works.
Report re Twin Valley
Mutual Aid Agreement
The City Manager reported that the Fire Chiefs of the Twin Valley
area assistance group recommend that the Tassajara Fire Protection
District be incorporated within the Twin Valley Mutual Fire Assis-
tance Agreement.
It is recommended that a resolution be adopted amending the agree-
ment.
RESOLUTION NO. 99-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AMENDMENT OF AGREE-
MENT (Mutual Fire Assistance)
Res. Rejecting Claim
- James & Catharine Gill
A resolution was adopted rejecting the claim of James and Catharine
Gill, as follows:
RESOLUTION NO. 100-76
A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF:
JAMES & CATHARINE GILL AND CALIFORNIA
CASUALTY
Res. Auth. Expenditure
of Funds for Remodeling
the Old Fire Station
As discussed at the meeting of April 19th, the Council adopted
a resolution authorizing an expenditure of up to $2,000 to
remodel existing facilities at the Fire Station No. 1 build-
ing to accommodate the relocation of the Purchasing Department
and reproduction services.
RESOLUTION NO. 101-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE
OF FUNDS REMODELING/RELOCATION
CM-32-l38
April 26, 1976
Res. re Landscape
Bids - Underpasses
The Council adopted a resolution awarding a bid to Naka Nursery
for landscaping of the underpasses.
Cm Staley stated that if this is a transaction in our City and
rules concerning a business license are applicable, the City
should insure that Naka Nursery pays the business license tax.
Cm Kamena stated that it would seem that the nursery might be
exempt.
Cm Staley stated that the nursery should not be exempt merely
becuase they are dealing with the City.
RESOLUTION NO. 102-76
A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID
(Naka Nursery)
Housing Authority
Minutes - 3/23/76
The Council received the minutes for the Housing Authority Board
meeting of March 23, 1976, for informational purposes.
Payroll & Claims
There were 293 payroll warrants in the amount of $95,943.48, dated
April 2l, 1976, and approved by the City Manager.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Request for Motion
Auth. Res. - Trujillo)
The City Attorney stated that he would like the Council to adopt
a motion authorizing a settlement of condemnation action for the
Gilbert Trujillo property.
eM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION, AS REQUESTED, SECONDED
BY CM KAMENA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 103-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT
OF CONDEMNATION ACTION (City v.
Gilbert Trujillo, et all
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Outstanding Parking
Ticket Fines)
Cm Dahlbacka stated that it has been suggested that volunteers
write letters trying to collect outstanding parking ticket fines.
CM-32-l39
April 26, 1976
(re Collection of
Parking Ticket Fines)
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he would like to ask the staff to
look into the possibility of establishing our own volunteer
collection agency.
Mr. Parness stated that this is done in house as time permits.
However, the outstanding tickets can pile up.
(Report re Investigation
of Commercial Uses on
First Street)
Cm Staley stated that last week he asked that the staff prepare
an investigation and report concerning the commercial uses out
on First Street in the I-I Industrial area. He is concerned
that this issue may be lost in the shuffle of things that must
be done and he would like a biweekly report consisting of a
one page report as to who is not in conformance and what the
City is doing about it.
Mayor Tirsell suggested that the staff prepare this as an in-
formational item once a month and Cm Staley concurred.
(Animal Shelter)
Cm Staley stated that Livermore uses the Alameda County Animal
Shelter since we have closed our own animal shelter and he found
it very discouraging to have to 90 into Santa Rita through the
Sheriff's Department, present his drivers license and identifica-
tion, and be subject to search, simply for the purpose of visiting
the animal shelter.
em Staley indicated that the procedure is the same for going to
the animal shelter as for going into Santa Rita and in his opinion
this discourages visits to the animal shelter. He felt it might
be appropriate to write. a letter to the Board of Supervisors
asking if it is really necessary that people must go through
the same gate to get to the animal shelter as those going into
Santa Rita.
The staff was directed to write to the Board of supervisors to
find out if something can be done concerning this problem.
(Various Items)
Cm Turner stated that he is waiting for a report concerning the
stop signs on "P" Street and North Livermore Avenue in the area
of the underpasses.
Cm Turner stated that he also asked that the Community Development
Director prepare a fee schedule and he would like to know the
status of this schedule. Mr. Parness indicated that it is under
study and is being done in conjunction with our Industrial Advisory
Committee.
Cm Turner stated that he sees a City truck on Holmes Street every
day with people to repair portions of the street. He wondered why
this is happening.
Mr. Lee explained that the fence is on City property so that it
can be maintained by the City. Otherwise there would be a vari-
ation of treatment. We now require masonry or something more per-
manent.
CM-32-l40
April 26, 1976
(Holmes St. Fence)
Cm Turner stated that perhaps the staff could estimate the cost
of daily repair vs. the cost of erecting a permanent fence.
The staff was directed to report back to the Council concerning
the costs of a permanent fence vs. the cost of repair.
(LAVWMA Meeting)
Mayor Tirsell reported that she and Cm Turner attended the LAVWMA
meeting, representing the City's position concerning the LAVWMA
pipeline size, and our entire resolution was accepted. The LAVWMA
Board reaffirmed its position on averaging the pipeline and the use
of surge ponds.
The Council directed that the staff write to the City Industrial
Committee concerning the cost and the sizing of the Livermore
segment of the line.
(AB 304l)
Mayor Tirsell stated that she has received notification from ABAG
that AB 3041 which dissolves BASSA into the ABAG Executive Committee
has passed the Local Government Committee by a strong vote. It was
amended to eliminate BASSA's power to tax and to intervene in local
situations, transfers to ABAG the planning powers and creates no
new functions for ABAG. It is expected to be heard April 29th or
May 3rd.
(East Avenue Meeting)
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would like to congratulate Mr. Lee
and Mr. Parness for an excellent meeting held on East Avenue,
last Thursday night. There were about 50 residents out to hear
about the overpass and the future alignment of East First Street.
The answers to the questions were very good and in her opinion the
meeting was very beneficial.
(re Ability of County
to Intervene in City
Public Works Projects)
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would like the City Attorney's office
to research and report back to the Council on the Government Code
relative to counties and their ability to construct or to intervene
in pUblic works projects. This would be relative to projects going
on in which they are not included and would like to intervene.
ORDINANCES
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT THE MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENTS RELATIVE
TO SURVEYS, CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, AND GRADING. MOTION WAS
SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
ORDINANCE NO. 880
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 6.2.3, RELATING TO
SURVEY OF ARTICLE I, RELATING TO GENERAL PROVISIONS
OF CHAPTER 6, RELATING TO BUILDINGS, OF THE LIVERMORE
CITY CODE 1959.
CM-32-l4l
April 26, 1976
ORDINANCE NO. 881
AN ORDINANCE ADDING A NEW SECTION 6.2.6, RELATING TO CER-
FICATE OF OCCUPANCY, OF ARTICLE I, RELATING TO GENERAL PRO-
VISIONS, OF CHAPTER 6, RELATING TO BUILDINGS, OF THE LIVERMORE
CITY CODE, 1959.
ORDINANCE NO. 882
AN ORDINANCE ADDING A NEW SECTION, 6.2.7, RELATING TO GRADING
PERMITS REQUIRED, OF ARTICLE I, RELATING TO GENERAL PROVISIONS,
OF CHAPTER 6, RELATING TO BUILDINGS, OF THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE,
1959.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, INTRODUCTIOK AND FILING OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE AMEND-
MENT RELATING TO CN DISTRICT AND SECURITY, WAS CONTINUED.
Cm Dahlbacka requested a report from the staff concerning the
possibility of requiring certain minimum security requirements
when a home is bought or sold. The insulation ordinance that
is presently being applied to homes is working out quite well
and perhaps this would be the time to require various security
items to be installed. He would like a report from the staff
before the Council goes to first reading.
CITY MANAGER
STATUS REPORT
Corps of Engineers Meeting
Mr. Parness stated that Mayor Tirsell has noted that there is to
be a Corps of Engineers Study and that a meeting has not been
held and she would like to know why. He has contacted the Corps
who have indicated that they have not held meetings because of
ABAG intentions to conduct the 208 Planning Study which does
involve surface water run-off. They are considering opting
for inclusion within that, in addition to the fact that they
are thinking about dropping the entire Wastewater Management
aspect of their study. They have indicated that they will be
contacting the City by letter concerning this item.
General Plan Printing
The General plan consultants have finally agreed to reimburse
the City for the cost of the printing of the General Plan.
Revenue sharinq
Mr. Parness and the Mayor met with Congressman Stark's repre-
sentative from washington D.C., and he did have good news. In
their opinion it is almost assured that Revenue Sharing will
continue, effective January l, 1977.
RECESS
Mayor Tirsell called for a brief recess before considering
appointments to the Planning Commission.
CM-32-l42
April 26, 1976
(re Call for Recess
and Intention to
Continue Discussions)
Cm Staley commented that he really objects to meeting after midnight
and would urge that consideration of Planning Commission appointments
be discussed at another time. In his opinion, good decisions cannot
be made after a certain hour after being up all day, and some of
the decisions made at the last budget session are proof of this.
CM STALEY MOVED TO CONTINUE FURTHER COUNCIL DISCUSSION TO ANOTHER
TIME. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA. MOTION FAILED 2-3
(Cm Karnena, Turner and Mayor Tirsell dissenting).
RECESS
After a brief recess the Councilmernbers returned to the discussion
of appointments.
P.C. APPOINTMENTS
Applicants to the Planning Commission,were: RaYmond Brice,
Richard Buckley, Gurnam Sidhu, Joan Green, Michael Eugene Soffa,
Rebecca Hundoble, Neil Riley, l~arren Thompson ,:and Donald Nelson.
All applicants were interviewed by the Council and after discussion,
ON MOTION BY CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
RAYMOND BRICE WAS APPOINTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO FILL THE
UNEXPIRED TERM OF GLEN DAHLBACKA.
It was noted in the discussion that it was very difficult to make
a selection because of the excellent qualities of the applicants.
A resolution of appointment will appear on the Consent Calendar
next week.
Cm Dahlbacka asked that letters be sent to everyone thanking them
for their interest in submitting applications for the Planning
Commission.
ADJOURNMENT
ATTEST
Mayor Tirsell adjourned the meeting at 12:20
~h, -m ~-.dtZ
M'ayor
~~~J~
y Clerk
ve ore, California
a.m.
APPROVE
CM-32-l43
Regular Meeting of May 3, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City council was held on
May 3, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Liver-
more Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:05 p.m.
with Mayor Tirse11 presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Dahlbacka, Kamena, Turner, Staley and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirse1l led the Counci1members as well as those present
in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
PROCLAMATIONS
(Hospital Week and
National Nursing Home Week)
Mayor Tirse1l read proclamations which proclaimed the week of
May 9th through 15th, National Hospital week, and National
Nursing Home Week.
(Armed Forces Week)
Mayor Tirsel1 also proclaimed May 8th to May 15th, Armed Forces
Week in the City of Livermore.
PRESENTATION OF CERTIFICATES
Mayor Tirsell introduced Jim Dimmick, who served on the Library
Board for eight years, and presented him with a certificate.
Mayor Tirse11 also presented Cm Staley with a certificate for
his service on the Planning ~mmission.
MINUTES - 4/19/76
P. 97, 8th paragraph, line 2 should read: do is to increase
the big line over the hill...etc. Line 6 should read: for
industry in the big pipeline it then decreases in size to the
30" pipe over the hill.
P. 98, first paragraph, line three should read: all go for
residential. This is not true...etc.
P. 98, fourth paragraph from the bottom, line 2 should read:
more difficult if the large pipe is reserved.
P. 98, 9th paragraph, 4th line should read: line and that
over the hill wi1lbe pressure driven, and that is the reason
it will carry more flow.
P. 102, 2nd paragraph, 2nd line should read: out occupations
of those who contributed. (Delete remainder of paragraph.)
P. 104, first line under (Council Calendar) should read Cm
Turner rather than Cm Staley.
P. l08, under (Appointment), line two should be Solid Waste
Management Committee rather than Garbage Committee.
CM-32-l44
May 3, 1976
(Minutes-4/19/76)
P. 102, 4th paragraph, leave the first sentence of that paragraph
but delete the remainder of the paragraph.
P. 102, 7th paragraph should indicate that 5% of $500 is $25.
P. 98, 3rd paragraph, line 2 should read: line they would have to
have a treatment plant for pumping the effluent into the pipeline.
ON HOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF APRIL 19, 1976, WERE APPROVED,
AS CORRECTED.
OPEN FORUM
(Jaycees Air Show)
Skip Claeson, representing the Livermore Jaycees, stated that he
would like to update the Council on their efforts to obtain insur-
ance to cover the clause in their insurance for the airshow. This
pertains to the clause that excludes the coverage of the performers.
At this time they have been unable to obtain insurance to cover that
exclusion. In retrospect to what the Council's guidance was last
week this means that they cannot put on an air show and that the
Jaycees will also lose approximately $2,000.
He asked that the Council reconsider the decision made last week
and allow them to obtain, from the performers, a hold harmless
agreement stating that they would not sue the Livermore Jaycees
for any damage which might occur to themselves or their aircraft.
Mayor Tirsell asked for a legal opinion.
The City Attorney stated that the problem with that kind of a clause
is that it is not the pilot of the aircraft that the City is con-
cerned about - it is the errors of the pilot who gets killed that
the City is concerned about. According to research done by his
department there is a problem in getting waivers for that type
of liability. If a pilot waives it and he dies, he is not the
one who is going to sue the City - it will be his family or someone
else. He would be happy to look into the matter to see if he could
help accommodate the Jaycees in accomplishing what they want to do
with some type of insurance for the pilots but in his opinion this
really does not alter the basic problems the City is concerned with.
Mr. Parness stated that the City's carrier has been out of town and
he will try to contact him again.
Mayor Tirsell wondered when the air show is to take place and it
was noted that it has been scheduled for this Sunday, May 9th.
Mr. C1aeson stated that the Jaycees went back to two carriers, both
of which had to go to Lloyds of London, and neither carrier has
heard from Lloyds of London, as of today. This would indicate
that Lloyds of London is not in favor of providing the insurance
or they would have contacted someone by now.
Cm Turner stated that Gene Morgan has indicated that 99% of the
insurances for this type of show excludes the pilot and that
even insurance from Lloyds of London would have the exclusion
clause.
Cm Dahlbacka asked the City Attorney if he is implying that a
hold harmless clause would not help at all, or is this something
that would be of some benefit?
CM-32-l45
May 3, 1976
(Jaycees Air Show)
The City Attorney explained that the City is not concerned
about possible liabilities that we pay if we lost. We are
concerned about the costs of an attorney to defend the suit.
Hold harmless clauses are fine if you have an entity that can
pay on the hold harmless but the City may not have an entity
that can afford that kind of a law suit.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL RECONSIDER THE MOTION MADE
LAST WEEK TO DENY, ON THE BASIS OF THE FACT THAT PAST INSURANCE
POLICIES HAVE HAD THE SAME EXCLUSIONS AND ON THE BASIS OF THE
FACT THAT THE APPLICANT HAS MADE EVERY EFFORT TO OBTAIN THE
KIND OF INSURANCE THE CITY WANTS, BUT HAS BEEN UNSUCCESSFUL.
IN ADDITION, MAKING THE REQUEST FOR A HOLD HARMLESS CLAUSE SIG-
NATURE FROM THE PERFORMERS; RECONSIDER THE DENIAL AND APPROVE
THE AIR SHOW. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM KAMENA FOR DISCUSSION
PURPOSES.
ern Kamena stated his understanding of what the City Attorney has
said, is that the City's prime concern is the cost of legal fees.
The City Attorney stated that this is basically the concern be-
cause insurance is purchased for this reason - not for the loss
that might occur. Before they can recover for a loss, they must
prove a dangerous condition of public property which means there
has to be something out there that is, in fact, dangerous. The
problem is that any wrongful death law suit can become extremely
expensive which would cause the City to seek and retain good, compe-
tent, personal injury counsel. If the City was found to be at
fault it would be responsible for attorney's fees as well as the
judgment at the end of the law suit.
Cm Dahlbacka wondered if it would be possible to get coverage
for air shows in the future and Mr. Parness indicated that this
is not know as yet, specifically. He has been told that it could
be obtained for a price.
Cm Staley indicated that he feels the City could do one of three
things: 1) reaffirm the motion made last week; 2) accept the
risks; or 3) ask for an indemnity for any damages the City might
have to pay, from the Jaycees, knowing that they could probably
not compensate the City fully for any damages that the City might
have to pay.
Cm Staley added that he would really like to see the air show
take place but if there were an accident the City would have to
pay for, it would bankrupt the General Fund. This is a huge
risk and in all conscience he cannot vote in favor,
Since the primary concern is legal fees, perhaps the Jaycees
would be willing to make an agreement with the City to indemnify
the City against any costs that might be incurred as the result of
a law suit.
Mr. Claeson stated that any indemnities the Jaycees might offer
would be absolutely worthless. They don't have that kind of
money and they can't even cover the $2,000 that they may lose.
Cm Turner stated that he would have to agree with what Cm Staley
has said and that he just couldn't vote for something that might
bankrupt the General Fund. He stated that he spoke with Gene
Morgan just today so he knows that he is back in town and perhaps
the Jaycees could contact him.
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that the Council could table the item until
later in the meeting if the Jaycees would like to contact Gene
Morgan this evening who may have some feeling concerning this.
CM-32-l46
May 3, 1976
(re Jaycees Air Show)
Cm Staley commented that as he recalls the Council's position, last
week, was that the Council would like to have coverage for the event
and the City Manager would see if it is available to the City through
our carrier. If it is available, it would be passed along to the
Jaycees at the City's cost.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE ITEM WAS TABLED UNTIL LATER IN THE MEETING.
(Railroad Relocation
Project - Complaint)
Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, stated that the railroad project has
caused displacement of businesses, people, increased taxes, and today
the PUC discussed the possibility of getting cars in and out of a
"wash rack" down on First Street near the railroad tracks.
It looks as if the problem of the wash rack will be settled but what
has not been settled is the increase costs on many things, including
Elba Leonard's tax assessment, etc.
He stated that Scott Street will be closed to First Street, which
will inconvenience people, and Purity Cleaners is blocked off and
is an inconvenience to customers.
All of these problems have taken place without any response from
the Council, to the taxpayers, and he feels this is fraud.
PUBLIC HEARING RE
REZONING APP. - FIRST
STREET & PORTOLA AVENUE
Mayor Tirsell opened the public hearing concerning a rezoning appli-
cation for property located at the corner of portola Avenue and
First Street requesting CN Zoning by Ensign-Bickford. The property
is presently zoned RS-4 (residential).
Letters supporting the request for rezoning were received from Phillip
pricket and Tony Deas, and letters of opposition were received from
Kenneth Marsh and Ira Ward, as well as a petition requesting denial
of the requested rezoning signed by 18 property owners in the area.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Council has received several petitions
as well as additional letters, as follows: A petition was received
from people in the Greenville North area supporting the proposed
shopping center, signed by llO residents. A petition with 67
signatures from people in the Kennedy Street area was submitted
in support of the shopping center.
A petition supporting the shopping center was received and signed
by residents of the Springtown area, and a letter of opposition
was received from Mrs. Fanzago of Hibiscus Way.
VERBATIM TRANSCRIPTION
OF PUBLIC HEARING
City Attorney: Mayor, can I say something before you start? I
believe there may be a certain amount of misunderstanding on the
part of the Council. You are under no obligation, whatsoever, as
a result of that court order, to do anything tonight. Okay?
Mayor: We understand.
CM-32-l47
May 3, 1976
(Verbatim Trans. of
Public Hearing)
Mr. Musso: This is an application for rezoning, a Council
initiated rezoning, to zone property located at portola and
First Street at the intersection, from present residential
to CN (neighborhood commercial). This site has been considered
to be a potential neighborhood commercial location for many
years. This plan and other plans have always showed a shop-
ping center at this location. There are other alternatives,
but generally it has been felt that up until recently, this
is the best location. As you know this, in the past, has
been zoned neighborhood commercial and after a period of time
and in accordance with the CN Zoning Regulations, the zoning
reverted back to residential and it was followed by an appli-
cation which was denied.
The difference between when the CN Zoning was first granted
and when it was later rescinded and when it was later denied,
was the probability or the lack of the probability that the
lack of the residential areas to the north would develop for
residential use. We didn't anticipate enough population in
the area to create a demand for a neighborhood shopping center;
particularly when there is a shopping area zoned in the Spring-
town area and another shopping center zoned at this location -
portola and Livermore Avenue.
In the original discussion before the Planning Commission, there
was some, but not much, testimony relative to the issue of
land use relationship to this site, to the adjacent property.
The original recommendation dealt primarily with the question
of supporting population and the issue of not allowing a shop-
ping center until some of the others, already approved, were
developed.
On this last hearing the P.C. did received significant testi-
mony against locating a shopping center at this location, re-
ceived from the adjacent property owners. So, in addition
to the original recommendation - that is to deny the commercial
because of the lack of population, etc., they also added a find-
ing that they felt that based on the testimony given by the
neighbors that this was not a desirable location for a shopping
center. The neighbors would object to it and on that basis it
would be detrimental to the adjacent properties.
Their recommendation, again, is for denial of the neighborhood
shopping center in that area.
Mayor: Does the Council have questions of the staff?
Cm Staley: Yes. It wasn't so much of George. I wanted to
ask if our Community Development Director had an opportunity
to review their proposal and if he had any comments on it.
Mr. Gorland: YYes, I did. In fact, I looked at the site just
today and based on the nature of the property across from the
street from the site it almost seems natural to rezone it for
commercial purposes. Now in addition to that, one of the things
that I questioned and one of the things that was questioned at
the P.C. meeting is, what is the status or what would happen to
the property between the proposed shopping center and the vacant
area between the shopping center and the existing residential.
That apparently is zoned residential and there is no petition,
to my knowledge, zoning it other than residential at the present
time.
CM-32-l48
May 3, 1976
(Verbatim Trans. of
Public Hearing>
Mr. Gorland: It appears to me that the fears of the people, that
there would be an encroachment on their property and disrupt them,
is not justified on the basis of the fact that there is a consider-
able distance between the proposed shopping center and the existing
residential. Now if and when there is ever a petition to rezone
that other area, which in discussion with the owners of the area
apparently there is no consideration at this time, then it would be
a matter of the P.C. and the Council to determine whether or not
that rezoning is justified. So apparently, one of the other objec-
tions to it was the objection of economic feasibility. Now knowing
how some of these supermarket firms operate and they don't select
a site lightly, I'm sure that they have made sufficient economic
studies to determine whether it is economically feasible or not.
Otherwise, they would not have selected this site, obviously, if
they felt it were not economically feasible. So apparently the
point that was made in the P.C. findings that the market is not
justified at the present time, apparently is the opinion, I would
say to a degree, is an uneducated opinion, as against the opinion
of the people who propose to put the money up to develop it that
I'm sure have far greater expertise in that matter. So beyond
that I have no further comments.
Cm Staley: Alright, thank you.
Mayor: Okay; is the applicant present and wish to speak? Not yet
Bill? Does the applicant want to speak?
Lloyd Haines: Lloyd Haines, l22l Stanley Boulevard. Good evening
Madam Mayor, Councilmembers; I represent Ensign-Bickford, the owner
of the land on which the proposed shopping center is placed. Mr.
Musso briefly went through the history, which we all know - that
the property was zoned CN back in 1972 and retained that until 1974,
at which time it was removed from the property and it was removed
partially because there was no proposed development at the time and
partially because of the concern about the population basis to sup-
port the center.
As Mr. Musso has also stated, this location has always been con-
sidered a prime location for a shopping center of this type, being
an intersection of two major streets - First and Portola.
We do feel that the proposed development will be harmonious with
the area. You have heard from your staff about the surrounding
area and with Codiroli Ford and the motels across the street in
the industrial park, I think it would be harmonious with the sur-
rounding neighborhood. Also, you have before you a negative EIR
showing there would be no detriment to the City as a result of this
project.
We have submitted to the Council, prior to this evening, a map showing
our estimate of the population base for this shopping center and we
have that figure placed somewhere at approximately ll,OOO people;
more than enough to support the center. Figures of 9,000 people
would be more than enough to support the center but we feel that
we have 11,000 people.
We intend, with this shopping center, to service the neighborhood
immediately adjacent to the shopping center and we are also very
cognizant of the problems of the North of I-580 Group and the
Springtown, in specific. Springtown will not have any development
out there for 20 years or more than that and the people do need
shopping facilities.
CM-32-l49
May 3, 1976
(Verbatim Trans. of
Public Hearing)
At this time I would like to present a petition from the North
I-580 Group with approximately ll4 signatures supporting the
center, and the second petition, which contains 62 names of
people who live on Kennedy Street, Briarwood Court, Scott
Street - people in the neighborhood right around the neighbor-
hood - there are 62 people on this petition, and if I might
present them. The first petition:
WE THE UNDERSIGNED, live in Greenville North, and
as we know, we have no shopping area for at least
5 miles, except for a small stop & shop grocery which
is not adequate for family shopping. Although we would
like to have a shopping center in our area, we realize
the population is not large enough to accomplish this;
therefore, a shopping center at portola and First Street
would reduce our distance by at least 2 miles, or 4 miles
on a round trip. We support a center at that location
at this time.
The second petition:
WE the undersigned, are in favor of the proposed shopping
center at First and Portola, approximately 470' to the
east of the existing residences because it will reduce
our distance we must now travel for our day to day shop-
ping, thus saving time, energy and expense.
The second petition of the people immediately surrounding the
center.
We feel that we have proposed a good project. We feel that the
neighborhood will be serviced. We have been before this Council
before and we have told you the concept of Tradewell stores, which
will be the major tenant in this shopping center.
Tradewell Stores is a discounted food chain which supplies signi-
ficant savings, below the price of Alpha Beta, below the price of
Luckys and Safeway; something that is important for this town. In
addition, Tradewell has a full line of merchandise, except for red
meat and in the proposal we intend to put a butcher shop, along
with all the neighborhood needs, such as shoe repair stores, barber
shops, and anything else that would support the surrounding neigh-
borhood.
Now we have previously delivered to the City Attorney, a deed,
deeding to the City of Livermore the 15 ft. buffer strip which is
located in the left portion of that map. That 15 ft. buffer strip
will remain as City property for infinity, and can be planted as
a permanent buffer.
As you have also heard from the staff, there is no proposed
development for the seven acres between the proposed center
on the right and the buffer on the left. There are seven acres
in there which are zoned residential and shall remain zoned resi-
dential and there are no plans to do anything with that. As you
also heard, for us to do that we would have to come back before this
Council. So I think there is no concern, or there should be no
concern, about Scott Street residents, that there will be com-
mercial development abutting their property.
Mayor: Council have questions of Mr. Haines?
Cm Dahlbacka: Helen, I have a question. In your map that you've
handed out showing the population area you include a considerable
CM-32-l50
May 3, 1976
(Verbatim Trans. of
Public Hearing)
area south of the tracks. I was wondering how people are going to
get across the tracks - there is just no way. How many population
figures were south of First Street on that map?
Mr. Haines: Not a considerable amount. I can't give you an exact
figure on that - I have not personally broken down the population of
north of I-580 and immediately adjacent to the parcel and on the
other side of the tracks, but it is not a significant amount. I
can't give you an exact figure on that.
Mayor: Is your opinion that people from Colgate and Hillcrest and
that area would drive down First Street and back out to your shop-
ping center?
Mr. Haines: Well, we are attempting to serve the neighborhood where
we are putting the center and we are cognizant of the fact that we
will be serving north of I-580, and we feel it is necessary to serve
that group; whether in fact citizens travel across the area that you
referred to is something that mayor may not happen. We feel that
the population surrounding the center, itself, and north of I-580
is more than enough to support the project.
Mayor: How did you compute your population?
Mr. Haines: The population figures were computed by the proposed
developer of the project, who is not here tonight.
Mayor: Perhaps we could ask George to write some numbers in for
us so we can have some population to discuss.
Mr. Musso: I do have the figures that we have generated.
Mayor: Okay, how about the Springtown area, or north of I-580?
Mr. Musso: The Planning Unit #l8, on the north of I-580, there
is proposed to be 2,938.
Mayor: Proposed, or are?
Mr. Musso: In the General Plan there is proposed to be 2,938
dwelling units. That is one of the service areas designed for
the shopping center.
Mayor: I think Mr. Haines is talking about current population,
George, what's the current population?
Mr. Musso: There are 3,000 people north of I-580 at the present
time.
Mayor: Okay, and how many live in the area north of Portola and
over to North Livermore?
Mr. Musso: They are in the staff report - everything north of
the railroad tracks is in the staff report.
Mayor: Okay, maybe we can just point out that area. While he
is finding that, Glenn, did you have more questions you wanted
to ask?
em Dahlbacka: No, I'd like to hear more testimony before we go on.
Mr. Haines: I had a few more brief comments, if I might finish.
CM-32-l5l
May 3, 1976
(Verbatim Trans. of
Public Hearing)
It is our position that the development of this center will
bring jobs to Livermore - construction jobs, jobs of people
who would be employed by the various stores, which is revenue
in the City; and also the business taxes that would be gen-
erated by the center will be additional revenue for the City.
I think it is important at this time, when there is no resi-
dential construction in this town, that there be some source of
income for the City and this we are ready, willing, and able to
proceed with and I think it's a good project for the City.
Mayor: Are there any other questions?
Mr. Musso: Just a comment. He stated that a negative decla-
ration was prepared. It was not - it was an EIR.
Mayor: Yes, I was going to say that. Lloyd, I think we have
more questions before we go to testimony. Maybe if we can get
some of these questions out it will solve some of the questions
for people who want to testify.
You have one firm contract, in other words, for the Tradewell
store. Is it not true that if you get the zoning that you do
not even have to build that one? That the zoning allows you
to build commercial at any time.
Mr. Haines: We have been imploring the City to let us build
this Tradewell store and this center for well over a year.
Mayor: I'm particularly interested in the center since I don't
feel that a grocery store is a center. Do you have other con-
tracts right now?
Mr. Haines: We intend to build out. My understanding is that
the Tradewell contract is the base and firm contract and other
contracts cannot be procured until we, in fact, get the zoning.
You have to get yourself a major tenant and once you get yourself
a major tenant and the zoning, then the rest will fall into line.
The rest are small uses, although I am told by our developer that
there are many people who have expressed interest, and this is the
testimony you heard the last time we were here.
Cm Kamena: Do you intend then, if the zoning is secured, to build
out the center even though there is only one commitment for a con-
tract for a tenant?
Mr. Haines: Well, there are requirements in the city that you do
build out a certain percentage of the center and certainly we will
have to comply with that. It is our intention to build a center,
yes.
Cm Dahlbacka: Isn't it true that there is about two plus acres
involved in the specific area you are talking about?
Mr. Haines: We are talking about 6.6. The total parcel is
approximately 14.5 acres. This parcel is 6.6 on the extreme tip
right in back of First Street in back of the service station down
on the triangle. There are open 7 acres and the buffer strip
brings it up to approximately 14.5 acres total.
CM-32-l52
May 3, 1976
(Verbatim Trans. of
Public Hearing)
Cm Kamena: But it is about 6.6 in consideration at the moment
for rezoning?
Mr. Haines: That is correct.
Cm Kamena: I'm wondering if that zoning is secured and that center
goes in, would the property owner continue to be Ensign-Bickford,
or is there something involved in this plan where it would be
split off and resold, or what are the specifics of it, if you
can reveal those?
Mr. Haines: May I have a moment?
Cm Kamena: Sure.
Mr. Haines: As far as the Tradewell is concerned they are pur-
chasing the property on which they are building, so they are not
a tenant. They will own that portion of it. The remainder will
be built out and owned by the developer and the owner of the land
and lease to various enterprises.
Mayor: In other words, Mr. Hutka testified last time that they
have a purchaser for the two acres, who is ready to develop, and
that's still true?
Mr. Haines: As far as I know, it is. As far as I know this has
been held in abeyance, pending the court decision.
Mayor: But those two acres would be sold off to the Tradewell store?
Mr. Haines: Yes.
Mayor: Any other questions?
em Kamena: I would like to ask Mr. Haines one more question, and
that is, why, in your opinion, would this not be a central business
district use?
Mr. Haines: Well, we are trying to serve the neighborhood on the
extreme portion of town that is not being served at the present time,
and the second point is that the Tradewell stores is such an operation
to sell food at the discounts that they do, that they cannot afford
the prices in a downtown central location. It is just not economically
feasible for them to do it. They are willing and they want to bring
a store into this town and give us the significant savings that they
can offer, but they can't do it in the downtown district.
em Kamena: But doesn't the very nature of that kind of operation
imply uniform appeal throughout the City rather than just for
neighborhoods?
Mr. Haines: We are directing the center at the neighborhood. I
can't prohibit someone from coming across town, as some people
travel across town to shop at their favorite Lucky or Alpha Beta.
All I can tell you is we are trying to serve the neighborhood, and
the neighborhoods which surround the center.
em Kamena: I was simply trying to differentiate between neighborhood
use and central business district use. I thought I understood you
to say then, or perhaps you implied or perhaps you did not, but
maybe you can clarify it for me. If the amount of money required
in a central business district area for that kind of operation were
reduced, would that in fact be what you would think would be a more
desirable location for it rather than a neighborhood center?
CM-32-l53
May 3, 1976
(Verbatim Trans. of
Public Hearing)
Mr. Haines: It can't be done. It can't be done - the price
of the land in a central business district will not support
this type of a store.
Cm Kamena: I think what I'm really looking for, is justifica-
tion that this is a neighborhood use not the kind of thing that
will appeal to the entire city.
Mr. Haines: We are talking about a center which will serve the
neighborhood. We are talking about a butcher shop, we are talk-
ing about a barber shop, we are talking about shoe repairs, we
are talking about a drug store, and we are talking about a super
market. That is neighborhood use. That is the intention with
this center down there. It's to serve the neighborhood down
there with those uses. Now I can't promise you that someone is
not going to cross town to shop at this particular store, but
all I can tell you is the uses that are going in or will go into
that proposed center will be such that they will serve the neigh-
borhood in which the center is built.
Mayor: Lloyd, I guess I have some problems with selling off those
two acres to the grocery store easement and intending to build
an integrated center with two ownerships. We have a shopping
center here in town that has been quartered and minimal uses in
it for many years because it was sold off in the Louis Shopping
Center. It had been a disaster until someone finally pumped
some money back into it. I have a lot of problems with that.
I'm wondering if you can comment on that; how you would intend
to build a Shopping center. Is Ensign-Bickford ready to go with
financing and build the center at this time?
Mr. Haines: Yes ma'am. It is the intention, and it would be
far more economically feasible to build it now - to build it
out at once, and that's what we intend to do. The fact that
there is going to be a joint venture with Tradewell and they
will own the parcel, that two acres that their store is going
on, will not prevent us from building. We are using the same
contract.
em Kamena: May I ask the City Attorney a question?
Mayor: Yes.
em Kamena: If that zoning was approved , could those conditions
be part of the approval?
City Attorney: You've got to remember what you're doing is you're
rezoning property. You are not rezoning property for a particular
use but rezoning the property for an overall use, taking into con-
sideration all the rest of the zoning in the City.
em Kamena: No time constraint is possible then?
Mayor: One year - they review it every year.
Mr. Haines: We would lose our CN zoning after one year?
Mayor: No, the City would just reserve the right to review it
after one year.
Cm Kamena: No more questions from me at this moment.
Mayor: Shall we hear testimony? Thank you, Lloyd.
CM-32-l54
May 3, 1976
(Verbatim Trans. of
Public Hearing)
Cm Turner: I have one question of Mr. Haines.
Mayor: Sure.
Cm Turner: Just to turn Marshall's question around, Bob, what if
the owner offered that as a - well, I'd better not do that.
Mayor: I would have some more questions, Lloyd. You're saying
that you are going to deed this 15 ft. strip to us and you'd like
us to plant it and maintain it - is that it?
Mr. Haines: I'd represent it to the City that we would plant it.
Mayor: And maintain it?
Mr. Haines: Well, I've never made that representation - no.
Mayor: Okay, I guess that's the end of my questions.
Mr. Haines: The l5 ft. strip was to insure that no development, no
development ever abutted on Scott Street property, of any sort, and
that was the purpose for deeding that lS ft. As I said before, we
have 7 acres here. It really doesn't matter, the project is down
7 acres, but on the other hand to insure that there will never be
any development, be it residential or parks or anything, that is
what that l5 ft. is for.
Mayor: Okay, could I see the hands of the people who wish to
testify on this item? People who wish to speak on this item?
Okay, let's see - I guess we will just start forming a line and
the maximum amount of time is 5 minutes. Otherwise, please have
something in writing for us and we will submit it into the testimony.
If you stand up and someone has said, before you something, you might
mention them by name and say I agree with so and so and not repeat
whole long items. According to Council policy you can have up to
5 minutes. If you will form a line and just keep filling in at the
back, either pro or con, however you wish to speak.
Mr. Older: These are the people who are with Mr. Haines?
Mayor: Either way - testimony either way.
Mr. Older: I'll form a line opposing it.
Mayor: You'll have to be second Mr. Older, Mr. Ames stood up first,
and right after him then. Okay. r
Mr. Ames: Mayor Tirsell and Councilmen, I've heard all of this
clap trap before. I have three petitions here. The first one
is:
We the undersigned, former Mayors of Livermore,
join the many other citizens of Livermore in their
petition requesting that the application for com-
mercalization of the area between Portola Avenue
and First Street be denied.
These are the former Mayors - there are just six of them, the other two
were out of town. I couldn't get them or I would have had them too.
The second petition:
We the undersigned residents of Springtown....
The reason for this is I heard so much about the people of Springtown
crying their eyes out for a shopping center, I thought I'd go over
and see. I went over. I didn't only see, but I heard.
CM-32-l55
May 3, 1976
(Verbatim Trans. of
Public Hearing)
We, the undersigned, as residents in the area of the
Ensign Bickford property located between portola Avenue
and First Street, respectfully request that the appli-
cation for commercialization of this area be denied.
This is III - this is neighborhood; Scott Street, and so on and
so forth.
Mayor: Mr. Ames, do you want to submit those over here so they'll
go into testimony?
Mr. Ames: Yes, of course.
Livermore, at the moment, has seven shopping centers. We are going
to start calling the place "Shoppersville". Two stores went off
First Street last week, only because of lack of First Street traffic.
That shouldn't be. All of you and I should be ashamed of that. We
could build that thing up and it can be done, but it won't be done
if we have another shopping center around here. We need that shop-
ping center - I need it like I need another arm.
I can think of a lot of other things, but I wouldn't dare say them
with all the ladies here. I think that's all I have to say, I'm
sure there are other people that have some things to say.
Mayor: Okay, Mr. Older put the mike down; remember, you don't need
it.
Mr. Older: I don't have to introduce myself.
Mayor: Go right ahead and introduce yourself and give your address
for the record, please.
Mr. Older: Okay. My name is william H. Older, but for 75 years I
have been called Bill. I now live at l524 Hollyhock Street out in
Springtown.
I'm going to begin where I left off on July 28, 1975. Before I
start, Mr. Haines, who is an attorney talks about "we", I assume
that he is being paid for what he is saying. I am also an attorney
but I am not being paid a damn cent for what I'm saying here tonight.
I say it as a citizen of Livermore.
In part, I'm going to reiterate what I said on the 28th of July,
1975. That's almost a year ago.
City Clerk: Discussion concerning microphone and the request that
Mr. Older not speak so loudly.
On July 28th, 1975, I said, and I'm going to repeat here what the
minutes said.
Bill Older stated that he has heard remarks such as rumors
that there will be a market place near the motel.
That's down at the motel that was, what do you call it, the Inn
there, you know.
Mayor: Holiday Inn?
Mr. Older: Yes, all we from Springtown were going to have a neigh-
borhood shopping center, and it is all outlined and so forth. We
never got it.
We heard later there was going to be one up the hill a little bit
and down on the approach, before you go onto 580, there by the
CM-32-l56
May 3, 1976
Cm Turner: Texaco?
Mr. Older: Yeah - but that never did develop either did it Dale?
He has spoken with a number of home owners of
Springtown and 80% of these people are not
particularly interested in whether they are
going to Luckys or some other place to pick
up their pound of bacon. What they are interes-
ted in is in getting the railroad moved back and
getting good stores into the new downtown develop-
ment area.
They would certainly be against any local develop-
ment that might draw away and limit or deter the
real progress of getting big stores into the down-
town area. People want a good store and a big store
such as Longs and good department stores.
Now where are the department stores? There hasn't been any yet
but the development of the railroad hasn't come through yet. It is
in process. The City has done a remarkable job. They have put two
overpasses in there, underpasses, and getting ready. It's now in
progress. Just within the last three months the Southern Pacific
Railroad finished its new circuit, isn't that correct, and they are
now in the position of instead of being a bunch of little birds while
we've got a neighborhood shopping center, it looks as though Livermore
is going to have a city after awhile.
My wife said the other day, why do we have to go over to Liberty
House or to go over to Bullocks? Why don't we have a good one
here in Livermore?
This is the sort of stuff that they are after that keeps us from
having it. We have too many neighborhoods and not enough central
business area, and that's exactly what we need. People want a good
store and a big store, such as Longs, and good department stores.
They want what they hope to get downtown, and that is what the
people of Springtown are waiting for. The people of Springtown,
as you can see, say today, the same thing that I said back in
July of 1975, nearly a year ago.
Now then, they talk about buyer. They talk about this Tradewells
or one of those things. It sounds from the way Lloyd Haines talks
that its another one of those Blair Stores. Now if Blairs couldn't
make it out on East Street where they were undercutting the market
and selling on a semi-wholesale business, and they moved out of
there, then what in the world is his kind of a store going to do
over here if they couldn't do it for the people that go out to
the area there on East Street - they go out there by the thousands,
could drop across and get their produce there, if they didn't make
a go of it then how in the world are they going to do it out here
at the corner of Portola at the intersection of Portola and First
Street.
One more sentence, and then I'm through.
Referring once again to July 28th, 1975, and I'm reading from the
minutes now, it says that Cw Tirsell stated on July 28th, 1975 that
she has been through three hearings on this issue - the issue is P.H.,
Rezoning First Street and Portola Shopping Center - I'm reading right
from it, itself:
...and it is very clear that the neighboring residents
do not want commercial development. It happens that
this is a very small public hearing...etc.
CM-32-l57
May 3, 1976
(Verbatim Trans. -
P.H. re Ensign-Bickford)
And a little later on, and this is going to be my finishing
blow, right to the center, and I'm going to quote:
The present Mayor of the city of Livermore, cw
Tirsell commented that the homes (the springtown
and the other area) were there many years before
this piece of property was annexed to the city.
Of course, consequently, we aren't interested - what we want is
a downtown City - not a bunch of villages strung around.
Mayor: Please refrain from any applause or any show of emotion.
Mr. Older: Oh, I've been through that before, never mind.
Mayor: If there are people who are speaking in favor of the pro-
posal we would like them to feel perfectly free to speak too, this
is a public hearing and both sides must be comfortable to speak.
clyde Highet, 1317 Hibiscus Way: In regard to the petition, I
covered four streets out of ten streets, which makes up the Spring-
town area itself -it does not take in Greenville West, Greenville
North. I did not have time and my health did not permit me to go
out to all of these places.
I had 99.9% of the people that I contacted, sign the petition to
deny a shopping center in this location. The peoples reason for
signing this for the denial is - when we do get any shopping, we
are well satisfied with our shopping at the present time when we
have to come downtown for banks, post office, and so on, and do
our shopping here in Livermore, we are well satisfied with what
shopping centers we have in the City at the present time. But,
as time comes on and the north side of I-580 does justify a shop-
ping center, which these people do want, then we want banks, post
office, and so on, and have a real shopping center. One store does
not say a shopping center. A shopping center takes in a multiple
of things, in which to serve the district in which it is put into.
Little stores only prolong a good shopping center in which we have
plenty of acreage at Springtown already zoned for commercial zoning.
I thank you.
Carrie Alexander, 338 Scott Street: Before I speak on the Ensign-
Bickford property I would like to thank those people on the Council
that I saw yesterday that supported the "Visit Old Livermore House
Tour". As coordinator of the 70 hosts and hostesses that showed
you through the homes, the lovely old homes that we had, I'm very
delighted to see your support of it. It's going to go to great
causes - one is a new foundation for the old May School, and anyone
who would like to help us pour cement this summer, I've got pencil
and paper to take names and telephone numbers.
Regarding the property in question, as a homeowner on Scott Street,
I would like to say that it is very discouraging to all of us with
homes within the vicinity of that property, particularly us with
homes bordering that property who will in no way benefit from the
eventual development of that land. We are, on the other hand, the
ones that stand to lose the most, financially. I contacted several
real estate offices in town and the facts bore this out - that our
homes will be devalued by that shopping center going in there and
we'll stand to lose our investments. Because of the fact that we
are like the majority of Americans and have most of our earnings
tied up into one thing, our own house, we feel that this is quite
unfair and we hope that you will not consider this to be rezoned to
CN. Thank you.
CM-32-l58
May 3, 1976
(Verbatim Trans. - P.H.
re Ensign-Bickford Prop.)
Cm Staley: Could I ask a question?
Mayor: Sure.
Cm Staley: I'm curious about this statement that several real estate
companies feel that a shopping center ....
Mrs. Alexander: The homes bordering the land, the closest to the
shopping center do not go for as high a price when they are sold,
as those even on the other side of the street. I would like, since
you asked me the question, to make another comment, unless that
doesn't answer you.
Cm Staley: It doesn't quite.
Mrs. Alexander: Alright, I was told - contacted because I am quite
concerned, and I know of several people who feel they have to sell
if the shopping center goes in because this is definitely going to
devalue their land. So I called several real estate people to see
if this was what would happen and they said all you have to do is
see what the prices are of the houses that border any of this type
development, and the ones that are even across the street will go
for more.
em Staley: But my understanding is that this proposed development
is several hundred feet away from the nearest residence.
Mrs. Alexander: I submit that this is right - what you say is true.
Mr. Haines very graciously made a point that this was going to fit
in very nicely with Milt Codiroli's Ford, down on First Street, and
it was going to fit with the PG&E yard down there, and the other was
going to remained zoned residential. I submit that this won't remain
residential.
Any developer that takes that property down there and puts that
commercial - you already have commercial on this side. There is
no way - it is a foot in the door. It's going to be commercial
behind us because no one is going to be putting new houses sided
on two sides by commercial.
Cm Staley: Well, my question is this. Then did you ask the people
that gave you this opinion, whether the shopping center was going
to be next door to the residences or 500 ft. away?
Mrs. Alexander: I told them that my home was two stories and the
house on each side of mine was two stories and it viewed the back
end of the land. We would have a two story view of the property
behind us, and that's exactly what I told them, and they said we
would have trouble.
The people across the street, on the other side of Scott, wouldn't
have as much trouble. I'm telling you I called to see, and that's
what they said.
Cm Staley: Okay, thank you.
em Turner: Not to pick on you, but I really hate to hear statements
like that made without some evidence as far as the people you talked
to testifying to that fact, because there are other areas in the City
of Livermore that I don't think that bears out.
Mrs. Alexander: They said that it does, and if you go and look, and
look particularly behind the Lucky's center and Vineyard, and that
is very dirty behind there, at the back of those houses, if you'd
care to go, and I figured that if we get a 15 ft. buffer strip and
CM-32-l59
May 3, 1976
(Verbatim Trans. - P.H.
re Ensign-Bickford property)
the rest of the land goes commercial, that's where everyone is
going to throw their garbage - right behind our house.
Kenneth Marsh, 322 Scott Street: My approach on this problem is
more of an aesthetic approach. I'm looking at the City from a
point of view of the parks, the entrances, the approaches, and
I took a little tour (it took a tank of gas) I took a tour of
the city, and if you can imagine with me, the various locations
coming into the city.
From the north we have Livermore Avenue. It's wide, it's land-
scaped, it is a divided road and it approaches in a residential
area. From the northwest we have porto1a Avenue. There is a
little business along that end which isn't good. It does end
at the Robert Livermore Park, which does help. From the east
we have Stanley Boulevard, approaching Oak Knoll Pioneer Memorial
Park. From the south, on Holmes Street, we have rolling hills
coming into a neat residential area. From the southeast, Livermore
Avenue, we have a Civic Center Park. From the east we have East
Street, and Pestana Park, and from the northwest, First Avenue,
we will have industrial on the left, commercial on the right,
we will have the end of a 15 ft. buffer zone gathering trash and
truant youngsters.
I ask you, is our concern for a more beautiful city, the wishes
of the residents, or for outside investments? Thank you.
Jerry Ball, 346 Scott Street: I'm the hi-fi set between the Boy
Scouts and the cello. Just a practical matter. I thought I'd
drive from portola and First out to Springtown and check it out
in terms of the distance. It measured out to l.7 - give it 2 miles.
I figured if I was going to be driving from springtown in that dir-
ection, I would be interested in how far it is and how long it takes
me to get there. About 6:00 o'clock tonight - 6:l5, it took me about
5-6 minutes to drive that distance. I drove from springtown in
North Livermore Avenue, then Junction, took a ride on Railroad, and
drove to Safeway - the Safeway, Alpha Beta area. It was about 3.8
miles, give or take probably 10%, something like that. It strikes
me that there is kind of a trade-off. I'm going to save 2 miles
and I'll go to a relatively small shopping center with a super
market and whatever, as opposed to taking - and by the way, the
time was about 8 minutes from Springtown into Safeway, and it
strikes me as a trade-off. Do I want to drive 8 minutes into
a full-fledged shopping center, or do I want to drive about 5 min.
and maybe 2 miles into something that I think -
I would agree with you Mayor, it is fragmentary. It would seem to
me like this would be the trade-off and if I were living in Spring-
town it would seem to me, perfectly reasonable to take the full-
fledged shopping.
Ruth Nuckolls, 3512 Murphy Street: I'd like to talk as a member
of the community who has been there a long time. We have lived
there as a first owner (it's almost 20 years); two of the six
people on our court have lived there that long. I believe four
of the people on Michell Court have lived there that long, and
a great many on Scott Street have lived there as first owners
of their homes.
We like the neighborhood very much. It's a stable neighborhood,
it's the kind of people we can run in and ask for the things we
might not have gotten at the grocery store - I don't go two blocks
away, I just go up the string. It is a quiet, cohesive neighbor-
hood. It seems fairly obvious by the number of people that come
here.
CM-32-l60
May 3, 1976
(Verbatim Trans. - P.H.
re Ensign-Bickford Prop.)
Charles Warren, 5877 Running Hills Avenue: I personally
talked to a large majority of people up there and all they
are saying to me were that they had been promised a shop-
ping center for, roughly, 5 years, and they would benefit
going to this shopping center on First and Portola because
it is shorter and it is going to be more convenient.
I talked to some people on Kennedy Street, and I would say
roughly 75% of the people I talked to told me that they would
benefit from a small shopping center, roughly for the con-
venience. I asked them, let's say in the middle of the night
or the afternoon, when you are baking a cake or something like
that, you don't want to drive down into town to buy a box of
flour or something like this, to where a small shopping center
like this would benefit the people.
A neighborhood food store would be great for the neighbors or
the residents and they would not only benefit from the con-
venience, they would benefit from the savings because they
would buy most of their food in their quantities. That's
roughly what this store would be.
It is a membership store and people that would get the mem-
berships would get flyers for all the savings and everything
for the week. I think that the shopping center would be a
good thing to have in the neighborhood because the majority
of people I talked to want this small shopping center. I
would have to disagree with Mr. Older, saying that all the
people from Springtown were mostly against it because I,
myself, personally, talked to a large majority of people
over there. I got the ll4 names from that area myself and
I only had two people tell me that they didn't want it, be-
cause they said it would be raising their taxes.
I tried to tell them that it wouldn't raise their taxes, it
would be a commercial tax and the City would be getting the
tax off of building this property, so I think I have to ask
you to move in favor of this because there are a large major-
ity of people that do want this shopping center.
Nick Chakakis, 320 Michell Court: I've lived there for 20
years, since it started, and I have a few questions that I
would like to ask this Council relative to this, and maybe
make a few statements in a nice courteous way, if I can,
please.
Mayor: You ask me, and I will answer the best I can.
Mr. Chakakis: One of them is that we are supposed to be
serving for the best interst of the City. Is this right
or not?
Mayor: Correct.
Mr. Chakakis: Okay. Now, if this City ignores all the
people that live up there and are against it, in addition,
that is one thing but if they support a center that is oppos-
ed by the people that live there, then we have to fall back _
is it good for the City. So I'm asking you, 'furthermore, if
they do put a commercial place in there instead of residential,
first of all your City taxes are going to be less than the com-
mercial people than if it is residential people. Secondly, if
a commercial business goes in there they are not going in there
for their health and it's a crock of crap when a guy tells you
he's going to do this and that for the residences and the people
living up there. He is going to pay taxes, whatever they are,
CM-32-l6l
May 3, 1976
(Verbatim Trans. - P.H.
re Ensign-Bickford prop.)
whether they're high or low and they will come from what he sells
the people, and that's the way any business is in this Country and
if you can't survive downtown.....
Now, the lady made a statement of lowering the property value on
your taxes which a few people questioned - lowering the value of
her property and the people living there. She gave legitimate
reasons which are true like the l5 ft. buffer zone can be just
a damn alley-way that they can drive across or dump their garbage,
which is probably the way it ends up. If they want to do it right
why in the hell don't they donate that property to the city. They've
got a hell of a lot of it there and make a nice park with it.
Now furthermore, if the Springtown people want a closer shopping
center you can drive down the road 1/4 mile past Codiroli's on
the right hand side of the road. There's a big sign there by Mr.
Hutka. All that place is commercial zoned, ready for lease. Put
it in down there. Now you must consider these people that are
living there - it does affect their property, both in the form of
taxes and in the value of their homes. They have everything invested
in them homes. They're not like the big commercial facilities.
That's all I had to say. Thank you.
Cm Staley: Could I make one comment on that? Namely, that l/4 mile
down the road there is no commercial property. I don't know how Mr.
Hutka has that zoned currently but that is industrial property.
Mayor: He has commercial on the sign.
Member of Audience: For commercial zoning, we have it right in
springtown. There is more acreage than what could ever be used
and what we need is a proper shopping center, not just some little
store and there is plenty of room in springtown where we need it,
on the other side of 580 and the people from springtown do not
care for a small store.
Mayor: Thank you.
David Madis, lOll Geneva: I own l2 houses on Trevarno Road which
is as close as the property on Scott Street, and I'm in favor of
this development for several reasons. First of all, I think a
couple of things that the audience is not aware of, and I'd like
to point those out. First of all, there is several hundred feet
before you get to those residents; secondly, where you see the
line between the shopping center and the open, which is a residen-
tial, it is a requirement of the City that there be a solid masonry
wall between the commercial that is this neighborhood shopping center
and the residential property.
So there is going to be a solid masonry wall. In addition, under
the new zoning for Neighborhood Commercial, there is going to be a
50 ft. setback between that wall at the edge of the commercial and
the commercial buildings. There is going to be 50 ft. there and
that's all going to be landscaped and I really don't think that
they're going to see that looking from their homes on Scott Street,
especially when there is already a l5 ft. strip, then there's several
hundred feet of open space that someday will, perhaps, be residential
and then there's going to be a solid masonry wall and then there's
50 ft. of plantings and setback that cannot be built on and then
there's going to be the commercial building and I really don't feel
that that's going to have a bad affect.
CM-32-l62
May 3, 1976
(Verbatim Trans. P.H.
re Ensign-Bickford Prop.)
I am reminded of the fact that every time we've talked about
Trevarno Road and when I've come in for a map, it has always
been in objection from the Council and it has always been an
objection from the Planning Commission that there are no ser-
vices out in that area and I think that this is a legitimate
attempt to put in some services between two major streets _
portola Avenue and First Street, and I don't think it's going
to have an adverse affect on property value.
If the lady who said that she was working on the tour of the
old homes, which I enjoyed very much, if that's really true
then all of the old homes that are mostly located in downtown
Livermore, and some of them that we toured, would have been
adversly affected by the installation of the 7-ll Store, be-
cause it is close enough. It is as close as Scott Street is
to those properties. Many of the fine old homes are located
near other types of commercial facilities and they are not
adversely affected.
I don't feel that the industrial zoning, and I wouldn't pro-
test the industrial zoning, on both sides of the homes on
Trevarno Avenue, I don't think that my property is going to
be adversely affected by the existence of commercial or indus-
trial property when it is properly conditioned by the City,
and in this type you have site plan approval, you have control
over vegetation, you have control over a solid masonry wall.
All of these requirements of the City and a lot has to do with
site plan approval but I'm confident that our shopping centers
in this City are attractive; they can be made attractive, and
I don't think that they detract from the homeowners whose
property lies nearby. They don't from mine. Thank you.
Andrew Holm, 5358 Iris Way: I've talked to several people up
and down my street. I haven't talked to the majority of the
people, because I haven't hit 400 houses, no way. Most of
the people out there have expressed absolutely no interest at
all. In fact, half of them don't even know that this stuff's
even going on, so therefore, that would indicate to me that
they don't care.
There's three shopping centers in this town right now that are
in bad financial trouble - Vineyard, the one on East Avenue,
and this thing down here, the one that just got some more money
pumped into it, but it's still all screwed up. They're suffer-
ing, each one of those centers, to my knowledge, I've been here
lO years, and each one of those centers have always had vacan-
cies of one type or another. They just can't find tenants for
these existing, supposedly shopping centers, which incidently,
these three centers are quite a larger scale than the center
that they are talking about putting in. As far as including
the ll,OOO population, it's my contention that you would have
to totally exclude Springtown and anything north of I-58D. That
is not a neighborhood shopping center. I cannot send my child
2 miles to get a quart of milk over a US Highway, an overpass
without a guard railing on the street side, and down another
state highway to pick up a quart of milk. Now this is not a
neighborhood shopping center. And, incidentally, nobody has
made mention, we do have shopping out in Springtown. Two of
the nicest people that you've ever met own that Palomart shop-
ping center out there, and they are good people and they are
fair as far as pricing goes. They are equal to 7-ll or any
of the other small mini super types of setups. So we do have
shopping out there. It's not as if we are strung high and dry.
CM-32-l63
May 3, 1976
(verbatim Trans. - P.H.
re Ensign-Bickford prop.)
I think if you realistically look, if anything has got to be
built, it's got to be built north of 580. Of course you might
not have to worry about that - we might be able to go over to
the world's most beautiful shopping center at Las positas City;
you never know, and they might have a lot better than we have
down here. To me, this center is going in an industrial area.
There's no future development for where this particular shopping
center is going. There's nothing here due to the super high
exorbitant fees to build anything in this town. Residential
building is virtually at a standstill. Even though that piece
of property behind the City is zoned residential, a man would
have to have a screw loose to hit a nail or pour a lick of ce-
ment on that piece of property.
It's my conte~tion, too, that if the shopping center booms like
the people who represent it seem to think, it looks like somebody
is going to have to come up with, $20,000, $30,000, $40,000,
$50,000 for a stop light at the corner of portola and First
Street.
As it is now, they get kind of minimum amount of traffic that
comes down portola and stops at First street. If this thing
blooms the way they say it is, I'm sure they are going to
have exits out portola and out First Street. They are going
to come out Portola, go around here, and everybody's going to
get broadsided. In the last few years they have had several
serious accidents at that corner with a minimum amount of
traffic. So the City's going to have to go some bucks there.
Like I told the Planning Commission at a previous meeting, it's
my contention that if this center is built here, all it's going
to do for the people north of I-580 is that the city's going to
come in, lower the speed limit, and it's going to take us that
much longer to get downtown. Thank you.
Dick Christmas, 394 Pearl Drive: I sit here and I've listened
to all this bassu about this and that and it looks to me like
those people that's so concerned that live at Springtown that if
they wanted to be a foot from everything up in the center of
Livermore, they'd have moved here. So I think it's up to you
City Councilmen to figure this out yourselves. The people that
you are concerned with is what we call low-income people and we
do have some low-income people, believe it or not, in Livermore.
I'm not one of them. I'm a senior citizen like these old couchers,
most of them. I'm concerned with the low-income people where
they can spend their dollar wisely, ge€ more for their dollar.
I'm concerned, and I hope you are too, and I know you are be-
cause you are good city Councilmen. I'm concerned that the
amount of jobs that's going to give young people in Livermore.
Now then, I live back on Pearl Drive. If he sells 2% cheaper
out there, I'll drive from there over there to trade. I'm
a conservative republican, believe it or not, so therefore,
I think that the shopping center should be; I know, I'm
concerned about my home and what I want there and what I
don't want there, but I've got to be more concerned for the
City and with the people who live in our City than I am myself.
If I don't, I'm not a good citizen. So I hope you consider this
thing and I'm sure these people wouldn't be spending their money,
hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars they told us is
going to close up in a year's time, so you've got to at least
take into consideration the unemployed that's here is Livermore,
the people it will give jobs. Take into consideration the low-
income people that will have a little better living and the young
CM-32-l64
May 3, 1976
(Verbatim Trans. - P.H.
re Ensign~Bickford Prop.)
people that it would give salaries. So I would just suggest,
I'm in favor of the shopping center going in. Thank you.
Don Burnham, 307 Scott Street: I'm here tonight to register
my objection to the proposed CN rezoning of the area that we're
speaking of. We moved into the neighborhood about three years
ago and one of our main considerations was that it was a quiet
neighborhood and I believe that any development of the area
other than residential, would appreciably increase the traffic
in the neighborhood, and also the noise level about the area.
The quietness of the area is already interrupted by the Ford
dealership"s paging speaker down the road, so any other develop-
ment would also infringe on our environment in that respect.
Also, this is the third public hearing on this matter and hope-
fully it will be resolved this evening for all concerned. Also,
in spite of my personal objection, in view of the unanimous
denial of the Planning Commission and their seven valid rea-
sons they submitted for the denial, only one of which was the
people's opposition to the project. I would encourage you to
also deny this rezoning once again.
There is a relatively low turnover in the neighborhood. It's that
type of neighborhood. As a whole, we just plain don't want this
commercial zoning in that area. We want it zoned as it was when
we first purchased the homes - as residential. Thank you.
Phil Prickett, 335 Scott Street: I am in favor of this shopping
center. I have shopped at prairie Market in Stockton and Lodi
and Concord, and I think they are a very good store. prairie Market
is owned by Tradewell - they are one in the same, and I would very
much like to see this store go in. Thank you.
Member of Audience: Would Mr. Prickett tell everyone who he works
for, please?
Mr. prickett: Did Carrie mention who her husband used to work for?
Mrs. Alexander: My husband did work for Coast Manufacturing.
Mr. Prickett: Coast Manufacturing is Ensign-Bickford - I work for
Ed Hutka.
Roman Bystroff, 330 Scott Street: I'm facing the property in ques-
tion. We have been at that property for some 15 years and I've now
heard almost every argument that I might have said so I'll restrict
myself to some personal views about it.
We remodeled our home many years ago, now, and placed a picture
window on the first floor and we have two bedrooms with a beautiful
view, which is the reason we moved there, of a field and the hills
in the background - not a house in site.
Somehow, when I moved there, instinctively, that was the value of
that property to me. I feel that today, if I were to place myself
in the shoes of another buyer corning to visit that house, it would
make a great deal of difference, how that field appears in the
background. That is it, in essence, except I want to rebut the
owner of Trevarno, who says that perhaps some sort of a masonry
wall and trees would make a difference.
CM-32-l65
May 3, 1976
(Verbatim Trans. - P.H.
re Ensign Bickford Prop.)
I maintain that the lay of that land, if you had a contour map
of it, would be more explicit, is such that we would still look
over the masonry wall straight down into the parking lot and any
way I visualize that property I see cars and I see a loss of pri-
vacy, and I see that perhaps I really don't want to live there
any more.
Bill Niven, 368 Scott Street: I join the opposition to the proposed
rezoning and I simply, in my own mind, ask the question, if the neigh-
borhood alone can support a thriving shopping center at this time.
Thank you.
Craig Lighty, 367 Scott Street: For all of the former reasons,
of course, that any of the neighbors of mine that have cited,
reasons that they do not care for this project, I am, of course,
in favor of those reasons - for the Council to turn down this
project.
However, some of the other reasons should be looked at. One of
the common ones is that any shopping center is usually situated
in a different position, such as a corner or on a street that
has a straight away, none with such a peculiar angle of two streets
coming together, such as First Street and Portola, which would
certainly make a traffic problem that the Council has to recognize.
I just think the output of people here tonight, I'd really be shocked
if the Council were to back this project.
People, also, that have spoken in favor, it seems to me have
certainly a different slant. Our slant is obvious - we live
on Scott Street, but the other slant of the gentleman just
speaking, ends up, works for Mr. Hutka's firm. The gentleman
previous to that, Mr. Madis, tells us he owns 12 pieces of
property.
Mayor: I don't think that's permissible because where people
work is not pertinent.
Mr. Lighty: Well, I think you should know where a person lives.
If he says he owns 12 pieces of property and lives adjacent or
close to this, and he lives two miles away, I think this should
be brought out. I thank the Council for considering this and I
hope they turn the project down. Thank you.
Mr. Haines: I really appreciate the view of the residents of
Scott Street, that they don't want any development abutting their
property. I think that's been clear - they want an open field,
and if we came in with a proposed residential development, which
the property is zoned at the present time, we would hear objections
for that. If we came in for any use whatsoever there would be
objection for it, because they have an open space right now, and I
appreciate that fact. But nonetheless, we are talking about serv-
icing a great deal of people and we are talking about putting a
shopping center that is in conformance with the Geeral Plan; it's
location has been talked about for many years, and it has always
been listed and it is at an intersection of two major streets.
I have heard reference to clap trap, that we are talking, that
we're not going to be building - we are here. We do want to build.
We are not asking for a rezoning without any intention of doing
anything with it. So I do appreciate the concerns that the residents
CM-32-l66
May 3, 1976
(Verbatim Trans. - P.H.
re Ensign-Bickford Prop.)
of Scott Street have, but I ask the City Council to consider the needs
of the residents out in Springtown and north of I-580, and there has
been quite a magnificent orchestrated approach here tonight by the
Scott Street residents, and I think that if we are looking at this
we should look at it, not just of the homes adjacent to the property,
but take a look at that whole area in town and see whether, in fact,
this center will serve that entire area. I think if you do look at
that, you will see that it will.
Mayor: Thank you Lloyd. Is there a motion to close?
Barbara DiGrazia, 352 Scott Street: I live at 352 Scott Street and
have for 20 years. I would like to make a couple of statements.
I think it was significant tonight that plaques were given to
members of the commissions that served this community, one of
which was to a former Planning Commissioner. Obviously, the
City Council holds the Planning Commission in some esteem, and
the P.C. has given their recommendation against rezoning. I
submit that for your recommendation.
David Eller, 3797 Oregon Way: I don't live in the vicinity of
that area but I do look, taken over all the view of the City,
and I have attended, I believe, all the public hearings on this
matter, and have testified before, at the Planning Commission
and I believe this was all said, what we are saying today, almost
verbatim, at the Planning Commission.
It was very well researched by the Planning Commission and I sort
of have a feeling, with the new Council, I don't know if it is a
true feeling, but I have a sort of sneaky suspicion that the new
Council isn't really reading the P.C. minutes, and I hope that
they will in the future because there are probably reams of infor-
mation on it and if they just study it I think they can come to
no conclusion but to deny this rezoning to commercial. Anybody
would have to have their head up in the stars to believe that this
open area, next to the proposed shopping center, would not be develop-
ed in the future because they would corne back and say, well look, we
have the shopping center, we've got Codiroli Ford, we've got Town
and Country, we've got all these other things, we've got to put
this ditch digger outfit in there, or something.
I do sYmpathize with the people north of 580. I heard them at the
Planning Commission. They were out in force, they were screaming
about they wanted a shopping center, etc., etc.
I do want to tell them, in spite of what Ensign-Bickford has been
saying out there, that this is not a regular supermarket and they
should be clear on this. This is not a regular supermarket and I
firmly believe that this is not intended to be a neighborhood super-
market. They may say this, but it's made to appeal to people that
are driving along 580 - they might just not have been able to pur-
chase a piece of property on 580.
It's too bad that we can't have smaller supermarkets located in
town like Riverbank and Oakdale, in the San Joaquin Valley, instead
of being gigantic supermarkets like Safeway and Alpha Beta. They
could be the small supermarkets like Safeway used to be when it
was in the middle of the downtown.
I think that just about states it.
Mayor: Thank you, David. Anyone else?
CM-32-l67
May 3, 1976
(Verbatim Trans. - P.H.
re Ensign-Bickford Prop.)
Ira Ward, 3536 Murphy Street: In regard to Mr. Haines' remark, I
wouldn't object to homes out there. Neither would anybody else.
Mayor: Any other testimony?
CM TURNER MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, SECONDED BY CM STALEY
AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RECESS
Mayor Tirsell called for a brief recess, after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present. The
Council returned to discussion of the proposal for rezoning of
the Ensign-Bickford property.
Mayor: The public hearing is closed. Does the Council want
to open the public hearing for further testimony?
Mr. Haines: May I just make one statement?
Mayor: That's what I'm asking the Council. Is it okay with
the Council? Consensus to hear from the applicant?
Councilmembers: Sure
Mr. Haines: Madam Mayor, the last time this matter was before
the City Council, there was vocal support from north of 580 and
there was very, very vocal support, as you will recall, of the
people that were in here. It was at least 10 to 1 in favor of
the project. A year, or better than a year, has lapsed since this
matter first came before you and there has been a problem in communi-
cation and people are placed in a position where they were vocally
in support of the project. Their views were expressed before
the Council, and the Council decided at that point that they
were not in favor of the proposed rezoning.
I would request, at this time, a two week continuance. The
purpose of this continuance is to poll the people north of
580 and see exactly what that support is, if the support is
still there. All the information that I have, is that the
support is still there and I think that the matter has dragged
on so long that through attrition we have lost a lot of people,
feeling that nothing is being done in the City Council.
I would request a two week continuance at this time in order
to bring additional testimony to this Council.
City Attorney: Before the Council considers a two week contin-
uance, I would like an agreement by Counsel on this law suit
that's involved, to stipulate to a 30 day continuance then, on
the appeal before the Court of Appeal, which is 30 days in
advance of the 30 days we just started running about a week
ago.
Mayor: I think the Council has to consider this matter, Bill,
(Mr. Older) if we open it up for further testimony we will
notify.
Mr. Older: I'm just opposing what he said.
Mayor: Sure. The Council has a request for a two week continu-
ance. We have advertised this public hearing in front of the
Planning Commission, there was ample opportunity for anyone to
come there; it has been advertised twice in front of this Council
by agenda. Is it the wish of this Council to reopen the public
hearing and continue this matter?
CM-32-l68
May 3, 1976
(Verbatim Trans. - P.H.
re Ensign-Bickford Prop.)
Cm Dahlbacka: Mayor Tirsell, I think that we should expedite
this matter and finish it off 'tonight. It has been before us
so many times. We have an indication that there is opinion
on both sides of the issue in the Springtown area. I don't know
that polling it is going to make any difference, one way or the
other. I think that the people have had an ample opportunity
to testify on this matter and I would like to make a decision
tonight and get on with the other business of the Council.
Mayor: Is there a consensus on that?
Cm staley: If I could say something on this issue. The last
time that this was before the Council, I found that there was
very strong testimony from some of the people in North I-580,
that they did, in fact, want this shopping center.
In fact, that was one of the things that was quite influential
in taking the position I did at that time. I'm concerned about
a two week delay. I think all the people are here tonight. On
the other hand, I'm also concerned about that position - I don't
know what that position is anymore. At the last hearing it
was very clear that the majority of the people out there seemed
to be in favor of this particular shopping center, and to me
that was influential.
Tonight, I would have to say that that position does not come
across clearly. I don't know if a two week continuance would
help that or not, but it is a real concern to me that that issue
isn't clear tonight. I guess I would go along with a continuance
for that reason.
em Turner: I didn't hear the last part of that, John.
Cm Staley: I said that position is not at all clear to me
tonight. There is testimony on both sides of the issue and
I'm really puzzled as to what has happened. If two weeks
would help iron that out, I would be willing to go along with
two weeks.
Cm Turner: Well, I guess - let me give you my position and
exactly how I feel on it at this point. Okay, we have been
over this I guess two or three times.
When I was on the Planning Commission it was zoned, at that
time, commercial and then it went back to residential because
there was no interest in a shopping center. Then there were
subsequent hearings to try to have it rezoned.
The last time around, back in July, there was about 50-50 split
as to favorable and unfavorable to the rezoning. The area I
was concerned about, the Scott Street residents, but I also
had a concern for the Springtown and the Greenvil1e areas and
I think I realized there would be no shopping centers out there
for many years. Tonight I have heard an overwhelming testimony
opposed to it. When I say overwhelming, everybody but three
were opposed to it.
Helen has pointed out that this is a matter of public record,
there have been hearings, the Planning Commission has held
hearings, there was going to be a hearing at the City Council.
According to certain people, the information was well known in
the Greenville area and in the Springtown area, and obviously,
in the Scott Street area. Mrs. Alexander was down to see me
today to tell me about that.
CM-32-l69
May 3, 1976
(Verbatim Trans. - P.H.
re Ensign-Bickford Prop.)
I believe, in my heart, that it is probably a good area for
a shopping center. I believe it woutd serve the Springtown
and Greenville area and the Scott street area. I believe
that the residents are sufficiently protected by our ordi-
nances concerning encroachment; but the overwhelming testi-
mony tonight is that we don't want it.
I hear it from Springtown, I hear it from Greenville, I hear
it from the area in question. I don't see any reason to delay
the issue another two weeks. I think it is a very emotional
issue, both for the Council, the applicants, and the residents.
My position tonight will be that I think the area has been
given fair consideration for zoning, it is obvious to me
that the majority of the people in attendance are not in
favor of it, I think I have to represent the best interests
of the residents; the people of Livermore, and my vote tonight
will be to deny the request for rezoning in the area.
Mayor: So you're not in favor of a continuance?
Cm Turner: I am not in favor, I see no reason to continue.
Mayor: And I am not, so that would be a majority.
Cm Kamena: There's no point in my commenting, then, under
the circumstances.
Mayor: Alright, then we will proceed.
Cm Dahlbacka: I'd like to make a motion.
CM TURNER MOVED TO DENY THE REQUEST.
Cm Dahlbacka: Dale has moved to deny. Are you basing it on
the Planning Commission recommendation and the seven findings
that they made?
Cm Turner: I will withdraw it - you make it.
Cm Dahlbacka: No. That's fine. That's your motion then?
MOTION WAS WITHDRAWN AT THIS TIME.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO ADOPT THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDA-
TIONS, LISTING THE SEVEN FINDINGS, FOR DENIAL WITH THE ADDI-
TIONAL CONDITION THAT THE UNUSUAL ANGLES OF THE MAJOR STREETS
CAN LEAD TO TRAFFIC PROBLEMS ON THE SUBJECT SITE.
Cm Dahlbacka: This might be an additional finding that we can
discuss.
Mayor: I think that would alert any future considerations,
that traffic problems do exist and would need proper con-
sideration.
Mr. Haines: Point of order, Madam Mayor, please. Is it in
order for the applicant at this time to withdraw their request
for rezoning?
Mayor: I would have to ask the City Attorney.
CM-32-l70
May 3, 1976
(Verbatim Trans. - P.H.
re Ensign-Bickford Prop.)
City Attorney: Sure. They can always withdraw it before a vote
is taken.
Mr. Musso: This was Council, 'Planning Commission initiated, not
application. It was initiated by the Planning Commission for the
Council - not the applicant. There was no applicant involved here.
Mr. Older: The public didn't do it - the Council did it.
Mayor: The Council has initiated that.
Mr. Haines: I believe that the action was initiated by the applicant
with the request for reconsideration.
Mr. Musso: He did not pay the fee, did not pay for the public hearing;
so I would say that was the City's Council initiated.
Mayor: Bob, is that true?
City Attorney: I'm inclined to think that the applicant asked for
reconsideration, at which time we took the position that there would
be a new hearing, and we did not want to reconsider it because of the
pending court case and because we didn't feel the court case had any
substantial impact on it but it was, as far as the Council was de-
termined, a request for a zoning reclassification, so I would have
to disagree with the Planning Director. I think that was the appli-
cant's request, not Council initiation.
Mr. Musso: Should there have been a fee charged then?
City Attorney: I have no idea.
Mayor: Bob, if that's the case and the Council would like to finish
the item and vote on it, though the applicant has withdrawn, is that
proper?
City Attorney: Well I don't see that there is any objection at all
with him withdrawing and for the Council to table the whole motion.
Just forget it.
Mayor: But we do have a court case on the matter.
City Attorney: But you do have a court case on the matter.
Irrespective of what you do tonight that court case will continue,
especially if you vote against it. If you vote against rezoning
tonight it will have absolutely no affect on the appeal. The
appeal will continue. We will file an appellant's...
Mayor: But then we will have lost all this work, all the people's
time coming out, back to another public hearing. If the court
case appeal is still against us we will have to go back through
all of this and ask these people to give testimony. Is there a
way we can finish this item tonight so that we will have, in fact,
done what the court ordered us to do?
City Attorney: Nope.
Cm Staley: Can I make a comment on that? It seems to me that if
the applicant, who asked us to reconsider this and we did in fact
reconsider, now wishes to withdraw that consideration - to withdraw
the application, that seems to me to pretty well dispose of the
issues in a court case.
CM-32-l7l
May 3, 1976
(Verbatim Trans. - P.H.
re Ensign-Bickford Prop.)
City Attorney: No, it really doesn't because the court man-
dated the Council to reconsider. We wanted to avoid that
reconsideration because we didn't feel there was any basis
for the court's decision. It's just bad case law and so we
avoided that. That's why we requested that the Council take
this as a direct request for rezoning. What you consider and
what you do tonight is considered to be a separate item, totally
apart from that court case, as far as we're concerned.
Mayor: In other words, if their appeal is upheld, we have to
go right back through this whole thing.
City Attorney: That's correct, but I wouldn't lose any sleep
over whether the appeal will uphold the Superior Court decision,
because I don't think it will.
Cm Dahlbacka: I don't know, I just have a feeling like I'd just
like to see this thing settled by a Council vote. After sitting
here, leaving people wondering what's going to happen and if it's
going to be coming back again and again and again.
be comin
Mayor: I think the people deserve to know how this Council feels
about that land, and reiterate our position.
city Attorney: You can go ahead and take it on. If they want to
request that you back off of it, I don't think you're obligated
to do so. You have an application before you on a recommenda-
tion, and a report from the Planning Commission. If you want to
act on it you can do so. It's kind of a meaningless act in a
way, but it would express the Council's intention, at this time,
again, if that's what you so desire.
Mayor: I feel that the people who have given testimony before
the Planning Commission and the Council deserve an answer on
this issue. Is there any other discussion?
Cm Turner: You haven't had a second to the motion.
Mayor: Okay, Glen has a motion on the floor to support the P.C.
recommendation for an eighth finding that the angles of the two
major - thinking that as a major street - the angles of the two
streets. I'm not sure they are both major. Are they?
Staff Member: Indicated they are.
Mayor: They are both major. The angles of the two major streets
pose traffic circulation problems.
City Attorney: May I make one more comment? This is a legisla-
tive act. As a legislative act you are not obligated to make
any particular findings in your resolution. There are certain
statutory findings that are created by the Government Code and
by your local ordinances. Beyond those statutory findings I
don't think you're obligated to make any findings so I wouldn't
even worry about that, especially if you intend on turning down
the rezoning.
Mayor: Okay, there is a motion, I WILL SECOND THE MOTION. There
is a motion and a second to deny the rezoning, based on the P.C.
recommendations. Any further discussion?
Cm Turner: Mayor? I have one last statement that is not in the
record. The president, or the person that I think is still the
president of the I-580 Group was in the audience. I believe he
has left now, and they were a very vocal group for approval of
this last time. They were here but without testimony. I think
that should be a matter of record.
CM-32-l72
May 3, 1976
(Verbatim Trans. - P.H.
re Ensign-Bickford Prop.)
Member of Audience: They gave up.
Mayor: Any other discussion?
Cm Staley: I would like to say something at this point. I favored
looking at this application again because as I said earlier, the
north of I-580 and the Greenville group seemed to me to have a very
strong argument for having shopping facilities in that area of town.
It seems unlikely that they will ever, or in the near future, have
shopping facilities north of I-580, and that group, as a whole,
indicated that they would prefer to have this area zoned Commercial
Neighborhood and have some shopping facilities there, in the near
future, rather than take a chance on what would develop north of
I-580 in the distant future.
Under the circumstances, where the testimony tonight simply has not
borne out that to the extent that I would like it to, even though I
would have liked to continue this to find out if that really repre-
sented their opinions, based on the testimony before us tonight, I
really have to go along with what I sense is the majority of the
Council.
Mayor: Any other discussion.
Cm Dahlbacka: Helen, I would just like to make one statement.
Most of us here have worked on the new CN Ordinance, and in the
purpose of that ordinance it clearly states that it is intended
that such shopping facilities, that is neighborhood shopping
facilities, shall be designed in such a way as to be operated
completely compatible to and harmonious with the character of
the surrounding residential areas, and shall provide only those
services which are intended to serve the one or more neighborhoods
of which it is a part. I think this is the intent of all the neighbor-
hood shopping centers that we have put in so far, and I can't find
that the area served by this rezoning is, in fact, sufficient size
to justify that rezoning to Neighborhood Commercial; that, in fact,
the uses proposed are not neighborhood commercial uses. On that
basis, I think just because it basically goes against what I think
the general philosophy of neighborhood commercial uses are, I'm
going to vote against it. I just wanted that for the record.
Cm Kamena: I don't see any reason to further chastise the proposal
and I therefore would like to call for the question.
Mayor: I haven't stated yet - do you mind if I make a statement
for the record?
Cm Kamena: Concurred.
Mayor: I will make it very brief. In relationship to this I think
the City has an obligation to maintain residential areas in as nearly
a precise manner as possible, unless there is an' overwhelming good
to the entire City. For instance, I can see neighborhoods that
maybe see a use in the neighborhood that will benefit an entire
city, and because of entire city consideration, one neighborhood
may receive the use.
We had that happen on East Avenue with the Fire Station, which will
benefit the entire section of the City. However, the Council is
very careful to listen to what the people have to say; we even
purchased another piece of land and moved the Fire Station as far
as possible from the residences. This Council, through the years,
,
CM-32-l73
May 3, 1976.
(Verbatim Trans. - P.H.
re Ensign-Bickford Prop.)
has done its best to listen to neighborhoods, and I must say
that this neighborhood is perhaps the most vocal and the most
interested in their neighborhood. I would like to congratulate
you upon your civic pride. Many, many nights we sit with items
here and no one from the neighborhood is speaking, and we have
to wonder what you're thinking out there - what you want, what
do you like, what do you agree? Perhaps you are disgusted about
having to come down to the Council and talk on items in your
neighborhood, but I would say that that's exactly what the
Civic's teacher was telling you. If you believe in participa-
tory democracy you'd better participate, and I congratulate you
upon doing so. I intend to vote in favor of the motion, and
I will call the question.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CONTINUED DISCUSSION
RE JAYCEES AIR SHOW
- INSURANCE PROBLEMS
Mayor Tirsell stated that the discussion concerning the Jaycees
Air Show and the problems of insurance was tabled earlier in the
meeting and she would request that the item be brought from the
table at this time.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO TAKE THE ITEM FROM THE TABLE, SECONDED BY
CM STALEY, AND PASSED BY 4-1 (Cm Turner dissenting).
Bill Archer, past president of the Livermore Jaycees, stated that
they would like to ask the Council to talk to Gene Morgan and have
him exPlain the pOlicy.
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that the Council asked that the Jaycees ask
Gene if a rider could be obtained.
Gene Morgan, insurance carrier, stated that Mr. Parness called
him earlier in the evening to explain that a problem had arisen
and wondered if there would be any way the City could obtain
coverage that would remove the exclusion for participants in
the air show coverage, that the Jaycees are securing or attempt-
ing to secure. He has checked all his sources and there is no
market available to him to remove the exclusion. He stated that
he could not advise the Council what to do or not to do, rela-
tive to allowing the air show but to merely explain the facts,
as follows.
The airport coverage has for years had air show exclusion on the
policy for various reasons, and all airports have this type of
coverage because it is not reasonable to ask the taxpayers to
pick up the additional coverage for an air show. The major
insurance carriers do not write air show coverage; therefore
this type of coverage mu~t be obtained from Lloyds of London.
Mr. Morgan then explained coverages used in the past, which
also excluded coverage for participants, and the type of
coverage that can be obtained at this time.
Air shows are being put on and since the insurance is not
available with the participants exclusion removed and there-
for they must be in shows with the participants exclusion
included. Other cities and Councils are doing this and
this decision would be up to the Council.
CM-32-l74
May 3, 1976
(re Jaycees Air Show)
Mr. Morgan stated that to his knowledge this type of coverage is
not available, and secondly, if air shows are still being presented,
and he is sure they are, he would presume that the exclusion is
included.
Cm Dahlbacka commented that there is a motion on the floor to
reconsider, which was seconded by Cm Kamena.
Cm Dahlbacka added that a good point is that the City is asking
for something that can't be obtained and that other cities are,
in fact, going ahead with their air shows. It would seem to be
there is some risk in the process of living and you can't insure
against everything. Also, every reasonable effort has been made to
obtain insurance that is comparable to insurance that is used else-
where. He would hope that the City could also get a signed waiver
from the participants to help to some extent. In his opinion the
Council should reconsider, and this would not be unreasonable.
Cm Turner stated that he would support the position expressed by
Cm Dahlbacka.
Cm Staley stated that he really feels terrible about this because
if it were his money he would be in favor of it, but in all conscience
he cannot vote to place the credit of this City and municipal resources
finances on the line with even the small chance that there is any sort
of accident. The risk to the City is catastrophic.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she shares the concerns of Cm Staley and
while this is very late for the Jaycees and places them in a very
difficult situation she cannot risk the City General Fund in this
manner. Almost every week the City is sued, even when the Fire
Department responds to something to help out, and in good conscience
she can't vote in favor of the motion.
Paul Tull, stated that he would like to suggest establishment of
a non-profit corporation to run the air show, exclusive of the City.
If this were done, the participants of the air show would be respon-
sible for themselves. They would have to have the insurance and pay
up.
Mayor Tirsell explained that the problem is that they would be using
the City's airport and our people would be putting gasoline in the
planes, etc.
Cm Kamena stated that he would have to agree that he cannot accept
the risk on behalf of the taxpayers, especially if it means running
te risk of bankrupting the City treasury.
Don Miller, 2862 Waverly Way, stated that someone mentioned a
performers waiver and he would like to know if is possible to
run an air show with requirements that the performers sign a
waiver, and if they do then the insurance problem goes away.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Council has been through that problem
and the problem is their heirs. They cannot sign away the right
of the heirs to sue.
Cm Turner stated that it looks as if the vote will fail anyway and
he would have to agree that he can't accept the risk to the taxpayers
if anything should happen.
CM-32-l75
May 3, 1976
~/
(re Jaycees Air Show) ~~'
Cm Dahlbacka indicated that it is a little irritatingjthat there
is a profit involved here to the point that we aren't ~illing to
take risks for anything, under any circumstances, and~ves addi-
tional power to other people to run our lives. Next thing we
know we will have insurance bills that rise lOO%. He is distres-
sed that something like this cannot go on even though other munici-
palities and other air shows run the same kind of coverage. This
does not seem reasonable to him.
Ken Johnson, 556 Bristol, past president of the Livermore Jaycees,
stated that he is very upset and he would hope that he can remain
cool. He has worked on seven air shows and he is really upset
with this Council. The logic of the Council baffles him, upsets
him, and in his opinion he voted for the wrong people on the Coun-
cil and in a couple of years the citizens may have a chance to
rectify that. He cannot see when we operate, in a day of contacts,
that there isn't some stability. They have been doing the same
thing for seven years, the coverage is the same, last year they
had additional coverage and didn't know it. Apparently that was
a mistake and they shouldn't have received such a good insurance
policy.
In his opinion the Council is stiffling improvement and if he had
known that he wouldn't have delivered the insurance policy to the
City Attorney. They didn't have it last year until the day after
the air show, and the same the year before. This year they re-
ceived it three weeks early, and they get no air show.
MOTION FAILED 1-4 (Cm Staley, Turner, Kamena and Mayor Tirsell
dissenting) .
COMMUNICATION
RE AB 3785 - BART
A letter was received from Robert S. Allen, Bart Director,
to inform the Council that the BART Board of Directors voted
to support AB 3785 which would extend the half-cent sales
tax to provide a continuing base of financial support for
BART's operations.
CM TURNER MOVED TO SUPPORT SB 3785, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA
AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
COMMUNICATION RE
LAVWMA PIPELINE
The Council received a copy of a letter sent to the Environmental
Management Task Force by Supervisor Cooper concerning the LAVWMA
pipeline. .
The letter was noted for filing.
COMMUNICATION FROM SCHOOL
DIST. RE SURPLUS SITE
A letter was received from R. F. D'Ambra, from the School Dis-
trict, informing the City that the Board of Education has de-
clared a 9.89 acre school site at Olivina and Starling Avenue,
surplus property and are offering the site for sale.
CM-32-l76
May 3, 1976
(Surplus School Site)
Mr. Parness stated that the land declared surplus by the School
District is adjacent to land the City has purchased in the past.
MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO REFER THIS ITEM TO LARPD, SECONDED BY CM
TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Cm Staley commented that he is not opposed to referring the item
to LARPD but he would question whether or not the City would have
the funds to purchase the site even if LARPD did express interest.
LETTER OF RESIGNATION
A letter of resignation from the Social Concerns Committee was
received from Quintin Ramil, an alternate.
The item was noted for filing and the staff was asked that Mr.
Ramil be sent a letter of thanks for his help.
CUP APP. RE CAR WASH
ON THIRD STREET
Mr. Parness commented that the applicant of the CUP for the car wash
on Third Street has requested a continuance.
Mr. Musso noted that there was a lot of public testimony concerning
this item at the Planning Commission meeting and perhaps the Council
would want to schedule it for a public hearing.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO SET THE ITEM FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON MAY 24,
1976, SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Cm Staley asked what the P.C. recommendation was and Mr. Musso noted
that the recommendation was for denial of the application. Cm Staley
stated that in his opinion it is not necessary to review the applica-
tion and hear all the public testimony again. The Council has just
been through two public hearings which ended up with the same opin-
ion as the Planning Commission's. He would be inclined to go along
with the recommendation of the P.C.
MOTION PASSED 3-2 (Cm Staley and Kamena dissenting) .
REPORT RE DOGWOOD
PARK SITE
Mayor Tirsell explained that the Public Works Department people
have conducted a survey of the residents who live adjacent to
Dogwood park and the results of the survey have been submitted
to the Council indicating a fairly even split as to those who
want the park and those who do not.
The reason the park was bought was because of public testimony
from the neighborhood indicating that they would like to develop
a park. This has not corne about and now the City is experiencing
vandalism and other problems. Mayor Tirsell asked if the Council
would like to take any action on the item or to make direction to
the staff.
em Turner stated that he originally brought up the item due to a
complaint from one of the residents in the area and he would like
to hear testimony. The report is inconclusive as to the 50-50
opinion.
CM-32-l77
May 3, 1976
(re Dogwood Site)
Alex Glavinos, 46l Oriole Avenue, stated that he saw a copy of
the staff survey and he finds that there is some credibility
lacking in a few of the areas. For one thing, one of the
people surveyed has indicated that he has complained severely
about the lot but the survey shows that he is unhappy about the
weeds, only.
In another case, there were two absentee homeowners who promised
to sign the petition and the renter next door to him claims that
there is no problem - but the renter doesn't need to be concerned
with any liability for that property.
Mr. Glavinos indicated that he believes there are discrepancies
in the survey because of the things he has mentioned. As far
as the issue, he believes there has been a failure among all
the parties to meet their responsibilities because they were
set forth as conditions that the owners would take care of the
land and they haven't. There have been nothing but problems
out there.
Mr. Glavinos submitted a petition to Mr. Lee that he would like
read into the minutes, and the petition best describes the
problems the people have had in that area. The basic problem
is juveniles and in his opinion the police cannot solve the
problem. The real situation is that there is no supervision
out there and basically this was one of the conditions in
establishing the park.
Mr. Parness explained that it is possible that one member of
the family was contacted and expressed a different view than
another family member might have, and perhaps this is the
reason for some discrepancies in the survey.
The present Council did not hear testimony concerning the pur-
chase of the park but the residents expressed a fervent view
that the City purchase the property and many pledges were made
by the residents that if the City would buy the property it
would be improved, voluntarily, by the residents in the area.
Unfortunately, such was not done. It was bought over strong
objections by LARPD who contended that these kinds of parks are
not functional and receive little use. LAPRD has said that if
improvements are installed they would consider taking over main-
tenance from the City and this is the point at which the City
is at this time.
Cm Turner stated that from everything he has observed and heard
he believes the property should be abated. There are tree
houses built in some of the trees and the back yards have no
privacy because of the tree houses.
Cm Turner stated that possibly the land could be sold and a
house developed on the lot. Perhaps Mr. Glavinos has a sug-
gestion.
Mr. Glavinos indicated that houses could be developed, it
could be a senior citizens residential area such as the
housing developed near the hospital. He stated that if
something like this were done there would be no impact on
the schools and it would be a good balance for the neighborhood.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would be interested in knowing
if LARPD would consider this area for a community garden.
Cm Staley felt that selling it might be the best answer and
wondered if it is a lot of record, or more than one.
CM-32-l78
May 3, 1976
(re Dogwood Site)
Mr. Parness stated that he believes the City purchased five property
ownerships. He is not sure as to whether or not the lot divisions
have been erased, but they are all in the City's name.
Mayor Tirsell stated that possibly the extra lots could be offered
to the residents to increase their lot size. Almost every house
could double the size of their back yard.
The City Attorney explained that this is public park property and
it can't be sold to anyone the City might wish to sell it to. It
has to be declared surplus property and sold to the highest bidder.
Mayor Tirsell stated that property along the arroyo was sold to
people who bordered the arroyo and wondered how this was accom-
plished.
The City Attorney stated that this was not the City's land.
Mr. Glavinos wondered if there would be a possibility of trading
this property for other property considered to be more desirable
for a park that would serve the best interests of everyone around
that area. Preferably, open space.
Mr. Musso noted that the only vacant land is the property across
from the park site (in another area) .
Mayor Tirsell suggested that the staff prepare a report as to
what process would be involved in the sale of the property.
In the meantime, this gives the residents some idea of what
the Council is considering and if there is some cohesiveness
in the neighborhood this may spark some action. They were
interested in the City's purchase of the property and possibly
that spirit still exists.
Cm Turner suggested that Mr. Glavinos be kept abreast of what is
happening concerning the property.
REPORT RE REQUEST
FOR LOT SPLIT -
1174 HILLCREST AVENUE
Mayor Tirsell stated that the report from the Planning Commission
concerning the request for _lot split at 1174 Hillcrest does imple-
ment the General Plan goals of in-filling and increasing the density
in the central part of the City. However, the proposed pOlicy is
an elaboration of the definition of a lot of record for the
purposes of sewer allocation.
Mayor Tirsell wondered if the City is protected with this and
the City Attorney stated that this is a matter of sewer policy
and it's a question of whether the Council is going to take
exception to the policy. The Council wants to be consistent in
any exception so that it will not be accused of being arbitrary
and capricious by granting it in one place and not in another.
Mayor Tirsell stated that, in other words, since the provision
made by the P.C. is that the division shall constitute a minor
subdivision and not more than 4 lots, if the Council wishes to
adhere to that it would not be found to be arbitrary or capricious.
The City Attorney noted that if exception is made in one place the
Council will be obligated to make it anywhere else if the same
type of fact situation applies.
CM-32-l79
May 3, 1976
(re Lot Splitting)
Mr. Musso felt the main differentiation between these lots and
any other property, is the RL-5 and RL-6, in a RL-5-0 Zone.
Mayor Tirsell stated that it has been restricted to~ning
districts in the old part of town.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he doesn't quite understand the pro-
vision concerning the requirements for public works improvements.
Mr. Musso explained that if a building permit is taken out the
owner would be responsible for curb, gutter and sidewalk. If
a subdivision is filed then what he is suggesting is that curb,
gutter and sidewalk be required, only. No street extension or
anything else. This is mainly geared to recognize old lots in the
old areas of town.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she is not prepared to vote on this
unless the City Attorney certifies that the whole Sewer Ordinance
would not be jeopardized by action.
The City Attorney indicated that this evening is the first time
he has read anything about the application and he would prefer
that it be postponed for a week.
Mr. Duterte, 417 Fordham Way, stated that he would like to expe-
dite this matter and can't understand why there will be a delay.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she understands what Mr. Duterte is
requesting but the Council is concerned about what this might
to do an ordinance that is very important to the City and she
would not vote on it unless the City Attorney says that it
would not jeopardize the ordinance.
Mr. Duterte stated that he doesn't know where he stands and
that he doesn't know what questions the Council needs answered.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she wants the City Attorney to read
everything, and compare the application with the ordinance
that has been passed and then render a legal opinion that would
confirm the fact that granting the request the Council would not
open the entire City to lot splits when the City does not have
the sewer capacity to accomplish it.
Mr. Duterte stated that there is sufficient sewage. Mr. Musso
has stated that lot splitting would involve only about 30 or
40 lots.
Cm Staley explained that the problem is not with a lot split
such as Mr. Duterte is proposing, but rather whether the
principle, if it is granted, could be applied to a 40 acre par-
cel. The City does not want to open the door to things the City
does not want to happen, by granting the request for the lot split.
The item was continued for one week.
APPEAL RE HOME OCCUPA~,
TION PERMITl.- PHOTO TYPE
SETTING SERVICE
The Planning Commission has granted a CUP for photo type setting
at 5221 Roxanne Court. The Council has appealed this action and
will discuss the approval of the permit.
Cm Staley stated that this item is different than the application
reviewed last week but he is really concerned with what is happen-
ing to our home occupation permits. More and more businesses are
CM-32-l80
May 3, 1976
(Horne Occupation Permits)
getting home occupation permits and it seems that the Council is
reviewing one or two a week approved by the Planning Commission.
The reason he is concerned about home occupations is because every-
one knows that this takes away from commercial businesses, deprives
the City of certain business revenues and deprives the people who
pay for an office and overhead, of competition.
After reviewing the application he has some questions about the
amount of traffic that would be involved, but apparently the P.C.
has approved it and he is prepared to withdraw the appeal now that
he has read their findings.
Cm Turner stated that he views this as business in competition with
our downtown business and the applicant would have the advantage
of not paying the normal rent paid by someone downtown. He would
like to see this item placed in abeyance until the Home Occupation
Ordinance has been reviewed.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would have to agree with the P.C.
because no printing is being done on the site. This would appear
to be the same type of things allowed in other home occupations.
CM STALEY WITHDREW THE APPEAL AT THIS TIME.
DISCUSSION RE BUSINESS
LICENSE TAX - CONTINUED
FROM APRIL 26TH
The matter of the business license tax was postponed from the meet-
ing of April 26th, at the request of the Chamber of Commerce, and
the Council will discuss this item at this time.
Don Miller, 2862 Waverly Way, representing the Joint City Co~ncil-
Chamber of Commerce Business License Tax Review Committee. He
stated that he would like to represent the position of the Committee
majority who have provided the Council with a supplement to their
earlier report.
After considerable discussion the Committee arrived at the follow-
ing majority recommendations concerning the matters that were at
issue. He will summarize the recommendations, but the Council has
a report which is more detailed on these recommendations.
1. That Pacific Gas and Electric Company and the other utilities
should pay both franchise fee and business license tax.
2. There is no recommendation concerning out-of-town physicians,
because the Committee was evenly split on this issue.
3. That the straight line rate of 80~ per $1,000 be retained
with increases for large firms and decreases for small
firms take place in two steps. Namely, one-half the increase
or decrease from the present retail rate would apply in 1976-77
and the full 80~ per $1,000 would apply in 1977-78.
4. That the minimum business license tax be increased to $40.
5. The present flat rate for carnivals will remain the same.
The major discussion was over the question of the retail rate struc-
ture and the majority of the Committee felt that the evidence for a
declining rate, or for categories that was presented by the Chamber
of Commerce, was not adequate or convincing.
CM-32-l8l
May 3, 1976
(Business License Tax)
The Finance Department did provide additional evidence which
confirms the Committee's recommendation on this issue and
Mr. Miller stated that he would be happy to answer any ques-
tions, but the details are included in the report, as well
as the original report.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Council must consider whether
they will work on this ordinance. It has been through first
reading and qualifies for second reading. However, if subse-
quent changes are made it will go back to first reading.
Cm Dahlbacka asked for clarification as to what change is be-
ing recommended since the first reading.
Mr. Miller explained that any changes to the text would be
in response to items 2, 3, 4, and 5. If the Council decides
to exempt out-of-town doctors from the business license tax,
this would be a change from the first reading. Item 3, would
require a new passage which would provide an intermediate rate
structure between large firms and small firms for the fiscal
years mentioned, and would require the insertion of that para-
graph which needs to be amended because it should refer only
to retail rates.
Changing the minimum to $40 would be a change, and leaving the
flat rate for carnivals would be cutting in half the value that
is presently in the first reading text.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Council needs to determine whether
or not they are working on a second reading to adopt the ordi-
nance that went through first reading; whether or not the changes
will be made, as recommended, to the ordinance that went through
first reading and because of the changes will go to first reading
again; or whether or not the Council will work on another ordi-
nance that hasn't had first reading at all.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that from this additional discussion, some
rather interesting things have been brought out and it would be
worthwhile to work on a new ordinance and start it off with a
new first reading, rather than working on the old ordinance.
The City Attorney stated that if there are to be substantial
changes to the ordinance he would suggest that it go to first
reading next week.
Mr. Nolan from the Finance Department indicated that this would
be compatible with the time schedule.
Paul Tull stated that regardless of what the business license
tax happens to be, it will eventually be paid by the consumers,
completely. Since this is an era of low income and high infla-
tion, he would suggest that the Council consider cutting some
from the top.
The Council concluded that they would start from the top and
discuss the recommendations, as listed by Mr. Miller.
em Kamena stated that he would like to know if the purpose of
the franchise agreement between PG&E and the City, was to
reach an agreement so that PG&E would pay a fee for the privil-
ege of tearing up our streets, or was the intent to grant them
a monopoly as being the sole provider of the service of power
to the City.
CM-32-l82
May 3, 1976
(Business License Tax)
The City Attorney stated that his answer would be that the purpose
for the franchise fee would be to pay for the use of public streets,
and not because they are an exclusive franchise holder.
Cm Kamena stated that his reason for asking the question is because
he believes there is a critical difference between the two. If the
purpose is to allow PG&E to rip up the streets and then patch them
up again, he believes this would be a different thing from the
business license tax. If, on the other hand, this was to allow
them to have a monopoly it would be similar to a business license
tax and he would agree to allow them an exemption from the business
license tax.
Mr. Beebe, representing PG&E, stated that what the City Attorney has
said is true; the franchise is to allow use of the streets. However,
they do have to pay extra money for anything that they do in the way
of permits, etc. They pay a substantial amount each year on that,
because they have to pay for proper paving, etc.
Mr. Beebe stated that last year PG&E paid the City, $55,600 for a
franchise fee and a business license fee will cost about $6,000.
This is the reason a business license tax does not apply to PG&E
is most ,of the cities they work in. They pay a very large franchise
tax. The franchise fee went up this year by $13,600 and this is
one of the reaons PG&E is requesting that they continue to be exempt.
Cm Turner stated that he views the franchise fee for PG&E as a rental
fee for using our streets and he can see no reason to exempt them
from the business license tax. He will support the recommendation
for a business license tax for PG&E.
CM TURNER MOVED TO REQUIRE PG&E TO PAY A BUSINESS LICENSE FEE
IN ADDITION TO THEIR FRANCHISE FEE. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM
STALEY.
Mr. Beebe read a portion of the State Code concerning the charging
of a business license tax for utilities, and asked that the City
go by the State Code.
Cm Staley stated that the City would not be doing anything to PG&E
that is not being done to merchantile corporations, which is 80~,
straight line. This does apply the state law very fairly.
Mayor Tirsell suggested that Mr. Beebe provide this information
to the City Attorney, because this is going to go to first reading
next week.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
It was noted that there is no change in this item - it will be
the same as it was in the first reading.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE CITY EXEMPT DOCTORS WHOSE OFFICES ARE
OUT-OF-TOWN, AND USE THE VMH FACILITIES. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY
CM DAHLBACKA.
Cm Turner stated that he has heard that because of the fact that
out-of-town doctors use VMH there is a greater need for police
and fire services. In his opinion, if the hospital were not
located in Livermore, we would still have the same number of
policemen and firemen in the City of Livermore.
It has also been said that Livermore has to pay $30,000jyear in
ambulance fees but Cm Turner believes that under the new joint
agreement the cost would be the same if the hospital were out-of-
town, because Livermore would still have to pay its fair share.
CM-32-l83
May 3, 1976
(Business License Tax)
Cm Turner also believes the physicians are not asking for
special consideration, because they are paying a business
license tax in the city in which their office is located.
The physicians do not create an additional cost to the City
by using the hospital and lastly, the hospital is supposed
to service the entire Valley, and they come to Livermore only
because VMH happens to be located here instead of somewhere
else in the Valley.
Cm Kamena stated that while he agrees with everything Cm Turner
has said from a philosophical point of view, he believes that
in actuality it is possible for a doctor to omit reporting
portions of his gross income that was earned in Livermore at
the hospital, and therefore pay a substantially lower business
license tax in the city where his office is located. In his
opinion this would make the City very vulnerable because he
believes there are other people who would think that their
services or products are just as vital and important as phy-
sicians and would want to argue for exemption. He would sug-
gest that this motion be denied and a new introduced which
would allow for the spirit by having the doctors sign a sworn
statement each year, submitted to our Finance Director, stat-
ing that they are reporting their entire gross to their home
jurisdictions and therefore would not be liable for tax here
in Livermore.
This would allow them the same service, to pay no tax, and
puts the City in a much more protective situation.
Mayor Tirsell suggested that perhaps the motion should include
that the physicians sign a sworn statement, as suggested by
Cm Kamena.
Celia Baker, 54l Bell Avenue, stated that possibly the doctors
who come from out-of-town and profit, might like to make a
donation either to the City of Livermore or the hospital -
this is just a thought.
Dr. Claude Burdick, 4678 Almond Circle, stated that the sug-
gestion made by Cm Kamena that the doctors sign a sworn state-
ment would be perfectly acceptable to the physicians, and
they believe this is a good idea. Secondly, in his opinion
the physicians are not asking for anything unusual because
they do not know of any other city in the state that does
tax out-of-town physicians and the physicians in Pleasanton
are strongly opposed to this. It is difficult for them to
allocate their revenues. He stated that the return to the
City should be increased substantially by the new business
license tax and he also believes that some type of donation
by the physicians could be accomplished.
Mayor Tirsell asked if the anesthesiologists will be acquiring a
business license since their office is at the hospital.
Dr. Burdick stated that they will be acquiring a business
license.
Clyde Highet stated that his wife had surgery at the hospital
and had to have a specialist from out-of-town. He believes
that an out-of-town license tax would jeopardize care of
patients who might need a specialist from out-of-town.
CM-32-l84
~ay 3, 1976
(re Business License Tax)
Dr. William Zavanelli, 1400 Santa Rita Road, stated that he did
work in Livermore for awhile and he has always reported his total
gross to the City of Pleasanton. He stated that the physicians
hope they are giving a service to the people of Livermore but
on the basis of the additional paperwork involved in the office
they would like the Council to reconsider charging a business
license tax for the out-of-town physicians.
CM TURNER RESTATED HIS MOTION NOT TO CHARGE THE OUT-OF-TOWN
DOCTORS USING THE VMH FACILITIES, A BUSINESS LICENSE TAX.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE THE STIPULATION
THAT THE EXEMPTION FOR THE PHYSICIANS AND OTHER DOCTORS WHOSE
PRINCIPLE PLACE OF PRACTICE IS OUTSIDE LIVERMORE, BE CONTINGENT
UPON THE SIGNING OF AN ANNUAL SWORN STATEMENT SUBMITTED TO LIVERMORE'S
FINANCE DIRECTOR, TESTIFYING THAT EACH DOCTOR'S ENTIRE GROSS HAS BEEN
SUBMITTED TO HIS HOME JURISDICTION. AMENDMENT SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
The City Attorney stated that in the first place, not all taxing
jurisdictions tax on a gross receipts basis. Some of them tax
on a different basis. Dr. Burdick indicated that he would make
all of his anesthesiologists pay, but unfortunately that is not
very enforceable from the City'S standpoint. The problem with
that is that they can shop for any City which has a decent business
license tax, like $25, as a flat fee, set up an office and then make
any number of gross receipts in Livermore and not pay anything other
than the $25.
The City Attorney added that the Council might consider the possi-
bility of some sort of a percentage allocation and any doctor utiliz-
ing 90% of his t VMH would pay a business license tax in the
City of Livermore and the 10% could be allocated elsewhere. That
would take care of doctors such as Dr. Zavanelli who is only an
incidental resident physician in the hospital because of his involve-
ment with patients who have to enter into the hospital with the major
portion of his practice in Pleasanton.
The City Attorney explained that he believes an unfair burden would
be placed upon doctors within the City who make most of their gross
receipts here and pay a tax based on that gross receipt, as opposed
to someone who would make almost 100% of his income at VMH, such as
an anesthesiologist, but would pay nothing but a flat fee such as
in Hayward for example.
If the Council wishes to accept the word of Dr. Burdick that all
the anesthesiologists will pay, or the ordinance can be changed
at some later date, this is the Council's prerogative.
Cm Kamena commented that the anesthesiologists have an office or
a place designated for them in the hospital and as long as they
are willing to sign a statement and present it to Mr. Nolan, that
they are reporting their gross receipts to some jurisdiction, there
should be no problem. The City isn't concerned with what other
jurisdictions do in the way of their business license tax.
Mr. Burdick stated that Mr. Nolan has been most reasonable in the
face of a great deal of provocation from some of the physicians and
if they find that it is not satisfactory to him they feel it is im-
portant enough to take some action on their own.
CM-32-l85
May 3, 1976
(re Business License Tax)
Cm Kamena wondered if it would be safe for Dr. Burdick to say,
as Chief of Staff of the Hospital, that the physicians whose
principal place of practice is within the City of Livermore
and who also practice in the hospital would find the proposal
unfair? Would they not continue to report their entire gross
to Livermore, even that which was made in the hospital?
Dr. Burdick stated that doctors have universally agreed to re-
port their total gross; even that which is made in the hospital.
Cm Kamena asked if this proposal seems acceptable in spirit
and concept to Dr. Burdick and Dr. Burdick indicated that
it is completely acceptable in spirit and concept. Not only
is it acceptable, but if you think that someone is "chiseling"
they will be willing to look into it for the City.
Cm Staley commented that he is willing to support Cm Kamena's
amendment, based on the fact that VMH is the only place in which
the physicians can do operations and he believ~ the proposal is
fair. He will support the amendment.
AMENDMENT PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
MAIN MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
The Council agreed that the carnival rate should stay at its
present level, ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA
AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT ITEM #4 TO INCREASE THE MINIMUM BUSI-
NESS LICENSE TAX FROM $20 TO $40. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM
KAMENA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Mayor Tirsell explained that #3, and the proposed ordinance
which has been to first reading are the same. If the Council
wishes to do something other than that, someone should make
a motion.
Cm Turner stated that the Chamber of Commerce hsas suggested a
20% increase. The merchants he has talked to have indicated
that this is a purely defensive measure to off-set the straight
line - there is some opposition to the straight line by some of
the merchants.
Cm Turner stated that he supports everything else except the
change in the collection formula. In his opinion, the present
method provides an annual increase in tax revenue, through infla-
tion. The curve is as fair andequitable as can be expected of
any tax. Mel Luna had testified that the "big guy" should pay
his fair share, but Cm Turner stated that he can't determine
what the fair share should be.
Cm Turner added that the City has hired a Community Development
Director and he is responsible for acquiring new business for
the City of Livermore. The new business that he acquires will
provide the City with additional business license tax money.
Lastly, the City has a captive audience in its merchants and
it is important to recognize that they must be in a competitive
posture in order to survive.
The profits the merchants earn are used in the same manner as
a salaried employee - this is their pay check and Cm Turner
stated that he cannot support the straight line method of
collection.
CM-32-l86
May 3, 1976
(re Business License Tax)
CM TURNER MOVED TO LEAVE THE ORDINANCE, AS IT NOW STANDS, NOT
GOING TO THE STRAIGHT LINE FORHULA.
Cm Staley noted that most of the arguments brought up by Cm Turner
have been raised and discussed at great length by the Committee.
The one that was not discussed while he was there was that the
curve, in fact, does not keep up with inflation and this is one
of the major problems with it. In fact, as you go further out on
the curve, in terms of gross receipts, the amount of tax collected,
per dollar, declines. Therefore, the more inflation you have, the
more likelihood you have of the businesses going over further and
further increments so they drop in terms of percentage of tax on
the gross receipts. The more inflation, the less return to the
City in terms of real dollars.
MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Cm Turner stated that if he can't get support for his motion, would
there be support to look into the collection method? He believes
Fremont and Oakland charge 30~ or 50~, something in that order, for
auto dealers and supermarkets. Would there be any support for study-
ing a categoric basis?
Cm Staley noted that one of the things he thought the City intended
to do when the matter was continued, originally, about 8-9 weeks
ago, was that more than one category would be considered in terms
of the straight line rate. Unfortunately, all the time was spent
in developing arguments against the straight line, or in favor of
the 20% across the curve, increase. There really wasn't enough
time to study categories in any great detail. In his opinion, the
concept of categories is supportable and they did not have enough
information to vote on it. There is not sufficient time to study
the concept of categories for this year. He believes that the
League of California Cities will be corning out with a draft ordi-
nance proposal in July, and that proposal will probably be straight
line and may have categories.
Cm Staley stated that he believes the way the Council should proceed,
considering the amortization schedule is part of the amendment to
the motion, would be to adopt the motion in its present form and when
the League of California Cities comes in with a recommendation in July
the Council could review the ordinance again at that time.
Mayor Tirsell explained that there is no motion.
Cm Staley noted that he forgot there was not a motion but this is
his position: To support the ordinance the way it is written and
when the League of California Cit1es comes in with their ordinance
draft, or if it is found that categories are justifiable, this
could be done by amendment at a later date.
Cm Staley clarified that he wishes no change in the proposed
ordinance.
Mayor Tirse1l stated that there is support for the proposed ordi-
nance with the idea that when the model ordinance comes from the
League of California Cities, the City could take direction from
that.
Bill Manis, representing the Chamber of Commerce, stated that as
a member of the Chamber of Commerce and the Committee, four dif-
ferent things were reviewed concerning the business license tax.
One was certainly to assist in raising sufficient revenue to help
the City meet municipal needs. Secondly, they were interested in
providing a healthy, vibrant climate within the community for all
businesses to operate within. They were looking at both the small
and the large business. He stated that this is so-called large
CM-32-l87
May 3, 1976
(re Business License Tax)
u
businesses, because there aren't really "many large businesses
in Livermore. Thirdly, they wanted to provide the community
at large with commercial enterprises that will satisfy the
customers needs rather than having them go out-of-town. Fourth,
to reduce the number of automobile miles traveled out of this
area for people that do shopping elsewhere.
Mr. Manis stated that when they looked at the City Committee's
proposal they were in agreement with them on three of the four
points made by them. They wanted to improve the ability of the
tax to grow with the economy, and last year was a good example
where we had double digit inflation figures. He is sure the City
will find a lO% increase this year if nothing else happens where
total sales are concerned. Everyone is in favor of simplifying
the tax method of collection and the merchants want to raise
additional revenue for the City. It is on the fourth point that
there is a hang-up, and everyone is speaking in terms that every-
one can't agree on. Some are talking about categories in one
way, and others are talking about categories in a different way.
Mr. Manis continued to say that there are basic differences in
in retail stores, whether it is a high gross, low net, which has
been discussed a lot, vs. the low gross, high net. There are
figures in the Dunn and Brad reports and in the Robert Morris,
Associate books, that show this distinction. They also go into
mark-up, if this is to be looked at from a different standpoint.
Every retail merchant has goods they have to purchase and they
determine a mark-up on that, which becomes the selling price,
and there if a big difference between the mark-ups, which will
vary as much as 15% for an auto dealer or a grocery store, up
to 55% for a jewelry store.
It is possible that the League of California Cities is looking
at the mark-up aspect, because there is a large distinction.
Mr. Manis believes that any proposal that is taxing a very small
percentage of the business in a community (10 to 15% at the most)
and giving a net reduction on the other end to many of the other
businesses to raise an additional $60,000 is just not a good
approach to take. It is not only going to hurt the people that
have to pay for it but it will also hurt the small business people.
As it turns out, it can be a good thing today for some people, but
in the long run, for the City and the community it will hurt them.
It becomes a significant dollar amount when $60,000 is to be split
among 100 businesses. There are 112 businesses in town that pay
a business license tax, so it is a very small percentage when you
look at it in that light and he would like the Council to consider
this aspect.
Celia Baker stated that she has a small business and if the City
adopted the straight line method her business license tax would
be under $10. The Council has just passed a motion which makes
the minimum business license tax $40. She noted that from what
she understands there are quite a few home occupation businesses
that pay no business license at all and she would like to remind
the Council of this point.
Mel Luna stated that he believes the question is the bottom line
percentage of profit. The problem is, how to get to the bottom
line and what to deduct before the percentage is made. As a
businessman he can deduct so much - if he makes $60,000 he can
deduct for a car, etc., and he can even bankrupt himself if he
wants to, and pay for it.
Discussion followed concerning the amount of depreciation that
can be taken against an expense account, etc.
CM-32-l88
May 3, 1976
(re Business License Tax)
CM STALEY MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL MAKE AN AMENDMENT IN THE DRAFT
ORDINANCE TO IMPLEMENT THE STRAIGHT LINE RATE OF 80~ PER $1,000,
MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Ozzie Davis stated that when he appeared before the Council asking
for a continuance in the adoption of the proposed ordinance, he
did not have any preconceived plan but it turned out that he
became the Chamber spokesman which he hadn't contemplated.
Mr. Davis stated that he carne up with the idea of 20% across the
board increase, using the present curve, which was accepted at
the Chamber of Commerce meeting, but was not accepted by the
Committee. He was told by the Mayor and other Councilmembers,
that the possibility exists for support of a category if the
proper proof could be provided that there is a need for that
category. He stated that he developed that proof and utilized
it, he had hoped, to establish the need for a category. Then
feeling that there was going to be a squeeze placed on the smaller
businesses, he felt it would be better to stay away from the cate-
gories and keep the current formula because he believes the current
formula is the most fair and equitable method. He stated that this
was not acceptable by the Committee.
Mr. Davis stated that he would like to go back to the original request
that there be proof that there is a need for a category. He stated
that he is speaking as a representative of his own business and
not as a spokesman for the Chamber of Commerce. He added that he
believes he would fairly represent the opinions of other car dealers
and grocery stores who are in the l.5 - 2% category. He wondered
what the net result would be for the proposed 80~ straight line,
to the large businesses here in Livermore.
Mr. Davis stated that assuming a business does $2 million worth of
business, it would pay $232 in Hayward, where they have a curve for
automobiles and grocery stores. In San Leandro the business license
tax is a $30 minimum plus $2 per employee, regardless of the size
of business - this would be a total of $80. In Fremont they have
a straight line with a special category for automobile businesses
and grocery stores, at 20~ - $200 is what they would pay. In
Oakland there is a 60~ straight line, except for automobile dealers
and grocery stores, which pay 30~ - they would pay $600 with a $2
million dollar business. Pleasanton has a curve, has a license tax
from $1 million to $2.5 million and the cost would be $200 with a
$2 million dollar business; $250 is the maximum fee regardless of
the amount of gross over $2 million. Dublin has no business license
tax.
The proposed ordinance would impose a $l,600 business license tax
for a $2 million Livermore business. The larger car dealers and
grocery stores here in Livermore are doing a $4 million business
which would mean a business license tax of $3,200 compared to all
the figures he quoted in the six nearby communities.
Mr. Davis stated that the businesses cannot be competitive because
they will have to pass this cost to the consumer. He would suggest
that a category for car dealers and grocery stores of 40~ would be
fair and equitable. He stated that this is his personal viewpoint
but the businesses must remain competitive and he has never argued
the fact that the City does need additional revenue and he realizes
that this is the only way the Council can turn to derive additional
revenue. However, with continued inflation the City would have to
have $8 per $1,000 in business license taxes in order to remain
solvent, in just a few years.
CM-32-l89
May 3, 1976
(re Business License Tax)
Cm Kamena stated that Livermore's proposed ordinance amount
would be a certain amount higher than if the same business were
in Oakland, and Oakland was used by the Committee as a good ex-
ample of the straight line method. He asked Mr. Davis how much
higher Livermore's tax would be than in Oakland.
Mr. Davis stated that Livermore's fee would be $1,600 for a $2
million business, and $3,200 for a $4 million business. Compared
to Oakland, if they have a tax rate of 30~ and a tax rate of 80~
in Livermore, Oakland businesses would be paying less than half
of the amount that would be required in Livermore. He added that
there was a need in all of the communities he mentioned, to estab-
lish a category, and this is his point. The business license tax
saw fit to name Oakland, specifically, because they liked this
method so well that they used Oakland's wording and he would say
stay with what Oakland is doing. Oakland has a 30~ rate for the
auto dealers and grocery stores and he would agree to a 40~ rate.
em Turner stated that the information that has been presented by
Mr. Davis has a lot of merit and is something the Council should
consider.
Mr. Miller stated that somewhere along the line it was mentioned
that lO% of the businesses will pick up all of the increase. It
was calculated by the Director of Finance that more than half of
the businesses in the community would receive a decrease in the
amount of their business license tax and half of the businesses
would get an increase. Some of the large businesses would get
a large increase, but it is not 10% of the businesses who are
picking up the increase. It was approximately 54-46%.
Cm Turner stated that he believes 10% of the businesses are pick-
ing up 90% of the increase.
It was noted that this is not correct.
Mr. Miller stated that the Committee felt that those businesses
who have a high gross have not been paying an adequate business
license tax in the past and the smaller businesses have been pay-
ing an unfairly high tax. Secondly, with the question of cate-
gories, it is true that some cities have categories, and some do
not. There was some discussion of categories and he would ask the
Council to examine the graph that was prepared by the Finance
Department, if they are concerned about this, and notice the
wide variation within type of business, and any overlap of those
areas, then examine both curves and both graphs. One is profit-
ability on sales and the other is profitability on investment.
As Dunn and Bradstreet says, the increasing tendency to consider
profitability on investments should be the real key to overall
profitability. Profitability was the basis that the business
representatives consistently asked the Committee to examine, up
until the very end.
It is true that there are wide variations with respect to cities
in the nearby vicinity, but there are other cities who are not
as close and have taxes higher than the Livermore rate - Modesto
and Stockton are two of these.
Mr. Miller stated that wide discrepancies look big until you see
what fraction th~ business license tax is, of the total cost of
some item, and the overall affect it has on the operating expense
of the business. It is a small portion of the operating expense
of business. In fact it is so small that it is in the minority
in considering other things that are more important, including
the property tax rate.
CM-32-l90
May 3, 1976
(re Business License Tax)
Mr. Miller stated that the total effect would be $4 worth of tax
on a $5,000 car and the difference between a zero business license
tax in Dublin and the proposed business license tax in Livermore
means a difference of $4 per $5,000 car, and will not send somebody
to Dublin or Hayward, etc. The same is true for a $50 grocery pur-
chase. The tax would be 4~ extra for $50 worth of groceries. The
point being made is that with respect to the competition, the busi-
ness license tax, in itself, is so small that it does not have a
major effect on competition between various areas.
Martin Plone, 2127 First Street, stated that a number of citizens
have expressed concern for getting large stores and having the
central business district developed. The high tax rate may not
be attractive to large businesses that might consider coming to
Livermore. He would suggest that the Council consider a ceiling
for the amount of tax required for anyone business. If a business
does $10 million worth of business it means they would have to pay
$8,000 for a business license tax. This may make Livermore less
desirable in considering location of a new business.
RECESS
Mayor Tirsell called for a brief recess, after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present and the
matter of the business license tax continued.
CM TURNER MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE A CATEGORY FOR
THE HIGH GROSS BUSINESSES, .AT A 50':: STRAIGHT LINE. AMENDMENT WAS
SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL.
Cm Staley wondered if this means anyone who grosses $1 million and
Cm Turner stated that the Council could discuss this but he would
initially suggest that this category be for the auto dealers and
the supermarkets.
CM TURNER RESTATED THE AMENDMENT THAT THE ORDINANCE INCLUDE A
CATEGORY FOR GROCERY STORES AND CAR DEALERS, AT 50':: STRAIGHT
LINE. AMENDMENT SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he would question the justification for
picking two uses "out of the air". If one looks at the data pro-
vided by the Committee on net profit and net worth after taxes,
the averages for those two categories are higher than the average.
If the Council is going to consider categories then perhaps the
Council should choose criteria to be used in making a selection
for categories. According to the report, jewelry stores, shoe
stores, and department stores, etc., should receive the break
rather than auto dealers and grocery stores. It would seem that
the Council should have a clear idea of what the cri teriC}: f-9+ uip l.iu.4' ~.
profi tability is. It would appear that if this is doneAl.t'WO':lrd~ .4~,'-'1)
open the door to all kinds of complications. (};f'"W,kdL .<f.-L~:;
09&d:
On the basis of the information which has been provided by the
Committee it would appear that the straight line 80':: is reasonable.
If there are compelling arguments do to otherwise, such as in the
ordinance draft by the League of California Cities, there will be
sufficient time to consider changes. In the meantime the City will
have adopted something that seems to be logically consistent which
treats everyone equally and fairly as well as generating revenues
to the City. At this point he believes that the Council has re-
ceived information that could be interpreted in whatever way the
Council would choose and under those circumstances it would appear
that the straight line method is as fair as any other way.
Mayor Tirsell stated that Mr. Davis brought up something that the
Council should consider, and that is the other cities with which
Livermore competes. People are going to look at the total dollars
paid in revenue to Livermore - not the tax rate or the percentage.
CH-32-l9l
May 3, 1976
(re Business License Tax)
Mayor Tirsell added that she still believes that the straight
line is a fair tax. It is good enough for the federal govern-
ment, and it's good enough for the state. We all pay a straight
line tax on our income tax which goes up with the more you make.
Her concern is for the large businesses that we want to get to
Livermore, and she would consider looking at a category for
them. They are looking at a business license tax of $2,000-$3,000
and historically speaking, in this town, automobile dealers and
grocery stores have received a separate category or on the curve
they were the lowest.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would favorably consider a category
for the auto dealers and grocery stores and not accept other uses
that may fall in that category.
Mr. Luna stated that it shouldn't make any difference what the
business is, or how he grosses the $2 million or $4 million.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would be willing to consider that.
Cm Kamena went to the board in order to list the complaints re-
ceived concerning the present ordinance or the proposed ordi-
nance, to see if some of the suggestions made will help with
the problem areas.
Cm Kamena stated that first of all, the present ordinance has
been considered unfair to the small businesses because they are
paying an unfair share. Under the Chamber's proposal the prob-
lem is basically the same and adds 20% more to the cost of the
tax.
If the City asks for the proposed rate of the straight 80~ per
$1,000, many people feel this to be equitable because the person
making lO times as much pays 10 times more. The objection to this
is that some people have too much increase at one time.
If the City creates a separate category for those businesses
referred to as high gross, low net businesses, then to generate
the same amount of revenue by parceling out the car dealers
and the grocery stores and dropping to a lower figure, the City
will lose some revenue over what the straight line would have
been if it had been left as it is in the proposed ordinance.
Mayor Tirsell stated that it still may be more revenue for the
City than what the curve provided in the past.
Cm Karnena stated that this is the point he is making.
Discussion followed concerning a straight line method with
a drop in the cost for the car dealers and grocery stores,
using hypothetical figures.
Cm Kamena stated that, essentially, if the City goes to the
straight line, the small business people will not complain,
and if the City drops down to 50~ for the high gross, low
net people, they will not complain. It would appear that
the only party to suffer would be the City because of the
drop in revenue but he is not satisfied that the revenue
drop would be significant.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he hasn't seen any definite evidence,
on the basis of anything that the Committee has submitted to
the Council, that there is a justification for differentiating
these rates.
CM-32-l92
May 3, 1976
(re Business License Tax)
em Dahlbacka stated that if the objection is a large increase, all
at once, then the resolution to this problem would be to ease the
increase out over a couple of years.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the objection always has been and always
will be, the total amount of dollars.
Cm Kamena noted that the car dealers have indicated that after
taxes and overhead have been paid for, the net profit on a $5,000
car is $48. If the increase in taxes to the car dealer means $4
per automobile (using the example of a $5,000 car) this would mean
about 10% of his profit.
Cm Turner pointed out that the Council should also consider the
fact that people may be looking at Livermore as a place to locate
a business and they will be looking at the cost of the business
license tax.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that if a business is going to do $4 million
worth of business in Livermore, he can't believe that a tax of
$1,500 would make that much difference to that particular business.
Rebecca Hundoble, Livermore, commented that she is concerned that
the categories, as suggested, might cause large businesses to decide
to locate elsewhere.
Cm Turner commented that it is his understanding that Oakland made
a reduction in their new business license tax ordinance and he
wondered what the justification was for reducing the charge to
auto dealers and grocery stores.
Mrs. Hundoble stated that after doing research she concludes that
it was because of pressure from these businesses and because of
the leadership in Oakland at the time.
Mr. Nolan explained that he had stated that more than half of the
business license taxes would be reduced, but many of the small busi-
nesses would remain unchanged.
AMEND~mNT TO ADOPT A 50~ CATEGORY PASSED 4-1 (Cm Dahlbacka abstain-
ing) .
MAIN MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
The City Attorney stated that he would like clarification for the
purpose of preparing the ordinance - will the category include
7-11 and all types of grocery stores?
Mr. Nolan stated that he would suggest that all car dealers and
grocery stores be taxed at the same rate. This would seem to be
more equitable.
Cm Kamena stated that he would agree. It wouldn't be fair to say
to one type of store that grocery stores would be in a certain
category with the exception of this store and that.
The City Attorney stated that it is his understanding that all
grocery stores will be included in the category and he would like
to advise that in his opinion the City will find itself without
a valid classification, because there will be some very low gross
grocery stores included and other businesses will argue that they
should be given the same type of preferential treatment. He
would suggest that if there is to be a category it should be based
on a certain amount of gross, such as anyone making a gross over
$2 million, or $l million.
CM-32-l93
May 3, 1976
(re Business License Tax)
MAYOR TIRSELL STATED THAT IT IS THE CONSENSUS OF THE COUNCIL TO
DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE INCLUDING THE CHANGES
ADOPTED THIS EVENING BY THE COUNCIL.
REPORT RE SEWER
CONNECTION AGREE-
MENT (H. Dhont)
The application for a sewer connection for H. Dhont was continued
to next week because the applicant left.
REPORT RE COMMERCIAL
USES - FIRST STREET
The report from the Planning Director concerning commercial uses
on East First Street was noted for filing.
It was noted that a monthly report will be coming to the Council
concerning uses on First Street.
REZONING APPLICATION
FOR REZONING ON NO.
LIVERMORE AVE. (Trevino)
The application by Noe S. Trevino for rezoning of property loca-
ted at North Livermore Avenue and Chestnut Street from RM to
CB-l was scheduled for public hearing on May 17, 1976, ON MOTION
OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
P.C. MINUTES -
4/6/76 and 4/20/76
The planning commission minutes for the meetings of April 6, 1976,
and April 20, 1976, were noted for filing.
REPORT RE FIRE DEPT.
EQUIPMENT PURCHASE
The City Manager reported that it is essential that a replacement
Fire Department pumper unit be purchased to be placed in service
in lieu of one of the current units. Substantial savings can be
realized through purchase from the State Office of Emergency Ser-
vices who must receive notice of intention to purchase prior to
the month of June.
The estimated delivery time would be approximately 14 months and
financing would be lease purchase method with a bank loan, over
a 5-year term. It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolu-
tion authorizing acquisition of a pumper unit from the State OES,
in the amount of $57,977.54, and to negotiate a lease purchase
loan with a local lending institution providing the most favorable
rate.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE RECOMMENDATION WAS ADOPTED.
Cm Turner added that he would want the lowest financing quali-
fied - would the interest be add-on or annual percentage, etc.
CM-32-l94
Hay 3, 1976
RESOLUTION NO. 105-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS
FOR PURCHASE OF A PUMPER FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT AND
AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF LEASE/PURCHASE AGREEMENT
FOR SAID EQUIPMENT.
REPORT RE DISPOSAL
SITE AGREEMENT AMEND.
The report from the City Manager concerning the agreement amendment
for the disposal site was postponed.
REPORT RE SB 1714
The City Manager reported that SB l7l4 would remove the pre-emptory
provisions of state law entitling a local school district to override
local zoning controls on land use.
The League of California Cities has recommended support of the
measure and the staff recommends support.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE COUNCIL EXPRESSED SUPPORT OF THE BILL.
REPORT RE PROPOSED
COMMUNITY MEETINGS
The Council has agreed to conduct community meetings to discuss
various civic matters of local importance. The first meeting is
suggested to involve the budget and municipal finance and the
Council has received a copy of the proposed agenda.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she cannot attend a meeting on May 26th
but could be present if the meeting is on May 25th.
Mr. Parness stated that he would try to find a place in which
the Council could meet that night if they prefer but the reason
the 25th was not selected was because it is a Tuesday evening,
the night the P.C. meets.
REPORT RE UNDERPASS
STOP SIGNS
The report from the Director of Public Works, concerning the stop
signs at the underpass was continued to May lOth.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Tract 1666
/ The resolution concerning Tract 1666 was continued to the meeting
of May 10th.
Res. Rej. Claim
The Council adopted a resolution rejecting the claim of Shirley
Taylor.
RESOLUTION NO. 106-76
A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF SHIRLEY TAYLOR
CM-32-l95
May 3, 1976
Res. - P.C. Appt.
A resolution was adopted appointing RaYmond Brice to the P.C.
RESOLUTION NO. 107-76
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING RAYMOND BRICE TO
THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Res. - Appt. to Energy
Conservation Committee
A resolution was adopted appointing members to the Energy Conserva-
tion Committee:
RESOLUTION NO. l08-76
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBERS TO
THE ENERGY CONSERVATION COMMITTEE
Res. - Appt. to
Housing Authority
The following resolution was adopted appointing members to the
Housing Authority.
RESOLUTION NO. 109-76
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBERS TO THE
HOUSING AUTHORITY (Hazel Ashworth, Marie
Heister, Diana Green)
Res. - Appt. to Com-
munity Affairs Commission
A resolution was adopted appointing Betty Archer to the Community
Affairs Commission.
RESOLUTION NO. 110-76
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING BETTY ARCHER
TO THE COMMUNITY AFFAIRS COMMISSION
Res. Granting CUP -
Twilite Zone
The Council adopted a resolution granting a CUP for the Twilite
Zone.
RESOLUTION NO. lll-76
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT (Twilite Zone)
Res. Granting CUP
(Tantivongsathaporn)
A resolution was adopted granting a CUP for Vithun Tantivongsathaporn,
for an automitive repair on First Street.
RESOLUTION NO. l12-76
A RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
(Vithun Tantivongsathaporn)
CM-32-l96
May 3, 1976
Res. re Rodeo Parade
The Council adopted a resolution requesting permission to use
a portion of Highway 84, for the Rodeo Parade on June 12, 1976.
RESOLUTION NO. 113-76
A RESOLUTION REQUESTING DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
FOR PE~iISSION TO USE A PORTION OF STATE HIGH-
WAY 84 AS THE ROUTE FOR THE LIVERMORE RODEO
PARADE BET~iEEN 8:30 A.M. AND l2:30 P.M. ON
JUNE l2, 1976.
Res. re Parking Zones
The Council adopted a resolution to amend Resolution l29-72,
including certain parking zones.
RESOLUTION NO. ll4-76
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 129-72,
AS AMENDED, RELATING TO LIMITED PARKING ZONES,
BY THE ADDITION OF FOUR LIMITED PARKING ZONES,
AS FOLLOWS: PORTIONS OF MAPLE STREET, MURRIETA
BOULEVARD, FIRST STREET, AND "Q" STREET, CITY
OF LIVERMORE.
CONSENT CALENDAR
APPROVAL
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS ADOPTED, WITH REMOVAL OF THE FIRST
ITEM CONCERNING TRACT 1666.
CM STALEY NOTED THAT HE ABSTAINS FROM THE RESOLUTION RE THE CUP
FOR THE TWILITE ZONE BECAUSE HE ABSTAINED LAST WEEK.
~TTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Noise Problems)
Cm Staley commented that the matter of noise generated by the
Codiroli Ford business was brought up a few times during the
public hearing and he felt it might be appropriate to have
the Noise Committee review the problem.
(Air Pollution)
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he would like to get an update from
the Air Pollution Study Committee, concerning air pollution
in the Valley, with an analysis of the new model that the
BAAPCD has, and how it will be used.
Mr. Parness was asked to contact the Air Pollution Study
Committee.
(Social Concerns Bldg.)
Mayor Tirse11 stated that the architect suggested that at the
time the Social Concerns Building is constructed, there should
CM-32-l97
May 3, 1976
(Social Concerns Bldg.)
be some beautification of the Barn, with trellis work, etc. She
would like consensus from the Council to write to the Cultural
Arts Council as well as LARPD, notifying them that there will be
no money available through the grant for the Social Concerns Build-
ing to do work on the Barn. They should know of this problem in
advance so they can try to obtain money for this purpose at the
time the building is constructed.
The Council concurred.
Mayor Tirsell asked that a copy of the letter be sent to the Beauti-
fication Committee as well as the Design Review Committee.
ORDINANCES
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE ORDINANCES CONCERNING SECURITY AND NEIGHBORHOOD COM-
MERCIAL DISTRICTS, WERE POSTPONED UNTIL NEXT WEEK.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Tirsell adjourned the meeting at 1:40 p.m.
~~ -7h
APPROVE
5l?~~ p R,
Mayor
ATTEST
CM-32-l98
Regular Meeting of May 10, 1976
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore
was held on May 10, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39
South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at
8:07 p.m. with Mayor Tirsell presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Kamena, Turner, Staley and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: ern Dahlbacka
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirsell led the Councilmembers as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES 4/26/76
P. 131, delete third paragraph from the bottom.
P. 134, prior to motion on Twilite Zone, add the following
paragraph: Cm Turner noted that after conferring with the
City of Attorney it was concluded that he does not have a conflict
of interest concerning the Twilite Zone application.
P. ll9, 7th paragraph, "with no particulars mentioned", should
be deleted.
P. l14, 4th paragraph, last line should read: a size of 8 sq. ft.
P. l09, under appointments, change James A. Dal to James A. Day.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF APRIL 26, 1976, WERE APPROVED AS
CORRECTED.
Proclamation - National
Police Week
Mayor Tirsell proclaimed May 15th, Police Memorial Day, and the
week of May 9th as National Police Week. The people of Livermore
would like to recognize the outstanding service rendered to the
community by the Livermore Police Department and the dedicated
man under whom they now serve, Police Chief Ron Lindgren.
The Mayor presented the proclamation to Chief Lindgren.
OPEN FORUM
(Jaycees Air Show)
Skip Claeson, representing the Livermore Jaycees, and on their behalf,
thanked the City Council and the City employees for their assistance
in helping the Jaycees conduct the recent air show.
All of the employees of the City helped immeasurably and he would
like to thank both Bob Logan and Gary Reiners, in particular, who
did an outstanding job in assisting them in obtaining the insurance
necessary to go ahead with the air show.
He then read a letter written by the President of the Jaycees, Lee
Lambert, expressing appreciation and commending the Council and the
City Attorneys for their efforts in helping them obtain the necessary
insurance coverage for the air show.
CM-32-l99
May 10, 1976
(Jaycees Air Show)
Mr. Claeson further stated that the Jaycees did have a successful
air show with an estimated 6,000 people, and they did make money
on the show. Their gross income was about the same as last year
and their expenses were up considerably which they managed to overcome.
(Central Business
District Plan)
Kevin Smith stated that he attended a meeting concerning the plan
for the CBD area and he was very disappointed with the whole plan.
He felt that the plan was very poor and didn't deal with pedestrian
circulation at all.
He stated that he would like to advise that the City not accept
plans from consultants because plans could come from citizens and
the consultants should be reporting on the plans rather than providing
them. Once the consultant has been paid for plans, it is very
difficult and costly to go back and say the City doesn't like the
plan.
COMMUNICATION RE SB l579
re Coastal Commissions
A letter from the San Francisco Bay Chapter Sierra Club, indicated
that unless SB l579 is passed, the Coastal Commissions will fade
away in December and people will be allowed private development
and limited public access to coastal areas.
They urge that the Council express support of SB 1579 for enforce-
ment of the Coastal Protection Plan.
It was noted that the League Committee is studying this bill and
the Council will be receiving more information on it.
Resignation from
Housing Authority
A letter of resignation from the Housing Authority was received
from Herbert Newkirk.
The staff was asked to send Mr. Newkirk a letter thanking him for
his service on the Housing Authority.
REPORT RE LOT SPLIT
REQ~EST - G. R. Duterte
The item concerning the lot split request by Mr. G. R. Duterte
was postponed in order that the City Attorney could review the
ordinance and report back to the Council as to whether or not
the lot split would create future problems.
The City Attorney reported that the ordinance was reviewed and
it is felt that there is no inconsistency with the resolution
concerning sewage allocation. If the Council wants to allow
the lot split this would be fine and it would seem to fit in.
The Planning Director has informed the City Attorney that in his
figuring of available sewer commitments, lot splits were included.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the fact that it is a minor subdivision
and restricted to RL-5, RL-5-9, and RL-6, makes it definitive.
CM-32-200
May 10, 1976
(Lot Split Request =
G. R. Duterte)
Mr. Musso stated that he had an inquiry about RL-lO, last week, as
well as RL-l, RL-2, and there may be some RL-7. He stated that if
the Council would specify RL, only, it would simplify everything.
Mr. Musso stated that there are not that many lots that could be
split and he would suggest that they be referred to the Planning
Commission at the time they are requested rather than to delay
action on this one.
Cm Turner stated that he would like to make some comments about
the P.C. pOlicy. In #2, it says the proposal will improve the
general quality of the older residential areas. In his opinion
there is no evidence that the quality is poor, and he would question
whether this shquld be left in the pOlicy statement.
Mr. Musso stated that there are vacant lots scattered all around
Livermore and people inquire as to whether or not a duplex, apart-
ment house, or commercial could develop on the property. The lots
are being built on with $50,000 homes, and he believes this has
stabilized those neighborhoods. This is the reason he included
the wording. Perhaps the Council would like to change the wording
to, "stabilize" the neighborhood.
Cm Turner stated that he believes this would be a better phrase
to use.
Cm Staley felt this would prevent the Dogwood Park site problem
also.
The Council concurred to change the wording t: "the proposal
will generally stabilize neighborhoods...."
Cm Turner stated that in #3, the first part of the sentence says
that the total number of lots is small and he would question whether
this should be included either.
Mayor Tirsell explained that she believes this is in reference to
the question asked of the P.C., which was if the policy was adopted,
would this open up to wholesale subdivision. They are commenting
back that the total number available is small.
CM STALEY MOVED TO RECOGNIZE THIS AS A CITY POLICY AND ASK THE
STAFF TO PREPARE AN ACCEPTABLE RESOLUTION. MOTION WAS SECONDED
BY CM TURNER. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Mr. Duterte asked what this means in terms of his application, and
was told that it would be approved.
REPORT RE REQUEST
FOR SEWER CONNECTION
Harold Dhont
The Director of Public Works reported that a sewer connection
agreement was entered into between the City and Mr. Harold C.
Dhont in 1973. The agreement expired because Mr. Dhont did not
connect to the sanitary sewer or pay any of the required fees.
He did not post a bond for the required public works improvements.
It is recommended that the Council approve execution of the sewer
connection agreement, providing that it will not be executed until
the bonds have been submitted in a form satisfactory to the City
Attorney, and providing that all applicable fees shall be paid.
Cm Staley stated that the report from the staff this week indicates
that Mr. Dhont was not connected to the City sewer, but the report
CM-32-201
May lO, 1976
(Request for Sewer Connection
Harold Dhont)
previously submitted by the staff indicated that there was
no evidence of a septic tank on the property. He would like
to know if there is a septic tank for the property or if Mr.
Dhont is connected to the City sewer system.
Mr. Lee stated that people from the city went to inspect the
area and dug down into the ground and where the lateral was
extended to the City sewer line, there was no connection. On
the basis of that, it was concluded that there is not a connec-
tion. Very likely there is a septic tank or a holding tank of
some type on the site.
Mr. Musso explained that the County is requiring connection to
the City sewer system because the property is within 200 ft.
of the city sewer connection.
Mayor Tirsell asked what would prevent Mr. Dhont from connect-
ing to the City sewer and posting the bond, etc., since the
County has no records of a septic tank.
Mr. Lee stated that the County would be notified that the agree-
ment was not signed and that Mr. Dhont was not connected to the
City sewer system, if the bond is not posted, etc.
Mayor Tirsell asked Mr. Dhont if he has a septic tank and Mr.
Dhont indicated that he does not and that he is prepared to
fulfill all the obligations concerned with connection to the
City sewer.
Cm Staley asked Mr. Dhont how sewage is being disposed of if
he does not have a septic tank and is not connected to the City
sewer, and Mr. Dhont stated that he is not in operation at this
time.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO ADOPT THE REQUEST FOR CONNECTION, WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS AS OUTLINED BY THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM KAMENA INCLUDED IN THE MOTION THAT THE STAFF BE DIRECTED TO
PREPARE THE APPROPRIATE RESOLUTION, ACCEPTABLE TO THE SECOND.
Cm Turner stated that this is property located in the unincor-
porated area of the City and Mr. Dhont will be connecting to
the City sewer. It is his understanding that the policy of
the City is that they have to consider annexation before a
connection will be allowed.
It was noted that this is part of the sewer agreement that Mr.
Dhont has to sign.
Mr. Dhont asked if the improvements for the front part of his
property will be delayed for some time.
Mr. Lee explained that the agreement requires that the bond
be posted for improvements along the frontage road and that
they be installed within a period of six months.
Mr. Dhont stated that this would be agreeable with him.
Mr. Lee added that the improvements for Preston Avenue would
be delayed until they are required by the City.
CM-32-202
Hay 10, 1976
DISCUSSION RE
UNDERPASS TRAFFIC
(No. P. Street)
Cm Turner had requested that the Council discuss the traffic situa-
tion at the UP" Street underpass area, and the possibility that
perhaps four-way stop signs are not necessary.
Cm Turner stated that he spent part of this past weekend observing
the area and he and Mr. Lee spent the lunch hour today to look at
the traffic situation at "p" Street and along North Livermore Avenue.
He has come to the realization that it is necessary to have the
four-way stop signs.
He would urge that the Council press for priority on signalization
at these streets, during the budget hearings.
Cm Turner stated that he does believe the City should have one
through street going from one end of town to the other and the
Council might consider removing the stop signs at "L" Street
where it intersects with Railroad Avenue. This is the four-way
stop that was created as a temporary situation with the closure
of "P" Street, and also at the intersection of Chestnut and "L"
Street, so that traffic can go straight through town on "L" Street
without having to stop.
Mr. Lee stated that the intersection of Chestnut and "L" Street
was a problem before the Railroad Relocation Project began. This
has always been a high accident intersection and to cope with the
problem the four-way stop was implemented. He would suggest that
a traffic count be done at these two intersections to see what
affect removal of the four-way stop would have. He would agree
that the stop at Railroad and ilL" could probably be eliminated.
Mayor Tirsell asked that the City Manager direct the staff to
conduct a traffic count at those intersections.
DISCUSSION RE
OCCUPANCIES - Hutka Area
The Director of Public Works submitted a report concerning the
uses in the buildings located in the Hutka Industrial area located
on First Street, and as to whether the uses are permitted.
It was noted that all of the uses are permitted with the exception
of the professional cleaning service located in the Avon Building,
and the report indicated that it is not known at this time whether
or not that use is permitted but that it probably is.
Cm Staley stated that it wasn't clear to him from the report, what
some of the businesses are doing. It is a little confusing that
the House of Redwood manufactures aluminum screens, only.
Mr. Musso stated that the City goes by the business license, as
to what the uses are, but they do have to have a certificate of
occupancy as well as a business license.
Cm Staley stated that, in other words, all of these uses had a
certificate of occupancy before they went in.
Mr. Musso stated that this is not the case. For instance, the
professional cleaning use was one use that he didn't know about
until two or three weeks ago.
Cm Staley wondered how the business could occupy an office without
an occupancy permit and Mr. Musso stated that they just move in.
CM-32-203
May 10, 1976
(Discussion re Building
Occupancy - Hutka Area)
Mr. Parness stated that the businesses are located in a build-
ing occupying only a part of the building. The building has
to be finally inspected and certified before it can be occu-
pied and that process was followed. However, the uses, with
respect to conformance with the zoning ordinance, is this type
of report. The staff did check out the business licenses and
not all of them do have business licenses but when the City
does focus attention to something like this they are able to
devote some staff time to reviewing the businesses. The staff
has found that only three of the major businesses do have busi-
ness licenses but the others will be investigated and made to
comply.
Mr. Nolan stated that he has sent his Accounting Supervisor
out to note the names of all the businesses on the site and
that each of the businesses will receive a business license
tax form.
Cm Staley noted that the Social Security office was approved
as a business and financial office, according to the report.
Mr. Musso stated that it was one of the early occupants of
the Avon Building. It has been there for about a year and
the only reason it could be permitted would be as a business
and financial office.
Cm Staley wondered if the fact that it does not conform with
the zoning has ever been discussed with them.
Mr. MussO stated that it has not been mentioned.
Cm Staley commented that he would recommend that the use be
abated, as not in conformance with our zoning laws. A Social
Security office is one of those services that belong in the
downtown area and not in the fringe area of town. In his
opinion this area is unappropriate for this type of service.
Cm staley stated that it would appear that the Transmission
Service should fall under Section l4A.32, Repair Service.
Mr. Musso explained that they don't repair anything. They
bring transmissions in and store them and then sell them
wholesale.
ern Staley noted that the point is, he doesn't want to dis-
cuss each use individually and whether or not they should
be abated. This area was designated I-I but is becoming
commercial by bending and ignoring zoning regulations. He
doesn't know if this is because they are not getting certi-
ficate of occupancy first, or what the problem is, but he
would like to see this practice stopped. It is inappropriate,
it harms the downtown area, and it harms the City's plan for
First Steet. This creates the situation the Council had a
couple of weeks ago for an application for a repair shop
which will be fronting on East First Street and will increase
the pressure for strip commercial in that area.
There is a new building being constructed in the same zone that
appears to be an office building and he believes the City needs
to bring to Mr. Hutka's attention that every business that lo-
cates there must have a certificate of occupancy and that it
is his responsibility to tell his prospective tenants this.
Secondly, the P.C. should review the Zoning Ordinance to the
end of eliminating this type of misuse of the zoning; specifi-
cally the definition used in Uses Permitted.
CM-32-204
May 10, 1976
(Discussion re Building
Occupancy - Hutka Area)
The definition of uses under Section 14.22 is either much too
broad or there is not the proper sort of explanation of what
those uses permitted should be.
Mr. Musso stated that this matter carne up during the discussion
with the Planning Commission over the auto repair. It is not a
matter of anyone of the uses locating there but the fact that
all of the marginal uses have located there and have created a
different atmosphere than an industrial area. The Planning Com-
mission would agree with the Council.
Cm Staley stated that it is fine that the P.C. would agree but
he would like something done about the problem.
CM STALEY MOVED THAT THE STAFF BE DIRECTED TO CONTACT MR. HUTKA
AND EXPLAIN THE NECESSITY FOR A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY AND
THAT HE NOTIFY ALL OF HIS PROSPECTIVE TENANTS THAT THEY WILL NEED
A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. MOTION SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
Cm Turner stated that the motion made by em Staley will not solve
the problem.
Cm Staley commented that this is correct, but he believes that this
is one of the things that can be done to help. First of all, Mr.
Hutka is familiar with the zoning laws here and the prospective
tenants are not, if they are from out-of-town. He is sure the
Social Security Office would not have intentionally located in
an I-I zone if they knew they were in violation of any City zoning
laws. Many times the lease is applicable, even though the premises
cannot be legally occupied because of the zoning. If Mr. Hutka
is asked to inform the people of this, it would go a long way
towards solving the problem.
Cm Turner stated that he is not sure this should be Council direc-
tion to Mr. Hutka and th~t.~~e staff should inform Mr. Hutka of
the problem. Also, it rs~e responsibility of the owner of a
building to insure that each of his tenants has an occupancy permit.
().k' A/,td, (!i!f!1r2.ut
Cm Staley noted that the motion did not state that Mr. Hutka
insure that they have it - the motion asks that Mr. Hutka inform
them that it is necessary to obtain one.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM STALEY MOVED TO REFER THE I-I ZONING ORDINANCE TO THE P.C.
FOR REVIEW, AND SPECIFICALLY ASK THEM TO SEE WHAT STEPS COULD
BE TAKEN TO PREVENT THE DE FACTO CHANGE IN ZONING FROM INDUSTRIAL
TO COMMERCIAL BY USES LOCATING IN AN I-l AREA.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she will not support the motion because
the Council designated the area I-I for any use listed in the
zoning ordinance, as long as it could conform. It is obvious
that the uses which are there are marginal but the City used
the standards from the Industrial Classification Manual.
Cm Staley commented that he has some suggestions for other changes
that could be made. For instance, the uses that appear to be more
commercial in nature could be required to not front on the major
streets. This is the type of thing that the P.C. should consider.
Secondly, there is the question of signs, and there may be some way
to determine whether a business is manufacturing, WhOlesaling, or
retailing, that could be built into the ordinance. However, the
immediate problem is to focus attention on what is happening out
there and attempt to change it before it is irrevocable.
CM-32-205
May 10, 1976
(Discussion re Building
Occupancy - Hutka Area)
Mayor Tirsell stated that she believes every time a use changes
the City should look at it, and this was the whole crux of going
to a new ordinance and there was a tremendous reliance placed
on the occupancy permit. The staff should review the applica-
tions and get out to see if the use is allowed or not allowed.
If this is to be referred to the P.C. the Council should discuss
whether or not it is the occupancy permit that is at fault.
It is the occupancy permit that the whole ordinance hangs on,
and perhaps the City does not have the staff to police it, or
maybe they just aren't policing it.
Cm Staley stated that he would be happy to broaden the motion.
He believes everyone on the Council agrees with the problem
and perhaps recommendations could be made by the P.C. for a
solution. Perhaps the wording of the motion is such that the
Council can't support it and he would be willing to change it.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the motion is very general. The
council just adopted the Industrial Ordinance last fall and
now the occupancy permit takes on tremendous importance with
that ordinance. Perhaps the Council just hasn't gone far
enough with what is written down. Perhaps the City Manager
should be directed to organize the administration of the
occupancy permit. The Council and the P.C. could study this
issue forever.
em Turner stated that he agrees with most of what Cm Staley
is suggesting but who would be the enforcement officer, the
City Manager?
Mayor Tirsell stated that the City Manager would have to deter-
mine whether it would be a building inspector or someone from
the Public Works Department.
Cm Turner felt the ordinance is fairly clear and that the Council
should direct the enforcement officer to find out what the real
situation is and bring it into conformance.
Mayor Tirsell concurred and added that there is no point in
further study.
Mr. Street stated that the certificate of occupancy is in the
Building Code provisions and was designed primarily to assure
that the building is suitable for the type of use intended.
Some uses cannot be placed in some buildings because they
require different standards. Only recently the ordinance
was changed to require a certificate of occupancy as a con-
dition of a business license and he arranged with Mr. Nolan
to have all business license applications referred to the
Building Department. They now check the uses and make a
check with the planning Department, prior to issuing a cer-
tificate of occupancy. This was not done prior to the very
recent change in the ordinance, which was about a month or
two ago.
Mayor Tirsell stated that perhaps the ordinance has not been
in effect long enough to see results.
Cm Staley concurred and WITHDREW HIS MOTION. He stated that
perhaps the staff could report what is happening in the next
regular report that comes to the Council.
CM STALEY MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO CONTACT THE SOCIAL SE-
CURITY OFFICE AND ADVISE THEM THAT APPARENTLY THEY ARE IN
VIOLATION OF OUR ZONING ORDINANCE.
CM-32-206
.Hay 10, 1976
(Discussion re Building
Occupancy - Hutka Area)
Mr. Parness stated that he is sure the Council would also ask in
its direction to the staff that tact be used in discussing this
matter with the Social Security Office people because the City has
tried for years to get them to locate in Livermore and the City is
very happy to have them here.
Cm Staley stated that is exactly his point. The Office is very
welcome and the problem for all businesses is locating in an appro-
priate zone, according to the City's plans. He is sure that if the
Social Security administration had known about they problem they
would never have located their office there.
Cm Staley then asked if the building that is presently being con-
structed on the Hutka site received site plan approval, and also
doesn't it appear to be a commercial type of building?
Mr. Musso stated that it appears to be a commercial building, and
Mayor Tirsell agreed.
Mr. Musso stated that it is difficult to define what the use will
be when they corne in with a building like that.
Cm Staley stated that there should be some way to set up a policy
that is not so difficult to define and one that people can
understand. Possibly the P.C. could make some recommendations.
.Hr. Musso stated that in looking at the list of the 12 uses that
have moved into the facilities over the last two years, probably
only three or four of them had approvals from the City. Maybe
with the new system it, in itself, will take care of the problems.
By instructing the particular property owner that the tenants make
sure they have certificates of occupancy before they are allowed
to lease the facilities, might help. If it doesn't, then perhaps
the ordinance should be more stringent. He added that he does not
want to make the ordinance so stringent that it creates the opposite
problem.
Discussion followed concerning the procedures used in acquiring
occupancy and what uses are allowed.
Mr. Gorland stated that he is surprised at the discussion taking
place by the Council because in most industrial areas the commer-
cial uses are allowed, on a cumulative basis. In other words,
offices are generally included in an industrial area because it
generally has the tendency to upgrade an area. He agrees that
a use should not be allowed that would dissipate the downtown
area, on one hand, but on the other hand he really cannot see
why office type uses would not be allowed, particularly if they
are industrial offices.
Mayor Tirsell pointed out that industrial offices would be allowed.
Mr. Gorland stated that he believes that commercial uses could
be allowed without being inconsistent with good zoning planning
and yet he can understand the Council's concern for not wanting
to dissipate the commercial areas available downtown.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the problem the City is experiencing
is that it costs less to build and locate out in that area and
so everyone is moving out there instead of locating downtown.
The land costs less and the setbacks and other requirements are
less. Less expensive construction means less rent, and everyone
will end up out in an industrial area.
.Hayor Tirsell stated that perhaps there should be strict interpreta-
tion of the ordinance because literal interpretation allows almost
every type of use.
CM-32-207
May 10, 1976
(Discussion re Building
Occupancy - Hutka Area)
Cm Turner stated that if the City follows strict interpretation
of the ordinance the staff will be in the position of having to
determine if it is a permitted use and in many cases the staff
would make no decision and bring the item to the Council. He
stated that he believes they should have the prerogative to
enforce the ordinance as they understand it.
Cm Staley stated that they should be able to do this and they
do, but on the other hand, if it doesn't raise any question in
their mind the use should be approved. If, on the other hand,
it does raise a question then perhaps it is something that
should appropriately be looked at by the P.C. or the Council.
Cm staley commented that his concerns are that the City should
do everything possible to keep the I-I Zoning area on First
Street from becoming a commercial use area.
Reports will be coming to the Council concerning the concerns
raised by the Council.
REPORT RE VOCATIONAL
TRAINING CENTER
The City Manager reported that a vocational training center is
located in Union City and the sponsors of the training center
would like to establish such a program in the Valley.
The program is federally funded but the sponsors would like
some local financial support and a brief presentation will be
made by Father Vincent M. Cowan.
Father Cowan stated that they would like to have a training
center here in the valley for the purpose of training people
for job placement. He has been with ACTEB since July and the
program has been very successful in Union City. It is his
understanding that there is a need in this area for such a
program, in looking at the number of people who are unemployed
which comes to about 8,000 people.
As far as ACTEB requirements, they are on target with lOOt on
jOb placements. They work with people from the industrial areas
and ask the personnel managers to meet with them once a month to
find out what can be done to train people for them and what their
needs are. They are a community based organization and they like
people to provide input and they like an advisory committee made
up from the community.
They have sent papers to Sacramento to become legally incorporated
and tax exempt. They will have an Industrial Advisory Board, a
Board of Directors, and also a Community Advisory Board to insure
that the program meets the needs of the community.
He realizes that it is difficult to obtain money from local com-
munities and that it is budget time here in Livermore and that
the City is faced with a very tight budget. However, they feel
that if the federal government is willing to put up $340,000
for the first six months for the community, that some help from
the community would also be very helpful. They are looking for
help in the way of rent and at present it appears that the only
place available is the old Pleasanton Post Office. This can be
sub-leased from the federal government because the post office
people are moving to a new building and could sub-lease it to
them for the remainder of their lease which is about 2~ years.
They pay $12,000 a year for rent and they feel they could sub-
lease it for $15,000 a year to the Training Center people.
CM-32-208
May lO, 1976
(Report re Vocational
Training Center)
Mayor Tirsell asked if the program is currently funded through
ACTEB, and Father Cowan indicated that they are.
Mayor Tirsell stated that if this is the case, why is the rent
not part of the funding, because rent is part of all other grants
that have been written.
Father Cowan stated that he tried to explain this to ACTEB but
they just do not seem to understand that the rents are so high
out in this area. He stated that Union City helps them with
$600 a month for their rent and expenses. He stated that it does
look good at ACTEB if local assistance is provided. He noted that
transportation was not included in the funding either.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she is very surprised that this got past
her when she served on ACTEB, because if an organization is to
serve the Valley they are to have transportation funds.
Cm Kamena stated that as he understands it, the training center
wants to come to Livermore to serve the Valley and it would not
be a part of the Union City program.
Father Cowan stated that this is correct.
em Kamena asked if the Manpower Advisory Council recommended
funding, and Father Cowan noted that nothing has been declared
official for the Livermore, Pleasanton area. The problem is that
they wish to implement a special project between two fiscal years.
They would like to scrape enough money together to get a program
going for at least six months and then if it is successful they
hope to get in on the funding at the time funds are renewed.
He stated that he has looked everywhere and there is no office
space available for their program and Camp Parks would be the
most economical place to locate but because of the problem of
getting sewage they can't get in there either.
Father Cowan indicated that he will be meeting with ACTEB again
Thursday and he will have more information at that time.
Mayor Tirsell suggested that the item be postponed until Father
Cowan meets with ACTEB. She added that the needs in this Valley
for social services are tremendous and unfortunately the City is
looking at a budget that has been cut drastically already. Be-
cause of the problem of finances, she would not favor picking up
an additional service that would be a cost to the City. She
would, however, be very much in favor of helping the training
center find a location which would be less expensive or in helping
them obtain funding.
Father Cowan stated that he realizes the predicament the City is
in but also realizes that the City knows the program would be
very beneficial to the Valley and he is sure the City will find
some way of helping them.
Cm Kamena stated that ACTEB will be meeting on Wednesday and he
will be reporting back to the Council concerning this item and
assured Father Cowan that the Council will follow through with
trying to assist the training center program proposal.
REPORT RE PUBLIC WORKS
IMPROVEMENTS FOR NAYLOR AVE.
(Capital Metals)
Capital Metals Company, Inc., was required by contract to install
public works improvements along Naylor Avenue when abutting
CM-32-209
May 10, 1976
(Report re Public Works
Improvements for Naylor Ave
Capital Metals)
properties were developed, or within one year. Capitol Metals
has requested a one year extension of the obligation and has
agreed to extend the bond coverage for the work.
The staff recommends that the extension be granted and that a
resolution be prepared authorizing the contract amendment.
CM TURNER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION,
AS RECOMMENDED BY THE STAFF, SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she is concerned about public works
improvements for Naylor Avenue and before she could vote for
a motion such as this, she would like to know from Mr. Lee
when public works improvements will be needed. She asked
about the status of all those properties along Naylor Avenue.
Mr. Lee stated that this property is at the end of Naylor Avenue,
so at the moment a delay would not create a problem. If some
development were proposed west of the property then it would
become important that the improvements be required. As he
recalls, the agreement stipulates that the public works improve-
ments can be required upon demand. In making the extension the
clause could very easily be included to prevent problems in the
event something develops in the area.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT RE
POLICY REGULATIONS RE
LOST & FOUND ITEMS
A report concerning the policy for unclaimed personal property
was submitted to the Council by the Assistant City Attorney
as a result of the Council's indication that they would like
to reconsider revision of the policy.
At present, the police Department retains and ultimately sells
unclaimed personal property.
Cm Staley stated that the policy provides the finder of the pro-
perty must be charged for the care and the storage of the item should
be very frustrating to anyone turning items into the police
Department. He stated that he could understand the cost imposed
on the rightful owner recovering his property but it is dis-
couraging to someone finding property to have to pay costs if
the value of the item is nominal.
The policy requires the finder to pay for the advertisement
in the newspaper as well as the storage fee.
The City Attorney stated that this is what the statute re-
quires and the only alternative would be that the City would
pay for the publishing of the notice in the newspaper.
Mr. Parness stated that publication cost is involved only if
an item is valued over $25, and publication cost is not sub-
stantial. It would seem reasonable that the person getting
the item should pay the cost.
Cm Staley commented that he believes most of the property is
probably reclaimed by the rightful owner and that publishing
costs would amount to no more than $30-$40 a year if the cost
of publishing were charged to the city and property given back
to the finder.
CM-32-2l0
May 10, 1976
(Policy Regulations re
Lost &Found Items)
Mr. Parness stated that he believes the cost of publishing notices
could amount to a substantial cost to the City because in touring
the Police station, there was a large accumulation of unclaimed
articles at the Police station, and there was an auction just 2-3
weeks prior to the day they made a tour. The staff could make a
check as to what an estimated cost would be and also the cost for
normal publication.
Mayor Tirsell asked that the staff prepare this information so the
Council will know what costs they are considering.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she also agrees that someone should not
be penalized for doing the right thing, but on the other hand, the
public should not be penalized because someone did the right thing.
Cm Kamena noted that in reading the report it appears that it is
discretionary as to whether or not a fee would be imposed for the
care and storage of an item. The area where lost items are stored
appears to be large and he would assume that normally a fee is not
charged for storage.
Mr. Parness indicated that this is correct.
em Staley commented that he would like information concerning the
matter because if the cost for the advertisement is nominal and
there is normally no storage fee to the finder then this would
be reasonable. However, he has no way of knowing what the storage
charge is, per day, and whether the charge is $1 per day per item,
or per square footage or what.
The Council asked Mr. Parness to report back to the Council on
these questions.
REPORT RE COMMER-
CIAL ZONING ON
TESLA ROAD (Miglioril
Mayor Tirsell stated that the County allowed commercial zoning
for property owned by Mr. Migliori for nine acres of commercial
property located on Tesla Road.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Council had supported his applica-
tion for a non-conforming use in an agricultural area and she would
like to know what happened to that.
Mr. Musso stated that the matter had to go through rezoning to
establish the use. He stated that use variances are no longer
allowed, which meant that the only way the use could be obtained
would be through the zoning and they allowed the commercial zoning.
Cm Staley indicated that he believes this report and any subsequent
action on the part of the Council would be the subject of an execu-
tive session, but he doesn't understand the issues well enough to
call for an executive session.
Mr. Musso stated that the issue has to do with whether or not the
action on the part of the County was in conformance with the
General Plan.
Mayor Tirsell stated that this would be relative to the County
General Plan, not our General Plan.
CM-32-2ll
May 10, 1976
(Report re Commercial
Zoning, Tes1a Road - Migliori)
Cm Staley stated that he understands all that, but as he under-
stands the issue, it is whether or not the City should institute
legal action to require the County to zone in accordance with
,their General Plan.
Mayor Tirsell stated that Cm Staley is suggesting that there
be an executive session to discuss the item then.
Cm Staley commented that there are a few issues that need to
be sorted out on this he would say that an executive session
would be in order.
Cm Turner stated that he would like to know what prompted the
County to take this type of action and what findings they used
to justify the rezoning.
Mayor Tirsell stated that this is a zoning matter and findings
are not required.
Mr. Musso stated that the County had to resolve that it conforms
to the General Plan because this is a statutory requirement
and apparently they felt it did conform to the General Plan.
Mayor Tirsell asked that the staff obtain copies of the minutes
from the County Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors,
concerning this item, and express to them that the City is having
a real problem with it. When the information arrives it should
be referred to the City Attorney for a report.
REPORT RE LOCATION
OF COMMUNITY SERVICES
CENTER
A letter was received from the Director of Public Works concern-
ing the discussion which took place at the Planning Commission
meeting regarding the location of the Community Services Center.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the architect should be informed that
the City is very serious about the recommendations concerning
the location of that building and about the close proximity to
the Barn.
Mr. Lee stated that he is sure the architect understands that
the drawing that was presented was only conceptual and that he
intends to work with the various committees to see that the
majority of the people are happy with the location.
Mr. Parness stated that the staff intends to meet with the archi-
tect and clarify this point.
SUMMARY OF ACTION
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING OF MAY 4, 1976
A summary of the action taken by the Planning Commission at its
meeting of May 4, was noted for filing.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
At this point Mayor Tirsell asked that the Chamber be cleared so
as to allow the Council to go into an executive session for the
purpose of discussing possible litigation concerning P.M. 1666
after which time the meeting resumed with all members present.
CM-32-2l2
Hay 10, 1976
REPORT RE PM 1666
(David S. Madis)
A resolution had been prepared by the City Attorney to approve the
tentative subdivision map of Tract 1666 in accordance with Council
direction.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION CONTAINING
THE FIVE CONDITIONS, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
The City Attorney stated it should be pointed out to the applicant
on the tentative subdivision map that the Sec. 5 is what his office
has previously discussed with him which is the dedication of
Trevarno Road and bringing it up to residential standards. lihat
they discussed somewhat amends what the Council discussed last
week, which would be a dedication of Trevarno Road and bringing it
up to residential standards.
David Madis remarked that, in other words, the City Attorney's office
has changed the motion that was adopted by the Council. He has a
copy of the minutes and the resolution that was repeated twice
before the Council and duly adopted within the time limits established
by law, and asked if that was correct.
Mr. Logan stated that it was clear that the Council took no final
action until the resolution was before them, and the final action is
tonight, and this resolution varies from the direction to the staff
to prepare a resolution similar to that motion.
Mr. Madis commented that the City Council had called an executive
session anticipating there was to be litigation over this tract, and
there will be if they adopt the resolution presented, because the
Council duly acted, and passed the resolution within the time limit.
Mr. Logan stated that there are no time limits on a parcel map, and
if it is assumed this is a tentative subdivision map, there are no
time limits on it right now.
Mr. Madis stated that he has a copy of eight pages of the minutes
from May 3, 1976, which reflect what the resolution was.
The City Attorney pointed out that the minutes have not been adopted
and until approved they are not official.
Mr. Madis indicated that they are good enough for the Superior Court.
Cm Staley commented that he would like to know what Mr. Madis'
objections are.
Mr. Madis stated that he would suggest that a resolution be adopted
which would allow Trevarno Road to remain a private street and not
to be brought up to City standards. He stated that he sees no basis
for any change and there has been no testimony indicating that there
should be a change.
Mr. Logan stated that Mr. Madis was asking for an assessment district
and an assessment district cannot be created without the street being
public property; therefore, if it remains private property there is
no way the assessment district can be created. The implication is
clear, from the last meeting, in talking about dedication.
Mr. Madis stated that he would like the Council to take a moment to
read the resolution that they voted on at the last meeting.
Mayor Tirsell pointed out that there was no resolution voted upon.
The staff was directed at that meeting to prepare a resolution.
CM-32-2l3
May 10, 1976
(Report re PM l666
David S. Madis)
Mayor Tirsell added that the resolution which is in front of the
Council is the resolution that has been prepared, but has not
been voted on, as yet. She stated that if the Council has noth-
ing to work with the staff has to be directed to prepare something.
Mr. Madis stated that it is necessary to work within the time limits
established by law.
Mayor Tirsell reminded Mr. Madis that Mr. Logan has just said that
there are no time limits on the portion that the City is working on.
The Council expedited the matter for the benefit of Mr. Madis.
Cm Staley noted that Mr. Madis' objection is still not clear to
him.
Mr. Madis stated that he is objecting to any change over what
was approved before. He wants Trevarno Road to remain a private
street because development is not possible with all the require-
ments that the Engineering Department would have. If it has to
be brought up to residential standards it would include all of
the improvements that make it impossible for subdivision. He
stated that he would be satisfied with the provision that they
would make such improvements, as are necessary, for the home-
owners on the street. There is no reason for it to be a public
street and he wants to maintain the street in its present condition.
That was the resolution that was passed by the Council.
Cm Staley stated that in his opinion this was not the resolution
agreed upon by the Council - there was no resolution passed by
the Council. The staff was instructed to prepare a resolution
and perhaps Mr. Madis would like the item continued.
Mr. Madis stated that he believes the matter should be continued
until the Council reads what actually was passed. He asked at
that meeting that the motion be repeated - it was repeated and
it is absolutely crystal clear. There is absolutely no doubt
about what that motion said.
Mr. Madis stated that apparently it doesn't matter what he says.
The City Attorney says the Council has no time limits and the
Council can do as it wishes and if the Council acted on something
before, it is not binding on the City or anyone else, so apparently
he has nothing to say about it.
Cm Staley noted that he believes this is not what the City Attor-
ney is saying. What everyone is trying to do is to arrive at
a solution that is fair, not only to Mr. Madis, but to the City
and everyone else.
Mr. Madis stated that this is what the City Attorney is saying;
either that or the resolution is passed. If the resolution is
not passed then nothing is binding on the Council. If the Coun-
cil is under no time limits then the Council can do as it pleases
at this time anyway. He added that he is not willing to have the
council reconsider.
Discussion followed concerning the meeting and discussion of
April 26, 1976, from which portions of that discussion were
read by Mr. Madis to the Council.
The City Attorney stated that the Council still has the option
to delete the dedication of Trevarno Road. As far as he is con-
cerned the Council direction was to ask for a resolution and he
gave two options on a resolution. The Council can still make the
choice.
CM-32-2l4
May 10, 1976
(Report re PM 1666
David S. !1adis)
The City Attorney commented that there is no need to reconsider.
Reconsideration implies all kinds of things. The direction of the
Council was relatively clear and as he recalls there was some ques-
tion raised about the requirement of dedication or non-dedication
of Trevarno Road. He has been discussing this matter with Mr. Madis
during this past week and he was of the understanding that Mr. Madis
had no objection to a dedication, subject to residential standards,
as opposed to industrial standards, but apparently he misunderstood
Mr. Madis. The Council can put this item over for one week and in
the meantime he could contact Mr. Madis to find out what his inten-
tions are.
Cm Kamena stated that he is at a loss to understand what appears to
be two conflicting statements. One, was that there was some type
of time constraints, and this evening everyone is saying that there
is no time limit. Perhaps the City Attorney could clarify this.
The City Attorney explained that the original application was based
upon a parcel map and he assumed that this was a misnomer and it was
to be a finalized map with time limitations between what action the
P.C. takes, and what the Council does as far as final adoption is
concerned. He is now of the opinion that it was no more than a
tentative subdivision map and there were certain time limits which
the Council effectively acted in, and what the Council is talking
about at this time really doesn't apply. There is no problem with
time limits at this point.
The City Attorney added that if it is a parcel map there are absolu-
tely no time limits to worry about but if it is a tentative map there
is a period of time in which certain time limits must be met.
CM KAMENA WITHDRE~\T HIS SECOND TO THE MOTION.
/
CM STALEY MOVED TO CONTINUE THE ITEM FOR TWO t~EKS, SECONDED
BY CM KAMENA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Report re County
Health System Agency
The City Manager prepared a report concerning the proposed Alameda
County-Contra Costa County Health System Agency and recommended
that the Council adopt a motion instructing that the interest of
the Council be expressed to participate in either the "provider"
or the "consumer" categories and it was decided that our City
would be a "consumer".
Report re County Transp.
Advis~ry Committee
The Council received from Alameda County Transportation Advisory
Committee a 1976 priority list recommended for the improvement and
development of the State Highway system in Alameda County, with
an invitation to attend their Thursday, May 13th meeting.
Cm Staley commented that priority #12 (Route 84 from Vineyard Avenue
to Route 580 (Freeway) near Livermore, should have a higher priority
if at all possible.
Mr. Parness explained that the City is lucky that the two priorities
concerning Route 84, were listed at all. Ordinarily only freeway
construction is all that is listed, and generally only about the
first three projects are ever funded. If it is the Council's desire,
however, he will recommend that #10 and #12 be reversed.
CM-32-215
May lO, 1976
(Report re County Transp.
Advisory Committee)
Cm Staley noted that he would like #10 and #12 to be reversed
on the priority list.
Report re Traffic Signal
at Murrieta & portola Ave.
The Council received a report, informational in nature, concern-
ing a traffic signal at the intersection of portola Avenue and
Murrieta Boulevard. A staff meeting has been held with Supervisor
Murphy to discuss some of the details of the proposal and he will
discuss this item with the County Director of Public Works and the
County staff. He will be informing the City of the County's inten-
tions concerning the signal.
Report re Murdell
Lane Shopping Center
The Director of Public Works reported that a condition of the
approval of Tract 3342 (Great American Land - Overaa) was for
the construction of a 3 ft. high fence fronting a proposed shop-
ping center site at the intersection of Stanley Boulevard and
Murdell Lane. The time for this installation expires May 8, 1976.
The property owner has requested a two year time extension for this
work which will include the usual surety bond and it is recommended
that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing execution of the
amendment to the agreement.
RESOLUTION NO. 117-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF FIRST
AMENDMENT TO SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT (Tract 3342)
Report re Application
re Park Acquisition Grant
The City Manager reported that an application is to be filed with
the state for a third year grant to complete the purchase of the
Woelffel property, along the Medeiros Parkway, westerly of Mur-
rieta Boulevard.
It is recommended that a resolution approving the application
for funds be adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 116-76
.~-
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE APPLICATION
FOR LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUNDS
(MEDEIROS PARKWAY PROJECT)
Res. re Occupancy
of County Premises
The County has granted the City permission to temporarily occupy
the County fire station on College Avenue during construction
of Fire Station #4. The County now requests a corresponding
resolution to be adopted by the City Council.
RESOLUTION NO. 115-76
A RESOLUTION APPROVING TERMS OF OCCUPANCY
OF ALAMEDA COUNTY FIRE STATION, LIVERMORE
CM-32-2l6
May 10, 1976
Design Review
Committee Minutes
Minutes for the Design Review Committee meetings of April 6, and
April 20, 1976, were noted for filing.
Payroll & Claims
There were 97 claims in the amount of $42,300.40, dated April 30,
1976, and approved by the City Manager.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Valley Bike Path)
Mr. Musso stated that the East Bay Regional Park District has asked
that the City of Livermore support their application for funding for
a bike path from the City of Fremont to the City of Livermore, via
Niles Canyon Road and Vallecitos Road. The deadline date for their
application is this week, the 15th.
Mr. Musso indicated that he felt the staff could not support it
because it was not planned.
Cm Staley commented that there would be no cost to the City for
the project and while the Council hasn't had the opportunity to
discuss it in detail, the concept is certainly worthwhile and
although Livermore's support wouldn't be worth very much since we
are not directly affected by the grant, it would be appropriate
to support their grant application.
The staff will send a letter expressing support.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(lip" Street Traffic
Pattern Near Safeway)
Cm Turner stated that he would like to bring up the problem of the
traffic pattern in the area along lip" Street between First Street
and Railroad Avenue.
Mr. Parness stated that a report is being prepared concerning
the problem and Cm Staley commented that this was one of the
concerns he wanted to raise for discussion also.
Cm Staley noted that he is really concerned about the whole shopping
center in terms of congestion in the parking lot and the difficulty
in getting in as well as the exits from the area. He stated that
he also sees a problem in the extension of the centers. We are at a
critical junction in the CBD development and it might be appropriate to
have P.C. consideration of all site plans for the CBD area as well
as zoning and the other duties they assume.
CM-32-2l7
May 10, 1976
("P" Street Traffic
Pattern Near Safeway)
Cm Staley added that he believes the CBD should be considered,
not only from the point of view concerning uses, but also to
have a citizens committee to consider the appearance and all
the parking patterns and bike circulation, etc. He would sug-
gest that this be scheduled for an agenda item for Council dis-
cussion as to what steps need to be taken to assure that the
CBD plans are developed as the Council would like.
Mayor Tirsell suggested that perhaps the Council should also
review the site plan approval.
Cm Turner felt that the Safeway access and parking problem
should also be considered and that it be referred to the P.C.
and perhaps this could be incorporated in future plans for that
area. It is possible that the P.C. is working on this aspect
presently.
Mr. Lee stated that the matter of circulation was planned for
in the shopping center plan. In fact, the circulation plan was
approved by the City Council. There were also bikeways within
the shopping center considered and approved by the Design Review
Committee as well as the Beautification Committee.
Not all of the improvements on the periphery of the shopping
center have been constructed. The medians and the left-hand
stacking lanes have not been constructed as they ultimately
will be on "P" Street, and nothing has been done at all on
Railroad Avenue.
He stated that he will try to cover all of these points in
the report he will be submitting to the Council.
(Sewer Agreements)
Cm Staley stated that the City has sewer agreements with people
outside the City which provides that they may be annexed upon
City request. He would like to know how many outstanding agree-
ments the City has, and whether or not the City should go ahead
and take action in the way of annexation of these properties.
It would be to the City's advantage to annex the properties be-
cause this would give the City additional property tax money to
go into the City's General Fund.
The City Manager explained that just the opposite is true. The
City is enjoying a property tax return in addition to a surcharge
as a condition of the extension of the sewer connection agreement,
without the need of extending City services except sewage. They
do not get pOlice and fire protection.
Cm Staley noted that in this case he would withdraw his comments.
(Ravenswood Priorities)
Mayor Tirsell stated that the construction priorities for Ravens-
wood were included in the Council packet. Apparently this was
discussed by the staff and she wondered if it was something that
was agreed to by the staff.
Mr. Parness stated that it was furnished by LARPD for comments
from the Council and the staff. He stated that in his opinion
it would appear to be reasonable, unless the Council has comments.
Cm Turner noted that it is basically the same schedule discussed
at the meeting whiche he and Cm Miller attended.
CM-32-2l8
May 10, 1976
(Community Affairs
Meeting - 5/25/76)
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Community Affairs Committee will be
meeting at the Rincon Avenue School at 7:30 p.m. on May 25, 1976,
and the public is invited. The subject will be the budget.
(Senior Citizens Month)
Senior Citizens will be celebrating Senior Citizens Month on May llth,
and they have invited the Council to visit them on that day. They
will be there from 1:30 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. tomorrow.
(Announcements)
Mayor Tirsell then read various announcements inviting the Council
to numerous events.
(Deed Recorded for
Fire Station #4)
The City Attorney noted that the deed for Fire Station #4 was
recorded today.
(Noise Abatement
Meeting)
Cm Kamena stated that he noticed on the calendar for May 13th
a meeting for the Noise Abatement Committee and that their guest
speaker will be from Codiroli Ford. He wondered if this has
anything to do with the report requested of the staff concerning
noise from this firm.
It was noted that Mr. Codiroli will be speaking about their paging
system.
ORDINANCES
Security Ordinance
Mayor Tirsell stated that Cm Dahlbacka had proposed that the City
amend the ordinance in the same manner as the Energy Ordinance to
require certain security items to be required at the time of sale.
Mr. Parness noted that this amendment has not been prepared and he
would ask that the item be continued until it has been prepared by
the Police Department.
Cm Tirsell stated that people do not use the locks they have now
and she would like a comment from the Police Department as to
whether or not they feel people would use them or if they feel
it is a necessary amendment.
Mr. Parness stated that they certainly feel the amendment is worth-
while.
Cm Turner stated that he would like to know the cost of installation
at the time of resale.
Mr. Parness stated that he has been told it is about $50 per home
but Cm Turner felt it would have to be higher than $50.
CM-32-2l9
May 10, 1976
(Security Ordinance)
Mr. Parness stated that at present the City is considering
the application for federal grants to hire people to do this
work.
Cm Turner stated that it can't be done for $50 when you con-
sider labor costs and material costs and Mr. Parness stated
that the $50 was for material costs only.
THE ITEM WAS POSTPONED PENDING AN AMENDMENT AND REPORT CONCERN-
ING THE COST, FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
ZO .ORD. RE
CN DISTRICT
Mayor Tirsell stated that under Section lO.44, there is no reference
to signs and if someone is reading the Neighborhood Commercial
Ordinance there should be some reference to the Sign Ordinance
and which section applies.
Mr. Musso noted that this is covered on Page 2.
Mayor Tirsell wondered if bicycle access is also covered.
Mr. Musso stated that bicycles are part of the section relative
to off-street parking and Mayor Tirsell suggested that bikes
be included in this section.
"...parking and loading spaces, including bicycle
access and parking shall be provided......
The Council concurred with this addition.
Mayor Tirsell wondered if the district size of five acres minimum
is consistent with what the new General Plan says.
Mr. Musso stated that it is because a typical CN shopping center
is between three and six acres.
Mayor Tirsell then asked if 6.l.l explains the kind of bank
the City is referring to and Mr. Musso noted that he is not
sure but the City did not, in the past, have something to
differentiate between the type of banking services and they
used the term included in the ordinance to define what the
Council means.
Mayor Tirsell stated that perhaps the requirement of a CUP would
help insure that the type of banking preferred is allowed.
Cm Staley stated that he also has a problem with the phrase
used and recalls that the Council discussed it and had a
rather definite idea of what was wanted but he doesn't
recall the wording that would satisfy this understanding.
Discussion followed, concerning wording which would clarify
what type of bank the Council wants to develop.
The Council concluded that since this has to go back to the
P.C. because of changes, they would ask the P.C. to review
the wording "full service bank".
Page 6 - 10.46 (c). Mayor Tirsell wondered if the P.C.
considered the policing problems involved. If it is an
area that abuts an "R" or an "E" District, they already have
to have a 6 ft. high masonry wall and now the City plans to
require 10 ft. of landscaping in front of it.
CM-32-220
May 10, 1976
(Zone Ord. re
CN District)
Perhaps it really isn't necessary to require that much width for
the planting area, along with the masonry wall because of the
expense that would be involved as well as trying to police the
requirement.
Mr. Musso stated that the 10 ft. was to allow large trees. The
City wasn't necessarily interested in landscaping as much as to
allow for trees. The P.C. can also review this item.
P. 7 - Stored Services Area. Cm Turner stated that the problem in
a shopping center is the loading and unloading in front of the center.
There should be no loading and unloading in the general public area
and he isn't sure how this should be worded.
Mr. Musso stated that the problem is that if a shopping center
is in an area with streets surrounding it, there is, in a sense,
no back.
Cm Turner stated that each store should have a rear entrance for
loading and unloading and in Granada Shopping Center, there is
a rear portion which is screened from the street by large trees.
The P.C. will also review this item.
Cm Staley stated that he also has a concern on page 7. He would
like to know if it should be written in such a way so as to avoid
the problem of having a shopping center in which the first and only
building in the stage of development is the grocery store. In other
words, if the grocery store occupys 50% of the total floor space,
the center could be allowed with only the grocery store as the
tenant. He believes this is also something the P.C. should consider.
Cm Turner stated that there should be something included about
a ramp for the handicapped and Cm Staley commented that he believes
this is now a part of the Building Code. Cm Turner stated that he
would like this pointed out in the ordinance, if possible.
THIS ITEM WILL GO BACK TO THE P.C. FOR RECO~1ENDATIONS ON THE ABOVE
MENTIONED QUESTIONS.
MUNI. CODE ~mND.
RE BUSINESS LICENSES
CM STALEY MOVED TO INTRODUCE THE ORD. AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATIVE TO BUSINESS LICENSE TAXES. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM
KAMENA.
Joe Kelly, attorney representing PG&E, spoke briefly to the Council
concerning the business license fee which will be imposed on utilities,
of 80~ per $1,000. Under the California Constitution, the taxing
powers of the cities are limited with respect to what can be imposed
on utility companies. The applicable provision of the Constitution
incorporated into the ordinance limits the taxing power of the City
to forbid taxation differently than the rate for mercantile, manu-
facturing, and business corporations. He sited the case of Oceanside
vs. Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company.
Mr. Kelly stated that since the City is prohibited by the provisions
of the State Constitution from taxing telephone companies at a higher
rate than that imposed or collected from mercantile, manufacturing,
and business corporation doing business within this state, he would
ask the Council to consider granting PG&E a credit for the franchise
payments which it already makes on its gross receipts. The franchise
is not paid by any of the other utilities in this City - they all pay
a gross receipts fee to the City.
CM-32-22l
May 10, 1976
(Muni. Code Amend.
re Business Licenses)
Mr. Kelly stated that he would like to ask that any tax that
is imposed is imposed in accordance with the provisions of the
Constitution, as outlined in the City's ordinance, wherein the
tax would be at no higher rate than imposed on other businesses
that do business in the City.
Cm Staley asked how Mr. Kelly comes to the conclusion that the
ordinance, as it is drafted, does not tax PG&E in the same way
mercantile organizations are taxed.
Mr. Kelly stated that it taxes at a higher rate because as he
understands it, the grociers and automobile dealers will be
taxed at 50~ or 30~ per $1,000 and PG&E will be taxed at 80~
per $1,000.
Cm Staley stated that all the other businesses, with the excep-
tion of grociers and automobile dealers will be taxed at 809
per $1,000.
Mr. Kelly stated that the mercantile business receiving the
most favorable treatment is the method by which utilities
should be taxed, according to the case of Oceanside vs. Pacific
Telephone.
The City Attorney stated that he would interpret the decision
that no higher rate would be taxed for PG&E - not the lowest
rate they can find in the City.
Discussion followed concerning the interpretation of the case,
and what the Council feels about the tax.
Cm Staley commented that he believes the Constitution is to
prevent the discriminatory tax against utilities and in his
opinion our ordinance, in no way, discriminates against the
utilities. He would favor the City Attorney's interpretation.
Mr. Kelly mentioned the Union Pacific case in which they were
to have been entitled to a lower rate of tax because a busi-
ness corporation should receive no better treatment than the
utilities.
Celia Baker, 541 Bell Avenue, stated that as she understands
the new business license tax, if a business has a gross of
$10,000 they would pay $40, or $4 per $1,000, and a business
with a gross of $20,000 would pay $40 also which would be
$2 per $1,000. She felt this to be unfair.
Cm Kamena stated that if he understands what Ms. Baker is saying,
the minimum is $40 and based on 80~ per $1,000, if you gross
$10,000 your tax should be only $8. Instead, it is $40, because
of the $40 minimum which is 5 times the amount of 80~ per $1,000.
If he interprets this correctly, Ms. Baker is saying she does not
like the minimum tax.
Ms. Baker stated that this is essentially correct. She stated
that she does not mind paying the license but it does seem '
unfair compared to 50~ for some of the other businesses.
Mr. Nolan noted that there was a typographical error in section
12.23, which he explained.
Mayor Tirsell asked the amount of revenue that will be lost by
implementing the 50~ rate for grocery stores and auto dealers,
and Mr. Nolan stated that this will mean a loss in revenue to
the City of $10,000 to $12,000.
CM-32-222
Hay 10, 1976
(Muni. Code Amend.
re Business Licenses)
Mr. Nolan added that the proposal for the minimum fee of $40 will
offset the loss by having the separate category for the grocery
stores and auto dealers.
Rebecca Hundoble, stated that in allowing the separate category
for the grocery stores and auto dealers, the City is going to get
many businesses coming before the Council asking for special
privileges. She added that she was impressed with the figures
mentioned by Mr. Davis last week in comparing Livermore's business
license tax compared to those in other neighboring cities. Last
week she told the Council that the reason Oakland's business license
was lowered for grocery stores and auto dealers was probably because
of pressure and this is exactly what is happening in Livermore.
Don Miller, 2862 ~vaverly, apologized for stating in earlier testimony,
what the loss of revenue would be to the City if auto dealers and
grocery stores were placed in a separate category. He stated that
he wasn't able to speak with ~1r. Nolan and someone gave him some
incorrect figures. The loss would be less than what he thought.it
would be. The loss would be $11,000 rather than $15,000. Mr.
Nolan just pointed out that with a minimum tax of $40, the City
should gain about $7,000 more making the estimated loss to the
City much less than what everyone had estimated.
Mr. Miller stated that he would like to argue, however, that a
'second category is not justified on any logical argument, based
on profitability. In his opinion, the second category is a special
privilege for the two business categories. If a second category is
going to be created, as the Council determined to do last week, he
would urge that the Council consider a compromise between the Com-
mittee's recommendation of no separate category and 80~ for every-
body, and the auto dealers proposal for 509, for a compromise of
about 659 per $1,000 for everybody. He feels this compromise has
a justification in our present practice because it is essentially
the same ratio as the present Category, "B", which includes auto
dealers and grocery stores, is to our present Category "A".
Mr. Hiller stated that 65~ is 80% of Category "A", and this would
not be an unreasonable compromise for the Council to consider
because the difference would raise a little more money for the
next year. Also, if the Council would consider not having a
second category, besides the reasons offered by Mrs. Hundoble,
the City would also avoid a possible law suit.
Crn Turner stated that there was a proposal to split the increase
gradually over a two year period and he would like to know if
this is a closed issue.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she is not in favor of it.
Cm Staley commented that he believes one of the reasons the Council
decided not to split the increase, is because the majority of the
businesses are not suffering the type of large raises that the
original proposed ordinance anticipated.
Cm Turner stated that as far as pressure is concerned, he was not
submitting to pressure because he was not in favor of an increase
in the first place. There are some aspects of the ordinance, how-
ever, that he believes are good. For instance, he believes the
PG&E tax is good and he accepts this tax, and also the waiver for
out-of-town physicians is something he agrees with.
Cm Turner noted that he simply is not in favor of this type of
formula for taxing and he just cannot vote for it but will not
go through all the reasons again.
CM-32-223
<.
l\1ay 10, 1976
(Muni. Code Amend.
re Business Licenses)
Cm Kamena stated that he believes he will abstain from the motion.
Mayor Tirsell stated that if Cm Kamena abstains this will pre-
sent a problem because there has to be at least three votes
in favor of introducing the ordinance.
Cm Kamena noted that the ordinance is important and he will
vote in favor of it.
MOTION TO INTRODUCE THE ORDINANCE FOR FILING AND TO BE READ
BY TITLE ONLY PASSED 3-1 (Cm Turner dissenting, Cm Dahlbacka
absent) .
MUNI. CODE AMEND. RE
REGULATIONS CONCERNING
LOST & FOUND ITEMS
The proposal for a Municipal Code amendment to repeal regula-
tions concerning lost and found items was postponed, pending
further information for the Council.
MUNI. CODE M4END. RE
ADVANCED UTILITY CONNECTION
CM STALEY MOVED TO INTRODUCE THE MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT
RELATIVE TO ELECTRICAL CONNECTIONS, TO BE FILED, AND READ
BY TITLE ONLY. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL.
Cm Turner stated that he objects to the change because as
far as strained relationships are concerned, that's just
business. He stated that he would like to know how often
the City has a problem concerning advance connections.
Mr. Street stated that there is a problem quite often.
Cm Turner stated that he does not know how people can operate
without electricity. He would assume that they test the
electricity, as a temporary hook-up, and then disconnect it.
Mr. Street stated that this is not the case and this is where
the problem comes about. The developer is given a connection
so they can have light to complete the construction and test
their equipment, etc., on the basis of a letter they submit
stating that they will not occupy the building for other pur-
poses, but in most cases when it comes time to move in they
do so as long as they have the electricity and then it is up
to the City to try to get them to meet whatever requirements
have not been met.
Cm Turner stated that in his opinion the charging of $100 will
not remove strained relationships but rather there seems to be
a communication problem involved. He would not be in favor of
the change.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the $100 is returned.
Cm Turner stated that the problem is one of strained relations,
and $100 deposit will not change that situation at all. It is
a matter of a problem in communication.
Mayor Tirsell stated that this is not her interpretation at all.
Mr. Street is saying that if all the requirements have not been
met, such as landscaping, etc., for $100 the developer can connect
to electricity and test their equipment.
CM-32-224
May 10, 1976
(Muni. Code Amend. re
Advanced Utility Connection
Mr. Street commented that any strained relations is the result of
someone not honoring the commitment he made when he received approval
to connect to the electrical service on a temporary basis with the
agreement that he would not occupy the building until everything had
been completed.
Cm Turner stated that his point is that $100 will not make a dif-
ference.
Mr. Street stated that this may be true but it is his op1n10n that
it will. Most people will respond to get their $100 back.
Cm Kamena asked if this applies to residential as well as commercial
and it was noted that it does.
MOTION PASSED 3-1 (Cm Turner dissenting, Cm Dahlbacka absent).
CITY ~mNAGER
STATUS REPORT
PUC Hearing re Car
Wash on First Street
The City Manager stated that a solution to the car wash entrance
problem on First Street was made at the PUC hearing. There will
be a one-way entrance gate installed in the pavement which is
satisfactory to the owner.
The examiner has agreed to meet again on the 18th, but in the mean-
time this arrangement will be worked out between the City, the state,
and the owner.
A substantial portion of the project is being held in abeyance,
pending this decision. This is for the occupancy of the relocated
tracks by Southern Pacific.
Underpass Landscaping
The underpass landscaping is about 80% complete and work is progressing.
Slurry Seal Bid
Slurry seal bids have been received, as part of the budget, and
the estimated amount for that work was $40,000, but the low bid
was at $24,000. The City has $16,000 remaining and the staff will be
back to the Council with a report asking that further bids be allowed
for more work to be done on this same budget appropriation.
First Street/So. Livermore
Avenue Project
The First Street/North Livermore Avenue intersection project is
progressing and the street surface should be paved within the
next day or two for traffic use.
Mills Square will be planted soon, as this area is just about
complete.
CM-32-225
May 10, 1976
Bowling Alley
The Planning staff has indicated that the bowling alley has sub-
mitted plans for expansion, which they have been talking about
doing for a long time. Hopefully, expansion plans will include
improvements to their site.
Noise Element
The Noise Element has been completed and is ready for a public
hearing along with the Scenic Highway Element. This will be
on the Council agenda very soon for scheduling of public
hearing dates.
When the two elements are adopted this will complete the City's
full statutory requirements for elements to the General Plan
process.
Commerce/Industry
The Community Development Director has been circulating among
industrial and commercial enterprises in our City and has been
doing a lot of outside contact. He is looking into various types
of federal programs that the City may qualify for.
The fee survey is underway by Mr. Gorland and the Building Inspector
and is expected to be processed through the Industrial Committee
and, in turn, back to the City Council before too long.
police Department
The police Department has reported they have found our cars. Mr.
Parness explained that there was a specified delivery date from
the bidder which was 90 days, but due to a computer error, the
cars were missent, but they have been found and are enroute, and
will be in service within a couple of weeks.
Labor Negotiations
Labor negotiations are underway with two of the employee organiza-
tions - the clerical and technical - which contract expires on
July 1, and also the mid-management group. The other two employee
organizations will not have a contract expiration until during the
course of the next fiscal year - October 1 for one group and January 1
for the other two groups.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Council,
meeting was adjourned at 11:30 p.m. to an executive session
pending litigation.
A -?Yl '7:A ~ -' ft
., Mayor
~
the
to discuss
APPROVE
ATTEST
Live
CM-32-226
Regular Meetin~ of May 17, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
May 17, 1976, in the Hunicipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:10
p.m. with Mayor Tirsell presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Kamena, Staley and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: Cm Dahlbacka (seated later) and Cm Turner
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirse11 led the Councilmembers as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
OPEN FORUM
(Heritage Guild re
Old Duarte Garage)
Janet Newton, 2131 Chateau Place, stated that as a representative
of the Heritage Guild she would like permission to hold a public
meeting in the old Duarte garage on Sunday, June 6, for the purpose
of showing how the old building could be made into a unique museum
of old cars and other artifacts of the Lincoln Highway, of which
the garage was once a part.
Permission to hold the public meeting was granted by the Council.
CM DAHLBACKA WAS SEATED AT THIS TIME.
(re Continuation of
HORIZONS Program)
Sherry Woodruff, 1010 Lisbon, speaking on behalf of the League of
Women Voters, stated that they support the continuation of the
prevention and diversion program (HORIZONS) for the juveniles
in our community who are in need of this program.
After a study concerning the results of the program, which is
presently funded by the Office of Criminal Justice Planning,
they have concluded that it seems to be successful in changing
the behavior of juveniles. Of the 232 youths who have been
referred to HORIZONS by the Livermore Police Department, only
17.1% were repeat offenders after a two year period.
The League of Women Voters would urge that the City allocate funds
for the continuation of HORIZONS, in the upcoming budget session.
P.H. RE APPLICATION OF
NOE S. TREVINO FOR REZON-
ING OF PROPERTY AT
CHESTNUT & NO. LIVERMORE
Mayor Tirsell stated that a public hearing has been scheduled for the
purpose of hearing testimony concerning the application by Noe S.
Trevino for rezoning of property located at the intersection of
Chestnut Street and North Livermore Avenue (SW corner) from RM
to CB-l.
Mr. Musso explained the location of the property and noted that
the item has been pending for some time because of the various
things that have been happening in the area, grade separation,
General Plan amendment, and the Specific Plan for the downtown
area.
CM-32-227
Hay 17, 1976
(Public Hearing re
Noe S. Trevino prop.)
Mr. rlusso stated that the matter has been delayed for over a
year during which times all of the problems for the area were
being resolved, and a decision made by the P.C. based on various
factors.
with regard to the Specific Plan, the Plan does not call for com-
mercial - it calls for urban high density, for which it is presently
zoned (RM) which would allow for apartment type of development on
the property.
The General Plan also does not show commercial for that area and
the area was designated in accordance with the General Plan which
shows multiple residential. The P.C. recommended denial of the
application for commercial zoning based on non-conformance with
the General Plan and not being a necessity for the convenience
and welfare of the general public with the findings specified.
One of the items discussed was the intent to not creating a new
commercial street - Chestnut; this was the basis of the whole
discussion. It is felt that Chestnut, though it is commercial
in part, it is primarily residential in nature and should remain
as such.
Cm Staley questioned the zoning south of the orange line on the
map and Mr. Musso explained that the General Plan shows this area
to be commercial. There is to be commercial south of the orange
line with residential of higher density north of the orange line.
Cm Staley noted that "K" Street is blocked off now because of the
railroad tracks which means that there is half a block of commer-
cial which has no access other than through what is now zoned as
residential.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that she believes general commercial would
be allowed in a CB District and wondered if commercial service
would require a CUP. Mr. Musso indicated that this is correct.
The General Plan designates the southern area Commercial and
this could include anything from professional commercial on
up to CB or CG - this has been adopted so he would assume that
any designation as commercial would be acceptable.
Mayor Tirsell asked if a change would require a General Plan
amendment, and Mr. Musso noted that he does not believe that
a change for 10,000 sq. ft. would require a change in the
General Plan.
Ray Herman, representing the applicant, explained the traffic
pattern for that area adjacent to the underpass, and the
difficulty created by the development of the underpass and
track relocation in that area with one-way streets.
Hr. Herman stated that the Southern Pacific Development
Shopping Center needs competition. The City has approximately
200-250 acres of property zoned for commercial use and he would
be interested in knowing how many people actually shop in Liver-
more, who live in Livermore, other than for necessities. It
seems that Livermore is not able to grab the bull by the horns
and develop something sensible. He is thinking about retail
competition with southern Pacific and he would urge that the
Council allow something that would offer competition with S.P.
Mr. Herman added that North Livermore is to become a main
artery into Livermore and they believe that what they would
propose will service many people and will help with the down-
town congestion problem.
CM-32-228
May 17, 1976
(Public Hearing on
Noe S. Trevino Prop.)
Mr. Herman continued that they have estimated that the total population
in the area of North ilL" Street up to portola Avenue and down First
Street to Scott Street, is 1,071, and is serviced only by the Quart
House and Ace-Hi Liquor Store, both of which have a parking problem
and problems of ingress and egress.
He stated that this estimated population does not include people
living in the Meadows area because it was not developed at the
time the figures were computed.
In Zone #10 there are 1,550 single family dwelling units from ilL"
Street to Portola and on over to Rincon. He stated that he could
be mistaken on the west boundary line of Zone 7 but he believes
it extends to Rincon Avenue. The only service for this area is
at the small market located recently on Portola Avenue.
In 1973, the traffic count for cars on Chestnut Street at the
intersection of "L" Street, was 4,421. At the intersection
of Chestnut and North Livermore, the traffic count was 2,301.
South of Chestnut, on North Livermore, the traffic count was
7,263. This was before there was an underpass and people were
turning east or west on Railroad Avenue.
Mr. Herman stated that they want to develop something that would
service people in that area and eliminate the necessity of driving
all the way to Safeway to get what they need. There are duplexes
and apartments in that vicinity as well as single family units and
they would hope to service 7,200 people.
Tom Bailey, property owner adjacent to the area, stated that he
believes the property in question has no value as residential
use and that the only value would be in some type of commercial.
The old property on the right that used to be residential is gone
because of the track relocation and the underpass and there is
not that much traffic corning from the residential area. The
majority of traffic will come from North Livermore Avenue. He
added that he has nothing to gain from a rezoning but he believes
that serious consideration should be given to rezoning. Something
should be done to make the property useful to the public, would
generate revenue for the City, and what else is there to consider.
CM STALEY MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, SECONDED BY CM
DAHLBACKA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOn1"1ENDATION OF THE P. C. TO
DENY THE APPLICATION FOR REZONING, FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL.
Cm Dahlbacka asked if there is an EIR concerning the proposal
and Mr. Musso noted that there is.
CM DAHLBACKA ADDED TO THE MOTION THAT THE COUNCIL ACCEPT THE
EIR. SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL.
Cm Staley commented that in his opinion the treatment of that
entire block is inconsistent and poorly zoned, even though he
does not feel strongly about zoning it commercial. It does
not make any sense to make the south half of the block commercial,
with no access, and make the north end residential. Either the
corner area should be made commercial, which would allow for
access, or the whole block should be rezoned residential.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that in the minutes from the P.C. hearing, it
was noted that a dividing line for commercial, in the middle
of a block, stops pressure from across the street better than
if the line is drawn at the street.
CJ:l1-32-229
May 17, 1976
(Public Hearing re
Noe S. Trevino prop.)
Cm Dahlbacka stated that as the Council is aware, from pre-
vious discussions, there is always considerable pressure
to continue certain zoning across boundaries.
The other reason for not having residential right up against
the railroad tracks is the consideration of noise. If the
whole block is made residential then the dwelling units along
the tracks have to have a large noise mitigation factor.
In development of the General Plan for the CBD area, an attempt
was made to provide some high density residential areas in the
downtown area, and this peripheral area seems to be reasonable
for this type of development.
Cm Dah1backa added that in his interpretation, a General Plan
amendment would be necessary if this area were rezoned, because
the line between districts is clearly drawn down the center of
the block. He believes that the line down the center of the
block has reasonable arguments for the division between the
residential and commercial, which are both desirable uses in
that area.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that there is an access problem on the south
side of the block, for some of the commercial properties; however,
not all commercial uses have the same need for a large volume of
traffic. He is sure there will be some uses that will be suitable
for that location.
Cm Kamena stated that he would like to speak against the motion
to adopt the recommendation of the P.C. for a number of reasons.
The unique geography of that particular area does not lend itself
to residential, as it is now zoned; the likelihood of people
wanting to live on that corner with higher density is not
probable; and he is not convinced that it would take a General
Plan amendment to approve rezoning. If it is necessary to amend
the General Plan, however, he recalls the Mayor saying that the
General Plan is not "carved in granite" and the amendment could
be made.
In looking at the traffic pattern, it is not the most desirable
pattern, and it does not make sense to Cm Kamena to deny the
application. He believes that commercial use would be very
appropriate and he will vote against the motion.
Cm Staley stated that in response to the comments made by Cm
Dah1backa, first of all, he is familiar with the argument made
by the P.C. that the zoning line drawn in the middle of the
block is best, as opposed to a division of the districts at
the street. He is not convinced by this argument, but for
the moment assuming that he does favor this concept, it is
still not applicable to this particular block. The reason
he believes is because ilK" Street has been closed off. If "K"
Street were open so that the commercial service area on the north
side of the tracks had access to the CBD on the south side, then
there would be a good argument for insisting that the line be
drawn in the middle of the block. However, it seems that since
ilK" Street has been closed off, and that area has virtually no
access other than by Oak Street at the Livermore Avenue/Chestnut
intersection, a unique parcel of land has been created by the
city.
Cm Staley stated that he would agree that there be residen-
tial in this particular area. He explained that he had
stated, in the beginning, that the corner should not neces-
sarily be commercial and that the whole_block was inappropriately
CH-32_230
~1ay 17, 1976
~Pub1ic Hearing re
Noe S. Trevino Prop.)
zoned because the whole block should be consistent. It would seem
that commercial use might be best for the particular zone in question
based on the argument made by Cm Dah1backa that the southern portion
of the area should be commercial rather than residential because of
the noise from the railroad track. Cm Dah1backa has convinced him
that residential is not appropriate south of the orange line and
therefore, if it is made CS, the question is one of access. How
do you go to a commercial area without going through a residential
neighborhood, which would not be desirable. There would seem to be
two choices - either rezone this particular corner with access around
the block on Oak Street; rezone "K" Street to allow for access; or
open up ilK" Street across the railroad tracks again. The last choice
is probably not possible and at the moment he would favor the rezoning
of this lot to commercial.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she is going to argue in favor of the motion
because she believes the zoning is precisely what it should be in this
particular area. When you plan a commercial area, you buffer it and
this is exactly what this zoning is - a buffer. Commercial service
areas are designed because they do not need close-in traffic pro-
vision. In an area such as this you know who you are going to see
and tremendous access is not necessary. Uses of a service nature
are located in the area, people know they exist, and they go there.
People are not passing through looking for a store - this is what
a commercial service is - a backup to general commercial. This is
a perfect buffer for a general commercial area and it does not
require a major street around it for circulation purposes.
To the north there is a very fine use for high density multiple,
and she is very sorry to think that the City might lose the chance,
which is the intention of the whole General Plan, to buffer the
downtown and add some density in that area so the City will have
the ability to use a metropolitan transit system of some type.
That was the purpose of the multiple zoning, and particularly the
north side was to be outlined in higher density towards the down-
town area so that if the City gets a shuttle bus system people can
get to the downtown area to shop.
Mayor Tirsell noted that the highest and best use of the land is
a fine thing if you are looking at the land in a vacuum around it.
You can't look at this piece of land in that way, however; it is
in a land use pattern at this time which is consistent with the
new General Plan and meets one of the goals of the new General Plan.
Also, the argument that a convenience market would mean that people
would not have to go downtown is not good because this is precisely
the reason the tracks were moved. The City wants people into the
downtown area. This is the very essence of why the tracks were
moved - to get the population into the downtown area where there
is redevelopment taking place.
The more uses are filtered out to the suburbs and out to the shop-
ping centers, the more you take away from the downtown area. She
stated that she does not agree with the arguments for rezoning of
this property and to do so would be the opposite of what the City
intends with the downtown redevelopment.
Cm Kamena stated that he is also distressed when there is intent
to keep people away from the downtown business area, but he believes
that the purpose of Mr. Herman's comment was not to indicate that
he would like a zoning area that would keep people away from down-
town, but rather he would like to provide a facility for the short
runs that would eliminate going through the congested areas for
a loaf of bread, for example.
CM-32-231
May 17, 1976
(Public Hearing re
Noe S. Trevino Prop.)
Cm Kamena stated that he believes the type of zoning for which
Mr. Herman is applying would be very convenient for people in
the area, and he can't stress enough that theoretically a look
at the General Plan appears that it would be satisfactory, but he
feels that the General Plan is not correct for this specific
area and his feelings about this are very strong.
Mayor Tirsell asked if Cm Kamena would suggest that the whole
block be zoned commercial because this would create a use in
the middle of the whole block. Land across the street will
corne in asking for commercial zoning, and all the way down.
Cm Kamena stated that he has not heard any testimony this
evening from any of the residents of that area, protesting
the application for the rezoning. There has been absolutely
no opposition to the proposal.
em Dahlbacka indicated that it is erroneous to talk about this
particular use because, under the application, any use allowed
in the CB-1 can go in there and it places pressure on all the
other corners of Livermore. Furthermore, in looking at that
situation, it would appear that there would be a traffic jam
if there is any type of high intensity use allowed in there
because of the constriction problem.
Cm Staley said that he doesn't necessarily think that this
should be part of the CBD. It is across the tracks from the
CBD area. On the other hand, the argument that he has not
heard successfully rebutted, was how to get into the CS area
without going through a residential street.
Mayor Tirse1l stated that there is no way to get to the downtown
area either, without going through a residential neighborhood.
Cm Staley noted that there is a difference because in this case
there is a street that is half of a block across the railroad
tracks, and has no access from the downtown area. He feels
that by closing off "K" Street, the City has created a unique
problem for this particular corner. If the line were at the
railroad tracks or at Chestnut the division would be reasonable.
It is just not reasonable to divide the zoning in the middle
of that particular block.
Mayor Tirse11 commented that what Cm Staley is suggesting would
allow high commercial use north of the zoning line in an area
that is already constrained and would therefore become a more
congested traffic area.
Cm Staley noted that people still need to know where something is
located and how to get to it. If you find that something is lo-
cated on Oak Street, it is hidden by residential on Chestnut and
closed off by no access on "K" Street, which means that those
commercial services will be very difficult to locate.
MOTION FAILED 2-2 (Cm Kamena and Staley dissenting) .
Cm Dahlbacka noted that since the Council is split on the opinions
concerning this area it would appear that no action could be taken
to resolve the issue until Cm Turner returns.
Mr. Musso noted that commercial is planned for north of the tracks,
in the General Plan, and it is up to the Council as to whether or
not they wish to extend it to this area.
CM-32-232
May 17, 1976
(Public Hearing re
Noe S. Trevino Prop.)
Mr. Herman stated that where the Union 76 gas station is located,
according to the new colors, their zoning is going to be taken
away, if he understands it correctly, and the land will revert
back to the RM zoning.
Mr. Musso stated that this is not a part of the General Planr
according to the General Plan that area is still commercial.
Cm Dah1backa noted that Mr. Herman is asking a hypothetical question.
If this plan goes through, what will the City tell the gas station
people?
Mr. Musso stated that if the plan is to be adopted it would later
be rezoned and the station would become a non-conforming use.
Cm Kamena stated that it appears that the Council position is split
and he hasn't spoken with em Turner about how he would vote but
perhaps it could be continued until he is present.
Cm Staley felt that perhaps it might be appropriate, since the P.C.
discussed the CB Zoning amendment, to refer the matter back to them
for a consideration of CS Zoning and for the more general considera-
tion of what to do about the two blocks. Mayor Tirse11 has made the
argument that commercial development should not be allowed south of
Chestnut Street. However, these are the only two blocks between
No. Livermore Avenue and "P" Street which are not commercial on the
south side of Chestnut. It appears that the City has created an
island of residential in a predominately commercial area.
CM STALEY MOVED TO REFER THIS ITF.M TO THE P.C. FOR RECONSIDERATION
OF THE ZONING IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA, AS WELL AS THE BROADER QUES-
TION OF THE ZONING OF THE THREE BLOCKS BOUNDED BY ilL" STREET,
CHESTNUT, AND "I" STREET AND FOR CONSIDERATION OF REZONING TO CS
OR SOHE OTHER APPROPRIA.TE ZONE. MOTION SECONDED BY 01 KAMENA.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO ASK THE P.C. TO CONSIDER THE AREAS WHICH
ARE PRESENTLY BUFFER ZONES, ALL THE ~vAY TO JUNCTION AVENUE.
AMENDMENT FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Mayor Tirsell asked that the P.C. have copies of these minutes
and that they be alert to the fact that this would require a
General Plan amendment.
MAIN MOTION PASSED 3-1 (Cm Dahlbacka dissenting) .
PROCLAMATION FOR
SUICIDE PREVENTION WEEK
Mayor Tirsell proclaimed May 16th through May 22nd, Suicide Prevention
Week in the City of Livermore.
LETTER OF RESIGNATION
(Burt R. Gasten)
A letter of resignation from the Noise Abatement Committee was re-
ceived from Burt R. Gasten which was noted for filing. The staff
was asked to prepare a letter thanking Mr. Gasten for his service
on the Committee.
cmmUNICATION RE
4th OF JULY FESTIVITIES
The Council received an invitation from the Community Affairs Com-
mittee to attend the 4th of July festivities planned by the Com-
mittee.
CH-32-233
.
May 17, 1976
CO~1MUNICATION FROM
GRANT JURY RE WARRANTS
A letter from the Grand Jury indicates that because of recent
losses in Oakland and Los Angeles, the Alameda County Grand Jury
has asked each city to explain the handling of warrants. From
the responses received it would appear that there is a lack of
safeguard in the protection of city warrants.
It is recommended that an immediate in-house study be made to
determine the City's degree of safeguarding warrants in storage,
handling, and accounting, etc.
Mr. Nolan stated that the letter from the Grand Jury was a form
letter sent to all cities. However, if the Council has any doubt
about the warrants handled by the City he would suggest that the
study be referred to an outside CPA firm.
The Council indicated that they are not concerned and the item
was noted for filing.
RE SUPPORT OF SB 1579
- COASTAL COMMISSIONS
MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO SUPPORT SB 1579 (Coastal Commissions)
AND NOTIFY SENATOR HOLMDAHL OF THE CITY'S SUPPORT. MOTION
WAS SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA WHO REQUESTED THAT A LETTER ALSO
BE SENT TO GOVERNOR BROWN.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE BUSINESS LICENSE
SURCHARGE FOR PARKING LOT
RE TENANTS OF THE MALL
The City Manager reported that the Council directed that recon-
sideration be given to the benefit district public parking lot
assessments prior to the beginning of the next fiscal year.
The purpose of reconsideration would be possible inclusion of
the merchants located in the Second Street mall. The building
has a public access means onto "J" Street and there are 11 mer-
chants located in the building. All businesses therein have
been served a notice of the proposed discussion at this time.
The current business license surcharge for the parking assess-
ment district in this area is 79% of the annual business license
payment.
~1ayor Tirse1l stated that at the time the Council worked on
the business license surcharge for the parking lot, the ques-
tion of the mall was discussed and it was concluded that the
item would be delayed until the business license surcharge
was to be discussed again. It is now on the agenda for dis-
cussion.
Cm Staley asked for a brief summary as to how the surcharge
is currently levied and how it changes from year to year, if
it does.
Mr. Parness explained that the surcharge is attached to the
business license tax for certain retail outlets in the CBD.
It is assessed under the authority of the Government Code
which does allow for parking and other public type improvements
in the downtown area of the City.
CM-32-234
May 17, 1976
(Rpt re Bus. License
Surcharge - Parking Lot)
Mr. Parness stated that the total amount of money collected from
this source is adequate to pay only the costs associated with the
public parking lot adjacent to the Municipal Court building, includ-
ing maintenance.
The district was established following a public hearing which took
place about five years ago. Lines for the district were established
and the Council has been given a copy of the map which delineates
those lines. It incorporates all retail outlets on the north
and south side of First Street, "J" and ilK" Streets between First
Street and Second Street, and a small portion on South Livermore
Avenue. The district properties are then divided into two segments
in an effort to reflect the varying degrees of benefit received from
the parking lot facility. The merchants on the north side of First
Street are assessed the highest amount and this year it is equivalent
to 142% of the business license tax. All other properties within
the district are assessed a figure equivalent to 79% of their busi-
ness license tax.
The formula can change annually, depending upon what the assessment
is with respect to major changes in the occupancy of the properties
within the zone. It has been changed about three times since it
was first formulated. This year the formula will have to be changed
because the County has offered to grant the City an additional amount
of funding, in response to the City's appeal and as a result of a
survey which indicated that many people were using the Municipal
Court services.
Cm Staley wondered why the merchants in the mall were not included
in the benefit district in the beginning. Was the mall vacant at
that time?
Mr. Parness stated that as he recalls the City just didn't give
recognition to the fact that there was an entrance on "J" Street.
It was an oversite on the part of the City.
Cm Staley asked if it is true that merchants who have their own
parking lot receive a credit towards the surcharge and Mr. Parness
indicated that they do.
Gordon Pefley, 1821 Almond Avenue, stated that he is the manager
and part owner of the mall as well as part owner of the Way Up
Gallery located in the mall. He added that he has yet to meet
a customer that has corne into his place of business and has parked
in the City parking lot. It is possible that some do, but he has
asked people where they park and none have indicated that they
used the City lot. He stated that the City parking lot is across
First Street and is some distance away from his place of business.
Hr. Pefley stated that there is an entrance from First Street but
there is no mall property fronting on "J" Street. They do not
have a sign located on "J" Street showing it as an entrance, and
it really isn't the main entrance or one that is used extensively
for the businesses in the mall. It happens to be an easement
required by the Fire Department for an exit to "J" Street.
~1r. Pefley felt that there are other businesses in the downtown
area who are as close to the parking lot as the mall but they
are not required to pay the surcharge. TIe feels this is
inequitable and he does not know why the merchants in the mall
have been singled out to be included in the district at this
point.
CM-32-235
Hay 17, 1976
(Rpt re Bus. License Sur-
charge - Parking Lot)
em Staley asked Mr. Pef1ey if it is not true that there is an
entrance to the mall from "J" Street, if there are not 11 merchants
in the mall, and that no parking provisions for the mall have been
made for customers of the 11 merchants. Mr. Pef1ey indicated that
this is correct. Cm Staley also asked if Mr. Pef1ey feels that
no benefit is being received by the merchants in the mall by the
City parking lot, and Mr. Pef1ey indicated that he knows of no
customers of his business that use the City parking lot.
Cm Staley stated that if the Municipal parking lot did not exist
and the 95 cars provided for in that parking lot would have to
park on the street, how would that affect the business for the
~vay Up Gallery?
Mr. Pefley stated that it would make business more difficult, but
this would also hold true for all the other businesses, including
all of those who do not pay for the lot.
Cm Dah1backa asked if the "J" Street entrance is there only be-
cause of the requirement by the Fire Department and Mr. Pefley
stated that he believes the owners of that lot would have built
in that area and it would have been fully closed off.
Mr. Street explained that as a part of the Building Code, the
exit/entrance is required as a second means of egress from the
mall for fire and safety purposes.
Melvin Kirby, stated that he has recently opened a citizens band
shop in the mall (last Thursday) and he did not receive a notice
of this meeting. He stated that he has looked around in the City
for some time for a business location and he did not have enough
business there last week to even pay his rent. He stated that
he believes it is unfair to have to pay for something
not used by their customers. Their customers park either on
Second Street or the parking lot adjacent to the mall. He stated
that his customers will not park clear across First Street in the
City lot and walk to his business. If he had a lot of customers
he wouldn't mind paying the surcharge, but right now people are
not coming to his store and he cannot afford to pay a surcharge.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the way the formula is arranged, if
a merchant does not have a large volume of business the gross
will be low and the business license tax will not be very high.
The tax is a percentage of the gross.
Mr. Kirby stated that he is not speaking just for his business
but rather it is the principle involved. Why should the mer-
chants in the mall pay for something that their customers do
not use?
Hayor Tirse11 asked what the major reason is that people do
not shop in the mall and if Mr. Kirby has any suggestions for
an increase in business in the mall.
Mr. Kirby stated that he has no idea. He has advertised in the
newspaper and has circulated flyers notifying people of the new
business located in the mall and he knows of no reason people
are not going to the mall.
Mr. Pef1ey stated that he believes one of the reasons people
do not shop in the mall is because they don't have large signs
CM-32-236
r.1ay 17, 1976
(Rpt re Bus. License Sur-
charge - Parking Lot)
to attract customers and to inform them as to what businesses are
located in the mall. Other businesses have large window displays
and a lot of exposure. If a place is opened on First Street there
is a sign above the business as well as a large glass display area.
This means that a great deal of advertising is not necessary. This
is not the case in the mall. The businesses were allowed only the
amount of sign area that one business would be allowed and the signs
can't really be seen by the public. In his opinion, the lack of
major exposure is a major reason for a lack of business.
Mayor Tirsel1 wondered if the parking problem is the reason only four
businesses are located in the mall at present, out of a possible
11 businesses.
Mr. Pefley stated that he really doesn't believe that parking is
the problem. In his opinion, people just do not know that a certain
business exists in the mall.
Mrs. Turner, owner of the lioness Beauty Salon and the Valley Beauty
Supply on "J" Street, stated that for three weeks she asked every
customer who came into Valley Beauty Supply where they parked, and
in those three weeks not one customer came from the City parking lot.
She stated that her customers are women and they will not walk _
they will double park on "J" Street before they will go all the way
to the City parking lot. She added that as a merchant on "J" Street
she does pay into the surcharge for the parking lot. The beauty
shop rents spaces from Blaisdell's parking lot which is adjacent
to the mall, and this is where their customers park.
Mrs. Turner stated that there is parking available around Carnegie
Park which is taken up entirely by all the bank personnel. The
banks do not allow their personnel to park in the bank parking
lots and the banks will not allow anyone other than customers
to use their lots either. The spaces in the parking lots of the
banks are empty every day of the week and if the banks would allow
their employees to use their parking lots there would be more park-
ing for customers on the streets. She stated that she is not bene-
fiting from the City parking lot at all and it is unfair that she
be asked to pay a surcharge, as one of the mall businesses, when
the customers of the beauty shop do not use the City parking lot.
Claudia Kirby, from the citizens band business, stated that during
the past week she has asked customers where they park and they all
have indicated that they park on "J" Street, Second Street, and
around Carnegie Park. They will not walk as far as the City parking
lot.
Tom Bailey, merchant, stated that when the assessment district was
formulated for the purpose of paying for public parking it was a
good idea; however, things have changed a lot since that time. He
would suggest that those who use it pay for it, as in the case with
the Oakland Airport parking lot, etc. In his opinion the merchants
should not be paying for it - the lot should be self-supporting and
if the user pays for it it will be supported by the people who use
it. In his opinion this is the only fair solution.
Cm Kamena asked if the merchants in the mall may be included in
the assessment district because of the exit onto "J" Street and
Hr. Parness indicated that this is the reason they may be required
to pay.
Cm Kamena stated that it would appear that there are some very broad
philosophical questions involved, in terms of the entire problem,
CH-32-237
Hay 17, 1976
(Rpt re Bus. License Sur-
charge - Parking Lot)
but according to what has been scheduled for discussion on the
agenda, the Council should devote the discussion specifically
to the mall. He stated that if Knodt's Flowers are involved
in the benefit district, then the mall should also be included.
However, he feels that the mall should not be included and that
Knodt's Flowers should be removed from the assessment. As
thorough as the City is, he just cannot believe that they over-
looked the "J" street entrance to the mall.
Cm Dah1backa stated that he has been in the mall several times
and he has never seen the "J" Street exit. In his opinion it
is not a practical entrance to the mall in the sense that people
use it.
Cm Kamena stated that he views the matter in the following way:
If the mall was included in the benefit district it would not
add revenue to the City - it would simply go to the general
treasury that goes to pay for the Municipal parking lot and
may reduce the amount other merchants pay. It is not a revenue
generating method for the City, and he cannot ignore the fact
that the merchants are not benefiting from the City lot.
Crn Staley noted that the same committee who studied the business
license tax, studied the question of financing the Municipal
parking lot and they examined the concept of the user paying for
the lot along with various concepts. It was finally determined
that the current method of financing the lot was the best of a
number of choices. The problem with requiring the users to pay
for the lot is that people will opt not to use the lot and will
park on the street which will take up available street parking.
Secondly, there is the problem of the entrance to the lot and
the private property adjacent to the Municipal lot which would
get cars parking on private property rather than entering the lot.
Thirdly, the merchants along First Street who indicated that they
were concerned about a benefit district for the lot and that this
method was unfair, came to the conclusion that the method of finan-
cing by surcharge was the most equitable method and in the best
interest of the downtown merchants, after looking at the alter-
natives.
It is true that those who are closest to the lot pay the most
(approximately 142% of their business license fee) but they
agreed that it was in the best interest for the entire business
community downtown and agreed to pay the surcharge. The reason
is because it is absolutely necessary for the businesses downtown
to provide adequate parking for customers. It may be true that
none of the customers of the mall park in the City lot, but
if someone does not pay for the City parking lot it means that
all of those cars will start parking on the streets. If those
95 cars started parking on the streets there would be no available
parking at all.
Cm Staley stated that the problem of bank employee parking is
really something the City can't do anything about. That is
private property and they have a policy that their employees
are not allowed to park on the property and that the parking be
reserved for their customers. The City has discussed this with
the bank people, the bank people feel that their policy is justi-
fied, and they refuse to change their policy.
Cm Staley stated that he does not know how the mall was approved
without the provision of parking for its customers. The mall has
absolutely no parking spaces for the customers and they are obvi-
ously parking someplace. The merchants on "J" Street, "K" Street,
CM-32-238
Hay 17, 1976
(Rpt re Bus. License Sur-
charge - Parking Lot)
and First Street pay for the City parking lot, and since the customers
of the merchants in the mall use these streets, the merchants who pay
into the surcharge are entitled to a contribution from the merchants
in the mall.
CM STALEY MOVED THAT THE MALL BE INCLUDED IN THE BENEFIT DISTRICT
SINCE THERE IS AN ENTRANCE FRml "J" STREET. MOTION SECONDED BY
MAYOR TIRSELT.J FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES.
Mayor Tirsell explained that if a business has a gross of less than
$80,000 per year, the cost for the surcharge would be $32. This
will give everyone an idea of the cost the City is talking about.
Mr. Musso explained that the reason the mall was not included in
the benefit district is because that building used to be the
Vine Theatre, and they were allowed to re-establish the basic
floor area without providing parking. They asked for, and
received a variance to add the second floor without parking. It
is the only variance that has ever been granted which did not
require parking provisions.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that the arguments made by Cm Staley are good,
but they apply to every business down there. The question is
whether or not that entrance constitutes a frontage when it is
required for safety purposes and happens to be an entrance he has
never even noticed. On the basis of what he has heard, it does
not constitute a frontage in the benefit district area.
Cm Kamena stated that the mall does have an entrance from "J"
Street but only because it was required by the City; therefore,
it is a technicality and shouldn't apply. The same is true for
Knodt's Flowers. They have an entrance from "J" Street that is
not used by the public and they should be exempt from the benefit
district.
Bobby Silva, representing the Cover-Up on "J" Street, asked what
would happen if the merchants on "J" Street and ilK" Street did
not pay the parking lot surcharge this year.
Mayor Tirsell commented that the merchants would be cited.
MOTION FAILED 2-2 (Cm Dahlbacka and Kamena dissenting).
RECESS
Mayor Tirsel1 called for a brief recess, after which all members
of the Council who were present during the above discussion
returned.
REPORT RE PARKING
PLAN & STREET CIR-
CULATION - LIVE~10RE
ARCADE SHOPPING CENTER
Mayor Tirse11 stated that Cm Turner has requested that the item con-
cerning the parking and circulation problems for the Livermore
Arcade Shopping Center be postponed until he can attend the meeting
and participate in the discussion.
The item was postponed for one week.
CM-32-239
May 17, 1976
REPORT RE GREENVILLE
NORTH SWIM CLUB
Mr. Parness stated that the item concerning the status of the
Greenvi11e Swim Club was placed on the agenda at the request
of Cm Turner and perhaps the Council would like to postpone
discussion of this item until he is present.
Mayor Tirse1l suggested that the Council postpone any dis-
cussion but asked if the staff has an update concerning the
negotiations for purchase.
The City Attorney noted that the cost for an appraisal of the
property will be $2,500.
Mayor Tirsel1 asked if the County Health Department has been
contacted and notified that it is a health hazard.
Mr. Clelland, the Fire Marshall for the City, stated that the
building has suffered a lot of vandalism. The swimming pool
has been drained, however it is being filled with refuse thrown in
by children. He has posted the property during the weed abatement
program and he contacted the attorney for Reliance Industries
who indicated that they would not abate the weeds and asked the
City to remove them. ~1r. Clelland stated that he is preparing
to go in and clean up the area - to remove the, weeds and trash.
They will be liable for the costs of this work, under the weed
abatement program.
Mr. Clelland stated that someone really should go in and secure
the building and the property.
Mr. Parness indicated that it is possible that the City could
secure the building but it is located on private property and
it might not be proper for the City to go in and start boarding
up doors and windows. The owner should really be responsible
for this type of action.
Mayor Tirse11 asked for a report concerning the problems mentioned.
REPORT RE LIVERMORE
MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
MASTER PLAN; ABAG'S
REVIEW OF GENERAL PLAN,
AND DISC. RE SECTION
30.00 OF ZONING ORD.
r1ayor Tirsell asked if the Council would like to set the item of
the Livermore Municipal Airport Master Plan for a public hearing
and adoption.
Mr. Parness stated that there are some technical details involved
with the form of acceptance of the Plan. He believes it would be
preferable for the Council to formally adopt the Plan as a part
of the General Plan for the City. The technical process has to
be followed and the EIS has to go through the same hearing stages
used for other EIR's which have been prepared for other projects.
subsequent to that, the Council and the P.C. would have hearings
on the plan and when it is in final form it would be adopted as
part of the General Plan for the city.
Unless there is some objection, the staff would recommend acceptance
of the consultant's plan. This should satisfy the FAA in the pro-
cessing of their claims and indicating that the consultant's work
has been done to the Council's satisfaction.
Mayor Tirse1l stated that she sees a problem because Vivan Brown
of ABAG has indicated that the populations used in the Plan are
CM-32-240
May 17, 1976
(Rpt re Airport Master
Plan - ABAG re Gen. Plan
and Sec. 30.00 of Z.O.)
significantly different than the figures ABAG is using and would
affect our grant funding. She has recommended that ABAG be allowed
input and a recommendation concerning the figures.
Mr. Parness stated that the City can wait for a referral from ABAG
but in the meantime the staff would suggest that the City begin the
regular process of hearings on the Airport Plan as an adjunct to the
General Plan of the City. This would he the submission of the EIS.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that she believes the consultant should change
the population figures and it might very well change what their
predicitions will be.
r1r. Parness stated that the staff will see that this is done prior
to holding a hearing.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he would rather wait until all the changes
have been made before discussing it and holding public hearings.
He added that he would suggest that the changes to be made can be
incorporated.
(Sec. 30.00 - Zoning Ord)
Mr. Musso stated that since the changes in the State Code require
zoning to conform to general plans, the application procedure is
not as significant as it used to be.
The City Attorney stated that if the City wants to have all kinds of
rules and regulations, he has no objection; however, from a legal
standpoint it is not necessary to have little rules, procedures
and guidelines. All the Council will be doing is shackling themsel-
ves to rules and procedures that are unnecessary by law and if the
Council fails to do everything, because of a simple oversight, the
City will end up in court.
Brief discussion followed concerning the recommendation made by
the City Attorney, and possible repeal of Section 30.00.
Mr. Musso stated that he feels a procedure should be set up so that
a person can seek a rezoning which is not as easy as appearing before
the Council some evening to ask for a rezoning. It involves fees,
and determinations as to whether the zoning would be in conformance
with the General Plan before the hearing and before anything is
initiated.
Cm Staley noted that the memorandum written by the Assistant City
Attorney points out that by setting up a procedure, if the Council
makes a decision the applicant does not like the City is inviting
him to file suit against the City because the City's own procedural
grounds have been violated.
Mayor Tirsel1 asked if a policy can be challenged? Is it the policy
statement rather than the ordinance that is the problem?
The City Attorney noted that this all depends upon what the Council
says in its policy. The City is setting up administrative procedure.
Discussion followed concerning procedure.
Cm Staley commented that in county offices there is a statement
posted in almost every office which says that the staff does not
practice law and if legal advise is desired, concerning legal
procedures, a person should contact his attorney. In his opinion
nobody on the staff, including the City Attorney, is qualified to
give legal advice to anyone applying to the P.C. or the Council for
a zoning change. This is really the problem of a private attorney
and the City Attorney should not be giving advice as to what the
law says or how it should be applied.
CM-32-241
May 17, 1976
(Sec. 30.00 - Zoning Ord.)
Cm Dah1backa stated that it would sound reasonable to amend
Section 30.00 to include the fees for the processes and then
handled administratively.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE AN AMENDMENT
TO SECTION 30.00 TO REFLECT A REASONABLE FEE STRUCTURE FOR
THE PROCESSING OF ZONING CHANGES AND GENERAL PLAN M1ENDr-1ENTS
FOR THE APPLICANT, AND REPEALING THE RE~mINDER OF THE SECTION.
ALSO, THAT THE ACTUAL PROCEDURES FOR APPT..JICATION BE HANDLED
ADMINISTRATIVELY. MOTION SECONDED BY CM KAMENA. MOTION PASSED
BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE P.C. INITIATED
REZONING OF PORTOLA/I-S80
AREA
ON HOTION OF CH KAHENA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE P.C. INITIATED REZONING OF THE PORTOLA AVENUE/I-580
VICINITY, l'1AS SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON JUNE 7, 1976.
P.H. SET RE SCENIC HIGH-
WAYS ELEMENT & NOISE
ELEMENT TO GEN. PLAN
ON HOTION OF CM KAHENA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE SCENIC HIGHWAYS ELEMENT AND THE NOISE ELEHENT OF THE
GENERAL PLAN WAS SCHEDULED FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO BE HELD ON
JUNE 7, 1976.
REPORT RE PER-
SONNEL RULES AMEND.
The City Manager reported that the City has experienced internal
difficulty concerning garnishment of municipal employee wages
from private creditors. The need to account for and administer
private payroll deduction is costly and time consuming. It is
recommended that the Council approve a personnel rule change
which would provide that three separate garnishments within a
12 month period may be grounds for dismissal. All employee
organizations have been notified of this proposed change and no
objections have been voiced.
If the Council concurs with this recommendation a resolution
will be prepared reflecting the personnel rule amendment.
Cm Staley indicated that he would like to know if the City
Attorney has reviewed this recommendation and if it would be
a lawful procedure.
The City Attorney stated that this item was referenced by the
City Attorney and that dismissal on these grounds would be
legal grounds.
em Staley stated that in that case he would like to make an
amendment to clarify this item. He stated that it is a growing
fact of life that courts order child support be taken out
of a person's wages for inability to make payments or for what-
ever reason. This is not technically a garnishment, according
to the law, but he is concerned that a voluntary or court ordered
wage assignment not be included in the policy.
CM-32-242
Hay 17, 1976
(Report re Personnel
Rules Amend.)
Cm Staley added that it is specifically stated, in the law, that
an employer may not discharge someone for a voluntary or court
ordered assignment of wages for child support. He would just
like to make it clear that someone should not be discharged for
that reason, and in his opinion it should be so worded in the per-
sonnel rules.
CM STALEY MOVED TO PREPARE THE APPROPRIATE RESOLUTION, SUBJECT
TO HIS CO~1ENTS CONCERNING PAYROLL DEDUCTION FOR CHILD SUPPORT,
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOU VOTE.
REPORT RE PURCHASING
ORDINANCE REVISION
The item concerning an ordinance revision relative to purchasing
was asked to be discussed by the Council by Cm Turner. For this
reason the item was continued for one week.
Cm Staley noted that the memorandum prepared by the Assistant
City Attorney concerning this matter, was excellent.
REPORT RE TRAFFIC
SIGNAL AT EAST AVE.
AND VASCO ROAD
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Council needs to adopt an EIR _
negative declaration, to be transmitted to the City Planning
Commission and Department and to the County Planning Commission
for processing, for the East Avenue/Vasco Road traffic signal.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that in the alternatives to the project, the
alternative of finishing another road is not mentioned. In his
opinion this would be a viable alternative. For example, provid-
ing the southerly route that would go along Vasco Road and would
mitigate the loss of grape vines by not requiring such a large
widening of East Avenue.
Cm Dah1backa stated that he believes this alternate routing has
not been investigated and he would like to see some investigation
on that as an alternative to the project.
Mayor Tirsel1 asked if Cm Dahlbacka would like to add this as
an alternative to Concannon and Cm Dalbacka stated that he would.
He would like this discussed and included in the EIR.
Hr. Lee asked if the Council would like the staff to corne back
with a report after this is done and the Council indicated that
it would.
r.rr. Lee stated that this \^,ould mean opening up a whole new set
of considerations and a new EIR, rather than negative declaration.
Cm Dah1backa stated that this is the whole point - if an alternate
would be less environmentally damaging than making five lanes on
East Avenue, it would seem to be a good alternative to the project.
}1r. Lee stated that it was the County that argued for the five
lanes - the City was not as convinced that the five lanes would
be absolutely necessary. Since the County insisted, has the
findings, and most of the land, the Council agreed to go along
with their recommendation.
CH-32-243
HAY 17, 1976
(Rpt re Traffic Signal
East Ave & Vasco Rd)
Mr. Lee stated that if the City gets into this kind of a dis-
cussion it will delay the project for some time.
Mr. Parness added that he believes a discussion concerning an
alternate would defeat the entire project. The project has
been placed as Priority #1, by the City Council, dating back
five or six years ago. At the request of the County, the list
was prepared and East Avenue was declared to be declared Priority
#1, after instituting the North Livermore Avenue project.
It has taken about two years just to get the engineering con-
siderations taken care of. It has been extremely difficult to
get this project to this stage and any considerations or even
any insinuation that the Council might be considering other than
the present width which has been declared to be official by this
Council, would probably cancel the project.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that the signalization would not likely be
affected, because this is a separate issue. However, if the
decision to make five lanes wide is the wrong decision, the
Council should know it, and the only way he can determine this
is to know what the alternative would be. If Concannon could
be extended and provide relief for East Avenue in terms of
traffic to the south, is there a need for five lanes? He stated
that this would seem to be a crucial question, in his opinion,
and the project at this point is only on paper.
Cm Dahlbacka noted that he can fully understand all the work
that has gone into this, but he would question if this is the
right decision.
Cm Staley indicated that he is not willing to go through the
discussions again. The Council discussed the widening of East
Avenue and even if the Council decided that they would rather
extend Concannon, there are simply no funds available for the
construction of Concannon Boulevard to Tes1a Road.
The City is looking at a 15 year project as opposed to something
like a two year project.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would like to make a comment
regarding item III. C. (To increase driver comfort and conven-
ience). She stated that the intent of the widening is not to
make happier drivers but rather to decrease congestion on a
major traffic bearing street. She would like to see this
item reworded to reflect that the intent is to decrease
conjestion on a major traffic bearing artery.
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that if the Council will refer to Page 4,
under Long Term, the statistical models are not developed to
the state and she believes that the proper wording would be
as follows:
Air - The air quality of the Valley may be improved...etc.
~4AYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE EIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND
TRANSMIT IT TO THE CITY AND COUNTY PLANNING CO~MISSIONS, IN-
CLUDING A WRITTEN STATEMENT ON CONCANNON AS AN ALTERNATIVE.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CI'.1- 3 2 - 2 4 4
May 17, 1976
(Rpt re Traffic Signal
East Ave & Vasco Rd)
It was noted that the changes could be taken care of at the staff
level.
REPORT RE BACKING
LOT FENCE ~~INTENANCE
(Holmes Street)
~1ayor Tirsel1 stated that Cm Turner had raised the question of the
maintenance nroblems of the fence along Holmes Street and the possi-
bility of installing a fence that would be more permanent and would
require less maintenance.
The staff has furnished a report on this item but the item was con-
tinued for one week, until Cm Turner can be present.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Departmental Reports
The following reports were submitted for informational purposes:
Building Department - April
Mosquito Abatement District - Barch
Municipal Court - March
Police and Pound Departments - April
Water Reclamation Plant - April
Report re Bids for
Underpass Side Rails
A report from the Director of Public Works indicated that the esti-
mated cost for the side rails along the bikeways on the new under-
passes would be $7,800, and the lowest bid received was $15,889.90.
It is recommended that the bids be rejected and the Council authorize
new bids.
~'~otorcycle Bids
Bids have been received for the provision of two motorcycles for
the Police Department and it is recommended that a resolution be
adopted awarding the bid to Schleicher Motors, the low bidder.
RESOLUTION NO. 118-76
A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID
(Schleicher Motors)
Report re Resurfac-
ing Program
Bids have been received for fog sealing projects for the current
fiscal year and it is recommended that the Council adopt a
resolution awarding the bid to Graham Contractors, Inc., the
low bidder. The bid by Graham Contractors, Inc., was substantially
below the bid allotment by $16,000 and it is recommended that the
Council allow a second bidding cycle for additional work in the
amount of $16,000.
CM-32-245
May 17, 1976
RESOLUTION NO. 119-76
A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID (Graham
Contractors, Inc.)
Res. re Allocation
of Sewage Capacity
The Council adopted a resolution, approved at the last meeting,
relating to sewage capacity allocation which was brought up at
time of the Duterte lot split discussion.
RESOLUTION NO. 120-76
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 55-75
RELATING TO ALLOCATION OF REMAINING CAPACITY
OF WATER RECLAMATION PLANT OF CITY OF LIVERMORE.
Res. re Settlement
of Condemnation Action
The Council adopted a resolution relative to settlement of condem-
nation action.
RESOLUTION NO. 121-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SETTLEHENT OF
CONDEMNATION ACTION (City v. Zepol, Inc.
et a1)
Payroll & Claims
There were 128 claims in the amount of $538,313.59, and 294 pay-
roll warrants in the amount of $99,125.33, for a total of $637,438.92,
approved by the Director of Finance and dated May 11, 1976.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM KN1ENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE (Cm Turner absent) THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED.
~ATTERS INITIATED BY STAFF
(Executive Session)
The City Attorney asked that there be an executive session after the
regular meeting to discuss litigation.
tffiTTERS INITIATED BY COUNCIL
(Appointment to Manpower
Advisory Council)
Cm Kamena asked for the consensus of the Council to appoint our
Personnel Director as the public representative to Manpower
Advisory Council - ACTEB, CM KAMENO MOVED TO APPOINT MS. ANN DUNCAN
AS THE REPRESENTATIVE, SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL, AND APPROVED
UNANIMOUSLY.
(Side Yard Landscaping
vs. Fence Height)
Cm Dah1backa asked how the discussion was coming at the Planning
Commission level re side yard landscaping vs. fence height, and
was advised by the Planning Director it was set for the next meeting.
CH-32-246
!lay 17, 1976
(BART Parking Lot)
Cm Staley stated he had written to BART and MTC re the possibility
of acquiring the fringe parking lot immediately, and he has received
a call today from Mr. Allen indicating he is working on it, and
feels that Mr. Parness and Mr. Lee could be of some assistance with
the BART staff as there may be funds available.
(Quezaltenango Delegation)
Cm Staley stated the delegation from Queza1tenango will be in Liver-
more early in June, and he is working out some plans for the visit.
(Parking in CBD)
Cm Staley stated that any plan for the development of encouraging
business in the Central Business District is going to require a
comprehensive plan for developing parking. The only way it can be
developed is by some method of financing and suggested they
consider the a concept of forming a parking assessment district
downtown as a surcharge on the business license tax. Not just
by the area currently served by the assessment district, but a
general assessment district for the CnD. He felt those merchants
who provide parking in accordance with the CBD ordinance, which
is 1 sq. ft. of parking for 1 sq. ft. of floor space would not
pay the assessment, but those who do not provide adequate parking
would pay the assessment.
He suggested that perhaps the Council set a general discussion for
forming a general assessment district. He felt there are three things
the Council should know: 1) can they legally form an assessment dis-
trict as some surcharge of the business license tax; 2) what
mechanism must be adopted if it is desirable and 3) how do they
determine the boundaries.
The staff was asked to prepare a report concerning this matter.
(Golf Course Restaurant
Remodeling)
Cm Kamena asked the City ~1anager if he had any report concerning
the progress of the remodeling at the Golf Course restaurant.
Mr. Parness stated he didn't have much to report and as a matter
of fact the leaseholder has had some difficulty with the sublessees,
and they are no longer in negotiation, but there are others he
has been talking to. He could not say what is happening as to the
improvement of the interior. He is keeping in contact with the
leaseholder and assuring he is current with his lease requirements.
(Rodeo Parade Entrant)
Mayor Tirsel1 asked if the staff would like to make arrangements
with Wells Fargo Bank to enter the Rodeo Parade as it is a tradi-
tional entry.
(LAvt'lMA Meeting)
Mayor Tirse11 reported concerning the LAm~1A meeting, stating that
the County had submitted a rather nebulus report about increasing
the pipeline for safety reasons, but they have never been specific
about what they want and how they intend to pay for it and how they
will mitigate, but they are holding over our heads that they will
not mitigate unless we give them capacity. It isn't even clear we
need them for mitigation measures since many agencies were asked for
mitigation measures. The City of Livermore is not waiting for the
County to mitigate anything, however. A letter was addressed to them
asking all of these questions and also direction that we are not
crv1-32-247
May 17, 1976
(LAV\^1MA Meeting)
happy with them using their County consultants as we are bound by
contract to use competent engineers and statistics and recommenda-
tions concerning the bonding capacity, etc. They were advised
it will be necessary to use our recommendations.
(Non-Conforming Signs)
A report had been submitted by the Planning Director regarding the
non-conforming signs in the City, and Mayor Tirse1l asked if there
were many of these signs left.
Mr. Musso stated they just keep cropping up and at the present time
there are four still to be abated which are in the process, but
there is a constant thing about new signs and penants, etc. and
they should really make a second round of the whole city.
Mayor Tirse11 suggested that perhaps a report be prepared about
how that could best be done.
ORDINANCE RE LICENSES
~H. 12, MUNICIPAL CODE
A MOTION WAS MADE BY CM. STALEY, SECONDED BY CM ~~ENA, TO ADOPT
THE ORDINANCE RELATING TO LICENSES AND PASSED UnANIMOUSLY.
ORDINANCE NO. 883
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE,
1959, BY THE AMENDf1ENT OF ARTICLE I, RELATING TO
LICENSES-GENERAL, OF CHAPTER 12, RELATING TO LICENSES.
A question was asked by a member of the audience concerning the
ordinance, specifically with regard to the $0.80 per $1,000 of
gross business and asked why the Council had deviated from this
amount for a car dealer.
Cm Staley replied to the question by stating that the ordinance
had been modeled after the Oakland ordinance which allowed a
different rate for car dealers and grocery stores.
The gentleman indicated that he did not feel it was fair to allow
a lesser rate to be used for car dealers, and stated his biggest
objection is that professional people will be paying less than
commercial.
Cm staley and Mayor Tirse11 advised him that professional people
are being required to pay double the rate.
Cm Staley pointed out for the record that the committee did in-
clude a retail merchant.
ORDINANCE RE SOURCE OF
ENERGY - RE ELECTRICITY
ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY, THE FOLLOWING ORDI-
NANCE RE ENERGY WAS ADOPTED WITH CM KAMENA, STALEY AND MAYOR TIRSELL
VOTING IN FAVOR OF THE ORDINANCE. CM. TURNER WAS ABSENT, AND CM
DAHLBACKA ABSTAINED FROM VOTING.
CM-32-248
May 17, 1976
(Ord. re Licenses
Ch. 12, Muni. Code)
ORDINANCE NO. 884
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 8.12 (b) RELATING TO
CONNECTION TO SOURCE OF ENERGY, OF CHAPTER 8, RELATING
TO ELECTRICITY, OF THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 1959.
ORDINANCE N-1ENDMENT
RE SECURITY
An ordinance had been prepared for introduction regarding the
Municipal Code amendment re Security. A question had been raised
by Cm Turner regarding the cost for installing the security devices.
~1r. Parness explained that an amendment was being prepared and he
was informed by the Police Chief and Chief Building Inspector that
the requirements for the locking devices do not belong in the
security ordinance, but rather they would urge that it be made a
part of the Building Code. An amendment is being drafted for
inclusion there, with the Council's permission, and at that time
the staff will have the cost figures which were requested.
CH KA.HENA MOVED TO INTRODUCE THE ORDINANCE TO BE READ BY TITLE
ONLY, SECONDED BY C~1 DAHLBACKA, AND PASSED UNANIHOUSLY. (CM
TURNER ABSENT) .
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
Prior} ty Listing
The Highway Advisory Com.TT\ittee met last week and in accordance with
the request of the City Council they did agree to reverse the two
priority listings.
Hearing re Car Wash
The PUC hearing will reconvene in San Francisco on May 18, to
consider the car wash matter, and it is hoped there will be con-
currence on that device. The primary question to be resolved is who
is to pay for it, which will be a difficult task on the part of the
examiner to resolve, but everything is awaiting the outcome of that
meeting.
"P" Street Irrigation
The tip" Street irrigation system is completely installed as far as
landscaping, and the work is now being done on Livermore Avenue.
There has been some difficulty in obtaining materials, but the
work is proceeding.
General Plan Report
The General Plan typing preparation is about 50% complete and
should be finished early next week.
Personnel
The Fire Chief and new Personnel Director have met with all
principles of the fire agencies in the Valley and it has been
decided that some joint testing of certain classifications will
be tried - firefighter, which is a common classification among all
the jurisdictions.
CJl.1-32-249
May 17, 1976
Summer School Employment Program
The Valley community is getting a substantial amount of federal
money for the employment of approximately 300 youths. There
are some qualifications, however, and that is that this being
federal money, the youths must be from disadvantaged families,
a definition which the CETA people have. This has to do with
income for the family. Several of them will be afforded to our
City, however they do require substantial supervision. It is
for a nine week term, 25-hour week maximum, and they are paid
$2.20 per hour.
Community Development
Mr. Gorland is busily engaged in researching the prospects of
the establishment of a local Industrial Development Corporation.
He has made contacts with some federal agencies, Small Business
Administration and EDA and has researched the state laws which
might apply here together with contacting other cities and states
that do engage in this activity. We are getting the material
~ogether and will have something to present to the Council shortly.
Home Occupation Ordinance
,4
Mr. Gorland has also been working on some changes in the Home
Occupation Ordinance, which the Council had asked to be reviewed.
The Planning Commission is also engaged in this and have offered
some suggestions as to how it should be modified.
Development Fee Survey
Mr. Gor1and's office is finishing up the Development Fee Survey
which he has been working on for some time. A great deal of
information has been gathered, which will first be processed
through the Industrial Advisory Committee, and in time will come
to the City Council.
Mayor Tirse1l remarked that the Council has assigned a lot of
paper work to the Community Development Director, who is supposed
to be out getting business and industry, and perhaps they might
want to watch that.
Mr. Parness indicated that some of these are being conducted by
people under him, but he is also involved in them.
Taxi Company Strike
The taxi company is on strike, but they are trying to bring in
other people to operate the taxis. They are operating but not on
the same schedule as in the past.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no other regular scheduled business to corne before the
City Council, the meeting was adjourned at 11:05 p.m. to an execu-
tive session to di,"::: litigation.
APPROVE ~~~
ATTEST
CH-32-250
'Regular Meeting of May 24, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
May 24, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:09
p.m. with Mayor Tirsel1 presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Dahlbacka, Kamena, Turner, Staley, and Mayor Tirse1l
Absent: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirse1l led the Councilmembers and those present in the
audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES (5/3/76)
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF r4AY 3, 1976,
WAS POSTPONED UNTIL NEXT WEEK BECAUSE A PAGE WAS MISSING FROM
THE DRAFT THEY RECEIVED.
OPEN FORUM
(re Haze1horst Property)
Edgar Hadley, stated that he would like to speak to the Council con-
cerning the Haze1horst family, a well established family in this
community, and their property which is currently in probate. He
stated that the property consists of 117 acres of land out on East
Avenue behind the Robert Livermore Park. The property is in probate
because of back taxes owed to the County of Alameda, and it appears
that the Haze1horst family may lose their property.
He stated that he would like to ask the Council to help the Hazelhorst
family save some of their estate in the way of forming some type of
corporation or trust for the estate.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that if she understands the matter correctly,
the property is located in the County and is not within the City.
She asked if they have ever made application to be included in the
Williamson Act.
Mr. Hadley stated that he does not know if such an application has
been made.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Williamson Act is now 10 years old
and would be protection against this type of thing. The land
could have been taxed as agricultural land for 10 years.
Mr. Hadley stated that it is taxed as agricultural; however, the
taxes are in excess of the estate's ability to hold the property.
Cm Staley noted that he believes the property is not taxed as
agricultural but rather zoned as agricultural. The agricultural
taxing is much less if it is in the Williamson Act.
Mr. Hadley stated that the property has been in probate for over
two years and there are problems involved. It had been sold to
Mr. Mehran for development but when he found that it could not be
annexed and developed the property was returned to the family.
CM-32-25l
May 24, 1976
(Open Forum -
Hazelhorst Property)
Mayor Tirsell wondered if there had ever been an application
for annexation to the City and Mr. Musso commented that there
has never been a formal application for annexation. However,
Mr. Mehran did discuss annexation with the staff.
Mr. Musso stated that this land was always considered high on
the priority list where development was concerned until the
sewage problem. This property would tie Wagoner Farms area with
the Jensen area. Even during the discussion at the time of
the General Plan it was felt that this property would be ser-
viced as soon as everybody within the City received sewage.
It would be the first County property to be allowed develop-
ment because it would be one of the fill-in areas.
em Kamena wondered if application for inclusion into the William-
son Act, at this time, could postpone the conclusion of the probate
period which is to expire July 1, 1976.
ern Staley suggested that Mr. Hadley contact his attorney concern-
ing the possibility of application for inclusion in the Williamson
Act. Instructions would have to be received from Superior Court
concerning this possibility. However, this will not solve the
immediate problem of property taxes as well as inheritance taxes.
He stated that perhaps the matter could be referred to the City
Manager and the Community Development Director to see if something
could be done because it is one of the highest priorities in the
City in terms of what the City would like developed.
Mr. Gorland stated that he had spoken with Mr. Hadley concerning
this matter and suggested that perhaps the land should have been
reassessed. Apparently it was assessed, for taxing purposes, at
a price greater than the fair market value. This would have been
one of the alternatives for getting the taxes reduced; however,
this does not eliminate the delinquency. It had been suggested
that the City purchase the property but he had indicated that
he wouldn't know where the City would get the money to purchase
the property even if it wanted to do so.
ern Staley noted that the problem is really one of inheritance
taxes. As he recalls, there is a provision in the Internal
Revenue Service Code, to allow a donation of certain parts of
property at its appraised value, to a municipality or a chari-
table organization. This would give a credit against the in-
heritance taxes and possibly an arrangement could be made for
donation of a part of the parcel for liquidation of most of the
inheritance taxes, and this might also eliminate the delinquency
on the property tax. However, this should be something to be
discussed with the attorney for the estate.
Cm Kamena asked if it would be helpful for the City to state its
policy concerning development of that property and the intentions
of the City if sewage does become available.
Mr. Hadley indicated that such a statement from the City would
be extremely helpful. This would be important information to
show the courts as well as potential developers.
Mayor Tirse11 suggested that the item be referred to the staff
to work out something, in the way of a policy statement for
potential development of the property as far as the General Plan.
CM-32-252
May 24, 1976
(Parking Lot Surcharge)
John Regan, 672 South "N", stated that the Council discussed the item
of whether or not to include the merchants in the mall in the sur-
charge for the Municipal parking lot.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the motion to include the mall merchants
in the benefit district failed with a split vote and one of the
Councilmernbers was absent during that discussion.
Mr. Regan wondered if consideration had been given to the fact
that those merchants and their customers use the area encompassed
by the benefit district and particularly the parking used on "~"
Street.
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that she and Cm Staley had pointed this out _
that there is an entrance on "J" Street, and people do park on
"J" Street to get to the mall.
Mr. Regan wondered if it had been mentioned that the merchants in
the mall also park on "J" Street.
Mayor Tirsell noted that this had not been discussed, specifically.
Mr. Regan stated that for the record he would like it mentioned that
in his opinion many of the merchants in the mall are using "J" Street
for parking.
P.H. RE CUP FOR CAR
WASH ON THIRD STREET
A public hearing has been scheduled for the purpose of hearing public
testimony concerning the CUP application of Louis Trotter to permit
construction of a car wash in the CBD area on Third Street. The
Planning Commission has considered the application and has recommended
denial on the basis of various findings submitted in writing to the
Council.
Letters of protest as well as a petition against the application
were also submitted to the Council by residents of the area.
Mr. Musso illustrated on a map where the property for the proposed
car wash is located, stated that it was considered by the P.C. at
which time there was significant protest from the surrounding
property owners, and primarily from the Christian Science Church
located in that vicinity. There was also protest from the owner
of the car wash presently located on First Street along the rail-
road tracks. He explained the considerations discussed at the
public hearing held by the P.C. and the decision to deny the
application.
ern Staley stated that it is his understanding that Mr. Musso
indicated that the use would be allowed if the applicant carne
in and asked for a building permit.
Mr. Musso indicated that the development of some other use would
be permitted - the car wash would require a CUP.
Louis Trotter, 5720 East Avenue, stated that he is the applicant
and that he would like to briefly discuss the site development
plan, as reviewed by the P.C. The P.C. did agree that the site
development plan, in itself, was not particularly objectionable
but even though there is commercial development in that area, this
property is bounded by residential property on all four sides.
CM-32-253
May 24, 1976
(P.H. re CUP for Car
Wash on Third Street)
Mr. Trotter stated that a 6 ft. high fence is proposed for the
west side with 12-15 ft. of landscaping and numerous trees to
screen the visibility of the residents. One of the problems
with any commercial use that might develop there, as allowed
by the ordinance, is that it will change the character of the
neighborhood. The area has not changed from residential to
commercial yet, even though the property is half a block from
commercial retail use to the north. In the same block the 7-11
store is located on Fourth Street, and about a block to the east
of this property the J.C. Penney shopping area exists. He stated
that in his opinion the area will develop commercially, eventually.
Mr. Trotter stated that before the use can be allowed, certain
findings have to be made, and one of the findings is that the
new use might change the character of the neighborhood. He felt
this was the overriding factor in the recommendation for denial
by the P.C. and he would agree that the use will change the
character of the neighborhood but the property is zoned commer-
cial and any commercial use will change the character of that
neighborhood.
Mr. Trotter stated that the reason the application was made
for this site was because the use should not be any more objec-
tionable than uses already allowed in the zoning district which
attract traffic, noise and light.
Cm Staley stated that as he recalls Mr. Trotter is a professional
planner and asked if this is the type of use Mr. Trotter would
locate in this specific location, as a professional planner.
Mr. Trotter stated that as he explained, any use allowed will
create the nuisance that the neighbors are concerned about.
If he were asking for a building permit to construct a 7-11
Store, it would be allowed and the residents would not have the
opportunity to voice complaints as they have in this case. A
7-11 Store would be given staff approval and it would still
generate as much traffic, noise, and light as his proposed use
would generate.
em Staley commented that, in other words, in Mr. Trotter's
professional opinion the use would not be any more damaging
to the area than a permitted use would be.
Mr. Trotter stated that this is correct.
Les Cooper, President of the Executive Board for the Christian
Science Church, across from the proposed car wash site, stated
that he believes there was some mention that the Livermore Car
Wash, the church, and the property owners suspect some type of
collusion between Mr. Trotter and the PUC.
Mr. Musso stated that this was charged at the Planning Commis-
sion hearing.
Mr. Cooper stated that for the record he would like to say that
there was no mention of any collusion from people from the church
or from the property owners.
Mr. Cooper stated that he would like to summarize some of the
points made at the P.C. hearing. The membership opposed the
CUP, based on four points, and the major point was the noise
CM-32-254
!1ay 24, 1976
(P.H. re CUP for Car
Wash on Third Street)
factor anticipated during church service hours. Secondly, they were
concerned with the increase of traffic, which would be significant.
At present, a traffic count indicates that about 20 cars pass by
the area during church services and the applicant has stated that
the car wash could accommodate 18-20 cars per hour, which means
that the traffic flow could double during church services. Also,
there is a potential litter problem as indicated by the property
owners and the Livermore Car Wash owners. There is concern for
the safety of the bike riders who use the bike lane and particularly
for the children during the Sunday School hours.
Mr. Cooper stated that the second finding of the P.C. is that the
site for the intended use is not served by streets and highways
adequate to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated by
the use from the standpoint that the intended use will generate
more traffic than deemed safe for this area.
Mr. Cooper stated that there is also conflict between the staff
analysis report and the EIR, as mentioned in the P.C. meeting of
April 20, 1976. He pointed out that there will be a noticeable
change in the ambient noise level for a substantial number of
people, and it will disrupt the neighbors by increasing the conges-
tion to an appreciable degree, as pointed out in one of the reports.
Mr. Cooper stated that even though it has been pointed out that
the use will be no worse than another use allowed in the area,
it is felt that it is possible that something could be developed
which might be better for the area and it was noted at the meeting
of April 20th that the area is better suited as a buffer zone between
commercial and residential zones, for office buildings.
Mr. Cooper noted that the first condition of Z.O., Section 28.21
is that the use be without detriment to adjacent existing and per-
mitted land use. The P.C. was unanimous in stating that this find-
ing could not be made and objections from the neighbors appeared
to support this. In approving the intended use there would be
adverse effects on abutting or neighboring properties. Another
requirement is that the use be necessary for the development
of the community. Such a facility is desirable but is not neces-
sary.
On behalf of the members of the Christian Science Church, Mr. Cooper
asked that the Council consider the testimony given by them as well
as the neighbors and the recommendation for denial by the P.C.
Barbara McMilin, 1758 Third Street, stated that she hsas submitted
a letter objecting to the proposed car wash and was also respon-
sible for circulating the petition opposing the use which was
signed by 31 residents and represents approximately 85% of the
residents within 300 ft. of the car wash.
Mrs. McMilin stated that she believes the use would devaluate
their property and would create unwanted litter and noise as well
as a hazard to people using the bicycle lane. She stated that she
would also like to know what type of trees are proposed for the area
because if the use is allowed she would want the area to be beautified.
Steve Hibbs, 1420 Fifth Street, member of the Executive Board of
the Christian Science Church, stated that he is not speaking on
behalf of the church members, but rather as an interested member.
CM-32-255
May 24, 1976
(P.H. re CUP for Car
Wash on Third Street)
Mr. Hibbs stated that it is his understanding that large diesel
trucks will not have access to the car wash area. However, if
this is not true, he is sure that the truck drivers would not
hesitate to use the street to get to the car wash. If open
bays are available he believes that trucks will be brought in
for washing. Diesel trucks are a problem in the way of noise
and he has not heard anything satisfactory concerning this point.
Mr. Hibbs stated that another noise related item that has not
been mentioned is the noise of radios being played while the
drivers are vacuuming and drying the cars after they have been
washed. The number of radios being played and the volume of
them cannot be controlled in any way. This is something that
has not been answered to his satisfaction. Litter is another
problem that cannot be controlled, as pointed out by the owners
of the Livermore Car Wash during the P.C. public hearing. He
stated that these are unanswered objections to the granting of
a CUP under sections 28.21 and 28.22 of the Zoning Ordinance.
It is required that a use be, "necessary to the development
of the community and in no way detrimental to the existing
uses, or to those uses permitted in the District.". The three
items mentioned by Mr. Hibbs are unquestionably detrimental
and in agreement with finding #3 from the P.C., as well as
finding #5.
Mr. Hibbs stated that he would also like to reiterate that
none of the church members or the residents charged the appli-
cant with a conflict of interest or collusion in this case.
In fact, the question of a conflict of interest was more than
adequately handled in the staff report and in his opinion it
should not be brought up again.
Mr. Hibbs felt that each proposed use should be judged on its
own, and the argument that something worse could develop with-
out anyone denying the use, is not a relative argument. Each
use should be judged as it comes up, and in his opinion many
uses would not generate the problems he mentioned above because
one of the requirements of a CB-l District is that the business
be conducted primarily indoors. He would recommend and request
that the application be denied by the Council as it was by the
Planning Commission.
Eleanor Barbera, 1828 Third Street, stated that she lives
directly across from the property on which the car wash would
be located and she would like to strongly oppose the use. On
summer evenings there are many people, both young and old, on
bicycles along the street and she does not want increased
traffic on that street. She stated that she can already hear
the noise from the 7-11 Store on Third Street and can imagine what
the noise would be right across the street from her. She
asked that the Council deny the application.
CM TURNER MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, SECONDED BY eM
STALEY, AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Cm Turner stated that he is opposed to the use, based on the
findings submitted by the planning Commission.
CM TURNER MOVED TO DENY THE APPLICATION BASED ON THE FIVE
FINDINGS LISTED BY THE P.C. IN THEIR LETTER OF MAY 13, 1976.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
CM-32-256
May 24, 1976
(P.H. re CUP for Car
Wash on Third Street)
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would like to say that she feels rather
strongly about residential neighborhoods and the Council's obligation
is to uphold the form in which the neighbors feel comfortable unless
there is an overriding community concern involved, such as a fire
station or something for the public health, safety, and welfare.
If there were an overwhelming public interest involved she would
probably be in opposition to some of the neighbor's desires. This
is a private enterprise and it seems to be in conflict with what
appears to be a well informed and caring neighborhood. These are
the types of things that she feels very strongly about and she will
vote to support the motion.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO DENY THE APPLICATION.
Cm Turner stated that if he were a resident of that area he would
be very concerned about the allowable uses in that area and he
would suggest that the people check into this matter with the
Planning Department.
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that she would also like to point out that
the Council is going through a CBD study. This area is very
predominately a part of the District and the Council is taking
testimony every time it is displayed, as to what the uses should
be for the new Specific Plan because it will have a new overlay of
zoning or reinforcement of the old zoning, and if the present zoning
is not the desire of the residents then they should become acquainted
with the plan and give testimony at meetings.
P.H. RE ESTABLISHMENT
OF UNDERGROUND DISTRICT
ALONG NO. & SO. LIVERMORE
A public hearing has been scheduled for discussion of the proposed
establishment of an underground district along North and South
Livermore Avenue from Chestnut Street to Fourth Street. If the
Council concurs with the establishment of such district it is
recommended that the staff be directed to prepare a resolution
establishing the district and setting forth the time for removal
of all overhead wires for underground installation.
Cm DahlQacka commented that at the time this item was mentioned
he questioned the use of the City's money for that purpose rather
than some other public works project.
Cm Staley wondered when the project will commence if the Council
authorizes establishment of the district.
Mr. Lee stated that it would be very soon. The design work is
substantially completed by PG&E and the work would be done over
the next couple of months.
em Staley stated that the reason for his question is because he
has been contacted by some of the merchants in the area that
would be under construction and they are not opposed to the
project but rather the timing of the project. This area of
Livermore Avenue has been torn up off and on for about two years
and they are concerned that if the project takes place immediately
it will mean another six months without regular business operations
because the street will be torn up again. The merchants wondered
if there would be any reason the project could not be delayed until
the first of the year.
CM-32-257
May 24, 1976
(P.H. re Establishment
of Underground District
Along No. & So. Livermore)
Mayor Tirsell asked if there would be any problem with the
funding if the project were delayed and it was noted that
there would be no problem from this aspect.
Mr. Parness stated that this would not cause a problem with
the funding but the monies have been accumulating for about
four years and he is assured that the monies will remain to
the City's credit but he is not sure how long this will remain.
At present they are reserved for the city's use and it is just
a question of getting the work done. The project could be
delayed.
Cm Turner stated that he would have to support the statement
made by Cm Staley. He has heard the same concerns. Two mer-
chants have indicated to him that they are just beginning to
recover from the recession and the tearing up of the street.
He would also question whether or not the funds could be diver-
ted for a signal light at the underpass at North Livermore.
Mr. Parness stated that the bulk of this money will be PG&E
funding and a nominal amount will come from the City through
gas tax funds. It is true that the funds could be used for
some other purpose but the PG&E funds can be used only for
the undergrounding.
Cm Staley wondered if the whole street will be torn up or if
only portions will be disrupted.
Mr. Lee stated that some trenching will be done but this will
not cause.'~pe,w~ole street to be torn up. Some sections will
not be 4~at all. The whole length will not be done
at one time - it will be done in sections from Chestnut Street
to Fourth Street. Since PG&E is near completion on the design,
he could bring the time schedule to the council if they would
like. JoI<lJt~4
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would ~~~~~~~to obtain
the time schedule and find out if ~t 1& s~ that would
pass a property owner in one day and something that could be
done during the summer with the lighter traffic. If it is
something that will cause one block to be torn up for a whole
week the Council might want to reconsider the time the project
should take place.
Mr. Lee stated that the trenches will not be open for an exten-
ded period of time because only ducts will be installed and
normally a section can be opened and closed within a matter
of two or three days.
John Regan stated that in speaking with people from PG&E it
is his understanding that the project would commence after
the 1st of July but the actual change-over would not take
place until after the first of the year. It seems that PG&E
is willing to be very cooperative and he believes they will
do everything possible to accommodate as many merchants as
possible, within their limitations. '
Bob Agert, 2310 First Street, stated that he does business
known as "Trader Bob" and when he tried to establish a
business in Livermore it took him over three months to
find a building in which to do business. With the assistance
of the Mr. Musso he found a building on First street. The
business was blocked off for three weeks and when it was not
CM-32-258
May 24, 1976
(P.H. re Establishment of
Underground Dist. Along
No. & So. Livermore Ave.)
blocked off by barricades the employees who were building the parks
on Livermore Avenue parked their cars in front of the store. He
has talked with one of the surveyors who told him that there is to
be a divider in the middle of the road and the street will be torn
up for another three weeks. Mr. Agert stated that he does not know
what the plans are or what the time schedule is, but at this point,
his parking facilities have been torn up for about a month. Recently
Mr. Madis, from whom he leases his store, received a notice that the
sidewalk will be replaced in about two weeks. The sidewalks are going
to be torn up and then it appears that the street will be torn up to
provide for underground utilities.
Because of all of these problems he has had difficulty in getting his
business started and the merchant next door to him indicated that his
business has dropped 50% during the time the parking has been affected.
He would like to ask that the Council delay discussion of this item
for at least six months. This would give the merchants in the area
time to recuperate their losses.
Murray Kelso, 167 South Livermore Avenue, stated that he is in favor
of improvements for the City but in his opinion the summer is a poor
time to plan for this type of project, particularly when some of
the businesses are beginning to get more businesses after the past
2~ years. He would agree that it would be reasonable to do something
like this towards the end of the year or after the first of the year
when business is generally slower.
Mr. Kelso stated that the last time the City did some type of under-
grounding in August of 1973 the street was torn up for a whole month
and reduced the amount of his business by 60%, because the City
blocked the islands at his service station. He is in favor of the
project but would recommend that it be done in sections with one
section complete before going to the next section.
Mr. Kelso stated that the last time wires for the telephones were
placed underground the cost to him was $400. He would like to know
if he will be charged for a new junction box at his expense because
the diagram does not show Second Street, but only shows the building
he is in.
Mr. Lee stated that he would imagine that Mr. Kelso would have to
pay for the new junction box; however, he is not sure how Mr. Kelso
obtains his service at present. If Mr. Kelso has an overhead service
at this time he would assume that Mr. Kelso will have to convert to
the underground service.
Mr. Lee stated that PG&E will pay for the undergrounding of the
utilities, the City will pay for the street lights, and the property
owners will relocate their service to underground service.
Mr. Lee added that a couple of years ago Second Street went to
undergrounding and if Mr. Kelso converted to underground wires
at that time he would not be required to convert now.
Dick Wright, with PG&E, stated that to answer Mr. Kelso's question,
he does have underground service at this time and he will not be
required to convert. PG&E had scheduled the project to commence
July 5th but there is no way this date can be met. They are now
planning to begin in August or September. The project is planned
to be done in sections - dig up the street, install the ducts, and
resurface then move on. They understand what the businesses have
to put up with and they plan to move as quickly as possible. The
street will be torn up for about three days.
CM-32-259
May 24, 1976
(P.H. re Establishment of
Underground Dist. Along
No. & So. Livermore Ave.)
Cm Turner asked about the time schedule from beginning to end.
If the project starts on July 5th, when would everything be
complete?
Mr. Wright stated that allowing for rain and other problems
the entire project should be complete in April or May of next
year. He explained that everything is not being done at one
time but this does not mean that trenches will be open for
this entire time. Trenches will be open for a maximum of three
or four days in anyone place.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, SECONDED BY
CM TURNER.
em Staley asked if it would be more appropriate to continue
the public hearing until such time as the Council receives
the report on the phasing of the project.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Council can always open the pub-
lic hearing again if it comes back on the agenda.
Mr. Lee stated that PG&E is doing their work assuming that the
City will proceed with the formation of the underground dis-
trict and they are devoting a lot of engineering time to this
project. They need to know that the City has a district and he
would recommend that the Council approve the underground district
at this time and rely upon PG&E not to have disruptions in the
street for any length of time.
Mayor Tirsell asked if it would be necessary to advertise a
public hearing if the Council closes the hearing at this time
and Mr. Parness indicated that he believes it would have to be
advertised again.
MOTION AND SECOND WERE WITHDRAWN.
Dick Wright stated that Mr. Lee is correct in reporting that
PG&E has been working on the engineering for this project.
Normally, this cannot be done without an underground district
and if it is not formed they will have to stop procedures at
this point. He would suggest that the City go ahead with the
formation of the underground district so PG&E can continue with
the engineering, and the scheduling can be worked out with the
City later.
em Staley commented that nobody has opposed the formation of
the underground district concept. The only concern has been
with the timing schedule. He would suggest that the Council
go ahead and close the public hearing and direct the staff to
proceed with the formation of the underground district.
CM STALEY MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, SECONDED BY CM
TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM STALEY MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PROCEED WITH THE PREPARA-
TION OF A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE UNDERGROUND DISTRICT, WITH
NO ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION TO BEGIN UNTIL THE COUNCIL HAS REVIEWED
THE SCHEDULE PREPARED BY THE STAFF. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM
KAMENA.
CM-32-260
May 24, 1976
(P.H. re Establishment of
Underground Dist. Along
No. & So. Livermore Ave.)
em Turner stated that he would like it to be a matter of public record
that the Council has recognized the needs and desires of the business
community in that area so that they can function on a day-to-day basis
and that the Council is doing everything possible to insure that there
is orderly completion of this construction with a minimum of disrup-
tion.
Cm Dah1backa stated that he will vote against the motion because he
believes that the amount of money involved is equivalent to two miles
of bike lanes, and in his opinion this would be a better use of the
public funds than undergrounding of utility lines, as well as being
better for the health, safety, and welfare of the public.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she believes it is the intent of the Council
to provide a CBD that is more attractive for people who will ride
their bikes to that area and one of the very fortunate items available
to the City is this type of legislation that provides for all but
about 1/10 of the funding. The City went through a lot of anguish
in trying to get industry on Research Drive to underground lines,
housing projects to underground, not only for aesthetic reasons but
for safety reasons as well. There are funds available to the City
at this time for this purpose and in her opinion the City would be
remiss in not taking advantage of this opportunity.
MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Cm Dah1backa dissenting).
A resolution will be prepared by the staff.
COMMUNICATION RE CUP
APP. FOR ALTAMONT
DISPOSAL SITE
A letter was received from the City of San Leandro which indicated
that the Interim Council is vigorously opposed to a CUP for Oakland
Scavenger Company relative to the Altamont disposal site.
Cm Staley noted that he believes this is a moot issue because a
decision has already been made concerning Oakland Scavenger's
application for a CUP.
Mayor Tirsell stated that a decision was made and she believes
that the Altamont site will not be subject to the provisions of
the Solid Waste Management Plan and would suggest that the letter
be noted for filing.
Council concurred.
TOWN MEETING
em Dahlbacka stated that tomorrow night the City is having a town
meeting to be held at Rincon Avenue School at 7:30 p.m. which will
be an opportunity for people to speak with City officials in a less
formal atmosphere than the City Council meetings.
There will be a discussion concerning the next year's budget which
has just been submitted in written form by the City Manager. This
is the only item that is scheduled on the agenda for discussion
other than a discussion of the Public Safety Measure for which
there will be some preparation for discussion.
The purpose of the meeting is free discussion for the public con-
cerning any problems they have. Hopefully, it will be well adver-
tised and people will attend to speak with City officials, the City
Council and among themselves.
CM-32-261
May 24, 1976
REPORT RE PARKING &
CIRCULATION - LIVERMORE
ARCADE SHOPPING CENTER
A report concerning the parking problems and traffic congestion
problems in the area of the Livermore Arcade Shopping Center
was submitted to the Council by the Director of Public Works.
em Turner stated that he is concerned about the problem of
trying to exit from the area in front of Safeway onto "P"
street in an effort to make a left hand turn. There is no
problem if someone tries to flow with the traffic making a
right hand turn. He stated that he made a survey of the
traffic problem in that area with Mr. Lee and apparently they
do not agree with the problem. At that time Mr. Lee did not
believe there was a problem involved, as em Turner did.
Cm Turner stated that Mr. Lee has indicated that the City has
planned to place an island in that area with only one place
where traffic can cross which happens to be at the Safeway exit.
His argument is that the exit is unsafe when trying to make a
left hand turn and he would like someone to agree with him.
Mr. Lee stated that included in his report to the Council is
a diagram illustrating the proposal for handling the traffic
around the periphery of the shopping center. At present the
problem is exaggerated because of the fact that Railroad Avenue
is not completed. Therefore, all of the access to the shopping
center has to be along "p" Street and First Street and it is
placing an exceptional burden on the entrances to the shopping
center at these streets.
Mr. Lee stated that em Turner has indicated that a problem
exists and he does not disagree with this and he would say
that there may be a delayed problem even after all the traffic
islands and streets are constructed on the periphery. That is
an exceptionally busy shopping center, and "P" Street is an
exceptionally busy street, particularly during the commute hours.
The design of the medians and left turn lanes on "P" Street and
the other streets have been designed to favor the on-street traf-
fic and to keep the traffic on the street moving. Limited access
to the shopping center was provided to accommodate the traffic on
"P" Street and this is the reason only one driveway was provided
on "P" Street.
There are 10,000 to 12,000 cars a day on "P" Street and it is
not conceivable that there would be a time when there will not
be some problem in getting out of the shopping center going in
a northerly direction.
em Turner stated that he believes the proposed island will be
an injustice to Security Pacific Bank, ACE Hardware, and the
Team Shop. Also, when the median is installed the other stores
will be in the shopping center and there will be even more traffic
corning from the shopping center than there is at present. He
stated that in trying to make a left turn from the exit in front
of Safeway a motorist has to watch the traffic corning from the
north, from the south, from the stores across the street, and
from the bank. In his opinion people don't even try to turn
left - they go ahead and turn right. Mr. Lee has indicated that
the opening of Railroad Avenue will help ease the problem and
he does not agree. The City plans to stop the traffic at "P"
and Railroad Avenue, which will add to the Up" Street congestion.
CM-32-262
May 24, 1976
(Report re Parking &
Circulation - Livermore
Arcade Shopping Center)
Mayor Tirsell asked Cm Turner if he has a suggestion as to a solu-
tion to the problem and he indicated that he doesn't know what
can be done, but the City should be able to come up with something.
Perhaps it means that a signal will have to be installed there or
something like that because in his opinion it is really a danger
to the health and welfare to the City.
Mr. Lee stated that he believes the situation is one which really
can't be solved. It is a problem that is analogous to having a
two gallon funnal and wanting to place four gallons of water
through it. This is a situation that engineering can't take care of.
The traffic on "P" Street can't be moved along without some incon-
venience because of the shopping center.
ern Turner stated that possibly the City should allow right hand
turns only.
Mr. Lee stated that a right turn only would present the problem
of too many cars in the stacking lane to get to First Street. He
stated that he was observing that area the other day when talking
to the people from the bank about the median and he noticed that
there were about 14 cars trying to go south to make a left hand
turn onto First Street and they were stacked a long way past the
stacking lane. This created the problem of about nine cars waiting
to turn into the shopping center from "P" Street, going north.
If openings are allowed in the medians for each of the stores
there will be even more problems.
Cm Staley felt there should be no opening in the median at all
and Mr. Lee explained that the reason an opening is planned
is because it would be near the center of the block and would
allow for a south bound turning lane.
Cm Staley commented that there should be no problem if no opening
is provided for in the median because this would mean that people
would have no difficulty getting into the shopping center. If
people are traveling down First Street they can pass through the
intersection and turn right into the shopping center rather than
turning at the lights to make a left turn into the shopping center.
Then if people are in the shopping center and want to go north they
can go to Railroad Avenue, when it is opened to the center, and make
a right turn onto Railroad Avenue.
Mr. Lee stated that he does not disagree that there is a problem
but there is not necessarily an absolute solution to it.
ern Karnena stated that this may be the time to consider some of the
long range problems the City might have because this is a clear
demonstration of a north/south oriented street which is presently
the easterly periphery of Phase I of that shopping center. It may
eventually become the westerly periphery of Phase II, or the center
of the downtown development and this same problem may happen to "L"
Street.
Cm Staley noted that he still doesn't feel his suggestion to have
a continuous median along "P" Street with no openings has been
satisfactorily rebutted and he would like Mr. Lee to make a spe-
cific remark as to this suggestion.
Mr. Lee stated that if there is a continuous median it would favor
the lip" Street traffic and would speed up the traffic but it would
complicate the problems for the shopping center because there are
many times during the day that a left turn from the center is not
particularly difficult.
CM-32-263
May 24, 1976
(Report re Parking &
Circulation - Livermore
Arcade Shopping Center)
Mayor Tirse1l stated that possibly there could be a sign posted
to prohibit a left turn onto "P" Street between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m.
if the peak hour is really a problem.
em Staley noted that in his opinion the person sitting in front of
Safeway trying to turn left is not the problem but rather the prob-
lem is the person sitting 10 cars back who wishes to turn right on
"P" Street. All of the internal lanes in the shopping center are
being blocked while someone sits at the exit trying to turn left.
em Turner stated that in the future, if the traffic can flow onto
Railroad Avenue to go north, is good ground work for Cm Staley's
proposal to provide a median without openings. During the interim
he would suggest that the Safeway exit be closed with the traffic
being funneled back onto First Street at the First Street exit,
or onto Railroad Avenue. In his opinion the median would be unfair
to the merchants across the street from the shopping center on
"P" Street.
Mayor Tirsell stated that if the traffic in that area is really as
bad as everyone is saying, the people from the Team Shop and the
other businesses across from the shopping center, should not be
able to turn left from those businesses to go south.
The Council concluded that a sign prohibiting left turns during
certain hours might be a temporary help to the problem and Mayor
Tirsell asked Mr. Lee to try this until Railroad Avenue is open
so the City can determine what the traffic flow pattern is when
Railroad Avenue is opened. She then asked if the medians will
go in prior to the opening of Railroad Avenue and Mr. Lee stated
that they are planned simultaneously.
The staff was also directed to consider a plan with no medians
as well as a plan with a solid median, and to report back to the
council on the effectiveness of the sign for no turns to the left
during certain hours.
Mr. Musso stated that his concern was the stacking problem getting
into the shopping center rather than the problem of trying to get out.
The staff will discuss these concerns with the owner of the shop-
ping center and report back to the Council.
REPORT RE PURCHASING
PROCEDURE REVISIONS
The City Manager reported that it has been suggested that a review
be made of our purchasing procedures to allow preference to a
local vendor. The staff has recommended that an amendatory ordi-
nance be prepared to increase the bid amount from $3,500 to $5,000;
to increase informal bids from $100 to $200, and a change in the
local vendors preference.
The City Attorney stated that his report concerning the Attorney
General's opinion is not contrary to the opinion of his office.
If the Council is confused that there is a difference between
his office and that of the Attorney General's office, this is
not true.
CM TURNER MOVED TO 1) INCREASE THE PURCHASES THROUGH A FORMAL BID
PROCESS FROM $3,500 TO $5,000, WHICH IS ALLOWED BY STATE LAW;
2) RAISE THE INFORMAL BID REQUIREMENTS FROM $100 TO $200; AND
3) ESTABLISH A 5% PREFERENCE FOR LOCAL VENDORS. MOTION SECONDED
BY CM STALEY.
CM-32-264
May 24, 1976
(Report re Purchasing
Procedure Revisions)
Mr. Parness stated that he doesn't understand the 5% portion of
the motion.
Cm Turner stated that at present, the ordinance establishes a 5%
preference for bids submitted by local vendors. The report from
the Assistant City Attorney indicates that the City has not used
the policy for years.
Mr. Parness stated that the City has not used the policy since being
advised not to use the 5% policy. It is 5% of purchases up to $500.
ern Staley commented that his understanding of the motion is that it
would be 5% of any amount of purchase.
ern Turner stated that this is the intent - no limit.
ern Kamena asked that the motion be made separately as three motions.
ern Dahlbacka stated that with the new limit ($5,000) it would mean
$250 if the City allows 5% and he couldn't vote for that.
MOTION MADE BY CM TURNER WAS WITHDRAWN AND MOTIONS RESTATED AS
FOLLOWS:
CM TURNER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE TO
INCREASE THE BID AMOUNT FROM $3,500 TO $5,000, ALLOWED BY STATE
LAW; AND TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF INFORMAL BIDS FROM $100 TO $200.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM KAMENA WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ESTABLISH A 5% PREFERENCE FOR LOCAL VENDORS,
UP TO A MAXIMUM BID OF $5,000, WITH DIRECTION TO THE STAFF TO
PREPARE THE NECESSARY ORDINANCE. MOTION SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
Cm Staley commented that his concern with the 5% policy is that
some local vendor may take advantage by adding to his profit by 5%.
Mr. Parness explained that sealed bids are received for any purchase
over $5,000.
ern Staley felt a 5% discount should be applied to bids over $5,000
rather than under $5,000 because if the City is purchasing anything
that might require maintenance, such as automobiles or machinery,
the 5% local preference is probably well worthwhile in keeping the
items locally for servicing. He added that he believes there is
danger in allowing the 5% discount for unsealed bids because the
vendor will know what others are bidding and can therefore add 5%
to his profit. What the City is concerned about is attempting to
spend tax dollars locally if the local merchant is within a reason-
able range, which would be within 5% of the next lowest bid.
Mr. Parness explained that on purchases up to $200, quotations
are usually done by telephoning process. When the purchasing
agent calls a vendor he does not tell the vendor what the other
quotations are and the City tries to get at least three quotations.
If informal bids are allowed up to $5,000, written proposals are
submitted; some sealed and most of them are informal. Again, these
vendors are not told what other bids are. The purchasing agent would
open the bids, tabulate them, and give a 5% discount to local vendors
then submit the results to the City Manager.
The City Attorney noted that this is not clear from a legal standpoint
and that there are evenly balanced arguments concerning the 5% dis-
count. This just happens to be the opinion of his office; however,
the more money involved, the more likely a problem.
CM-32-265
May 24, 1976
(Report re Purchasing
Procedure Revisions)
Cm Staley commented that he would like to know if this is action
that is mandatory or discretionary on the part of the staff. He
stated that it isn't clear and it could be discretionary.
The City Attorney explained that it would have to be mandatory.
em Turner stated that the sense of his motion is to reactivate
the policy.
MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Mayor Tirsel1 dissenting) .
REPORT RE BACKING LOT
FENCE MAINTENANCE-HOLMES ST.
A report was submitted by the Director of Public Works concerning
the backing lot fence maintenance cost on Holmes Street, and the
estimated cost of replacement of the grape stake to a masonry type
of fence as suggested by em Turner. .
The estimated cost for maintenance of the present fence is $1,600 a
year. Raplacement with a steel fence would cost $55,000, and re-
placement with a masonry wall would be an estimated $72,500.
Cm Turner stated that he doesn't exactly agree with the figures
in the report but he would accept the report.
RECESS
Mayor Tirsel1 called for a brief recess after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present.
/ RESOLUTION RE
TRACT 1666 (Madis
- Trevarno Road Area)
The resolution concerning Tract 1666 (Trevarno Road area) was
postponed from the meeting of May 10, for further staff and
applicant discussion.
It was noted that the applicant was not present.
The City Attorney stated that he would contact the applicant
and ask him to attend the next Council meeting to discuss the
resolution. The provisions of the resolution are a matter of
a great debate and some of them seem rather liberal but their
intention is not as liberal as they appear. For the public
record it might be useful that everything be discussed so that
everyone is informed and knows what is happening.
The item was continued and the City Attorney will be contacting
Mr. Madis to ask him to attend the next Council meeting.
REPORT RE GREENVILLE
NORTH SWIM CLUB
The City Manager reported that representatives of the owners of
the Greenvi1le North Swim Club facility have agreed to jointly
conduct a preliminary appraisal of the facility at a cost of
$625 each. It is recommended that the Council authorize the
preliminary appraisal at a cost of $625 for the City, subject
to the property owner contributing the same amount.
CM-32-266
May 24, 1976
(Report re Greenville
North Swim Club)
Mr. Parness stated that the Fire Marshall has inspected the premises
on two or three occasions, he has been in contact with the owner and
has posted the property. The property is being cleared of weeds and
debris. The building is completely vandalized to the extent that it
does constitute a hazard and in that respect our Building Department
has assessed the situation and has reported that the property can
qualify for demolition process under the Building Code provisions.
Mr. Parness has notified the owner that the demolition process may
be invoked by the City unless some means of security measures are
taken immediately.
ern Turner stated that he visited the area with Frances Harper, repre-
sentitive of the Greenville area, and he has concluded that it is
a health hazard and that the Council should make a decision as to
whether the City should purchase the property or to have it abated
as a nuisance. He submitted pictures taken at that time for the
record.
Cm Turner stated that he is not willing to pay half of the appraisal
fee and that the staff should be directed to contact the owners to
find out if they want to sell it or not and perhaps some type of
negotiation could be made.
Mayor Tirse11 noted that the City Attorney had been directed to
contact the owner concerning sale of the property to the City and
negotiations have been taking place to a certain extent.
The City Attorney stated that this is correct. The staff has been
discussing this item with the owners for about two months and the
agreement to share the cost for an appraisal is based on those
negotiations. The idea was that since both parties are possibly
interested in the property each would share in the cost for the
appraisal if the Council would agree to sharing the cost.
At this point the Council should not discuss whether or not the
property is a public nuisance, but rather whether or not the
City is interested in an appraisal and possible purchase.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that the property is in such a state of disrepair
that it would not be possible to use the facility this summer even if
it were purchased by the City. Therefore, she would suggest that
the City Attorney be allowed to proceed with the measures he has
taken without asking for an appraisal at this time and to allow him
to continue to negotiate with the owners.
The City Attorney explained that he cannot enter into negotiations
for acquisition of a piece of property, using public funds, without
an appraisal. He will inform the owners that the Council is not
interested in proceeding any further, at this time, and that the
Council is not interested in sharing the cost of an appraisal and
if they have any interest in doing something with the property they
will have to approach the City with an offer.
Frances Harper, 5691 Oakmont Circle, stated that she can understand
the concerns of the City staff and the Council. However, her con-
cern is that something is going to have to be done soon because the
gates to the pool area are open. The children are riding their bikes
right in the pool and broken glass is everywhere. It is dangerous
and school will be over on June 11th.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the City placed chain locks on the gates
at one time and the children still got into the pool area. It
appears that the City is not able to keep them out.
CM-32-267
May 24, 1976
(Report re Greenville
North Swim Club)
Cm Staley stated that he believes the Council should settle
one issue before getting into another issue.
Mrs. Harper stated that she also agrees with this but she
is concerned about the kids in the community and the Council
should take this into consideration along with settling the
issue of whether or not the City will purchase the property.
em Turner stated that the City Attorney has advised that the
Council not discuss the hazards involved so he can't mention
that people in that area should take notice of the children
in the area.
MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO CONTINUE
CONTACTING THE PROPERTY OWNER CONCERNING THIS ITEM. MOTION
WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES.
Cm Kamena stated that the staff has indicated that our portion
of an appraisal would be $625. As he recalls it was mentioned
that an appraisal would cost $2,500, half of which would be
$1,250. He wondered if the $625 is an accurate figure for the
City's share of the cost of an appraisal or if this is a mistake.
The City Attorney explained that there are two types of apprai-
sals. One is a preliminary appraisal and the other is a narra-
tive appraisal. The narrative appraisal would cost $2,500.
A preliminary appraisal, for purposes of purchase, is adequate
but he would never use a preliminary appraisal in any kind of
acquisition over $10,000 if there were a court trial involved.
If a court trial is not involved a preliminary appraisal is
sufficient and this is what has been agreed to.
CM STALEY MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INSTRUCT THE CITY ATTOR-
NEY TO CONTACT THE PROPERTY OWNERS TO INDICATE THAT THE CITY IS
NOT WILLING TO PARTICIPATE IN THE COST OF AN APPRAISAL AND THAT
THE CITY'S WILLINGNESS TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY WOULD DEPEND UPON
THE PRICE UPON THEIR APPRAISAL OR A PRICE THEY WOULD ESTABLISH
FOR THE PROPERTY.
The City Attorney stated that he intends to back out of this
entirely and any further action would have to be instituted
by them because any negotiations for the purpose of purchase
would require an appraisal.
AMENDMENT WAS WITHDRAWN.
MAIN MOTION WAS WITHDRAWN.
Cm Turner felt there should be some way the City Attorney could
indicate to the owners that the City is interested in possible
purchase of the property. Perhaps the owners could make an offer.
Cm Kamena stated that discontinuing negotiations does not pre-
clude listening to any offer the owners may wish to make.
The City Attorney stated that if the Council intends to discuss
the public nuisance aspect of the property it should be scheduled
as an agenda item because the Council will probably wish to dis-
cuss abatement of that public nuisance. Mr. Parness has sent
a letter to the owners indicating that there is a major concern
on the part of the City over the safety aspect, and he has also
spoken with the attorney for the owners about the hazards that
exist and the City's concern.
CM-32-268
May 24, 1976
(Report re Greenvi1le
North Swim Club)
Cm Staley noted that if the Council decides to discuss the safety
aspect at another time, as an agenda item, and it is determined
that something should be done, the City will have to wait 30 days
to do anything. This means that it would be the middle of July
before anything could be done to protect the kids from getting
in there.
Mayor Tirse1l explained that it would appear the City has no alterna-
tive because locks are broken immediately and the kids get inside.
Aside from demolishing it, there is no way to make it secure at
this time. The windows are all broken out.
Cm Staley suggested that the City begin with abatement process and
in the meantime if the property owner complies and secures the property
the City can dissolve or rescind the abatement procedure. If the
City does not take some type of action to proceed it will be the
middle of summer before anything is done out there.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would like to know if the building
qualifies for demolition and if the ordinance would apply to that
area. She would not be prepared, at this time, to begin abatement
proceedings.
ern Dahlbacka noted that the report from the Building Inspector
indicates that the present condition of the Swim Club is obviously
worsening rapidly. The premises must be classed as a hazard to
safety, health, and public welfare, by reason of inadequate main-
tenance, etc. As such, the building is declared by Section 243 of
the Uniform Building Code to be a public nuisance and must be abated
by repair, rehabilitation, demolition, or removal, in accordance
with the procedures approved by law. ern Dahlbacka stated that
included in the report from Mr. Street are the specific procedures
to follow.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would like to have the opportunity to
read the report from Mr. Street and discuss the item in two weeks.
CM TURNER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO TAKE STEPS TO INITIATE THE
ABATEMENT PROCESS. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
Cm Staley commented that he realizes Mayor Tirsell is uneasy about
taking action at this time but he believes the City should do every-
thing possible to protect the safety of the children in that area
and this action is necessary.
Mrs. Harper urged that the City either demolish the facility or
purchase it before someone is hurt on that property.
MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Mayor Tirsell dissenting) .
THE ITEM WILL BE REPORTED ON IN TWO WEEKS.
REPORT RE APPLICATION
TO REMOVE TWO HERITAGE
TREES 740 So. Livermore Ave
An application for the removal of two ancestral trees was submitted
by Mr. and Mrs. Steve Coronado of 740 So. Livermore Avenue. The
request has been denied by the Tree Superintendent as well as the
Planning Commission.
Mr. Coronado stated that he would like the two trees on his property
removed because they are a hazard to his children and the expense
of upkeep is high. The cost for pruning of palm trees is $200 per
year, which doesn't increase the value of his property.
CM-32-269
May 24, 1976
(Report re Application
to Remove Two Heritage Trees
740 So. Livermore, Ave.)
Hestated that it is necessary to prune the palm trees
every year because if they are not a limb can fall and each limb
weighs approximately eight pounds and they are about 15 ft. long.
Mr. Coronado stated that he would plan to replace the palm trees
with a tree that would be more suitable and less expensive to prune.
Ray Brice, 2705 Superior Drive, stated that as a former member of
the Beautification Committee, there were two palm trees removed
in 1974 at the Callaghan residence on Fourth Street. The cost
for each tree was $300 for pruning and $900 for removal. He
stated that first the tree must be pruned before it can be re-
moved. The Beautification Committee reviewed the application
by Mr. Coronado for removal of the trees and it was felt that
there was no good reason to remove the heritage trees and that
professional pruning could solve the problem of falling fronds.
The Planning Commission considered the possibility of removing
palm trees from the Ancestral Tree ordinance because of their
rapid growth and to consider specifications such as a certain
diameter of the palm tree with a certain height from the ground.
Another point that was brought up was that several cities are
having difficulty with their heritage tree ordinances due to city
liability problems.
Cm Turner stated that he visited the property and the Coronado
family was not at home. He spoke with Mr. Baezel1 who wrote
a letter asking that the City grant the request of Mr. Coronado
to remove the trees because the branches which falloff each
year are a danger to his two small children. Cm Turner stated
that he is sympathetic to the applicants and will support their
position for the following reasons. In the first place, there
are two large palm trees growing in a small front yard and if
they blew over they would destroy the house. The two trees
cover the whole front yard and no lawn can grow in the area
which leaves the yard in a dirty condition. He can really see
a danger if one of the limbs fell and he, personally, would not
want to have to climb the trees to prune them.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE APPLICANT, MR. CORONADO, BE ALLOWED
TO REMOVE THE TWO PALM TREES WITH THE FINDINGS THAT 1) THEY
DO CONSTITUTE A HAZARD; 2) THEY ARE NOT IN KEEPING WITH THE
SIZE OF THE YARD; 3) THAT IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO GROW ANY TYPE
OF VEGETATION SUCH AS GRASS UNDER THE TREES; AND 4) THAT IT
DOES NOT CONSTITUTE SPECIAL PREVILEGES. HE STATED THAT HE
WOULD ALSO ADD THAT MR. CORONADO BE REQUIRED TO REPLACE THE
PALM TREES WITH TREES SUITABLE FOR THAT AREA. MOTION WAS
SECONDED BY CM STALEY FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES.
Cm Staley stated that at this point he really doesn't know how
he is going to vote on the motion. He also looked at the site
and he believes it is difficult to balance the public good
against the private responsibility. In establishing the Ances-
tral Tree Ordinance the City has determined that the public good
and interest in having these ancestral trees is of sufficient
concern to require people who own them to properly care for them.
Cm Staley added that he does not know what to do because in
this particular case the trees absolutely overshadow this
particular lot and he can see the danger involved. On the
other hand he can see the desire to protect ancestral trees.
Cm Kamena stated that he is sympathetic with the applicant;
however, the City is bound by legal constraints and certain
findings must be made before an ancestral tree can be removed.
CM-32-270
May 24, 1976
(Report re Application to
Remove Two Heritage Trees)
Cm Kamena stated that the tree must be diseased or in danger of
falling or causing material property damage and he is not sure that
this has been established in the testimony. He also is not sure
that the trees would have to be removed to allow reasonable use of
the site on which they are located. He can understand that they are
expensive to continue to maintain but the trees have been there
longer than the applicant has.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that people are not used to seeing large trees
and they sometimes appear to be out of proportion but he cannot
vote in favor of allowing removal of them. He believes it is impor-
tant to uphold the ordinance and there seems to be no real reason to
remove them. In his opinion, maintenance problems are not really
grounds for allowing removal of trees.
The City Attorney explained that the alternatives Cm Kamena mentioned
are alternative rather than comprehensive. The Council does not need
to make all of those findings and anyone finding would be adequate.
Cm Kamena noted that in his opinion none of those findings he mentioned
had been made.
Mr. Gorland explained that in speaking with the Tree Superintendent,
Mr. Freitas, he indicated that on the basis of the ordinance he had
no alternative but to deny the application.
Cm Staley stated that his interpretation of the ordinance is that
all four findings would have to be made before the trees could be
removed and the City Attorney commented that in his opinion a fair
reading of the ordinance would not imply this because the findings
are not necessarily consistent - anyone of them could stand up.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Council should probably not be discuss-
ing the legalities of the ordinance and if the Council wants to dis-
cuss this it should be a separate agenda item.
Cm Staley stated that it makes a difference as to whether all four
findings must be made because on this basis he was intending to vote
for the recommendation to deny the application; however, if all four
findings are not necessary it may make a difference in how he votes.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he can't agree with the City Attorney
because finding (b) "That the removal of the tree or trees will
not cause erosion or increased flow of surface waters or pollution
of adjacent water courses.", by itself is ridiculous.
Cm Turner stated that there is no place in the front yard of that
home that the two trees do not cover. If a limb falls there would
be a good chance that someone might be hit by it.
Cm Staley commented that he is confused now because it was his under-
standing that all four findings had to be made and he was prepared
to vote against the application. However, he has no problem in
finding that this is causing material damage to the property.
In his opinion, large fronds falling on the property has to be
considered material damage. If the trees were located on a 1/2 acre
lot then a palm tree covering 25 ft. of space is not causing material
damage to the property but if you relate the problem to a 5,000 sq.
ft. lot this is a problem.
Mayor Tirse1l stated that all the ancestral trees are located on
lots of 5,000 sq. ft. or less because they are all in the old part
of town.
CM-32-271
May 24, 1976
(Report re Application
to Remove Two Heritage Trees
740 So. Livermore, Ave.)
The City Attorney stated that it is up to the Superintendent of
Trees to make the finding. He has denied the application and it
is being appealed to the Council. Therefore, it is not necessary
for the Council to make findings, unless it is the intent of the
Council to grant the appeal. In this case findings would have to
be made.
Mayor Tirsell stated she is concerned that if the Council allows
removal of these trees so that the property could be used in a
better way, the Council would have to grant the same permission
for removal of ancestral trees for anyone else wanting to remove
their tree for the same reason.
Cm Kamena stated that at this point he does not have enough infor-
mation to vote on the item and he plans to abstain from the motion.
Mayor Tirsell suggested that rather than abstain Cm Kamena should
ask more questions if something is not clear, or postpone the dis-
cussion and vote.
ern Kamena stated that he would agree with postponement and Cm Staley
stated that he would also agree with postponement because he is hav-
ing real difficulty. It is his understanding that the findings can-
not be made in the alternative and that they are all required findings.
At least this was the original sense of the ordinance. If all four
are not required he would vote in favor of the applicant because
some of the findings can be made. If, however, they are all required
findings he would have to vote against the appeal because all four
cannot be made.
THE VOTE WAS MADE ON THE MOTION AS FOLLOWS:
Ayes: Cm Turner and Cm Staley
Noes: Cm Dah1backa and Mayor Tirsell
Abstain: Cm Kamena
Mayor Tirsell asked for a ruling on the vote taken.
The City Attorney stated that he does not have a set of Roberts
Rules of Order with him but he believes the vote failed. He will
inform the Council on this point at the next meeting.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM FOR TWO WEEKS, SECONDED BY
CM TURNER, WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE CAR WASH
ENTRANCE DESIGN
The representative of the Livermore Car Wash, located on First
Street, has requested to address the Council on the matter of
the entrance design, installation and maintenance responsibilities.
ern Kamena stated that he was contacted by Burke Critchfield, the
attorney representing the car wash, asking for a continuance on
this item because he cannot attend the meeting this evening.
At the request of the applicant the matter was continued to the
next Council meeting.
REPORT RE
DOGWOOD PARK
The City Manager reported that the Council discussed the problems
of the Dogwood Park site on May 3rd, and asked that the City
CM-32-272
May 24, 1976
(Report re Dogwood Park)
Attorney report back to the Council as to whether or not the property
could be sold by the City since the property was purchased with pub-
lic funds. The City Attorney has indicated that it can be sold
using procedures under the statutes.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she has received telephone calls from
residents in the area of Dogwood Park who indicated that they would
like to discuss other alternatives besides sale of the property.
Terry Bersie, 529 Oriole, stated that he is in favor of selling
the property so that something is developed in that area, but
because of the unfavorable publicity the Dogwood site has received
in the newspaper he believes the land will not sell quickly. He
and some of the other residents would like a fence erected on a
temporary basis until the property is sold.
Mayor Tirsell asked if Mr. Bersie feels that the neighbors who
are concerned would be willing to help install the fence and Mr.
Bersie stated that he would be willing to help.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the reason she is suggesting that the
neighbors put up the fence is because the City has already spent
quite a bit of money on the purchase of that site.
Mr. Lee stated that rough calculations indicate that a fence for
that area would cost approximately $2,500.
Cm Dahlbacka wondered if this would be property with old lots of
record that could be connected to the sewer.
Mr. Parness indicated that he believes they would be old lots of
record and would qualify for sewage. As he recalls there are
five separate ownerships involved and the lot lines are still
defined and a matter of record. These lines would not be erased
with the acquisition of the property. Five connections should
be allowed if this is the case.
Cm Staley noted that there are six lots.
Mr. Musso commented that resubdivision of the property would be
desirable because of the potential development problems.
CM TURNER MOVED TO INSTRUCT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE INSTRUC-
TIONS FOR SALE OF THE PROPERTY. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
Cm Turner stated that the property has been sitting there as a
proposed park site for about 5 years and in his opinion there is
no need to spend money to fence it, at this point. In his opinion
the kids would just climb over the fence anyway.
Mr. Bersie stated that the major problem they have to contend with
on weekends is motorcycles in that area and a fence would keep
them out.
The City Manager stated that the least cost to the City would be
to post the area declaring it City property with no trespassing
allowed and perhaps this would help.
Mayor Tirsell commented that this would give the Police Department
grounds to make arrests if trespassing occurs.
The Council concurred.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM-32'::'273
May 24, 1976
(Report re Dogwood Park)
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would like to say that this is
really a sorry situation because the Council was deluged with
people who wanted to build a park on that site. The City felt
it was not a good site for a park and the Council did not want
a park on the site but the people really wanted it. Public money
was spent for the acquisition of the site and it floundered and
failed and nobody lifted a finger to see that the park was de-
veloped. The City spent over $30,000 for the acquisition.
CM STALEY MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO POST THE PROPERTY WITH
NO TRESPASSING SIGNS, AND THAT IT BE APPROPRIATELY PATROLLED.
MOTION SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
Mr. Bersie stated that there is a heritage tree on that site
and he would like to know what will be done to take care of
it.
Mayor Tirsell stated that Mr. Freitas will be asked to check
the condition of the tree.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE PARKING LIMIT
ZONE ON "I" STREET
(Between Der Wienerschnitzel
and the Tri-Valley Herald)
It was brought to the attention of the City staff that there
were no signs for limited parking along "I" Street adjacent
to Der Wienerschnitzel and that cars were parking in the block
for extended periods of time.
The merchants were contacted and it was concluded that everyone
would be satisfied with the proposal to provide signs for two
hour parking on the east side of "I" Street, next to Der
Wienerschnitzel, and a l5-minute zone on the west side of
the street along the Herald and News office.
Mr. Lee stated that the report from him concerning the parking
limitations is a matter of information and he would suggest that
the present signing be allowed to continue, as reported.
Item was noted for filing.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Res. Rejecting
Claim - Calif.
Auto. Association
The Council adopted a resolution rejecting the claim of the
California State Automobile Association.
RESOLUTION NO. 122-76
A RESOLUTION REJECTING CLAIM OF CALIFORNIA
STATE AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION
Design Review
Committee Minutes
Minutes were submitted by the Design Review Committee for their
meetings of May 4th and May 8th, and were noted for filing.
CM-32-274
May 24, 1976
Res. Auth. Appraisal
of Property for
Acquisition (Overhead)
The Council adopted a resolution authorizing an appraisal of the
property located between First Street and the railroad tracks as
part of the First Street overpass project.
RESOLUTION NO. 123-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPRAISAL OF
REAL PROPERTY (Fallon Enterprises, Inc.)
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF MAYOR TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(New Development -
Fourth & "N" Streets)
Mr. Musso stated that he would like to inform the Council about
a site plan approval permit which involves construction of a commer-
cial use at Fourth and "Nil Streets. The use is within the area
designated in the new downtown plan as commercial office and
high density residential.
This is behind the old Burger Chef where the new Mexican restaurant
is going in.
The Council has the alternative to adopt an interim amendment to
the Zoning Ordinance to freeze development until the CBD Plan is
complete. Otherwise, the staff will proceed to approve the use.
/'
Mayor Tirsell stated that at this point she is not prepared to
comment, one way or the other, because the Council does not have
enough information concerning the plan. She wondered if Mr. Musso
believes that this would be a use that would commit the whole area.
Mr. Musso stated that, personally, the area is already commercial
up to the 7-11 Store and one more commercial use should not make
a difference.
(Water Problem at
Dump Site)
Mr. Lee stated that during an open forum someone from the public
reported that during the rainy season there is water standing
in the area of the dump site and the Council had directed the
staff to look into the problem.
The staff has contacted the County Health Department as well as
the Department of Water Resources who both periodically inspect
the dump. They have both indicated that they know of no problem
concerning water standing in that area and that this has never
been observed, and from sampling the water there is no evidence
that water from the dump is entering the ground water.
CM-32-275
May 24, 1976
(Resolution re Variance -
Tantivongsathaporn)
The City Attorney stated that he has presented the Council with
a second page which will be inserted as the proper resolution
for the Vithun Tantivongsathaporn variance. He stated that this
item is very confusing and he would like to explain the matter to
the Council.
The evening this was discussed his notes indicate that the Council
had determined to allow one or the other of two designs for the
auto repair - either a particular facing of the bays or a masonry
fence. He asked his administrative assistant to check with Mr.
Musso prior to preparing the appropriate resolution and Mr. Musso
indicated that both requirements were approved by the Council.
Therefore, both requirements were in the original resolution that
came back on the Consent Calendar.
Mr. Tantivongsathaporn came into the City Attorney's office to
say that the Council had required either the bays facing in
a certain direction, the masonry wall. As a result of this
the minutes were reviewed which reflected that both motions
failed.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that this item is in error, considerably,
because in the first place all items required, up through #9,
are required, and there was a #10 requiring a masonry fence
or directed bays to mitigate noise. Those were two different
amendments made by Cm Dahlbacka and seconded by Mayor Tirsell,
which both passed.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that as he recalls both he and Cm Staley
then voted against the main motion. The minutes indicate that
all the Councilmernbers voted in favor of the main motion.
The City Attorney stated that the resolution came back on the
Consent Calendar with both requirements. If the requirement
is for one or the other-tnis can be changed and he can insert
a new second page. The minutes of April 26th reflect that Cm
Dah1backa made the motion which was seconded ~y Mayor Tirsell.
The minutes indicate that the motion failed with Councilmembers
Turner, Staley and Kamena dissenting.
The City Attorney stated that his concern is that the minutes
for the meeting of April 26th have been approved and even though
Cm Dahlbacka was not present to make corrections they still be-
come official as soon as they are approved.
Cm Dahlbacka wondered if the motion could be reconsidered.
The City Attorney stated that he believes Mr. Tantivongsathaporn
has been of the understanding that one or the other would be re-
quired, and to his knowledge no money has been expended. He
would suggest that this item be reconsidered and that Mr. Tantivong-
sathaporn be informed to appear before the Council on June 7th.
Hopefully, this will not cause him a delay. Otherwise, the Council
could take the position that Mr. Tantivongsathaporn is aware of
the requirement and adjust the resolution accordingly.
In order to keep everything in proper order he would suggest that
Mr. Tantivongsathaporn be asked to reappear with reconsideration
of the matter.
Mayor Tirsell stated that this could be placed on the agenda as
old business and it probably is not necessary to discuss the whole
item again.
CM-32-276
May 24, 1976
(Resolution re Variance -
Tantivongsathaporn)
The City Attorney stated that he will set the item for reconsidera-
tion and inform Mr. Tantivongsathaporn, and in the meantime he will
listen to the tapes of that meeting to determine what the vote was
on the motions.
Cm Staley stated that if the original motion of the minutes for
that meeting indicate that he voted in favor of it, he would like
this changed because he was definitely not in favor of that use.
The City Attorney explained that the minutes indicate that Cm Staley
and Cm Dahlbacka cast a dissenting vote on the main motion.
(CBD Plan Meeting)
Mr. Parness stated that the consultant for the CBD Plan has recommended
a meeting for June 2nd.
Cm Dah1backa stated that he will not be able to attend the meeting
on that day.
Cm Staley stated that before meeting with the consultant he would
like to know why there is to be a meeting.
Mr. Parness stated that the consultant would like to respond to the
suggested amendments to the original plan.
Cm Staley suggested that the consultant prepare a response in written
form before the Council meets with him so that the Council will have
an opportunity to respond to what he suggests.
Mr. Parness stated that he will ask the consultant to prepare some-
thing in writing to submit to the Council prior to a meeting.
(Scheduling of
Budget Session)
Mr. Parness asked that the Council select the dates for the
budget session.
It was concluded that the Council will meet on June 19th to
discuss the operating budget, beginning at 9:00 a.m. in the
public meeting room at the Library.
The second day for discussion of the Capital Improvements budget
will take place on June 26th, Saturday, beginning at 9:00 a.m.,
the same place.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCILMEMBERS
(Beautification Committee)
Cm Turner stated that Nick DiTota has requested that his name be
added to the list for selection of Beautification Committee members.
Mr. DiTota is with the Lions Club, is a school administrator
and teacher.
(First Street Parking)
Cm Turner stated that he would like to discuss the red lines on
First Street, as an agenda item, because he has been contacted
by some of the merchants who would like them removed.
CM-32-277
May 24, 1976
(First Street Parking)
Mayor Tirse1l stated that this item was discussed just this
past fall and the reason the red lines were painted is because
the parking spaces are short. All of the spaces were counted
and all of this was worked out by the staff and the Council.
ern Turner stated that this means parking spaces are being lost
because of the red lines.
Mayor Tirsell stated that this is a mistake because it was con-
cluded that more parking spaces have been created because of the
way the parking has been designed.
ern Staley noted that this was what was noted during the last
discussion.
The Council indicated that they are not willing to discuss the
item again.
(Letters of Thanks to
Business License Tax
Committee Members)
Cm Staley stated that the members of the Business License Tax
Committee spent many hours studying this issue and he would
like the staff to write letters thanking those citizens for
their services, and to give them recognition at the next Civic
Awards Dinner.
Those who served were Annette Morris, Don Miller, Rebecca
Hundoble, and Marshall Kamena.
(League of Calif.
Cities Building)
ern Staley stated that the item concerning assessment to the
cities for a new League of California Cities building will
be an agenda item in the near future.
The building is to be constructed in Sacramento and it is
causing considerable problems because the assessment is
substantial and nobody seems to know how the building ever
got started and where authorization for it came from.
This will be discussed at the next East Bay League meeting.
(League Opposition
to Proposition #15)
Cm Staley reported that the League of California Cities has
taken a "no" position on Proposition #15, after considerable
studying of the issue and after hearing testimony from both
sides.
(Drive-In Windows)
Cm Staley stated that it was mentioned that the Council has never
discussed or taken a position on drive-in windows but he believes
it should be discussed. The proliferation of drive-in windows
is creating a real problem in this town and everywhere else.
This is creating smog problems as well as traffic problems and
some consideration should be given as to when a drive-up window
should be allowed in commercial uses.
CM-32-278
May 24, 1976
(Drive-In Windows)
Cm Dah1backa stated that he understood that the Planning Commission
was going to discuss this matter and Mr. Musso stated that the
Design Review Committee did ask the Planning Commission to review
this but it hasn't been on their agenda yet.
(Water Conservation)
Cm Dahlbacka stated that we have had a very dry winter this year and
he would like the staff to write to Zone 7 to find out what they plan
to do in the way of water conservation.
It is possible that this could be a California wide problem if more
dry years are experienced, which is possible because this is pre-
dicted by some people due to sun spot activity. Sun spot activity
is right for drought now and for the next couple of years.
Cm Dahlbacka would like to know if Zone 7 has a water conservation
program and whether or not they would consider implementing it.
Suggestions like having people reduce the amount of water in their
toilets would help cut down on the water problem. Also, this would
cut down on the amount of water going into the sewer plant.
(LLL Hiring)
em Dahlbacka stated that LLL plans to hire about 850 people and
he would like to have the City compose a letter explaining the
environmental situation in the Valley and the desirability of
having people who work in Livermore, live in Livermore, and in
some way indicate that the City would like to discourage commuting.
The Lab distributes a brochure to prospective employees and perhaps
they could be asked to include a letter about the environmental
conditions, etc., so that people have a clear idea of what the
situation is in Livermore. This may help persuade people to live
in Livermore if they are hired by the Lab rather than to live
elsewhere and commute to the Valley.
Mr. Parness asked if Cm Dahlbacka is suggesting that the City write
a letter to the Lab and ask that they reproduce the letter for
inclusion in their material to prospective employees and Cm
Dahlbacka stated that this is what he has in mind.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she is not certain she would be interested
in doing this and she would like to have the opportunity to give it
some thought. She added that she is not sure Livermore could
absorb that many families.
Cm Staley wondered what type of growth rate this would indicate
over the next two years.
em Dahlbacka stated that there is ample housing turnover on the
market to handle the people hired by the Lab.
(Report re AB 3041)
Mayor Tirsell asked for a report from the staff on AB 3041, as to
where it is and what is happening with it.
(Res. Supporting
Bueans Vidas)
Mayor Tirse1l asked that the staff prepare a resolution supporting
Buenas Vidas. They are applying to the County for funds.
CM-32-279
May 24, 1976
(Advertisement -
Livermore Day at
the Fair)
Mayor Tirsell stated that if the Council is interested in advertis-
ing Livermore Day at the Fair, the cost would be $35, in the Valley
Times.
Mr. Parness stated that the advertisement would be an invitation
from the Mayor to the community to join in the celebration of
Livermore Day.
Cm Turner stated that rather than placing an advertisement in
the newspaper, why not just make a statement to the press asking
that citizens participate.
Mayor Tirsell asked that this be noted on the agenda for the
meeting of June 28th so that the council can remind the citizens
at that time.
ORD. RE BUILDING
SECURITY
The second reading of the Municipal Code amendment concerning
building security was scheduled but Cm Turner requested postpone-
ment.
ern Staley commented that Cm Turner's concern is the cost of the
installation for security measures and it was concluded that
the cost is not covered in the ordinance. The ordinance speaks
only to new homes and there is nothing to require that old homes
be required to install the security measure before sale.
Mr. Parness stated that ern Turner wanted the cost figures on the
hardware that would be included, and it was concluded by the
Building Inspector and the Police Chief that this aspect of
the Security Ordinance should be in the Building Code and would
not be included in this ordinance. It is being prepared for the
Building Code.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT THE ORDINANCE, SECONDED BY CM STALEY
WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
ORDINANCE NO. 883
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE,
1959, BY THE AMENDMENT OF ARTICLE I, RELATING
TO LICENSES-GENERAL, OF CHAPTER 12, RELATING
TO LICENSES.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Tirsell adjourned the meeting at 11:45 p.m. to an execu-
tive session to discuss possible litigation and personnel matters.
ATTEST
'-1?1 <;&:~
Mayor
~~~~-!~
City Clerk
Livermore, California
-~
,
.-.
APPROVE
CM-32-280
Regular Meeting of June 7, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
June 7, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:08
p.m. with Mayor Tirse1l presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Dah1backa, Kamena, Turner and Mayor Tirse1l
Absent: Cm Staley
BLACK BART GANG
- CAPTURE OF MAYOR
The Black Bart Gang captured the Mayor and held her for $2 ransom.
She paid the ransom, which will help purchase candy for children
at the parade, and she was immediately released.
MINUTES 5/10/76
5/3/76 and 5/17/76
5/3/76
P. 176, line 3 should read: take risks for anything, under any
circumstances, and this gives....etc.
P. 191, third paragraph from the bottom, next to last line should
read: profitability is. It would appear that if this is done (car
dealers and grocery stores) it would open the door to all kinds of
complications.
P. 180, second paragraph, first line should read: Mayor Tirse1l
stated that it has been restricted to zoning districts...etc.
5/10/76
P. 205, 7th paragraph, next to last line should read: the problem.
Also, it is not the responsibi1ity...etc.
CM KAMENA MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETINGS
OF MAY 3, AND MAY 10, AS CORRECTED, AND THAT CORRECTION OF THE
MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF MAY 17, 1976 BE POSTPONED UNTIL ALL MEMBERS
OF THE COUNCIL ARE PRESENT. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND
PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, WITH CM DAHLBACKA ABSTAINING FROM THE
MINUTES OF MAY 10th.
OPEN FORUM
(Dogwood Park)
Mrs. Ritman, 4118 Stanford Way, stated that she lived in the area
of the Dogwood Park site for awhile and explained that at the time
the residents requested that the site be developed as a park it was
because they didn't want more apartments constructed in the area.
Originally they tried to work with LAPRD to see if a park could be
developed and received no response in the way of agreement to de-
velop a park because of their lack of funds. Then a church became
interested in the property and tried to obtain a CUP to use the site
for the church, but this was turned down. Finally, the City became
interested and purchased the proeperty:
She stated that since that time many of the people who were actively
involved are no longer there. She ~dded that during the time they
lived in the area they never say any blueprints for the park and
CM-32-281
June 7, 1976
(Dogwood Park Site)
even after they had moved they would have been willing to come back
and help with the physical development of that park. She stated
that she is very upset that the park she worked so hard to get is
now going to be sold.
Mayor Tirse1l stated that one of the residents of the area is
working on the possibility of keeping that area as a park site
and the Mayor expected her to be at the Council meeting this
evening.
The City Clerk explained that this item will be on the agenda
next week.
Terry Bersie, 529 Oriole, stated that he understood that the matter
of the Dogwood Park site was settled and that it was to be sold.
Mayor Tirsell stated that there is a Mrs. Lee who is interested in
possible development of the park and who does not want the site
sold. The item will be discussed next week and Mrs. Lee will
probably attend that meeting to discuss retention of the land
for use as a park site.
Mr. Musso pointed out that a public hearing would be required
before the property could be sold anyway.
Mayor Tirse1l agreed and noted that it is designated as park
land at this time and will remain as such until the Council
holds a public hearing as to whether it should be sold.
SUMMER JOBS FOR
TEENS POSTERS
Mayor Tirse1l stated that the City is going to advertise and
pUblicize summer jobs for teens and she showed the Council
posters that will be displayed around town. The new EDD
Office is open and they are taking job requests as well as
offers of jobs such as household and business jobs for teenagers
for the summer. The number to call if anyone would like to work
this summer or if anyone has a job to offer a teen, is 455-HIRE.
Teenagers from 13 to 18 years of age can work through this program.
P.H. RE RECOMMENDED
REZONING IN VICINITY
OF PORTOLA & I-580
The Planning Commission considered the area north of the I-580
interchange, north of porto1a Avenue, and the area adjacent to
and including Grossmans Building Supplies, for rezoning from ID
(Industrial Development) to CS (Commercial Services), and OS-A
(Open Space Agricultural). The P.C. adopted a resolution recom-
mending the rezoning.
Mr. Musso illustrated the area considered for rezoning and explained
that at the time the property was annexed to the City it was zoned
as Industrial, because at that time the zoning was the best zoning
for the uses anticipated. After a period of time the City con-
sidered CS Zoning and the Planning Commission has recommended
that the zoning be changed to CS. Mr. Musso added that this is
the last of the ID/IM Zoning areas and if it is rezoned the
ID/IM Zone can be repealed.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that this would also be the end of combin-
ingV~highway with CS Zoning.
~~-
~i\J~ Jv
~C!JP
CM-32-282
June 7, 1976
(Rezoning - Portola Area)
Cm Dah1backa stated that he did not realize that property north of the
freeway would be considered in this rezoning and would like an expla-
nation concerning the status of those properties.
Mr. Musso stated that the property north of the freeway is owned
by the state and is part of the state freeway but not in the right-
of-way.
Cm Dahlbacka wondered if zoning the area north of the freeway to
CS would be setting a precedent for that type of development north
of the freeway and it was noted that the area surrounding the pro-
posed CS property is OS-A, and there is no access to the OS-A land.
MAYOR TIRSELL OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING.
IN THE ABSENCE OF PUBLIC TESTIMONY, ON MOTION OF CH TURNER, SECONDED
BY CM DAHLBACKA AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE AN
ORDINANCE RELATIVE TO THE RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE P.C. ON MAY 4,
1976, AND TO ACCEPT THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION. MOTION SECONDED BY
CM DAHLBACKA. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
P.H. RE PROPOSED GEN.
PLAN AMEND TO INCLUDE
NOISE ELEMENT & SCENIC
HIGHWAY ELEMENT
Mayor Tirse1l stated that the Council has received information in the
past, concerning including the Noise Element and the Scenic Highway
Element to the General Plan. She would suggest that the items be
separated with discussion concerning the Scenic Highway Element first.
The Council concurred.
Mr. Musso explained that it is required that the Scenic Highway
Element be included in the General Plan. The Scenic Highway Element
(SHE) was prepared by the Planning Department with the aid of other
examples of SHE, particularly the County's plan. The County plan
was updated and made somewhat more definitive to fit Livermore's
scale. It was referred to the Beautification Committee who con-
tributed some changes to the early draft approved by the P.C.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that there were some differences between the recom-
mendations of the consultant on the SHE in the recent General Plan
adoption of the SHE, and he wondered if these have been reconciled.
Mr. Musso stated that there were some minor changes involved but he
did forget to bring them and doesn't recall exactly what they were.
There were primarily some minor additions, including the addition
of a couple of streets. If the Council wishes to adopt the SHE he
will distribute a list of the changes for the final draft.
It was concluded that the Council would like to review the changes
prior to adopting the resolution for the Scenic Highway Element.
The Council moved to the Noise Element portion and Mr. Musso explained
that this is a rather comprehensive element that cannot be explained
in detail.
ern Turner stated that he would like to raise a point of order and
asked if the Council has postponed adoption of the SHE. The Mayor
explained that a public hearing has been scheduled and the Council
must allow public testimony before making a decision. She will ask
this question at the end of the public hearing.
CM-32-283
June 7, 1976
(re Noise Element)
Mr. Musso stated that the Noise Element is another mandatory
element of the General Plan. The way it is prepared is in
using the City's Noise Committee. The Committee and staff
tried to prepare the ordinance, first, as had been suggested
by some of the experts but they became bogged down because of
the realities of having to apply specific regulations too soon.
They then turned to the preparation of the Noise Element.
The draft of the Noise Element was prepared by the Planning
Department with most of the data provided by the Noise Committee.
The Committee did noise studies to determine what the basic noise
sources were and he explained that the City purchased a $500 noise
detector which measures the decibel levels of noise which the
Committee used in their studies.
The P.C. adopted the Noise Element this year and since that time
Mr. Musso has received new information from the state, establish-
ing a law and a new department relative to noise. Mr. Musso felt
that possibly what the City had done would then be obsolete but
a meeting was held with people from the sta~e and it appears that
the City's method and approach to noise is satisfactory. The next
step would be to adopt an ordinance, if the Council desires, but
this is not mandatory.
The state is producing a model Noise Ordinance that the City will
be using to develop a City ordinance.
Public hearings were held and there was little response other than
from LARPD who is concerned about the impact of the Noise Element
on their parks. The City had responded to complaints concerning
soccer games at Junction Avenue School and the City considered the
standards for parks, at great length. After much discussion there
was some modification and a certain noise level was adopted.
Mr. Musso stated that he believes the important item with the
Noise Element is not to look at it as an ordinance. This is
when some definitive numbers will have to be backed up. The
Noise Element is a type of elementary noise primer to be used
in educating everyone. The most important thing will be the
Noise Ordinance, when the City gets to it.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that what Mr. Musso is saying is that the
Noise Element is a goal. Mr. Musso indicated that this is true.
It is a goal in its general requirements and a desired goal but
not absolute at this time; however, it may prove to be the absolute
by virtue of the ordinance. The Committee and staff tried to make
everything a desired goal and desired standards.
Mayor Tirsell asked how the staff would write an ordinance that
would be less restrictive than the General Plan amendment.
Mr. Musso stated that the Council should remember that this is
still general goals. In the Noise Ordinance there may be several
steps to achieve a certain goal. Perhaps the City can't take care
of the railroad problem in one step, for example. There may be
a series of steps and programs to achieve the goal.
A lot of the problems relative to park noises, for example, are
not necessarily the responsibility of LARPD or the City. They
may be the responsibility of some future developer.
One of the main concerns in the way of an early enforcement
problem would be something like air conditioners which is
a serious problem in residential areas.
CM-32-284
June 7, 1976
(re Noise Element &
Scenic Highway Element)
Mayor Tirse1l wondered if this would be adopted into the environ-
mental evaluation and Mr. Musso indicated that it has already been
used in EIRs.
MAYOR TIRSELL OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASKED FOR TESTIMONY
CONCERNING THE SCENIC HIGHWAY ELEMENT OR THE NOISE ELEMENT THAT
WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE GENERAL PLAN AND MANDATED BY THE STATE.
No public testimony was presented.
Mayor Tirse11 suggested that perhaps the public hearing could
be continued until next week so the Council could get all the
information they need concerning the Scenic Highway Element and
then ask for a resolution at that time.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he feels the Council should have all of
the Scenic Highway Element information prior to adopting a resolu-
tion and there may be some more discussion on the Noise Element.
He stated that he is surprised that nobody from LARPD carne to
testify.
The City Clerk indicated that LARPD gets the Council agendas and
they should have known that the Council would be discussing the
Noise Element.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE SCENIC
HIGHWAY ELEMENT AS WELL AS THE NOISE ELEMENT, TO JUNE 14. MOTION
WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
COMMUNICATION FROM
LLL RE MUTUAL FIRE AID
& AUTOMATIC RESPONSE
A letter was received from representatives of LLL which indicated
that with the completion and staffing of the new fire station loca-
ted on East Avenue, there is no longer a necessity for an agreement
between the City and LLL for the Mutual Fire Aid and Automatic
Response agreement.
Cm Turner stated that he believes the City should continue with
the agreement until Fire Station #4 is complete.
~1ayor Tirsell stated that as she recalls the items that will go
into Fire Station #4 are presently located in the County Fire
Station facility on College Avenue.
Mr. Parness stated that this is correct and the only benefit to the
City in continuance with the LLL coverage would be for the eastern
portion of the City. At present the City's coverage for that por-
tion of the City is more than adequate. He explained that the
City firemen at the County Fire Station do not respond to fires
in the County, so essentially this is where Fire Station #4 is
located temporarily.
Cm Dah1backa stated that as he recalls, under this agreement
the City was providing service for the F-27 as it landed and
he wondered what would happen with this service with the discon-
tinuance of the agreement.
Mr. Parness stated that the Lab will reassume the responsibility
of providing the service for the plane. It was being serviced
from the Rincon facilities but the Lab will assume the responsibility
again.
CM-32-285
June 7, 1976
(re Mutual Fire Aid
& Automatic Response)
Cm Dahlbacka stated that this would seem to be a very satisfactory
arrangement and he is not convinced that the agreement should be
dissolved.
Mr. Parness stated that the agreement was particularly benefi-
cial to the City when there was a lack of coverage in the eastern
part of the City but the Council should remember that when the
truck from Station #2 went to the airport twice a day, it meant
that a substantial portion of the City had a minimum of fire
protection available. This was a matter of grave concern both
to the Fire Department and the City Manager.
Mayor Tirsell pointed out that the letter from the Lab indicates
that effective immediately, the agreement is terminated. She
asked that the staff write to the Lab thanking them for their
cooperation during the term of the agreement, and the benefit
this has been to the community.
COMMUNICATION RE LOCATION
OF TRANSPORTATION AND
WAREHOUSE BUILDINGS
JSchool District)
It was noted that the item on the agenda concerning the location
of the transportation building and the warehouse building for the
School District was scheduled at the request of Cm Staley.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED.
COMMUNICATION RE SUR-
PLUS SCHOOL DIST. PROP.
The School District informed the City that they have surplus
land located on Olivina and it will be offered for sale.
In response to this information LARPD has written to the School
District indicating that additional property for park purposes
in the Olivina area is not critical at this time and they would
not be interested in purchase.
Letter was noted for filing.
COMMUNICATION RE PUBLIC
WORKS IMPROVEMENTS ALONG
EAST AVE. (Robt. Livermore Park)
A letter was received from LARPD indicating that they considered
public works improvements for the area along East Avenue where it
fronts on Robert Livermore Park, and that they have decided to
take limited action. It is felt that improvements would be
temporary and that relatively few bicyclists use the north side
of East Avenue.
Cm Turner stated that he would have to disagree with the statement
that few bicyclists use the north side of East Avenue because of
the number of school children who travel on that side. Also there
are some people from the Lab who use the north side.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that the City.s letter to the County was in
response from pleas from people using the bike paths daily and
CM-32-286
June 7, 1976
(re Public Works Improv.
- Robert Livermore Park)
the City would like something done as fast as possible. Perhaps
the City should write to the County again, explaining the City's
intention.
Mr. Parness stated that LARPD has requested a meeting with the
City Council for June 14th, to discuss this particular problem
as well as other items.
It was noted that the Councilmembers could not meet on June 14th
and asked that LARPD be invited to meet with the Council on June 17th.
CO~~UNICATION RE SOLID
WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN
A letter was received from the Alameda County Planning Department
indicating that the Board of Supervisors adopted the Solid Waste
Management Plan on May 18, 1976.
The Council was given a copy of the changes made to the Plan.
Item noted for filing. Action will be taken at a later time.
COMMUNICATION RE ANIMAL
CONTROL SHELTER PROCEDURES
At the request of Cm Staley a response has been received from Alameda CO'
County relative to procedures to entering the Animal Control Shelter
located at Santa Rita.
This item was postponed for one week~
COW1UNICATION RE LAVWMA
SEWAGE DISPOSAL PROJECT
A letter was submitted to the Council concerning the Board of
Supervisors' meeting of May 18, 1976, and their consideration
of the LAVWMA Sewage Disposal Project.
Letter was noted for filing.
COMMUNICATION RE DRAFT
EIR & MITIGATION MEASURES
FOR SECONDARY IMPACT RE
LAVWMA PROJECT
A letter from LAVWMA indicates that as part of the required procedure
for developing the draft EIS for the LAVWMA project, it is requested
that all appropriate jurisdictional agencies comment on mitigation
measures for secondary impacts.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the City has to show what its intentions
are by ordinance or whatever, with respect to the mitigating measures
for the LAVWMA project.
Mr. Parness stated that the staff is working on something to present
to the Council.
COPY OF COMMUNICATION
TO CORPS OF ENGINEERS
FROM ABAG RE 208 STUDY
A letter from ABAG to the Corps of Engineers asks that the Corps help
ABAG augment their 208 Program.
CM-32-287
June 7, 1976
(re 208 Study)
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Council has not received the 208
Plan of Study, as yet. The letter from ABAG to the Corps of
Engineers is the letter that the Council worked on the day
she and Cm Miller attended the Corps of Engineers meeting.
At one point the Corps of Engineers were not involved with
urban runoff studies but ABAG discovered they do not have
enough money to do the urban runoff studies so they are try-
ing to work with the Corps of Engineers to get the Corps to
do that part of the study for the Valley.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she was really distressed to see
what they are proposing but she would like to have a long
discussion after the Council receives the plan of Study.
For instance, the letter indicates that in most areas of
the County, the cost of structural controls for urban runoff
could be justified; however, the Valley is very unique and
a more detailed structural approach may be needed. In her
opinion this sounds as if a new set of standards will be
imposed for the Valley.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she suggested to the Corps that
the City would support a study only and if the study did
not show that there were absolutely terrible damaging
problems from the urban runoff, the City would not support
any further study.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that it appears they are talking about
some type of regional channelization and the Corps should
be brought up-to-date with respect to some of the arroyo
studies that have been done in this area in terms of widen-
ing the arroyos for 100 year floods, etc.
Mayor Tirse1l stated that structural things can also mean
additions to a sewer treatment plant which could be very
expensive.
Cm Turner stated that as he recalls the Corps was going to do
a study required by ABAG and if the City would not let the
Corps do the study then ABAG was going to do the study. It
happens that ABAG does not have the funds and now the Corps
wants to do it. It is a requirement and the Corps repre-
sentative did indicate that it was only a study and they
had no intentions of going further.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she has no objections to the Corps
doing a study of our problems. For example, there may be
large amounts of pesticides in our runoff, or vast amounts
of asphalt - we don't know this. However, unless they can
prove that our urban runoff is more damaged than any other
urban runoff in the Bay.Area, then that is where the study
should stop. She added that there is a limit to what we can
do and the Valley should not become a show case for the EPA.
Mr. Parness stated that the application of the Corps was made
from ABAG to have the Corps divert their finances and attention
to surface runoff to the 208 Study. This was an obligation of
the 208 Planning Agency and there is every belief that there just
is not sufficient funding to do the study. The impetus did
corne from ABAG rather than the Corps.
Mayor Tirse1l stated that the point she would like to make is
that the Corps indicated that they would not be interested in
CM-32-288
June 7, 1976
(re 208 Study)
doing a study on urban runoff unless they could look into the struc-
tural controls of cleaning up the problem. Mayor Tirsell asked them
at their mee~ing wha~ problem they are referring to - it hasn't been
proved that there is a problem. She stated that she will not be in
support of the study at all as well as not in favor of signing a
letter of intention unless it is clearly stated that they will have
to prove that a problem exists and that it is a very damaging problem,
before proceeding with Phase II.
Cm Turner stated that this is exactly what the representative from
ABAG said. The study would be merely a part of a master plan that
is required. They don't have the money so they want to use the Corps.
This item will be discussed again when the Council has the Plan of
Study.
REPORT RE APPEAL -
REQUEST TO REMOVE
ANCESTRAL TREES (Coronado)
At the meeting of May 24th the Council discussed the application of
Mr. Steve Coronado of 740 So. Livermore Avenue, to remove two
ancestral palm trees. A vote was taken on the motion to direct the
staff to initiate the abatement process for allowing removal of the
trees which was voted on 2-2 with one abstention. The City Attorney
was asked for a ruling on the vote and he indicated that he would
report back to the Council. The item was continued to this meeting.
Mr. Coronado gave brief testimony reviewing the testimony he presented
at the last meeting and noting that the trees do restrict his rights
in the use of his property and that he does plan to replace the trees
with a suitable type of tree.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE APPLICANT BE ALLOWED TO REMOVE THE TREES
BECAUSE 1) THERE IS A DANGER FROM THE FALLING FRONDS; 2) THE TREES
COVER THE ENTIRE FRONT YARD WHICH MEANS THE OWNER IS NOT AFFORDED
THE SAME PRIVILEGES AS OTHER HOME mfflERS IN THE AREA SUCH AS GRASS
AND A SAFE PLACE IN WHICH TO BE; 3) THE TREES ARE OVERSIZED FOR THE
FRONT AREA OF THE RESIDENCE; AND 4) THE OWNER HAS ATTEMPTED TO MAIN-
TAIN AND TRIM THE TREES AND TO GROt^! A LA~^lN, lVITHOUT SUCCESS, AND
5) THE TREES ARE NOT NATIVE TO THE AREA. MOTION FAILED FOR LACK
OF A SECOND.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL UPHOLD THE RECOMMENDATION OF
THE P.C. AND RECOMMEND MAINTENANCE OF THE ANCESTRAL TREES ON THE
SITE FOR THE REASONS OUTLINED BY THE P.C. TO UPHOLD THE INTENT OF
THE ORDINANCE. MOTION SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL.
Cm Turner noted that Raymond Brice from the Beautification Committee
had mentioned that he felt the expense of pruning, compared to the
expense of removing them would be about half the cost, and proper
pruning would take care of the hazardous conditions.
Cm Turner stated that if that half were paid every year, within two
years the cost of taking out the trees would be covered, and the
third year it would become an additional cost. If it is $300 per
year for pruning it is a matter of $25 per month. He stated that
as an individual it would be hard for him to pay $25 a month for
something he didn't want.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the trees had not been pruned for many
years and she is sure it would not cost $300 each year.
CM-32-289
June 7, 1976
(re Ancestral Palm
Trees - Coronado)
Cm Turner stated that, reportedly, the cost is $150 for each
tree each year. Also, Mr. Lee reported that if the trees are
not cared for properly each year, they become a hazard.
Mayor Tirse1l stated that the intent of the ordinance is to
preserve ancestral trees in this town and it was a tragedy
when the City lost an ancient oak tree which prompted this
ordinance. Each ancestral tree is dear to the town and the
ancestral trees are located only in the old part of town. In
her opinion, everything Cm Turner has said could be said of
any ancestral tree. All trees need care and looking after,
and particularly old trees. When Mr. Coronado moved into the
house the trees were already there and in her opinion, if the
Council allows removal of these trees there is no reason why
all the other ancestral trees in town couldn't be removed also.
Cm Kamena had abstained from the vote last week because he felt
he did not have enough information to make a decision. Over
the weekend he looked at the site and is ready to vote on the
motion. He stated that for the record he would like to say
that he did find that he could make a good case in favor of
Mr. Coronado, but he could also make a good case in favor of
upholding the ordinance, and explained as follows:
If he had prepared the ordinance he may have worded it differently,
but he did not prepare it. In fact, there was not a unanimous vote
in favor of the ordinance at that time. However, the ordinance
does exist and is one over which he cannot let emotion rule.
He believes that he must vote in favor of supporting the spirit /
of the ordinance. He addeq, 1zJ)~!-...)1....el.,:!!L to:r.l).~ p~tween PJ;:9~ty of$1~:\JL
rights of an individual~~--unaerstaiiC1 ~d1Sriiay that &'1'
Mr. Coronado must have in terms of not being able to remove
them when they are on Mr. Coronado's own property and they
are his own trees.
Cm Kamena stated that he believes there would be a technical
argument in favor of removing the trees if, in fact, it takes
only one finding of the four findings listed. He can under-
stand that the pruning cost could be rather expensive each
year as well. However, in his opinion, this particular set
of trees does not necessarily interfere with the building site
and it does not appear that the trees must be removed to allow
reasonable use of that building site. He was unable to ascertain
any evidence as to disease of the trees and if the Council allows
removal of the trees it may reduce the number of these types
of trees for the neighborhood and the trees are attractive.
The spirit of the ordinance is clear and that is to maintain
as many ancestral trees as possible. He stated that the ordi-
nance does say that the intent is to maintain as many ancestral
trees as possible, "while not unnecessarily impairing the value
and enjoyment of private property.", but in his opinion the in-
tent is still clear.
The planning Commission, the Beautification Committee, the Tree
and Park Superintendent, have all denied the application to re-
move the trees and the reasons listed in the letter from Mr. and
Mrs. Coronado are not sufficient reasons to allow removal of the
trees, in considering the spirit of the ordinance.
MOTION PASSED 3-1 (Cm Turner dissenting).
CM-32-290
June 7, 1976
REPORT RE FIRST STREET
CAR WASH ENTRANCE
Mr. Lee has submitted a report to the Council concerning the request
by the car wash located on First Street, for the City to assume
maintenance costs for the entrance devices to be installed. Hearings
on this item will be taking place with the PUC.
The matter was continued from the meeting of May 24th at the request
of a representative of the owners of the car wash. The protective
entry devices have been approved by the owners/operators, but there
is still the question as to the responsibility of the capital cost
am the annual maintenance.
The staff has recommended that the Council adopt a motion instructing
the staff to prepare an agreement specifying that the City will assume
the maintenance responsibility for the entry protection devices, sub-
ject to liability insurance being maintained by the property owner in
an amount satisfactory to the City and naming the City as co-owner.
Mr. Parness explained that he met with the owners and their attorney
today. There has been a submission made by our staff to the PUC
Hearing Officer on the matter, suggesting a method for the division
of the capital costs. An appeal brief has been filed by the S.P.
legal counsel, which is causing a delay on the entire matter. The
applicants feel it is important to await the results of the PUC
Hearing Officer's conclusion. The staff would ask that this matter
be continued until the decision from the PUC Hearing Officer is
received. A decision should be made within about three weeks.
The item was continued.
RES. APPROVING TENTA-
TIVE MAP - TRACT 1666
(Madis - Trevarno Rd.)
./
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION
MAP OF TRACT 1666 (Trevarno Road area). MOTION SECONDED BY eM KAMENA.
It i'~s (!l?!~~c ~hc;~_Lt-~e _~f2:i_cL~~~"L,-~i~~~~M~~~-"as in attendance, a.yL~.(~
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. cr?-t-~- .
RESOLUTION NO. 124-76
A RESOLUTION APPROVING TENTATIVE
SUBDIVISION MAP OF TRACT 1666.
RECESS
Mayor Tirse1l called for a brief recess, after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present, as during
roll call.
APPEAL RE ENCROACHMENT
PEID1IT FOR FENCE
A letter was sent to the Council from Mr. Henry Lopez, 1861 Helsinki
Way, indicating that he installed a fence across the front and side
of his property which is in excess of three feet in height. He has
been advised by the Public Works Department that either the fence
must be lowered or application should be made to the Council for a
variance. He is requesting the variance at this time.
CM-32-29l
June 7, 1976
(Request for Variance
- Fence on Helsinki Way)
The P.C. considered the referral to them from the City Manager
at their meeting of June 1, 1976. The referral was the encroach-
ment without a permit of a masonry wall with masonry pillars in
excess of three feet in height.
The P.C. concluded that the wall is serving as a retaining wall
and therefore, the subject wall is presently in conformance with
the City restrictions relative to fences in required front yards
as administered. The policy adopted by the Building Department
and the Planning Department and accepted by the P.C. is that
the first two feet of any retaining wall used to level the front
yard will not be counted as fence and a three foot fence or wall
would be allowed on top of the two foot retaining wall.
Mr. Lee stated that he would like to say that Mr. Lopez re-
ceived a letter from the City in December of 1975. Mr. Lopez
noted in his letter to the Council that he was informed of the
possible violation of the permit in February of 1976. Mr. Lee
stated that the reason he mentions this is because the policy
concerning the limit of three feet was based on the encroachment
policy adopted by the Council on May 10, 1966. The reason it
pertained to retaining walls, as well, was because the question
came up at that time as to whether encroachments in the right-
of-way area would be a liability in the event of someone falling
in that area or if someone is backing out of their driveway and
the retaining wall or fence obstructs their view and causes some-
one on a skate board, bicycle, tricycle, or a pedestrian to be
hit. The intent is that there not be an obstruction in the public
right-of-way higher than three feet, based on this concern.
Since the policy was adopted in 1966, this policy has been applied
many times in issuing encroachment permits for fences and retain-
ing walls three feet high. The fence in question does not comply
with the policy and is the reason it has been referred to the
Council.
Mayor Tirsell asked if the fence would be in conformance if the
four pillars on the front of the fence were removed or lowered
and Mr. Lee stated that it would then conform.
Cm Turner stated that his understanding was that the P.C. con-
sidered the fence to be in conformance because it was being
used as a retaining wall.
Mr. Musso explained that the P.C. was looking at it only from
the standpoint of the Zoning Ordinance on private property -
not as an encroachment permit - and they would allow a fence
of up to five feet if two feet were used as a retaining wall.
Mayor Tirsell asked Mr. Musso to explain the difference because
this is where the confusion lies.
Mr. Musso stated that the Zoning Ordinance is not applicable to
the public right-of-way. The P.C. was looking at it from the
standpoint of being on private property - not in the right-of-way.
Mr. Lopez stated that when this item was considered by the P.C.
one of the members looked at his fence and determined that
because his property is lower than the street the height should
not be a problem. He stated that when he began construction of
the fence he did not have a permit because he did not realize
that the first 10 feet from the curb belonged to the city.
When he received the letter from the city indicating that he
was building on City property the fence was already constructed,
CM-32-292
June 7, 1976
(Request for Variance -
Fence on Helsinki Way)
at considerable cost to him. If he had known about the portion that
belonged to the City he would have constructed the fence 10 ft. from
the curb and there would have been no problem. The same circumstances
as explained by Mr. Lee were presented at the meeting with the P.C.
but they felt that the fence served as a retaining wall and should
be acceptable. The fence was constructed professionally and none
of his neighbors object to the fence.
Cm Kamena wondered what the intent would be in finishing the fence,
if the Council approved it.
Mr. Lopez stated that wrought iron would be placed between the
masonry pillars for the completion of the fence.
It was noted that the violation was noticed by someone from the
staff and that the violation was not reported by neighbors. .~~ '
. af?'r7~ ~~/(}~(!a<-~.
Mayor T1rsell stated that the staff knows-1every new fence be1ing
constructed, every fence line, roof line, etc. in a block and
anytime something is new in a block they are aware of it and they
come back to the office to see if there is a permit. She is sure
this is what happened.
Mr. Lee stated that since a policy was established based on the
safety and visibility aspect, perhaps Mr. Lopez could explain if
the wrought iron will be an open type for visibility, and what
type of plants will be within the fenced area.
Mr. Lopez stated that the wrought iron will be open and that the
area inside, which is presently dirt, will become lawn.
Cm Turner wondered if Mr. Lopez could be given some type of credit
if his lot is below grade.
Mr. Lee stated that he does not believe any type of credit could be
given because the policy is based on visibility. However, normally
when a retaining wall is built back On the property line or adjacent
to the sidewalk, it is because there is some substantial slope from
the house down to the sidewalk. This could be the reason Mr. Lopez
constructed the fence as he did, using it as a retaining wall.
Cm Kamena wondered if Mr. Lee is saying that if the visibility is
adequate that this may make a difference.
Mr. Lee stated that if the visibility is not obstructed and the
driver of the car can see p~op1e who might be on the sidewalk, in
both directions, it would not be as serious a problem as a solid
wall. The Council might wish to approve this, as an exception,
and in order to prevent setting a precedent the Council should
cite that it is an exception because of the adequate visibility.
Cm Turner asked if the intent of the ordinance is to allow something
that does not constitute a hazard and Mr. Lee stated that this is
the intent of the policy the Council previously adopted and it would
be appropriate to make that type of finding to prevent setting a
precedent.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE BECAUSE
THE VISIBILITY DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A PUBLIC SAFETY HAZARD. MOTION
WAS SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that she could not support the particular motion
because it is not specific as to what the fence design should be. It
would appear that any fence cou1dv~ the finding mentioned in the
motion. ~7j~r ()1J;kck.o.filu'-
CM-32-293
June 7, 1976
(Request for Variance -
Fence on Helsinki Way)
CM KAMENA AGREED THAT THE MOTION SHOULD BE MORE SPECIFIC AND
WITHDREW HIS ORIGINAL MOTION.
The Assistant City Attorney stated that the Council adopted a
policy concerning fences at the meeting of May 19, 1966, and
as such an informal policy the Council has the right to review
it, modify it, or rescind it at any time, or make exceptions to
it. This is what he would consider this to be. If the applica-
tion is approved it would be an exception to a policy based on
whatever consideration the Council feels is valid.
Mayor Tirse1l stated that the Council does not want to make the
exception open so that everybody could come in and say they want
an exception made. The Council wishes to specify that this is
a special circumstance and the Council has found that....
Mr. Lee added that the policy is also based on the fact that
there must be an encroachment permit.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that her only concern is for the safety
of children on tricycles and that perhaps they can't be seen.
Mr. Lopez stated that the fence, itself, is 24" high and the
posts will not block any more visibility than the fence, be-
cause of the angle of the property. The fence, itself, is
in conformance - the question at this time is the height of
the posts and they will not make a difference with respect
to visibility.
.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO ACCEPT THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL TO ALLOW
THE SUBJECT STRUCTURE, WITH ENCROACHMENT PERMIT, AS LONG AS
THE VISIBILITY AND DESIGN OF THE FENCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE
A PUBLIC SAFETY HAZARD. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION THAT THE CONSTRUCTION
OF THE FENCE MUST BE OF AN OPEN NATURE FOR THE WROUGHT IRON
STRUCTURE, RATHER THAN A SOLID STRUCTURE, TO PERMIT VISIBILITY
OF THE STREET IN BOTH DIRECTIONS. AMENDMENT SECONDED BY CM
DAHLBACKA.
Cm Turner stated that he has no difficulty in supporting the
motion but he would like it to be clear that the Council is
not showing favoritism, in this case, in light of the item
the Council discussed earlier with respect to the trees on
private property. He stated that when he was on the P.C.
there was denial of an application for as' fence on the
lot line at the sidewalk - not because the fence was lo-
cated where it was but because the visibility was obstructed
because the fence was solid. This created a hazard. He
stated that he finds no difficulty in supporting this motion
and he does not believe that the granting of the application
would allow any special privilege for Mr. and Mrs. Lopez.
Mayor Tirsell agreed that if the fence were solid there would
be no way she could approve the application.
AMENDMENT PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
MAIN MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE MAX BAER
PROPERTY PURCHASE
The Council has authorized the purchase of 2.4 acres of property
adjoining the Max Baer Park. The site adjacent to the park con-
CM-32-294
June 7, 1976
(re Max Baer Area
Property Purchase)
sists of 6.71 acres and the owner would like to sell the entire
site. LARPD has indicated that they do not wish acquisition of
the entire site and it is recommended by the staff that the Council
adopt a motion confirming the original offer of purchase for the
2.4 acres.
CM TURNER MOVED TO REJECT THE OFFER OF THE SELLER FOR THE ENTIRE
PARCEL, BASED ON INFORMATION PRESENTED BY LARPD THAT THEY DO NOT
WANT THE ENTIRE SITE. MOTION SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE DESIGN
OF RAILROAD AVENUE
FROM "P" TO E. STANLEY
A plan for the design of Railroad Avenue from "P" Street to East
Stanley Boulevard was distributed to the Counci1members for
approval.
The Public Works Director reported that the Council made certain
decisions concerning the layout of Railroad Avenue at the May 5th
meeting during the review of the Livermore Central Area Development
Plan and these decisions have been incorporated into the plan which
has been submitted to the Council for approval.
Mr. Lee stated that he is sure the Council has reviewed the plan
and he won't go into great detail. However, the staff is considering
a slight change which is a change in the location of the crosswalk
a little to the west to allow more room for the left turn stacking
lane into the shopping center.
Mayor Tirse1l wondered how many cars generally stack for a commercial
area and Mr. Lee stated that it depends on the situation but normally
about 5-6 cars during the rush hour and if there were room for 7-8
this would be ideal.
Cm Turner stated that an overpass type of pedestrian walkway would
be desireab1e but this would probably be very expensive and Mr. Lee
indicated that it would be very expensive. Also, neither shopping
center is two stories and this type of walkway would not be natural.
Mayor Tirse1l wondered if the area in back of Longs will be
developed to include shrubery and greenery, etc.
Mr. Lee indicated that these were the improvements that were delayed
and these will be installed.
Mayor Tirsell wondered how all of the bicycles will get up over
the curbs. All of this should be drawn in as part of the plan -
where the bike parking will be located and how the bike lanes
tie into the access route.
Mr. Lee stated that the plan is to have ramps for bicycles at
strategic locations, which he illustrated on the plan. He stated
that the bike routes will not be shown on the plan and they will
not be a part of this particular plan. As the Council may recall
the bicycle parking will be provided and bicyclists can ride on
the sidewalks.
Mayor Tirsell stated that this part is done. What she is referring
to is the back of the site.
Mr. Lee stated that it was planned that bicycles could use the
sidewalks in that area also. It is a wide sidewalk and there will
be an on-street bikeway.
CM-32-295
June 7, 1976
(re Design of
Railroad Avenue)
Mayor Tirse1l stated that her concern is that the bike routes
seem divorced from the shopping center and where they are to
be placed. She had hoped that the Council would have something
to review with respect to exactly how the north section will be
built. In reviewing the site plan, as it is, she doesn't see
how bicycles can get through the area without mixing with the
traffic from the shopping center traffic. That was the whole
intent of the addition made to the off-street parking - so the
bicyclists would have their own access and a means of getting
through shopping centers without having to travel through the
vehicle traffic.
Mr. Musso stated that as he recalls there is access from the
parking lot to Railroad Avenue, for the bicycles. He does not
believe it goes through the entry area, but it is possible.
Mayor Tirsell asked that the areas for bikes be clearly designa-
ted in the plan.
Cm Dahlbacka wondered why the crossing for pedestrians was placed
down by Sherwin-Williams rather than further into the shopping
center area. It appears that this would allow a longer stacking
lane on one side and makes the other stacking lane shorter.
Mr. Lee explained that the crossing is located between two stores
across the tracks in the area of the breezeway, across to the Longs
shopping center area.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he is not thinking of the symmetry of
the plan but rather on the basis of where people will walk and
on the basis of use. It seems that perhaps the crossing should
be moved to the east.
Mayor Tirsell stated that, on the other hand, the area will be
a planted area and perhaps it would be logical for the crossing
to be located as is shown on the map.
Mr. Lee stated that he is sure the architect would not want the
plan for the crossing changed because he has extended to breezeway
as well as to plan for two structures at the planned location. It
really would not be effective if the crossing were placed anywhere
other than at the breezeway area.
Discussion followed concerning placement of the crossing in rela-
tionship to the stacking lanes, as well as discussion of the stack-
ing lanes.
Cm Turner stated that he is concerned about the number of entrances
and exits to the shopping center because he believes they will be-
come major centers. He can see potential problems with those shown
on the plan. He would suggest adding more entrances and exits.
Mayor Tirse1l stated that this portion of the plan has been adop-
ted. It has been set and was negotiated with S.P. at the time it
was developed.
Mr. Lee concurred.
Mayor Tirse11 wondered who builds the brick-yard parks and Mr.
Lee stated that it is in a six year capital project budget that
the Council will be reviewing in the future. Ultimately it will
be developed by the city. It was not a part of the plans for
improvements of the shopping center.
CM-32-296
June 7, 1976
(re Design of
Railroad Avenue)
Mayor Tirse11 stated that when the existing shopping center was
developed, why wasn't the brick-yard area looked at?
Mr. Lee stated that at that time the City wasn't relocating the
railroad tracks and the curb, gutters, and sidewalk curved dif-
ferently for the street to allow access to the land-locked area.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she understands this and it means that
suddenly there is an excess triangle.
CM TURNER MOVED TO APPROVE THE RAILROAD AVENUE LAYOUT PLAN WITH
THE SUGGESTIONS MADE BY THE COUNCIL, SECONDED BY eM DAHLBACKA AND
PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE WATER RECLA-
MATION PLANT CAPACITY
ALLOCATION
Mayor Tirsell stated that Cm Turner has brought up the point that
there are three different allocations for the application for the
additional 1 MGD for the Water Reclamation Plant, and the Council
should discuss the allocations.
Cm Turner stated that he was going to ask that the item be continued
for a week because Cm Staley had a number of comments to make con-
cerning this matter.
The item was continued for one week.
REPORT RE SIGNS
FOR TRUCK ROUTES
A report was received from the Director of Public Works concerning
signing of the truck route. It is recommended that the Council
adopt a motion approving the recommendations contained within the
report which noted various locations for the signs.
Cm Dahlbacka asked if it is the intent of the City to cite any
trucks not using the truck route.
Mr. Lee stated that this is correct. The Police Department would
cite any trucks not on the truck route as long as it is properly
signed. He stated that Brenda Souza, on the P.C. is very concerned
about this item and has brought this to the attention of the staff
in the past. She has made suggestions to supplement the report
which Mr. Lee believes would be very good. She has suggested that
there be truck route signs posted at some crucial locations such as
off eorto1a Avenue prior to Murrieta Boulevard, as well as load
limit signs placed on Airway Boulevard and Kittyhawk Road as well
as Vasco Road and ilL" Street. The signing for First Street would
be located in the County and the City would ask that they cooperate
and place signs in that location.
Mayor Tirsel1 asked about truck routes for trucks going to Shopping
centers and Mr. Lee stated that trucks can go to shopping centers
using the major streets and then go back to the truck route for the
most direct course.
Mr. Lee added that trucks making deliveries in the residential
areas are also permitted as long as they go back to the truck route.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO ADOPT THE REPORT OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
ON TRUCK ROUTES, WITH THE ADDITIONS RECOMMENDED. MOTION WAS SECONDED
BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM-32-297
June 7, 1976
P.C. SUMMARY OF
ACTION 5/25/76
& 6/1/76
The summary of action taken at the Planning Commission meetings
of May 25, 1976, and June 1, 1976, was noted for filing.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Res. Auth. Exec. of
Agree. - ~is Property
The Council adopted a resolution authorizing execution of agree-
ment for the Willis property at the corner of Wall street and
E. Stanley Boulevard for $21,000.
RESOLUTION NO. 125-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF REAL
PROPERTY AND EXECUTION OF CONTRACT (Guy
C. and Dorothy Willis)
The Assistant City Attorney commented that this offer was possi-
bly withdrawn, but possibly not withdrawn, as of this morning.
However, the agreement has already been signed and executed by
the owners. If the council wishes to continue with the trans-
action the City has every right to continue. The Council's
signature is only a formality, at this point.
The Council concurred that it should be adopted and if the City
Attorney's Office wants to come back to the Council on this item
later on, this can be done.
Res. Supporting Buenas
Vidas Youth Ranch
The Council adopted a resolution supporting the Buenas vidas
Ranch grant application.
RESOLUTION NO. 126-76
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING BUENAS VIDAS RANCH
APPLICATION FOR GRANT
Res. re Notice of Intent
to Reduce Surcharge -
Parking Improvement Area
It was noted that because of the County's contribution to the
cost of the Municipal Parking lot, the business license surcharge
will be reduced for the financing of the parking lot lease. The
Council will hold a public hearing on June 21, 1976, at 8:00 p.m.
RESOLUTION NO. 127-76
NOTICE OF INTENTION TO EFFECT REDUCTION
IN BUSINESS LICENSE TAX SURCHARGE FOR
PARKING AND BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT AREA.
Res. Denying CUP
(Louis Trotter)
The Council adopted a resolution to reflect the action taken
by them at the meeting of May 24, 1976, denying the CUP applica-
tion for a car wash on Third street (Louis Trotter) .
CM-32-298
June 7, 1976
RESOLUTION NO. 128-76
A RESOLUTION DENYING A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT (Louis Trotter)
Res. Auth. Exec. of
Second Agreement
(Danat Investment Co.)
The Council has agreed to a one year extension for the completion
of improvements along Naylor Avenue to be done by Capital Metals.
It is recommended by the staff that a resolution be adopted auth-
orizing a second amendment to the agreement.
RESOLUTION NO. 129-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT (Danat
Investment Company)
Report re Purchase of
Kissell Co. Property
The City Attorney reported that in November of 1975, the City Council
authorized the purchase of a small parcel of property adjoining the
Christensen Park site, owned by Kissell Company. An agreement has
been reached concerning some deed covenants and it is recommended that
the Council adopt a resolution authorizing execution of the contract
for purchase of the .61 acres.
RESOLUTION NO. 130-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE OF REAL PROPERTY
AND INDEMNITY AGREEMENT (The Kissell Co.)
P.C. Minutes - 5/4/76
The minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of May 4, 1976, were
noted for approval.
Payroll & Claims
There were 293 payroll warrants (May 14, 1976) and 303 payroll
warrants (May 28, 1976)for a total of $198,558.71, and 149 claims
in the amount of $362,621.33, for a total of $561,180.04, dated
5-27-76, and approved by the City Manager.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED WITH REMOVAL OF ITEMS 5.2
(Tantivongsathaporn Resolution) AND 5.8 (City Attorney Office
Remodeling), WHICH WILL BE DISCUSSED PRIOR TO MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF AND COUNCILMEMBERS.
DISCUSSION RE RESOLUTION
(Tantivongsathaporn)
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that the resolution concerning the CUP
for Mr. Tantivongsathaporn was continued from the meeting of
C~4-32-299
June 7, 1976
(Resolution re
Tantivongsathaporn)
May 24th because Mr. Tantivongsathaporn contends that the resolu-
tion does not reflect the action the Council took that evening
and the minutes for that meeting were not definitive either
way. The item was postponed because it was Cm Dahlbacka who
had the discussion that evening.
ern Dahlbacka stated that the resolution, as it is presented
this evening, appears to conform with his recollection of the
votes that evening. The only thing that he would wish to do
would be to add in Item 9, at the end of the sentence, as
follows:
9. A 6-8' masonry wall shall be erected along the west
property line for noise abatement.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the discussion and vote was either
~ _ either faced away from the houses or a masonry fence.
Cm Dah1backa stated that this is correct, but he would like
the words "noise abatement" added someplace in the sentence
so the purpose is clear.
Mayor Tirsell commented that the item of dispute was the fence
at the back and the facing of the bays. In the discussion em
Dahlbacka was concerned about the direction of the bays and
that they not be turned towards the houses. If the bays are
turned towards the houses then the masonry wall would have
to be constructed. The wall is not required if the bays are
turned away.
Mr. Tantivongsathaporn stated that this is what he recalls
from the discussion.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that the only thing the council is doing
at this point, is clarifying the issue, for the record. She
asked if this will be new construction.
Mr. Musso stated that it will be new construction. He misinform-
ed the Council about this because he was looking at the plot
plan which was filed for site plan approval, which is in process
at this time. The plan does show the existing building which is
the swimming clubhouse and apparently Mr. Tantivongsathaporn
intends to maintain the existing building. There will be new
construction in front of the existing building.
Mayor Tirsel1 wondered what the existing building will be used
for and Mr. Tantivongsathaporn stated that it will be used for
storage and that it has not been seen by the Building Inspector.
Mayor Tirse1l wondered if there is something in the Building
Code or the ordinance that would require specifics for allowing
storage in the building.
Mr. Musso stated that in order to use it for storage, other than
for personal storage, there would have to be a permit issued.
Mayor Tirsel1 explained that Mr. Tantivongsathaporn will have
to have a permit to use the building in conjunction with the
uses on the site and she suggested that Mr. Tantivongsathaporn
find out what is required. It is possible that the building
will not meet the code for the use intended.
Mr. Tantivongsathaporn stated that he intends to use the building
to park his own car and Mayor Tirsell asked that he be sure to
check with the Building Department to see if this would be allowed.
CM-32-300
June 7, 1976
(Resolution re Auto Repair
CUP-Tantivongsathaporn)
Mayor Tirsell asked if the swimming pool will stay in that area
and Mr. Tantivongsathaporn stated that he belongs to a club and
he intends to use the swimming pool for social purposes.
Mayor Tirse11 asked that he check to see if all these things conform
in that particular zoning district because if they do not conform
this may cause problems.
Cm Kamena stated that he contacted the attorney for Mr. Tantivongsatha-
porn to find out if this particular resolution represents what their
understanding of the discussion and motions were and the attorney
indicated that there is no objection to the resolution in its
present form.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION, AS AMENDED. MOTION
WAS SECONDED BY CM KAMENA, AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. THIS
RESOLUTION RESCINDS RESOLUTION 112-76.
RESOLUTION NO. 131-76
A RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 112-76
AND GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (Vithun
Tantivongsathaporn) .
REPORT RE OFFICE
REMODELING (City
Attorney's Office)
~
~
~
~
~
Cm Turner stated that he is going to vote against making the repair~ ~
as- reques~~, ~cGausc ~c:e:ding ~o the City Manaqer ~Rd the RC\lSpap8rs~
therb~d~& in SUGh a s~ate of disrc~~ir ~ he \~eald not be ab1e\~
~uSi1fYspending additional money on that building. It is time ~.
that the Council consider new housing quarters for the City employees.~
The City Manager reported that a request has been received from the
City Attorney that a ceiling be installed over the office quarters
occupied by the Assistant City Attorney for the purpose of privacy.
The estimated cost is $484.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she believes the privacy of an attorney
is one of the most important things in his practice, and certainly
to the benefit of the citizens. It is doubtful that the Council
can solve this problem for the Assistant City Attorney in the
very near future and it would seem that the Council should take
every precaution that his deliberations are private and would
remain within the confines of his room.
MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE EXPENDITURE FOR A CEILING
OVER THE ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. MOTION WAS SECONDED
BY CM DAHLBACKA AND PASSED 3-1 (Cm Turner dissenting) .
RESOLUTION NO. 132-76
RES. AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS (City Attorney's Office)
11ATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Census)
Cm Dah1backa stated that he believes that when the City reaches a
population figure of 50,000 it achieves a special status with
respect to certain state funding. Is there an estimate as to when
the City will reach 50,000 and whether it would be worthwhile to
conduct a special census to determine this?
Mr. Parness stated that the City has probably exceeded the 50,000
figure and the amount the City would benefit would not be signi-
ficant and would be for engineering services. It amounts to only
CM-32-30l
June 7, 1976
(Census)
a few thousand dollars. The city is listed as having a popula-
tion of 48,850 but it is felt that the City has about 2,000 more.
A population count would cost the city about $7,000.
Mr. Parness stated that he believes the City has about 300 more
people than the census indicates but this would still be slightly
over 50,000.
Mr. Parness stated that there are certain groups or levels used
in some federal programs - for example, HCDA has a 50,000 popula-
tion minimum and these types of grants can be approached from
different avenues. However, it is not particularly advantageous
with respect to state grant programs.
Cm Dah1backa stated that he would be interested in seeing a list
of what the benefits would be.
Mayor Tirse1l stated that the City recently conducted a special
census and she is sure that the city will want to do another
survey prior to 1980.
(Ancestral Tree
Ord. Wording Amend.)
Cm Kamena stated that if the Council would be interested, he
would like the Ancestral Tree Ordinance sent back to the P.C.
for amendment to some of the wording and if the Council would
like, he would be happy to act as a representative of the city
council and to express some of his concerns.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she believes this is an excellent
idea and that she would suggest that the ordinance also be
referred to the Beautification Committee for their input.
Cm Kamena asked if the P.C. automatically sends items such
as this to the Beautification Committee, and it was noted
that they do not.
(City Hall Plans)
Cm Turner stated that he has asked the City Manager to dust off
the old City Hall plans and bring them to the council for dis-
cussion and he is sure they are corning right along.
Mr. Parness stated that this item has been on his desk and he
had every intention of getting the plan to the Council but he
has been involved in budget work recently.
(Microphones)
Cm Turner stated that he is also concerned about the microphones
that the Council authorized, and it was noted that these are on
order.
(legal Matters)
Mayor Tirse11 asked that the City Attorney's Office look into the
rezoning of the Migliori property by the County and report back
to the Council concerning legal action that might be taken.
Mayor Tirse1l stated that the City Attorney also was asked to
review the Zone 7 rate increase and corne back to the Council con-
CM-32-302
June 7, 1976
(Legal Hatters)
cerning possible litigation because of the City's five year contract
with Zone 7, and now we are getting a yearly rate. She urged that
a report be submitted so that something can be done.
The Assistant City Attorney stated that the City Attorney was working
on a report concerning the contract with Zone 7 and he assumed that
the Council had received the report.
(Sister City Events)
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that representatives from Quezaltenango will
be arriving in Livermore at 3:00 p.m. on June 11th.
The City dinner for the delegates will take place on Tuesday night,
the 15th, at the Emporer's Garden. She would suggest that the
Quezaltenango Counci1memhers and their spouses or companions be
invited to attend the dinner. The City will host the dinner, but
not the bar.
The Chairman of the delegation is going to be asked to ride in the
stagecoach in the Saturday parade, June 12th.
(Butka Sign)
Mayor Tirsell stated that the sign out on First Street for Mr.
Hutka's new building says there is commercial office space for
rent and wondered if the sign could be removed.
Mr. Musso stated that he spoke with Mr. Hutka about his signs and
he agreed to take the signs down that do not conform. He will check
to see if this has been done.
(Council Minutes)
Mayor Tirsell stated that Mr. Parness and the City Clerk have discussed
the length of the Council meeting minutes which have become horrendous.
They have suggested that the Council go to a brief form of minutes
rather than verbatim, or by motion as is presently done, listing
the main motion and the resolution. The tapes can then be stored
in perpetuity as the legal record of the City.
~layor Tirsell stated that she can see advantages and disadvantages
in both methods and perhaps the Council should talk with other~~Ynkv
Counci1members to determine how everyone feels about it. ~~a{,
Cm Dahlbacka stated that as he recalls the City once had mini Cl~a&~.
minutes summary. v
The City Clerk stated that the City did at one time, and the length
of the minutes are an increasing concern. For this reason she has
asked several cities of varying sizes to submit copies of their
minutes and agenda to get an idea of what other cities might be
doing.
This matter will be discussed as an agenda item when the City Clerk
receives sample copies of minutes.
The City Clerk stated that because of past problems in recording
the vote on a motion and the difficulty of hearing the tape, she
has suggested to the Council that they conduct the entire discussion
on an item and at the end make one clean motion rather than to make
a motion in the beginning, have a full discussion and make numerous
amendments, which become confusing.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that if there is difficulty picking up the votes
from the tape, perhaps the Council could go to the roll call type
of vote, where each person voices a vote individually.
CM-32-303
June 7, 1976
(council Policy)
Mayor Tirse1l ~tated that in reviewing the older Rules of council
Conduct, a policy was made that the Council would not discuss an
it~:coming from the Open Forum, and that the council would dis-
cuss only those items listed on the agenda, unless something of
an urgency nature needed to be discussed or adopted.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would like to go back to the old
rules but it needs an update because other policies have been
adopted, and which the Council goes by. If the Council would
agree she would like to work with Dorothy in placing the new
policies in the rules and then stick with them. All of the
items in Roberts Rules are not necessary.
The city Clerk stated that she has never found that anything has
corne up which the Rules of council Conduct did not cover.
ern Dahlbacka stated that there is one item not in the council
rules which is covered by Roberts Rules, and that is the objection
to consideration. This is very seldom used but he believes it would
be worthwhile to include.
Mayor Tirsell stated that if any of the Councilmembers works with
something that is not included, let her know and she will work
with the City Clerk to get everything included that the Council
wants.
INTRODUCTION OF MUNI.
CODE AMEND RE TRUCK ROUTES
ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT TO SECTION 13.14, RELATING
TO TRUCK ROUTES, WAS INTRODUCED AND READ BY TITLE ONLY.
INTRODUCTION OF MUNI.
CODE AMEND. RE PURCHASING
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MUNICIPAL CODE A.MENDMENT REGARDING PURCHASING WAS INTRO-
DUCED AND READ BY TITLE ONLY.
CITY MANAGER
STATUS REPORT
Track Relocation project
The Track Relocation project is at a standstill because of the
problems mentioned concerning the car wash on First Street, and
because of the legal brief filed by the Southern Pacific attorneys.
First St./No. Livermore
The project at First street and No. Livermore Avenue is also stalled
because the contractor is having difficulty getting electronic equip-
ment, other equipment, and poles. They are still within their
contract term, however, and everyone just has to wait until
material is received.
CM-32-304
June 7, 1976
Springtown Golf Cour~~
At the Springtown Golf Course, the new irrigation system is installed
around the lake and the duck population has been reduced; therefore
the City intends to plant greenery around the lake and hopefully
it will grow.
(City Manager's Report)
City Hay
The City's crop of hay at the airport has been baled. The crop
this year was very good and reportedly there are about 2,500 bales
of barley. Bids were received and the bid for the barley went for
$5l5/bale, which is a very good price. The oats are being sold
at $4.75/bale. The City expects to have a good financial return on
the farming operations at the airport this year and it has been
reseeded for the second crop. It is the intention of the staff
to get about 5 harvests from that property.
Mayor Tirsel1 wondered if the local ranchers were notified of the
sale so they could bid, and Mr. Parness stated that everybody was
notified.
~i-Service Building
The architect for the MUlti-Service Building met with the Social
Concerns Committee this week to begin preliminary discussions about
building designs. They plan to meet again in a couple of weeks to
continue the discussion.
Livermore Day at the Fair
Livermore Day at the Fair is scheduled for July 2nd, if there is
a fair.
Fire Station Garage
The City is constructing the old Fire Station garage with the
Council's permission, and at the request of one of the employees
the OSHA inspectors have gone through the building and have re-
assured everybody that the building is safe. They did suggest
that it would be desireable to have a second means of exit from
the building and the City is looking into this.
Assistant City Manager
The City Manager stated that he is very proud to be able to announce
that his assistant, Don Bradley, is one of 16 nationwide recepients
of a scholarship which has been awarded for a very concentrated
one month seminar at Princeton University. Mr. Bradley will receive
college credits for the seminar and at present he is studying for
his doctorate degree.
Community Development Dept.
The Community Development Director has been very active over
the past week talking to various sources, including the pros-
pect of the Industrial Development Corporation. He is pre-
paring a report to submit to the Council very soon.
Mr. Gor1and has talked to federal authorities that have some
information to offer, as well as lending institutions and to
the office of economic development.
CM-32-305
June 7, 1976
Community Development Dept. (Contd)
He has also talked to S.P. about their proposed industrial
park, which was pulled off their calendar about a year ago.
They haven't let it die but because of economic considerations
they have elected not to go ahead with it. They do want to talk
to the City about the prospects of an assessment district for
the industrial park and the Council will probably want to listen
to that proposal.
The Industrial Advisory Board is considering the subject of fees
and charges and the staff is in the process of preparing additional
information for their consideration.
Downtown Area
The City has prepared a brochure which is attractive and informa-
tive, and will be given to a major commercial interest in our CBD.
The staff met with the interested firm, along with the Mayor, and
they were positive in their outlook as to what the City discussed
with them and the prospects for revitilizing the downtown area.
police Bicycle Patrol
The police Department is trying a new saturation approach by way
of bicycles. They are using the bicycles they have accumulated.
They plan to do this about once a month, and according to the
police Chief it has been eminently successful. Since this has
been implemented the amount of crime by each given neighborhood,
has been drastically reduced. The benefit is that the men are
able to get out into the neighborhoods and can become familiar
with what is going on in the neighborhood without being readily
noticeable.
police Cars
All of the police cars have been locatedr and
except for radios, which the County installs.
is on strike and it may be necessary to go to
get the cars rolling.
are ready to go,
Presently the County
a private firm to
COUNCIL VACATION
SCHEDULES
Mayor Tirsell asked for a quick rundown of the vacation schedules
for the Councilmembers so that everybody will know when someone
will be gone.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Tirsell adjourned the meeting at 11:10 p.m. to an executive
session to discuss legal matters. *
APPROVE
~~,
~
~,
Mayor
~L
C1ty C erk
~ Livermore, California
the discussion in executive session,
adopted:
ATTEST
the following
* As a result of
resolution was
RESOLUTION NO. 133-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT OF LAWSUIT
(City of Livermore v. Granite Construction Company, et a1)
CM-32-306
Regular Meeting_of June 14, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
June 14, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 29 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:a5
p.m. with Mayor Tirsell presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Dahlbacka, Kamena, Turner and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: Cm Staley (Seated Later)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirsell led the Councilmembers as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES 5/17/76
& 5/24/76
ON HOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY eM DAHLRACl<A AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MINUTES paR THE MEETING OF MAY 17, 1976, WERE APPROVED,
AS SUBMITTED, (CM TURNER ABSTAINING) .
5/24/76
P. 258, typo - 6th paragraph, line 3 correct word distrubed to
disturbed.
P. 258, 7th paragraph, line 2 should read: the time schedule and
find out if the project would pass...etc.
ON MOTION OF CM TUffilER, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE r,mETING OF MAY 24, 1976, WERE APPROVED,
AS CORRECTED.
SPECIAL ITEM - DOvnlTOWN
BEAUTIFICATION PROJECTS
A special item concerning beautification projects for the downtown
area was scheduled first on the agenda, but at the request of a member
of the Beautification Committee it was postponed until after the
public hearing.
CONTINUED P.H. RE SCENIC
HIG~7AY ELEMENT AND NOISE
ELEMENT OF GENERAL PLAN
The public hearing concerning the Scenic Highway Element and the
Noise Element to be adopted as part of the General Plan was postponed
from the meeting of last week. Additional public testimony will be
heard this evening prior to adoption of these elements.
Scenic Highway Eleme~
Cm Dahlbacka stated that it has been recommended that two roads be
deleted from the Scenic Highway Element (SHE) - ~1ay School Road and
Vallecitos Road. He asked that Mr. Musso explain the recommendation.
Mr. Musso stated that these are to be rural roads and not highways.
Vallecitos will remain a rural type of road because it will not be
developed. May School Road used to be a major street in the City's
General Plan, but it will remain a rural road.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that Vallecitos is rather a scenic route and
he wondered why it was removed. Mr. Musso stated that he could not
give additional information as to why it was removed.
CM-32-307
June 14, 1976
lcontinued P.H. re Scenic
Highway Element and Noise
Element of General PLan)
Mayor Tirse11 agreed that Va11ecitos should be included as one of
the scenic highway routes and indicated that Cm Dahlbacka might
want to make a motion to include it.
Cm Turner wondered if "fire resistant material" could be misconstrued
to mean artificial material, and Mr. Musso indicated that he is sure
it could not - this applies only to native natural material. There
could be imported plants that might apply, however. Ice plant, for
example, is fire resistant and normally would not be suitable for the
Valley unless it were irrigated.
MAYOR TIRSELL OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR TESTIMONY CONCERNING THE
SCENIC HIGHWAY ELEMENT.
No testimony was voiced.
Noise Element
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he spoke with a technical editor from LLL
about volunteering his time to edit the Noise Element manuscript
and he has agreed to volunteer this service. Cm Dah1backa stated
that after the discussion concerning the Noise Element he would
suggest that the document be referred to this person who will use
his professional expertise in editing the document to make it as
competent as possible.
THERE BEING NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY, ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED
BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING
THE SCENIC HIGHWAY ELEMENT AND THE NOISE ELE~fENT, WAS CLOSED. ~
. iJ~V-
J(X~~
powers agre~m:nt
wondered iffdis-
could be coordi-
Scenic Highway Element
Cm Turner stated that there is mention of a joint
or some type of coordination of this plan, and he
cussion as to how this might be implemented or it
nated with the County.
Mr. Musso stated that the first step would be taken in the adopt-
ion of the SHE, because it is fairly compatible with the County
SHE. He stated that beyond that he doesn't know what might be
done to implement the plan. It may not be mandatory that the City
agrees with the County, this just says that the City will try.
Mayor Tirse11 wondered if the County interchange policy is included,
and Mr. Musso indicated that the policy is not incorporated. That
was more of a land use decision.
Mr. Musso added that the elements have been referred to all the
other agencies, asking for a response, and there was no response.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT THE SCENIC HIGHWAY ELEMENT. MOTION WAS
SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that she would like to suggest a word change
on page 6 which indicates that one of the goals is to make IIdriving"
pleasurable. She suggested the following wording:
Page 6., 1., line 4: "... and to provide continuous pleasurable
travel within major scenic areas.1I
The word driving will be replaced by the word travel.
CM TURNER INCLUDED THE CHANGE IN THE MOTION, AGREED TO BY THE SECOND.
CM-32-308
June 14, 1976
(Continued P.H. re Scenic
Highway Element and Noise
Element of General Plan)
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE THE ROADS RECOMMENDED
BY THE CONSULTANT - GREENVILLE ROAD, I-580 TO PATTERSON PASS ROAD;
FLYNN ROAD; ARROYO ROAD; COLLEGE AVENUE TO CONCANNON BOULEVARD;
CONCANNON BOULEVARD; ARROYO ROAD TO TESLA ROAD; HARTMAN ROAD; HARTFORD
AVENUE; DALTON AVENUE; NO. LIVERMORE AVENUE FROM PORTOLA TO I-580:
AND THE VALLECITOS EXTENSION, AS ADDITIONS TO THE SCENIC HIGHWAY
ELEMENT.
Mr. Musso explained that when the Vallecitos extension is mentioned
this referrs to Vallecitos from Arroyo Road to Vasco Road, and this
was deleted from the General Plan, so it should be deleted.
CM DAHLBACKA AMENDED HIS AMENDMENT, TO STRIKE THE VALLECITOS EXTEN-
SION . A~END.MENT WAS SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL.
AMENDMENT PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
MAIN MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
Noise Element
Cm Turner noted that on page 40, it is mentioned that the noise
level can range from 3 db to 50 db, for various uses, such as
a swimming pool, paved area for court games, recreation center,
sports field, and play lot. The figures for these activities are
appropriate design figures for noise. During recess at school or
in a busy park such as May Nissen, the noise level could reach
50 db, measured from a residential property line.
The figure is the average noise level, and that excludes the peaks
which are very loud for a short duration. The averaging technique
was used in response to concerns that LARPD had about how much noise
would be generated by sports fields and schools.
Cm Turner stated that the point he is trying to make is that the
normal voice level is 60 db, and it appears that schools and parks
would be required to make less noise than that level in a normal
conversation range.
Cm Dahlbacka explained that the normal range of conversation between
two people is is based on a distance of about two feet apart. The
noise levels are measured at the residence property lines and there
generally is quite a distance from that property line to where the
noise is generated. The decibel level is the impact of the noise
on residential properties. Distance is the greatest mitigator against
noise. for almost e7eEythift~.
1 /"
{M:7,i;/,4-aiL rtitq-Gu</;t j-~
Cm Tur~ stated that he ~me concerns witI1 -this~~~ause even
though e~ are to be ~u es, guidelines have a way of becoming
law and the City may one day be required to adhere to the levels
mentioned and this may require omission of the sports fields. The
sports fields have been placed in residential areas for good reasons.
LaVerne Cave gave some explanations concerning questions the Council
had concerning the noise levels. Comments were not audible.
Cm Dahlbacka wondered if the Noise Element and the Airport Haster
Plan have been made to be compatible.
Mr. Musso stated that the Committee felt that the 55 db is equivalent
to the 65 CNEL, and that there should be about a 5 db compromise.
They would recoTllT1end that the omr. be lowered by about 5.
CM-32-309
June 14, 1976
(Continued P.H. re Scenic
Highway Element and Noise
Element of GeBera1 Plan)
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that she is concerned with a statement which
appears on page 35 (e). It indicates that if there is development
for which noise is excessive and cannot be mitigated to a level con-
sistent with the standards, development "sha1l" be prohibited. She
stated that she would feel more comfortable with "may" be prohibited.
There are many things which may have to be evaluated - one may be
noise, or there may be a case in which something cannot locate in
any other area and may be off by 5 db.
The Council concurred.
Cm Turner stated that in Chapter 9, it gives the decibel levels allowed
for daytime uses. The freeway level is 45 db, industrial districts is
60 db, and residential (RS) is 40 db., so these things would not be
allowed near freeways. It would seem that these are contradictory
and that there would be land near the freeway that couldn't conform
to any use.
Cm Dah1backa noted that there are tables for both the ambient noise
level as well as the average noise level and this is the reason it
is somewhat confusing.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO DRAFT A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE NOISE ELEMENT
TO THE GENERAL PLAN, AS AMENDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL AND RECOMMENDED BY
THE P.C., WITH REFERRAL OF THE DOCUMENT TO GARY SHAW FOR TECHNICAL
EDITING. MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
The city Attorney noted that there are some very broad categories
of prohibitions included which he believes will present some diffi-
culties in terms of implementing the ordinance. He read the council
a paragraph on page 36, which he indicated would present a problem
because the City would be faced with vested rights and the City
would probably not be able to enforce that particular section.
Mr. Musso asked that the technical writer be informed that this
was written for the layman - the document could have been written
more technically. In fact, it was written by a technician.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that she is concerned about having a technical
writer review this because the Committee was a technical committee
who felt comfortable with the language used in the document. The
P.C. used that language for their public hearing, and she would
not want any substantial changes.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that this is not the intent. This would be
the procedure that the General Plan went through with one person
reviewing it and editing it. If the Council wishes, they could
review the changes to make sure that no substantial change was made.
Cm Turner stated that
it has been approved.
pone acceptance until
request editing.
he would not want the document edited after
Therefore, the Council should either post-
it has been edited, or to accept it and not
Cm Dahlbacka felt it would be reasonable to postpone adoption until
after it has been edited.
Mayor Tirse1l stated that everyone has been working on this for
a long time and she would hesitate to postpone adoption. Perhaps
it could be adopted and one chapter sent out for editing, so the
council can see what will be done in the way of editing.
CM-32-3l0
June 14, 1976
(Continued P.H. re Scenic
Highway Element and Noise
Element of General Plan)
The City Attorney recommended against adoption until it has been
edited because it may be edited in such a way that a substantial
change is made that the technical writer is unaware of.
MOTION FAILED 1-3 (Cm Karnena, Turner and Mayor Tirsell dissenting).
Mayor Tirse1l stated that in light of what the City Attorney has said
about there being broad categories of prohibition, she would suggest
that adoption of the document be postponed until these things have
been taken care of. She stated that if the City will have difficulty
enforcing some goal, she would like to be aware of this, and if some-
thing is borderline, she would like to know that also.
The City Attorney stated that he could be reviewing these items while
the document is being edited.
MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO REFER THE DOCUMENTS TO THE CITY ATTORNEY WITH
A SIMILAR DOCUMENT SUBMITTED TO THE TECHNICAL WRITER FOR EDITING, AND
SCHEDULED AS A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
SPECIAL ITEM - RE DOWN-
TOWN BEAUTIFICATION PROJ.
Norman Hong, representative of the Beautification Committee reported
on the beautification projects for the downtown Livermore area. He
stated that at present the area has a monotonous atmosphere which is
comprised of streets, sidewalks, and buildings, with no invitation
to people to shop in the area. He presented plans for an approach
to the problem in different areas of the downtown, as the result
of studies done in the area. Rest areas, kiosks, and bicycle parking
is planned, as well as greenery. Hopefully these improvements
will encourage people to come to the area, walk around the area
and shop.
With respect to funding for the projects, hopefully, one or two areas
could be funded yearly, with an overall master plan of the downtown
area. Unfortunately, the downtown development plan did not include
specific guidelines for First Street.
Linda Galas reported on specific projects for the downtown area
and noted that Annette's store will be the first to incorporate
plans using the ordinance relative to the sidewalk overhang, and
the Committee is making every effort to see that the Schenone Building
is unified by paint and style. The Boy Scouts have offered to paint
the building, as well as to paint other buildings along First Street
that need painting. They have also offered to help with any clean-up
project the Beautification Committee might have. She has spoken with
the City Attorney about this type of arrangement and if there would
be any liability to the City and the City Attorney indicated that
there should be no problem.
Mrs. Galas stated that she has received many complaints about
the condition of the backs of the stores and the Committee is
trying to get the merchants all along First Street to clean up
the backs of their stores, paint the backs, and keep the garbage
picked up.
commUICATION RE REVENUE
SHARING LEGISLATION
The letter from Congressman Stark regarding revenue sharing legisla-
tion was noted for filing.
CM-32-31l
June 14, 1976
COMMUNICATION RE
LAVWMA SEWAGE FACILITIES
FUNDING - INDUS. & FAIR
A letter was sent to the City of P1easanton and the City of Liver-
more concerning the request to the State Board for grant funding
of industrial andvfair sewage cppacity in the LAVWMA pipeline.
~~~
Mr. Parness reported that the Council did not receive a draft
copy of the City's response to the letter from LA~rnA and this
item will be on the agenda next week.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that LAvm4A has asked if the cities will
fund the industrial capacity if they do not receive a grant and
in her opinion the City can't fund it. If the City indicates
that it has no plans to fund the additional capacity this should
be a comfortable position to take.
Mr. Parness indicated that he would hope the tenor of the wording
would be such that every effort would be made within financial
possibilities, to fund the additional capacity, because the City
feels this is of critical importance.
RESOLUTION RE ABATE-
MENT OF DOGWOOD PARK SITE
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that a resolution declaring the City's intent
to abandon Dogwood Park site is on the agenda.
Also included with the resolution is a letter from Mrs. Lee protest-
ing the proposed sale of the property and suggesting that it be
developed as a park site, as originally planned.
Mrs. Lee, 544 Nightingale Street, stated that she has circulated
a petition opposing the sale of the park site, which has been
signed by 41 residents in that area. She has spoken with many
officials in the City who agree that the land should be developed
as a park site and she has spoken with friends, residents of that
area, the Livermore Jaycees, the Army and.Air National Guard,
who have agreed to help with the labor in developing the park,
including furnishing bulldozers to clear and level the land.
She stated that the only stipulation is that the City furnish
the sprinkler system to water the park and that it may be necessary
for the City to furnish a pump for the well. She stated that
she believes she can get most of this donated.
Mr. Munn Mar, from Zone 7, came to see about the well and found
that the well is not covered, but rather is filled with debris.
He has suggested that the City clear the debris so the status of
the well can be determined.
Mrs. Lee stated that with respect to reports of vandalism and
robbery, she believes this is the sign of the times and that
the park is not responsible for these problems. She stated
that she lived in the Sunset area and was robbed when she lived
there also. People in the area are really opposed to houses or
apartments being developed on that site and what they really need
is a park.
Cm Dah1backa stated that he would like Mrs. Lee to go down the
list of pledges made by the different organizations and what
they have offered. He attended the meeting of the Jaycees on
Wednesday and they indicated that they had an interest in this
matter but their interest was contingent on all kinds of things
and he believes they have not made any particular commitment.
CM-32-3l2
June 14, 1976
(Resolution re Abatement
of Dogwood Park Site)
Mrs. Lee stated that the Jaycees agreed to provide plants for the
park. She then noted what each group plans to contribute for the
development of the park.
Cm Dah1backa wondered what Zone 7 said about the well if it is found
that it has no water.
Mrs. Lee stated that Zone 7 has agreed to pay the water connection
fee.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that the reason he is raising this concern is
because Zone 7 has never donated a water connection in the past
and it represents something like $2,000.
Mr. Musso indicated that if the City seals the well it is entitled
to a water connection from Zone 7.
Stanley Markiewicz, 462 Oriole, stated that the property consists
of a dirt mound with a dying tree and he can see no reason to
develop it for a park. He stated that people were Supposed to
clean the area and that there is nothing there but debris. Unless
the property is cared for by the City, if it were developed as a
park, the whole project would be useless because it wouldn't be
properly watered and maintained if this were left to the homeowners.
He stated that he believes the adjacent homeowners will lose privacy
and that people who go to parks go with noise and debris and then
leave. .
Ayn Weiskamp, representing the Beautification Committee, stated that
once the City has purchased property for open space, they really hate
to see it lost. The Committee is willing to help the residents in
any way possible to plan and develop the park, including physical
labor.
Terry Bersie, 529 Oriole, stated that he lives adjacent to the
park site and he has to contend with the problems in that area
whether it becomes a park or remains a public nuisance. He
stated that in his opinion the situation will not be much better
if it does become a park. He submitted additional names (a petition
was submitted by him prior to this time) opposing the open space and
asking that homes or apartments be developed on the site.
Mary Jo Ritman, 4118 Stanford Way, explained the history of trying
to get this property designated as open space and purchased by the
City so that it could be developed as a park. At that time (4 years
ago) she was a resident of that area and helped work to get the park.
She stated that she would be very disappointed if the land were sold.
Lois Lavinos, stated that the property is covered with broken glass
and rusty nails and the Boy Scouts should not be allowed to go out
to clean the area because it wouldn't be safe for them to do so.
A park in that area will not service the entire area, it will serve
only two blocks. It has been proposed that the property house a
senior citizens center and Mrs. Lavinos wondered if any consideration
has been given for the senior citizens.
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that a building for senior citizens was never
submitted as a proposal to the City. The City does not build retire-
ment homes for senior citizens.
Louise Tully, 579 Nightingale, stated that she has lived at this
address for five years and owns her home. She agrees that senior
citizens should receive consideration, but in this case the area
is composed of young families and there are many children in the
area. This would not be the proper place for senior citizen housing.
CM-32-313
June 14, 1976
(Resolution re Abatement of
Dogwood Park Site)
Mrs. Tully stated that she has a 7 year old that she would not
send as far as May Nissen Park and even though the park would
serve only a few blocks there are many children in that area
who would use the park. Right now the park site is a disgrace
and something must be done about it. She will be willing to help.
Andrew Avilla, 547 Nightingale, stated that he is in favor of the
development of a park. He is tired of looking out his window
at a dump. He stated that in his opinion, if anything other
than a park is developed on the site it will ruin the neighborhood.
His property has also been vandalized and it has nothing to do with
the vacant lot. He stated that he knows there is a group of kids
who are going around vandalizing property and if this could be
stopped maybe things would be a lot better.
Jackie Lambert, 473 Oriole, adjacent to the park site, stated that
she believes people are losing sight of what the issue is. At this
time the park site is extremely dangerous to the children who go
through it and she cannot send her small children out into the
back yard to play because people are throwing broken bottles and
all kinds of debris over her fence. She believes this is unneces-
sary and very dangerous. She stated that a beebe has gone through
the window just over her baby's playpen and rocks have been thrown
through her windows. She stated that she would like to know if
everyone is going to sit by waiting for something very serious to
happen to someone before something is done. She has called every
City department and has received nothing but indifference and has
been shifted from one department to another. She stated that she
still is not sure that it will be maintained by the City if it does
become a park.
Mrs. Lambert stated that it has just been mentioned that there is
an open well on the site and she would suggest that it be covered
tomorrow morning, before some child falls into it and drowns.
The problem with developing the lot as a park is because it is an
oddly shaped lot almost entirely surrounded by houses and there
is not much access to it. In essence, if it is developed as a
park it will be only for those people directly around it. She
stated that during the interim, while a decision is being made
as to what should be done with the property, that a chain link
fence be installed around the perimeter of the property for pro-
tection of children and from further vandalism.
Mrs. Lee stated that if anyone would be interested in helping to
develop the park site, they should contact either her or Mr.
wolfgang Klamp.
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that the City has a resolution posting the
property for sale, and that a public hearing will take place on
July 19.
Cm Dahlbacka asked if a park is developed, would the City
assume the responsibility for normal maintenance?
Mayor Tirse11 stated that the City would have to maintain it, be-
cause it would be a City owned park.
Cm Dah1backa asked about the estimated cost for that type of
maintenance.
Mr. Lee stated that he would get this information for the council.
It wouldn't be as costly as the maintenance of the mini-parks
because the turf area would be larger and would lend itself to the
large mowing equipment owned by the City.
CM-32-314
June 14, 1976
(Dogwood Park Site)
Cm Turner stated that for the record he would like to know if it was
the Council's intent at the time the property was purchased for a park
site, to release it to LARPD for development and maintenance.
Mr. Parness stated that LARPD rejected this proposal, formally, prior
to purchase of the site.
Cm Kamena stated that people have indicated that the City has not
kept its end of the bargain, and he would like to know what the City's
part of the bargain was.
Mr. Parness stated that as he recalls there was no promise on the part
of the City for develoning the park. Many people testified that they
would be willing to do this or that to develop the park but no inquiry
was ever made of the City offices to get anything going.
Cm Kamena wondered what prompted purchase of the property in the
first place, and it was noted that a church applied for a CUP to
develop on the property and the neighbors carne out, in force, insist-
ing that the City purchase the property for a park site and that they
would develop it.
Mr. Musso stated that the people agreed to develop it and the City
indicated that it would be maintained by the City to a certain degree.
Mr. Lee stated that the Public Works Department has done considerable
work in leveling mounds and cleaning debris from time to time. It is
:: ::::n. :e:.:::e~:;~~h~h..~{~~~~~~~:;;}:;: :: ::: :::::::d~tate:i~l. ly
until some. qroup. wpulii orgaI}ize and improve the siteJ~~ :~, \ i'~\,V-\:'
a.-- tL.rff" ~C<.~~_ ~~.-+-. . ,JIv~
Mr. Parness stated that this was one possibility but in the event ~ \
the Council decided to keep the park site, the staff was considering
asking the Council about the possibility of some improvement costs.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he also does not like to see land purchased
for park purposes lost to another use and there does seem to be inter-
est in getting the park developed, after all. Hopefully the City will
see that the well situation is taken care of immediately. If the
property were developed and sod were planted, etc., there would be
less opportunity for vandalism because the rocks and debris would
be removed. However, he would want substantial commitment from
people for the development, and he would want to know that the
maintenance costs would not be prohibitive. He would like to see
a continued effort on the part of those people who are interested
in developing the site, to line up the commitments so that they are
firm commitments and that the people who have pledged to do certain
'''ork are known.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the public hearinq concerning sale of the
property is more than a month away, and during this time the infor-
mation Cm Dahlbacka is requesting should be available.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING THE SALE OF THE DOGWOOD PARK
SITE WAS SET FOR JULY 19, M~D ADOPTING THE RESOLUTION DECLARING
THE INTENT TO ABANDON THE SITE.
RESOLUTION NO. 135-76
A RESOLUTION DECLARING INTENTION TO
ABANDON DOc;WOOD PARK SITE.
Cm Turner stated that between now and the date of the public hear-
ing he is going to consider the following things:
CM-32-3lS
June 14, 1976
ere Dogwood Park Site)
1) Vandalism problems
He stated that in his area they have a park they call Big Trees
and he refuses to allow his children to go to their neighborhood
park because of the vandalism problems. TRis type sf par]{ RM'S
,jYS~ Re~ worked SQ~ iR tkeir afea. He would like to know if the
vandalism problems would be solved for the adjacent residents if
this does become a park site.
2) Volunteer labor
If there is to be volunteer labor, how long will the enthusiasm
for the work that needs to be done continue? There was a people's
park in Livermore that eventually died.
He stated that his real concern is not for upgrading the park site
but the problems of vandalism and how to cope with this. This is
a problem with all parks that are surrounded by houses. ~Y~rl~J:"
Mayor Tirse11 stated that LARPD has certain guide1ines~~~1~OW
in considering purchase of a park site. In this case the park has
terrible access, is surrounded by houses, and there...!!.. REt major
street going past the park. Supervision problems are difficult and
the property is too small to be of any service other than to a very
small neighborhood and perhaps only the houses that surround it.
For these reasons she will be looking for some worthwhile reasons
for developing it. One might be to help solve the problem of vandal-
ism.
RECESS
Mayor Tirse1l called for a brief recess after which the meeting
resumed with all members of the Council present (Cm Staley seated
at this time).
RESOLUTION RE GUESTS
FROM QUEZALTENANGO
The Council adopted a resolution welcoming the City's guests from
Quezaltenango, the Sister city.
RESOLUTION NO. 134-76
A RESOLUTION WELCOMING OUR FRIENDS FROM QUEZALTENANGO
APPEAL RE DENIAL BY
P.C. FOR VARIANCE RE
HOLIDAY INN SIGN
Discussion concerning the appeal by the Holiday Inn for a variance
concerning the size of their sign has been scheduled at this time.
em Staley wondered if the city had any response from the Highway
Department concerning the sign, and Mr. Musso stated that the P.C.
had asked that they be contacted and they did not respond.
Cm Turner wondered how much allowable square footage of sign is
allowed for the Holiday Inn, totally, and Mr. Musso explained
that the total cannot be combined for one sign. There is a cer-
tain amount allowed for each side of the building.
Discussion followed concerning the amount of square footage allowed,
not including the free standing sign.
CM-32-316
June 14, 1976
(Holiday Inn Sign)
Mr. Gor1and stated that it appears the P.C. recognized the inadequacy
of the freeway sign, as a highway oriented business. Their decision
not to grant the variance was due to the fear that to do so would
have an adverse affect on the integrity of the Sign Ordinance and
the sign provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. It was also felt
that approval might bring on a rash of other requests for var-
iances.
Mr. Gor1and stated that, personally, he favors stringent sign regula-
tion. However, such regulation must be tempered with realities of
the market place and signs which are not properly controlled are
not effective and could be a blighting influence in established
market areas such as a neighborhood center or the CBD. On the other
hand, if the City has a viable and successful highway oriented bus-
iness, it must be provided with the means to attract such business.
This is especially true in areas where access is limited, such as
along state highways.
Cm Staley asked what Mr. Gorland would suggest and Mr. Gorland
stated that perhaps there should be either a modification of the
ordinance with regard to highway oriented type businesses with
limited access, or to make special exceptions in each case.
He added that the inhibition on the part of the P.C. to approve
this variance appeared to be the possible adverse affect with
respect to the intent of the provisions of the Sign Ordinance.
Cm Staley stated that Mr. Gorland indicated that there was a question
of whether the Sign Ordinance had an adverse physical impact on the
applicant. If this is Mr. Gorland's opinion, why?
Mr. Gorland stated that he believes it would have a physical impact
for the various reasons mentioned by the applicants at the P.C.
meeting. ,~~ does.~~ow that a highway oriented type of business is
differen~~~a~usiness in the CBD or a neighborhood shopping center
where the people normally and customarily go to shop. With a highway
oriented business people must be able to see where they are going,
and they must be able to see it quickly in order to get there. If
they are not able to quickly identify the particular use and they
pass it, it is very rare that they would turn around and go back
to that use. There should be ample means of identifying the par-
ticular use in order to give the driver of the vehicle adequate
time to stop if they desire to get off the highway for whatever
use they want.
Bill Moore, 6730 Cutting Boulevard, El Cerrito, stated that he
was retained by Holiday Inn to study this item and to determine
what might be done for better identification of the Holiday Inn.
At the P.C. meeting there was a unanimous vote that the present
sign provided, under the Sign Ordinance, is inadequate. The other
vote was a denial of the request for variance. The P.C. felt that
a variance might have a detrimental affect on the overall Sign
Ordinance.
Mr. Moore stated that the variance they are requesting would
provide the exact type of re1~ef they need. They need to
get people to their place of business one time during the day,
from 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. If people can't find the Holiday Inn
they keep going until they get to Oakland.
Mr. Moore presented slides illustrating approaches to other HOliday
Inn businesses from the highways in other cities, as well as the
approach from the highway to the Livermore HOliday Inn.
Mr. Moore stated that there are three types of Holiday Inns _ the
freeway Inn, the metropolitan Inn, and the resort Inn. The condi-
tions for these different types vary, subs~antial1y. The average
size of the letter on the building is 38 inches, and the sign they
CM-32-317
June 14, 1976
(Holiday Inn Sign)
propose would be 54 inches. In square footage, the present sign
is 130 sq. ft., and the proposed sign would be 182 sq. ft.
Mr. Moore explained that this does not include the background that
the letters are mounted on. If the letters are placed on an exist-
ing background, only the letters are counted, but if they are placed
on a background which is then placed on the building, the entire
background and lettering must be counted. In counting the background
as well as the letters, there would be 336 sq. ft., which is sub-
stantially less than half of any of the other highway oriented
Holiday Inn signs the Council saw in the pictures, where similar
conditions exist and in similar communities where a variance was
necessary.
em Staley wondered if Mr. Moore feels that the small signs that
identify gas, food, and lodging, with the Holiday Inn symbol, would
be of little value.
Mr. Moore explained that they have fought to obtain the standard
state sign indicating gas, food and lodging and they received it,
but it didn't make any difference. The signs located on I-5, with
gas, food, and lodging as well as the little Holiday Inn symbol
(logo) are located on private property and they are not state signs
but were allowed by the state.
Mr. Sauder, of Holiday Inn, stated that there are different economic
ranges with respect to the cost of motel rooms and for this reason
different people look for different motel chains. The Holiday Inn
recieves only a certain segment of the highway traffic or the highway
clientele and one of the problems Holiday Inn is faced with is the
fact that billboards are corning down in California as a res~~~f~~,
California beautification plans. The small !retHoliday I~9~~t
is used to direct people to the motel and if people do not see the
motel soon after they see the sign they wil~ keep going right past
the building looking for it further down the freeway. At this time
there is intermitent visibility traveling west, none traveling east,
and none from First Street, so they can't pick up the business from
these directions. The bulk of their business from people without
reservations, is between 6:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m. Driving in a west-
erly direction about 6:00 p.m. the sun is in the driver's face and
it is rather difficult to see their sign and this is the only direc-
tion in which the sign can be seen. If the driver spots the sign
from Vasco Road, the response time is 45 seconds to the turn-off
to the Inn, if he is traveling at 60 mph.
Mr. Sauder stated that the reason they are requesting the variance
is because their business is just not what it should be and the
amount of business has been declining in the past couple of years.
Don Miller, 2862 Waverly Way, stated that consideration of highway
oriented business signs are reflected in the provisions of the pre-
sent Sign Ordinance. The Council spent a couple of years amending
the Sign Ordinance and disband the possibilities of allowing larger
signs for freeway oriented uses. It is not a matter of needing to
consider special provisions - this has been done.
Mr. Miller stated that what people do not seem to realize is that
a different design for the Holiday Inn sign is possible and it
could be made larger with different design and some trade-off
with the amount of sign on the side of the building. Holiday
Inn has the best sign exposure of all the motels along the
freeway, within the valley. The small sign which Holiday Inn
uses, is a terrible design with respect to visibility from the
freeway and it could have been designed with a dark background
and light colored letters or something that would stand out.
The sign on the building is visible and there is time to get
off the freeway when the driver sees the little Holiday Inn
sign.
CM-32-318
I
June 14, 1976
(Holiday Inn Sign)
Mr. Miller stated that their freestanding sign is a nonconforming
sign and he would suggest that the City compromise with Holiday Inn
by allowing redesign of the freestanding sign so that it is more
visible and allow it to remain there. Secondly, the City should
press the question of the freeway sign which indicates gas, food
and lodging, with the logo, and if these signs a~e located in the
freeway right-of-way, the City should press the state to allow this
type of sign in the right-of-way. This is the best way to let people
know that these facilities are available at the next turn-off from the
freeway. If the state does not allow the signs in the right-of-way then
the City should consider acquisition of a piece of the state's property
for placement of a sign of this type, or working out an arrangement with
the property owners along the freeway so the City could allow installa-
tion of a sign that would indicate that gas, food and lodging is avail-
able, and would be of help to the freeway oriented businesses.
A small sign along the freeway would be a lot better than a giant
freestanding sign and Mr. Miller felt the City could cooperate with
the Holiday Inn and the property owners along the freeway to find
property on which to place a small sign, with the Holiday Inn logo,
if the state won't allow it.
Mr. Miller stated that he would agree that Holiday Inn has a problem
but they haven't done everything possible to improve their situation,
such as redesigning their freestanding sign. This would also pro-
tect the features of the Sign Ordinance.
LaVerne Cave, 1055 Laguna Street, stated that the Holiday Inn has
stood as a kind of mockery because of its size. The Livermore HOliday
Inn is a second class Holiday Inn, in appearance from the freeway, and
she has always looked at it with shame. If the City wants industry,
the City is tying the hands of the developers because their signs
tell people what Livermore has. Livermore should work with the
Holiday Inn and provide brochures to tell what Livermore has to
offer overnight guests so they will stay longer and spend money in
Livermore.
~
I
\
~
Cm Staley wondered how the applicant feels about the suggestion made
by Mr. Miller.
Mr. Moore stated that Holiday Inn has pursued the idea of trying to
redesign their sign but it can't be done. As far as the small high-
way sign designating gas, food, and lodging, with their logo on it,
he has .be~~_tQ~ t~t~~^w~ll ~~~~.qet such a sign. Unfortunately,
thi~~ae~~ens1ve-~e~~ey can't try something different
all the time, hoping that it will prove to be successful.
Cm Turner asked if the sign on the building, or the freeway sign is
considered the most effective.
Mr. Moore stated that they were designed to be equally effective.
He believes the sign on the side of the building has less attraction,
and from an aesthetic point of view it would really look better on
top of the building. They also rely heavily on the highway sign and
they do not want to have to give up either the roof sign or the free-
way sign.
em Turner stated that any sign is visible if you are familiar with
the area but there have been many times he has driven down the free-
way and not being familiar with the area has found it difficult to
locate something he wanted, on many occasions. He has always con-
sidered the Holiday Inn sign a joke, and he believes he could make
findings to allow the variance. He has considered what Mr. Miller
has suggested in the way of purchasing property for a small freeway
sign, or whatever might be necessary to get a sign located in that area,
but he believes everyone would want to be identified on that sign.
CM-32-3l9
I
June 14, 1976
(Holiday Inn Sign)
Mayor Tirsell asked if Mr. Moore had considered a sign of 159
sq. ft., which would be three times as large as the present
freestanding sign.
Mr. Moore stated that they did work with this figure, but in
going back to the visibility tables they found that this size
would not be effective. The size of the letters on the free-
standing sign will be 160 sq. ft., measured by the Code, but
because of the problem of counting the footage of the background,
it comes to 280 sq. ft. He explained that the reason the letters
on the building have to be so large, is becuase it is 550 ft. away
from the freestanding sign.
Cm Staley wondered if the 50 ft. height proposal for the freestand-
ing sign would be within the Code, and Mr. Moore stated that it is
not.
Cm Staley asked if the roof sign would be allowed, under the Code,
and Mr. Musso stated that the 350 sq. ft. roof sign would need a
variance for being above the roof line, and for its size. They
would be allowed 150 sq. ft. either on the wall or the roof, but
they are requesting more footage than allowable, and they also
want the sign above the principal line of the roof.
em Staley asked if Mr. Moore is indicating that he would be
willing to remove all the other signs if they are allowed the
large sign above the roof line, and Mr. Moore stated that they
~rou1d be willing to remove all of the other signs located on
IJ"Vthe building. The roof sign would be visible from every direc-
,: .,~~~~na stated that the intent of the ordinance is to allow identificati~n
\\ ') .;~i.rather than advertising, and perhaps there is the ability to construct a sl.gn
\1'lj'~different in shape from the "great" sign. It COU1.d be 152 sp. ft., conform
~ to our ordinance, and be effective, with a 4' ~igh script, and could b~ se;~
1,920 ft. away with a rectangular sign shape of approximately 6' by 26. e
Holiday Inn is requesting a size that could be seen from only 1,584 ft. away
or .3 miles. Our present ordinance, therefore~ allows the sign to be seen
from 336 lineal feet farther back than the Inn s request.
Cm Kamena stated that if this could be done and the City could
pursue the matter of placing the gas, food, lodging, (with logo)
sign in the freeway right-of-way, this should help Holiday Inn
substantially.
Mr. Moore stated that the H on the wall script is 5' high and
it is not visible. What they are after is identification and
not advertisement.
em Staley stated that the sign on the wall is 223 sq. ft.,
which is the permitted wall size. They are asking for 332
sq. ft. above the roof line, and he would like to know if the
permitted size of 223 sq. ft., if it were placed above the
roof line, would be visible without going to the excessive
size. It was noted that this would also require a variance.
Cm Dah1backa stated that he has heard no testimony that would
indicate that granting the variance would be a grant of special
priviledge and he would be willing to continue this item pending
further information as to what might be done. However, if the
Council does not wish to continue the matter he would suggest
that the application be denied, based on the recommendations of
the Planning Commission.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO DENY THE APPLICATION, BASED ON THE RECOMMEN-
DATIONS OF THE P.C. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
CM-32-320
June 14, 1976
(Holiday Inn Sign)
Cm Staley stated that he would like to continue the item until the
City can find out more about the freeway signs indicating gas, food,
lOdging, because he believes these are the most beneficial and would
allow the City to keep its Sign Ordinance and at the same time allow
the Holiday Inn the ability to be identified by a motorist in suffi-
cient time to get off the freeway.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she believes the highway signs in the state
freeway right-of-way have no bearing on this application. If the
signs are worth pursuing, they should be pursued, whether or not
the variance is granted for Holiday Inn.
Cm Staley stated that he would agree that the City should pursue the
matter of the state right-of-way signs anyway, but if the state says
that under no condition will they grant the signs, his attitude
towards Holiday Inn's variance would be affected by the denial.
He feels they do have a need to be identified from the freeway in
sufficient time for motorists to make an exit from the freeway. If
CAL-TRANS will not go along with the small logo signs then he would
like to consider some way Holiday Inn can be provided proper identifi-
cation.
CM STALEY MOVED TO CONTINUE THE ITEM UNTIL THE CITY HEARS FROM CAL-
TRANS CONCERNING ADDITIONAL SIGNING ON THE STATE FREEWAY SIGNS TO
INDICATE FOOD, GAS, AND LODGING. MOTION SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
Cm Turner mentioned that Commissioner Simonen asked about a month
ago if the staff would pursue the matter of the sign in the right-
of-way, and this hasn't been done.
Mr. Musso stated that he did contact the state but has not received
a response.
em Turner stated that if this type of sign by the state is provided
for the Holiday Inn, every other motel in downtown Livermore will
want to have a similar logo sign.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Council is talking about freeway signs,
and there aren't any other motels on the freeway.
Cm Turner stated that everyone agrees that the sign at the HOliday
Inn is ridiculous, and he doesn't believe that a directional sign
will solve the problem. In the first place, he doesn't believe
the state will allow the directional sign, and secondly, he doesn't
believe the City would purchase property for the sign and then rent
the property back to the owner. Thirdly, he doesn't believe the
signs indicating gas, food, and lodging, with the logos in them
are attractive allover the freeways.
Cm Turner stated that in his opinion the sign located at the Holiday
Inn is not adequate and he is fully prepared to grant the variance
for that particular sign. The only thing a continuance will accomplish
is a two week delay.
her understanding
. e
food,
em Staley stated that the intent of the motion is
find out if it is possible to have similar signs,
Livermore. The mechanism of how they are done or
them is something to be discussed in the future.
for the City to
as on I-5, for
who pays for
Mr. Sauder stated that Holiday Inn is allowed only two types of
signs - either the "great" sign or the script sign. They can't put
up food and lodging, such as Howard Johnson's uses.
CM-32-32l
June l4, 1976
(Holiday Inn Sign)
Cm Kamena wondered if Mr. Sauder is saying that he would not be
willing to pursue the logo attached to one of the directional
signs.
Mr. Sauder stated that he would have to agree with what em Turner
has said - if a logo is affixed to one of the directional signs
for the Holiday Inn, every other highway orie~ted use would want
the same thing. ~I\~~. -~. u-<<~~ 0> ~ .:eM:'
.~ 7- ~'~~,~'(!J!.~. ..;r
Cm Kamena stated that in lig~t of what Mr. Sauder has said he
will vote against the motion.
MOTION TO CONTINUE FAILED 2-3 (Cm Kamena, Turner and Mayor Tirsell
dissenting) .
CM TURNER MOVED TO ALLOW THE VARIANCE TO ALLOW THE SIGN ON THE
ROOF, AS REQUESTED BY HOLIDAY INN, (Exhibit A). MOTION SECONDED
BY CM STALEY.
It was noted that the square footage for the roof sign in Exhibit
"A", is 336 sq. ft.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he views the discussion as a rewriting
of the Sign Ordinance in a very unusual way. The Council seems
to be concerned about the cluttering of the freeway with the
little directional signs and logos attached,~d~;~~~O~ ~
is being given to allowing a sign double its, ize~s~u~~
means that the City will have a line a mile long with people
waiting to get sign variances. Approval of the variance would
be arbitrarily looking at a request and granting it. He stated
that he can't see that there is any spec. ial~e here.
~ .~
em Dahlbacka stated that he believes the poi~made by Cm Kamena
is well taken. If the existing building sign were moved closer
to the freeway, there would be ample visibility. It is quite
visible on the building. The size of sign mentioned by Cm Kamena
should be quite visible.
If the variance is allowed, the gas station in that same inter-
section will say the same thing, and Grossman's on portola will
say the same, and it will go on and on. This is the purpose of
setting standards. In his opinion Holiday Inn has not done every-
thing possible within the realm of the ordinance, to gain maximum
advantage for their place of business. He could not vote for
the variance without feeling that he was voting for a grant of
special privilege.
Cm Turner stated that his motion to grant the variance is based
on the fact that he believes the ordinance is restrictive and
places a hardshio noon this particular use - the Holiday Inn.
Granting the variance would not be a grant of special orivileqe.
This is not a rewrite of the ordinance - it is a variance and
a tool used to change the ordinance when the Council feels
there is justification.
MOTION FAILED 1-4 (Cm Dahlbacka, Kamena, Staley and Mayor
Tirsell dissenting).
Cm Kamena stated that he had wanted to continue the item because
the present sign is inadequate and possibly a rectangualar
sign with script lettering, within our present ordinance and
with proper contrast, could be constructed and that the City
might look into a sign with a logo attached. However, at that
time Mr. Sauder had not indicated that they wouldn't be interested
in the sign with the logo.
CM-32-322
June 14, 1976
Mayor Tirsell stated that if there is not a consensus on the Council
to grant the variance for a larger sign, would it be the intention
of HOliday Inn to increase the sign and still conform to the ordi-
nance, or would HOliday Inn keep the small freestanding sign which
is there at present?
(Holiday Inn Sign)
Mr. Moore stated that he would first like to say that what em Kamena
has said about the visibility of a 4' high letter being visible from
l,920 ft. is correct - however, this is not the way viSibility works,
because with the 4' "H" is a little 8" "0". The wording has to be
balanced out for the average lettering. He said that he may be
exaggerating because he didn't work it out exactly, but with the
5' "H" on the wall, there is a 14" "0" following it. If they could
achieve what they want, within the ordinance, they would not be
requesting a variance.
Cm Kamena asked if the answer to the Mayor's question is, "no", and
Mr. Moore stated that this is correct. They have made all kinds of
designs and there is just no way they can be noticed without getting
a variance for their sign.
CM STALEY MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL REFER THE QUESTION OF THE ORDINANCE
TO THE P.C. AND HOLD THE APPLICATION UNTIL THE P.C. REPORTS TO THE
EXTENT THAT THERE BE CONSIDERATION OF AMENDING THE SIGN ORDINANCE
IN SUCH A WAY THAT A FREEWAY ORIENTED USE CAN HAVE A SIGN THAT CAN
BE IDENTIFIED FROM THE FREEWAY IN SUFFICIENT TIME TO EXIT. MOTION
SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL.
em Turner stated that this issue was not raised by the P.C. in
their minutes, and Mayor Tirsell stated that the Council will
ask that they consider it.
Cm Turner stated that he thinks the Council is dragging its feet
in referring the item back to the P.C.
Mayor Tirsell stated that there have been numerous motions and none
have passed and the Holiday Inn should be able to wait until the
City can get the problem solved.
em Kamena stated that he would agree this item should be taken care
of as expeditiously as possible; however, if viSibility and identifica-
tion is a problem, perhaps the ordinance should be amended to take
care of these problems for freeway oriented businesses.
Mayor Tirsell wondered if Mr. Moore feels there would be a problem
with a freeway sign that is an aggregate sign, using the same for-
mula, and no other signing permitted on the building. The City is
trying to accommodate a use and the City can control size. Perhaps
the size would not work out to be as large as what Holiday Inn has
requested, but if there is no other wall sign allowed, would there
be a problem?
Mr. Moore stated that as he understands the question, the possibility
of making the aggregate of the sign with the hope that the total
aggregate could be incorporated into one sign, exists.
Mayor Tirsell stated that this would mean that it would not be as
large as the total aggregate, but it shhould allow a much larger
sign.
Mr. Miller stated that the reason the P.C. and former Councils didn't
accept the philosophy of aggregate signs was because of the overall
conflict between advertising vs. identification. Use of the aggre-
gate could allow a sign which would be very large and serve as a
billboard, effectively, rather than identification. The intent was
not to allow the billboard concept.
CM-32-323
June 14, 1976
(Holiday Inn Sign)
Mr. Miller stated that the intent of the ordinance was to allow
sign sizes, by the provisions of the ordinance, which would be
adequate for visibility of the various kinds of businesses, in-
cluding those along the freeway. If the council does feel that
the size allowed is not large enough, it is probably a good idea
that the P.C. will be looking at the matter.
Cm Turner stated that the P.c. has spent two study sessions con-
cerning this variance, and now the council is suggesting that it
be referred to the P.C. for review again. If there is to be a
change in the ordinance, there will be a public hearing with the
P.C. and another public hearing with the City Council. He stated
that he is concerned with all the time that will be involved.
Mayor Tirsell stated that Holiday Inn has had that ridiculous sign
out there for five years and the council is trying to do whatever
it can as fast as possible, but a little time spent in trying to
make a decision will not make that much difference_seeaQBe ~ftey
ha.e Baa ~he si~ft fer fi~e years~ The council does not want to
take the chance of destroying the~hole. sign. Ordinance, and one
big variance could destroy it. ,/ J L
_ k/C.
MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Cm Turner dissen ng).
REPORT RE LIVERMORE ARCADE
SHOPPING CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY
The city Manager reported that at the request of the Council, the
staff met with representatives of the owners of the Livermore Ar-
cade Shopping Center to discuss the traffic congestion problems
at the "p" Street exit/entrance. The city requested that the
six parking stalls in front of Safeway be removed and in their
place would be a vehicular delivery and customer pick up area.
It has also been suggested that there be a sign posted at the
exit prohibiting left turns during weekdays between 4:00 and
6:00 p.m. Hopefully these suggestions will help relieve the
problems until Railroad Avenue is reconstructed.
Mr. Parness stated that nothing is planned in the way of medians
on "p" street at this time. These items will be the first step
in trying to provide a solution to the traffic problems. It may
be that no left turns will be permitted at all if the 4:00 to
6:00 p.m. restriction is not effective enough, or the driveway
on "p" Street may-be made as an entrance only.
Cm Turner wondered if the council would have to be consulted
before any type of median is installed on "P" street.
Mr. Lee stated that the council has approved a plan for the
median and to change it would take action of the city
Council. construction of the approved plan could commence
without notice to the Council.
Cm Turner stated that before any permanent median is installed
he would like the city to use sand bags to determine the
effectiveness.
IT WAS NOTED THAT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY MEDIAN, THE
ITEM WILL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE COUNCIL FOR
DISCUSSION.
CM-32-324
June 14, 1976
REPORT RE VISITING THE
ANIMAL CONTROL SHELTER
LOCATED AT SANTA RITA
At the request of Cm Staley, the staff wrote a letter to the County
concerning entrance procedures to the Animal Control Shelter, located
at Santa Rita. It was noted that the same procedures are required
for going to the Animal Control Shelter as the Santa Rita jail,
and that this may discourage people who might want to go to the
animal shelter.
A letter of response was received from Sheriff Houchins and from
the Field Services Office, indicating that the Animal Control
Shelter is located on Santa Rita property and that the sheriff
makes policy regarding access to that property.
The letter from the sheriff indicated that for security reasons,
anyone entering the Santa Rita property must present some form
of identification, but it has never been a policy to surrender
a driver's license.
Cm Staley commented that in the letter from Sheriff Houchins, it
is noted that presentation of identification of guests of the
shelter, at the gate, is a small price to pay. He disagrees with
this statement because people going to the shelter are not guests.
They are taxpayers who are attempting to use a tax supported facility.
Secondly, he believes it is very reasonable for someone to present
identification when they are entering the Santa Rita property for
purposes of visiting the prisoners, for obvious reasons. However,
he feels that most people object to being asked for identification
in conducting normal day-to-day business. He stated that he objects
to this and he believes that most people do not like to have to
furnish identification to use a regular facility of the County.
Cm Staley stated that in his opinion the problem is the location
of the Animal Control Shelter, and that the City should respond
to Sheriff Houchins and the Board of Supervisors. The City should
indicate that it is in error to require the driver's license or
anything else, to use the Animal Control Shelter facility. The
facility should be located in an area that does not require security
measures. He believes this discourages people from using the facility,
even though the County may not receive complaints.
The staff was directed to write a letter to Sheriff Houchins indicat-
ing that the City supports any efforts on the part of his department
to either relocate the shelter or to provide a separate entrance for
the use of this facility, to eliminate the provision of identification
to enter the facility, since it is a facility provided by the taxpayer.
em Staley stated that he would agree with what the staff has been
asked to include in the letter, but the letter should be directed
to the Board of Supervisors, with a copy to the sheriff.
A report was submitted to the Council by the Director of Public
Works concerning allocation of water reclamation plant capacity.
REPORT RE ALLOCATION
OF SEWER PLANT CAPACITY
Mayor Tirsell noted that on Page 3 of the ordinance, under 18.19.3,
(1) it mentions that no more that 45% of the increased capacity will
be used for residential development. This figure should be 50%.
CM-32-325
June l4, 1976
(Sewer capacity Allocation)
Mayor Tirsell stated that the council went through long discus-
sions concerning the allocations, and in the General plan it
shows that no less that 50% shall be allocated to industry and
commerce. It would seem that since the adoption of the General
Plan, with a different figure, that all the other resolutions
would reflect the 50%.
The council concurred.
Mr. Lee was asked to use the 50% figure with respect to submitting
grants, or for any other communications concerning this item.
REPORT RE PARKING PRO-
POSAL FOR THE LARPD
RECREATION CENTER
The City has received a recommendation for additional parking
stalls around the Recreation Center located on 8th Street. The
Public Works Department has reviewed the plan and made recommen-
dations in a written report to the Council.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Director of Public Works recommends
against closing "G" street, since it is needed for circulation
but has no strong objections to diagonal parking at the front of
the building, or the sides, as long as the Council recognizes
the problems of diagonal parking.
Robert Turnbaugh, 5000 Collier Canyon Road, stated that he uses
the LARPD building, as a representative of the National Assn.
for Retired Federal Employees, and they are in favor of anything
that could be done to provide the greatest number of parking
stalls in that area. He would request diagonal parking on both
sides of "G" street because there is diagonal parking on both
sides of "I", "J", and "K" Streets, and those streets are the
same width as "G" Street.
Dee Manning, Recreation superintendent, stated that they would
like to have the maximum number of parking spaces possible for
people using the center. If the decision on "G" street, is not
to permit diagonal parking on both sides of the street, then they
would concur that diagonal parking on the side of the street by
the ball diamond would be appropriate. They understand that
diagonal parking on both "G" and "H" Streets might necessitate
installation of stop signs, but they would not object to this.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO ADOPT THE PARKING DIAGRAM, AS SUBMITTED,
WITH THE EXCEPTION THAT THE EAST SIDE OF "G" STREET BE PARALLEL
PARKING. MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
_. Cm Staley stated that, normally, he would agree with the fact that
diagonal parking is dangerous and inappropriate, and the only
reason he has been willing to make exceptions has been because
of the tremendous need for parking spaces in the CBD. This area
is not CBD, and the difference in this case would mean walking
an extra block. In the CBD, it may mean the difference of not
finding a parking space at all within several blocks. The over-
riding necessity of having parking available in the CBD is the
reason he voted in favor of diagonal parking in that area. In
his opinion there is sufficient parking in the area of the LARPD
Recreation Center, and he would support Mr. Lee's position that
only one side of "G" should have diagonal parking or that the
street remain as is.
CM-32-326
June 14, 1976
(Rec. Center Parking)
.Mayor Tirsell stated that at this time the Recreation Center is
used primarily by the senior citizens, and they will not want to
walk two or three blocks.
Cm Staley wondered how many of the senior citizens use the Center
at one time, and Dee Manning indicated that on a Sunday afternoon
there are about 300-400 senior citizens using the Recreation
Center.
Mayor Tirsell stated that if the parking were to accommodate people
who play tennis or baseball, she would agree that they could walk
the extra block or two, but she believes that the City should pro-
vide the additional parking for the senior citizens.
Mr. Turnbaugh stated that the City doesn't seem to have a problem
with the diagonal parking on both sides of "I", "J", and "K" Streets,
and he can see no problem with allowing it on "G" Street. He would
suggest that there be diagonal parking on both "G" and "H" Streets,
and that the present diagonal stalls in front of the Recreation
Center be widened because they are very narrow.
,
Mayor Tirsell stated that she wouldn't be able to accept the pro-
posal made by Mr. Turnbaugh because this is a residential neighborhood
and the City would like to keep it residential while at the same time
try to accommodate the senior citizens in providing additional park-
ing, which the motion would allow.
IT WAS NOTED THAT THE MOTION IS FOR PARALLEL PARKING ON THREE
SIDES OF THE BUILDING - THAT THE EAST SIDE OF "G" REMAIN PARALLEL
PARKING.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE LOST/FOUND
ARTICLE PROCEDURES
A report from the City Attorney's office, in April, specified an
alternate procedure for the disposal of unclaimed lost/found
property, under state statute.
The City discussed this item and expressed concern as to publication
and storage costs that might have to be paid by the finder. The
staff has indicated that a signle article publication would cost
about $4.25, and a minimum storage fee might be $5. It is possible
that the cost of publication could be smaller if serveral articles
were publicized at the same time. The staff recommends that the
finder of the article pay the costs and that the section of the
ordinance relative to lost/found articles, be repealed.
It was noted that the City Attorney has indicated that the Council
need only ask that the Police Department draft a policy concerning
the lost/found articles.
CM STALEY MOVED TO DIRECT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO DRAFT A POLICY
CONCERNING THE LOST/FOUND ARTICLES AND THAT THE OLD SECTION OF THE
ORDINANCE BE REPEALED. MOTION SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL AND PASSED
BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
It was noted that all members of the Council have not received a copy
of the joint powers draft agreement for the Solid Waste Management
Committee and no action can be taken by the Council until this docu-
ment has been reviewed.
CM-32-327
June 14, 1976
P.H. RE REZONING OF
HOLMES & MURRIETA BLVD.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, A PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING THE REZONING APPLICATION FOR
THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF HOLMES STREET AND MURRIETA
BOULEVARD, WAS SET FOR JUNE 28, 1976.
COUNTY REFERRAL RE
REZONING SO. SIDE
OF LAS POSITAS ROAD
The P.C. has considered the referral from the County as to
rezoning of the south side of Las positas Road from A (agri-
cultural) to single family residential with a 10 acre minimum
building site. By majority vote of the P.C., the P.C. agrees
with the proposal for the rezoning with the 10 acre minimum
building site.
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE COUNCIL CONCURRtD WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE P.C.
AND REFERRED THESE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE ALAMEDA COUNTY P.C.
Mayor Tirsell noted that the P.C. did express their concern
for the proliferation of septic tanks out in that area and
this might be mentioned in the letter.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Report re Office
Lease Extension
The City Manager reported that the lease on the Masonic building
which houses the public Works Department and the community Develop-
ment Department, has expired. A one year option for extension has
been exercised by the City and the new rent has been negotiated
and raised from $700 to $760 per month. It is recommended that
the Council adopt a resolution authorizing the lease.
RESOLUTION NO. 136-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
AGREEMENT (Masonic Temple Association)
Report re Street
Resurfacing Program
The Director of Public Works reported that because an exceptional
bid received for the street resurfacing program, there were addi-
tional funds available for other street work and the Council
authorized bid solicitation for the balance of the uncommitted
funds. It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution
awarding the bid for street resurfacing.
em Turner wondered if the uncommitted funds could be used for
other purposes, such as a traffic signal, and Mr. Parness stated
that this is possible, but it is a matter of priority. Some of
The City streets are in very bad shape, and the City should be
spending much more money to improve these streets.
It was noted that Cm Turner objects to approving this item on the
Consent Calendar, and it was removed from the Consent Calendar.
CM-32-328
June l4, 1976
Status Report re
Groundwater Monitoring
Mr. Lee submitted a report to the Council on the monitoring of
groundwater, including the number of wells that might be
affected by the dischargers (Livermore, VCSD, Pleasanton,
Veterans Administration Hospital, and Castlewood wells) .
Payroll & Claims
There were 193 claims in the amount of $204,111.85, and 391 payroll
warrants in the amount of $147,826.20, for a total of $35l,938.05,
dated June 10, 1976, and approved by the Director of Finance.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE CONSENT CALENDAR, WITH DELETION OF
THE ITEM RELATIVE TO THE RESOLUTION FOR THE STREET RESURFACING BID.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE
(em Staley abstaining because he did not have time to review the
entire Consent Calendar) .
REPORT RE STREET
RESURFACING PROGRAM
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE MATTER OF THE STREET RESURFACING PROGRAM
BID BE HELD IN ABEYANCE UNTIL IT CAN BE DISCUSSED AT THE BUDGET
HEARING ON JUNE 26, 1976.
Cm Dahlbacka wondered if a delay would make a difference and Mr.
Lee stated that he really can't say. Normally the City has a
30 day period before the bids expire. However, if he finds that
the bids will expire prior to June 26th, he will inform the Council.
NO FURTHER ACTION TAKEN BY THE COUNCIL.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Appointments)
Cm Turner wondered if the Council will be considering appointments
this evening.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she didn't expect Cm Staley to be present
this evening and asked if everyone will be present next week.
The Council concluded that they will discuss appointments next
Monday evening, beginning at 7:00 p.m.
(COVA)
Cm Turner presented a status report concerning the discussion
at the last COVA meeting, concerning Zone 7, and the COVA budget.
(In-fill of the
Hazelhorst Property)
Cm Turner reported that he has talked to a developer who has expressed
interest in a step program for in-fill of the Hazelhorst property with
CM-32-329
June 14, 1976
(Development of
Hazelhorst property)
residential development, and terms agreeable to the City and the owners
of the Hazelhorst property.
em Turner wondered if the council would be interested in discus-
sing the filling in of that area with terms that would be accept-
able to everyone involved. Perhaps there could be 50 permits
or 100 permits allowed each year, or whatever.
Mayor Tirsell stated that under the city'S present policy, this
couldn't be done without amendment of that policy.
Cm Turner stated that this would depend upon receiving additional
sewage capacity and it would also involve annexations. This
would solve a lot of problems for a lot of people, and per-
haps something could be done that would be beneficial to everyone.
Cm Kamena stated that he would be interested in discussing the
item.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would be very cautious about prom-
ising sewage to anyone, because this is why pleasanton is involved
in a $6,000/day suit.
Cm staley suggested that rather than discuss this item at the
council level, perhaps the staff could contact the owners of
the property and ask them to contact the community Development
Director, to see what can be done.
Mayor Tirsell suggested that the matter be referred to the city
Manager, because the Community Development Director may not be
the proper channel for this type of item.
(Dinner for Sister
City Delegates)
The dinner for the Sister city delegates has been scheduled for
6:30 p.m. at the Emporer's Garden, tomorrow night.
em staley commented that some of the delegates have indicated
that they would like the dinner to begin at 7:00 p.m. or 7:30 p.m.,
because of other commitments they have.
The City Manager stated that he would call and change the reserva-
tions to 7:00 p.m.
(S.P. Parking)
Mayor Tirsell wondered if the S.P. Development Company had re-
ceived a variance for the parking requirements in phase I of
the program.
Mr. Musso stated that they provided 3-1 parking for the grocery
store, and 2-1 parking for that portion in the CG area, and l-l
parking for the remainder of the site. In addition, Safeway will
have less than 3-1 when they put in the nursery. They do have
more than is required by the ordinance at this time.
Mayor Tirsell stated that perhaps the City should review the
parking requirements for the CB and CG areas. It is obvious
that there is not sufficient parking in that shopping center.
The staff was directed to ask the P.C. to review the parking
requirements and to inspect the phase II development and parking
area.
CM-32-330
June 14, 1976
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATIVE TO TRUCK ROUTES, WAS ADOPTED
BY THE CITY COUNCIL. (Cm Staley abstained from the vote.)
ORD. RE TRUCK ROUTES
ORDINANCE NO. 886
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 13.14, RE-
LATING TO TRUCK ROUTES, TO WEIGHT LIMITS,
AND EXCEPTIONS, OF CHAPTER 13, RELATING
TO MOTOR VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC, OF THE
LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 1959.
ORD. RE PURCHASING
PROCEDURES
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATIVE TO PURCHASING PROCEDURES
WAS ADOPTED. (Cm Staley abstained from the vote.)
ORDINANCE NO. 887
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER l7A, RE-
LATING TO PURCHASES, BY THE AMENDMENT
OF SECTIONS l7A.7, RELATING TO BIDDING,
l7A.lO, RELATING TO FORMAL CONTRACT PRO-
CEDURE, AND l7A.l4, RELATING TO PREFER-
ENCE TO LOCAL VENDORS, OF THE LIVERMORE
CITY CODE, 1959.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA, AND
THE ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATING TO PORTOLA
I-580 AREA WAS INTRODUCED AND READ BY TITLE ONLY.
abstained from the vote.)
INTRO. OF ZOo ORD. AMEND.
RB-PORTOLA/I-580 AREA
BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
AVENUE AND THE
(Cm Staley
ADJOURNMENT
ATTEST
Mayor Tirsell adjourned the meeting at 12:35 a.m. to an adjourned
regular meeti~gl ~t 7:00 p.~., June 21st, to discuss appointments.
APPROVE ~ ---rY\ % ~ ~li
Mayor
~ J ~c1 ~../l.cJ / '. /'
~f( J ~~~~
tC,J.ty Clerk
. i ve~ore, California
CM-32-33l
Adjourned Regular Meeting of June 21, 1976
An adjourned regular meeting of the Livermore city council was
held on June 21, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m.
with Mayor Tirsell presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Dahlbacka, Kamena, Turner, Staley and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: None
The purpose of the meeting was to discuss appointments.
By unanimous vote of the Council, the following appointments were
made to various committees:
Beautification
Committee
Joan (Tot) Green
Julia Estabrook
Robert DeSimon
JoAnn DeHart
Greens Committee - W. F. (Bill) Wolcott
Housing Authority - David Tritsch
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Tirsell adjourned the meeting at 7:15 p.m.
APPROVE
-1JJ~ ~)1~. ~U~
Mayor
ATTEST
~
CJ.ty C erk
Livermore, California
CM-32-332
Regular Meeting of June 21, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on June 21,
1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue.
The meeting was called to order at 8:05 p.m. with Mayor Tirsell
presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Dahlbacka, Kamena, Turner, Staley and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirsell led the Councilmembers as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES 6/7/76
P. 30l, 6th paragraph should read as follows: Cm Turner stated that
he is going to vote against making the repair. He cannot justify
spending additional money on that building. It is time that the
Council consider new housing quarters for the City employees.
P. 290, 4th paragraph, line 7 should begin: rights of an individual,
and legislative control over them, and he can understand....etc.
P. 282, last paragraph should read: Mayor Tirsel1 stated that this
would also be the end of the combining districts - highways with
CS Zoning.
P. 29l, second paragraph under Tract 1666 Item, should read: It
was noted that the applicant, David Madis, was in attendance and
did concur with the resolution.
P. 293, 5th paragraph should begin: Mayor Tirsell stated that the
staff knows almost every new fence being constructed...etc.
P. 293, last paragraph, line 3: would appear that any fence could
qualify for the finding mentioned in the motion.
P. 303, 5th paragraph from the bottom, second line should read:
in both methods and perhaps the Council should talk with former
Councilmembers...etc.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF JUNE 7, 1976, WERE APPROVED,
AS CORRECTED. (Crn Staley abstaining since he was absent at that
meeting.)
P.H. RE AMENDMENT TO
PARKING LOT SURCHARGE
A public hearing has been scheduled to receive public testimony con-
cerning the amendment to the parking lot surcharge.
Additional revenue will be expended by the County for the municipal
parking lot because of the added use of the lot by County vehicles.
Therefore, it is possible to reduce the business license surcharge
for the next fiscal year. The reduction will be from 79% to 58%
for the estimates on the south side of First Street, and from 142%
to 134% for all other businesses on First Street who pay into the
surcharge.
It is recommended that the Council adopt an ordinance establishing
the new business license surcharge, effective July 1, 1976.
CM-32-333
June 21, 1976
(P.H. re Parking
Lot Surcharge)
THERE BEING NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY, ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED
BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
CM TURNER MOVED TO INTRODUCE, READ BY TITLE, AND ADOPT THE ORDI-
NANCE ESTABLISHING THE NEW BUSINESS LICENSE SURCHARGE. MOTION
WAS SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
ORDINANCE NO. 888
AN URGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 623,
AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A
PARKING AND BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT AREA, TO AMEND
SECTION 4 THEREOF, RELATING TO THE ADDITIONAL
RATE OF TAX IN ZONES I AND II.
P.H. RE AMENDED
ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS
A public hearing was scheduled to hear testimony concerning the
proposed amended assessments for the Northern Sanitary Sewer
Assessment District, No. 1962-1, and the Northern Water Assess-
ment District, 1962-2.
THERE BEING NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY, ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED
BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTIONS AMENDING THE NORTHERN SANI-
TARY AND NORTHERN WATER ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS. MOTION WAS SECONDED
BY CM KAMENA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 137-76
RESOLUTION CONFIRMING AMENDED ASSESSMENT AMENDING
ASSESSMENT NO. C-6, ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 1962-1,
NORTHERN SANITARY SEWER ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, CITY
OF LIVERMORE, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
RESOLUTION NO. 138-76
RESOLUTION CONFIRMING AMENDED ASSESSMENT AMENDING
ASSESSMENT NO. C-6, ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 1962-2,
NORTHERN WATER ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, CITY OF LIVER-
MORE, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
COMMUNICATION RE ACAP
ADMINISTERING BOARD APPTS.
The Mayor stated that Mr. McKinley, the ACAP Legislative Analyst,
has made recommendations concerning the makeup of the Administering
Board.
Mayor Tirsell stated that as she recalls, when she and Cm Miller
set up the appointment system they did what ACAP is asking for
and this should be on record. Perhaps Cm Kamena could discuss
this item with former Cm Miller.
Mr. Parness stated that he believes the concern raised by Mr.
McKinley, is the overall structure of the ACAP grouping, as to
the Administering Board and the Governing Board. It is not
entirely in conformance with the federal statutes so there
must be some changes. ACAP is asking that the appointments
be done in accordance with the recognized arrangement.
CM-32-334
June 21, 1976
(ACAP Appointments)
Cm Kamena stated that all of the appointments have been made and
it is necessary that the Joint Powers Agreement revision be adopted
by the Board.
The item was noted for filing.
REPORT RE DANGEROUS
CONDITION OF SWIM CLUB
LOCATED ON BROADMOOR
A report was submitted by the Chief Building Inspector concerning
the dangerous condition of the swim club located at 1708 Broadmoor
and information concerning abatement procedure of a public nuisance.
Item was noted for filing.
REPORT RE FORMATION
OF UNDERGROUNDING DIST.
The Director of Public Works reported that the Council voiced approval
for formation of an Undergrounding District for Livermore Avenue but
requested a proposed construction schedule and locations for the
trenches for the project. He has submitted the summary of the pro-
posed scheduling and recommends that it be approved.
Dick Wright, from PG&E answered questions the Council had relative
to the scheduling and indicated that by December 17th all sub-
structures will be placed in the ground and by March 28th, 1977
they will be ready for the conversion to undergrounding. The
project should be complete by May 27, 1977.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM KM1ENA AND BY A 4-1 VOTE (Cm
Dahlbacka dissenting> A RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED SETTING UP THE UNDER-
GROUNDING DISTRICT AND APPROVING THE PROPOSED SCHEDULE.
RESOLUTION NO. 139-76
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING AN UNDERGROUND
DISTRICT ON NORTH AND SOUTH LIVERMORE
AVENUES BETWEEN FOURTH STREET ON THE SOUTH
AND CHESTNUT STREET ON THE NORTH.
REPORT RE CARD ROOM
PLAYER NUMBER REGULATIONS
A report from the Chief of Police indicated that a request has been
received from the operator of a local card room, to amend the City
Code to increase the number of card players from the existing seven,
per table, to eight.
The Police Department has no objection to a modification in the
Livermore City Code to allow for eight players at one card table.
The staff recommends that the Council adopt a motion instructing
preparation of an ordinance amending the Code to allow eight players
at one card table.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE AN AMENDMENT TO
THE CITY CODE, TO ALLOW EIGHT PLAYERS AT ONE CARD TABLE, AS REQUESTED.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY eM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM-32-335
June 21, 1976
REPORT RE AIRPORT
HANGAR CONSTRUCTION
The Director of Public Works reported that the City recently
solicited bids for 16 new T-hangars for the airport. The low
bid was $157,500.
Following the bid process, all local lending institutions _were
contacted concerning a 10 year loan and the most favorable inter-
est rate charged, was quoted by Wells Fargo Bank at 7% per year.
The hangars will be self-sustaining in their capital cost and
the City will receive $49,236 for rental of the hangars. The
City has received notice of interest from 70 plane owners and
38 letters of commitment are on file for the 16 hangars.
It is recommended that the council adopt resolutions authorizing
award of bid for the construction of the T-hangars and authoriz-
ing execution of the loan agreement.
It was noted that the 45 tie downs are being used for collateral,
in a sense, which Mr. Lee explained.
Mayor Tirsell wondered if the revenues for the new T-hangars
are calculated in the new budget, and Mr. Lee stated that they
have been included.
Cm Turner commented that Mr. Nolan and Mr. Lee should be congrat-
ulated for negotiating a very favorable loan package with Wells
Fargo.
ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, RESOLUTIONS WERE ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL AS RECOMMENDED BY
THE STAFF.
RESOLUTION NO. 140-76
A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID (Page Con-
struction and Lloyd Hunter)
RESOLUTION NO. 141-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
AGREEMENT (Wells Fargo Bank)
REPORT RE WORKMEN'S
COMPENSATION INSURANCE
COVERAGE
A report was submitted by the City Manager concerning a partial
self-insurance program for workmen's compensation insurance
coverage.
It is recommended that the Council adopt a motion authorizing
the staff to notify the State Workmen's Compensation Insurance
Fund of the intent of the City to cancel its current policy,
effective July I, 1976.
It is proposed that the City purchase an excess limit of $10,000,000
with a deductible being the liability of the City in the amount of
$100,000.
It is recommended that the staff also be instructed to prepare a
resolution authorizing the purchase of excess workmen's compensa-
tion insurance coverage in the amount of $lO,OOO,OOO from the State
CM-32-336
June 21, 1976
(City Self-Insurance)
Fund at the price quoted and to retain claims adjustment services
from the firm of ESIS.
CM STALEY MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO NOTIFY THE STATE FUND OF
THE CITY'S INTENTION TO CANCEL ITS CURRENT POLICY, BY JULY 1, 1976.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Cm Kamena noted that he would like workmen's compensation referred
to as, "worker's compensation", in the future.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
PURCHASE OF EXCESS WORKER'S COMPENSATION INSURANCE COVERAGE, AS
NOTED IN THE REPORT.
COMMUNICATION RE GRANT
FUNDING (LAVWMA LINE)
FOR INDUSTRIAL & FAIR
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Council has received a report for
information purposes only, concerning the request by a LAVWMA
representative to the State Board for grant funding of industrial
and Alameda County Fair capacity.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the request was not flatly denied and
the request will have to be made of the State Water Quality Control
Board in July or August.
Item was noted for filing.
It was noted that the letter relative to mitigation measures will
be sent as prepared, under the Mayor's signature.
The Director of Community Development has reported that he would
recommend approval of the application to HUD for Section 8 Rental
Assistance Payments for the Hillcrest Gardens.
REPORT RE HILLCREST
GARDENS RE RENTAL ASSIST.
The purpose of the Section 8 rental assistance payments is to reduce
rent payments for low income families and elderly persons, to 25%
of their income.
The Council voiced no objection to the application for rental
assistnace from HUD.
At the meeting of June 14th the Director of Public Works reported
that the total amount of funds allocated for the 1975-76 Street
Resurfacing Program were not expended because of a low bid and
that excess funds would allow for additional street work to be
done. He asked that the Council authorize execution of agreement
for additional street work. The Council approved the agreement
and bids have been received.
REPORT RE STREET
RESURFACING PROGRAM
The Council had asked that the item be delayed for discussion during
the budget study sessions.
The staff reports that the bid will expire about July 4th and the
present budget allotment would expire as of June 30. The budget
session is scheduled for June 26th for the Capital Improvement portion.
CM-32-337
June 21, 1976
(street Resurfacing Bid)
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AWARDING THE BID FOR THE
SLURRY SEAL PROJECT, BECAUSE STREET PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE IS
NECESSARY. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
RESOLUTION NO. 142-76
A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID
(Graham contractors, Inc.)
CONSENT CALENDAR
P.C. summary
of Action
The summary of Action for the P.C. meeting of June 15, 1976,
was submitted for informational purposes.
P.C. Response to County
Referral re EIR
A copy of the comments regarding the referral from the County re
the EIR for the l24lst Zoning Unit submitted by Chester L. Anderson
for rezoning in the portola Avenue area, was presented to the Council.
Res. Auth. Execution
of Bill of Sale
The Council adopted a resolution authorizing execution of bill
of sale regarding a manhole on East Avenue for future underground-
ing of utilities.
RESOLUTION NO. 143-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION
OF BILL OF SALE (PT&T)
Res. Rejecting
Claim (J. B. Bird)
A resolution was adopted rejecting the claim of John B. Bird,
Flying Chef.
RESOLUTION NO. 144-76
A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIMS
OF JOHN B. BIRD DBA THE FLYING CHEF
Res. Rej. Claim
- Paul W. Newkirk
The following resolution was adopted, rejecting the claim of
Paul W. Newkirk.
RESOLUTION NO. 145-76
A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF
~R'R'F,~'" w. N'F,WK:IRK ~!:; GUARDIAN AD
LITEM FOR PAUL W. NEWKIRK
CM-32-338
June 21, 1976
The Council adopted a resolution denying the appeal of Mr. and Mrs.
Steve Coronado for removal of two ancestral palm trees located at
740 South Livermore Avenue.
Res. Denying Appeal re
Removal of Trees (Coronado)
em Turner voted against the resolution denying the appeal.
RESOLUTION NO. l46-76
A RESOLUTION DENYING APPEAL FOR REMOVAL
OF ANCESTRAL TREES (Mr. and Mrs. Coronado)
Departmental Reports
The following departmental reports were received for informational
purposes.
Airport Activity - April and May
Building Inspection - May
Mosquito Abatement District - April
Municipal Court - April and May
Police Department - May
Water Reclamation Plant - May
Payroll & Claims
There were 98 claims in the amount of $128,577.05, dated June 15, 1976,
and approved by the City Manager.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED WITH CM TURNER VOTING AGAINST
RESOLUTION NO. 146-76.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(CBD Plan)
Mr. Parness reported that the planning consultant has the CBD
modifications ready. The plans will be delivered to the City this
week and the consultant will meet with the Council whenever they
wish to meet.
(re Ravenswood & LARPD)
LAPRD has scheduled a meeting with the architect, Mr. McCabe, for the
Ravenswood structure. The meeting will be next Monday at noon, and
the Council is urged to attend the meeting. They will be reviewing
the final plans and specifications for Ravenswood.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Assessments)
Cm Dahlbacka stated that it has been brought to his attention that
there is possible discrepancy in assessed valuations because some
homes are not updated equally. Homes that are sold are updated at
CM-32-339
June 21, 1976
(Assessments)
their present value, but a neighbor's home which may be the same
type of home is not updated at the same value. This amounts to
a type of "newcomer" tax.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he has heard that this is true and he
would like someone from the staff to look into it because this
would seem to be very inequitable.
Mr. Parness stated that he would disagree. He believes that
people receive higher assessments almost annually on the basis
of property transactions. The assessments for homes are fairly
accurate but it is the commercial properties that are not asses-
sed equitably.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he would like to have a presentation
from the Assessor as to how homes are assessed.
Mr. Parness stated that he would arrange to have the Assessor
explain the procedures, sometime in the fall.
(Restaurants with
Radar ovens)
Mayor Tirsell stated that she has been contacted by someone who
has a pacemaker and is afraid to eat in the restaurants in town
because of the use of radar ovens. Apparently, anyone within
close proximity of a radar oven can suffer heart pain or a seizure,
and she wondered if it would be possible to require restaurants with
radar ovens to post a sign on the door indicating this.
Mr. Parness stated that he would look into the possibility of the
placement of such signs, and will report back to the Council.
Mayor Tirsell stated that it might be pointed out to the restaur-
ant owners that if something happened to someone with a pacemaker,
while in their restaurant, that they might be liable.
(Sister City - Gift of
Hospital Supplies)
em staley stated that representatives of the Sister city of
Quezaltenango, as well as the Counsel from San Francisco, expressed
thanks to the ,City for sending hospital supplies after the recent
earthquake.
It was noted that though many things were sent, these were the
most needed and used and they were greatly appreciated.
ADOPTION OF ZOo ORD.
AMEND. RE PORTOLA AVE.
& I-580 REZONING
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZOo ORD. RE REZONING OF PORTOLA
AVENUE AND 1-580 AREA, WAS ADOPTED.
ORDINANCE NO. 889
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 442, AS AMENDED, OF THE
CITY OF LIVERMORE, BY AMENDING SECTION 3.00 THEREOF, RELATING
TO ZONING~ AND BY THE REPEAL OF CHAPTERS 14 AND IS, RELATING
TO "ID _ INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND ADMINISTRATION DISTRICT"
AND "1M _ INDUSTRIAL MANUFACTURING DISTRICT". (Portola Ave-
nue and 1-580)
CM-32-340
June 21, 1976
INTRO. OF ORD. RE
CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATIVE TO "CERTIFICATE
OF OCCUPANCY" WAS INTRODUCED AND READ BY TITLE ONLY.
INTRO. OF ORD. RE
UNCLAIMED PROPERTY
ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATIVE TO REPEAL OF THE
CURRENT SECTIONS CONCERNING UNCLAIMED PROPERTY, WAS INTRODUCED AND
READ BY TITLE ONLY.
ORD. AMEND. RE POLICY
RE REQUESTS FOR REZONING
& THE GENERAL PLAN
Mr. Musso asked that the item concerning the Zoning Ordinance amendment
to Chapter 30 concerning new pOlicy for requests for rezoning and the
General Plan, be postponed.
The Council concurred.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Tirsell adjourned the meeting at 8:35 p.m. to
session to discuss lit~q. ~~
APPROVE ~ .......,
Mayor Pro Tempore
ATTEST ~
. .. ]. ty Clerk
Li eilllore, California
an executive
-
----
CM-32-34l
Regular Meeting of June 28, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore city council was held on
June 28, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:05
p.m. with Mayor Tirsell presiding.
ROLL CALL
present: Cm Dahlbacka, Kamena, Turner, Staley and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirsell led the councilmembers as well as those present
in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
SPECIAL ITEM
- PROCLAMATION
Mayor Tirsell read a proclamation commending Rodney stribling for
saving the life of another human being in the vicinity of Shadow
Cliffs Park area on the morning of June 17th.
MINUTES 6/14/76
P. 309, 5th paragraph from the bottom, last line, place a period
after noise. Strike the remaining words in that line.
P. 322, 7th paragraph down, line 5 should read: is being given
to allowing a sign double its allowable size. This.....etc.
Last line should read: that he can't see that there is any
special circumstance here.
P. 316, 4th paragraph, line three should read: terrible access,
is surrounded by houses, and there is a major street...etc.
P. 32l, delete the third paragraph from the bottom.
P. 324, third paragraph, line 4 should begin: make a decision
will not make that much difference. (delete remainder of that
sentence)
P. 308, first paragraph under Scenic Highway Element should read:
Cm Turner stated that there is mention of a joint powers agreement
or some type of coordination of this plan, and he wondered if there
had been discussion as to how this might be implemented or how it
could be coordinated with the County.
P. 309, 4th paragraph from the bottom, should begin: Cm Turner
stated that he has some concerns with this report because even
though it is to be a guide, guidelines have a way of becoming
law....etc.
P. 316, first paragraph, line three, delete sentence after the
word problems.
P. 312, first paragraph, line 3 should read: of industrial
and County fair sewage...etc.
P. 315, 8th paragraph should begin: Cm Kamena stated it was
his understanding that the land would remain in its present
state until some group would organize and improve the site,
rather than a City initiated project.
CM-32-342
June 28, 1976
(Minutes - 6/14/76)
P. 317, 5th paragraph, 4th line should read: different from a
business in the CBD...etc.
P. 318, 4th complete paragraph down, line 7 should read: California
beautification plans. The small Holiday Inn great sign...etc.
P. 319, 6th paragraph, line 5 should read: this entire consideration
is a very expensive venture...etc.
P. 320, 6th paragraph, line 3 should begin: the ability to construct
a sign different in shape from the "great" sign. It could be 152 sq.
ft., conform to our ordinance, and be effective, with a 4' high script,
and could be seen l,920 ft. away with a rectangular sign shape of
approximately 6' by 26'. The Holiday Inn is requesting a size that
could be seen from only 1,584 ft. away, or .3 miles. Our present
ordinance, therefore, allows the sign to be seen from 336 lineal feet
farther back than the Inn's request.
P. 322, paragraph 2, add a sentence at the end of that paragraph to
read as follows: He was therefore not willing to pursue this type
of sign.
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF JUNE 14, 1976, WERE APPROVED
AS CORRECTED.
OPEN FORUM
(Roller King)
Bob Erickson, representing Roller King, stated that on July 6th he
will be asking the P.C. for a use permit to locate a Roller King in
Livermore. He stated that he would like to introduce himself to
the Council and explain that they would like to locate in Livermore
to provide clean fun and entertainment for people in Livermore.
He stated that in order to achieve their goal of clean fun they
maintain control of their operations and the people who use their
facilities, and they enforce a dress code.
They would like to get involved in the community because they
believe they would benefit and that Livermore would benefit.
(Holiday Inn Sign)
Bill Moore, representing Holiday Inn, asked that the Council reconsider
their appeal for a larger sign, based on new evidence and information
he has just presented to the Council.
Mayor Tirsell explained that it is Council policy that anything
brought to the Council during Open Forum is not decided on at that
time. It is possible that the Council might make an exception if
the majority of the Council wishes to discuss the item.
Cm Staley and Dahlbacka indicated that they did not receive a copy
of the letter which had the new information included.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Council has asked
the ordinance with respect to signs relative to
uses and make a recommendation to the Council.
has information he believes might influence the
Council.
the P.C. to review
highway oriented
Apparently, Mr. Moore
decision of the
CM-32-343
June 28, 1976
(Holiday Inn Sign)
Mayor Tirsell stated that the council has the option of consider-
ing the item this evening, placing it on the agenda for discus-
sion and letting the P.C. go ahead and work on the ordinance, or
to bypass the P.C. and make a decision.
Mr. Musso commented that the application is being held until
the P.C. makes a recommendation to the council concerning the
ordinance and signs for highway oriented uses. In effect, the
application has been tabled.
Mayor Tirsell stated that since the council policy is that there
will be no decision made on anything not listed on the agenda,
it would require a unanimous vote of the council to make an
exception and to discuss the item this evening.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he would like to have time to review
the information that has just been presented by Mr. Moore prior
to discussing the item/thuiCl~/~~. ~ /~(!, /UF~'
~,. ~-
Cm Turner stated that he believes f would be wrong to make an
exception to council policy by discussing the item tonight but
he would like to set the item on an agenda for discussion.
CM TURNER MOVED TO SET THIS ITEM ON THE JULY 12, 1976, AGENDA,
SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND PASSED 4-1 (Cm Dahlbacka dissenting) .
P.H. RE APPLICATION FOR
REZONING - HOLMES ST. &
MURRIETA BOULEVARD
Rezoning has been requested for property located at the corner
of Holmes street and Murrieta Boulevard from CP District to CO
District. The applicants are Arelene S. Sweedler, Burt Duke,
and Mike Johnson. A public hearing has been scheduled at this
time for the purpose of receiving public testimony concerning
the application.
Mr. Musso illustrated the location of the property and explained
the uses which are located in that area and adjacent to the
property for which the rezoning is requested. He explained that
the question is not one of whether the property should be com-
mercial, or not, but rather what type of commercial should be
allowed.
The property has gone from single family zoning, to multiple
zoning, and to CP zoning, in the past 14 years. The primary
difference in CP and CO zoning is the number and types of uses
which would be allowed. The CO allows a wider range of uses
and some of the uses almost go into retail, but not quite - a
pharmacy, for instance, would have some retail qualities that
would be allowed. Also, a bank or real estate office would be
allowed in the co Zone.
The P.C. feels that the area should be kept at a low level of
use and they believe the CP zoning will do this. The P.C.
recommends that the rezoning be denied. The CP Zone is restric-
ted to one story, and there is a minor difference in the setbacks.
Cm Turner stated that he would like an explanation of what a
low level use is, since this is what the P.C. wants to maintain
in that area.
CM-32-344
June 28, 1976
(P.H. re Rezoning App.
-Holmes & Murrieta)
Mr. Musso explained that the Planning Commission was looking at the
intent of the CP Zone, and this was to establish 'uses that would
be compatible with residential uses, which most professional offices
are.
em Turner stated that the CO District is designed to be a transitional
area between residential development and more intensive commercial
areas. Therefore, it would appear that the CO District would also
be compatible with the residential area.
Mr. Musso stated that both the CO and the CP districts have been
designed in this way and have been used adjacent to residential
areas. He then pointed out the areas which are CP and those which
are CO in the immediate vicinity of the property in question.
Keith Fraser, attorney representing Burt Duke and Mike JOhnson, the
intended developers of the property, stated that there have been
changes which have taken place since the P.C. meeting that may be
of importance to the Council in considering rezoning.
Mr. Johnson intends to use the major portion of the building to
be located on the site, for his real estate office, and Mr. Duke
intended to the the remainder of the building for his company, known
as Duke Interiors. At the P.C. hearing there was some concern over
Mr. Duke's quasi-retail use and Mr. Duke has now decided to find
other accommodations for his office. This may have been one of
the considerations in the denial of the application by the P.C.
Mr. Fraser stated that in the minutes of the P.C. there were con-
cerns expressed that lending institutions are not as anxious to
lend money for conditional uses and that this is one of the reasons
the rezoning is being requested. Also, there were objections raised
by the residents to the north of the property concerning the proposed
rezoning because CO zoning would permit a two-story building. The
applicants will agree to condition the rezoning to a one-story build-
ing, and the building would be subject to design review.
It has been noted in the P.C. minutes that CO Zoning requires a 1 acre
parcel of land unless it is contiguous to CN, CB, CH, or CG. Mr.
Fraser stated that he believes CP was omitted from the list.
Mr. Duke explained that at the time the CP Zone was created in the
ordinance he was on the Planning Commission. It was the intent of
the CP Zone to be a buffer between residential development and
intensive commercial because there were requests to extend "L"
Street out to the area which was known as Joesville at that time.
The CP was first used on "L" Street to provide the buffer between
the two uses - residential and commercial.
Mr. Duke stated that there is heavy traffic in the area of Murrieta
and Holmes Street and he believes the request for the rezoning from
CP to CO is quite reasonable. He can understand that the Council
is concerned about keeping that corner an attractive area but he
intends to have an attractive building on the site.
Dick Ryon, ll83 Glenwood Court, stated that he purchased his home
two years ago. Since his back fence abuts the property for which
the CO Zoning is being requested, he asked what could be developed
on the vacant lot. He was told that development would be for pro-
fessional offices of some type and he was satisfied that this use
would be compatible with residential and therefore purchased the home.
CM-32-345
June 28, 1976
(P.H. re Rezoning App.
_ Holmes & Murrieta)
Mr. Ryon stated that he has a considerable investment in his
home and he really objects to a change in the zoning of that
property behind his home. The building and use proposed is
not as objectionable as what could be permitted in a co Zone,
but often what is proposed and what actually develops are two
different things. Situations can change because sometimes busi-
nesses have difficulties and the applicant has indicated in other
discussions that a conditional use is not what they want. A con-
ditional use permit would impose conditions that could be allowed.
Mr. Ryon stated that the P.C. unanimously denied the application
for the rezoning and he would hope that this would carry some
weight in the Council's consideration of the application. He
added that after listening to the P.C. discussion of the applica-
tion he was more opposed to the rezoning than before he heard
any discussion.
Cm Staley asked which uses in the CO Zone Mr. Ryon would find
objectionable and Mr. Ryon stated that he is concerned with
the type of development that could take place in co. He is
concerned with the multi-story building that could be allowed
as well as the different setback requirement and the signs
allowed in the CO Zone. Also, the CP type of use would not
be doing business on weekends and at night and something like
a real estate office would.
Mr. Hale, 1170 Glenwood street, stated that he is also opposed
to rezoning of the property on Murrieta and Holmes Street and
that he has a vacant lot in back of his home and may one day
be in the same position as Mr. Ryon. He pays a high property
tax for the privilege of living where he does and he would
be very unhappy if any rezoning were to result in a loss of
property value in his area.
Al Goldberg, 1220 Glenwood Street, stated that he is also
opposed to the proposed rezoning and he believes that the
property is not large enough to accommodate people going to
a co business.
Mr. Musso stated that the ratio for parking is I-I for CO
and 3-2 for CPo
Mr. Goldberg stated that his concern is that a one-story build-
ing may go in that area now but later on someone may want a
two-story building which would be allowed in a co Zone.
James Jepson, 1177 Glenwood Court, stated that when he built
his home on that street they were somewhat in the country and
Valley Memorial Hospital was not built yet. There was nothing
around them in the way of office buildings or the hospital
facility. Things started changing and they didn't mind when
the hospital went in near them. Next, Murrieta Boulevard was
developed and from that time on the area has been going down-
hill, as far as he is concerned. He stated that he believes
development has to stop somewhere and he would like to see
things left as they are.
Mr. Fraser stated that he would like to comment that he believes
the parking would be more of a problem in a CP Zone because if
a doctor's office is located on the corner, people have to go to
the office. If it is a real estate office, the sales people go
to the customers to show homes.
CM-32-346
June 28, 1976
Cm Turner stated that he would like to know if the purpose of the
request for the rezoning is to satisfy the needs of Mr. Johnson for
a real estate office.
(P.H. re Rezoning App.
- Holmes & Murrieta)
Mr. Fraser stated that this is the reason for the request for the
rezoning.
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Cm Turner stated that in reviewing the categories listed for the
purposes of allowing certain uses in certain zones, a real estate
sales person is not listed in the category of professionals. If
the Council would reclassify the real estate sales person to include
them in the professional category, the requested rezoning would not
be necessary. The office could be developed on the site with the
existing CP Zoning.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that this could also be accomplished by means
of granting a CUP.
Mr. Musso expained that under our present ordinance a use permit
cannot be granted unless the ordinance is changed to include real
estate sales.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he would like to point out that this type
of problem is very common in rezoning applications. People wish to
condition a zoning application with the use and in his opinion it is
a mistake to condition rezoning. The point has been made that once
a zoning is allowed, it allows all things in that zone.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he beleives the best way to handle problems
such as this, is to go through the Conditional Use Permit procedure.
If there are no significant differences to the P.C. and the Council,
then construction can go ahead, to the standards of the CP Zone.
The standards for the CP Zone are more stringent and the reason they
are is for the protection of residential areas.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL UPHOLD THE RECO~lliENDATIONS OF
THE P.C., ACCEPT THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION, AND DENY THE APPLICATION
FOR THE REZONING ON THE BASIS OF THE FINDINGS MADE BY THE P.C. _
THE WHEREAS CLAUSES IN THE P.C. REPORT. MOTION SECONDED BY MAYOR
TIRSELL FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that there are significant differences in the
uses allowed in the two zones (CP and CO) not only from the stand-
point of construction and setback but also because the CO Zone would
allow business offices, public and quasi-public uses, research and
development laboratories, hospital, clinic, sanitariums, etc.
There is a larger class of uses in the CO Zone than is allowed in
the CP Zone and this location is adjacent to a residential area. It
deserves the bUffering treatment from the higher intensity uses allowed
in a CO Zone. He added that allowing a CO Zone would create a poten-
tial for greater traffic on an already congested corner. In his
opinion it would be best to maintain a zoning that would allow a
lower use potential in an area where there is such heavy traffic.
em Kamena stated that he works in the two-story building across
the street from this vacant property and he has the opportunity
to look at the property daily. He stated that the Council has
to assume that the plans presented by the applicant indicate what
would be developed if the rezoning were allowed, and he cannot see
how this would result in lowering the value of the residential area.
CM-32-347
"-~"--."------'-'-~~-'-
June 28, 1976
(P.H. re Rezoning App.
- Holmes & Murrieta)
em Staley stated that he would have to agree with em Kamena in
that the council should be able to have some faith in what people
say they are going to do. Both the CP and the CO are designed to
buffer residential and more intense uses.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she believes the offices are placed
into two different categories and zones because there are all
kinds of offices that are very commercial in nature and other
types of offices are professional in nature.
Cm Staley stated that he reads the ordinance as zoning existing
structures to CP to allow professional office buildings and that
CO zoning is designed for zoning of vacant spaces to buffer resi-
dential from more intensive uses.
em Dahlbacka stated that he would like to emphasize that he feels
it is a mistake to rezone on the basis of a stated use because all
kinds of things can happen. He has no doubt that the intentions
of the applicants are good but the same intentions can be met
under a CUP procedure, while retaining the present zoning. If
this procedure were followed and a CUP granted, everyone would be
happy. A rezoning would be risky and he would like to hear from
the City Attorney about zoning for a particular use.
The City Attorney commented that there are instances in which
conditional zoning can be done but generally this is because
there is an overriding public need. He used the example of the
rezoning of property located at Holmes street and Concannon where
Mr. Mehran received a rezoning, conditioned upon provision of traffic
signals at that intersection. In this case, there does not seem
to be an overriding public need for justifying a condition to
rezoning.
em Turner asked if it makes a difference if the applicant offers
to place a condition upon the rezoning, such as to build a single
story building.
Mr. Logan stated that the only problem is that if the building
is sold in a few years the new owner may decide to place another
story on the building and the new owner would not be bound by the
old agremeent if he could argue that the conditional zoning that
was attached to it, in the first place, was unlawful. Mr. Logan
stated that in his opinion this would be a good argument.
em Kamena stated that the concerns mentioned by people who object
to the rezoning are the following: l) traffic problems: 2) a multi-
story building that would be allowed in a co Zone; 3) use of CO
businesses during weekends and evenings; and 4) signing.
Discussion followed concerning these problems. Cm Kamena pointed
out that a variance was allowed for the two-story building acrosS
the street in the CP Zone, the traffic situation would be roughly
comparable: and physicians, etc., often return to the office to do
business during off-hours. The difference in signing is that of
being allowed to read a sign from a reasonable distance, or not
being able to read the sign from a reasonable distance, and other
than that, there is little difference in the signing allowed.
Mr. Goldberg stated that he would like to raise a point of order.
Is it possible that Cm Kamena has a conflict of interest because
he owns and leases property in the vicinity of the property?
Mr. Logan stated that if this property could affect his financial
interest by $l,OOO or more, he may have a conflict of interest.
If not, there is no conflict of interest. However, it should be
noted that Cm Kamena has an interest in the property across the
street.
CM-32-348
June 28, 1976
Cm Kamena noted, for the record, that 1171 Murrieta is the location
of his office. He not only leases the office but owns a portion of
the entire bUilding. He has no financial interest at all with any
of the applicants.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she is disappointed that the Council is
discussing rezoning for a particular use rather than looking at the
zoning as it should be. She stated that the P.C. voted unanimously
to oppose the rezoning and the discussion this evening indicates a
disrespect for the P.C. and planning principles.
Cm Staley stated that he would disagree that this would be zoning
by application. What he is saying is that he cannot see that the dis-
tinction between the CP and the CO is great. This is the primary
reason he is not voting in favor of the motion. Secondly, nobody
has answered what he said was the reason for the CP and CO.
(P.H. re Rezoning App.
- Holmes & Murrieta)
Mayor Tirsell stated that she beleives one of the prime reasons for
the distinction between CO and CP is to keep realty offices out of
professionally zoned areas. A realty office is an office that is
much busier than any other kind of office, and particularly on
weekends.
MOTION PASSED 3-2 (Cm Staley and Turner dissenting).
Cm Turner stated that he would like to say he is disappointed that
the Mayor would imply that he is disrespectful of the P.C. and the
Mayor explained that she was referring to the discussion on this item
only.
A response to the City's comments concerning the draft EIR of the
Chester Anderson property located at Portola and I-580, was received
from the BAAPCD.
COMMUNICATION RE DRAFT
EIR OF ANDERSON PROPERTY
(Portola/I-580 Area)
The letter was noted for filing.
COMMUNICATION FROM LAVWMA
RE PUBLIC REVIEW OF PRO-
JECT REPORT
LAVWMA has indicated, by letter, that the project report for the
LAVWMA program has been filed with all agencies. A summary report
will be distributed to the Council for informational purposes.
The item was noted for filing.
The Council received a draft statement from LAVWMA, formalizing
the proposed mitigation measures associated with the LAVWMA
project. The statement is requested by the EPA.
COMMUNICATION FROM LAVWMA
RE MITIGATION MEASURES
FOR SECONDARY IMPACTS
Mayor Tirsell stated that A. 4, on Page 2, there should be word-
ing that reflects that the City encourages the use of the William-
son Act and that the City has its own preserve procedure.
CM-32-349
June 28, 1976
(Comm. From LAVWMA re
Mitigation Measures)
Mr. Parness stated that the City could add that, alternately, within
the incorporated bounds, there are provisions which conform.
On Page 5, G. 8, it is mentioned that the city encourages the use
of the Williamson Act, and she requested that the wording suggested
by Mr. Parness be included with this item also.
Also, it should be mentioned that the community Development Office
is used as a means of getting industry.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE INFORMATION WILL BE FORWARDED TO THE EPA.
COMMUNICATION RE PRO-
POSED ROLLER SKATING RINK
A letter was received from Judy Firneno requesting that the
council approve the application for a roller skating rink
in Livermore.
Letter was noted for filing.
REPORT FROM PLANNING
DIRECTOR RE SITE PLAN
APPROVAL REVOCATION
The Planning Director reported that DeVengenzo Landscaping re-
ceived a 90 day extension on his site plan approval to allow
compliance with the permit requirements. The requirements in-
clude a property grant along Vasco Road frontage and bonding
for the improvement requirements. The applicant has not com-
plied with the requirements and the permit expires June 28th.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the City has written letters to the
applicant, he did not respond to the letters, did not attend
the P.C. meeting when the item was discussed and is not present
this evening in spite of two notifications.
No action is required on the part of the Council, the permit
will expire June 28, 1976.
RECESS
Mayor Tirsell called for a brief recess after which the council
meeting resumed with all members of the council present.
REPORT RE PARCEL
MAP 1936 (R. Shaheen)
A report from the public works Director indicated that Mr. Roger
Shaheen recently created new parcels at the south end of Research
Drive with Parcel Map 1597 and the public works improvements are
nearly complete.
The owner would like approval of parcel Map 1936 for the creation
of one additional industrial lot on Research Drive, in the area
of Parcel Map 1597. It is recommended that a resolution be adopted
authorizing the Director of public Works to sign Parcel Map 1936
for recording, subject to engineering considerations which have
been prepared in writing, and after the developer has made the required
submittals.
CM-32-350
June 28, 1976
(Report re Parcel
Map 1936 (R. Shaheen)
The City Attorney stated that a resolution can be prepared by direc-
tion of the Council, but he would like all of the conditions as
set forth in the engineering considerations, to be included in the
resolution.
CM TURNER MOVED TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE A FAVORABLE
RESOLUTION. FOR THE MEETING OF JULY 12, MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM
STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. (Cm Dahlbacka abstained from
voting on the motion.)
The Director of Public Works reported that the purpose of Parcel Map
1879 is to alter property lines of Parcel A, in order to allow greater
setback from a building that is presently being constructed. The
effect of the parcel map is to create Parcel C, which is presently
undeveloped but is planned for development by Mr. Tantivongsathaporn.
REPORT RE PARCEL MAP 1879
Normally, public works improvements are required when a parcel abuts
a. public street but the developer has asked that the improvements
not be required at this time because improvements will be constructed
at the time Mr. Tantivongsathaporn develops.
The Council has the option to require construction of the public
works improvements along First Street, or to require installation
of the public works improvements adjacent to Parcel C, in accordance
with City specifications.
The staff recommends that the City not require the improvements at
this time and that the developer be allowed to bond for them and
delay installation for a period of one year with the provision that
they be installed upon development of Parcel C.
em Turner stated that the pUblic works improvements were required,
originally, and he sees no reason to change the requirement. If
they are installed then everything will be taken care of and there
will be no problem.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ACCEPT ALTERNATE "B" TO REQUIRE THE INSTALLATION
OF THE PUBLIC WORKS IMPROVEMENTS ADJACENT TO PARCEL "C", IN ACCORD-
ANCE WITH CITY SPECIFICATIONS. MOTION SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL.
Mr. Hutka, the developer, explained that a CUP has been approved
for Parcel "C", and to transfer the property there must be a map
filed. In order for Mr. Tantivongsathaporn to get his bUilding
permit, he must file a parcel map and that is the reason the parcel
map is in front of the Council.
When Mr. Tantivongsathaporn gets a building permit he is required to
install the public works improvements as a condition of his bUilding.
Mr. Hutka stated that he has to put in public works improvements
before he can transfer the property to Mr. Tantivongsathaporn.
If the Council requires the public Works improvements before
the map is approved, there is a problem because he cannot trans-
fer the property until the map is filed. In the past the Council
has always required the public works improvements at the time of
the bUilding permit.
Mr. Lee explained that if the motion passes, the public works will
not have to be installed before a parcel map is filed. The developer
would bond for the improvements - the City doesn't care who bonds
for the improvements, it could be done by the new owner. Mr. Hutka
can go ahead and file the parcel map and transfer Parcel "C" to Mr.
Tantivongsathaporn.
CM-32-35l
June 28, 1976
(Rpt re Parcel Map 1879)
Mr. Butka stated that he will not bond for another person's property.
Mr. Tantivongsathaporn will be improving it as part of his improve-
ments. If Mr. Hutka has to bond for it then he may as well not
sell the property at all. Every time a piece of property is to be
sold the City is going to require the public works and the seller
is going to have to do all the public works improvements. This
has not been the City's policy in the past.
Discussion followed concerning the improvements and which party
should be responsible for the public works improvements.
em Turner wondered what the policy has been and Mr. Lee stated
that he knows of no instance in which the public works improve-
ments have not been required. They were required in the indus-
trial area owned by Mr. Shaheen, they were required along Mines
Road in Mr. Hutka's area, and they were required of the S.P.
subdivision that was to have been developed.
Mr. Hutka stated that at the time of the sale of property to
Mr. Shaheen by Mr. Bloxham for the industrial park, the public
works improvements were not required. They were not required
until the time Mr. Shaheen began development.
Mr. Lee explained that Mr. Shaheen was required to install
the public works improvements for the entire parcel at the
time the first lot was developed.
em Turner stated that he would be sorry to jeopardize the project
but according to what the Director of Public Works has said, the
City is following the procedure which has always been used.
Mr. Hutka stated that there is a misunderstanding over this
issue, and he feels that the council doesn't understand what
Mr. Lee is saying. There is a misunderstanding over splitting
of a parcel. When a parcel is split, all of the improvements
are not developed, when the owner does not intend to develop
it. Mr. Hutka stated that he does not intend to develop parcels
but Mr. Tantivongsathaporn does and at the time he does then the
public works improvements should be required.
Mayor Tirsell stated that if this is the case then Mr. Tantivong-
sathaporn need only post the bond for the improvements.
Mr. Hutka stated that when someone is purchasing property they
are generally not able to get an additional $20,000 for a bond.
He added that he wants to sell the property and he would like
to file a map.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the issue is very clear. Everything is
in writing and all the City wants is a bond for the public works
improvements.
Mr. Hutka asked if it is a condition of the Map Act to post a bond
when parcels are split.
Mr. Logan stated that he is not in a position to comment on the intent
of the Map Act. He would advise that if Mr. Hutka wants to raise this
issue that he obtain legal counsel. He added that it is allowable -
it can be required at the time of filing of the map, or at the time
of issuance of the building permit.
Mr, Logan pointed out that the council is not approving a parcel map
this evening, and at best, the council is giving some preliminary con-
sideration of what the council might do if the parcel map comes before
the council for approval.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM-32-352
June 28, 1976
The Director of Public Works reported that as a result of the current
budget process it has been necessary to review and recommend adjust-
ments in the current fees and charges assigned at the municipal airport.
A written report has been submitted to the Council listing the present
rate as well as the proposed rates, to be effective July 1, 1976.
REPORT RE AIRPORT
RATES & CHARGES
It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing
adjustment in rents and charges, effective July 1, 1976.
Olaf Landeck, owner of Landeck Aviation at the airport, stated that
they are referred to in the budget as the fixed base operator (FBO).
At present they pay the City about $11,000, and the proposal by Mr.
Lee would mean an additional $4,000 which they would have to pay
the City, or roughly 40% increase. He stated that they cannot pass
the increase to their customers because they are already charging
what the traffic can bear.
The City is suggesting that they pay 75% of the markup for the fuel
and they are presently paying 49% of the markup. Their contract
indicates that they should pay no more than 40% of the markup.
The 49% is excessive and the 75% proposed, is outrageous.
Apparently there is some question as to the validity of the two
pages of the lease which refers to the 40% markup and the Council
can either vote on the 40% markup, which was the intent and purpose
of the two pages, or the Council can wait until the City Attorney
finds out how the two pages came about and the purpose and intent.
Mr. Lee stated that the FBO has been enjoying a very low markup for
an extended period of time and, in fact, during that time the cost
of living index has gone up SUfficiently to bring the amount
up to the recommended 75% markup price. Rates have been going up
for other users of the airport because of inflationary costs.
The Airport Committee and Mr. Lee discussed what a fair price would
be for a bulk user and it was concluded that 75% would be a fair
amoun t .
Mr. Landeck has copies of a lease draft that was prepared and never
signed several years ago. At one time the FBO had questioned the
City's right to limit the sale of gas. The FBO wanted the privilege
of selling gas and challenged the lease agreement. During
the discussions several drafts were developed as possible agree-
ment modifications the Council might consider. The pages of the
lease Mr. Landeck is referring to are not part of a signed lease. It is
just a piece of paper with no legal status.
Cm Turner stated that he would like to ask Mr. Zagotta, of the
Airport Committee one question. Did the Committee investigate
the cost to an FBO at other airports?
Mr. Zagotta stated that the Committee did not look into this
question, specifically.
em Turner wondered if the increased cost of fuel is passed to
the user, and Mr. Zagotta indicated that it is. However, the
City's markup has not been following the cost percentage of the
cost of fuel. The purpose of the change would be to base the
markup on the consumer price index, so as expenses rise, the
revenues will go up at the same time.
Mr. Zagotta noted that the report by Mr. Lee fairly summarizes
the opinion of the Airport Committee concerning the rates and
charges proposed for the airport.
CM-32-353
June 28, 1976
(Report re Airport
Rates & Charges)
MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ADJUST-
MENT IN THE RENTS AND CHARGES AT THE AIRPORT, EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 1976.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
Cm Turner stated that he' will vote for the motion because he be-
lieves the .
75% cost of the markup to the FBO is reasonable. ~~
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 147-76
A RESOLUTION ADJUSTING RATES AT THE
LIVERMORE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
REPORT RE AIRPORT
RESTAURANT LEASE
Mr. Parness reported that the current airport restaurant lessee,
the Crosswinds Corporation, has been negotiating with prospective
successor firms. Of those who have indicated interest, the Cross-
winds is proposing that the lease be transferred to the Red Baron
Steak House. Transfer of the lease would require approval of the
City Council.
The staff recommends that subject to checking that everything
is in order, the Council adopt a motion indicating its approval
of the proposed lease transfer and instructing the staff to pre-
pare the necessary lease amendments and a resolution authorizing
its execution.
Mr. Parness stated that the City has received an application for
a lease transfer, pending approval and granting of the transfer
by the Council. The prospective new lessee would be the Red Baron
Steak House which is a chain with headquarters located in southern
California.
Mr. Parness has been provided a great deal of information by the
prospective lessees as to their credit standing and business oper-
ations, and he has done considerable checking about them. They
are presently located in six places in California. He has spoken
with representatives from each of the six jurisdictions about
their facilities and maintenance, etc., and with moderate excep-
tion, have found the reports to be quite good, and their credit
rating is exceptionally high.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that in light of the City'S experience with the
restaurant at the airport in the past, is there any way the City
can be assured that the agreement will be executed and, if not, is
there a way the City could recover any losses?
Mr. Parness stated that the difference in this case is that the
former lessee, Mr. Casey, is asking that the entire lease be trans-
ferred to the new firm. The former application was to approve sub-
leasing. There is quite a difference in a sublease and transfer of
a lease.
In the event Mr. Casey does not go through with the arrangement, he
has a very brief remaining term under the lease. In the event he
does not comply with the lease, the lease would be defaulted.
CM-32-354
June 28, 1976
(Report re Airport
Restaurant Lease) ~..11
Cm Turner stated that at one time Mr. Casey came to the co>>nc~~~
asking that he be allowed to sublease to Mr. Gentile~wa~concerned
about their financial ability to operate the restaurant. It is very
important that a business have capital backing O~ial~
ability to conti~~~~~ ~ndly, that they~~ City the
type of operatio~~-a~ires1rt:the airport. He is not completely
comfortable that this is possible and he has not had the opportunity
to review any financial statements or any information about the appli-
cant and he would like to ask the Council if they would consider a
two week delay until these items have been reviewed. This is a very
critical time for the airport and golf course.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he is personally familiar with the Red
Baron Steak House chain, and he found this to be a very nice chain
of restaurants.
Mr. Casey, representing the Crosswinds Corporation, stated that
they have made some mistakes out there, but they have paid over
$lOO,OOO to the City, in rent.
At this time the Crosswinds Corporation has a signed agreement
with the Red Baron Steak House, contingent upon City Council
approval. The financial statements have been reviewed by the Director
of Finance as well as the City Manager. They have been in business
for 17 years, their corporation is successful and they are contin-
uing to grow. He would hope that the Council will not choose to
delay approval of the application.
Cm Kamena stated that he understands that the Crosswinds Corporation
may continue to operate the coffee shop, and Mr. Casey indicated that
this is correct, it is a fairly simple type of operation.
Mark Ricert, representing Red Baron Steak House, stated that he
would be happy to answer any questions the Council might have re-
garding the operations.
Cm Kamena asked why the Red Baron Steak House would be interested
in a transfer of the lease at this time, when the lease would default
in the very near future anyway, and the Red Baron Steak House could
negotiate its own lease.
Mr. Richert stated that they could wait until the lease went into
default, but if this were to happen there would probably be four
or five other restaurant operators who would want to locate at the
airport and they feel they would not be in as good a negotiating
position as they are at this time.
Mr. Richert indicated that they do not want to get into a bidding
position because, for example, they lost a bid for a restaurant
in San Diego because they do not serve breakfast. The present
type of operation is similar to the type of operation they have
and they believe it would be suitable and they would like to
have the lease transferred now.
He explained that they hope to attract families who go to dinner
a couple of times a week and then go back home. They have some
entertainment with a limited space for dancing. This type of
arrangement has never created problems in any of their other
locations.
Mr. Parness assured the Council that the staff has been very cautious
in checking the company and he has been furnished a financial state-
ment which has been reviewed in some detail. He has also spoken
with one of the lending institutions that researched the company
in great depth. Their company has received nothing hut the highest
praise concerning their credit standing.
Mayor Tirsell asked if the City Manager is satisfied that transfer
CM-32-355
June 28, 1976
(Report re Airport
Restaurant Lease)
of the lease agreement would be in the best interest of the city
and Mr. Parness indicated that he is.
Mr. Parness explained that there are some modifications proposed
for the lease agreement because of the experience the city has
had with the former lessee. The term to declare default will be
shortened, considerably, and in the event required paYments are
not made within the requisite time, that penalties be assessed.
Also, the City will have the right to review the gross paYments
every five years. The amount of gross paYments will be based
upon what is being paid in the Bay Area community.
em Dahlbacka wondered what happened to the sublease agreement
with Mr. Casey and Mr. Parness indicated that there never was
an agreement because the Tailwinds could not come to terms with
the Crosswinds corporation.
In answer to questions posed by em Kamena, Mr. Richert stated
that they will hire local people with a trained manager from
another area, they plan to spend about ~40,000 on renovation
of the restaurant, they will provide a separate banquet room
and a salad bar, and they hope to be ready to serve people in
about 30 days. There will be a manager as well as a general
manager who visits each restaurant at least one day every month
and a manager will be present at all times.
Cm Turner stated that after hearing everything the City Manager
has said he is satisfied that the company would be acceptable.
CM TURNER MOVED TO APPROVE THE LEASE TRANSFER AND TO INSTRUCT
THE STAFF TO PREPARE THE NECESSARY LEASE AMENDMENTS AND RESOLU-
TION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF THE LEASE. SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND
ACCEPTANCE BY THE CITY ATTORNEY. MOTION SECONDED BY
MAYOR TIRSELL.
The city Attorney stated that he does not want the Council to
make an assignment until the City knows who will enter into
the lease, and when they will enter into it. He is concerned
about the fact that they have entered into a contract for sale,
based on a presently existing lease that the City intends to
amend.
em staley stated that he believes the motion should include that
the directions to the staff include that this be subject to further
negotiations with the staff.
Cm Turner indicated that this is the sense of the motion.
Cm staley stated that he would really like to see the terms spelled
out.
Mr. Parness explained that the changes will be very minor. They
have been discussed with Mr. Casey as well as the lessees, and
everyone is satisfied with the changes.
The city Attorney stated that his concern is that he does not know
who is going to enter into the quasi-amended lease, and if it is
assigned, it is assigned subject to the existing lease. He would
not suggest that the Council approve an assignment based on the
existing lease if the City wants to make some amendment in the
procedural provisions of the lease.
CM-32-356
June 28, 1976
(Report re Airport
Restaurant Lease)
Mr. Casey stated that they have the right to assign the lease,
subject to Council approval.
Mr. Logan stated that this is correct but any mechanical change
would require a lease amendment. There has been no lease amendment
and he does not know anything about the amendment or what kind of
arrangements were discussed with the City Manager.
Mr. Casey stated that if the lease can be modified and he can
it before it is transferred, he would be willing to do this.
ever is necessary, he will comply, because it is a matter of
a change in the mechanics, only.
sign
T'Yhat-
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Council is happy with the suggested
changes and she would suggest that Mr. Casey meet with the City
Manager and the City Attorney in the morning to discuss the legal
procedures that must be followed.
MOTION WAS WITHDRAWN AND THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO PREPARE THE
NECESSARY LEASE AMENDMENTS AND RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION
OF THE LEASE, SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY THE CITY ATTORNEY.
REPORT RE EMERGENCY
AMBULANCE SERVICE AGREE.
The City Manager provided a written report concerning emergency
ambulance services for the Valley, as well as the cost. The City
of Livermore has been working with the City of Pleasanton, Alameda
County and Valley Memorial Hospital, for providing emergency
ambulance services~ The cost during the four year term of the
agrement has risen from $700 per agency to $1,600.
Alameda County Emergency Medical Services has been preparing an
emergency ambulance services plan for the County which was financed
by a federal grant. Two primary facets of the study are emergency
ambulance services and centralized dispatching. The plan was approved
by the Council and the contractural arrangement is based upon a bidding
process.
Bids were solicited, and regrettably, only one proposal was received
from the same firm that has been servicing our city for the past
three years (Tri Cities Ambulance, Inc.).
The County Board of Supervisors has approved the emergency ser-
vices contract and has agreed to assume all of the costs for dry
run services, as of January, 1977. This will result in a substan-
tial savings to our City.
The contract will take effect July 1, 1976, and it is recommended
that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing execution of the
agreement.
Cm Turner stated that it is mentioned in the agreement that the
City shall maintain the capability of responding to 90% of the
emergency calls and he would like to know how this can be monitored.
Mr. Parness stated that the monitoring of the program will be done
by Alameda County.
em Turner stated that there is to be backup of emergency ambulances
to adjacent zones and he wondered what the history has been in
trading off backup service.
CM-32-357
June 28, 1976
(Rpt re Emer. Ambulance
Service Agree.)
Mr. Parness stated that the city has never had an adjoining zone.
This arrangement is something new. The adjoining zone will be
Zone 4, which is the tri-cities area. The contractor (Tri cities
Ambulance) will also service the adjoining areas.
Cm Turner stated that the contract indicates that the administra-
tor may inspect the ambulance units at any time without prior
notice and he would like to know how often ambulances are
inspected and the results of the inspections.
Mr. Parness stated that presently VMH is the coordinating
agency and he believes they have been careful to check the
equipment and to see that it was properly maintained. Under
this arrangement the coordinating agency will be the County.
Discussion followed concerning the contract agreement and Mr.
Parness noted that the City is obligated to pay for only 360
emergency calls per month at $50 per call, and this would be
divided among the three agencies.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that the next item on the agenda has to do
with approving acceptance of three emergency vehicles and if
the council approves, would the City be forced to subsi-
dize the ambulance company if the emergency calls for that
company are reduced.
Mr. Parness explained that the vehicle would be a rescue
vehicle - not an ambulance. It will be used only in the
event a backup service is needed for an emergency type of
situation in which all the equipment is being used.
In that case, the fire department will respond with the rescue
vehicle.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION
OF THE AGREEMENT. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED
BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 148-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREE-
MENT (County of Alameda).
REPORT RE ACQUISITION
OF EMERGENCY VEHICLE
The City Manager reported that as a part of the emergency services
plan of the County, federal funds have been allowed for the purchase
of emergency vehicles, one of which may be assigned to the Livermore
Fire Department.
The County has inquired as to our interest in receiving one of the
rescue vehicles for housing and permanent use by the Fire Department
and it is recommended that the Council adopt a motion authorizing
acceptance of the vehicle. Several Fire Department employees have
accumulated some of the training required for qualifying as medical
technicians but it will be necessary to train additional personnel
to man the vehicle. This will be a cost obligation to the City
but it is felt that the public advantages are significant.
CM TURNER MOVED TO APPROVE ACCEPTANCE OF THE VEHICLE, SECONDED BY
CM STALEY, WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM-32-358
June 28, 1976
The Community Development Director prepared a written report, for
informational purposes only, concerning the feasibility of establish-
ing a publicly sponsored local development corporation for the purpose
of assisting in the development of industry.
REPORT RE LOCAL
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
The report was noted for filing, and em Dah1backa stated that he was
very pleased with the information.
REPORT RE AUTOMATIC
CROSSING PROTECTION
AT ilL" STREET
The Director of Public Works reported that in 1975 the Council execu-
ted a local/state agreement for crossing protection at "L" Street
and Western Pacific Railroad. This was Agreement #1, Supplement #l.
In March, 1976, Supplement #2 provided for protection at Junction
Avenue, and Supplement #3, which is recommended at this time, would
provide for protection at ilL" for the Southern Pacific Railroad cros-
sing.
The agreement provides for 90% federal funding and 10% local funding.
The cost to the City would be $2,980 of the total $29,800. It is
recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing execu-
tion of the agreement.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE COUNCIL ADOPTED A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION
OF AGREEMENT.
RESOLUTION NO. l49-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREE-
MENT (State of California Department of
Transportation)
CONSENT CALENDAR
Res. Transferring Funds
The Council adopted a resolution transferring funds. This is an
annual procedure and all are in compliance with the current fiscal
year budget.
RESOLUTION NO. 150-76
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING
TRANSFER OF FUNDS
Report re Munici-
pal Code Printing
The City Clerk reported that the Municipal Code printing contract
is proposed for renewal which provides for the printing of inserts
to the Code. The printing rate for the contract renewal has in-
creased 50~ per page.
The Council adopted a resolution authorizing execution of the
agreement.
CM-32-359
June 28, 1976
RESOLUTION NO. 151-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
AGREEMENT (Municipal Code corporation)
Resolutions of
Appointments
The Council adopted resolutions appointing members to the Beautifica-
tion Committee, the Housing Authority, and the Greens Committee.
RESOLUTION NO. 152-76
APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS TO THE BEAUTIFICATION
COMMITTEE (Joan T. Green, Robert DeSimon,
Joanne DeHart and Julia L. Estabrook and
Ann Bradley, reappointed)
RESOLUTION NO. 153-76
APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER TO THE HOUSING AUTH-
ORITY (David Tritsch)
RESOLUTION NO. 154-76
APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER TO GREENS COMMITTEE
(W. F. Wolcott)
Res. Auth. Exec. of
Amend. to CETA Contract
A resolution was adopted authorizing execution of agreement be-
tween the City and the County concerning CETA, Title II funds.
RESOLUTION NO. 155-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREE-
MENT (Alameda County: Re Funding Under
CETA, Title II)
The resolution authorizes paYment for the CETA Title II employees
from July 1975 through September 30, 1976 in the amount of $15,600.
Report re occupancies
- Hutka Industrial Area
A report was submitted to the Council from the Planning Director
concerning uses presently occupying the buildings in the Hutka
industrial area on East First Street.
Report re storm Drain
Construction projects
The Director of Public Works submitted a list of the areas to be
included in the storm drain projects for 1976. The projects are
a part of the Master Plan for extending adequate storm drainage
facilities in the older areas of the City.
The Council authorized solicitation of bids for the projects.
CM-32-360
June 28, 1976
P.C. Minutes - 5/25/76
The Council received copies of the minutes for the P.C. meeting of
May 25, 1976. The minutes were noted for filing.
Res. re Employment
of Appraiser for the
Civic Center Site
The Council adopted a resolution authorizing appraisal of the property
in the area of the Civic Center site, for the purpose of possible
acquisition.
RESOLUTION NO. 156-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPRAISAL
OF REAL PROPERTY (Civic Center Expansion)
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Truck Routes)
Cm Turner stated that large trucks are seen in various areas and
he has talked with one of the policemen about this problem. It
was indicated that the problem with enforcement of the large
trucks on the streets is that weight signs are not posted for the
residential areas.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the City is preparing signs for the
truck routes and the trucks will have to stay on these routes
except for delivery into the residential areas only.
Mr. Lee was asked to explain to the jUdge that the City has adopted
a truck route and that signs will be posted.
Cm Turner explained that from Vasco Road, trucks go to Crestmont
and many of them park back by the swimming pool area. Signs should
be posted in this area.
(Speed Limit)
Cm Turner stated that there is no speed limit sign going out of
town, just past Sambo's Restaurant, and for this reason the speed
limit cannot be enforced.
The staff indicated that they would look into this matter. One
side of the road belongs to the County and the other side is in
the City limits.
(Rodeo Parade)
Cm Kamena stated that an inner-office memorandum from Carl Carlin
indicated that the City's contribution for the 1976 rodeo parade
amounted to $1,211.48, in the way of cleanup costs, etc. He asked
that the news media mention this so people would know that the City
did contribute to the cost of the parade.
CM-32-361
June 28, 1976
(EBRPD Land
Acquisition)
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he would like the Council to support the
East Bay Regional Park District's land acquisitions in the hills,
by sending a letter to them. He stated that he believes the
proposed acquisitions would eventually tie together Del Valle and
Camp Ohlone. This is an excellent opportunity that
should be taken advantage of.
The Council concurred.
(Transportation
Committee Report)
Mayor Tirsell stated that in the report from the Transportation
Committee, it was pointed that there are only eight months of
operational money left for the City's BART feeder bus. She
asked that the staff find out what this means.
Mr. Parness explained that unless state legislation is passed
for continued financing, all of the BART system will fold.
ORD. RE SURPLUS &
UNCLAIMED PROPERTY
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE ORDINANCE RELATING TO SURPLUS AND UNCLAIMED PROPERTY
AND REPEAL OF SECTION 20A, WAS ADOPTED.
ORDINANCE NO. 890
AN ORDINANCE REPEALING SECTIONS 20A.10 THROUGH
20A.l4 OF CHAPTER 20A, RELATING TO SURPLUS AND
UNCLAIMED PROPERTY, OF THE LIVERMORE MUNICIPAL
CODE, 1959.
ORD. RE RULES & REGULA-
TIONS RE CARD ROOMS
ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY, AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT REGARDING RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR
CARD ROOMS WAS INTRODUCED AND READ BY TITLE ONLY.
ADJOURNMENT
session
meeting at 11:10 p.m. to an executive
igation.
APPROVE
ATTEST
" ~ Pro Tempore
~
I . ,
~ r-
J . -. C1ty l:lerk
Livermore, California
CM-32-362
Regular Meeting of July 12, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
July 12, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:10
p.m. with Mayor pro tempore Turner presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Dahlbacka, Turner and Staley
Absent: Mayor Tirsell and Cm Kamena (Seated later)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor pro tempore Turner led the Councilmembers as well as
those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
Cm Kamena seated at this time.
MINUTES 6/21/76
and 6/28/76
P. 344, 4th paragraph, after the last word add the following:
and to receive the P.C. report.
P. 355, 2nd paragraph, in second line, strike the word very.
P. 354, 2nd paragraph should read: Cm Turner stated that he
will vote for the motion because he believes the 75% cost of the
markup to the FBO is reasonable.
P. 355, line 2 should read: asking that he be allowed to sub-
lease to Mr. Gentile, and Cm Turner was concerned...etc.
line 5 should read: ability to continue, and secondly, that
they provide the type of operation the City desires at the
airport. etc.
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF JUNE 21,
WERE APPROVED AS SUBMITTED AND THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING
OF JUNE 28, WERE APPROVED, AS CORRECTED.
Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that a public hearing has
been scheduled to hear public testimony on the 1976-77 budget
and asked that speakers limit their comments to 5 minutes.
P.H. RE 1976-77 BUDGET
Bill Bennett, 30 year Livermore resident, stated that he can
appreciate the fact that the Council and staff have been work-
ing on the budget in good faith to create a City of which every-
one can be proud. However, he is concerned about the decision
by the City concerning the 8% surcharge and for the future of
the airport. He stated that the airport is a guest of the City
and that the land was purchased for only $1 but parlayed into
$2 million and has not been a cost to the citizens or to the
City. The airport has actually generated $10,000 which has
been placed in the General Fund.
Mr. Bennett stated that the City plans to increase the administra-
tive charge and the County has also increased the assessments.
Each owner of a plane will be assessed $171 to cover the administra-
tive charges. He mentioned that money will be available to cities
at a ratio of 9-1 through a bill which has just been signed by
President Ford for development of airports and acquisition of air-
port land. $5.5 billion will be contributed by airplane users.
CM-32-363
July 12, 1976
P.H. re 1976-77 Budget)
Cm Dahlbacka stated that in previous testimony he understood that
the ratio would be 5-1. If what Mr. Bennett is saying is correct
it would mean that the City could purchase $lOO,OOO worth of clear
zone property and open space with the $10,000 from the General Fund.
He stated that he is in favor of changing the surcharge and leaving
the money in the General Fund on the basis of the fact that the money
can be put to good use for the City.
Cm Staley commented that he believes as fair an allocation as possible
has been made for the current year and there is no way to increase
the allocation for the airport without increasing the burden on the
other municipal enterprises.
Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that the Council majority agreed that
the surcharge should be imposed for the current year but that the
Council would discuss surcharges with the various committees in the
next three or four months.
Mr. Bennett stated that his complaint is that a few people are paying
money into the General Fund for use of the airport which will benefit
the whole community. If, for example, everyone in Livermore had to
pay a higher water rate for additional revenue for the General Fund,
it would be more equitable. It was assumed that the increase in hangar
rates, etc., would go into airport development.
steve Patenaude, junior member of the Airport Advisory Committee,
stated that in the past 10 years the airport has been self-supporting.
In the next 10 years it will be facing pressures from urban encroach-
ment, noise abatement procedures and additional regulations. The
members of the Airport Advisory Committee feel they have been betrayed
and urge that the Council reconsider the reinstatement of the surcharge.
The users of the airport must ultimately pay for the surcharge and if
caution is not taken, Livermore may price itself out of the fair
market place.
Bill Zagotta, 5155 Lillian Court, stated that the question of whether
or not the surcharge to the airport is fair can't really be answered
because the charge is levied to cover the services that the City pro-
vides to the airport. However, when a dollar amount is estimated
the bookkeeping process clouds the issue. It is difficult to account
for the number of hours City personnel spend on matters pertaining to
the airport. He stated that he believes there should be a special
exception for the airport and would endorse the idea that while it
may be less equitable for the Library Board than the Airport, there
are two important differences. One is that the airport can get federal
participation for the airport land and if that land gets away from the
City it will be gone forever, while the library books will be there
for years.
Ray Faltings, 1018 Via Granada, stated that he has heard people
testify that the airport is a no cost operation to the City. As he
recalls they were in the same situation as the city golf courses, and
a slight cost to the City. He would suggest that if the golf courses
are not self-supporting by next year that they be deleted from the
City budget.
Don Miller, 2862 Waverly Way, stated that there is a certain merit
to the proposal by Governor Brown about fixed dollar raises for
state employees. In his opinion, raises should be partially fixed
dollar and based on merit. He would urge the council to consider
lower raises on a percentage basis for people at the top salary bracket
of the City because the raises most people get are barely sufficient
to take care of the cost of living.
CM-32-364
July 12, 1976
(P.H. re 1976-76 Budget)
Mr. Miller stated that he would suggest that the raises for
management be at a lower percentage rate and that there be
a fixed dollar amount up to a certain amount. Raises beyond
this should be based on a very clear cut merit.
Bob Lockhart, Pleasanton resident, stated that he owns an
airplane and mentioned the fact that the price for gasoline
for the aircraft is much higher in Livermore compared to the
price for fuel in Tracy.
em Staley commented that the price of gasoline reflects the
administrative costs for that particular station or airport
and in his opinion it is not unfair to include the increase now.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that apparently it is the consensus of the
majority of the Council not to deduct the gasoline tax at the
airport, based on public testimony. He stated his preference
to deduct the gasoline sales from the administrative surcharge
for the airport and asked if there would be support for this
change.
No support was voiced.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he is concerned that the City may lose
the opportunity to purchase some of the airport land and he
believes it is necessary for the City to provide the monies
necessary for the clear zone purchase out of Capital Improvement
funds. He would like to have a clear commitment from the Council
that those monies will be provided when the acquisition of the
clear zone is necessary with appropriate federal and state par-
ticipation in the purchase.
Mr. Parness indicated that there is a program pending for the
acquisition of about 37 acres for the clear zone area and 105
acres to the east. There is a federal grant pending on both
properties but there is a problem with the appraised values.
The City is working with this problem at present. He assured
the Council that in the event approval is given for the acquisi-
tion of the property, the staff will contact the Council as to
proceeding with the acquisition program. On the easterly approach
zone, the City is trying to work out a program acquisition plan
with the owners of that land, over a term of years, because it
is not possible, financially, to acquire that amount of property
unless it is over a length of time.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he understands the efforts being made
but he would like to know what funds would be used for the City's
share.
Mr. Parness indicated that this would come from the City Capital
Improvement Fund and if it is necessary to come up with additional
money this would have to come from the reserves.
Mayor pro tempore Turner wondered if it is mandated that the City
purchase the land around the airport and Mr. Parness indicated
that it is not mandated but the City is urged to purchase that
property.
Cm Staley commented that he was not at the budget session during
the discussion of salary increases but he is sure the Council was
familiar with his proposal for salaries which was that the people
with high salaries should have been limited to a fixed dollar raise
CH-32-365
July 12, 1976
(P.H. re 76-77 Budget)
rather than a percentage raise. His suggestion would have been to
use the average Livermore income, multiply this amount by the increase
in the cost of living (6.1%) and allow this dollar figure to the salary
of the executive employees. In addition to this he suggested a two-step
merit raise.
Cm staley added that he was suggesting this as a general policy
to be adopted and not a policy to pertain to certain individuals.
It would be similar to that suggested by Mr. Miller.
Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that one of the local veterinarians
commented to him that his concern with raising the dog license
is that many people may not license their dogs because of this
increase. The prime concern is not that dogs are licensed but
that they are required to have the rabies shot to get the license.
If dogs are not licensed there is a possibility that there will
be more cases of rabies. This is something that should be watched
very carefully and if it appears that less dogs are licensed because
of the increased cost, it should be reported to the Council.
Cm. Dahlbacka indicated that people will be fined if their dogs
are not licensed and the city intends to follow a strict enforcement
program. He added that the City did receive a letter from someone
asking if the increase would be sufficient because the program
should be self-supporting.
It was noted that the letter from the P.C. expressed concern for
the parkway and travelway along Murrieta Boulevard, south of Olivina
Avenue, and suggested that the parkway and trailway project be
maintained in the budget to help complete and make more functional,
the parkway and trailway.
Mr. Parness stated that the widening of Murrieta Boulevard is
planned for delay.
Mr. Lee indicated that this is correct. The intersection of Murrieta
and Olivina will be delayed until verification of funds have been
made. As to the bikeway and paths, there are funds in the budget
for this and the City will proceed with their development.
Mr. Musso explained that the P.C. was concerned with the bikeway
and trailway system; this is separate from the Murrieta bike and
trailway.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 1976-77
FISCAL YEAR BUDGET. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that in 90 days after the budget
is adopted the Council will discuss the Springtown Golf Course
and, hopefully, the surcharges will be discussed at this time.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 157-76
A RESOLUTION APPROVING 1976-77 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET
P.H. RE SEWER SERVICE
CHARGE BILLING &
COLLECTION METHOD
Mayor pro tempore opened the public hearing for the purpose of
receiving protests on the method of billing and collection of
residential sewer service charges. As in past years, the method
to be used is inclusion with the property tax billing as distribu-
ted by the County Tax Collector.
CM-32-366
July 12, 1976
(P.H. re Sewer Service
Charge Billing &
Collection Method)
No public testimony was presented, and no written protests.
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
CM STALEY MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION CONCERNING THE SEWER SER-
VICE CHARGE BILLING AND COLLECTION METHOD. MOTION WAS SECONDED
BY CM KAMENA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 158-76
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING REPORT OF CITY FINANCE
DIRECTOR RE SEWER SERVICE AND USE CHARGES.
PROCLAMATION COM-
MENDING KAREL KRM1ER
Mayor pro tempore Turner read a proclamation commending Karel
Kramer for attending City Council meetings for the past year
and a half as a reporter for the Valley Times, and wishing her
success in her new job as a Publications Specialist for the
Asian Foundation.
CO}lliUNICATION - RESIGNA-
TION FROM COMMUNITY
AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
The Council received a letter of resignation from the Community
Affairs Committee, from pricilla Payne.
Mayor pro tempore Turner asked that the staff send a letter to
Mrs. Payne thanking her for the outstanding job she has done
while serving on the Committee.
ON HOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO SEND A LETTER TO MRS. PAYNE.
COMMUNICATION RE
SPRINGTOWN GOLF
COURSE
A letter was received from Brigetta Dobraty, 1223 HOllyhock,
concerning the Springtown Golf Course and protesting the City's
abandonment of it. ,
Mayor pro temport Turner stated that the letter will be considered
at the time there is discussion concerning the golf course.
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE LETTER WAS NOTED FOR FILING.
COMMUNICATION RE SCHOOL
CROSSING GUARDS
A letter was received from Jolene Abrahams, 737 El Caminito, indicating
that the reason school crossing guards are needed is because drivers
in Livermore do not obey speed limits. She suggested that the speed
limit on El Caminito be posted at 25 mph and that there be four-way
stop signs at various intersections where children cross to go to
schools.
CM-32-367
July 12, 1976
(Communication re School
Crossing Guards)
Mayor pro tempore Turner commented that apparently there was an
article in the newspaper which indicated that one of the crossing
guards was drawing unemployment checks and that the City Council
was upset about this. He added that he did not know about this
and if it is true he is not upset about it.
Cm Staley commented that the concern is that there is no money
in the School District budget for the crossing guards and therefore
it falls upon the shoulders of the city. The City believes these
funds should come from the School District since it is something
directly related to the schools. Nobody has suggested that the
crossing guards should be eliminated.
em Dahlbacka stated that he would agree that stop signs should be
installed at Wall Street and Sonoma Avenue because El Caminito
was designed as a collector street with through traffic but since
it now has a four-way stop people are traveling down Wall Street
for through traffic to Stanley.
Lee Cantebury, crossing guard at East Avenue at Seventh Street,
stated that crossing guards are paid $2.80/hour and they do not
receive any benefits or pay for holidays. They are eligible for
unemploYment insurance which the City does not pay into and they
have received only three or four checks from unemplOYment over
the past year, not exceeding $35 per check. They get paid for
time on the job, only, and most crossing guards hours have been
cut.
The item was referred to the staff.
APPEAL RE HOLIDAY
INN FREEWAY SIGN
At the meeting of June 28th the Council agreed to reconsider the
matter of the Holiday Inn sign, and the item has been set for
discussion at this time.
Bill Moore, representing Holiday Inn, stated that he has been
working with Mr. Musso in trying to select a sign for the Holiday
Inn that would be acceptable to everyone. He presented the Council
with a drawing of a proposed sign at the suggestion of Mr. Musso.
Mr. Musso has suggested that if the sign on the building were
designed in keeping with the architecture of the building that
perhaps the building would not have to be included as part of
the overall square footage allowed. They are suggesting script
of 160 sq. ft.
Cm Dahlbacka wondered what variances would be required with what
is suggested at this time.
Mr. Musso stated that a variance would be required to eliminate
the counting of the background of the sign, which would be a portion
of the existing building, or to determine that it is architecturally
a part of the building which would not require the variance.
If the background must be counted then the proposed sign would
exceed the minimum allowed by the ordinance because the script,
alone, is 160 sq. ft. and is the maximum allowed.
Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that originally he was in favor
of granting Holiday Inn a variance to allow a larger sign and he
is still in favor of granting a variance.
CM-32-368
July 12, 1976
(Appeal re Holiday
Inn Freeway Sign)
William Kennedy, visiting from Washington, stated that he is a
planning director in Washington and he worked for the Planning
Department in Livermore about 7 years ago. He was somewhat
involved in implementing the Sign Ordinance. Since he has re-
turned he has had the opportunity to see what has resulted in
Livermore because of the Sign Ordinance and he is very pleased
with the appearance of Livermore. While traveling he has noticed
that the state places signs on the freeway about a mile from the
business or appropriate interchange with logos, so people will
know where certain businesses are located. He would suggest that
the Council use alternate means for informing people of the loca-
tion of the Holiday Inn.
Mr. Musso mentioned that Item 4.3 (c) on the agenda is a report
from the Planning Commission with comments on the referral from
the City Council concerning possible amendment to the Sign Ordi-
nance relative to highway oriented signs. They have recommended
that there be no change in the ordinance and listed their reasons
in a written report to the Council.
Cm Staley commented that the response from the Planning Commission
would seem to indicate that they didn't understand what the Council
was asking them to consider. The Council wanted to know if the
present sign ordinance allows a freeway sign of a sufficient size
that someone has time to exit from the freeway to a particular
freeway oriented use. Cm Staley spoke with Commissioner Selden
who indicated that this aspect was not discussed and this is
where the problem lies. This is something that has to be
answered. The discussion was how the Holiday Inn could receive
a variance rather than what the Sign Ordinance should say to
allow the intent that it be visible from the freeway in sufficient
time to make an exit to the use.
Cm Staley noted that Commissioner Selden has indicated to him
that now he has a different understanding of what the Council
wanted discussed and would like the opportunity to discuss it
again with the Planning Commission members. Everyone seems
to agree that there is a problem with the present size of the
sign but allowing Holiday Inn a variance will not solve the
existing problem. The problem is that a sign should be allowed
which is of sufficient size for the majority of people who wish
to see the sign. The length of time needed to identify a freeway
sign and to have time to exit to that use has not really been
established.
Cm Staley stated that he is very sympathetic with the request
from Holiday Inn but in his opinion granting a variance would
not solve the problem and he is not willing to grant a variance
because this would create a problem with every other freeway
oriented use.
Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that in his opinion the Holiday
Inn is the only type of freeway use that might require the var-
iance but he is very distressed that the P.C. didn't understand
the direction of the Council as to what they were to consider.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he believes it would be a mistake to
grant a variance for the Holiday Inn without very careful study of
the ordinance and without amending the ordinance. He would like to
refer the matter back to the P.C., based on the comments made by Cm
Staley, so they can consider the calculations with respect to visibility
and what the implications would be for the size of the use. Would this
allow a very large sign for any freeway oriented use?
CM-32-369
July 12, 1976
(Appeal re Holiday
Inn Freeway Sign)
Cm Dahlbacka added that he believes the City should pursue the
possibility of having the state place freeway signs along the
freeway to identify the uses.
Mr. Musso stated that, essentially, the state has said they would
not allow the freeway signs.
em Dahlbacka suggested that the City write to AssemblYman Mori
and Senator Holmdahl requesting consideration of this type of
signing and outlining the City's concerns.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO REFER THE CALCULATIONS OF VISIBILITY FROM
THE FREEWAY, TO THE P.C., WITH CONSIDERATION AS TO THE FLOOR SPACE,
SO THAT ALL FREEWAY ORIENTED USES WILL NOT HAVE ENORMOUS SIGNS
ALONG THE FREEWAY.
MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Cm Kamena stated that he would like to know from the Planning
Director, what the mechanism would be for allowing a Conditional
Use Permit and what signs would have to be eliminated for the
total aggregate to comply with the Sign Ordinance.
Mr. MussO stated that the mechanism for a CUP and a variance are
much the same. The application would have to be made, a fee paid
and the item considered. It was felt that it would be best to
use the approach of application for a variance at this time.
em Kamena stated that his understanding of the variance procedure
is that four findings must be made and no specific limit as to
size - it could be 1,000 sq. ft. if that variance were approved.
The CUP would have to operate within a certain total aggregate
that would not approximate that allowed by a variance. He wondered
if this is correct.
Mr. Musso explained that the CUP would require findings also.
Both the CUP and variance approval is based on hardship. He stated
that he is not sure if a CUP would allow any size or not.
em Kamena stated that in his opinion this is a key issue.
Mr. Musso stated that the only provision which allows for a larger
sign is designed for regional shopping centers, through a CUP.
Cm Kamena stated that it appears there are four choices, outside
of denying the variance: 1) grant the variance; 2) explore the
possibility of a CUP; 3) whether or not the background should
be included as part of the total aggregate; and 4) ordinance amend-
ment. oI!-t
Cm Kamena felt the least desirable method fo~ al~owing a larger
sign would be the variance method because.;~7Aidesteps the intent
of how much floor space is being covered,~equates ~ to how
much sign is allowed. Also, if the Holiday Inn one day becomes
a different use with a different proprietor, the variance may
go on in perpetuity.
Cm Kamena stated that the applicant has indicated that he would
be able to live with the alternative for the script on the build-
ing, if the background were not counted in the total aggregate.
This would mean that a variance would not be required.
CM-32-370
July 12, 1976
(Appeal re Holiday
Inn Freeway Sign)
Cm Kamena wondered if a CUP could apply in this instance and
Mr. Musso commented that in his opinion it would not fit into
the category of a regional shopping center facility for which
a CUP would be used. This is the reason he suggested that the
Holiday Inn apply for a variance.
Cm Dahlbacka wondered what the square footage would be if the
present script were used with a reasonable background provided
for the script.
Mr. Musso stated that it would be about 260-280 sq. ft. if back-
ground were provided.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that just from looking at the diagram of the
script on the wall it appears that the script is much smaller
and if the script were moved over and the ordinance interpreted
that the building top line was drawn across with the sign under
it, possibly the 160 sq. ft. could be allowed.
Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that what em Dahlbacka is suggest-
ing is that perhaps the script on the building could be turned into
a freestanding sign. If this were done, what would the square foot-
age be?
Mr. Musso stated that a freestanding sign with that size script
would amount to 252 sq. ft.
Cm Kamena asked if Mr. Moore would be happy with a large sign,
not freestanding, if it were allowed on the side of the building.
Mr. Moore stated that they would be happy with one large sign on
the building, of roughly l59 sq. ft., and they could still conform
to the ordinance.
Cm Staley stated that if the present script on the building is
used and the amount of sign for the freestanding sign is also
calculated, what is the amount of signing Holiday Inn is allowed?
Mr. Musso stated that a total of 169 sq. ft. is allowed for the
Holiday Inn.
Cm Staley noted that as he understands it, Holiday Inn's proposal
is to eliminate the 52 sq. ft. of freestanding sign which they
presently have, eliminate the small script on the building which
they presently have, and in their place be allowed a larger script
on the side of the building totaling 159 sq. ft., approximately.
Mr. Moore stated that this is the proposal.
Cm Kamena wondered if the Council needs to make a motion concern-
ing this item if it is a matter of interpretation of the ordi-
nance concerning allowing the building not to be counted as
background.
The City Attorney stated that the staff would have to have some
direction as to what the Council wishes to do.
The City Attorney added that to grant a variance there are findings
which have to be made and the determination as to whether or not
they are legitimate findings has to be made by the Council. This
could be challenged in court and the court may disagree with the
Council's determination but at this point in time it is a legislative
determination.
em Kamena stated that possibly a variance is not required, under
these circumstances.
CM-32-37l
July 12, 1976
(Appeal re Holiday
Inn Freeway Sign)
Mr. Miller stated that the amount of sign for the Holiday Inn which they
presently have is not in conformance with the Sign Ordinance. The total
amount of sign they have amounts to 252 sq. ft. Their sign was
up prior to adoption of the Sign Ordinance. If the Council decides
not to count the backing for the script, it will be going against
the words of the ordinance. Mr. Miller then went to the chalk
board to illustrate how the script could be made to be more effective
without violating the ordinance, by having a dark background in
contrast to light letters. The freestanding sign could be redesign-
ed for better visibility.
Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that Holiday Inn has specifically
asked for a variance, the matter was referred to the P.C. with
the direction that they make a recommendation concerning possible
amendment to the ordinance. Apparently they did not understand
the direction and did not discuss the calculations concerning
visibility from the freeway and it seems they did not have all
the pertinent information. He would suggest that the P.C. be
allowed to review this item once again.
Cm Kamena stated that Mr. Miller has indicated that the wall area
behind the script must be counted as part of the total aggregate
and as he recalls, Mr. Musso indicated that it does not need to
be counted unless paint is used behind the letters. He is somewhat
confused because these pieces of information are in conflict.
Mr. Musso stated that the side of the building is not counted
unless a box is drawn around it. If a box is not drawn around
the letters, the background does not have to be counted. He went
to the board to illustrate this point.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE P.C. FOR SPECIFIC
CONSIDERATION OF VISIBILITY FROM THE FREEWAY AND CALCULATIONS
THEREOF, WITH THE POSSIBILITY OF A RECOMMENDATION FOR AMENDMENT
TO THE ORDINANCE. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
Cm Staley commented that he wants it to be clear that what he
wants from the P.C. is not merely consideration of how to design
a Holiday Inn sign so it can be seen from the freeway in time
to exit, but rather discussion more fundamental to the ordinance,
which is what freeway uses should qualify to have a sign large
enough to be identified from the freeway in sufficient time to
exit safely. There does not seem to be disagreement with this
principle but the two things the Council does not know are: 1)
what is the distance; and 2) who qualifies.
CM DAHLBACKA INCLUDED THE LAST STATEMENT MADE BY CM STALEY IN HIS
MOTION. SECONDED BY CH STALEY.
Mayor pro tempore Turner explained that, basically, the Council
is doing the same as was done in referring the item to the P.C.
about three weeks ago. The variance will be held in abeyance
pending possible amendment to the ordinance.
Cm Staley stated that he would also like the P.C. to review
the plan, as submitted by Mr. Hoore just recently and to dis-
cuss interpretation.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
The staff was also directed to contact Assemblyman Mori and
Senator Holmdahl concerning state highway signs to be provided
along the freeway for highway oriented uses.
CM-32-372
July 12, 1976
(Appeal re Holiday
Inn Freeway Sign)
Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that in the motion there was no
mention of a time limit but he would hope that this item would
be discussed and a recommendation made to the Council as soon
as possible.
RECESS
Mayor pro tempore Turner called for a brief recess after which
the Council meeting resumed with all members of the Council present
(Mayor Tirsell absent).
REPORT RE REFUSE COLLEC-
TION RATE INCREASE REQUEST
A written report was submitted to the Council from the City
Manager concerning the request for a refuse collection rate
increase.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that prior to discussing the item he would
like to say that he believes it should be postponed until Mayor
Tirsell can be present to take part in the discussion and also,
as he recalls, whenever a rate increase is proposed there is to
be a public hearing scheduled.
ON MOTION OF eM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS SCHEDULED FOR JULY 26, 1976, CON-
CERNING POSSIBLE RATE INCREASE FOR REFUSE COLLECTION.
It was noted that the public hearing is not required but the
Council had agreed to follow the procedure outlined in the
model agreement which has not been formalized.
Mr. Parness stated that the refuse collection company is very
anxious for the Council to discuss this item and come to a
decision as soon as possible.
Jack Corley, representing Oakland Scavenger stated that the
Council has seen the information in the way of a written report
and he is sure the Council realizes that Oakland Scavenger is
in need of a rate increase. The City of Oakland has seen the
same information and adopted a rate increase the 7th of July,
effective retroactively to the 1st of July. They received their
information at the same time the Council received its informa-
tion.
Nr. Corley disagreed that it is necessary to publicize a
public hearing or to publish an article in the paper urging
people to attend a hearing to speak on proposed increased rates.
He indicated that the newspaper had already publicized the increase.
Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that he doesn't agree with Mr.
Corley at all. If a proposal for a rate increase amounts to
about twice as much as what people are presently paying, they
should have the opportunity to protest if they wish.
em Staley commented that he can understand that Mr. Corley would
like to have the item settled as soon as possible but the item
was in the newspaper just over the weekend and people may not have
had the opportunity to change their schedules to attend the meeting
this evening. He believes they should have a chance to speak and he
would also agree that it should be delayed so that people will notice
from the newspapers that there is to be a hearing concerning the pro-
posed rate increase.
CM-32-373
July 12, 1976
(Report re Refuse Collection
Rate Increase Request)
Ray Faltings, 1018 Via Granada, stated that he would like to know why
the proposed increase for Livermore is about 73% when Oakland
Scavenger received a 33% increase from Newark and Union city.
He stated that the distance the garbage must be hauled is considerably
less for Livermore than from Dublin, for instance. Somehow,
this should be considered in adjusting rates.
Don Miller stated that he would like the staff to provide information
as to what basis Oakland Scavenger is asking for a rate increase.
The people should be able to have a better look at what Oakland
Scavenger is doing as far as their costs and expenses. Otherwise,
the Council would be working on a recommendation without any proof
that the increase is necessary.
Mr. Parness explained that the information concerning the costs
and expenses, etc., is a very thick document which has taken four
man months to review. It would be virtually impossible to condense.
This is the reason the Joint Refuse Study Committee was formed - to
study the comprehensive information.
Mr. Miller stated that the Council needs to know on what basis the
rate of return is figured and that some type of staff report should
be furnished for the Council.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he would like to hear some discussion as
to the feasibility of picking up separated trash and what the cost
would be for this type of pickup. He does not want to discuss this
now, but sometime when rates are discussed.
Mayor pro tempore Turner mentioned that in Albuquerque, for example,
people take their trash cans to the curbs on garbage pickup day and
by doing this their rates are substantially less.
Mr. Parness noted that a pioneer attempt of this type of arrangement
was done in Fremont about two years ago and the results of the- study
are available. The City intends to come back to the Council next
year with a modification of the present system which would involve
the type of thing Mayor pro tempore Turner is suggesting.
Lou Alberti stated that Fremont tried this plan but their Council
declined to adopt it on a permanent basis because people were
required to place the ~arbage in plastic bags and place them on
the sidewalks on garbage pickup day. The bags are not biodegradable
and the City did not like the aesthetics of bags in front of the
homes and for various reasons decided against using this method.
REPORT RE FBO LEASE
DEFAULT (Airport)
The City Attorney stated that the report from the City Manager concern-
ing the lease default by the Airport FBO, should be discussed in an
executive session because of the possibility of litigation.
The item was moved to executive session immediately upon adjournment
of the Council meeting.
Bill Zagotta wondered if there is any way the Airport Advisory
Committee could attend the executive session for discussion of
the FBO lease default and the City Attorney indicated that they
could not attend the executive session.
No testimony will be heard concerning the FBO lease default.
CM-32-374
July 12, 1976
REPORT RE PARCEL
r-1Ap 19 84 ( 7 th & "ll " St.)
Mr. Musso explained that Tentative Parcel Map 1984 is located
at 7th and "ll" Streets and is in conformance with the Council's recently
adopted policy relative to subdivision of the older scattered
and isolated lots in the community which have remained vacant.
The proposal is to divide the parcel into three lots. The lots
conform to the Zoning Ordinance, there are no major public works
or improvements required other than upgrading of present improve-
ments as development takes place. The P.C. recommends approval
of the lot split.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAPF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION
APPROVING THE SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL MAP 1984, SECONDED BY
CM STALEY, l~IICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE P.C. COMMENTS
RE REVISION OF SUB-
DIVISION ORDINANCE
The item concerning P.C. comments on the referral by the Council
concerning reV1Slon of the Subdivision Ordinance, was postponed
until July 19th because the Council did not have a complete
copy of the ordinance, ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY
CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
P.C. CO~~ENTS RE SIGNS
FOR HIGHWAY ORIENTED USE
It was noted that the item concerning signs for freeway oriented
use was discussed at the time the Holiday Inn sign was discussed.
CM STALEY MOVED TO CONTACT SENATOR HOh~DAHL AND ASSEMBLYMAN MORI
AS TO THE FEASIBILITY OF APPROPRIATE LEGISLATION TO ALLOW LOGO
IDENTIFICATION SIGNS IN THE LIVERMORE AREA. MOTION SECONDED BY
CM DAHLBACKA.
Cm Staley stated that this area is a scenic highway and that bill-
boards and large signs for identification are discouraged by the
National Beautification Act and that this would be an excellent
area in which to develop a trial system concerning the logos and
to ask when the City may expect to receive the logos.
Mayor pro tempore Turner explained that this may delay action on the
Holiday Inn sign.
Cm Staley felt this would not interfere with the decision on the
Holiday Inn sign, because this type of legislation would probably
take about two years to become effective but he does believe it
should be done.
Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that he is opposed to the use of
the small signs with logos because he views this as a mini billboard
with everybody's logo attached.
em Kamena stated that while traveling in Massachusetts he had the
opportunity to see the signs used all along the turnpike in that
area and he found the signs with the logos to be very attractive
and he knows that the Holiday Inn people would like them too.
MOTION PASSED 3-l (Mayor pro tempore Turner dissenting) .
Cr.1-32-3 7 5
July 12, 1976
P.C. SUMMARY OF
ACTION 7/6/76 MEETING
The P.C. summary of action taken at the meeting of July 6, 1976,
was noted for filing.
P.C. MINUTES
6/1/76 & 6/8/76
The Planning Commission minutes for their meetings of July 1, 1976,
and July 8, 1976, were noted for filing.
SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT PLAN REPORT
Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that the Council has been asked to
postpone the Solid Waste Management Plan report until July 19th, at
the request of Mayor Tirsell.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE ITEM WAS POSTPONED UNTIL JULY 19, 1976.
REPORT RE LAVWMA PRO-
POSED PROJECT & BOND ISSUE
Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that he and Mayor Tirse11 are the
LAVWMA representatives. Since he and the Mayor do not totally agree
on some of the changes to the Joint Powers Agreement, he would suggest
that this item also be postponed until Mayor Tirsell is present.
Cm Staley stated that besides that point, the rationale for the
changes arrived only this evening and the Council has not had the
opportunity to review them.
Cm Dahlbacka commented that the proposal in front of the Council gives
an unlimited expenditure power to LAVWMA, without voter approval.
This is a significant change from the previous agreement.
THE CONSENSUS OF THE COUNCIL WAS TO POSTPONE THE ITEM UNTIL JULY 19th.
REPORT RE CORPS OF
ENGINEERS URBAN STUDY
A report from the staff indicated that the Council has received all
the information concerning the Corps of Engineers Plan of Study for
the Upper Alameda Creek.
Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that this is also an item that Mayor
Tirsell is extremely interested in discussing.
Cm Staley noted that it is his understanding that Zone 7 continued
this item for several weeks and perhaps there is not the pressure
to respond, as there was.
Mr. Parness stated that in contacting Zone 7 he has found that
they do not intend to discuss this item until their next meeting
which will be held sometime next month. In his opinion, it would
be preferable to await the results of the Zone 7 review before
the Council discusses the item.
THE ITEM WAS POSTPONED UNTIL A LATER DATE.
CM-32-376
July 12, 1976
REPORT RE TREES
FOR HOLMES STREET
A report from the Parks & Trees Superintendent, Dan Freitas,
indicated that the Council expressed a desire to change the
type of street trees on Holmes Street to a hardier variety.
Mr. Freitas listed three types of trees that would do well
in wind, heat, or drought and would recommend that the mag-
nolia trees be replaced during the fall when the weather is
cooler.
Cm Kamena stated that he is really distressed to know that
people are running over the trees with automobiles on Holmes
Street and vandalizing the trees. He wondered if anything could
be done to protect the trees.
Mr. Freitas indicated that it would be helpful for citizens to
be more aware of the damage being done to the trees and to
report incidents of vandalism.
Mr. Freitas stated that as far as recommending a choice of tree
he would recommend the Portugal laurel.
Cm Dahlbacka indicated that he would be interested in looking
into the possibility of offering a reward for information leading
to the arrest of citizens destroying City trees. The Council
concurred.
CM KN{ENA MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF SUBSTITUTING
THE STREET TREES ON HOLMES STREET tVITH THE PORTUGAL LAUREL,
AND THAT THIS TREE BE USED IN OTHER AREAS WHERE TREES ARE TO BE
PLANTED BY THE CITY. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND
PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE CBD
PLAN MEETING
The Planning Consultant for the CBD Plan has asked that the
Council select a meeting date for discussion of the modifications
and proposed changes to the CBD Plan.
Cm Dahlbacka suggested that the Council meet at 6:00 p.m. prior
to the regular Council meeting on July 19th. The Council con-
curred.
It was felt that two hours would be sufficient to review the
final draft of the CBD Plan.
Mr. Parness stated that the Council has the option of review-
ing the CBD Plan on the 19th and meeting with the consultant
later, or to have the consultant meet with them on the 19th.
It was the Council's decision to discuss the plan before meeting
with the consultant, and the Planning Commission was invited to
attend the meeting.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Res. Estab. Health
Plan Participation
for Councilmembers
The Council adopted a resolution establishing health plan participation
for City Councilmembers.
It should be noted that Cm Dahlbacka voted against this resolution.
CM-32-377
July 12, 1976
(Res. Estab. Health
Plan Participation
for Councilmembers)
RESOLUTION NO. 159-76
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING HEALTH
PLAN PARTICIPATION FOR CITY COUNCIL-
MEMBERS.
Res. Approving Parcel
Map 1936 (Shaheen)
A resolution was adopted approving Parcel Map 1936 for Roger L.
Shaheen Company reflecting action at the meeting of June 28th.
RESOLUTION NO. 160-76
A RESOLUTION APPROVING PARCEL
MAP 1936 (R. L. Shaheen Company)
Res. Denying Appeal
for Rezoning - Corner
of Murrieta & Holmes (
A resolution was adopted denying the rezoning at the corner of Holmes
Street and Murrieta Boulevard.
RESOLUTION NO. 161-76
A RESOLUTION DENYING THE APPEAL FOR REZON-
ING (Duke and Johnson for Sweedler)
It should be noted that Cm Turner voted against this resolution.
Res. Rej. Claim
(Cassie Broadbent)
A resolution was adopted rejecting the claim of Cassie Broadbent.
RESOLUTION NO. 162-76
A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF CASSIE
BROADBENT
Res. re Underpass
Railing Bids
A resolution was adopted authorizing award of bid to Thompson &
Thompson for the underpass bike path railings in the amount of
$9,770.
RESOLUTION NO. 163-76
A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID (Thompson & Thompson)
Res. re Bids for
Chemicals & Chemical Analysis
A resolution was adopted awarding bids to various companies (4)
for chemicals and chemical analysis for the Water Reclamation Plant
as called for in the budget for the next fiscal year.
RESOLUTION NO. 164-76
A RESOLUTION AWARDING BIDS
CM-32-378
July 12, 1976
Res. re I,Torkmen' s
Compensation Contract
The Council adopted a resolution retaining the services of ESIS
as the City's claims adjustment agency for workmen's compensation
matters.
RESOLUTION NO. 165-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
AGREEMENT (ESIS, Incorporated)
Res. re Salary Adjust-
ments 1976-77 Fiscal Year
The Council adopted a resolution approving the adjustments in
salary levels as per agreement with various employee organiza-
tions. One employee group has not concluded contract negotia-
tions. Cm Staley voted against the resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 166-76
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE AMENDING
RESOLUTION NO. 86-76, FOR THE CLASSIFIED AND
UNCLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF LIVEID10RE,
ESTABLISHING RULES FOR ITS USE.
Payroll & Claims
There were 163 claims in the amount of $260,693.99, and 310 payroll
claims in the amount of $112,205.92, for a total of 372,899.91, as
of June 25, 1976, approved by the Director of Finance.
There were 52 claims in the amount of $117,333.27, dated June 30,
1976, and approved by the Director of Finance.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED WITH DISSENTING VOTES
ON VARIOUS RESOLUTIONS, AS NOTED.
DISCUSSION RE CONSENT
CALENDAR APPROVAL ITEMS
The Council discussed the policy concerning resolutions appearing on
the Consent Calendar for approval after action has been taken a week
or two before. There is a problem with the procedure in that some-
times a Councilmember will vote against an item and then when it
appears on the Consent Calendar as a resolution the Consent Calendar
is approved. This reflects that the resolutions on the Calendar were
approved by everyone and this is not always the case.
Cm Staley stated that perhaps a procedure could be followed about
the same way court orders are handled. The resolutions could
indicate that they were prepared on a certain day and approved and
signed on a different day.
The City Attorney had suggested that resolutions come to the Council
ahead of time so they could be reviewed and approved or rejected at
the time they are discussed.
Mayor pro tempore Turner asked that the City work on a suggestion
relative to procedures to be followed concerning resolutions and
their adoption and report back to the Council.
CH-32-379
July 12, 1976
(Disc. re Consent
Calendar Approval Items)
Cm Staley stated that he would also like to have some explanation
or background concerning claims against the City,. He stated that
he understands that the City automatically rejects all claims but
he would like to know the basis of the claims, etc.
The City Attorney stated that he could attach a copy of the claim
to the resolution rejecting it if the Council would like. The
City has a standard claim form that he could submit to the Council.
Cm Staley stated that what he would like would be a brief resume
from the staff as to what the complaint is, and what the circum-
stances were.
The City Attorney explained that the staff does not look at the
situation at all - there is no investigation. The only thing that
takes place is the filing of a form claim.
Cm Staley commented that he would like to see the claim forms with
the resolutions rejecting that claim.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(County General
Plan Hearing)
The City staff is preparing to attend the County General Plan hearing
but the County staff is not ready. They had indicated that they would
be ready for hearings in the valley in the latter part of July but
they now indicate that it will be well past that date before they
can hold a hearing.
The staff has talked about the prospects of suggesting someone to
be considered by the Council for retention to represent the City
at these hearings who would be knowledgeable and experienced in
the subject. This person has been contacted by the City and has
met with the City Attorney.
(ABAG Meeting re
LAVWMA Project)
Mr. Parness stated that ABAG will be meeting on July 15th and
one of the matters to be discussed will be consideration of
the LAVWMA plan. The ABAG staff is recommending concurrence
with the intention of the plan. This will be of support
in the City's planned meetings with the State Water Resources
Board, in hopes that they will amend a variance to their policy
concerning industrial capacity funding.
Mr. Parness stated that he is going to ask Dan Murphy of the
LAVWMA Executive Board, to be present to monitor the meeting,
with Council concurrence.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Complaint re Auto
Repair Work Being
Done at Night - Hutka Area)
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he has received a complaint from some-
one indicating that auto repair work is being done at night in
the garage area of the Hutka Industrial Park area.
CM-32-380
July 12, 1976
(Complaint re Repair
work at Night)
Apparently they are creating a lot of noise and much of it is
generated from the reving up of engines.
(Regional Revenue
Sharing)
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he would like to bring up an item to
be discussed by COVA, which is possible regional revenue sharing for
a regional shopping center in the Livermore Valley. He is
sure there are many reasons Livermore would be interested in
something like this because it would have an impact on Liver-
more's commercial development and because people from Livermore
would be using the regional shopping center.
(Town Meeting)
Cm Dahlbacka stated that a Town Meetinq has been scheduled for
August 30th, which is the fifth Monday of the month. The
Council should consider what should be discussed and where ,,)~~/
the meeting should be he ld . ".tr &t<.
~; ';G; /' -cJ:,.--, L---
Cm D ka stated that he is sure the it ty ~ .~~~~
;ax.ov,:..rri~e. :~U~~U.. n~il mi.ght W.i~.h .to d.isCUS.s:. -2..' ~~~- CV1
J.. J~ --<L-l.-L.!i" :-:~~~;: ;:; ]7~ ~~~~~~/~~~'..~ ~:L'} -~ J5;Jor;L
./U f..A tJl-1-- ..y <-- {/ :J cJ
/;t.~<1 t-<-v.-q...-< j, (Health Plan for
Part-Time Employees)
Cm Dahlbacka wondered if permanent part-time employees of
the City have the option to join the health plan of the
City if they wish to pay the entire contribution.
Mr. Parness indicated that they are not eligible to join.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he would like to see a report for
consideration of this possibility. He stated that the Council
should be considered part-time employees and they have just
been awarded this choice. To be consistent the other part-time
employees should have the option.
(City Financing Problems)
Cm Staley reported that he and Cm Kamena met with the staff of
Representative Fortney Stark to discuss the financing problem this
City has in three areas. One of the first items discussed was the
City's application for a sewer grant and the problems of it being
funded on a state level. While they can't do anything to help at
the state level they felt they could discuss some of the things with
the EPA, such as mitigating measures and the attempt to balance the
community. They have asked that the City provide a copy of our appli-
cation grant along with a cover letter indicating what the process has
been, to date.
They also discussed the possibility of revenue
of revenue sharing funds for a new City Hall.
this connection was the use of the block grant
center and the fact that the plan calls for an
sharing and the use
Also discussed in
for our multi-service
amphitheater.
They have requested that the City send a copy of all the concepts
and drawings or renderings of the multi-service agency as well as
those for the entire Civic Center with the thought in mind that
there are various grants they are aware of through arts foundations,
etc., which some of our projects or all of the projects may qualify
for. It may be possible to fund a part of the multi-service center
CM-32-38l
July 12, 1976
(City Financing Problems)
through different federal programs than the one we intend to use at
this time, and this could free the money earmarked from the block
grant, for another capital building purpose.
He would suggest that the City send copies of what the City has
on the multi-service center as well as the entire Civic Center,
to Congressman Stark's office, to the attention of Mr. Copeland.
Hopefully, this will produce some results.
They did discuss, in great detail, revenue sharing, and the desire
of the City that it be continued.
The termination of the CETA employees was discussed and it appears
that this will become a dead issue at the end of the year.
Transportation was discussed - both BART and municipal transportation
and the concept of some type of regional transportation. There is
money for purchase of this type of system but the question is where
the money might come from to operate the system.
The two main items discussed were the sewer application and the
Civic Center.
(Appointments)
Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that appointments are made when a
full Council is present so the appointments will be postponed.
(Liberty Torch)
Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that the Liberty Torch will be
coming through Livermore on July 22nd and Mayor Tirsell will be
there to meet it.
(Building Permits/
Sewer Permits)
Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that he would like to know how
many building permits/sewer permits the City has for lots of
record.
Mr. Musso stated that he believes there are about 1,500.
Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that he would like to know how
many of these will be used between now and the time Livermore
receives increased capacity at the sewer treatment plant.
Cm Staley commented that he believes there are 1,500 permits
available - not necessarily capacity available for this number.
Mr Musso stated that there are 1,500 lots of record - 1,500
can be built but there is not necessarily that much capacity.
Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that when the Council discussed
the whole issue of sewer capacity, the Council specifically
reserved capacity for all lots of record.
Mr. Lee stated that there is capacity for the lots of record
as well as a small amount of industry.
Mr. Parness indicated that this is correct. The amount of
sewage reserved for industry was for industry known to be
coming to Livermore, and one of those was Sears warehouse.
CM-32-382
July 12, 1976
(Building Permitsl
Sewer Permits)
Hayor pro tempore Turner is correct. All lots of record were
tallied and the small amounts of commercial and industrial
were tallied, with a residual amount of about 40,000 gallons.
Mr. Musso stated that on industrial and commercial it was only
anticipated, but not a potential - the residential was a potential.
Mayor pro tempore Turner stated the idea he wishes pursued is
if and when there is a need for residential housing how many
of those are going to develop in the next three, four or five
years .1,.1
9m D~~lbacka stated he.would be willing to consider reallocation~~\-~~k
ln llcht o~ the potentlal for commercial development downtown and r~\,}
felt that lt should be investigated with respect to a time li~it. ~
limit.
Mayor protempore Turner stated that the Hazelhorst property brought
this to mind for which there was some thought to in-filling, as there
may be something they can work out that would be beneficial to the
Hazelhorst heirs, to the City and to some development, and this is
what he would like to discuss.
Cm Dahlbacka asked the City Attorney what he thought about obligations
that expire after notice, and Mr. Logan stated there was a two year
limitation, and those who had allocations reserved were required to
use them in two years or they would revert back to whatever alloca-
tion the City wanted to designate.
Mayor pro tempore asked that this matter be placed on the agenda
in the next month or so at which time they should have a report on
the real capacity in the treatment plant.
ORDINANCE RE LICENSES RE
CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
On motion of Cm Staley, seconded by Cm Dahlbacka, the following
ordinance was adopted concerning certificate of occupancy.
ORDINANCE NO. 891
AN ORDINANCE M1ENDING ARTICLE I, RELATING TO LICENSES -
GENERAL, OF CHAPTER 12, RELATING TO LICENSES, OF THE
LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 1959, BY A."1:ENDING SECTION 12.9
RELATING TO CONTENTS OF LICENSES.
ORDINANCE RE CARD ROOM
RULES AND REGULATIONS
On motion of Cm Staley, seconded by Cm Dahlbacka, the following
ordinance was adopted relating to rules and regulations relating
to card rooms.
ORDINANCE NO. 892
AN ORDINANCE N1ENDING SECTION 6A.l3, RELATING TO RULES
AND REGULATIONS GENERALLY, OF CHAPTER 6A, RELATING TO
CARD ROOMS, OF THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 1959.
CM-32-383
July 12, 1976
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further scheduled business to come before the Council,
the meeting adjourned at 11:50 p.m. to an executive session to
discuss possible litigation, and then to an adjourned regular
meeting at 6:00 p.m., Monday July 19, 1976, to meet jointly with
the Planning Commission to review the report of the General Plan
Consultant.
1l~ 11:J ~
Mayor
~rk
. L~ more, California
APPROVE
C
ATTEST
l
Regular Meeting of July 19, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
July 19, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:10
p.m. with Mayor Tirsell presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: em Dahlbacka, Kamena, Turner and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: Cm Staley
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirsell led the Councilmembers as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
OPEN FORUM
(Crossing Guards)
Jqseph Cannon, l356 Calais, stated that he would like to speak
to the Council on behalf of the parents of children in Livermore
who would like to praise the efforts of the crossing guards in
Livermore. He stated that people do not want the crossing guards
CM-32-384
July 19, 1976
(Crossing Guards)
displaced and he has a petition to present to the Council with 494
signatures, favoring the crossing guards. He stated that he contacted
em Turner who indicated that the Council has not voted to discontinue
the crossing guards, but because of reports concerning this issue in
the newspapers the parents are concerned and want the Council to know
how they feel about the crossing guards. Parents do not want the City
to try to save money at the expense of the lives of children.
Mayor Tirsell commented that perhaps she could save a lot of discussion
by explaining that the City has no intention of dissolving the crossing
guard jobs but rather a letter was sent to the School District asking
if they are aware of the cost for providing this service and if they
would be willing to share in the cost of the crossing guards. The
City has not received an answer from the School District - it has
been from six to eight months since the City has written to them.
Since no response has been received the Council has asked that the
matter be referred to the School Board. This is the extent of the
matter. She apologized that there was isunderstanding of this matter.
Mr. Cannon mentioned that there has been a suggestion for a Safety
Patrol comprised of students to help children cross and he explained
the problems he has seen with this type of program.
Emily Pena, crossing guard, stated that she talked with Mayor Tirsell
and understood that the City would like to replace the crossing guards
with students because the expnse of the crossing guards is becoming
excessive.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she is sorry if this is what Mrs. Pena
understood her to say because she had tried to explain that the City
is concerned and this is the reason they are asking the School
District to help with the cost. It is not the intention of the
City to replace the adult crossing guards with students.
Georgia Vonduri, 1231 Vancouver Way, stated that in speaking with
her neighbors everyone seems to be concerned over the crossing guards
and particularly with the traffic problem at the crossing at Vancouver.
and Holmes Street.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she understands the Holmes Street crossing
problems and that her children also use that crossing many times.
However, it is a state highway and it is difficult to get the state
to make any kind of changes. It took the City a long time to get
lights at Concannon and Holmes where there were many accidents.
Discussion followed concerning the problems of the heavy traffic on
Holmes Street and the situations Mrs. Vonduri has observed because
she lives at the corner of Vancouver and Holmes Street.
Mr. Lee stated that before the state will do anything they have to
have a certain number of warrants and even the accidents and volume
of traffic at Holmes Street and Concannon really didn't qualify for
a traffic signal.
Mrs. McCloud, 1297 Wagoner, stated that the traffic on Wagoner is
like the traffic on a freeway all day until midnight. That street
really needs the crossing guard.
(Complaint re Family
Arcade on First Street)
Mrs. McCloud, 1297 Wagoner, stated that she would like to know what
the Code says concerning pinball machine establishments in Livermore.
CM-32-385
July 19, 1976
(Complaint re Family
Arcade on First St.)
The Assistant City Attorney commented that he believes there is
no code prohibiting or regulating use of pinball machines at
the present time, only licensing.
em Dahlbacka stated that he spoke with Mrs. McCloud about the
problem of no age limitation for use of pinaball machines and he
intended to request that there be an investigation of this prob-
lem, during Matters Initiated by the Council.
(Crossing Guards)
Mary Truss, crossing guard at Holmes Street and Vancouver, stated
that it has been her understanding that the area between flashing
yellow lights indicating "school crossing" is a 25 mph area, even
if the 25 mph isn't posted.
Mr. Lee indicated that he believes this is incorrect.
Mrs. Truss asked what the City intends to do if the School District
will not help with the cost of the crossing guards and Mayor Tirsell
stated that the City will continue to pay for the cost of the guards
if the School District will not help contribute to the cost.
Ray Faltings stated that if Highway 84 could be rerouted to Isabel
Avenue, perhaps some of the traffic problems could be eliminated.
Mayor Tirsell explained that this is no longer on the state pri-
ority list and the City is hoping that it will become a major
street only.
P.H. RE DOGWOOD
PARK SITE
Mayor Tirsell stated that the possible sale of the Dogwood Park
site has been discussed during two public hearings and there
have been pros and cons in about equal numbers. A public hear-
ing has been scheduled this evening to allow any additional
public testimony which has not been heard.
It was noted that the report from Mr. Lee concerning the cost
for the landscaping would be actual costs and does not reflect
volunteer labor.
Anita Lee, 544 Nightengale Street, stated that she has contacted
29 other families who have signed up to help with the volunteer
labor. She has three formal commitments in the mail which have
not been received. They are from the Army National Guard at
Camp Parks, the Army Reserve Civil Engineers, and the Livermore
Jaycees.
The residents require a pump and electricity for the well and
a fence around the pump. Mrs. Lee stated that she appreciates
the fact that someone did go out and seal the well that was
open.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would like to report that she
contacted Mr. Lee after the last public hearing and found that
the well was never open and a danger. She received a lot of
telephone calls from people allover town who were concerned
about the open well and this was not true.
Mr. Lee explained that there was about a six-inch opening which
led to a hole about 18-inches deep, next to the pump. People
may have assumed that the hole was very deep.
CM-32-386
.
July 19, 1976
P.H. re Dogwood
Park Site)
Mrs. Lee stated that she has a commitment from Ace Hardware for
the pipe for the sprinkler and they have someone to drive the
back-hoe. They will also be getting pipe from HandYman but they
need to know how much pipe to order.
Terry Bersied, 529 Oriole, stated that he is strongly opposed to
a park development in that area. He would like to see the property
sold for single dwelling homes. LARPD has said it is not a suitable
park site and the Livermore Police Department has indicated that it
could not be adequately policed.
Alex Glavinos, 461 Oriole Avenue, stated that there have been many
problems occuring in this area and the City has the opportunity to
abate the problems or allowing continuance of a very bad situation.
There has been testimony for and against the City keeping the property.
There was testimony given that people know that vandalism is taking
place and they even know who is doing the vandalizing but they won't
tell who is doing it.
Robert Lee, 544 Nightingale, felt the area could be properly
patrolled.
Linda Bersied, 529 Oriole, wondered who would have to pay for damage
done on the site. It wouldn't be fair for the homeowners to have
to pay for damage.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she can understand the problem and it is
the same problem that exists for people who live next to school sites
or other public places where children might break windows, etc.
Steve Lambert, 473 Oriole, expressed opposition to developing the
vacant lot into a park and this will not solve the problems of
vandalism which have occurred. He has had to pay for broken windows
and most of the damage takes place at night when it is dark. This
area is only three blocks away from May Nissen Park and when he goes
to the park with his children they go to the May Nissen Park. In
his opinion the City does not have justification for spending money
for the small park. His property is adjacent to the vacant site.
Mr. Lee stated that at present the site is undeveloped and people
don't take their children there to play. It would seem that a
developed area which is used would reduce the amount of vandalism.
Mary Jo Ritmann, 4llS Stanford Way, stated that four years ago the
City purchased the property to be used as a park and she would like
to see the property used for the purpose it was purchased.
Mrs. Leal, 740 Olivina Avenue, stated that she is opposed to develop-
ment of the park. Her property backs up against the property and she
has lived there for 20 years.
Mrs. Lee stated that she neglected to mention that the area would
have to be lighted. She also knows the children who are vandalizing
the property but there doesn't seem much that anyone can do about it.
The Police Department has responded to complaints and they have indi-
cated that if they could do something they would.
Joe Leal, 740 Olivina, stated that motorcycles drive through his
driveway area and on back to the vacant lot. The Police Department
can't seem to do anything. He felt the situation would be as bad
if a park were developed on the vacant site.
CM-32-387
July 19, 1976
(P.H. re Dogwood
Park Site)
Mr. Glavinos stated that this particular site is not suitable for
a park, baseball diamond, or whatever.
Mary Jo Ritmann stated that the problem is one of vandalism, not
a park. Concerned citizens must report the problems of vandalism.
The property has been purchased for a park and this has nothing
to do with whether or not it is located in an area which exper-
iences problems of vandalism. In her opinion, vandalism is a separ-
ate item.
Mrs. Bersied stated that most of the people who want the park do not
have property abutting the park site. Grass and trees do not pre-
vent vandalism problems and she does not want to be a babysitter
for children going to the park. Her property is adjacent to the
park site.
James Carskadden, 396 Adelle Street, urged the Council to sell the
property and let houses be built on the site which will pay taxes
to the city. A park will be another source of expense to the City
in the way of maintenance costs.
CM TURNER MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, SECONDED BY CM DAHL-
BACKA, AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
em Turner stated that it was he who brought up the suggestion to
sell the property, based on complaints from people in the area.
He still believes there is no reason for the park to be developed,
in spite of testimony by people who want it. Development of a
park will not solve the problems mentioned and the people from
that area are very close to May Nissen Park. It will cost $84,000
to develop it and $15,000 a year to maintain it, and the City can't
afford this extra cost. ~
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he ha~a ~o hear from the people who
wish to develop the park and tlia~ re would be a well planned
park with reasonable operational costs. He is sure that most
of the cost of development could be done with volunteer service;
however, the $l5,000 maintenance cost per year would have to be
paid by the City. In his opinion there is nothing in writing
from the groups who have indicated they would donate equipment,
etc., to go ahead with the park. He really doesn't like giving
up public property but is very concerned with the amount of funds
that might be involved and if it would be developed.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION OVERRULING PROTESTS AND
TO OFFER THE PROPERTY FOR SALE. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MAYOR
TIRSELL FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES.
em Kamena stated that the last time this item was discussed he
was optomistie that there would be an organization of people
who would be willing to develop the park, to look at the figures
in terms of what it would cost the City, and to try to make some
decision regarding vandalism problems. He isn't convinced that
such a plan exists, but on the other hand he is concerned that
sale of the property is a little too easy as a means of getting
rid of the problem, and that there may not be people waiting to
purchase the property. Testimony seems to be overwhelmingly in
favor of abating the property and he would like to vote in favor
of selling the property but he is not sure sale would be immedia-
tely forthcoming.
Mayor Tirsell stated that perhaps the Council could place a time
limit on the sale of the property. If it were not sold within a
certain period of time perhaps the City could reverse the decision
to sell. It appears that public tesimony is overwhelmingly in
favor of sale.
CM-32-388
July 19, 1976
(P.H. re Dogwood
Park Site)
Mayor _Tirsell cst:atedthat she -realized Mrs.; 'ILee rhas 'spent a lQt,'~of
time worki:ng'on,this ,item, and _,she is disappointed ithat the Council
doesn't have something more concrete to work with. Public opposition
is greater this evening than before. She stated that if the City
decides to sell the property and it does not sell within a certain
length of time, the problems still exist and the City should be
responsible for providing minimum improvements. The City cannot let
another season go by with the area overtaken by weeds and other prob-
lems associated with the site.
CM TURNER MOVED TO
SOLD BY JANUARY 1,
REVIEW THE MATTER.
UNANIMOUSLY.
INCLUDE IN THE MOTION THAT IF THE PROPERTY IS NOT
1977, THE COUNCIL WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL. MOTION PASSED
Mr. Musso stated that if the land is to be sold there should
refiling of the subdivision with a change in the lot lines.
was one of the reasons the property was good for purchase as
park site, because the subdivision of it was poorly planned.
be a
This
a
em Turner stated that members of the Council have indicated that
there have not been plans to work from. His reason for making the
motion to sell the property was based on the problems of vandalism,
cost, and because May Nissen is reasonably close.
Mr. Parness stated that as a condition of sale he would assume the
six building permits could be obtained. It was noted that this
is correct. There may be some changing of the lot lines but six
sewer connections would be allowed.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
The following resolutions were adopted to reflect the action of
the Council.
Resolution No. 175-76
A RESOLUTION OVERRULING PROTESTS AND
DECLARING THE ABANDONMENT OF DOGWOOD PARK
RESOLUTION NO. 176-76
A RESOLUTION IMPOSING CONDITIONS UPON THE
SALE OF DOGWOOD PARK SITE
DISCUSSION RE DUARTE
PROPERTY & GARAGE
The Livermore Heritage Guild has requested that the City retain the
vacated Duarte garage structure located at the intersection of "L"
Street and Portola Avenue, for historical exhibit-museum purposes.
Janet Newton, 2131 Chateau Place, representing the Livermore Heritage
Guild, stated that the Livermore Heritage Guild is interested in sav-
ing the building because it is a type of building that will never be
built again although it looks very shabby now. They believe it could
be attractive if the paint were sand blasted and the facade repainted.
If the area around it were landscaped it would be evident that it is
part of the park. They would like the small house adjacent to the
garage to become a caretaker's house for protection against vandalism.
If the height of the shrubbery between the house and the garage were
reduced the whole property would be very visible and this would offer
additional protection from vandalism. The Guild has many items that
could be displayed if they had someplace to store them. The stage
coach that was used to carry the Councilmembers and delegates from
Quezaltenango could be stored in the garage and school children could
visit the proposed museum to see these types of things.
CM-32-389
July 19, 1976
(Discussion re Duarte
Property &Garage)
It could be very valuable to the community to have a museum with items
from the Robert Livermore home as well as a picnic bench and a plaque
located at the Robert Livermore Park site explaining about the Robert
Livermore home. This would be in keeping with the hospitality shown
by the Robert Livermore family.
Mrs. Newton stated that the Guild intends to store old cars in
the building and for this purpose the building does not need to
be beautiful. If it is made to be reasonably safe and attractive
on the outside this could probably be accomplished for little cost.
Anna Brown, 11450 Tesla Road, stated that at first many people
felt that the building was not worth saving but after looking
at it they agree that it is worth saving. She asked that people
take a second look if they feel it should be demolished. Once
a building is destroyed, alternatives are gone, and she would
hope that the Council will seriously consider saving the building.
It is very unique and very impressive, once it is gone the City
can never get it back.
James Carskadden, stated that he would suggest the City do the
same thing with this property as is planned for the Dogwood Park
site. Sell the property, raze the buildings and place businesses
on the property so the City can start getting revenue from it.
He disagrees that every vacated building should be renovated and
made a historical building.
Jim Boehmke, 441 Jackson Street, a member of the Model A Ford
Club in Livermore, stated that the club members like old cars
and the scenery that goes along with them. The general consensus
of the club members (60) is that the garage should be saved. They
would hope that it could be used as a museum as well as a meeting
place for their club or other old car clubs. He would be willing
to help renovate the building and he is sure other club members
would be willing to donate their time in helping to restore the
building.
Dorothy Nielsen, 4520 Tesla Road, stated that many people have
volunteered to help restore the old building and to act as care-
takers after it is restored. There would be no salary involved
for the caretaker. If the building were demolished the property
would only be landscaped, it would not be developed commercially
for additional City revenue.
Jerry Wilverding, 4886 Primrose Lane, felt that the old building
deserves to be saved. He would like to see it restored as it
was originally, as an old gas station. The gas pump is the type
in which the gas is pumped up to the top and gravity pulls the
gas down the hose. It would be a very interesting addition to
the City of Livermore. He stated that he believes there should
be an ordinance for ancestral buildings, as there is for ancestral
trees that cannot be removed if they are a certain age.
Mr. Carskadden stated that he would not object to restoration
of the building if it could be turned into a functional gas
station or if it could be rented for a meeting place. If some-
thing can be done to help pay for the upkeep he wouldn't object.
em Dahlbacka stated that he would really like to know what some
of the specific costs would be in renovating the buildings.
em Kamena stated that he would agree with Cm Dahlbacka in that
he would like to know what the costs would be, but he would be
interested in saving the building if the costs are not too
prohibitive. He would be opposed to spending park money for
this purpose because he believes this money should be saved
for landscape purposes.
CM-32-390
July 19, 1976
(Discussion re Duarte
Property & Garage)
Mayor Tirsell stated that at first she felt the bUilding was very
ugly but after listening to Janet Newton, it starts looking better
all the time. She stated that in driving past the bUilding she
can envision children going through it looking at old cars and fire
engines, etc. and this would seem to be a worthwhile project. However,
she cautioned the Council against doing something that would begin the
setting of a precedent - using City money for restoration of old build-
ings. The City has never been involved in this type of activity
since various City committees have always raised the money for restora-
tion of whatever building they want renovated. She would be in favor
of seeing the building restored but would oppose the use of public
funds to accomplish it.
Cm Turner stated that when he came to the meeting he intended to vote
in favor of demolishing the building but Mrs. Newton has changed his
mind, again. There seems to be enough people who want to help re-
store the building and live in one of the buildings as a caretaker
to make it worthwhile to try to raise funds to restore the bUilding.
He also agrees with the Mayor that City funds should not be used
for this purpose. He stated that he really likes the idea expressed
by Mr. Wilverding and he is convinced that the bUilding should
be saved.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL SUPPORT PRESERVING THE BUILDING
BUT THAT PUBLIC FUNDS WILL NOT BE SPENT ON THE BUILDING. MOTION
WAS SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the intent of the motion is that the
garage and the house will not be demolished by the City but no
public funds will be expended on the renovation.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Mayor Tirsell called for a brief recess after which the Council
meeting resumed with members of the Council present as during roll
call.
RECESS
Mayor Tirsell stated that she attended the Interim Mayors Conference
at which time the Solid Waste Management Plan and the Joint Powers
Agreement were discussed. All cities were instructed to either
adopt or reject the Plan, and this decision is due tomorrow.
REPORT RE SOLID
WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN
em Dahlbacka stated that he would like Page 3, (i) to include word-
ing to the effect that a public hearing would be required to levy
and collect fees and charges, as apart of the Joint Powers Agreement.
Mayor Tirsell explained that this is included in the Plan but there
are many things not mentioned in the Joint Powers Agreement because
they are a part of the Plan.
Public hearings will be held on rate setting and this will be a
function of the Rate Setting Committee and each municipality _ it
is not a function of the Plan but the public hearing process is
mentioned.
em Dahlbacka stated that he was also curious about the two votes
given to Alameda County and whether its population base is sufficient
to justify the two votes.
CM-3~-39l
July 19, 1976
(Report re Solid Waste
Management Plan)
Mayor Tirsell stated that Alameda County is charged with the
responsibility of filing the Plan and there would be no Plan
to this point if they had not been given the weight of two
votes on the Board.
Cm Turner stated that he is concerned about the County having
two votes and Oakland having three of the votes because this
amounts to about l/3 of the total vote of the Board. If they
had three more of the votes it would be the majority vote.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she had the same concerns but at one
time they got even more of the vote and the committee negotia-
ted as best they could to make the vote more equitable. The
present method of voting is the only way the County would accept
the Plan.
em Turner stated that he is also concerned about a selection of
location for dumping.
Mayor Tirsell explained that this is a function of each muni-
cipality. For example, the City's long term contract with
Ralph properties concerning a dump site is in no way affected
by the Joint powers Agreement.
Cm Turner stated that he is concerned about the voting power
because the Valley is in the minority with respect to repre-
sentation and he would like to know about what limitations
are imposed for debts that could be incurred.
Mayor Tirsell explained that the only debts that would be allowed
would be those allowed by state law which would be paid through
revenue bonds only.
Lois Hill, stated that it was difficult to come up with this
Plan which has been in the making for about three years. Un-
fortunately there was not enough contact between the Committee
and the County and the cities during formulation of the Plan.
As a member of the Committee during the last stage, she and
Don Miller worked very hard to see that several important
things happened. One was to go for the largest amount of
resource recovery as a goal and to set up some kind of agency
to administer the Plan. The agency they recommended was not
accepted but this was a beginning place for discussion and
final resolution. She would suggest that the Council adopt
the plan as presented this evening.
Don Miller, 2862 Waverly Way, stated that he would like to
echo the comments made by Lois Hill. A lot of work was done
by appointees to the Mayors' Conference and by private citi-
zens as well as representatives of private industry to get
to this point and it has been very difficult. He believes
this represents the best compromise that was available at
the time although he is also concerned about the large number
of votes for the Oakland/County area. However, as Mayor Tirsell
pointed out, the balance of votes was worse at one time. This
plan is probably the best that could be agreed upon and there are
some good things in it. One of the good points is protection
of land and against zoning to accommodate Kaiser.
Mayor Tirsell explained the concerns the City of Alameda had
with the plan and her understanding of the Plan is that local
jurisdictions would have the right to implement solid waste man-
agement projects as long as they are in conformance with the Plan.
CM-32-392
July 19, 1976
(Report re Solid Waste
Management Plan)
For example, open burning type of dumps would not be allowed. ~ .~_.
B9:ES of SQPerviser: ha:e iftdiea~ea: that her Ufta8rBtaRain~ of ~he~k~.~
PI.. eeRo~aiqg 1oea! jeri;di;;ieR~ is C6LLe~t. The City either ~,
has to adopt or reject the Plan this evening but she would like
the City to send a cover letter indicating that local jurisdictions
would have the right to implement solid waste management projects
that are in conformance with the Plan because of the City's agreement
with Ralph Properties and because of the concerns of the City of
Alameda.
em Dahlbacka stated that he is concerned that the provisions for
a public hearing are buried in the Plan and not in the Agreement
where they should be.
Mr. Parness stated that the public hearing process is really implied.
The financing and rate setting mechanism referred to in the Plan is
deferred to the local agency. It is implied that the cities follow
procedures which may be specified locally.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would agree with this. Some jurisdic-
tions may choose not to do this. It is up to each jurisdiction.
CM KAMENA MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION APPROVING THE
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN AND JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT
WITH A COVER LETTER CONTAINING THE APPROPRIATE REMARKS EXPRESSED BY
MAYOR TIRSELL. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 167-76
A RESOLUTION APPROVING SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN
AND JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS (Alameda County Solid
Waste Management Plan)
Mayor Tirsell stated th&t she would like to thank Don Miller and
Lois Hill for the three long years of hard work and effort they
have contributed to this project to insure that a small community
such as Livermore is adequately represented on the Board.
The LAVWMA Board is considering recommending modifications to the
eXisting Joint Powers Agreement. The Council has received a copy
of the proposed changes with a statement from the Pleasanton City
Attorney who drafted the changes.
REPORT RE LAVWMA JOINT
POWERS AGREEMENT
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he finds the changes recommended by the
Pleasanton City Attorney to be unacceptable. The changes are
designed to avoid the voters and the only changes he would be
Willing to discuss would be some of the items concerning the Finance
Officer, the Treasurer, and possibly whether or not the l3 MGD is
the appropriate number to specify in the agreement rather than the
projected E-O gallonage being considered at this time.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would like to say, in defense of those
who have been asked to review the Joint Powers Agreement, that they
are faced with a great dilemma. We are facing a law suit from the
Alameda County Water District because .of detriment to the under-
ground water table and because of the fact they are purchasing expensive
water because their water is POlluted by the refuse and runoff from
the Alameda Creek Watershed area.
CM-32-393
July 19, 1976
(Report re LAVWMA Joint
powers Agreement)
Mayor Tirsell stated that this is a problem that must be
solved and virtually every alternative has been eliminated
during the past two years because of s~ate requirements for
disposal. The state standards now also include carcinogens
and hormones. You may not dispose any water down the Alameda
Creek that contains carcinogens and hormones.
The reverse osmosis plant, which is an experimental plant at
Kaiser, is possibly the most efficient method of wastewater
treatment but does not operate to the level of eliminating
carcinogens and hormones that the state would accept. LAVWMA
is therefore faced with the fact that the only project that
could be grant funded and acceptable to the state was the
pipeline. This must be done because it is a state mandate
and yet the city promised the voters that the cost of the
project would be submitted to them. The voters should be
reminded that if they vote against the project in November,
LAVWMA must still go ahead with the project or face a law suit.
em Turner stated that there are some changes that are recom-
mended that he would find acceptable, such as the Finance
Officer change, but his concern is the obligation that the
LAVWMA Board can bring to the people in the Livermore Valley.
He would be willing to talk about a change in the Joint powers
Agreement, to the point that the LAVWMA Board has the right
to incur the debt to build a pipeline as far as the fundable
flow goes _ 15.62 MGD. He would not object to a change as
long as there is a limitation but he would not be willing to
give them a blank check.
Cm Turner stated that as Mayor Tirsell mentioned, if the voters
are against the project there is little choice. He would guess
that the LAVWMA Board would have to say it would be built any-
way. Would this be the alternative, or woul~\~~~t be built
at all? ~~
em Dahlbacka stated that he is not sure wha~the alternatives
would be, but the city is mandated to do something, even though
the voters should have a say about the project. He would sug-
gest that the ballot be worded to give the voters a choice on
the E-O funding and then a choice as to whether or not they
want the recommended project which is somewhat in excess of
the grant fundable project. It seems that an argument presented
to the voters, as it has been tonight, concerning the alternatives
and what the jurisdictions face, would be appropriate. He is sure
if they are aware of the facts they would probably approve one of
the projects.
em Turner stated that his position would be that he would be will-
ing to amend the Joint Powers Agreement to show the figure of
15.62 MGD which is the fundable flow, rather than the l3 MGD.
This would mean that the LAVWMA Board could incur debts up to
the cost of the 15.62 MGD,~ could ~ go to the voters
ar ae~ as aft elce~ed b9dT~~.'
em Dahlbacka stated that the project represents a substantial
increase in sewer tax charges, and he believes this should go
to the voters.
CM-32-394
July 19, 1976
(Report re LAVWMA Joint
Powers Agreement)
em Turner stated that he is not suggesting the change be made and
that LAVWMA automatically go in debt for the costs of the
15.62 MGD. He is only suggesting that the figures which now read
13 MGD be changed to 15.62 MGD because this represents the actual
fundable flow. This would mean that LAVWMA would have the right
to make application for the funding of the l5.62 MGD, if they so
desire.
em Kamena stated that he would prefer to stay with the original
agreement but to change some of the figures with perhaps some
cleanup wording. He would not want to change the agreement to
any substantial degree. He would agree that any amount of sewage
in excess of that which is fundable should go to the voters.
Mayor Tirsell stated that there seems to be consensus of the
Council to change the 13 MGD to the fundable 15.62 MGD, but this
would still have to go to the voters because of the limitation of
the $l.5 million the voters would have to pay for the local share.
She is sure the votes in November will reflect the preference that
there be reservation of sewage for industrial development and there
will be a determination very soon as to whether or not industrial
sewage will be grant dfundable. It will be known before the issue
is voted on, whether or not it will be grant fundable. Mayor Tirsell
added that she is not willing to bypass any November vote, on the
project.
Discussion followed concerning the problem in trying to educate
people to the problems and what the alternatives are with respect
to information on the ballot. It was noted that it is often diffi-
cult for people to understand simple local ballot issues and the
dilemma that will result if the people vote against the project.
Mayor Tirsell pointed out that people do not want to spend money
for the project and for this simple reason the vote may fail.
Mayor Tirsell felt that if people are asked if they would support
a project that would cost everyone $l/month on their tax rate, they
will say "no". This does not reflect that people are not intellegent
enough to know what is good for them but rather becomes a matter of
spending more money, this is a money issue.
Cm Dahlbacka disagreed. He felt that if people are informed as to
the prOblems, the alternatives, and if everything is spelled out
clearly, they will vote in favor of one of the projects.
Mayor Tirsell stated that this can't be fully explained on a ballot
issue, but Cm Dahlbacka disagreed.
em Turner stated that he does not know what will be done if the
voters turn down the project and he feels that for this reason
he believes the LAVWMA Board should be allowed to decide whether
or not it should go to the voters. This is a referendum item
and if the LAVWMA Board approves the fundable flow the voters
can still say they will not allow LAVWMA to do this. The voters
still have the option to referend, but he feels they probably
would not take this action. The Council has to consider what
would happen if it is presented to the voters !ft ~he first ~laoe,
and turned down.
em Turner added that if the project is funded and built it will
service the 2% growth rate for the next 20 years in the Valley.
He stated that everyone agrees that the l5.62 MGD is reasonable
and he would like to see this amount funded. He stated that if
it is turned down, three or four years down the line a different
LAVWMA Board may change the Joint Powers Agreement to allow funding
for a 31 MGD line.
CM-32-395
July 19, 1976
(Report re LAVWMA Joint
powers Agreement)
em Dahlbacka stated that some years down the line the project
could be expanded anyway.
Mayor Tirsell and Cm Turner noted that once the project has
been funded it can't be changed. Once authorization is given
to sell a certain amount of bonds, not one penny more can be
spent to increase the size of the project.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she really has mixed emotions as to
what should be done. She feels an obligation to see the project
through but since it will be an expenditure of the taxpayer dollar
she is inclined to allow them to express their opinions on the
ballot. If the voters turn down the project and the Environmental
Protection Agency imposes a $6,000/day fine, the voters will also
know that.
MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO AMEND THE AGREEMENT ONLY FOR THE GRANT
FUNDABLE PORTION, WHICH IS TO AMEND FROM 13 MGD to 15.62 MGD.
MOTION SECONDED BY CM KAMEN A FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES.
Mayor Tirsell commented that industrial capacity is not part
of the project. This is something that was brought out later
on, after the project had been planned. The project is for
cleanup purposes and legislation says that the funds are granted
for specific purposes and one of these is for cleanup of current
pollution. In that, a certain amount of leeway is allowed for
growth because the project is a constraining project. A certain
amount would be allowed for septic tanks around our City, the
V.A. Hospital gets some al}.~~J~h w... Vl.e,C!fanton gets some
allowance for castlewood,/~lia~'"'OrI5 .62 MGD. Any-
thing beyond the 15.62 MGD would not be grant fundable, at
this point. She felt the amount of the basic project, which
is 15.62 MGD, should be mentioned.
Mayor Tirsell indicated that if the basic project is stated and
the voters fail to support development of it, LAVWMA should
be able to go ahead with the project in some way.
Mayor Tirsell mentioned that on Page 7, of the Agreement, the
way it is written there really is no way to bypaSS the voters.
em Dahlbacka agreed.
Cm Turner commented that the overriding factor, in this case, is
that the project is going to be done regardless of what the voters
say. He believes the Council has a responsibility to go ahead with
the project and it will allow the city to follow through with the
General plan for the city of Livermore. He can't agree that this
should go to the voters. In his opinion this is a responsibility
of elected officials and by passing it to the voters S~~~:~C~~P_l
people are not fulfilling their obligations. This ~~i~~
~ha~ is mandated by the state and if it is rejected the Council
intends to go ahead with it anyway. ~.~. ~~
em Kamena stated that he is concerned wi~~e problem of escala-
ted costs the longer the project is postponed and also by the
factA~~~ if the project is not started by a certain date the
City~ be fined $6,000 per day by the 1:H*. He. added that
somehow, the dollar figure for the City's share should be con-
sistent with any change in the amount of MGD. In other words,
at present there is a limit of $1.5 million for 13 MGD, which
can be approved without going to the voters. If the figure in
the agreement is changed to 15.62 MGD the cost may exceed the
$1.5 million which is presently specified in the agreement.
CM-32-396
July 19, 1976
Cm Kamena stated that he would Suggest a wording change to indicate
the following, as an example:
(b) Any capital expenditures in excess of the
local share of the basic project (15.62)
......etc.
(Report re LAVWMA Joint
Powers Agreement)
Cm Kamena felt it would be consistent to change the dollar amount
if the MGD is to be changed. It is true that it is not known what
the figure will be but somehow it seems that it could be linked
directly to the basic project.
em Turner stated that this is basically what the Pleasanton City
Attorney is suggesting.
It was noted that the City Attorney's suggestion is to include the
whole capital expenditure.
Cm Turner stated that he would agree with the suggestion made by
em Kamena. This suggestion would mean that LAVWMA could approve
the project up to 15.62 and anything beyond this amount would have
to go to the voters. Any additional 3.5 MGD for industrial develop-
ment would have to be approved by the voters.
Ray Faltings, 1018 Via Granada, felt that if the people are SUfficiently
informed, they would intelligently vote on the issue. The School Dis-
trict was recently successful in passing a $lO million measure be-
cause the people were informed. He stated that the LAVWMA pipeline
was initiated with the promise that the people would have the final
vote and that nobody has ever been elected to this particular agency,
directly by the people.
Don Miller, 2862 Waverly Way, stated that the LAVWMA Agency has a
legal obligation to clean up water pollution but the people have
no legal or moral obligation to do anything. He would suggest
that there be no change in the agreement because it presently
allows an amount that would satisfy the cleanup problems and up
to $1.5 million of local share in the funding, without going to
a vote of the people. He believes, however, that the people should
be informed about the problem and the $6,000 fine if something isn't
done, and allow people to vote before anything else is done.
Mr. Miller felt the people should be offered two choices _ the 13 MGD
or the 15.62 MGD. He is sure that if people understand the problems
and that a fine will be imposed if a project is not selected, that
people will be willing to vote for one of the projects.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she doesn't support a 13 MGD project at
all because Livermore's share of the pipeline would be 5 MGD and
the current treatment plant is operating at 4.8. The reservations
in the 15.62 include a 1 MGD expansion for Livermore.
Gurnham Sidhu, l532 Vancouver Way, urged that this item go to the
voters, In his opinion, if taxpayer money is to be spent on anything
people should be allowed to vote.
Jerry Wilverding, stated that the choice on the ballot will be to
either vote for a tax increase or to be fined $6,000 a day. He
stated that if this is the choice the voters would probably vote
for it and he doesn't understand the pessimissim on the part of
the Council.
CM-32-397
July 19, 1976
(Report re LAVWMA Joint
powers Agreement)
James Carskadden, stated that if the voters turn the project down
the city should let the EPA fine us $6,000 a day and we will just
not pay the fine. What can they do if the city doesn't have the
funds to pay the fine?
Mayor Tirsell stated that she believes the city doesn't want to
eliminate the police Department and Fire Department in order to
pay a fine, and this is what would result.
Homer Weed, 805 Los Alamos, asked that the council support the 13 MGD
and not change the $1.5 million local share.
Mr. Miller stated that he is sure that if the ballot states what
the alternates are and the costs involved that people will make
a reasonable decision. He urged that the item go to the voters.
Mayor Tirsell commented that a delay of one year on this project ~
cost the taxpayers $9 million. Such a delay would cost the City more
than what the state grant will amount to for the project.
MOTION FAILED 1-3 (Cm Dahlbacka, Kamena and Turner dissenting) .
IT WAS NOTED THAT THERE WAS A MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE MOTION. THE
MOTION IS TO CHANGE THE FIGURE OF 13 MGD to 15.62 MGD, IN THE AGREE-
MENT, WITH NO CHANGE IN THE DOLLAR FIGURE.
MOTION PASSED 3-l (em Turner dissenting) .
CM TURNER MOVED TO CHANGE VI. (c), PAGE 2., TO READ AS FOLLOWS:
(c) "Auditor" shall mean a person selected by the Board
from the staff of one of the participating agencies.
(p) "Treasurer" shall mean a person selected by the Board
from the staff of one of the participating agencies.
THE COUNCIL CONCURRED WITH THE CHANGES ABOVE, AS RECOMMENDED BY
THE PLEASANTON CITY ATTORNEY.
THE COUNCIL CONCURRED THAT ANYTHING HAVING TO DO WITH THE FIGURE
13 MGD, SHOULD BE DELETED AND REPLACED WITH THE FIGURE, l5.62.
THE COUNCIL CONCURRED WITH THE CHANGE TO THE AGREEMENT, SUGGESTED
BY THE PLEASANTON CITY ATTORNEY, 'FOR PARAGRAPH X, CONCERNING THE
AGENCIES OBLIGATION TO PROVIDE INSURANCE TO ITS EMPLOYEES.
:~ c= ~:o ::'~ w;: i:C~CB IV. (CoRersl pewsn)
. WI'fIl CIIANGB& 'fO 'fUE W9RDItlC FOR ITEM ('). ~
~
RECESS
Mayor Tirsell called for a brief recess after which the Council
meeting resumed with members of the Council present as during
roll call.
ORD. AMEND. RE
TAXI CAB RATES
The Assistant City Attorney explained that it seems to be rather
cumbersome to provide for taxicab rate adjustment by ordinance
in view of the fact there is a 30 day waiting period before the
rates are effective. It is recommended that there be an amend-
ment to the ordinance providing that rate setting be done by
resolution.
CM-32-398
July 19, 1976
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ALLOWING FOR THE SETTING OF TAXICAB
RATES BY RESOLUTION, WAS INTRODUCED AND READ BY TITLE ONLY.
THE ORDINANCE WILL BE ADOPTED AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING.
(Ordinance Amending
Taxicab Rates)
The Council received a report from the P.C. concerning an application
by Louis Trotter for a self-service coin operated car wash to be
located on Murrieta Boulevard, west of Fenton. The use could be
permitted by approving a CUP, and it is recommended by the P.C.
that the Council approve the application for construction of a
self-service, coin operated car wash at this location.
REPORT RE CUP APP.
FOR SELF-SERVICE
CAR WASH (Murrieta)
Mr. Musso explained that the application by Mr. Trotter is for
a CUP within a CO Zone, located behind the Holdener Dairy property.
The P.C. made the necessary findings to allow the CUP and did require
certain conditions such as the fencing. The P.C. did express some
concern that the car wash might set a precedent for a similar use
for the front of the property but this was discussed only briefly.
Mr. Musso commented that the problem with this type of application
is that there are not many locations available that would be suit-
able for this type of business.
em Kamena mentioned that one of the votes in favor of the applica-
tion was due to the fact that the front of the property would be
for an office bUilding and yet this is not one of the conditions
of the application.
em Turner stated that he is also undecided as to how he feels about
the application because everything in the report from the P.C. seems
to revolve around the office bUilding for the front of the property.
Personally, he is not enthused about a car wash in this particular
area because of the potential traffic problems. Aloso, the City may
experience receiving other applications that might not be compatible
with the overall plan.
Mr. Trotter, the applicant, spoke to the Council concerning his
plan for the car wash noting that there is sufficient room for
a number of cars on the site and that with respect to traffic
in that area, Murrieta Boulevard is a street with a large volume
of traffic. The P.C. has recommended approval of the application
and they have listed conditions which they feel will make the car
wash suitable for this location.
em Kamena wondered if Mr. Trotter would intend to place an office
bUilding in the front portion of the lot, and Mr. Trotter stated
that this is his intention.
MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE P.C. TO
APPROVE THE CUP, WITH THE FINDINGS OUTLINED IN THEIR WRITTEN REPORT
TO THE COUNCIL; TO IMPOSE THE CONDITIONS LISTED BY THE P.C. WITH THE
FIFTH CONDITION THAT THE CUP APPLIES ONLY TO PARCEL #2 ON THE MAP
WHICH HAS BEEN FILED TO BE INCLUDED IN THE RESOLUTION WITH THE SAME
FINDINGS, AND TO ADOPT THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION. MOTION SECONDED
BY CM KAMENA. MOTION PASSED 3-1 (Cm Turner dissenting) .
Cm Dahlbacka indicated that he shares the concern Over the impact
on the zone, but further development should help hide Visibility
of the car wash.
CM-32-399
July 19, 1976
REPORT RE PARCEL
MAP tl929 (HEXCEL)
Parcel Map 1929 involves property purchased from Hexcel by Wells
Fargo Bank. It was introduced to the Council but action was post~
poned pending a resolution of the tract map requirements associated
with street access and public works improvements. Several meetings
have been held with the applicant and a set of conditions
have been drafted which are acceptable to the applicant and
are recommended by the staff and P.C. for Council approval.
Mr. Musso explained that with respect to Parcel Map t1929, it
involves an exchange of property and the temporary creation of
a lot which will be sold to HEXCEL. He illustrated plans for
development.
Discussion followed concerning the standards for Hillcrest Avenue
because a portion of it will be developed to industrial stan-
dards to accommodate trucks.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE COUNCIL ADOPTED A RESOLUTION APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL
MAP NO. 1929 SUBJECT TO ALL CONDITIONS AS NOTED IN THE SUBMITTED
REPORTS.
RESOLUTION NO. 172-76
A RESOLUTION APPROVING PARCEL MAP 1929
REPORT RE TENTATIVE
PARCEL MAP - PROPERTY
LOCATED ON COLLEGE AVE.
In reviewing the parcel map for property located on the south
side of College Avenue, east of Sherry Way, the P.C. recommends
that the council approve the tentative parcel map subject to
conditions outlined in a written report.
Mayor Tirsell commented that the parcel map is a redefinition
of lot lines for owners Norris, Linn and Garrano.
ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE TENTATIVE MAP WAS APPROVED.
RESOLUTION NO. l73-76
A RESOLUTION APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL
MAP (Norris, Linn and Garrano)
REPORT RE REVISION
OF SUBDIVISION ORD.
The Council will postpone the discussion of the proposed Sub-
division Ordinance until August 2nd, at the request of Cm
Turner, but Cm Dahlbacka stated that he would like to comment
on the changes he would propose, this evening.
P. 19, Section 20.40.l, there is reference to provisions for
the same right-of-way and street width for cul-de-sac streets
as for other streets and he believes this is not necessary.
He asked that the council give this some consideration.
Mayor Tirsell commented that one of the reasons the standards
are the same is to allow room for emergency vehicles, but
the Council will consider the item.
CM-32-400
July 19, 1976
(Revision of Subdivision
Ordinance)
em Dahlbacka stated that no other street widths are defined else-
where in this particular ordinance - the street width is generally
discussed someplace else. His contention is that the street width
belongs in another document - not this ordinance.
P. 26, 20.54, allows fees to be paid either at the time the map or
building permits are issued. Cm Dahlbacka wondered if it would be
an advantage to calculate the dedication fee at the time of the
issuance of the permit because a substantial amount of time can
lapse between the time a map is approved and permits are approved.
Perhaps fees could be paid in lieu of land dedication at the time
the building permit is issued rather than at the time of conveyance.
He would like the Council to consider this possibility also.
P. 27, 20.56, indicates that at the time of approval of the final
subdivision map, etc., the City shall specify when development of
the park or recreational facilities shall begin. em Dahlbacka
wondered how LARPD feels about this - it would seem that it is
incorrect to say the City shall specify. This is something that
has to be done by LARPD and it would seem that they should set up
the timetable.
Mr. Musso explained that LARPD must develop within a certain length
of time and Mayor Tirsell commented that if LARPD does not develop
within five years, the land reverts back to the owner.
Mr. Musso noted that the City has primary responsibility for develop-
ment of the property, including the park. By agreement, the City
allows LARPD to develop the park.
Section 20.80, is a section which deals with reserved dedication,
and em Dahlbacka commented that he would like to know more about
what reserved dedication is, in more precise terms.
em Dahlbacka noted that this is really not a problem and he will
contact someone from the staff on this item.
em Dahlbacka stated that he would also like some discussion concern-
ing the fees relative to Section 20.93.
THE COUNCIL WILL DISCUSS THIS ITEM ON AUGUST 2nd.
The Assistant City Attorney commented that there is no provision
in the Subdivision Ordinance for public hearings on any type of
map and the Council may wish to consider this.
Mr. Parness stated that he would urge the Council not to hold
official public hearings for subdivision maps.
The Council concurred that they would prefer to follow Council policy
rather than specifyinq in the ordinance that public hearinqs shall be
held.
REPORT RE PROFESSIONAL
PLANNING REPRESENTATION
The City Manager reported that our staff and legal counsel believe
that outside professional planning representation should be retained
to assist in the official response to be made by Livermore to the
Alameda County General Plan amendments pertaining to the Livermore-
Amador Valley. It is proposed that Robert L. Williams, President
of Coleman-williams, Inc., a planning and engineering consultant
firm, be retained.
CM 32-401
July 19, 1976
(Report re Professional
Planning Representation)
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, A RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF THE SER-
VICES OF COLEMAN-WILLIAMS, INC.
RESOLUTION NO. 168-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF MEMO-
RANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (Coleman-Williams, Inc.)
REPORT RE COMMERCIAL
TRUCK PARKING
A report from the police Chief indicates that the Public Works
Department has placed load limit signs at the entrances to the
springtown-Greenville North area which will enable the Police
Department to enforce weight restrictions in that area.
If parking on Vasco Road is to be restricted, posting would
be necessary and Chief Lindgren would recommend posting of
restricted parking signs.
Cm Turner stated that he would like to request that the City
post the restricted parking signs on Vasco Road, as recommended
by the police Chief, within the next 30 days.
P . C. REPORT RE COUNTY
REFERRAL - REZONING
OF ANDERSON PROPERTY
The Planning Commission reported that the RS rezoning application
by Chester Anderson has been heard by the County but a view should
be expressed by the City.
Mr. Musso explained that the P.C. recommendation has been for-
warded to the County with the notation that a recommendation
from the City Council would be forthcoming. If action is taken
by the County the Council would have to contact the Board of
supervisors who will be hearing this item in August.
The County Planning Commission as well as the City of Livermore
Planning Commission, recommended approval of the rezoning, with
the condition that the problems of sewage and other service prob-
lems are resolved.
REPORT RE BIKEWAY
REGULATIONS
Mr. Lee reported that he would like the Council to adopt an
amendment to the municipal code relative to bikeways so that
it is not mandatory that bike riders use the bikeway and they
may ride on the street if they prefer.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE THE AMEND-
MENT TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW A BIKERIDER TO RIDE ON
THE STREET, SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL. MOTION PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM-32-402
July 19, 1976
REPORT RE RETENTION OF
MONIES FOR WATER RECLA-
MATION PLANT, PHASE III
The Director of Public Works reported that the contractor for the
Water Reclamation Plant, Phase III Project, has requested that the
City reduce the retention of monies owed to him from 10% to 5%, as
50% of the project has been completed. The state's policy is to
allow a reduction from 10% to 5% when 50% of the project is completed
and it is recommended that the Council allow the reduction in the
amount of retention of monies.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A REDUCTION IN
THE AMOUNT OF MONIES TO BE RETAINED FROM 10% TO 5%. MOTION WAS
SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
Cm Turner stated that he would vote against the motion for the
reasons he has mentioned in the past concerning retention of
monies until a project is completed.
MOTION PASSED 3-1 (Cm Turner dissenting).
RESOLUTION NO. 169-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING RELEASE OF FUNDS (C.
Norman Peterson Company)
CONSENT CALENDAR
Res. Rej. Claim
(Robert Lankford)
The Council adopted a resolution rejecting the claim of Robert
Lankford.
RESOLUTION NO. 170-76
A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM
OF ROBERT LEE LANKFORD
Res. Approving Tenta-
Tive Parcel Map 1984
(South "H" & 7th Sts)
The Council adopted a resolution approving tentative Parcel Map
1984, for property located at the northeast corner of South "H"
Street and Seventh Street.
It was noted that in-filling of properties in the older sections
of town ia encouraged as part of the General Plan but the City
must be sure to get a letter from the School District indicating
that school facilities are available. (This is a requirement of
the approval).
RESOLUTION NO. l74-76
A RESOLUTION APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL
MAP 1984 (Bertha D. and Forrest Frick)
Payroll & Claims
There were 68 claims in the amount of $101,158.28, and 286 payroll
warrants in the amount of $96,759.35, for a total of $l97,9l7.63,
dated July 12, 1976, and approved by the City Manager.
CM-32-403
July 19, 1976
Res. Auth. Execution
of Lease With IBM
The Council adopted a resolution authorizing execution of a
lease with IBM for a memory typewriter which was authorized
for the City Attorney's Office and approved in the 1976-77
fiscal year budget.
RESOLUTION NO. 17l-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
AGREEMENT (Lease of Equipment: IBM)
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Recommendation of
Appt. to ACTEB Board)
Cm Kamena stated that with Council approval he would like to recom-
mend the appointment of Neil Riley, 528 Briarwood Court, to the
ACTEB Manpower Advisory Council, as a representative of the busi-
ness sector. The Council concurred.
(Purchase of
Recycled Paper)
em Dahlbacka stated that the Solid Waste Management Committee recom-
mends that agencies begin purchasing recycled paper and if the City
does not purchase recycled paper at present, perhaps this should be
considered.
Mr. Parness stated that the City purchases paper from the County
and they do purchase some recycled paper, but he is not sure how
much or if the City receives any of that which is recycled. He
will make a check and report back to the Council.
(Pinball Machine
Regulations)
em Dahlbacka stated that he has received a complaint from someone
"who is concerned about minors playing the pinball machines and
em Dahlbacka asked that the staff check the regulations of other
communities and whether or not there should be an age limit imposed.
The Council concurred that this should be investigated and" the
staff was directed to do so and report back to the Council.
(Application before County
re Commercial Land)
Mayor Tirsell asked the Planning Director what the status was of
the application before the County for a commercial feed~.~
directly across from the Civic Center Site.
Mr. Musso explained that the County will be eonsidering it some-
time in August, but there is a possibility it will be postponed.
CM-32-404
July 19, 1976
Mayor Tirsell asked about the PUC appeal of the car wash people, and
was advised by Mr. Parness that the opinion of the examiner is being
typed and when it is ready for distribution there are time intervals
that come into play and there is a certain length of time for it to
be under study before they either confirm, deny or modify the opinion.
The staff is trying to work out a solution with the owners of the
property and there have been several plot plans prepared and submitted
to them by the engineering department.
(re Car Wash Appeal
Before PUC - 1st Street)
(Card of SYmpathy - Staley)
Mayor Tirsell asked that the staff arrange for a sYmpathy card to be
sent to Cm Staley's mother in the Council's name.
(Corps of Engineers Study)
Mayor Tirsell asked the Public Works Director if he had prepared the
letter of assurance to the Corps of Engineers.
Mr. Parness explained that Mr. Futch advised the Council that the
Zone 7 Board is not ready. The Conncil agreed it WQuld be appropriate
to wait until Zone 7 concludes something regarding the matter before
the Council.
Mr. Lee stated that he had prepared a letter for the Council and
evaluated the concerns of the Council, and he has been in touch with
the project engineer of the Corps.
Mayor Tirsell stated that Mr. Futch had studied the matter thoroughly
and he has submitted about nine items in which there is a discrepency
between what actually exists and what is in the plan study, and she
asked that these be duplicated and included in the agenda item.
APPROVE
Mayor Tirsell adjourned the meeting at 12:15
~b_ /}J ~:'jj!jl
ayor
NJ~ f{~~!-==-
ADJOURNMENT
a.m.
ATTEST
CM-32-40S
Regular Meeting of July 26, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore city council was held on
July 26, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:05
p.m. with Mayor Tirsell presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Turner, Staley and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: em Dahlbacka and Kamena (seated immediately after
roll call)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirsell led the councilmembers as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES - 7/12/76
df/~
P. ~,- under Town Meetings item, add last paragraph as follows:
The suggestion was made that the meeting be held at Springtown
and the golf course could be discussed.
.3 f..3 p!.'
P. ~, 4th paragraph should read: Cm Dahlbacka stated he would
be willing to consider reallocation, in light of the potential
for commercial development downtown, and felt that it should be
investigated with respect to a time lim~t.
P. 370, next to last paragraph, line 3 should read: of how much
floor space is being covered, which equates to how much sign...etc.
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE (Mayor Tirsell abstaining) THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF
JULY 12, 1976, WERE APPROVED, AS CORRECTED.
OPEN FORUM
(Business License Tax)
The owner of the small janitorial business located on First Street
stated that she and her husband recently opened their shop and are
trying to get started. They obtained a business liceJllse in January
for $20 and now the minimum business license tax is $40. She felt
the $40 is too high because they have very little business at this
time and their gross is extremely low - lower than the tax.
em Kamena stated that there were many discussions during the past
year, in considering the business license tax, as to whether the $40
minimum should be higher. He agrees that in some cases the $40 mini-
mum is very high on a percentage basis when a gross income is small.
The Committee felt that $40 to do business in Livermore for one year
is not unreasonably high but it is true that if a gross income amounts
to $40 and the tax is $40, this would be 100% on a percentage basis.
He suggested that the Director of Finance, Mr. Nolan, be contacted
because if business is done out-of-town, the ordinance may be
interpreted differently.
(Eviction-City Hall Annex)
Jerry Wilverding, 4886 primrose Lane, stated that he has been reading
in the newspapers about the city and the law suit with Mr. Madis. He
wondered if the City has plans if Mr. Madis wins the suit against
the city concerning the eviction from the annex and Mr. Parness
indicated that the city has no specific plans in mind.
CM-32-406
July 26, 1976
P.H. RE REFUSE
RATE INCREASE
At the City Council meeting of July l2, consideration of the pro-
posed increase for refuse collection rates was postponed in order
that an official public hearing might be scheduled.
Questions were posed at the meeting of July 12 which have been
referred to the franchisee for a response: 1) Why were the refuse
collection rates for the tri-city area, granted in 1971, less than
those for Livermore? 2) Why is the recently negotiated rate increase
for VCSD less than the amount proposed for Livermore? 3) Would any
cost saving be realized through use of a plastic bag pickup curb
service? 4) Would there be any cost saving associated with a man-
dated customer refuse separation practice?
Mr. Parness reported that about three years ago a study of refuse
rates began in a joint effort among 10 of the 12 Alameda County
public jurisdictions. Prior to this time it was difficult to
determine what the accurate revenues and expenditures were for
Oakland Scavenger due to the fact that they have a conglomerate
of business enterprises. Price, Waterhouse, and Company has com-
pleted a nine month study which went into the accounting methods
of Oakland Scavenger, in detail, and which has been reviewed by
the study committee.
Mr. Parness stated that on several occasions, Oakland Scavenger
has asked that possible rate adjustments be discussed but they
were asked to wait for results of the formulation of the proposed
program. The program is a type of mini PUC approach to revenues
and expenditures for this operation. All of the public jurisdictions,
with the exception of Albany, Livermore and possibly Newark, have
adopted the rate adjustments, as recommended by the joint technical
committee. The rates are based upon the current level of service
and also upon other phases of the franchise fee collected by the
jurisdictions. This is a very complex subject matter to try to
assess.
Randall Jennings Smith, Oakland Finance Director, stated that the
purpose of the committee was to set equitable rates - rates which
would be fair both to the public and to the company. Oakland
Scavenger provides a very essential service and they are entitled
to earnings which would represent a fair return on their invest-
ments. They have not had a rate increase since 1971 and the com-
mittee believes that the present recommendation is a modest one.
The rates are in line with other jurisdictions, and part of the
recommendation is that each juriSdiction should furnish its share
of the total revenues to be provided to the company to generate
a rate of return at a little over 8%. If possible, they would
like to see that all the jurisdictions accept the recommended rates,
effective July 1, 1976, or as soon as possible thereafter.
em Dahlbacka asked if Livermore is helping to pay for the Alta-
mont landfill as part of Oakland Scavenger's investments and
as a part of the consideration for Livermore's rates.
Mr. Smith stated that Livermore is not paying for the cost of
the landfill although it is sharing in the total investments
made by Oakland Scavenger. The total revenues projected for
Oakland Scavenger for 1977 amount to $26 million. Of this
amount, Livermore would pay $1.245 million, while Oakland is
paying $13 million. The cost spread would be as follows:
$14.5 million - Northern Area
6.4 million - Central Area
4.0 million - Southern Area
l.2 million - Eastern Area (Livermore)
$26.1 million TOTAL
CM-32-407
July 26, 1976
(P.H. re Refuse
Rate Increase)
Mr. Smith stated that in Livermore's rates, it is paying for the
rate of return, not the land for the Altamont site.
em Dahlbacka wondered if the $1.2 million we will be paying is
for 8% of the return on investments and Mr. Smith indicated that
it really doesn't work that way either. The $26 million is a
gross revenue and the $1.229 is the 8% return on investments.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that his understanding was that Livermore
would be paying $1.2 million and Mr. Smith indicated that this
is not correct.
em Dahlbacka stated that Livermore will be using the Vasco Road
dump site for another 20 years and Livermore should not have to
share in the cost of a disposal site for other areas, whether
it is sharing in the return on investments or whatever.
em Turner stated that he would agree with em Dahlbacka in that
he has difficulty in deciding to pay for a site that will be used
by someone else and may be heavily funded with federal money.
Mr. Smith stated that the cost of the site is not included in
the Livermore rate.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he would be interested in knowing what
the PUC allows PG&E on their rate of return. Also, their assets
are all in capital, and he would like to know if this is the same
situation for Oakland Scavenger.
Mr. Smith stated that different calculations were used for a return
on the business which is a relatively new type of calculation
and recommended by the American National Association. It is compar-
ing return on investments with items such as savings discounts
and mortgages, etc.
Ray Faltings, 1018 Via Granada, stated that the proposed rate for
Dublin is $3.60 for one can and $3.85 for one can for Livermore.
Oakland Scavenger has said that there is a l5% difference in services
rendered which would mean that the rate should be $4.43 for 2 cans
in the summer rather than $5.55, as mentioned in the report.
Mr. Faltings stated that Oakland Scavenger claims that the reason
the rates are less for Dublin is because they use larger trucks
but there should be no reason the larger trucks can't be used in
Livermore because there is no weight limit. Also, a 38% increase
is proposed for the tri-city area but a 64% increase for Livermore.
It would seem that if an 8% profit can be realized from a 38% increase
in other communities that a 38% or 40% increase should allow an 8%
profit from Livermore.
Mayor Tirsell explained that there was a built-in rate increase
for the tri-city area, in their last contract, and they have already
had one increase. Livermore has not had such an increase.
Lois Hill, 874 Adams Avenue, representative of the Recycling Center,
stated that she made a random telephone survey asking people if
they use the Livermore Recycling Center for newspapers and cans
and that 33% said yes. She then asked if people would be willing
to sort cans and papers for home pickup and 77% said they would.
Livermore could almost double the volume of materials recovered
vOluntarily. She felt if separating materials were mandated the
volume of recovered materials could be increased even more. The
Council must decide whether it wants more material to be reclaimed
or economy.
CM-32-408
July 26, 1976
(P.H. re Refuse
Rate Increase)
Mrs. Hill stated that the present system exploits free labor
and the members of the 52 volunteer groups that work at the
Center, the members of the Mormon Church who keep newspaper
recycling going continuously in Livermore, regardless of
market fluctuation, those who conduct paper drives, and
private groups and individuals who sell their aluminum to
Reynolds.
Mrs. Hill stated that on the other hand, separate pickup would
require paid employees. The most lucrative item is newspapers
which can easily be picked up during regular garbage collection
by present employees. Glass, cans, cardboard, and drained oil
are more difficult to collect with present equipment. Special
trucks have been designed to collect these types of items, and
color coded bags could be used for separated collection. If
the City's goal is material recovery, separated collections should
be considered for Livermore. Many people are willing to separate
items but are not willing to drive to the recycling center and
depend upon neighbors to take their material to the center.
If separated collection is not the choice of the Council then
perhaps consideration could be given to an expanded, City
operated, recycling center program. Mrs. Hill asked that
everyone cooperate in planning our future with vision as our
forefathers did in planning our nation.
Susan Wells, 740 Hanover, stated that she has been very upset
with the garbage company for two summers, and the trash pickup
in Livermore. Oakland Scavenger is asking for a huge rate
increase and on several occasions they have refused to take
the garbage from her home because the can was too heavy. She
stated that other friends have experienced this same problem. She
stated that she agrees that everyone is entitled to a cost of living
raise but they are not offering Livermore any additional service
and in her opinion a 63% rate increase is not justified. She stated
that if the rates go as high as Oakland Scavenger proposes, she will
discontinue the service and take the garbage to the dump.
Rob Rothram, l373 Chelsea Way, stated that he is new in Liver-
more and he finds the rates for garbage collection very high
in comparison to what he was used to paying in Minnesota. He
indicated that he cannot understand why there is only one garbage
collection agency in Livermore and why he does not have a choice
as to what company he would like to service him.
Mayor Tirsell explained that the City allows a franchise for
the garbage collection in the City. Some cities have their
own municipal pickup and Newark, for example, has municipal
pickup as well as Oakland Scavenger. He added that after
having recently paid $35 for a curbside mailbox, he finds $5
per can an unacceptable cost.
Mayor Tirsell commented that the rate for garbage pickup in
San Francisco is much higher and people would really be upset
if they had to pay that price.
Jerry Wilverding, stated that as a representative of the American
Taxpayers Union, Local #115, he has sent a letter to the Council
concerning this item and he believes the City should open bids
to other companies. We live in a capitalistic world and no
business is guaranteed 8% on their investment. Some grocery stores
are operating on a 4% margin. Mr. Wilverding asked if the 8% is
based on an equity investment or their total gross value investment.
CM-32-409
July 26, 1976
(P.H. re Refuse
Rate Increase)
Mr. Smith stated that the return on investments is calculated on
the total assets - not the equity. The return on total gross
revenues is a separate thing. He added that the return for total
sales at a grocery store can be very small but the return on their
investments is better than 8%.
Don Miller, 2862 Waverly Way, stated that Mr. Smith has indicated
that the overall return on investments is 8.3%, however, implied
in this is that it is different for the different divisions and
the question would be, what is the rate of return that Livermore
is paying, and is it larger or smaller than the average. Is
Livermore paying more than 8.3% or less?
Mr. Miller stated that in aSking if the Altamont landfill is part
of the investment that Livermore is paying for the answer was
that it is not, but Livermore is paying for it in the way of assets
to the company in the rate of return. Consequently, the Altamont
landfill is a part of the investment and the City is paying for
it. In his opinion Livermore should not pay for any part of it
because the City does not use it and because the Altamont landfill
is wrong, in principle, from the standpoint of the Solid Waste
Management goals, because landfill should be phased out.
Mr. Miller stated that he would like to know if the large trucks
to be used for the transfer stations will be a part of the overall
costs that will ultimately be assigned partially to Livermore,
as well as the engineering costs for the Altamont landfill which
may be part of the operating costs which Livermore helps pay for.
Mr. Miller stated that it has also never been clarified as to
whether or not Dublin is included in the Livermore division.
It was mentioned by Mr. Faltings that Dublin's hauling costs should
be more expensive than Livermore's because they are farther away
from the dump site.
The rate of return for PG&E, allowed by the PUC, has been mentioned
and PG&E does not receive 12% on their investments. This was
discussed by the Council in the past and it was determined that
their rate of return is 7.5% or possibly 8%. This is an issue
with the PUC because the numbers can be raised without any change
in service and without any investment increase, making large changes
in rates paid. The 8.3% seems to be an arbitrary figure in the
question of why 8.3% rather than 5.1% or whatever.
The items concerning the allocations of Livermore's costs should
be examined by the Council because it does not appear that all
of them are being fairly allocated by the Joint Refuse Rate Committee,
and in particular, those costs relative to the Altamont. These
costs should be deleted from Livermore's share, and they should
be deleted from the share of other communities who do not use
the Altamont site. He urged that the twice a week pickup in the
summer be continued because this helps eliminate fl~es and the
smell from garbage.
Elton Johnson, 868 Caliente Drive, stated that he is disturbed
by the proposed increased rate for garbage collection. He would
suggest that someone take a look at the management and operations
of Oakland Scavenger. He agrees that they may be entitled to
some increase since they have not had an increase for five years
but he stated that his income certainly has not increased by 63%
during the past five years.
CM-32-4l0
July 26, 1976
(P.H. re Refuse
Rate Increase)
Mr. Johnson stated that he would like to know what options might
be open to citizens of Livermore for disposal of their garbage
other than through Oakland Scavenger.
Mayor Tirsell commented that the other option is to take garbage
to the dump, on an individual basis.
Jerry Sellick, 915 Orion Way, stated that he has become confused
about the 63%.
Mayor Tirsell explained that the present rate allows pickup in the
summer at the same rate as that paid during the other months of
the year. There is no extra charge for the second pickup during
the summer. The proposal is that residents pay 63% more during
the winter and in excess of 100% more in the summer for the pickup.
Mr. Johnson stated that he comes from the east coast and in that
part of the country garbage collection is considered part of the
property tax. The garbage collectors take whatever is put out
with certain limitations on the amount of weight. He stated that
he considers this a type of tax increase and the City will be ask-
ing the citizens for a tax override in the upcoming election. Hope-
fully people will not approve a second tax increase in the next
election.
Mayor Tirsell explained that the rate would be charged to pay
Oakland Scavenger for the franchise in the City. The City acts
as a type of PUC in listening to Oakland Scavenger and letting
them have the franchise to operate in the City.
Claudia Nielson, 621 Pelican Court, stated that the newspaper
indicates that Livermore would be receiving 2% of the gross
receipts to Livermore-Dublin Disposal Company, or $12,000. By
increasing the percentage by five times, the City expects to
net $60,000 next year.
Mayor Tirsell commented that this is the franchise rate.
Mrs. Nielson stated that she has a 2- can service during the
summer and it would mean a cost increase of about 150% for the
summer months on her bill.
Donald Nelson, 2463 Sixth Street, stated that he agrees with
what Mrs. Hill has said and that some consideration should be
given to people with fixed incomes. The older people of the
community are a very important segment of the community and
should be considered.
CM STALEY MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, SECONDED BY CM
KAMENA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Cm Turner stated that he would be interested in pursuing the
idea of garbage separation and use of plastic bags that will
be sold by Oakland Scavenger. The bags would be easily identi-
fied as Oakland Scavenger bags and the purchase price would
include pickup. He added that by setting the bag out on the
curb it should also help reduce the cost of pickup.
Mr. Corley, representative of Oakland Scavenger, stated that
they are interested in trying the plastic bag method. People
would be asked to place the bags on the curb and this should
help reduce the cost. However, they are not ready to begin
this type of service yet because they have to find a type of
bag suitable for this method of pickup.
CM-32-41l
July 26, 1976
Mr. Corley stated there have been concerns expressed by the staff
and other cities as to having the bags sitting out on the curbs.
He would urge that the staff give this consideration.
em Turner stated that it is his understanding that Alburquerque
has implemented this type of program and if Oakland Scavenger has
been giving this type of program some thought, they must have some
figures in mind.
Mr. Corley stated that Oakland Scavenger has thought about it but
they ran into the problem of bag distribution and whether or not
they should be sold by Oakland Scavenger, sold at City Hall, or
what. The reason they don't have the figures is because this would
mean a complete change in their operations. Mr. Corley stated
that either the whole City would have to go to the bag system or
not at all. The company couldn't have half the City doing one
thing with half doing something else. This is the type of system
Cm Turner was referring to - complete bag system with no cans at
all.
Mayor Tirsell indicated that she misunderstood. She thought the
bag system would be additional service along with the regular can
service.
em Dahlbacka stated that in Albuquerque they have a bag system
and people purchase coupons from City Hall and then get the bags
at the grocery stores with the coupons. People place the bags out
in front on the day of delivery and people felt this system is
satisfactory.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he believes the bag system offers a lot
of flexibility and recycling could be done by using color coded
bags. Also, more garbage generated means more cost to the indi-
vidual and in his opinion the rates should reflect this. People
should pay in proportion to the amount of garbage they generate.
The bags would take care of this situation. People on fixed incomes
are not the people generating all the garbage so this would also be
an advantage to them.
Mr. Parness stated that he would agree that those who generate more
garbage should have to pay more than those who generate little
garbage. For this reason he feels it is a shame that some cities
include in the tax assessment for property because this does not
reflect the amount of garbage generated by the owner. He also
suggested that the City contact the City of Fremont which has
conducted a pilot study on the bag system. He stated that he has
contacted people who were part of the pilot program and the response
was good and people favored this type of system.
em Turner stated that if there is support to pursue the bag system
the Council should take some type of action. If there is no sup-
port for this type of program the Council should indicate this now.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he would like to know how Livermore
stands with respect to the overall investments of Oakland Scaven-
ger. Is Livermore greater or lower?
Mr. Alberti, Oakland Scavenger Company, stated that Livermore is
included in the overall investments as part of the Joint Powers
Agencies and they are included in the Altamont site investment.
If the philosophy is taken that people should not pay for items
not used people would complain about paying property taxes for
all the services covered that they have never used, such as pOlice
and fire services.
CM-32-4l2
July 26, 1976
(P.H. re Refuse
Rate Increase
Mayor Tirsell stated that this is quite a different thing because
a private company is involved and everyone is helping with their
capitalization program. Livermore is helping to pay for a dump
that it will never use and Livermore has a separate contract for
its dump site.
Mr. Alberti stated that if Livermore is going to be a part of the
Joint Refuse Rate Committee it has to be included in the formula
which will apply to all agencies. Each agency can't pick and choose
which items they will pay for. Other communities could say that they
are not interested in the fact that Livermore needs new trucks and
these types of arguments could go on forever. Unless all agencies
are included in the same formula it will mean that Oakland Scavenger
will have to go back to the old method of negotiating with each com-
munity on an individual basis and separate contracts.
Mayor Tirsell stated that it would seem that Mr. Alberti is implying
that the rate setting committee did not consider whether or not a
city owned its own dump, distance from the dump, or total amount of
gargabe collected in that city. If this is the case and the total
character of a city is not built into the rate study structure then
she would not be interested in the committee.
Mr. Alberti noted that these items were considered in setting the
rates for operational costs, but this was not considered as far as
investments. The differences are reflected in the rates but not
in the 8.3% return on the total investments.
em Dahlbacka pointed out that the 8.3% return is due to the rates
they receive.
Mr. Alberti stated that he could only reiterate what he said before,
that one year Livermore may be getting new trucks and everyone else
will be helping to pay the cost, and other cities will be getting
other things, but this is part of the overall package. If everyone
can't agree with this type of system they will have to go back to
the separate negotiations.
Mr. Smith explained that it is just not possible to break down the
assets of various cities to determine what portion or percentage
of return would be fair. He then went through a formula on the
blackboard illustrating what Livermore's share will be.
Mr. Nolan explained that on the last page of the report to the
Council, the operating ratio concept is shown. This is an attempt
to show the profit the company will make on its revenues. The
profit on sales would be a little over 5% of the sales dollars.
Of those profit dollars, the returning earnings, they revert to
the company and from the prOfits the company's operations such
as equipment and land acquisition, are acquired.
Discussion followed, concerning the profit. Mr. Nolan indicated
that his interpretation is that the retained earnings of the
company are used to fund the long range capital programs and
Livermore is contributing a little over 5% of the revenue dollars
retained by the company from which they fund their long range programs.
The cost of the Altamont dump site has not really been allocated, per
se, to Livermore other than what would be paid for out of profits.
He explained that 5% on gross revenues represents 8% return on their
investments.
Mr. Smith explained that the majority of the charges for equipment,
etc., are charged directly to operations through depreciation.
CM-32-4l3
July 26, 1976
(P.H. re Refuse
Rate Increase)
Cm Dahlbacka asked if Dublin is part of the Livermore division,
and it was explained that it is not because they were not part
of the rate study committee. Cm Dahlbacka asked why their rates
are $3.60 and Livermore's will be $3.85.
Mr. Smith explained that there is a difference in the mix of resi-
dential and commercial service for Livermore and Dublin. Also,
Livermore had extra service in the summer and Dublin did not.
It was explained that commercial and industrial users subsidize
residential users.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he is still very much interested in the
possibility of the plastic bag type of system and he would like
to get figures on what the costs would be for this type of opera-
tion, realizing that Oakland Scavenger has indicated that this
cannot be done overnight.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he is also concerned about people on fixed
incomes and those with low incomes who do have trouble paying
their bills for garbage. He would suggest that the rate struc-
ture be reviewed to see if something can be done to allow a lower
1 can rate. Most people who have 2 cans have no trouble paying
for the garbage. Cm Dahlbacka added that he would like to see
Oakland Scavenger come up with a plan for recycling materials within
the next six months to one year.
Cm Turner asked if Livermore receives any credit from material
recycled, such as paper and rags.
Mr. Alberti indicated that Livermore does receive credit for
recycled material.
Cm Turner asked if Oakland Scavenger would be willing to nego-
tiate on the twice weekly pickup since they are now asking that
people pay extra for it.
Mr. Alberti stated that as long as the money is there they will
agree to pick up three times a week. The staff worked out a for-
mula they felt would be agreeable to everyone and would be at a
rate that people could afford. He believes the staff has made
the best proposal but if Livermore wants twice weekly pickup,
they would go to the $4.20 for 1 can rate.
em Dahlbacka stated that he would like to see a recomputation
of the formula to allow a lower rate for 1 can. The total
dollars to Oakland Scavenger from Livermore would remain the
same. He would also like a motion to be made directing the
staff to work on the plastic bag proposal.
em Staley commented that he would interpret what Cm Dahlbacka
is saying as follows: Assuming the Council will accept the
Joint Technical Committee's recommendation for an 8.3% return
and the amount of money raised by the rate schedule equals the
8.3% return, how can we change the rate schedule so that 1 can
will cost half as much as 2 cans and arrive at the same dollar
figure. In other words, charge $3 for I can and $6 for 2 cans.
Mayor Tirsell stated that while she agrees with the concept that
people who generate more garbage should pay for it, she does
believe that it doesn't take twice as much work to piCk up 2 cans
and there are many families who need the second can because of
the size of their family. These people would be penalized if
the rate schedule were adopted, as suggested by em Dahlbacka.
CM-32-4l4
July 26, 1976
(P.H. re Refuse
Rate Increase)
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would not be willing to accept the
schedule, as suggested by Cm Dahlbacka unless a study is done.
It was noted that $3 for 1 can and $6 for 2 cans is only an example
of what Cm Dahlbacka would like and not the suggested fee.
em Staley commented that he is not sure what the fee would have to
be but a certain total amount of dollars is needed. A projection
would be made based on the number of cans collected but the disadvan-
tage of a high rate for 2 cans is that many people may cancel the
second can and Oakland Scavenger will receive less revenue from
Livermore than what they have requested.
Mr. Alberti commented that the problem with lowering the rate for
1 can is that everybody has I can but only a certain number of
people have the 2 can service. Also, allowing the second can for
$1.70 means that larger families can have their garbage taken care
of properly rather than having them try to stuff everything into
one can and having additional garbage lying allover the place.
It is true that about 60% of the families in Livermore have the
2 can service compared to about 18% in Oakland.
em Kamena stated that he believes the potential benefit from recycl-
ing, which is stimulated by increased costs for multiple cans, can't
be ignored. If Livermore is committed to the idea of recycling
and conservation, Mr. Alberti should be asked to come back with some
innovative plans for a recycling program.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A 10% FRANCHISE
FEE. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM STALEY, AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Mayor Tirse1l asked that the staff prepare a resolution reflecting
the motion.
The City Attorney explained that any action taken tonight will be
reflected in resolutions under Old Business on the agenda, next week.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION AUTH-
ORIZING REFUSE RATE COLLECTION REVISION TO REFLECT THE LINEAR COSTS
TO BE PROPORTIONAL TO THE NUMBER OF CANS COLLECTED. MOTION SECONDED
BY CM STALEY.
Mr. Parness commented that the City can't be sure a revised fee
schedule will work, such as $3 for I can and $6 for 2 cans, because
if the fee per can is an equal amount the public may not act favorably.
em Turner commented that he believes it probably won't work.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would speak against the motion also.
From a philosophical standpoint, she agrees with the motion, but
she hasn't heard anyone say they would be willing to pay as much
as $6.20 for garbage pickup. This is the type of thing that people
need more information on.
em Dahlbacka stated that his suggestion would be $3.l0 for 1 can
and $6.20 for the 2 cans. This would be a 75~ reduction for
everyone with I can even though it would be a 60~ increase, over
the proposed increase, for 2 cans.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would rather see a program such as
the plastic bag pickup whereby someone on a fixed income can purchase
the bags for a fee that would include pickup. If they use only I bag
per week they would be purchasing less bags and their costs would be
less than someone using 3 bags per week, for example.
CM-32-415
July 26, 1976
yJ
fi~J\Ji<
Cm Turner stated that the proposed $3.85 for 1 can includes~A~/
all of the costs. i ",uQ1 u9A ""...A lor this reason he believes .J:.t: f
should not be reduced to $3.10 wi~h a ,g~ raise OR ~he other
eRa of the .~ale .begause there may be many people who are now
paying for 2 cans who will go to I can when the rates are in-
creased. He would agree that the $3.85 for the 1 can which.
would pay for the costs would b~ rea~o!}ab_le -t.k.-- 6t7,! ~
adduf.t-;; ---cIu, ~~, ~I~~'
Cm Staley commented that there may be so~~~erit in making
the second weekly pickup less expensive than trying to work
out a formula to make the second can twice as expensive as one
can. For the reasons mentioned by Mr. Miller earlier, he feels
it is advisable to encourage the twice weekly pickup because it
helps eliminate flies and odor and he would suggest that this fee
be reasonable.
(P. H. Re Refuse
Rate Increase)
Mayor Tirsell suggested that the Council vote on the motion on
the floor and then discuss the voluntary second pickup.
Cm Kamena stated that wha~~m St~~~~~as said would be contrary
to the philosophy of the ~~~{i~nlch is that those who gener-
ate more garbage should pay more.
Mr. Miller stated that the Council could work on the second pickup
as a public health measure.
RECESS
Mayor Tirsell called for a brief recess after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present. Discus-
sion continued concerning the proposed rates for Oakland Scavenger.
Mr. Miller indicated that he would like to comment and it was
noted that even though the public hearing has been closed the
Council will listen to anyone who would like to speak if their
comments are brief.
Mr. Miller stated that operating expenses are complicated but can
be separated out for the several divisions of Oakland Scavenger.
Assets are few and big and they can be separated out also. The
company has separated out the transfer station, from our assets,
and the Altamont site should be separated out of our assets as well.
The Altamont site is a $l million total asset of the $ll million
total assets of Oakland Scavenger. This represents lOt and means
that 10% of the assets of Oakland Scavenger should not apply to
Livermore and yet they are proposing that Livermore pay for it
out of the $65,000 profit from Livermore towards their 8.3% return.
This means that $65,000 could be reduced by about lOt for Altamont
and if the transfer stations have not been deducted, the percentage
could be reduced even more. A 10% reduction would amount to about
3-4~ a can and it is not insignificant. He urged that the Council
get all of this information before making a decision.
Mayor Tirsell stated that it was pointed out in the testimony
that if certain items are separated out, Oakland Scavenger will
have to get back to the method of negotiating with each city
on an individual basis with separate contracts.
em Staley commented that he agrees with the motion but in
thinking about this item he has come to the conclusion that
homeowners have not had any warning of the increased rates and this
would be a major impact on homeowners with 2 cans. For this reason
he is no longer in favor of the motion as it is stated but he would
CM-32-4l6
July 26, 1976
(P.H. Re Refuse
Rate Increase)
like the Joint Refuse Rate Study Committee to review the concept of
a straight line rate for cans and report back to the Council at some
future date. He stated that he does believe this is a valuable social
tool and does support the use of that tool to encourage recycling.
At this point he believes such action would be a little hasty.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Council has held a pUblic hearing to
hear how the public feels about the rate increases and nobody has
indicated they would be willing to pay a social debt on their garbage
rate. Those who have worked on the Joint Refuse Rate Study Committee
or the Joint Powers, realize there is a social obligation involved
but there should be a study concerning the impact on the community.
f\~i.,LL-o A tl.~v,Y ~r:L
One- meri\ffcr )if-tho audieDc9 commented that he is sorry he did not know
that em Dahlbacka would be making the proposal he did because he is
sure there would have been testimony in favor of the straight line
per can fee.
MOTION FAILED BY A 1-4 VOTE (Cm Kamena, Turner, Staley and Mayor
Tirsell dissenting) .
em Turner stated that if the rate increases are not adopted by the
City, what would the City's option be if Oakland Scavenger refused
to service Livermore.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the City would either have to institute
a municipal operation or people would have to take their garbage
to the dump. The Mayor added that the contract with Oakland Scavenger
runs through 1977 but the contract did not have a rate increase built
into it as other communities did.
The City Attorney noted that this would not prevent Oakland Scavenger
from discontinuing service in Livermore. They could file a law suit
alleging that they were not making a sufficient return to operate.
MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION
SUPPORTING THE PROPOSED RATE SCALE WITH INSTRUCTION TO THE DELEGATE
TO THE RATE STUDY COMMITTEE TO PURSUE THE PHILOSOPHY THAT THE SECOND
CAN SHOULD COST NEARLY EQUALLY THE COST OF THE FIRST CAN. SHE WOULD
ASK THAT OAKLAND SCAVENGER COME BACK TO THE CITY IN THE NEXT SIX
MONTHS WITH PLANS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF A PILOT PROGRAM FOR BAG PICKUP
IN LIVERMORE SO THAT FIXED INCOME PEOPLE, LOW INCOME, AND 1 CAN FAMI-
LIES CAN AVAIL THEMSELVES OF PURCHASING A BAG WHICH INCLUDES PICKUP
PRICE.
Mayor Tirsell explained that the motion would allow the City to
make philosophical changes in the garbage collection system dur-
ing the next rate setting discussion.
MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER. MOTION FAILED BY A 2-2 VOTE (Cm
Dahlbacka and Kamena dissenting and Cm Staley abstaining).
Cm Staley commented that he abstained from the motion because
he would like to know how much money Livermore is paying towards
the Altamont dump site.
Mayor Tirsell noted that other cities will be subsidizing equipment
for Livermore, such as new trucks, and this is no different than
helping other communities pay for their dump site. Also the City
may wish to subsidize the transfer station so the garbage can be
recycled rather than having everything dumped at Altamont.
CM-32-4l7
July 26, 1976
(P.H. re Refuse
Rate Increase)
Cm Staley commented that he would agree with the second two
parts of the motion.
THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TOKPURSUE THE LINEAR RATE, AND AS A
PART OF OUR FRANCHISE AGREEMENT WITH OAKLAND SCAVENGER, THAT
THEY WILL INSTITUTE A PILOT PROGRAM FOR THE BAG SYSTEM IN
LIVERMORE AND THAT SUCH A PROGRAM SHOULD BE PLANNED WITH
CONSIDERATION GIVEN TO THE ALTERNATIVE OF BAG AND/OR CAN.
Mr. Smith stated that he has done some calculations, as
requested by Cm Staley as follows: The total assets for
Oakland Scavenger, ignoring reserve for depreciation, are
$ll,694,000. The Altamont site is $700,000. Roughly, this
is 7/ll7 x l7.5~ (the l7.5~ represents 5% on the gross
revenue which has been rounded to $lI7,000,000). This
amounts to l.l~ per can.
MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION WITH THE PRO-
POSED RATES FOR OAKLAND SCAVENGER. MOTION WAS SECONDED
BY CM STALEY.
Cm Turner stated that he intends to vote in favor of the
motion because he believes the proposed rates to be the
most equitable for everyone, and will provide for the implementation
of a pilot program for bag service that may lower the present rate
if the citizens opt to select this type of service ,in the future.
MOTION PASSED 4-l (Cm Dahlbacka dissenting) .
RESOLUTION NO. 177-76
A RESOLUTION AMENDING FEES FOR REFUSE COLLECTION
P . H. RE WEED
ABATEMENT
A total of 81 parcels have been cleared of weeds and a public
hearing has been scheduled to hear protests from property
owners whose properties have been cleared and will be assessed
for this work. It is recommended that the Council adopt a
resolution overruling any objections and confirming the report
of assessments for filing with the County Auditor for collection.
THERE BEING NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY, ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SEC-
ONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE PUBLIC HEARING
WAS CLOSED.
CM STLAEY MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION, AS RECOMMENDED,
SECONDED BY CM KAMENA, AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 178-76
A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENTS -
WEED ABATEMENT
COMMUNICATION RE
SB l7l4 RE NON-
EXEMPTION FROM
CITY ORDINANCES
A letter was received from the School District indicating
that they are opposed to SB 1714 which exempts school
districts from local city ordinances in regard to selection
of school sites and construction of buildings.
CM-32-4l8
July 26, 1976
(Comm. re SB 1714 re
Non-Exemption-City Ord)
Cm Staley commented that he does not agree with the letter sent to
the City by the School District and he would suggest that a letter
be sent to Assemblyman Mori and Senator Holmdahl indicating that
the City does not agree with the School District because the City
Council has the responsibility for the establishment of the zoning
and the implementation of building codes with respect to setback
requirements, etc. It is essential that there be one unified
authority to plan and organize a town. He stated that he appreciates
the School District's problem but he feels they should not be allowed
to exempt themselves from the orderly use of the zoning power any
more than a private builder might. The School District should con-
form to the Zoning Ordinance and the City would not be unreasonable
in the application of the ordinances and they should meet the same
requirements.
The staff was directed to prepare a letter, and Mr. Parness indicated
that such a letter has been prepared.
REPORT RE RESTAURANT
LEASE AMENDMENT AND
ASSIGNMENT
The City Manager explained that in reviewing the draft of the
restaurant lease amendment, the City Attorney has found that
there has been an omission concerning the notice on default.
The draft was prepared by an attorney representing one of the
applicants and has been rewritten but is not ready for consideration
by the Council. It will be on the agenda next week.
Also, the prospective lessees would like some questions
answered, informally, which would mean slight changes in the lease
draft. The first has to do with the hours of operation concerning
liquor sales. The present draft indicates that liquor sales are
to extend from the time of opening until 2:00 a.m. They feel this
is impractical because on several days of the week it would not be
necessary to serve liquor after 11:00 p.m. They have requested
that this be optional.
The City Attorney stated that the 2:00 a.m. closing applies to the
cocktail lounge and at the option of the Council it can agree that
the recommendation that the hours in the cocktail lounge should be
consistent with the hours in the dining area.
This option is provided for in the lease agreement but the pro-
spective lessees are concerned that this Council may go along
with allowing them to close at 11:00 p.m. but some future Council
may ask that they remain open until 2:00 a.m. and by the lease
provision this regulation by the Council is allowed. They are
requesting that the 2:00 a.m. time period be changed to 11:00 p.m.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Council would agree with the 11:00 p.m.
closing requirement; however, if they have customers beyond 11:00 p.m.
the City would not want them to have to leave.
Mark Ritchard, prospective lessee, stated that if someone is still
in the cocktail lounge after 11:00 p.m. they will stay open to
serve them but they do not want to be required to stay open until
2:00 a.m. when the whole place is empty.
The consensus of the Council was that they would prefer not specify-
ing any closing time and that this be left to the option of the
management. Depending upon the volume of business and as the need
arises, the City would expect the premises to remain open but not
past 2:00 a.m.
CM-32-4l9
July 26, 1976
(Rpt re Restaurant Lease
Amendment and Assign.)
Mr. Parness stated that the second item to be considered by the
Council is the suggestion of the lessee that on the installation
of fixtures, any improvements not exceeding $3,000 in 30 days,
would not require prior approval of the City. At this time
if they install a can opener they would have to receive approval
by the Council, technically. The lessee feels the $3,000 with
the 30 day time limit would be reasonable.
The Council concurred that this would be acceptable.
Cm Dahlbacka commented that it was his understanding that some-
one mentioned the possibility of allowing up to $36,000 worth of
improvements in a year without prior approval by the Council.
em Staley suggested that the agreement state that they would be
allowed $3,000 worth of improvements per month, not to exceed
$6,000-$9,000 a year. This type of wording would eliminate any
major rennovations.
It was noted that the staff would insert a reasonable dollar figure
that would be allowed for improvements each year.
Cm Kamena stated that he is concerned about the statement as to
how the termination has been cleared up. He indicated that he
doesn't understand the intent.
The Attorney explained that one interpretation could be that the
lease is a 15 year lease and by the original recommended amendment,
one could argue that termination of the lease was not the end of
the period of the lease, i.e., 15 years. If there were an earlier
termination the City doesn't want the lessees to be removing their
fixtures from the City's premises. The addition of voluntary or
involuntary termination includes both natural termination of the
lease as well as notice by the City whereby upon their vacation
of the premises, the City becomes owner of whatever fixtures are
there.
Cm Kamena stated that, unfortunately, this is upon vacancy of the
premises rather than upon notice. The interim between the two
periods could call for drastic removal of fixtures.
The City Attorney stated that if this were the case the City would
have reasonable grounds to sue them for damage. Apparently there
is some advantage to the lessee to have the fixtures under their
ownership - anything installed after they take over the lease.
Discussion followed concerning the lease and the fixtures.
Cm Kamena stated that his concern with amending the agreement is
that once an amendment is made to an agreement then essentially
the lease is not being transferred, as it existed, to another
interest.
The City Attorney explained that he is sorry the letter he sent
to the City Manager on this item was not included in the docket
because this is one of the issues raised originally. He did send
the Council copies of that correspondence.
Mike Casey, Hillsborough resident, present lessee, stated that
the changes in the lease represent changes on both sides with
cooperation from the City. The Council could go on forever
discussing items that have been agreed upon. They spent an
CM-32-420
July 26, 1976
(Rpt re Restaurant Lease
Amendment and Assign.)
hour on these things just the other day in a meeting with the City
Manager, three attorneys, businessmen, and representatives from the
Red Baron. The City can get into renegotiation of the lease but
this would mean a delay for people who are spending a lot of time
and effort improving the restaurant.
I1ayor Tirsell stated that, in all fairness, the Council did direct
that the lease be brought back to the Council to be reassigned. The
Council allowed the City Manager to go ahead with the details.
em Kamena stated that he agrees with what Mayor Tirsell is saying
but what he sees in front of the Council is the possibility of more
than what the Council agreed to. His interpretation of what the
Council said was that the Crosswinds has a lease and they would
agree that that particular lease be transferred to Red Baron. The
only modifications suggested at that time had to do with tightening
up the default provision. Nothing was said about installation of
fixtures or aggregate amounts in excess of $3,000, the hours for
the cocktail lounge, or anything else such as this. The point he
is trying to make is that this is not a mere transfer of a lease.
Mr. Casey indicated that it is not the intent to install anything
that would be garish or to cause problems.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she is sure Mr. Casey can understand the
City's concerns because the City has less than a fortunate exper-
ience with the restaurant. The City wants to forestall a third
disaster and it is not looking for another disaster but it is up
to the Council to protec~j.~yestments.
~ ~~tld;;&~
The lease will be prepared and will ~ on the agenda again next week.
RES. AUTH. EXEC. OF
SEWER SERVICE CONTRACT
(Harold Dhont)
CM TURNER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION FOR THE
SEWER SERVICE CONTRACT (Harold Dhont) IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE RECOM-
MENATIONS OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR.
The City Attorney explained that the resolution has been delayed
because Mr. Dhont has never provided the bonds and he will still
refuse to sign the resolution until bonding is provided.
Mayor Tirsell commented that this is part of the recommendation
by. the Director of Public Works.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
Mr. Dhont stated that there are some questions about which items
must be bonded and the Mayor suggested that Mr. Dhont work with
Mr. Lee on this matter because the sewer agreement will be prepared
according to his recommendation.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Report re Recycling
Center Location
The City Manager reported that the Livermore Recycling Center has
been located on the Civic Center site for about three years and
because of site improvements their equipment has been moved twice.
A third relocation will be required due to the development of the
Multi-Service Center on that site and in view of the fact that the
CM-32-42l
July 26, 1976
(Report re Recycling
Center Location)
Recycling Center would like to place a storage tank under-
ground to hold oil for recycling, it is recommended that
the Recycling Center relocate to a more permanent site.
The staff recommends that the Recycling Center relocate
to the property purchased by the City as an addition to
Robertson Park located adjacent to property on So. Livermore
Avenue.
The Committee for the Recycling Center opposes the staff
recommendation and favors relocation further to the east
along Pacific Avenue within the Civic Center Site.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he received a call from a Director
of LARPD who was upset that the City had not referred this
item to them for consideration.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she also received a call asking
that the City refer this to them for comment, if the Council
and the Committee for the Recycling Center do not agree on
the specific site.
Lois Hill, representative of the Recycling Center, stated
that the Council encouraged recycling of oil earlier this
year and after engineering details were worked out they
were asked to delay the burial of the tanks until a deter-
mination was made as to the location of the Multi-Service
Center. It now appears that the Recycling Center must be
moved and the staff wants it on South Livermore Avenue and
the Recycling Committee wants it further down Pacific Avenue.
The Recycling Committee considers it temporary until further progress
is made in recycling. She would ask that Terry Rossow explain
the Recycling Committee's objections to the South Livermore
Avenue location.
Terry Rossow stated that the Recycling Center is an example
of true voluntary cooperative action under the auspices of
the Valley Ecology Center. It is located on property owned
by the City and uses electricity from the BARN and has re-
ceived other support from the City and major support has
come from the Livermore Disposal Company and other businesses
in the area. Approximately 75 groups volunteer to run the
Center one day a year in return for the profits of the sold
material. It is presently located at the dead-end of Pacific
Avenue and it has unique advantages in being centrally located
which is convenient to the users by car and bicycle. In being
located on a dead-end street it is a safe and noncongested lo-
cation for the slow traffic the Center generates.
The City staff is recommending that the Center be relocated
to a location on South Livermore Avenue and the Recycling
Committee is opposed to this location for a number of
reasons. There is not the availability of electric power,
restrooms, telephones, it would result in traffic congestion
and it would not be convenient to the public, which he ex-
plained in detail.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she is not happy about the recom-
mendation for the South Livermore Avenue location and asked
why this site was selected rather than allowing the Center
to move further down Pacific Avenue.
CM-32-422
July 26, 1976
(Report re Recycling
Center Location)
Mr. Parness stated that the Recycling Center must be moved and
he feels that it is not really in harmony with what is proposed
for development at the Civic Center site. As long as it has to
be moved the staff believes it would be better if it were placed
in a location where it could be allowed to remain for a longer
period of time with no conflict with other abutting uses.
Mayor Tirsell stated that in discussion concerning development of
the Multi-Service Center, it was noted that the Berkeley Recycling
Center has been screened and beautified and nobody would guess that
recycling is taking place. She asked Mrs. Hill if consideration
had been given to making the Recycling Center fit in, from the
standpoint of aesthetics.
Mrs. Hill stated that this is something that would cost money and
they do not believe in increasing costs beyond what is absolutely
necessary. However, if water is to be available it would
not be very costly to landscape the area with plants.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Berkeley Recycling Center not only
used plants but also latice work with boards, etc., in beautifying
the area.
Mrs. Hill stated that they believe the Recycling Center is not
that permanent and the Mayor pointed out that the Recycling Center
does not like being moved and they have requested permission to
bury a tank for recycling of oil. The City is trying to select
a site that would be suitable for all of this because if they
intend to bury a tank it would appear that they are fairly permanent.
Mrs. Hill stated that the Committee feels the area further down
Pacific Avenue would take care of their needs.
Cm Turner stated that when the Council discussed plans for the
Civic Center Multi-Service Building, they discussed an overall
plan for the Civic Center and as he recalls the staff was directed
to prepare plans that would encompass the Recycling Center.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the Council reviewed the plans for the
Civic Center site, but she doesn't recall that any direction was
given concerning any new plans.
Cm Turner stated that the overall plans were discussed.
CM TURNER MOVED TO APPROVE THE RELOCATION OF THE RECYCLING CENTER
TO THE SITE RECOMMENDED BY MRS. HILL. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM
DAHLBACKA.
It was noted that the intent of the motion is that the staff
select the site on Pacific Avenue that would be best for the
Recycling Center and that would not likely cause a fourth relocation.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE COMPLAINT
RE WALL STREET &
SONOMA AVE. INTERSECTION
A request was made by Mr. and Mrs. Abrahams that the City install
a 3-way stop at the intersection of Wall Street and Sonoma Avenue.
The staff has prepared an analysis for Council consideration, a
copy of which will be forwarded to Mr. and Mrs. Abrahams.
Item was noted for filing.
CM-32-423
July 26, 1976
REPORT RE CORPS OF
ENGINEERS URBAN PLAN STUDY
The Director of Public Works reported that the Corps of
Engineers Upper Alameda Creek Urban Study Plan of Study
has been reviewed and he has prepared comments for review
by the Council. Also included in the report are points
listed by Archer Futch, member of the Zone 7 Board.
Mayor Tirsell wondered if the Council will receive a copy
of the letter of assurance that will be drafted by the
Director of Public Works, and if Mr. Lee would redraft
the comment made by Mr. Futch as specific points in the
letter to the Corps.
Mayor Tirsell commented that Mr. Futch points out that in
the study of urban runoff, the Corps is gradually phasing
out agricultural uses in the Valley. These types of items
should be pointed out in the letter to the Corps.
It was noted that the letter will come to the Council before
it is signed and sent to the Corps of Engineers.
REPORT RE 1976
SISTER CITY VISIT
A letter was received from W. S. Neef, Jr., Chairman of the
Livermore Sister City Committee, noting that a delegation
visit is planned for the last half of August. Traditionally,
such a visit has been part of our cultural exchange for 13
years and the Committee would like to request that they be
authorized to purchase round trip airline tickets for Mayor
Tirsell and Richard Ryon, this year's delegates.
A member of the audience indicated that he finds it difficult
to make ends meet with the rising cost in living and since
the City has trouble having enough funds for the budget he
would suggest that the City not waste taxpayer money to pur-
chase the airline tickets for the delegates.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the philosophy of this has been
discussed many times and during the budget session she is
sure nobody would have objected to eliminating this cost.
However, the Sister City Organization is one that the City
supports and has had official delegations travel back and
forth. When Guatemala suffered its recent earthquake the
City sent hospital supplies as a matter of relief for them.
The gentleman in the audience indicated that he is not opposed
to good will, but he feels that the delegates should pay for
their own trip if they wish to visit Quezaltenango.
em Staley stated that he would like to comment on this item
because he has wrestled with the problem of whether the City
should be in the business of funding this expense, or not.
In his opinion, it is justified because the City participates
in the Sister City program in terms of its citizens to citizens.
Students go there to study for awhile, and students from down
there come to Livermore to study for awhile, at no cost to the
City. The exchange of people to people is at no cost to the
City and the only cost directly to the City in this program
is that once a year a member of the City Council is asked to
visit. Since a member of the Council is asked to make the
trip the City provides the plane fare. This would not seem
to be an unreasonable expense.
CM-32-424
July 26, 1976
(report re 1976
Sister City Visit)
The gentleman stated that when you are living on a budget, $4-$5
hurts, and he would like to know if property taxes could be reduced
if items such as this were deleted.
Mayor Tirsell explained that everything has been trimmed from the
budget except this. The City no longer gives to any organization
and it does not support anything.
The gentleman stated that his complaint is that the City has money
to hire a $25,000/year position to drum up business in Livermore
and to take trips, but it doesn't have money to lower taxes. He
is not a professional person and he finds it difficult to feed his
family.
The City Attorney commented that this is an item that has been
budgeted and for this reason it is not necessary to adopt a
resolution authorizing the expense.
Cm Staley stated that he has received a letter from one of the
delegates from Quezaltenango, who stayed with him while visiting
Livermore, thanking the City for it's hospitality and expressing
the good will to Quezaltenango, and who is looking forward to the
visit from the Livermore delegates. Livermore is somewhat committed
to making th~e~_:~~-=:CL:!~~ ~~_ 4Mer2J~tL
Cm Kamena~tated that the tax rate for Livermore w~~ $1.51 last
year, andl~gai~ this year. If this item were eliminated from the
budget the tax rate would remain the same.
Mayor Tirsell explained that the gentleman has every right to make
his comments with respect to City expenses but what she is trying
to convey is that there are many things that make up a City and
Livermore has become stripped of funds and there is no reserve in
the budget which make a rounded city life. This visit has been a
tradition for the past 13 years. If the taxpayers find that this
is a frill it can be eliminated at the next budget session. Thus
far, it has been a beneficial program for our students and we
have as many as 18 students go to Quezaltenango and stay and go
to school at absolutely no cost for one year. She added that
she can appreciate the gentleman's point of view also - this program
isn't worth the money to him.
No action required.
REPORT RE STAFF
REASSIGNMENT
The City Manager reported that the Purchasing Department will be
relocating from the City Hall annex to the renovated portion of the
First Street Fire Station, and the current Purchasing Agent will be
retiring in February of 1977.
After due consideration it is recommended that the Purchasing Agent
assist the Finance Director, during his remaining interim time
with the City, in matters relative to business licenses and tax
enforcement and inspection. His presence would permit an orderly
transition to a Purchasing Agent replacement.
It is proposed to recruit for a replacement of the Purchasing Agent
and to consider existing qualified employees for a ftew classification
to be entitled Assistant Purchasing Agent since the City Manager
is specified as Purchasing Agent in the current City Code. The
proposed salary for this reclassification would be $1,200 per month.
CM-32-425
July 26, 1976
(Report re Staff Assignment)
It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution approv-
ing a job description for an Assistant Purchasing Agent and
to amend the salary resolution by addition of Assistant Purchas-
ing Agent - $1,200.
Cm Turner stated that he believes in promotion from within.
The recommendation would be a reasignment of a staff person
and a downgrading of the present position. He stated that
he does not understand the day to day operations of that
particular department but it would appear that there might
be somebody within the City who would be able to take over
the job. He would prefer that the Council urge promotion
within rather than advertising outside.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the recommendation would take
into consideration those City employees qualified for
the job, as well as applicants from outside.
em Turner stated that if someone is qualified he would pre-
fer that they be given the jOb rather than go to the expense
of advertising.
Mayor Tirsell felt this would be setting a bad precedent.
Mr. Parness stated that the Personnel Director as well as
the present Purchasing Agent, have advised that this posi-
tion be open to everyone. The City employees who might be
qualified would be urged to apply for the position.
Ann Duncan, Personnel Director, indicated that open advertis-
ing would be advisable and that the proposed salary would be
compatible with the classification and other staff members.
CM STALEY MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTIONS, AS RECOMMENDED
BY THE STAFF. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
Cm Staley stated that he believes the job should
to a qualified City employee but the Council has
tion to have an open application so the City can
.\~fied people both within the City, and outside the
~. ~cm~U;p~~At~d that i the urchasing. Agent is working with
a~s~ :~~ 1t would be re onab e to p mo t t~person to
his position rather than
If the Personnel Director feels there i nobody within the
City qualified to handle the job, this is a different matter.
Cm Turner stated that the Council intends to recruit and get
the best person for the job, and in this case he believes the
open advertising is not necessary. If someone in the City is
qualified he would prefer that they be promoted.
be given
an obliga-
review quali-
City.
MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Cm Turner dissenting) .
RESOLUTION NO. 179-76
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING ASSISTANT PUR-
CHASING AGENT CLASSIFICATION
RESOLUTION NO. 180-76
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION 86-76, AS
AMENDED, RELATING TO SALARY SCHEDULES FOR
CLASSIFIED AND UNCLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES, TO ADD
NEW CLASSIFICATION, ASSISTANT PURCHASING AGENT.
CM-32-426
July 26, 1976
REPORT RE ENVELOPES
FOR PARKING VIOLATIONS
The City Manager asked the Chief of Police to respond to the feasi-
bility of providing self-addressed envelopes to be distributed with
parking violations.
Chief Lindgren has reported that envelopes can be obtained at a cost
of $310 per 10,000 which would represent a two year supply and that
he would recommend trying this system.
It was the consensus of the Council to try the distribution of
self-addressed envelopes with violations. It was noted that
this has been allocated in the budget.
REPORT RE INJURED POLICE
OFFICER REPLACEMENT
A report was submitted by the Police Chief concerning Police Officer
Lee, who was injured while on duty over a year ago and is still unable
to return to work. Chief Lindgren has recommended an appropriation
of approximately $2400 to hire reserve police officers 40 hours
per week for a period of three months to ease the burden on the
force due to the absence of Officer Lee.
An authorizing resolution will be prepared for adoption at the
meeting of August 2.
PURCHASE OF EXERCISE
EQUIPMENT - POLICE DEPT.
A report was submitted by the Police Chief concerning the purchase
of exercise equipment jointly with the Police Officers Association,
for installation in the locker room of the police building.
Mr. Parness advised that it was intended that this amount, $1,538.l9,
would be taken from the existing budget account for training if the
Council concurs with the expenditure.
Mayor Tirsell asked if any member of the City staff could use the
equipment since it is being purchased with City funds. Mr. Parness
replied that since it will be installed in the locker room, the
women could not use it.
Mr. Logan explained that from a lia~ility standpoint, there should
not be too many people involved in case of injury since it is on
City property, and it could involve workmen's compensation claims.
em Staley asked if the request was for an additional budget amount
of $1538, and Mr. Parness stated it was not, this would merely
utilize some of the amount already budgeted.
Cm Staley asked if that is so, why is it necessary for the Council
to do anything about it, and Mr. Parness explained that this equipment
was originally requested at the time the building was constructed
and room was designed into the quarters to accommodate it; however,
at that time the city was unable to purchase it. Now the Police
Association has proposed that they pay for half of it.
Cm Staley stated he was reluctant to approve this equipment since
it is planned to have placed on the November ballot a tax override
for additional police and fire department personnel, and he felt
this purchase should be deferred until after the election. Although
he favored the exercise equipment, he felt it was not as important
as an additional police officer.
CM-32-427
July 26, 1976
(Purchase of Exercise
Equipment for Police Dept.)
Cm Dahlbacka commented that on the job injuries are very serious,
and although he is concerned that the funds would be coming out
of the training monies, he would leave it to the discretion of
the Police Chief that it is the best overall thing to do for the
department. CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO APPROVE THE BUDGET ADDITION AS
RECOMMENDED, HOWEVER THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
CM TURNER STATED HE WOULD SUPPORT CM STALEY'S POSITION AND MOVED
TO RECONSIDER THIS ITEM IN DECEMBER 1976, MOTION SECONDED BY CM
STALEY AND APPROVED 4-1 WITH CM DAHLBACKA DISSENTING.
CONSOLIDATION OF BALLOT -
PUBLIC TAX SAFETY OVERRIDE
In accordance with the Council's earlier decision for the sub-
mission of a local ballot proposition re a public tax safety
override, the City Clerk reported that the following schedule
must be observed: 1) the ballot proposition must be transmitted
to the Board of Supervisors no later than August 20; 2) argu-
ments for and against the proposal must be received no later
than September 1. The proposed wording for the ballot measure
is the same as used previously.
Cm Staley asked if the ballot measure could be made a little
more emphatic.
The City Attorney explained there were very difficult legal con-
siderations in composing the ballot measure.
Mayor Tirsell recalled that when this measure was placed on the
ballot in March, the Council wanted to be very sure that the
monies would be specifically reserved for police and fire as
there is a split interpretation on whether that is indeed appro-
priate, and they wanted to assure the public that it would in
fact be used only for pOlice and fire protection.
A member of the audience voiced his objection to having this
measure again placed on the ballot as it was voted down once
before so the Council should understand that is the way the
people want it.
Mayor Tirsell pointed that there is a 15% turnover of the people
in Livermore each year, and so t~e ~eople who voted in March may
not be the same people who will vote in November. March was a
Municipal Election, November is a General Election. When
100,000 people may be purged from the Alameda County rolls
and if those same people had voted on a County Charter amend-
ment, should you say that since those people voted on it, the
amendment should remain forever? When 100,000 people may be
purged from the rolls, plus a 15% turnover in that county, it's
a new electorate, and it is not right to disfranchise somebody
who moves to town one day after a vote is taken. It is the
Council's way of turning to the electorate and asking the question.
You may vote twice on the measure, and you are certainly priv-
eleged to vote "no" twice, but there may be someone new who
has moved to town since March, and we may have added a number
of new voters. At any rate it is the Council's intention to
put the question to the vote and give everyone a chance to vote
on it and if it fails, they will reconsider it again.
em Staley added it is not only fair to put it to the people again,
it is absolutely necessary that it is put before the people.
CM-32-428
July 26, 1976
(re Tax Override)
em Staley stated that there are several problems in getting something
like this passed, because in the first place it means an increase in
the taxes, which no one really wants. It is this Council's opinion
that this sort of increase is absolutely necessary to continue to safely
run the City. That is the reason he wrote the ballot statement and
the reason he will support it this time. Cm Staley went on to explain
that if a person owns a $47,000 home, he pays $150 a year to the City
for which he gets police and fire protection. The City's entire amount
raised from property taxes presently does not pay for even police
alone. We spend $1.2 million for police, and p~gp~y j;~s give us
almost $1 million. That is the City's singleASo~rce o~evenue and
it is prohibited by state law from raising the property tax unless
it has the vote of the people. This year the City used up its entire
reserves to operate. The tax rate could not be raised and it was neces-
sary to dip into other funds but next year where will the money come
from if there is no tax increase? It will be unfair to the voters of
the City if the question is not placed on the ballot.
Mayor Tirsell suggested that the gentlemen attend a budget session
and study the issue, and perhaps he would come to a better under-
standing of the situation. The Council is elected to find solutions
to the problems, and this is what they are attempting to do.
REFERRAL FROM CITY
COUNCIL RE CN DISTRICT
A report from the Planning Commission was received concerning
the proposed CN District Ordinance which had been referred back to
the PC by the Council.
The Council concurred that due to the lateness of the hour, this
item should be continued for two weeks. Also, the summary of action
of the Planning Commission meeting of July 20 was continued until
that time.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that when the Planning Commission studies the
directional signs on the highway, she would like to have Mr. Musso
inform the PC that the same interstate runs through Iowa, and there
the freeway exit signs are green and white clearly printed overhead
and within the public right-of-way there is a blue and white sign
that says "Holiday Inn, Denny's and whatever". It says food, lodging,
and the listing. She felt if they can do it in one state they can
do it in another as it is an interstate freeway system.
Mr. Parness explained that CAL Trans is checking into this matter.
MINUTES PLANNING COMM.
The minutes of the Planning commission for the meeting of July
20, 1976, were noted for filing.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Training Agreements
w/Ca1if. State Police
A resolution authorizing our department personnel to participate
in the training program of the California State Police Division
was adopted by the Council.
CM-32-429
July 26, 1976
RESOLUTION NO. 181-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING
THE EXECUTION OF TRAINING AGREEMENTS
(Department of General Services, California
State police Div.)
CUP Approval - Car
Wash (Louis Trotter)
The Council considered an application submitted by Louis Trotter
for a. car wash on a site located on the north side of Murrieta
Blvd, 650+ west of Fenton at the meeting of July 19. The Coun-
cil approved the recommendation and the staff was instructed to
prepare the resolution reflecting this action.
The following resolution was approved with Cm Turner dissenting
and Cm Staley abstaining.
RESOLUTION NO. 182-76
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
(Louis Trotter)
Restricted Parking
Zones - Vasco Road
A resolution was prepared amending Res. 129-72, re restricted
parking zones on Vasco Road to reflect Council direction at
the meeting of July 19.
RESOLUTION NO. 183-76
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 129-72, AS
AMENDED, RELATING TO RESTRICTED PARKING ZONES, BY
THE ADDITION OF A NO-PARKING ZONE FOR VEHICLES
EXCEEDING 6000 POUNDS ON VASCO ROAD BETWEEN DEL
MONTE STREET AND CRESTMONT, CITY OF LIVERMORE.
Report re Power Genera-
tion from Digester Gas
Cm Dah1backa had inquired about the feasibility of using digester
gas at the Water Reclamation Plant for generation of power. The
question was referred to our Consulting Engineering firm, Brown
and Caldwell, who had studied the subject in depth, and a report
was submitted by them. This report was noted for filing.
Departmental Reports
The following Departmental Reports were received:
Building Activity - June 1976
Emergency Services - April - June
Industrial and Commercial Inquiries - April - June
Industrial Advisory Board - Development Fees
Library - annual report - 1975-76
Mosquito Abatement District - May
police and Pound Departments - June
Water Reclamation Plant - June
CM-32-430
~Tu1y 26, 1976
Payroll & Claims
Claims in the amount of $32,752.00, dated July 20, and Claims
in the amount of $4,838.92, dated July 22, 1976 were ordered paid
as approved by the City Manager.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA, THE ITEMS ON
THE CONSENT CALENDAR WERE APPROVED AS NOTED.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Approval of Resolutions
on Consent Calendar)
Cm Turner stated that when resolutions are placed on the Consent
Calendar the week following action taken by the Council, there has
been a problem in the past because the Council approves the Consent
Calendar, and as a matter of course the resolutions reflect this
approval. Many times, however, one or two members of the Council
may be opposed to the action.
Mr. Logan, City Attorney, had indicated that perhaps it would be best
if the resolutions are placed on the agenqa as unfihished business,
which would give the Counci1members the opportunity to vote on each item.
Cm Turner commented that he did not think this would be a good system
but would suggest that in the future if there is not a resolution
in front of the Council, the matter be postponed to the following week.
Cm Turner stated that in the past, action has been taken by the Council
but when the resolution is prepared and the vote taken, the person
may be absent and so the resolution does not reflect the actual vote.
ern Turner suggested that if the resolution is not available at the
meeting when the action was taken, and it was prepared for a later
meeting, then it should show who made the motion and the vote should
also be reflected and then it could be placed on the Consent Calendar.
The staff was directed to add the vote to the resolution at the time
it is prepared.
(Multi-Service Center)
Cm Staley asked if the staff had received the information from
Congressman Stark's office on the Multi-Service Center.
Mr. Parness stated he was holding this pending the completion of the
report on the administration building which is being prepared for
the Council's review.
Cm Staley stated his only concern was that we not spend any funds on
this project if monies are available from another source.
(Joint Powers Agree-
ment - LAVl~)
Cm Dahlbacka stated that at the LAVWMA meeting the Joint Powers agree-
ment is being sent back to Mr. Schidig to review some of the smaller
changes, and in addition he notes that the wording presently allows
$1.5 million expenditure basically to be piggy-backed on top of any
ballot that's voted and it is conceivable it could be interpreted
that way. It is possible that there will be a rewording on that
coming back to the Council.
CM-32-431
July 26, 1976
(re LAVWMA Agreement)
Also, during the LAVWMA discussion it turns out that in the applica-
tion for industrial capacity, it would be useful to have job market
shown, and he wondered if the staff could work up something like that.
(Service Awards)
Mayor Tirsell stated she has been advised by the Personnel Director
that there are a number of service awards that need to presented to
our staff members and would like some determination from the Council
as to the manner in which they may be presented - at a reception, at
a regular Council meeting.
(Use of Heritage Site)
Mayor Tirsell stated that Janet Newton was interested in moving the
the old fire engine into the garage which was discussed at the
meeting of July 19, and is to be preserved by the Heritage Guild.
Mr. Parness stated he is having a staff report prepared on build-
ing modifications and structural costs and this should be com-
pleted before anything is placed in the building.
(Dog Licensing Fee)
Mayor Tirse11 stated that a long letter had been received from
Mrs. Herrick concerning the dog licensing fee, and asked if the
staff would please respond to this communication.
ORDINANCE RE TAXICAB
RATE INCREASE
ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, AND APPROVED UNAN-
IMOUSLY, THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATING TO RATES - TAXICABS
AND OTHER VEHICLES FOR HIRE WAS ADOPTED.
ORDINANCE NO. 893
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 22.59, RELATING TO
RATES, OF ARTICLE I, RELATING TO GENERAL PROVISIONS,
OF CHAPTER 22, RELATING TO TAXICABS AND OTHER VEHICLES
FOR HIRE, OF THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 1959.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at l2:20 p.m. to an executive session
to discuss condemnation.
RESOLUTION SETTLE-
MENT OF LAWSUIT
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, THE FOLLOWING
RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THE COUNCIL:
RESOLUTION NO. 184-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT OF LAWSUIT
(City v. Wright, et al)
~J~ ---m~i-,d~.
Mud~. /aY:L
_ c~ty Clerk
. iVE!"rmOre, California
APPROVE
ATTEST
CM-32-432
Regular Meeting of August 2, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
August 2, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:05 p.m.
with Mayor Tirsel1 presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: em Kamena, Turner and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: Cm Dahlbacka (seated later) and Cm Staley
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirsel1 led the Counci1members as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
CM DAHLBACKA ARRIVED AFTER THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
MINUTES - 7/19/76
P. 394, 3rd paragraph from bottom, first line should read:
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he is not sure what all the alternatives..etc.
2nd paragraph from the bottom, next to last line should read: the
cost of the 15.62 MGD or LAVWMA could go to the voters. (Delete
remainder of sentence)
P. 395 ,2nd paragraph from bottom, next to last line should read:
would happen if it is presented to the voters and turned down.
P. 396, 2nd paragraph from bottom, third line from bottom should
begin: people are not fulfilling their obligations. This project
is mandated by the state.
Last paragraph, 4th line should read: City could be fined $6,000
per day by the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
P. 388, 6th paragraph, line 2 should read: wish to develop the
park and that he hopes there would be a well planned...etc.
P. 393, first paragraph, delete entire second sentence in that
paragraph.
P. 396, paragraph in middle of page, beginning Mayor Tirsell,
3rd line from bottom should read: allowance for Cast1ewood,
making a total of 15.62 MGD. Anything beyond...etc.
P. 398, 5th paragraph, first line, last word should be could.
P. 404, 2nd paragraph from bottom, 2nd line, last word should
be store.
P. 398, motion prior to recess should be deleted. The Council
did not concur with the change in XI (6).
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF JULY 19, 1976, WERE APPROVED,
AS CORRECTED.
CM-32-433
August 2, 1976
COMMUNICATION RE
ATTIC FANS
A letter from Michael J. Burger, 1023 Sherry Way, indicated
that research by the National Bureau of Standards shows that
houses with attic fans and air conditioners use more energy
than houses with air conditioners only. He suggested that
the Council reconsider the ordinance relative to attic fans.
Cm Dah1backa stated that he read the study that was done under
narrow conditions. He would suggest that the item be referred
to the Energy Committee for their recommendation.
Cm Dahlbacka noted that in the study, attic fans were not
controlled by thermostats as are required in the Livermore
ordinance.
Mayor Tirsell commented that in the study, the attic fans ran
for 24 hours while Livermore attic fans are to be set to run
when the temperature reaches 120 degrees.
Mike Burger explained that the National Bureau of Standards
is recognized as one of the best federally funded research
institutes in the united States. Its charter is to serve as
a focal point for the federal government for insuring maximum
application of physical and engineering science to the advance-
ment of technology in industry and commerce. One of the div-
isions of the NBS is the Center of Building Technology, from
which the report eminates. He summarized the report and the
conditions under which the study was conducted.
Mr. Burger stated that he believes people should be allowed
to make their own decision concerning the installation of
an attic fan with their air conditioning and that the
Council should stay to its chartered responsibility and
leave these types of decisions to the home owner. He believes
the attic fan is an additional cost from the standpoint of
using more energy, installation, and inspection costs, and
that this is a type of additional property tax.
Mr. B~rger added that he feels this is also the case with
the smoke detector and the deadbo1t lock that is being pro-
posed - this should be the choice of the homeowner.
Cm Kamena stated that the report pointed out that the study
and the results could apply only to buildings similar in de-
signs as those tested and that they tested only one building.
The building was constructed in l89s and when the study indi-
cated that there was an increase in the amount of energy used
(7%) this was in running the fan during the night and turning it
off during the day.
Mr. B~ger commented that the building tested was made of brick
and he would estimate that the amount of energy needed to cool
a home in Livermore made of different material would be 55% more.
In talking with Dr. Hunt, of the NBS, he has concluded that it
would be far more effective to add insulation to the attic than
to require an attic fan.
Mayor Tirse1l asked if Mr. Burger would be opposed to the
City requiring additional insulation rather than an attic
fan and Mr. Burger indicated that he would be opposed to
this requirement also. He believes the City should not
be in the position of deciding what homeowners should do.
Cm Turner stated that when the Council discussed this item
he was not convinced that the attic fan was an energy saving
CM-32-434
August 2, 1976
(re Attic 2ans)
device, and he would be very interested in the results of the discus-
sion by the Energy Committee concerning this report.
COMMUNICATION RE
HIGHWAY LOGO SIGNS
A letter from Assemblyman Mori indicated that he is interested in
the possibility of allowing logo signs in the freeway right-of-way
but the Department of Transportation is conducting a study on this
item and he feels it is not appropriate to introduce this into
legislation until the study and its results are complete.
Item was noted for filing.
COMMUNICATION RE
ENTRANCE TO ANIMAL CON-
TROL SHELTER PROCEDURE
A letter was received from Loren Enoch, County Administrator, which
explained that he would like to recommend to the Board of Supervisors
that the creation of a separate entrance to the Animal Control Shelter
at Santa Rita coincide with completion of the new booking facility
at the Rehabilitation Center.
ern Turner stated that this is an item that was brought to the
attention of the Council by Cm Staley and he asked that the item
be postponed for one week so that Cm Staley might have the oportunity
to comment.
Item postponed one week.
COMMUNICATION RE
"911" SYSTEM
The City received a notice from Scott Hovey, Jr., Alameda County
"911" Project Director, announcing that the "911" emergency
telephone system was approved between Pacific Telephone Company
and the Alameda County Board of Supervisors. Effective May 1978,
the system will automatically route emergency phone calls to the
proper police or sheriff department when the "9Il" number is dialed.
Noted for filing.
LEASE AMENDMENT RE
LAS POSITAS RESTAURANT
The City Manager reported that the proposed changes concerning the
Las positas restaurant lease, relative to insurance coverage and de-
fault of lease, hours of operation, ownership of fixtures; trade
name, and management standards are considered proper and will clarify
subsequent administration of the leasmpremises. The amended lease
is to be formally assigned to the Red Baron Steak Houses, Inc.
Mr. Parness reported on the status of the draft, adding that the
present lessee, Mr. Casey, would like the City to allow a second
assignment concerning the operations of the snack bar area. The
Red Baron Steak Houses, Inc., would prefer not to operate the snack
bar, and Mr. Casey has contacted someone who is willing to assume
operations of the snack bar.
CM-32-435
August 2, 1976
(Las positas Restaurant)
Mr. Parness stated that he has researched the assignee for the
snack bar and has met with him on two occasions to discuss his
background, work experience, and financial stability. The person
involved in the snack bar assignment, proposed for Council con-
sideration, is Mr. Wallace K~ODe.
Mr. Parness reported on the experience and background of Mr. Krone
and added that he would not hesitate to recommend him as the assignee
for the snack bar. Mr. Krone has read the lease and finds it accept-
able.
The City Attorney explained that he intends to add wording to
the resolution authorizing execution of consent to assignment
so that it will be clear what the resolution authorizes, which
will be included in the "now therefore" clause.
Cm Kamena stated that it is his understanding that there will
not be a change relative to ownership of fixtures, as was sug-
gested by the prospective lessee.
The City Attorney explained that they had suggested a modifica-
tion which would have required an additional lease amendment
and after discussing this with their attorneys it was concluded
that this is covered under the present lease.
The City Attorney added that the original 2:00 a.m. time for
the closing of the cocktail lounge has been agreed upon and
the only addition to the lease is the following wording:
"Said hours of operation shall be established by
a lessee, subject to the approval of lessor
which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld.
Lessee shall be required to post the hours of
operation for both the restaurant and cocktail
lounge in a conspicuous place."
Mr. Logan stated that this is basically what the original
agreement calls for. The other addition was the $3,000 per
month allowance for alterations. He added that he is con-
vinced that $3,000 can easily be spent in one month for
alterations but there was a $10,000 a year limit included.
These are the only other changes included other than what
was originally agreed upon by the Council.
Cm Turner wondered if Mr. Krone and the Red Baron have other
financial agreements such as additional rents for use of the
downstairs area.
The City Attorney commented that he can't answer this but Mr.
Krone is present and could provide the answer.
Mr. Krone indicated that there will be no division of the assign-
ment. He will be responsible for the downstairs portion of the
restaurant with the Red Baron managing the upstairs restaurant
and cocktail lounge.
Cm Turner stated that he would feel more comfortable with the
provision that if one of the parties were in default the whole
building would be in default and the City Attorney explained
that the agreement would not allow this type of leeway.
Cm Turner stated that he believes the liability should be with
the master lease.
Mr. Parness indicated that, historically, the City has always
had just one lease, in effect, with both operations. This has
resulted in the most exclusive attention of the management
devoted to the restaurant, to the detriment of the snack bar
area.
CM-32-436
August 2, 1976
(Las Positas Restaurant)
Mr. Parness stated that he can understand Councilman Turner's concern
but he would recommend that these interests be allowed to be managed
separately, as is proposed. These are two distinctive types of
businesses.
em Kamena stated that the Red Baron proposes to sell to Mr. Krone,
all of the furniture, fixtures, equipment, improvements, etc., on
the second floor area. He wondered if this would become the property
of the Red Baron to be sold to Mr. Krone.
The City Attorney stated that he would assume that everything conveyed
to the Red Baron by the Crosswinds would include the majority of what
is mentioned for sale, if not all of it. The Crosswinds owns every-
thing located in the snack bar area.
Cm Dahlbacka wondered if, in separating the leases, this would pose
any problem with respect to collections.
The City Attorney stated that this could work to the detriment as
well as the advantage of the City. The advantage would be that if
the operations of the snack bar fail, the City could get rid of it
without jeopardizing the operations of the restaurant and the City
would still be guaranteed the income from the upper floor. The
same would be true with respect to operations of the restaurant,
in the reverse situation.
ern Turner wondered what income was derived when the restaurant was
in normal operation.
Mr. Parness indicated that under normal operations the gross was
about $2,000 per month - the City charges 6% of the gross as a
minimum for the base rent. It was not possible to determine what
revenue was derived from which operations because it was under one
lease with an accumulated gross.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTIONS AUTHORIZING LEASE AMENDMENTS,
AUTHORIZING ASSIGNMENT, AND PARTIAL ASSIGNMENT OF THE SNACK BAR.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CMDAHLBACKA. '
Francis Keple, 1342 Daisy Lane, stated that she would like to know
how the negative financial picture of the restaurant can be improved
with approval of the lease assignment, and amendments to the lease.
Mayor Tirsell stated that at the present time the restaurant is
closed. This action will get the restaurant opened up for business
again.
Mrs. Keple stated that the golf course has a tremendous financial
deficit and she can't understand how the losses can be recovered.
Cm Turner stated that even though the restaurant has been closed
for the past five months, they have never missed a lease payment.
Mr. Parness explained that the City has a business enterprise that
has been operating for about five years. The operations has been
interrupted and the City is sorry about this misfortune but there
is an attempt being made to get the doors reopened. The City has
the opportunity to begin accruing revenues from that business
enterprise and the more business done, the more the City receives.
Jerry Wi1verding, 4886 Primrose Lane, wondered if it would be possi-
ble to assign the master lease to Red Baron with the provision that
they sublease the snack bar.
CM-32-437
August 2, 1976
(Las positas Restaurant)
Mayor Tirsell commented that Mr. Parness has indicated that Red
Baron is not at all interested in the snack bar area and they
do not want to have this area included in the lease. Out of
all the operations interviewed, who expressed interest in the
restaurant, the majority were not interested in the snack bar
operations.
Mr. Parness explained that there was a misunderstanding because
most of the people interviewed did want both operations. Most
of them wanted managerial rights for food dispensed on their
own premises. However, the city's experience would indicate
that the reverse might be more successful.
Mr. Wilverding asked if the City would have any problem getting
a lessee for the restaurant portion if business with the proposed
lessee fails, since the snack bar would then be leased to someone
else.
Mr. Parness indicated that the only problem the City had with
finding someone interested in operating the restaurant was be-
cause of the necessity of a substantial amount of ' capital outlay.
Now that all of the interior appointment has been installed,
there would probably be very little trouble in finding a res-
taurant lessee.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 185-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THIRD AMEND-
MENT TO LEASE
RESOLUTION NO. 186-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHOaIZING EXECUTION OF
CONSENT TO ASSIGNMENT (Berkeley Science
Capital Corporation)
RESOLUTION NO. 187-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
CONSENT TO PARTIAL ASSIGNMENT (Red
Baron Steak House, Incorporated)
RES. RE TEMPORARY
ADDITION OF POLICEMBN
The staff has recommended that the Council adopt a resolution
authorizing a budget amendment for the addition of reserve police
officers on a temporary basis, while officer Lee is recuperating.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA, AND BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED.
RESOLUTION NO. 188-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AMENDMENT
OF 1976-77 BUDGET
CM-32-438
August 2, 1976
DISCUSSION RE P.C.
REPORT RE ZO. ORD.
AMEND. RE CN DISTRICT
Mayor Tirse11 stated that when the Council discussed the amendment
to the Zoning Ordinance relative to the CN District, the PC was
asked to comment on the required 15 ft. setback at the rear of the
building that is to be landscaped.
Mr. Musso stated that this was discussed by the Planning Commission
and he had made the comment to the P.C. that adjacent property owners
might not want tall vegetation, used as a screen, at the back of the
property. The P.C. has recommended that there be no change. The
present requirement is that there be a vegetative screen for purposes
of screening out light, glare, and noise.
em Turner stated that he would suggest that developers for the
commercial areas be required to plant a larger tree than specified
in the ordinance.
Mr. Musso stated that this had been discussed and it was pointed
out by the City Tree Superintendent, that the larger trees usually
die when they are planted, but the smaller trees grow faster and
the survival rate is greater.
Cm Turner stated that he would like the item referred to the Beauti-
fication Committee for comment as to the type of vegetation they
would recommend, the size and age, and whether or not the 20% cover-
age is reasonable.
It was noted that the Council has had a public hearing and the ordi-
nance is ready for first reading, after it has been prepared by the
staff.
DISCUSSION RE REDRAFT
OF SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE
Cm Dahlbacka stated that in the redraft of the Subdivision Ordinance
he believes the document has no reference to streets or street widths~
Section 20.40.1 refers to cul-de-sac streets and it would be consistent
to strike this section and place it in another document because the
street widths, etc. are in another document.
Mr. Lee stated that this would be reasonable and consistent.
Mr. Musso stated that this was in the old General Plan, which standards
have been repealed. The P.C. is now in the process of readopting the
standards with a revision of the standards.
Mayor Tirse11 asked if it would be better to leave Section 20.40.1
in the ordinance, in this case.
Mr. Musso stated that in his opinion it wouldn't be a problem to
leave the section in the ordinance.
Cm Dahbacka stated that his concern is that until the Council has
a report and recommendation from the P.C., the City is demanding
that the cul-de-sac be the same width as other streets, and there
may be a different recommendation from the P.C. He stated that
he believes the City would not be in danger of not having streets
constructed to Public Works standards, during the next couple of
months.
CM-32-439
August 2, 1976
(re Subdivision Ord.)
em Dahlbacka stated that his intent is that the ordinance should
be as consistent, as possible, with the letter of future standards
and since the standards which are not generally referred to are
being deleted he believes this particular specification should
be placed in another document.
The city Attorney commented that if the Council wants an incon-
sistent statement it could be prefaced with, "notwithstanding
any other ordinance or notwithstanding any other section of this
Code". Secondly, a lot of this has been extracted from recommen-
ded subdivision ordinances which have been reviewed, in great
detail, by several attorneys in the state. He would rely upon
what other attorneys have done, in dealing with this type of thing
on a regular basis, and they believe this type of wording is essen-
tial. He stated that the Council could also make a change by drop-
ping the word "shall" and inserting the word "may". This would make
reference to cul-de-sac streets flexible and discretionary.
The Council concurred. Section 20.40.1 shall begin as follows:
"Cul-de-sacs, streets not intended for future
extension, m~y have the same right-of-way and
roadway widt s..........etc.
em Dahlbacka stated that with respect to Section 20.54 (page 26),
he had mentioned that he believes that at all times, fees should
be paid at the time of issuance of a building permit - in lieu
fees. A significant period of time can elapse between the time
a final map is filed and building permits are taken out, and the
City has to determine what the fee should be, on a regular basis,
taking into account the cost of living, etc.
Mr. Lee stated that, normally, the City's requirement is that
a certain portion of the fees are paid at the time the final
map is filed and, if not, at that time then they have to be paid
at the time of the issuance of the building permit.
Cm Dah1backa stated that he would like to know if the fees are
computed at the time of the final map and remain stay that way
regardless of when the building permit is issued and Mr. Lee
stated that they are not computed.
Mr. Lee stated that the Subdivision Agreement is written in
such a way that it requires the fees to be paid at the then
current amount, at the time the building permits are taken
out.
em Dahlbacka stated that this was his concern. That would
take care of a delinquency. However, it probably wouldn't
hurt to repeat that the then current fees would be imposed
at the time a building permit is issued.
Mr. Lee stated that he would insert wording that would take
care of the Council's concerns.
Mr. Musso commented that the in lieu fees have to do only
with the park property dedication, and Cm Dahlbacka indicated
that he realizes this.
with respect to Section 20.56, page 27, Cm Dahlbacka stated
that his questions have been answered concerning the City
specifying when development, etc., shall begin.
CM-32-440
August 2, 1976
(re Subdivision Ordinance)
em Dahlbacka asked that the City Attorney explain reserved dedications
for future street purposes.
The City Attorney stated that it is dedication, but this type of
dedication is under legislative ground of authority under a provision
of the Government Code, and that particular provision says that you
dedicate land for a school site within a subdivision but as part of
that is also the reciprocal requirement that the land has to be paid
for by the school district within a certain number of days from the
date of dedication, at the price it costs the developer. It is a
savings, in a way, because it probably comes in at a lesser price
than if the developer had been allowed to sell it outright on the
open market. It is not a dedication of land as is the dedication of
land for park purposes.
em Dah1backa wondered if a fee of perhaps $35 would be sufficient
for petitions to revert property to acreage (Section 20.94, page 38)
and the staff indicated that they will review the fees for inclusion
in the draft.
Cm Turner stated that if the development date expires then the developer
has to pay a .5% fee to renew it for another year. If a developer gets
a conditional approval of a tentative map and then nine months later
gets an approval of the map, does he have only three months left on
the map, or does he have a full 12 months from approval of the final
map?
Mr. Musso stated that the developer is allowed l2 months from the
date of expiration.
em Turner asked if it is a realistic fee (Sec. 20.21) to require $10
per hour for checking of final and parcel maps.
It was noted that this figure is reasonable.
Cm Turner stated that he would like to suggest that there not be
a fee specified for the park fee (Sec. 20.51 (b) (1), page 23.) and
that this figure represent the current value at the time of application.
Mr. Lee stated that this amount is set each year by the Council, by
resolution.
Cm Turner stated that the problem with this method is that someone
could apply very late in the fiscal year and the figures that would
apply would be almost a year old. If there are sufficient numbers
of parcels involved, the City could be losing a considerable amount
of money.
Mr. Lee stated that he believes a one year period for the figure
is reasonable.
Cm Turner stated that he would like to know how all of the various
ordinances can be tied into the Subdivision Ordinance, to cover bike
paths, streets, etc. Anyone developing should know that they have
to have security locks and attic fans, etc.
Mr. Lee stated that the developer is given Engineering Considerations
and knows that he has to comply with the Building Code and he also
receives a list of all the fees charged.
Mr. Musso stated that there is a listing on the subdivision map of
various requirements, in addition to public works requirements and
what the zoning regulations are. However, a subdivision does not
require building of a house on that subdivision, so there is no
requirement concerning the Building Code.
CM-32-44l
August 2, 1976
(re Subdivision Ord.)
Mr. Musso added that also, it is possible that the zoning regula-
tions may be changed so the zoning regulations are not specified
on the map.
Mr. Musso stated that there were some problems with the setback
for properties on portola Avenue, and this has been taken care of
by having a zoning use permit issued for the subdivision. When
they file the subdivision they come in for their first building
permit and a zoning use permit is issued which designates the
setbacks and any special conditions applicable to that subdivision,
with a copy going to the Building Department and Public Works.
REPORT FROM BEAUTIFICATION
COMMITTEE RE ANCESTRAL
TREE ORDINANCE REVIEW
Mr. Musso reported that the P.C. will be discussing the report
from the Beautification Committee concerning review of the
Ancestral Tree Ordinance at their meeting tomorrow.
The Council will discuss this item after hearing the recommenda-
tion from the P.C.
REPORT RE ARCHITECTURAL
DESIGN FOR FIRE STATION #4
The City Manager stated that property has been acquired at the
corner of Concannon Boulevard and Cordoba Avenue, which consists
of a half acre site. Since the time of its acquisition the archi-
tect has been working on the architectural design which is in its
final stage. The architect has indicated that the design will be
ready for solicitation of construction bids on or around the first
of September. He is present this evening to give the Council an
idea of what the estimated construction costs might be along with
the floor plan and the architectural styling.
Mr. Parness explained that the cost estimates which have been pre-
pared and distributed to the Council are very liberal estimates
and hopefully some of the costs can be pared down.
Mayor Tirsell asked if there is enough money left over from the
revenue sharing funds to cover the costs for Fire Station #4,
and Mr. Parness indicated that there is. The City is hoping
to construct the station for $l40,OOO, which would be paid for
through the revenue sharing funds. The estimate is slightly
higher than this figure and hopefully there can be some cuts
and it can be constructed for the $140,000.
Mr. Randy Schlientz, architect, explained that the building
has been oriented on the site to allow emergency vehicle exits
from two directions, and bays have been provided to accommodate
two vehicles in the two directions. Ultimately, four vehicles
could be housed in the station. This places the majority of
the landscaping near the corner which is desirable in a pri-
marily residential neighborhood with the apparatus yard to the
rear of the yard and fenced in, similar to Station fl.
Mr. Schlientz discussed the floor plan, illustrating the loca-
tion of the office portion and the dormitory; the workshop and
storage area.
Lynwood Hester, 552 Brighton Way, asked where the money will
come from and the Mayor explained that it will be paid for
through federal revenue sharing funds reverted to the City.
CM-32-442
August 2, 1976
(Fire Station #4)
Mr. Parness indicated that the cost estimate, per square foot, is
a staggering $65/sq. ft.
Mr. Schlientz stated that he realizes the cost per foot is high but
there is a lot of development outside of the building itself which
is very costly. It would be unfair to say that the $65/sq. ft.
represents only the building cost.
The consensus of the Council was to proceed with the plans, as sub-
mitted.
RECESS
Mayor Tirse11 called for a brief recess after which the Council
meeting resumed with members of the Council present, as during roll
call.
REPORT RE EXTENSION
OF ISABEL AVENUE
The City and County have jointly purchased property right-of-way
for the a1ingnment of the Isabel Avenue Highway. The state will
probably not allow construction within the next several years but
Alameda County has an interest in the project with respect to
extension from E. Stanley Boulevard to I-580 which would provide
relief of some internal traffic congestion.
Supervisor Murphy has sent an inquiry to the City and has asked
for comments from the staff. It is recommended by the staff that
the Council adopt a motion voicing approval to the proposal that this
interim highway design be installed.
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that she would like to comment on the suggestions
as to the design, which have been prepared by the Director of Public
Works. She stated that she would disagree with (5) which suggests
a bike path on only the east side of Isabel Avenue. She stated
that from the experience with the bike paths on both E. Stanley
and East Avenue, the bike path on one side is just not adequate.
Mr. Lee stated that he would assume this would depend on the width
of the bike path, and what he had in mind was something that would
meet state standards.
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that the City has found that it doesn't matter
how wide the path is, if bikes are to travel in both directions it
is hazardous to have them on one path.
Cm Dah1backa stated that he would have to agree with the Mayor.
Mr. Parness stated that he believes the extension of Isabel Avenue
would somewhat guarantee that the full four-lane expressway would
eventually be constructed by the state.
Mayor Tirsel1 asked if the funds are available for this type of
project and Mr. Parness stated that they are, but projects must
be ready for commencement of construction within 90 days which
means that there would have to be a push to get everything ready.
Some land acquisition would be necessary but this could be done.
em Dahlbacka asked if the extension of Isabel Avenue might make
it more feasible to get access to I-580 and Mr. Lee stated that
this is a possibility. The Junior College has expressed interest
in getting access to I-580 but the state has not had the funds to
pay for an overpass at Collier Canyon Road. However the state indi-
cated they would be willing to do some of the preliminary design work.
CM-32-443
August 2, 1976
(re Isabel Highway)
ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, COUNCIL APPROVAL WAS EXPRESSED FOR THIS PROJECT WITH THE
SUGGESTION THAT THE BIKE PATH BE PROVIDED ON BOTH SIDES OF THE
ROAD.
Cm Dah1backa stated that the only link that would be missing is
the one across the Arroyo del Valle, on Route 84. He wondered
if the Council should make mention of the link at this time.
Mr. Lee stated that there has to be improvements if the link
is connected, and he felt the improvements would be so extensive
that it might burden this extension. It might be possible that
the state could promote this extension because of the County's
interest in the extension from Stanley to I-580 and because of
the bill which has been signed by the President for public works
projects, making the funds available.
REPORT RE VARIOUS
TRAFFIC SUGGESTIONS
A report from the Director of Public Works indicated that Cm
Turner suggested that both lanes, northbound on Livermore
Avenue, be allowed to turn left onto Fourth Street.
After a study of this intersection it has been concluded that
this suggestion would work only if the southbound traffic were
not allowed to turn left onto Fourth Street and that the restric-
tion and public reaction would not warrant the advantage to the
traffic turning west onto Fourth Street.
Cm Turner also suggested that the four-way stops at "L" and
Chestnut and at "L" and Railroad Avenue be eliminated with
through traffic for "Lit Street.
The staff recommends, after careful study, that the stop signs
not be eliminated along "L" Street at those intersections.
Cm Turner stated that his reason for suggesting the change on
Livermore Avenue to allow two lanes to turn westerly onto
Fourth Street was for the purpose of expediting lab traffic.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that the timing for the signals could be
changed so that the people going south on Livermore could be
allowed to turn left onto Fourth, but not at the same time
as traffic coming from East Avenue turning onto Fourth.
Mr. Lee stated that this could be done but it would mean
taking up more time and causing delays for everyone.
Staff recommendation accepted.
em Turner stated that he has observed the intersections of
Chestnut and "L" and Railroad and "Lit and he is convinced
that the four-way stop is necessary at Chestnut and "Lit
but he would like the four-way stop eliminated at "L" and
Railroad Avenue.
It was the consensus of the Council to remove the four-way
stop signs at "L" and Railroad so the "L" Street traffic
will not have to come to a stop at that point.
CM-32-444
August 2, 1976
P.H. SET RE GEN. PLAN
AMEND. FOR VARIOUS
AREAS OF TOWN
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, A PUBLIC HEARING WAS SET FOR AUGUST 23, 1976, REGARDING A
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE SPRINGTOWN AREA, MADERIA
AVENUE, AND TREVARNO ROAD.
REFERRAL OF PLANNING
UNITS f8 & #9, TO P.C.
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, PLANNING UNITS # 8 AND # 9, WERE TAKEN FROM THE TABLE AND REFERRED
TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Reports from
Public Works Director
Reports were submitted to the Council by the Director of Public
Works concerning underground construction to LLL, and also the speed
limit between amber warning lights. The reports were furnished
for informational purposes.
Report re Request for
Encroachment Permit
The Director of Public Works has reported that the Cultural Arts
Council has requested an encroachment permit to occupy certain streets
in the vicinity of the Carnegie Building for the Eighth Annual Cul-
tural Arts Festival to be held on October 2nd and 3rd.
The Council is requested to authorize issuance of the encroachment
permit.
Report re 1976
Storm Drain Projects
The Director of Public Works prepared a report on the 1976 Storm
Drain projects which have been specified in the current budget.
It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution awarding
the bid to the low bidder, Martin Brothers, of Concord in the
amount of $121,662.20.
RESOLUTION NO. 189-76
A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID
(Martin Brothers)
Report re Acceptance
of Phase I and II -
Slurry Seal Projects
The Council adopted resolutions authorizing the Recording of
Completion notice for the Phase I and II Slurry Seal projects.
RESOLUTION NO. 190-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE
OF WORK AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING
THE RECORDING OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION
RE (Phase I - Project 76-1)
CM-32-445
August 2, 1976
(Concent Calendar)
RESOLUTION NO. 191-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE
OF WORK AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING
THE RECORDING OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION
RE (Phase II - Project 76-l)
Res. re Abandonment
of Sanitary Sewer
Easement - Tr. 3321
The Council adopted a resolution abandoning the sanitary sewer
easement within Tract 3321.
RESOLUTION NO. 192-76
ABANDONMENT OF SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT
(Tract 3321)
Payroll & Claims
There were 66 warrants in the amount of $358,479.82 dated 7/28/76,
and approved by the City Manager.
There were 121 warrants in the amount of $269,762.79, dated 7/28/76,
and approved by the City Manager.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Energy Ordinance)
Mr. Parness stated that he has heard from Davis and wondered if
the Council would like the report referred to the Energy Commis-
sion.
The Council indicated that they would like the information sent
to the Energy Commission.
(Town Meeting)
Mr. Parness stated that the tax override and the Springtown Golf
Course will be discussed at the upcoming town meeting to be held
on August 30th (fifth Monday) as planned by the Council. He
asked if the Council has suggestions as to where they would like
to meet.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would like to meet in the Springtown
building and Mr. Parness indicated that this could be arranged.
CM-32.446
August 2, 1976
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Industrial Fees)
Cm Turner asked the Community Development Director about the status
of the review concerning industrial fees.
Mr. Gorland stated that he attended a meeting recently with the
Industrial Advisory Board and the Chamber Subcommittee. Three
of the fees were discussed. There was general agreement with
regard to a potential phasing of the fees over a longer period of
time. There were no specific recommendations made because there
was not a quorum of the Industrial Advisory Board, nor a full com-
mittee of the Chamber. They intend to meet again, within the next
month, with hopes of being able to make some substantial recommendations.
(Dog Licensing Program)
ern Kamena stated that he would like to suggest initiating a pilot
program for dog licencing, whereby people would go door to door
asking if people own a dog and if the dog is licensed. If the dog
is not licensed the suggestion could be made that the owner purchase
a license.
Mr. Parness stated that the Police Department regulates the animal
program and also sponsors a Boy Scout Explorer post. Beginning about
August 10th the Police Department will ask for volunteer service from
that post for the purpose of covering the entire City on a door to
door basis to take a census of the animal population. In the proper
type of presentation they will ask whether the animals are licensed
along with an explanation as what the license program is. They will
also distribute a brochure, at the same time, defining what the law
of the City is. Mr. Parness will also ask that they include bicycle
licensing as a part of their inquiry, for informational purposes.
The animal control officer will follow up in all instances in which
the person either refuses to answer or indicates that the dog is
not licensed and will not purchase the license. The young men will
not debate the issue at all but will merely make a hotation which
will be followed by contact by the animal control officer.
(Removal of Stop Sign)
Cm Dah1backa stated that a stop sign has been removed at Guilford
and Madison and he recently discovered that the sign had originally
been installed as a result of petition by the homeowners in that
area asking for the stop sign.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he was not aware of this at the time the
staff recommendation was made that the stop sign be removed. He
has spoken with people in that neighborhood who are opposed to
the removal of the stop sign and they are irritated that they have
to go through the petition process again to get the stop sign instal-
led once again.
Mr. Lee stated that there had been a series of complaints about
the stop sign and this was the reason the staff had recommended
removal.
Mayor Tirse1l asked that the staff prepare a report on this item.
CM-32-447
August 2, 1976
(Property Acquisition
for Park purposes)
Mayor Tirsell wondered if the City has plans to purchase the
commercially zoned land behind the ARCO station on Stanley
and Murrieta Boulevard.
Mr. Parness indicated that there are plans to do something
with this property this year.
~v Mayor Tirse11 stated that Zone 7 has some money available
~hiCh is disapperinq very quickly,aag is for acquisition
!Of the channel. This money might be useful for the City
since the City has never used their money. She would ask
, . that someone from the staff contact them to find out if the
,/ City could get some of the money.
(Restaurants -
re Pacemakers)
Mayor Tirse11 asked if anything has been done about the prob-
lem of the microwave ovens in restaurants and the suggestion
by the Council that signs be posted indicating that this type
of oven is used in that particular restaurant, for the purpose
of warning people with pacemakers.
Mr. Parness stated that he has written to the Health Department
but has not yet received a response.
(Pinball Ord.)
Mayor Tirse1l asked if there had been a review of the ordinance
relative to the rules concerning use of pinball machines.
The City Attorney stated that this matter has had to take a back
seat to other important items and unless he receives direction
to the contrary it will have to remain in the background for
awhile. He added that several ordinances in several cities
which were thought to be valid have been overturned by the
court. Basically, the courts have now determined that it is
not a gambling device but rather a game of chance, which takes
away the police power to regulate them as gambling devices. He
is not sure this could be regulated on the basis of age unless
there is other criteria upon which age is based.
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that this satisfies any questions she may
have had regarding pinball machines and added that they are now
located in 7-11 and other stores, and it would be very difficult
to regulate the use of the machines.
(Used Cars in Safe-
way Parking Lot)
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that over the weekend there were many cars
and a boat in the First Street Safeway parking lot, advertised
for sale. That area is beginning to look like a used car lot
and she asked that something be done to control this type of
advertising and parking.
Mr. Parness stated that the owners of the parcels on which the
cars park on the weekend have been notified and the City cannot
do anything unless the owner authorizes something be done.
CM-32-448
August 2, 1976
(Used Cars in Safe-
way Parking Lot)
Mayor Tirsell asked that someone from the staff contact the owners
to find out if the City could post a sign citing the Code, so that
the Police Department can enforce the Code regulations concerning
this type of activity.
(November Ballot)
Mayor Tirsell stated that since the City has to provide measures
to be consolidated in the November ballot, she would like to know
if the Council would be interested in an advisory question placed
on the ballot relative to separation of garbage. The contract
with Oakland Scavenger ends in 18 months and it might be helpful
to know what people want. She stated that she has received about
50 telephone calls during the past week concerning the garbage issue
and she has no clear indication one way or the other. The calls were
about even as to those who want to separate their garbage and those
who don't want to bother.
The Council concurred that they would like to discuss this item and
asked that it be placed on the agenda for discussion next week.
(General Plan)
Mr. Parness stated that the General Plan is in its final stages
of preparation and it is almost completely printed with the
exception of the cover and a few addendum items. It should be
ready for distribution in a couple of weeks.
The staff has been asked to prepare a report as to what the costs
have been in order that the Council might determine what the cost
of sale of the General Plan should be.
(Annexation of
Northfront Road Area)
Mr. Parness stated that when the City annexed the property on North-
front Road, an effort was made to cross I-580 for incorporation of
the weighing station because it is a location for the assessment
of fines. It occurred to him that the City should find out if the
County has been giving credit on that location within our City limits,
and the staff has discovered that it has not. The County Court did
not know of the annexation and it has always been the policy that
the City notifies only the County Planning Commission and the County
Assessor, assuming that if any other agency of the County government
is to be notified, they will take care of this.
Mr. Parness stated that the City feels it is owed a debt and intends
to press for collection of this debt. In the meantime, they know now
that the weighing station is within Livermore's City limits and the
City is entitled to receive 50% of all the fines exacted at that
location. This could amount to as much as $2,000 per month for the
City's share.
(City Employment
Job Openings)
Mr. Parness stated that the City is recruiting for seven job openings
at this time and about the same volume of applications are being
received for all of them.
CM-32-449
August 2, 1976
(Labor Negotiations)
The City is still negotiating with the clerical and technical
employees group (MEAN) but terms have not been agreed upon as
yet.
(Safety Committee)
In connection with the City's self-insurance program, the City
has reactivated the general Safety Committee. They have had
their first meeting in company with representatives from the
City's claims adjustment firm for providing consulting services
for safety programing. The representatives will be meeting with
the City on the basis of about once a month for this purpose.
It is the intention of the City that the Safety Committee is
very active, and this has to be the case in view of what the
City is assuming in the way of self-insurance.
(Exxon Property
Beautification)
The Exxon service station property located at Murrieta Boulevard
and Portola Avenue has been graded and improvement of the lot
will begin upon receival of the planting materials. This should
be complete within the next month.
(Earthquake Drill)
The City staff will participate in a mock earthquake drill on
August 27th. This program was done about three years ago and
the City has asked that it be repeated. Because of the City's
geographical location, there is a particular interest in this
type of thing and Mr. Parness believes our Emergency Services
Department is one of the better ones in our area and the City
likes to feel that it is up-to-date with respect to earthquake
protection. This will be a good program that will last most
of the day and he would invite the Council members to stop by
to see how everything is progressing on that day.
ADJOURNMENT
APPROVE
adjourned the meeting at 10:30
~i<-n ~ ~VL~
Mayor
p.m.
Mayor Tirse11
ATTEST
f' ~
~.
__ .- j.,."-"~ I
r ..: ~ ..
. \ I
'/. .'.
. I f.. Ci ty Clerk
. i~re. California
CM-32-450
Regular Meeting of August 9, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
August 9, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m.,
with Mayor Tirsel1 presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: em Turner, Kamena, Staley, Dah1backa and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirse11 led the Counci1members and those present in the
audience in the Pledge of Allegiance.
RESOLUTION IN MEMORIAM
Maitland R. Henry
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY, THE FOLLOWING
RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED.
RESOLUTION NO. 193-76
A RESOLUTION IN MEMORIAM
MAITLAND R. HENRY
MINUTES - July 26, 1976
P. 429, middle of the first paragraph the sentence should read:
That is the City's single largest source....
P. 4l7, third paragraph from the top delete one member of the audience
and insert Terry Rossow.
P. 416, first paragraph, second line, after costs place period and
delete "involved and", and begin next sentence with "For this reason
he believes the fee ..." Delete "with a 60ft raise on the other end
of the scale because" and add: "the 60ft reduction added to the 2nd
can" .
P. 418, 5th paragraph, third line after "everyone" put a period,
delete the next four words, "and will provide for" and add, "Also
the Council has directed".
P. 426, the paragraph just before MOTION PASSED 4-1, delete the first
two words from the second line "some partner" and replace them with
"a qualified assistant". In the 3rd line delete "advertising for
qualified people." and replace it with, "the expense of advertising."
P. 415, paragraph 9, check the motion for exact wording.
P. 416, para. 4, 2nd sentence, strike out word Council and insert
motion.
P. 425, para. 6, 2nd line delete "again this year" and insert "was
not raised one penny".
P. 421, middle of the page, last line of Mayor Tirsell's comment,
delete word "its" and insert "the City's".
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA, THE MINUTES WERE
APPROVED AS AMENDED.
CM-33-l
August 9, 1976
Minutes Correction
em Turner questioned the resolution adopted at the executive session
asking if it would not be more appropriate to have included on
the agenda for the following week the result of any action taken
in executive session.
The City Attorney explained that it can be done either way and
usually if there has been a decision made in executive session
on the settlement of a law suit, it has been put on the agenda the
following week. However, settlement of lawsuits are not open to
public comment.
em Turner indicated his preference would be to have the resolution
placed on the agenda for the following week, and the Council
concurred.
OPEN FORUM
(Public Hearing re Isabel Highway)
Mignon Richards, Brookfield Drive, asked that the Council hold
a public hearing on the Isabel Highway, stating there had been no
public hearing, and there are many people who have no idea they
even live close to Isabel Ave.
Mayor Tirsell summarized a telephone conversation with Ms. Richards,
in which she explained that the Council had unanimously supported
the extension of Isabel and that the item had been a matter of pub-
lic record since 1959 when it was adopted as part of the General Plan.
Mayor Tirsell explained that the Council could answer any questions
that she may have as to how far the road would be from houses and
what the anticipated benefits to the City are.
Ms. Richards replied that she was aware of how far it would be
from the houses, and the benefits to the City are dubious. If the
whole project were completed, there would be benefits, but as of
now there are only benefits to the gravel pits.
em Staley stated he did not understand the purpose of a public
hearing and asked if it was Ms. Richard's intent that the Council
reconsider the entire project.
Ms. Richard stated that was the intention of her request as a pub-
lic hearing would give the people the opportunity to express them-
selves.
The Planning Director explained that a year ago there were public
hearings on Planning Units 8 and 9 which included Isabel Avenue.
Mayor Tirse11 added that the purchase of the right-of-way for the
highway was on several of the Council agendas last year and
stated she is committed to the major street system, the
street has been planned since 1959 and she feels it is needed.
She feels that she has made the decision for the best of the City.
Mayor Tirsel1 asked Ms. Richards if it was her thinking that the
Council would reverse their decision if there were enough people
present at a public hearing.
Ms. Richards stated she did hope the Council would reverse the
decision if there were a public hearing but she did not expect a
reversal this evening.
em Dahlbacka stated he understood Ms. Richards concern that the
proposed Isabel alignment may have negative impact on property
values, but it has been planned for a long time and, in fact,
was initially planned as an expressway, but has now been down-
graded to a major street, and that would have generated considerably
CM-3'3-2
August 9, 1976
(P.H. re Isabel Highway)
more traffic than what is now being proposed. It is his belief that
the loop system of streets planned for the City of Livermore is vital
to the circulation pattern. Every effort can be made to mitigate the
impact of the traffic on Isabel Avenue to adjacent residences
by utilizing the rightofway to the best degree possible and the
engineering staff is working on that at present. There has been
a lot of testimony and the major str~lt system has been established ~.!
for a long time, and in his opinion,~1s for th~~fit of the ~. .V:~ ~
DVerall citizens of Livermore to have that street built~throuqh.- v, ~~
When it is complete, it will reduce traffic through the downtown ~ I
area and air pollution in that area and the concentratio~~yhic1es.
His consideration has not been based upon gravel truck,~r~~nat
it would make it easier for any gravel company, but rather for
the benefit of the City of Livermore, and he was happy that the
County is willing to participate as it reduces financial impact
on the City. No project can be put in where some people aren't
negatively affected in some way or another.
Mayor Tirsell reminded Ms. Richards that the whole southwest corner
of town funnels through Olivina up Murrieta, and if there is a major
access, such as Isabel Avenue, and that is the consideration of this
Council, it will relieve the Olivina/Murrieta corner and all of those
people who attended the public hearing testified loud and long
about that intersection. Isabel Avenue would provide a channel for
the whole southwest corner of town to cross Stanley and go north in an
unrestricted manner so there would be an equal distribution - those
who live South of Stanley and funnel through the center of town would
use Murrieta Blvd., but not all of the many commuters who live in the
southwest corner of town, it would be divided as a major street system.
If this item were placed on the agenda again, it would indicate that
she would be willing to reconsider the item, and she is not as she
feels it would be very beneficial to the City to build. Since it is
not going to be an expressway, it will be many feet from where it
would have been as an expressway, therefore saving homes with a
narrower right-if-way. She pointed out that the bicycle lanes will
be separated from the roadway, hopefully, one in each direction
thereby putting it further from the street.
Mayor Tirse1l remarked that these are the questions she is willing
to answer tonight unless she hears a majority of the Council wishing
to reconsider the item.
Ms. Richards stated that if the Council does not allow more of the
people to come and explain their objections, they are not being fair.
She did not feel that this would relieve the traffic on Murrieta Blvd.
em Staley stated he was offended by Ms. Richards remarks in which
she indicated that the Council is bowing to some special interests.
One of the things this Council bends over backwards to do is to pro-
tect the interest of all the citizens of Livermore, and it was a very
unfortunate remark.
Ms. Richards apologized for the remark, adding that she could under-
stand what it is all about, but she felt that there would not be as
much benefit compared to the harm it will bring to so many people.
Mayor Tirsell asked if there was a motion to reconsider or repost the
item, and there was none.
Safety Override Tax
Paul Tull, 2243 Linden St., commented that he had read that the Mayor
commented there was 15% turnover amongst voters, and he said there is
a 15% turnover amongst the residents and agreed those residents should
have their say.
CM-33-.3
August 9, 1976
(Sewage System, Garbage, Etc.)
Paul Tull stated there had been an exchange about the sewage system,
garbage, etc. wherein the Council implied there had been a snow job
at the COVA meeting, and he referred to an article as proof of that
in the Oakland Tribune of August l, which spoke to the Contra Costa
Sanitary District's new $70 million treatment plant, and the Council
had made the statement there was no other means of handling the
sewage situation except the pipeline. He indicated that what was
being done in Contra Costa County is what he has been proposing for
a number of years.
Mayor Tirsell suggested that Mr. Tull make copies of this article
for the Council agenda.
PUBLIC HEARING
SIDEWALK REPAIR PROGRAM
The City Council authorized a continuing program which calls for
location of defective and hazardous areas and their repair. For
those areas not done by the property owner involved, the City
causes the work to be done and the charge is levied as a lien against
the property. Eleven parcels have been repaired under this program.
Mayor Tirsel1 explained that this item is posted yearly and opened
the public hearing at this time.
Jim Cannon, 5628 Crestmont Avenue, stated he had just had his side-
walk repaired at a cost of $330, and it was not due to trees, sewer-
age and water, but when the sidewalk was built there was no drainage
under the sidewalk and the water built up and caused the sidewalk to
rise.
The Public Works Director stated there had been no attempt to de-
termine the exact cause of the problem, and since we have no freez-
ing condition here and since the weight of the sidewalk is two and
a half times as great as the weight of water, he did not think
that would cause the ground to heave in the area.
Cm Staley stated that the cause would make no difference. The
City did not construct the sidewalk, so it is a matter of needing
to be repaired, and the City has always take the position that the
property owner pays for the repair. He asked Mr. Cannon if he
was alleging it is something the City did.
Mr. Cannon stated he knew that, but could not understand why he
should pay for something when the drainage was left out when the
sidewalk was installed and was something he had no control over.
Mayor Tirsell suggested that this might be something to check out
with the developer who put in the sidewalk. The City keeps the
walks in good repair because of the liability involved.
THERE BEING NO FURTHER TESTIMONY A MOTION WAS MADE BY CM DAHLBACKA,
SECONDED BY CM STALEY TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND PASSED UNAN-
IMOUSLY.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENTS,
SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA, AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
RESOLUTION NO. 194-76
A RESOLUTION OVERRULING PROTESTS AND
CONFIRMING ASSESSMENTS FOR SIDEWALK REPAIRS
CM-33-4
August 9, 1976
COMMUNICATION - CALIF.
STATE AUTO ASSOCIATION
A communication was received from the California State Automobile
Association congratulating the City for winning the special citation
for casualty record in the 1976 AAA pedestrian safety inventory
program. A plaque is to be presented to the city at a later time.
SPRINGTOWN GOLF
COURSE STATUS
Mr. Carlton Douglas, a resident of the Springtown area, had asked
to speak to the City Council concerning the Springtown Golf Course.
Mr. Douglas stated he just wanted to submit a simple, sensible,
desirable proposition for the Council's consideration. There are
people in Livermore who still think it is a private course as it
does not have any exposure, and he feels this is one of the reasons
there isn't enough play there. He remarked that the course is in
the best condition it has ever been in, and it is a good course for
older people, women and beginners. He felt that the golf course
should be promoted, and the only way it can be done is through the
newspapers. He has investigated the cost of an ad, two columns wide
and two inches deep, in the Hayward Daily Review, Livermore Herald
and Tri-Va11ey News and it would be about $40.00, the price of about
one sprinkler head. He suggested that two ads- a week be placed for
about eight weeks and felt that such a promotion would be very
helpful. If it shows substantial increase in the play it would be
money well spent.
Mayor Tirsell stated that usually this type of thjng is ref~~red
to the Greens Committee, and she asked Mr. Douglas if he had con-
tacted the committee, but he replied he had not.
It was the consensus of the Council to direct the staff to prepare
a report for the agenda next week.
John Migliore, 6270 Tesla Road, stated it is true the City is
subsidizing the golf course and asked who uses it, whether they are
mostly senior citizens and middle income families. Most of the
people of middle income are homeowners in town and are paying pro-
perty taxes, and he did not feel we should be asked to subsidize the
golf course or to pay for social programs.
Clyde Highet stated that the people who have homes in the Springtown
area are in an assessment district, and it is not a city tax, but
the people who are in the assessment district who keep up the golf
course.
Mr. Parness stated that the assessment district is for the sewage,
and Mayor Tirsell added that the assessment has nothing to do with
operating the golf course, but the district was formed to extend
the sewer and water facilities to Springtown.
Mr. Highet stated that might be true, but the people who have homes
adjoining the golf course do pay extra money.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the monies went to the developer, not to
the City.
Shirley Rozmassie, corner of Hollyhock and Bluebell, stated she has
had many people stop and ask her for directions to the golf course.
She felt if it were properly marked it would be easier to locate.
Cm Staley wondered if perhaps the Holiday Inn advertised the Spring-
town golf course as he felt it would be an advantage to them.
CM-33-5
August 9, 1976
(Springtown Golf
Course Status)
Mr. Lee stated a special score card has been made up showing the
Holiday Inn on the map and where the public golf course is in
relation to the inn. These are placed in the rooms at the Holiday
Inn every day, so there is some advertising. If something can be
worked out in the not too distant future at Springtown, there would
be a much better front door to the course, and perhaps the Council
could consider this in the next week or two.
REPORT RE BALLOT MEASURE
RUBBISH AND TRASH SEPARATION
A resolution had been prepared by the City Attorney's office re-
garding the prospective ballot measure on rubbish and trash separa-
tion.
Mr. Parness stated he did not know whether the Council wished to
be formal concerning the item. It is a very critical issue, and
if the Council does decide to place this measure on the ballot,
and if it is favorably received by the electorate, it would be
one of the first cities that would consider this undertaking and
the Council would be mandated to go ahead with it. There is a lot
of investigatory work that needs to be done on the measure as to
cost to the residential home owner. This will be done over the
next few months in accordance with the Council's direction. He
was not sure if it would be advisable to place the issue before
the electorate at this time. He felt it was a bit premature, but
it is a very well w9rthwhi1e thing to look at.
Mayor Tirse11 had asked that the item be placed on the agenda and
stated it was her feeling that after listening to the citizens'
many views the week after the garbage rate discussion before the
Council, she could not find a consensus amongst the citizens although
she had between 30 and 50 phone calls and many supported mandatory
sorting of garbage. Some wished mandatory two-time service during
the summer because of the abatement of flies; many supported
placing the cans at the curb.
Mayor Tirsel1 stated what she was suggesting was something
would gain a little more information from the electorate.
resolution which has been prepared indicates that the City
to adopt an ordinance requiring these things, but what she
ing for was a more informal question.
which
The
is ready
was hop-
Cm Turner stated he would agree with the City Manager as it was
a little too cut and dried and did not leave the Council with any
choice. He would prefer to wait and do a little more investigating
and not place it on the ballot.
Lois Hill, 874 Adams Avenue, of the Livermore Recycling Center,
stated she was encouraged to find that the Council was considering
an advisory vote on a mandatory separate collection of sa1vagable
materials from solid waste because it is the first step of respon-
sible action required by the state. Mrs. Hill stated it would be
appropriate, first, for the Council to declare their intention at
this time with a resolution which might read: Resolved that the
City of Livermore, including the County Waste Plan, has made a com-
mitment to strive to reach a maximum of 67% resources recovery
from solid waste in the 1980's as stated in the County plan, with
a minimum goal of 25% by 1980 as state law requires. These goals
have been set because the rapid depletion of resources threatens
our state and national economy.
Mrs. Hill stated she still has a questionnaire on present volumes
recycled in the City for the State Solid Waste Board several years
ago so they would be able to measure our performance in future years.
CM-33-6
August 9, 1976
(Rpt re Ballot Measure
Trash Separation)
Mrs. Hill stated that the Council might preface the ballot issue
by stating: "In order to meet the goal of 25% resource recovery
from solid waste by 1980 as required by state law the City Council
seeks the advice of the citizens as follows:" and she listed the
five preferences the people could vote on. She felt such a compre-
hensive ballot would enable the city to proceed with a plan the City
can support and citizens would more clearly understand the necessity
for such a plan.
Mayor Tirsell stated she had asked the City Attorney if such a ballot
measure could be prepared and was told it could not, and she again
asked why they could not list several items in the ballot issue as
what the Council is seeking is information in order to carry out the
wishes of the citizens.
Mr. Logan replied that it could possibly be done in that manner, but
the reason the resolution had been prepared showing the measure before
them, it was his understanding they wanted an ordinance making the
separation of garbage mandatory and so it became limited in nature.
Mayor Tirsel1 asked if the measure could be a three part question, and
Mr. Logan replied that they probably could, but it could be rather
complicated to put on the ballot.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that is what she would like in order to get as
much information from the people as possible, and em Dah1backa agreed
that this is what he would like.
Cm Staley commented the question in his mind is not whether the
measure should be put on the ballot, but when. He did not feel there
was enough general information available to the general public to
form an intelligent decision on these questions. They need to know
the cost for the different options, and he wondered if these questions
could be referred to the Solid Waste Committee. They need to determine
the mechanisms to be used if they get an affirmative vote, and he
did not feel there was time to gather all this information for the
November ballot.
The City Clerk advised the Council that the ballot measures will be
billed to the City - any expense in that regard. In addition, she
reminded them that each measure carries with it the privilege of
having yes and no arguments, which arguments must be submitted in
booklet form, translated into Spanish and the City must also pay
for those.
Mayor Tirse11 asked if the measure could be placed on the March
ballot with the school election.
Mr. Parness replied this could probably be done, but it would be
difficult because the precincts are different.
Mayor Tirsell stated that was her concern as the garbage contract would
be up in eighteen months for the next November electifl .and the City
would have no lever t8 --pu!lh with.~....4~" pN osQ~(] ~ /J
(j Q.<., (l "-Lit-
Cm Turner felt that Cm Staley was correct because f they don't have
all the answers, it could be a vote that would be absolutely mean-
ingless in the end regardless of which way it went.
Mayor Tirsell stated the ballot argument could read that providing
that the cost does not exceed the normal rate increase over the
present method.
Cm Turner commented that was not the only reason for putting it on
the ballot, they are also discussing energy problems which is the
overriding factor.
CM-33-7
August 9, 1976
(Rpt re Ballot Measure
Trash Separation)
Mrs. Hill asked if this City Council intends to strive for the
goal as they only have four years. We are now doing only 7.2%.
Mayor Tirsell asked Mrs. Hill if she really felt she has done all
that the volunteer system can carry, and actually recycling has
been declining from the peak of two years ago, and Mrs. Hill
replied to the affirmative.
em Dahlbacka stated he would like to see the points Mrs. Hill men-
tioned in a different ballot format for next week's agenda and at
that time they can discuss the individual items.-a~d make 1:hCHl as
minimum1y eost colleeti~~ aRQ as philose~hica1 as ~OGsib~. He
felt the prospe. ct of a year delay was alarmi~as they do only have
four years.:t:c q~' utJ..-<.-- ';]5~ ./f-U-t'-O.(A<;j' M(~
V (/ ~-l!.A
Cm Kamena stated the voters are mentally nd emotionally equipped
when they are in the voting booth to making yes and no decisions
rather than just being asked for advice. They feel that when they
say yes or no, that becomes bindig and an ordinance has already
been prepared awaiting approval. He felt the wording in the proposed
proposition liB" is a little bogged down in the legalese, which
makes him think as a voter and when the election is over they are
either getting'it or not getting it. He felt a questionnaire might
be the kind of tool they need for getting advice from the public,
and he suggested that since Explorer Scouts are going from door to
door looking for unlicensed dogs, and voters aren't the only people
who generate garbage, perhaps they could include a brief questionnaire
on the garbage.
Mayor Tirsel1 commented that after having gone through a very
heavy experience called General Plan Review and having spent no
less than 150-200 hours on a selection of someone to do that sur-
vey, she could very well say that the results of such a survey will
not be reliable if you send volunteer people to do the survey.
em Kamena remarked that he was not convinced that the results would be
reliable either if they reduce the entire question of recycling
down to yes or no. It is his understanding it is difficult to have
a multiple choice type of thing on the ballot.
Mr. Logan stated that the County might require that rather than hav-
ing one ballot proposition with multiple choice, they have multiple
ballot propositions with yes or no arguments on each.
Cm Kamena asked what would happen if they all passed, and Mr. Logan
replied he would assume they would not put anything on that could
not be implemented, assuming they received a yes vote and the Council
went along with it. Obviously, the vote of the public is a direction
but not mandatory as the Council could still refuse to do it.
It should be made clear this is an advisory vote rather than a
mandatory direction.
Mrs. Hill pointed out that she suggested a preface, and Mayor
Tirsel1 stated that is a ballot argument, there cannot be a
preface on the ballot.
James Carskaddon, 396 L Street, stated he followed the instructions
from the garbage company to place bundled newspapers on top of the
cans and they would pick them up, but when they did pick them up
they just threw them in with the rest of the garbage which is not
doing any good as far as recycling is concerned. He mentioned that
many cities in the east collect leaves, etc. and grind them up
and they are put in windrows at the sewage site and the compost is
then sold as fertilizer. He feels there is nothing wrong with se-
gregation of garbage, and it should be done because the time is
coming when it will have to be done.
CM-33-8
August 9, 1976
(Rpt re Ballot Measure
Trash Separation)
Cm Staley suggested that rather than putting the measure on the
ballot at this time that they hold a public hearing on the subject
of solid waste management in the City, and they would then get infor-
mation and viewpoints which might at some future time make a basis
for a ballot proposition. There was no second to this motion.
Mr. Carskaddon suggested that information could be obtained through
the news media.
Mayor Tirsell suggested that the Council ask the City Manager to
take their comments, together with Mrs. Hill's submittal, and ask
the Clerk to obtain from the County the cost for a separate ballot
issue and arrange this information for next week with no obligation
upon the Council at that time to adopt it.
MAYOR TIRSELL MADE THE MOTION, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA, TO ASK THE
STAFF TO RETURN NEXT WITH WHAT THEY CAN GLEEN AS FAR AS COST FOR SUCH
A BALLOT ISSUE AND PRECEDENT FOR SUCH AND TO USE MRS. HILL'S INFORMATION
AS A POINT OF DEPARTURE FROM WHICH THE COUNCIL CAN CONSTRUCT SUCH AN
ISSUE. ~ /
~, I t (je'!
CM STALEY ASKED THAT THEY ADD THE CONCEPT OF CHARGING ~UM) RAT S. " j
FOR EXTRA CANS OF GARBAGE TO THE BALLOT.
Mayor Tirsell stated they would discuss the cost for proportional
cans next week.
VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
RESOLUTION RE MEASURE
ON NOVEMBER BALLOT -
PUBLIC SAFETY MEASURE
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, AND BY UNANIMOUS
APPROVAL, THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED:
RESOLUTION NO. 195-76
A RESOLUTION PROVIDING THE FORM OF BALLOT FOR A MEASURE TO
BE SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE AT THE
GENERAL ELECTION TO BE HELD AND CONDUCTED IN THE CITY OF
LIVERMORE ON NOVEMBER 2, 1976.
Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, stated that the measure as stated
in the resolution is a farce as the 25~ cannot be put anyplace except
in general funds.
LAVWMA BALLOT MEASURE
Mayor Tirsell asked the Council's permission to place the ballot
measure for LAVWMA under new business at this time as she and em
Turner need direction for the Thursday meeting of LAVWMA when
the ballot issue will be set.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO SUSPEND THE RULES AND ADD THIS ITEM OF NEW
BUSINESS BECAUSE OF ITS EXPEDIENT NATURE, SECONDED BY CM TURNER,
AND THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
RECESS
After a short recess the meeting resumed with all Counci1members
present. Mayor Tirsel1 also acknowledged the presence of two
local Boy Scouts working on a badge.
CM-33-9
August 9, 1976
LAVWMA BALLOT MEASURE
Mayor Tirsell had distributed the LAVWMA ballot measure, and the
P1easanton City Attorney's discussion which had gone to the
P1easanton City Council in regard to their ballot measure. Since
he is the legal counsel to the LAVWMA Board the discussion came
to the Livemore City Council because of the lawsuit involving the
promotion of ballot measures by the people submitting the ballot
measures. She felt it is quite clear that LAVWMA will not be able
to do anything other than a very strict narrow discussion of the
facts, the expenditure of public funds .
Mayor Tirsell stated that at the meeting on Thursday in the sixth
line the 15.6 mgd was amended to read 19.7. The word E~proximate1Y
is very important since in a ballot measure you are aut orizing a
specific amount of money, and it is .a qualifying statement. Mayor
Tirsell continued that there was a meeting on July 19 at which time
the ballot measure was discussed, and it was her opinion, that the
City of Livermore pushed hard to have a split ballot measure. One
would delineate the basic project, which is 15.6 and a second
) \~allot measure wo~A delineate the reserve capacity for in-
~~~ dustry which is ~ or appreximat~ly ~, however, the bond counsel
ii)indicated that he would advise against this split since LAVWMA will
issue the bond and it takes 51% of that electorate to pass it.
. The amount we are going for is 19.7, and he felt that the City of
Livermore and the City of Pleasanton would then have, if it passed,
the amount apportioned under the bond back to them for their
reserve capacity. She felt it was pretty well cast in concrete
as she was overruled at the LAVWMA discussion when the question
was asked, the majority of the board seems to feel committed
to the 19.7.
Mr. Parness stated it was felt to be important so as not to get
the measure too complex and would rather have one figure in the
measure. It would be very difficult to explain this to the voters
in the VCSD area as they would not assume any responsibility for the
additional 4. mgd.
Mayor Tirsell explained that the ballot issue goes to the entire
electorate, and you would have to explain to the Dublin voters
that they are not voting on that 4.mgd and will not be paying any
of those costs.
em Dahlbacka felt that casting the ballot in this form is jeo-
pardizing the passage of a basic ballot issue. He would hope the
LAVWMA Board would reconsider and remove the industrial capacity
from the basic ballot issue and submit it as written, then draw a
separate ballot issue for the industrial capacity for the cities
of Livermore and Pleasanton. He felt if this is not done, the
voters of VCSD will be easily confused as to what they are paying
for, and the industrial capacity has potential to become a very
hot political item and jeopardize the passage of the ballot issue.
If the ballot issue fails at 19.7, it will make it very difficult
for the City of Livermore to consider alternatives because we
won't be sure what the people voted against, the basic project
or the industrial capacity, or if the VCSD voted against it.
Mayor Tirse11 explained that the bond counsel advises that you
cannot have LAVWMA issue bonds unless the total LAVWMA
area votes on the measure. Therefore, if the Livermore area only
votes on industrial reservation, LAVWMA cannot issue those bonds.
That is the legal point.
em Dahlbacka asked if that is the case, could Livermore and Plea-
santon issue the bonds themselves, which would be the only
alternative LAVWMA would not issue the bonds, but the cities
CM-33-10
August 9, 1976
(LAVWMA Ballot Measure)
of Livermore and Pleasanton would issue the bonds under the Revenue
Bond Act, and LAVWMA would stay out of it as far as the bond issue is
concerned, however they still do provide the necessary coordination
for the management of the project.
Mayor Tirse11 stated another point was made that if you apportion
the amount it is about $800,000, P1easanton would have about $500,000
and Livermore about $300,000 and that amount of bonds is very difficult
to sell. She asked Mr. Parness if that was correct.
Mr. Parness replied as a practical matter they are difficult to
market, but it can be done.
Cm Staley asked if you have all the bonds issued by LAVWMA how do
they assess the voters in the Livermore-Amador Valley. Would the
rates for us be more than for Dublin.
Mr. Parness replied if it were to be one issue of 19.7, that would
be correct. The cost would be apportioned based on what the Livermore
contingent would buy, which would mean its part of the 15.6 and
the total cost of 2 mgd for industrial.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that the size of the project is mentioned as
15.6 mgd, and if the 19.7 is placed on the ballot, it was the bond
counsel's opinion you would then go through the precincts and if
Livermore supported the industrial reservation, you could build the
basic project and give the industrial reservation to Livermore. If
the Pleasanton precincts supported it, you could build the basic
project and P1easanton would get the industrial r~servation. She
felt this would be a matter of chance as you can prove or disprove
any election if you go through the precincts that way.
ern Staley asked what the dollar amount would be, and Mayor Tirsell
stated that nothing was said, but hopefully they will be given that
amount on Thursday. She added that the rounded figures have been
discussed all the way through, and the specific amount will not be
grossly different from that figure.
em Turner stated that the VCSD Board has already given direction
for the 19.72 mgd, and Pleasanton has indicated they would favor
the 19.72. He felt it would be easier to sell the project if the
City did agree to a joint ballot issue of 19.72 mgd.
ern Staley stated he had two objections 1) philosophical, in the
sense he doesn't know if he would want to give someone a blank check
in this range of figures, and 2) what assurance do we have that ..~..A'(J L~;
LAVWMA, at some point in time will not change its mind. ~ .~CJu{~
Mayor Tirse11 stated..a11 that is included--irr-the re1301U~ l4' ,
they go to a 19.7 OR the ballot i66a~, the resolution that calls for
the ballot delineates the project, the reservations for industry,
the contracts, the ordinances that must be written and the specific
amounts of money allotted to each item in the resolution. Those are
not on the ballot.
ern Staley stated he would like some assurance that the project will
not be changed.
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that averaged capacity describes the project _
an average capacity of approximately 15.62 mgd, although 19.72 is
what the bond counsel recommends and she is concerned because she
is not sure people will read the ballot measure to realize this
project includes industrial reservation. Livermore has the majority
of voters, and the measure just has to pass in Livermore.
CM-33-l1
August 9, 1976
(LAVWMA Ballot Measure)
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO DIRECT LAVWMA REPRESENTATIVES TO CARRY THE
COUNCIL'S CONCERN THAT THE BALLOT ISSUE BE SPLIT INTO THE BASIC
PROJECT OF 15.6 MGD AND THE RESERVE INDUSTRIAL CAPACITY OF 4.1
BE LEFT AS A SEPARATE ISSUE FOR THE VOTERS OF PLEASANTON AND
LIVERMORE, AND IF NECESSARY THE CITIES CAN ISSUE THE BONDS RATHER
THAN LAVWMA TO AVOID ANY LEGAL PROBLEMS AND ALSO AMENDING TO
"AVERAGE CAPACITY" AND USING THE WORD "INCLUDING". MOTION WAS
SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the ballot measure this motion would
suggest then is when we are given the dollar amount, the line 6
would say, "average capacity of approximately 15.6 mgd, including
related pumps, surge ponds, machinery etc., land use and ease-
ments , therefore..." and "that a second ballot issue be
submitted for the industrial reservation".
Cm Turner asked what happens if P1easanton wants to go to the 19.7,
and Mayor Tirsell replied if four members of LAVWMA Board who say
that, then Livermore has lost. That is what she is concerned about
and the reason she asked the Council to discuss the matter this
evening.
Cm Turner stated he could understand her concern, but if the ballot
issue becomes too complicated it may lead to a total failure of
the pipeline, and he feels it will be a close vote.
Cm Dahlbacka stated he didn't understand how that could happen
because it separates a controversial issue on the ballot for
separate consideration. using an area of confusion with respect
to VCSD voters who are not interested in industrial capacity, it
is something that cannot be written into the ballot measure but
it has to be explained in the voter pamphlet. The people in
the VCSD say they should only be paying for the 15.62, it is going
to be easy to be confused.
Mayor Tirse11 reiterated her concern that if it failed at 19.72
they would have no indication from the voters why it failed. The
environmentalists will say it was too large, and the people who
want to open up the valley will say it was way too small.
ern Kamena stated it was his opinion that if the issue were split on
the ballot, it could be worded in such a way so as not to be
ambiguous to the voter. What they are discussing tonight goes along
with their philosophy a couple of weeks ago that the voters should
have a chance to approve that portion that is in excess of the
E-O calculation. He could not understand em Turner's support for
the 19.7 mgd, and asked how he could separate it to the point
where he would know that the people wanted the extra industrial
capacity.
em Turner replied that he did not have an answer to that question.
em Staley asked why they would want Pleasanton and Livermore to-
gether for the 4.6 mgd.
Mayor Tirse1l replied P1easanton would be separate and Livermore
would be 1.88 mgd. Also there is the possibility that the project
will be redesigned because one or the other city may come in with
their industrial reservation that would fall between the 15.6 and
19.7 which would make it a 17.2 project.
em Turner stated part of his concern is due to what the bond counsel
has said that it would be difficult to sell that bond issue. If
it is separated as Cm Dah1backa is suggesting and the project did
pass, he asked if the 1.88 mgd would be folded in under the overall
bond issue.
CM-33-l2
August 9, 1976
(LAVWMA Ballot Measure)
Mayor Tirsell stated you cannot sell one dime more bonds than the
electorate has authorized.
Cm Kamena stated if both parts of the issue passed - 15.6 and the
1.88 mgd why couldn't those be combined.
Mr. Parness stated he could see no reason why they couldn't be
combined.
Mayor Tirsell stated the bond counsel's argument was that you cannot
issue in the name of an agency when the electorate has not voted on
the entire issue.
ern Staley stated what is behind that theory is if for some reason
Livermore area failed to retire its extra section of the bonds, it
would fall on the other areas of the Valley.
Mr. Parness stated the question also has to be answered as to whether
or not, if the industrial capacity is to be segregated, whether it
is to be a singular ballot proposition for Livermore and Pleasanton,
or two separate ones, one of 2 and one of 2.2.
Mayor Tirse11 felt that the consensus is one for Livermore and one
for P1easanton.
A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION WHICH PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mayor Tirse1l asked the City Manager to communicate to the City
Attorney from Pleasanton what the Council is intending to ask for
and the wording that has been agreed upon, and call the bond counsel
so that on Thursday they can have a meaningful discussion on the
issue.
ANIMAL LICENSES-FEES
A report was received from Police Captain Jack Essex regarding
animal license fees requesting that the Council place a 60-day
moratorium on the enactment of new license and penalty fees. He
also asked that the Council waive the current penalty fee for late
licensing until after the first contact by representatives of the
department, indicating it was their intention that citizens contacted
intia11y would be given a two week period to obtain their licenses
without any penalty fee being assessed.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE POLICE CHIEF
TO ALLOW THE TWO WEEK GRACE PERIOD AFTER NOTIFICATION FROM THE
EXPLORER POST, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
Cm Dah1backa asked if the people will be required to pay the new
fee or the old fee, and Mr. Parness indicated it would be the old
fee. Cm Dahlbacka commented that it would not help raise revenues
to match the cost of the animal control program.
Mr. Parness explained that the new fees city-wide would go into
effect at the beginning of the year.
Cm Staley stated that if the new fees are not effective until
January there would be no point in the 60-day moratorium.
Mr. Parness stated it is just a suggestion that the ordinance not
be enacted until the program is over. It will take about six weeks
to complete the canvassing.
CM-33-l3
August 9, 1976
(Animal Licenses-Fees)
em Kamena stated that all the people who would normally license
their dogs in January have paid their proper fee for this year.
However because the City is trying to increase the numbers of
animals licensed, the intent of the moratorium which would be
required with the philosophy of the recommendation, is to try
to expand the number with a temporary restraint on the penalties
that have been imposed to get them licensed so that a year
from now when the license fee is due the new fee will be effective.
ern Staley asked if the second paragraph means that no one has to
license their dog until they have been contacted because that
is the way it can be interpreted.
Mayor Tirsell asked if the intent of the motion can be brought
to the Council as a specific resolution for next week so that
people are not exempt.
Martin Plone, 2127 First Street, spoke to Cm Staley's concern,
stating that the whole idea of a license for dogs, aside from
helping to offset the cost of the program, is so that the dog can
be identified if it is lost or injured, it can be returned to
the owner. His concern is that as many dogs as possible have
an identification tag so that when one is brought into a veterinary
hospital at night by the police department that they have an
idea the dog has an owner and they can do whatever is necessary
to do. If anything is done to discourage licensing it creates
a burden on practicing veterinarians. He would encourage the
Council in the licensing of animals for identification purposes.
If the Council were to impose any fine, it would discourage
people from licensing their animals. He thanked the Council
for starting the Explorer Scout program.
Paul Tull remarked that in July 1974 he complained about dis-
crimination between his dog and cat and got rather specific
about it. He still finds that same discrimination if it is
the intent of the Council to license dogs only. He did not
feel the dogs should have to bear the burden of the cats. He
further remarked that if an Explorer Scout is sent to his door
he will "sic" his dog on him and in that way get rid of his dog.
Cm Turner stated he has heard several other people make that same
remark, and felt this was a very immature statement to make and
he would hope no one would take this out on a Scout if he does
not want to buy a license.
A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATION AND
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
The Council asked that a resolution be prepared for next weeks
agenda.
COUNTY REFERRAL
REZONING APPLICATION
(Judith Ahlem and Manuel Escover)
A rezoning application from Judith Ah1em and Manuel Escover for
reclassification from R-l-L-B-E (Single Family Residential Agri-
cultural) to C-2 (General Commercial) District at 1339 So. Liver-
more Avenue was referred to the planning Commission from the
County. The Planning Commission has recommended denial of the
application.
CM STALEY MOVED TO ADOPT THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION,
SECONDED BY CM TURNER, AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
CM-33-l4
August 9, 1976
(Rezoning Application
Judith Ah1em & M. Escover)
Mr. Musso explained that the hearing was held.before the Planning
Commission today, and they recommended denial to the Board of Super-
visors as there was opposition from the neighbors. He also passed
on the recommendation of the Livermore Planning Commission.
SUMMARY OF ACTION
P.C. MEETING 8/3/76
Summary of action of the Planning Commission meeting of August 3,
was noted for filing.
P.C. MINUTES 7/6/76
The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of July 6, were noted
for filing.
CODE AMENDMENT
SEC. 6.13 - MOVING OF
FOREIGN BUILDINGS
A report was submitted by the Planning Director indicating that a
used building is being proposed for relocation from Dublin to
Livermore. The building meets the code and has a good appearance.
Section 6.13 of the Code prohibits relocation of such a building
into the City, and the restriction was to discourage relocation of
freeway displaced structures. It is recommended that Section 6.13
of the Code be repealed.
CM TURNER MOVED TO INSTRUCT THE STAFF TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE
AMENDMENT AS RECOMMENDED, SECONDED BY CM STALEY,MOTION PASSED
UNANIMOUSLY.
REPORT RE PROPOSED
ANNEXATIONS
The City Clerk explained that the City recently purchased two pieces
of property - the reservoir site along Doolan Canyon Road and the
2-acre parcel adjacent to Max Baer Park. These should be annexed
to avoide paying taxes on the property.
It is recommended that the Council adopt a motion directing the
staff to proceed to take appropriate action pursuant to Section
35200 of the Government Code, uninhabited territory and to refer
the matter to the Planning Commission for report.
CM TURNER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PROCEED TO TAKE APPROPRIATE
ACTION PURSUANT TO SECTION 35200 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE FOR BOTH
PARCELS AND REFER TO P.C. FOR REPORT. MOTION SECONDED BY CM KAMENA
AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Resolutions Authorizing
Assessment District Levies
to be Placed on Tax Roll
RESOLUTION NO. 196-76
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT LEVY TO BE PLACED ON THE TAX ROLL
TO BE COLLECTED BY THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA.
(Northern Sanitary Sewer Assess. Dist 1962-1)
CM-33-l5
August 9, 1976
(Res. Auth. Assess. Dist.
Levies Placed on Tax Roll)
RESOLUTION NO. 197-76
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT LEVY TO BE PLACED ON THE TAX ROLL
TO BE COLLECTED BY THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA.
(Northern Water Assessment Dist. 1962-2)
RESOLUTION NO. 198-76
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT LEVY TO BE PLACED ON THE TAX ROLL
TO BE COLLECTED BY THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA.
(Wagoner Farms Assessment Dist. 1962-3)
RESOLUTION NO. 199-76
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT LEVY TO BE PLACED ON THE TAX ROLL
TO BE COLLECTED BY THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA.
(Lincoln Shopping Center Assess. Dist 1963-1)
RESOLUTION NO. 200-76
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT LEVY TO BE PLACED ON THE TAX ROLL
TO BE COLLECTED BY THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA.
(Porto1a Avenue Assess. Dist. No. 1966-2)
RESOLUTION NO. 201-76
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT LEVY TO BE PLACED ON THE TAX ROLL
TO BE COLLECTED BY THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA.
(Murrieta Blvd. Assess. Dist No. 1967-1)
RESOLUTION NO. 202-76
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT LEVY TO BE PLACED ON THE TAX ROLL
TO BE COLLECTED BY THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA.
(Railroad Assessment District No. 1974)
Resolution Rejecting Claim
(James D. Agnew)
A claim in the amount of $75,000 for personal injuries and damages
was filed by Struthers, Harris & Grossman on behalf of James Agnew.
RESOLUTION NO. 203-76
A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF JAMES D. AGNEW
Support of Grant
Under AB 3059
Freis and Miller and Associates propose solutions to child care
problems in the Livermore-Amador Valley by provision of va11ey-
wide central information and referral service, provision of in
service training, technical assistance, group purchasing, job
referrals and resource centers. They have asked the Council to
endorse their request for a grant under AB 3059 to provide funds.
RESOLUTION NO. 204-76
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING GRANT UNDER AB 3059
CM-33-l6
August 9, 1976
Resolution Authorizing
Training Agreements
A prior resolution was found to be in error and it is necessary to
rescind that resolution and authorize execution of agreements as
necessary for members of the Police Department to participate in cer-
tain training programs sponsored and administered by the California
State Police Division.
RESOLUTION NO. 205-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE
EXECUTION OF TRAINING AGREEMENTS (Department
of General Services, Calif. State Police Div.)
Resolution Requesting
Ballot Consolidation
RESOLUTION NO. 206-76
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE
REQUESTING THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO PROVIDE FOR
THE CONSOLIDATION OF A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION WITH THE
GENERAL ELECTION WITHIN THE TERRITORY OF THE CITY TO BE
HELD ON NOVEMBER 2, 1976.
Notice of Completion
Fire Station No. 1
The architect has certified that with some very minor exceptions
the work on Fire Station No. 1 has been satisfactorily completed.
The work remaining is exclusively electrical which cannot be
finished because of the current electricians strike, however
sufficient funds will be retained for this purpose. It is re-
commended that a resolution be adopted authorizing recordation
of the Notice of Completion.
RESOLUTION NO. 207-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER
TO RECORD NOTICE OF COMPLETION RE FIRE STATION NO. l.
APPROVAL OF CONSENT
CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY, THE ITEMS ON THE
CONSENT CALENDAR WERE APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.
MATTERS INITIATED BY
STAFF
(Executive Session)
The City Attorney asked that the Council adjourn to an executive
session to discuss several matters of litigation.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY COUNCIL
Cm Dahlbacka asked if the Council would like to consider the
possibility of providing approximately $100 per year per Council
Member for mailing prive1eges to their constituency and asked if
there could be some discussion on that.
CM-33-17
August 9, 1976
(Matters Initiated
by Council)
Mayor Tirse11 questioned whether that would be a legal expenditure
of public funds.
Mr. Logan stated that he would check into that, and report back.
em Turner asked the City Attorney if he would also check into the
legality of having their mail put through the postage meter at
City Hall.
Mayor Tirse11 commented that she had serious reservations, but
she would have no objection for looking into the legality of it.
She felt it would be incombent upon the elected person and their
constituents to support him, and possibly a portion of the campaign
funds could be used for that purpose, however em Dah1backa reminded
her that you could not spend any of the campaign funds after the
election.
Mr. Logan remarked that this would probably revolve around the
question of what the Councilmember intends to send out.
Cm Staley stated there is a second problem in that each Councilmem-
ber represents the entire City, not a given constituency within
the City.
League of Calif. City Info
ern Staley mentioned there is a convention of the League of Calif.
Cities in October. There is a seminar on more effective council
decision making which is to be held in San Diego. em Staley re-
ferred to the bulletin regarding resolutions, and the new League
Headquarters.
Mayor Tirsell asked the City Manager if that could be posted on
the agenda.
Cm Staley stated it would mean an appreciable increase in fees
if the Council votes in favor of the new office building.
Mr. Parness stated there is descriptive material being prepared
on that and as soon as it is received it will be placed on the
agenda.
Tax Override Campai~
Cm Turner referred to the tax override measure to be placed on the
ballot stating he had mentioned earlier there should be some plan
of action as he felt there should ge some kind of a campaign to
sell it. I ~~~
~<~O
Mayor Tirsel1 stated she had ~~~y~_literature against the
spending of city funds ~~~:rnlti~ive, and asked if this item
could be placed on the agenda to discuss a citizens' committee.
ACAP Joint Powers Agreement
Cm Kamena referred to a proposal regarding the jurisdictional
expansion and ACAP Joint Powers Agreement on which a recommendation
must be made before September. He asked if the staff could be
directed to post this as an agenda item for Council consideration
and endorsement if appropriate.
CM-33-18
August 9, 1976
Cancellation of Grant
Mayor Tirse11 stated that there was a letter from Dee Manning in their
agenda indicating that LARPD had received a grant for a youth program
this summer and after reception of the grant the terms were changed
and it was necessary to cancel the program. Since we are a member
of that governing board, and she asked if the Council would like to
instruct our delegate and write a letter to that agency.
Cm Kamena stated it would be after the fact since he had already
lodged a formal protest in San Francisco with regard to their con-
sultant for arbitration.
The Council consensus was to send the letter.
Letter to Army Corps of
Engineers
Mayor Tirse1l stated the Public Works Director has drafted a letter
to the Army Corps of Engineers and she asked the Council's permission
to sign and mail the letter. There are nine points which are questions
raised by Archer Futch where the plan and study differs from questions
he had. She initiated the last statement that the Corps will not
receive the phase II without adequate investigation of phase I and
that the Council approves the plan of study.
It was the consensus of the Council to have the letter sent.
Social Services Survey
League of Women Voters
Mayor Tirsell gave each of the Council members a copy of the Social
Services Survey conducted by the League of Women Voters so that
when they are called, the citizens who have a problem can be referred
to the proper agency. Mayor Tirse11 felt that this would be helpful
for ern Kamena, sitting on the ACAP-CETA Board, encouraging agencies
in our Valley to apply for grants since there are considerable gaps
in social services pointed out, both for County revenue sharing money
and social services. She suggested that the Council also read it
and perhaps they could come to a consensus on some grant applications
they would like to encourage.
Condolences-City Employee
Mayor Tirsell asked the Council to direct the staff to send condolences
to a member of the staff - Eve Feiler whose son and husband were
killed in a traffic accident over the weekend.
Appointments
Mayor Tirsel1 asked that committee appointments be placed on the
agenda next week.
Cm Kamena asked that the City Clerk's office contact the various
committees where appointments have been made during the last four
months, and if those appointees have not made attendance record
that perhaps they could consider another appointment.
CM-33';;;'19
August 9, 1976
Rezoning Granted Anderson
Mayor Tirsel1 remarked that the newspapers reported that the
rezoning granted by the County Board of Supervisors was a victory
for Chester Anderson. She pointed back to testimony given in
October 1973 by the City of Livermore opposing commercial zoning
on portola Avenue as bad planning. Residential zoning for that
property is preferred.
ADJOURNMOUNT
The meeting adjourned at 10:50 p.m. to an Executive Session to
discuss litigatirn. .
APPROVE ~ -~ ~JL
1ty C erk
'vermore, California
ATTEST
Regular Meeting of August 16, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
August 16, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:05 p.m.
with Mayor Tirsell presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Turner, Kamena, Staley and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: em Dah1backa (Seated during Open Forum, and absent again
after the recess).
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirse11 led the Councilmembers as well as those present in
the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES - August 2, 1976
P. 448, third paragraph, 2nd line, strike "which is disappearing very
quickly, and is".
ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, THE MINUTES FOR THE
MEETING OF AUGUST 2, 1976 WERE APPROVED AS CORRECTED (Cm Staley
abstaining) .
CM-33-20
August l6, 1976
OPEN FORUM
(Bicentennial Safari)
Pam DeStiger stated she represented the Bicentennial Safari,
a group of forty Livermore students who will visit the historical
places in the nation. They will leave September 18 and will be
gone eleven days. To finance the trip they have held a flea market,
art auction, raffle, candy sale and will have a carnival at
the barn on August 21st, and they invited all to attend.
The members of the group introduced themselves to the Council and
audience, and Mayor Tirsell congratulated them upon being selected
to make the trip, and encouraged the citizens of Livermore to
support their endeavor.
Bob Hansen, 1818 Pine Street, stated he will accompany the group back
east and advised the Council they are forty good representatives who
will make Livermore very proud of them.
(Garbage Recycling)
Bob Hansen spoke to the rate increase for refuse collection and
asked the Council to consider everything that could be done
to encourage people to separate and recycle, and then they would
only have to pay for what they actually put in the can to be collected.
Mayor Tirsell remarked that the Council does support that concept,
and invited him to stay for the discussion concerning polling the
citizens to get some indication on what type of refuse collection
they would support.
(East Avenue Traffic)
Jerry Wilverding, 4886 Primrose Lane, asked the Council to consider
revision in local traffic law to permit both lanes travelling west
on East Avenue at the intersection of So. Livermore Ave. and 4th Street,
to turn left on 4th Street, heading in a westerly direction. This
item was discussed several weeks ago and in discussing the matter
with a city civil engineer learned the apprehension concerns the
north and southbound traffic on So. Livermore Avenue as he believes
persons going north on So. Livermore Avenue will attempt to turn
left onto 4th Street. This belief is based on an idea that at the
intersection he must paint in the right lane an arrow indicating a
left turn is permitted from this lane. He did not feel there was a
need for an arrow of this type as the present markings are adequate.
He offered that there is a sign on the right hand of East Avenue
which states no right turn on red light, and by placing another
sign of equal size on the same pole it could be stated both lanes
permitted to turn left on 4th Street.
The Public Works Director stated that was a lot of information
submitted, and he would suggest that he extract that from the minutes
and analyze what was said and then he could report to the Council.
COMMUNICATIONS
(Alameda County re
Microwave Oven Operation)
Mayor Tirsell had asked for research regarding possible effects
of microwave oven operation on cardiac pacemakers which was a
concern of some local citizens. The Alameda County Health Care
Services Agency reports that they do not find any significant
danger as there has been only one reported ) case. The FDA has pro-
posed mandatory standards that will require all pacemakers to be
shielded against the effects of electromagnetic energy.
Mayor Tirsel1 asked that this information be transmitted to Mr.
Walter Arnold.
CM-33-2l
August l6, 1976
(Revenue Sharing)
A communication was received from Senator Alan Cranston indicating
that possibly revenue sharing will be enacted again this year.
RESOLUTION RE SEWAGE
CAPACITY BOND PROPOSAL-LAVWMA
The City Council's recent decision was to separate the revenue bond
measure for the proposed industrial capacity only in the LAVWMA
export transmission system amounting to approximately 1.88 mgd
for Livermore and that the bond measure should be duplicated in
the City of P1easanton. The City Attorney had been directed to
prepare a resolution in accordance with their discussion.
Mayor Tirsel1 pointed out that the cost had now been apportioned
which was a concern of em Staley at the last meeting in the amount
of $990,000. The measure is to be finalized for consolidation
of the November ballot.
Mayor Tirse11 explained a misunderstanding had occurred, she
had advised the Council that it had already been determined the
ballot issue would be 19.72. The legal counsel had also under-
stood it to be that and had prepared the ballot wording. Based
on this the Council had taken a stand in opposition to the 19.72
mgd.
ern Dahlbacka asked if it had been determined what engineering
index would be used under the cost estimate.
Mr. Parness responded that the financial consultant firm recommended
ENR 4800.
There followed some discussion concerning the monthly cost per
household for the project which would be approximately $1.50 per
month. The present service charge is $4.80 per month so the
total would be $8.00 or $9.00 - an increase of about 33%.
Mr. Parness explained that our service charge for the 19.72
mgd would be $1.90 per month per household.
ern Turner stated that the bond counsel would prefer that there be
one ballot issue of 19.72 mgd. The bond counsel was asked the
question that if there is a split ballot and both pass, if the
City of Livermore could join forces with LAVWMA and have the bond
counsel do it as one project and he thought their answer was no.
Mayor Tirse11 stated there was no discussion when the question was
asked concerning the split bond issue. Since she had understood
the matter had already been voted on, she didn't push the issue, but
He was not in favor of a split issue.
em Staley asked if the Council does elect to have a separate elec-
tion on the 1.88 mgd for Livermore and P1easanton would decline to
have that election so that it was combined with LAVWMA, would that
mean we would be paying for P1easanton, and was told we would not.
em Staley was referring to the costs which indicate that the service
charge is cheaper if the project is combined - a difference of 20~,
and he asked the reason for this.
Mayor Tirse11 explained the ballot will only go one way. It won't
be combined for P1easanton and split for Livermore. Wherever the
four votes on the LAVWMA Board lie is the way the ballot issue will
be written and the vote has not been taken as yet.
Mr. Parness stated that the costs are only capital costs as the
maintenance cost has not been calculated as yet.
CM-33-22
August 16, 1976
(Resolution re Sewage
Capacity Bond Proposal-
LAVWMA)
em Turner stated that a vote had not been taken on the capacity.
Pleasanton was opposed to a split issue and Dublin did not feel they
had taken a direction vote as to whether it should be split or the
full 19.72 mgd so the item was tabled until Wednesday of this week.
em Turner stated he went along with the motion taken at last Monday
nights meeting - a split ballot of 15.62 mgd and 1.88 mgd for indus-
trial. In reflecting on that vote he would now vote for a single
ballot issue as he believes the pipeline is critical. It is
necessary that the Dublin vote be included in the overall issue
rather than voting on the 15.62 mgd and P1easanton and Livermore
voting on a split ballot.
Cm Dahlbacka asked why it was felt the Dublin vote is necessary since
they have no interest in the industrial capacity.
Cm Turner stated he felt they do have an interest in it, and any
affirmative vote from the Dublin area would be beneficial to the
passage of the total pipeline, including the industrial portion.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL RECONSIDER THE DECISION MADE AT
THE MEETING OF AUGUST 9, 1976, AND DIRECT THE LAVWMA REPRESENTATIVE
TO VOTE FOR A SINGLE BALLOT WHICH IS 19.72 MGD.
Mayor Tirse11 stated she would like to, split the question as they
really need to know if they are going to reconsider.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE CONCIL RECONSIDER THE DECISION, SECONDED
BY CM STALEY, AND PASSED 4-1 WITH CM DAHLBACKA DISSENTING.
CM TURNER MOVED TO DIRECT THE LAVWMA REPRESENTATIVE TO SUPPORT A
SINGLE BALLOT ISSUE OF 19.72 MGD, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
Cm Dah1backa stated he had the same feeling as last week that it is
a mistake to ask the people in Dublin to vote on something that is
not in their interest. Since they do not have an interest
we would be jeopardizing the basic project to handle the pollution
problems in the Valley by adding an issue that is political in nature,
The industrial capacity has not been demonstrated, conclusively,
that it is going to mitigate. There has been no contract written
that will exclusively reserve the capacity for industrial use -
there is nothing in the ballot issue as proposed by the LAVWMA Board.
He felt that all the elected officials can support the basic
15.62 mgd, but he was not sure he could support the additional indus-
trial capacity at this time. The common denominator arnong~everyone
is 15.62 mgd, the basic waste water problem of the valley and which
he feels is the best thing they can give to the voters in November.
Then the people can decide whether they want the added industrial
capacity with the argument pro and con as that would be more
controversial.
em Turner stated he did not agree with Cm Dah1backa's statement
that industrial will not mitigate.
Cm Dah1backa indicated that he had stated it is not demonstrated
that the industrial capacity will mitigate.
Cm Turner replied that since he has served as Planning Commissioner
and Council, it has been discussed that any industrial base that
can be developed within the Livermore Valley will, hopefully, create
new jobs and cut down on commuting, a real benefit to the air pollution
problem.
em Dah1backa stated he would agree with that, but the other real
concern is that the industrial capacity is not grant fundable.
CM-33-23
August 16, 1976
(Resolution re Sewage
Capacity Bond Proposal
LA VWMA)
ern Staley remarked that if it is voted on as a lump sum issue the
cost would be $1.90 a month more but if it is split, there is an
additional cost of 20~.
Cm Dahlbacka stated they will be given a choice of whether they
want to pay $1.60 or if they want the additional sewer capacity of
50~. He did not understand why there should be that difference in
the cost. .
The Council tried to determine how this difference was derived
and Mr. Parness indicated that it was attributable to the cost of
financing a smaller issue.
Cm Dahlbacka, on the other hand, felt it should not be that high,
and thought it had to do with the intermediate sizes, but Mr.
Parness remarked it was not a direct line relationship.
Cm Staley stated there is another problem as all the calculations
are based on either building the 15.62 or 19.72 mgd project size.
If it is split out into separate issues for P1easanton and Livermore,
it may well be that cost analyses are not correct.
Mayor Tirsell stated there are essentially four projects they can
build - the basic, with Livermore, with P1easanton or with both.
em Dahlbacka asked the City Attorney if he had an opinion on the
viability of reserving sewer capacity strictly for industrial use
over a period of twenty years or longer, and whether that can be
done if there are alternate demands of other agencies. Mr. Logan
replied that he did not have an opinion. Cm Dah1backa continued
that it was not clear cut and as far as he has been able to read
in the resolution and in the ballot issue, he was never to find
a statement reserving the additional capacity strictly for indus-
trial users.
Mayor Tirse1l stated the bond counsel is reluctant to put such a
thing in the ballot wording, however she would not vote for any
resolution calling an election that does not have that wording in
it.
Cm Dahlbacka stated he did not believe the industrial capacity of
4 mgd will be used in the Valley because in ten or fifteen years
there will be incredible pressure on using that additional capacity
for residential development. The kind of numbers they are talking
about in terms of additional residences, on the order of 40,000
additional people, is inconsistent with the General Plan for this
City or Pleasanton or the E-O growth projection for the Valley.
Mayor Tirse11 remarked it is inconsistent with P1easanton's urban
limit line, but not inconsistent with the Livermore General Plan.
Mayor Tirse11 added that the E-O is way below our general plan expec-
tations as it is 65,000 or 67,000 people. She did not feel it was
correct to say it was inconsistent with our general plan actually,
because 2% to 1996 goes to more than 65,000 people.
CM TURNER MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO PLACE IN THE RESOLUTION
THE WORDS THAT 4.1 MGD TO BE USED FOR INDUSTRIAL CAPACITY ONLY.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL.
Cm Kamena referred to the main motion, stating he felt the issue is
simpler when it is one measure rather than two, and he also believed
in the people's right to vote on the issue. Even if the ballot measure
is consolidated to a single issue such as 19.72 mgd, he felt that the
CM-33-24
August l6, 1976
(Resolution re Sewage
Capacity Bond Proposal
LAVWMA)
voters will be able to vote on that expenditure, and it is his opinion
that the City does, in fact, need industrial reservation and expansion.
He favors the larger capacity and he did not think that monitoring
the reservation is as big a problem as some people say especially if
LAVWMA has some of the jurisdictional charge, so he did favor the
motion.
Cm Dah1backa stated he could not support the motion and if is placed
on the ballot this way he did not feel he could support the ballot
issue because they have removed the lowest common denominator, which
is the basic pollution problem.
Mayor Tirsell stated the motion is consistent with the majority of
the Council in asking for the 1.88 mgd and she felt the numbers were
conclusive because how could you ask someone to vote for an additional
1.88 mgd for industrial capacity and say it will cost 20~ more because
it is placed on the ballot in this way. One other point she wanted
to make, and that is she felt there is more leverage if you are sewed
up with LAVWMA rather than independently, as it would be difficult for
the cities to monitor one another. The LAVWMA Board will take the
responsibility for the monitoring of the project and it would not be
one city against the other. It will be up to the City Council to be
concerned that the reservation is reserved for industry.
ern Dahlbacka asked if the measure states anywhere about the reserved
capacity or if it stated in the ballot argument that it will be used
exclusively for industrial use.
Mayor Tirsel1 stated the bond counsel is very nervous about including
any numbers except the amounts of money. Mayor Tirse11 stated that
the wording that the Livermore City Council wanted included had not
been inserted as yet and she and Cm Turner will have to manuever those
through at the next meeting. The amendment to include a reservation
for industry will have to be included in the measure.
A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE AMENDMENT AND PASSED 5-0.
A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MAIN MOTION AND PASSED 4-1 WITH CM DAHLBACKA
DISSENTING.
REFUSE COLLECTION
Mayor Tirsell explained that she had suggested that when they con-
solidate with the ballot for the November election they get an
advisory vote regarding garbage collection. The staff has recommended
that rather than a ballot issue a survey form be inserted in the
water bill which would be a polling of the community and the cards
could be returned and tabulated. A questionnaire had been prepared
for a yes or no answer to questions concerning various forms of trash
pickup .
Cm Turner stated he did not like the wording that was used in the
questions, and in the first question he would prefer not to use
the word required, but rather urged as he felt there would be
some people who would not be able to accomplish this task.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that they should determine tonight if it is
the Council's intent to place the issue on the ballot, and if so
then they need to work out the wording. If not, they can discuss
the wording on the questionnaire.
Mayor Tirse11 asked for a consensus of the Council.
CM-33-25
August 16, 1976
(Refuse Collection)
Cm Staley indicated that it made a lot more sense to send out a
questionnaire along with the utility bill, and this was the consensus
of the other members of the Council.
Lois Hill, 874 Adams Avenue, felt that the wording in the question-
naire was fairly clear, and she would not object to the substitution
of the word urged however the primary reason for going to the public
is that resource recovery law is required by the state and this has
been replaced by the words environmental protection. She would pre-
fer the following statement as a preface, "The County solid waste
plan has been approved by the City of Livermore. The plan endorses
vastly increased resources recovery goal. The state requires 25%
recovery from total solid waste, generally, by 1980. We are now
recovering less than 10%. Your answers to the following questions
will help the City determine the means by which these goals can be
exceeded in Livermore".
Mrs. Hill continued that to her a ballot issue is preferable
to this questionnaire because a ballot is more democratic and it
would reach more people as customers of the City water company would
be left out. She felt that the response to a ballot issue in a
presidential election would be much higher than a questionnair and
that a telephone survey would provide more representative sample
than a mailed questionnaire. The cost issue is very complex and
there are no accurate cost figures available at present, but
we must expect costs since we are required by the state to recover
resources and these costs are just as legitimate as costs for
parks, streets, etc. It would be less costly to have a truck
gather the salvageable materials than for each family to transport
them to the recycling center. The cost of a home collection
would be small compared to no program as it would be a loss of
resources for landfill, higher energy costs, and various other
costs. Mrs. Hill introduced Mr. Humphrey from Modesto whose
program has just been cost analyzed.
Mr. Humphrey stated that the recycling work that has been in progress
the past couple of years would make it much easier for the City
to go to some kind of home collection program at the recycling
center in Modesto they are recovering over 200 tons a month of
bottles, cans and newspapers which brings in a gross income of
approximately $100,000 a year. There are 4,000 families taking
part and about 50% of their volume comes from the curbside collection
program that a nonprofit educational group operates with its
own equipment and pays the employees. They work with pickup
trucks and trailers and drive the collection area once a week
on a 5day week basis. The homeowners place their newspapers
in a shopping bag, their cans in another and their glass into
a third bag or cardboard box, all of which are placed out on
the curb. About 10% of their volume comes from dropoff bin at
the ecology center, 30% of the flow is from their purchase program
where they give people in the industrial area three options,
put material on the street, drop them off or sell them to the
center.
Mr. Humphrey went on to explain the costs of this program and
the participation which is now 23% and is expected to go to 50%
in the next year. The Livermore City Council can observe their
program. Merced has just launched a similar program, and they
would be interested in monitoring the result of our questionnaire.
He felt that Livermore would have a much higher percentage of
participation than they do now because of the recycling program
we already have.
CM-33-26
August 16, 1976
(Refuse Collection)
Mayor Tirsell asked if they are able to keep viable markets going
for them, and Mr. Humphrey replied that the markets are getting
stronger, the materials more valuable and with the community spirit
they have, he felt the program will work.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the consensus is to use the California
Water route, and we would also use our own water billing to cover the
whole town.
Mr. Parness stated that Cal Water has respectfully declined the use
of their envelope system, however they will provide us with their
customer names and address on gummed labels.
Cm Dahlbacka asked if there was any cost estimate for the survey and
Mr. Parness replied a lot depended upon the size of the text
and how it could be fitted on various size cards.
Cm Staley stated that if Ca1 Water will not provide the envelopes,
perhaps Oakland Scavenger may be willing to since they are mailing
to everyone who has a garbage can, however Mr. Parness indicated
that there are 12,500 billings in our City, and we have 16,000
residences.
James Webb, 3926 Pestana Way, asked if the service is mandatory,
and if so why are there only 12,500 who are having it picked up.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the garbage company has not enforced their
right to require pickup, the enforcement is up to Oakland Scavenger.
Mr. Webb stated he did not favor curbside pickup, but did favor
twice a week pickup as it originally began because of flies. He
would even be willing to pay the additional cost of this as he did
not favor sorting his garbage.
The Council discussed the cost difference for a ballot measure or
a questionnaire mailing and it was determined that the ballot measure
would be more expensive.
MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO USE A MAILING THROUGH THE WATER COMPANY
REGARDLESS OF THE COST BECAUSE SHE FELT THEY HAD MORE FLEXIBILITY
TO GET THE INFORMATION THEY WANT. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Cm Turner wondered if they would reach more people through the
utility bill questionnaire or the voter registration, but surmised
they would reach more families through the utility bill questionnaire.
Lynwood Hester, 552 Brighton, asked if the people were required
to use the garbage disposal system if they wanted to or not, and
Mayor Tirse11 stated that in granting the franchise it is mandatory
garbage pickup as garbage pickup is a health measure in a community.
Mr. Hester stated this was taking away people's rights. Mr. Hester
asked what time they are allowed to begin the pickup and was told
5:30 a.m. He then asked why they were allowed to begin so early
because if other people made that much noise they would be arrested
for disturbing the peace, which Mayor Tirsel1 explained had mainly
to do with traffic.
Mayor Tirse11 asked if the Council would let her and another inter-
ested member of the Council work with Lois Hill to develop a
questionnaire, and Cm Dahlbacka offered to work with her.
Cm Turner stated that in developing the questionnaire it might be
helpful that when they ask the question there should be some simple
documentation to back up the question as he did not feel the third
question in the draft was of any value.
CM-33-27
August 16, 1976
(Refuse Collection)
Mr. Logan reminded the Council that the information they receive
through the questionnaire will be used as the basis for an ordinance.
A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
SPRINGTOWN GOLF COURSE
ADVERTISING
A citizen had recommended that the City advertise the Springtown Golf
Course because many people think it is a private course. The staff
has recommended newspaper advertising program effective May/June/July
1977. It is further recommended that the City Council allow the
placement of one and possibly two small directional signs, perhaps
2 ft. by I ft. which would state "Springtown Golf Course-Public
Invited", which could be placed now. These signs could be placed
near the travelled way at the Springtown off-ramp and near the
Recreation Center parking lot.
Cm Turner suggested that this information be included in the Septem-
ber discussion on the Springtown Golf Course. He did not feel it
should be referred specifically to one certain newspaper.
Cm Kamena reminded the Council that Carlton Douglas was relating
to the need for promoting the Springtown Golf Course. In the sug-
gestion to advertise the program in May, June and July 1977 does
not address itself to the issue of the possibility of closing the
course in 1976. If the Council feels this is a good idea, why
don't they give it a try as fast as they can, and then when they
have the discussion in September they will have more information.
em Staley remarked they have an excellent chance to test this on a
one month basis as they have established figures for play on the
golf course at this time of year. He suggested that they run the
ad in the newspaper that gets the best circulation for the least
amount of money and try it for thirty days, and they would then
have the figures for the September meeting.
Mayor Tirsell stated the Council planned to discuss what they in-
tended to do with the Springtown Golf Course sometime in September
and asked the staff for the date of the discussion.
Mr. Parness stated that had not been decided, but suggested it be
the later part of the month.
CM STALEY MOVED TO PLACE AN AD IN THE NEWSPAPER GIVING THE BEST
PRICE ON THE AD FOR ADVERTISING THE SPRINGTOWN GOLF COURSE, PURSUANT
TO MR. DOUGLAS' SUGGESTION, RUN IT FOR 30 DAYS TO BEGIN AS SOON
AS POSSIBLE AND MONITOR THE PLAY. MOTION SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
Cm Turner stated that any advertising should be on a sustained basis
and he did not feel that 30 days would give any meaningful results
since this is the tail end of the golfing season. Also he did not
feel there had been an opportunity to develop an advertising program
that would be beneficial, and did not think an ad would be enough,
and questioned whether that is a good expenditure of funds at this
point. The idea is good, but he would prefer to wait until after
they make their decision on whether or not to keep the Springtown
Golf Course, then the advertising would be an avenue to pursue in
1977.
Cm Staley stated it was not expected that this ad would turn the
attendance and suddenly make a profit, but what they are looking for
is a change in the seasonal play pattern.
CM-33-28
August 16, 1976
(Springtown Golf Course
Advertising)
Mayor Tirse11 agreed that if they are going to do an ad campaign
it should be well planned and done at the height of the season,
and then if you are full potential and manage to jack that number
up 100-200 a week, you know the ad is effective.
A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION WHICH FAILED WITH CM STALEY BEING THE
ONLY ASSENTING VOTE.
CM TURNER MOVED TO REFER THIS ITEM TO THEIR SEPTEMBER DISCUSSION,
SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL, AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Parness stated he felt it was very important for the posted
signs to be allowed. He was out there the other day and counted five
"No Entrance", "No Parking" sign restrictions on the Springtown Golf
Course parking lot advising cars will be towed away. There is no
indication that it is the parking lot for the golf course.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ALLOW TWO SIGNS INDICATING "SPRINGTOWN GOLF COURSE
PUBLIC INVITED", SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
RECESS
AFTER A SHORT RECESS THE MEETING RESUMED WITH ALL MEMBERS EXCEPT
CM DAHLBACK PRESENT.
LOTS OF RECORD -
SEWER SERVICE COMMITMENT
The City Council had requested a staff report on the amount of
residential lots of record currently entitled to sewer service, the
existing sewer flows and remaining capacity. The purpose of the
report was to consider transferring such committed quantity to some
undeveloped bulk acreage.
ern Turner explained he had called for the report because a representa-
tive of the Hazelhorst property had contacted the Council for a
solution to their problem of possibly losing the property because
of back taxes. It was his idea that perhaps they could get a developer
to build homes in that area in various price ranges that everyone
could afford, and in this way the Hazelhorts could sell their property
and make a little money. However according to the report submitted
by the Planning Director this would not work. This was one property
that the City would like to see developed as residential in the general
plan.
Mr. Musso stated that this could not be done under the present City
policy, but under that same pOlicy, the next allocation of available
sewer capacity would be for the development of existing parcels
within the City. The next stage would be for those parcels which
are not in the City and which have been bypassed or for other reasons
are desired for in-fill. Mr. Musso added that a CETA employee working
in the Planning Department has been working on a development scheme
to determine exactly what would be involved with the development of
the property. The only problem is the Connelly property which would
also need to be annexed as it would be landlocked otherwise. This
would add up to 326 dwelling units on the Connelly property and
338 on the Haze1horst property. Mr. Musso stated that he had
discussed this idea with an interested gentleman and one of his
inputs was dedicating land equivalent to his tax liability, however
a park is not needed in the Haze1horst property area.
Cm Turner stated he sees the need for some development of residen-
tial property - perhaps 200 building permits per year. He had
checked with the City Attorney to see if the City had any commit-
ment to these lots of record, and he indicated we did not have
a commitment.
CM-33-29
August 16, 1976
(Lots of Record -
Sewer Service Commitment)
Mr. Logan explained that if the Council changes the policy, they
have no commitment. It is a Council created policy.
Mayor Tirse11 remarked that they had worked out very carefully
the manner in which they designated the capacity left in the
water treatment plant.
Mr. Logan stated there is no question if the Council wishes to
allocate capacity for industrial, they better not change their
policy at this time. If they do, they will raise all kinds of
issues including questions from people who have been denied per-
mits. There is legally no commitment if the Council changes their
policy.
Cm Turner stated another reason he had was that there are 450 new
jobs at the Livemore Lawrence Laboratory, but how many people plan
to locate in Livermore, he did not know. He was interested in the
housing availability in the Valley as the recent PG&E report shows
there is a vacancy rate of less than 1%. One other factor is that
the City needs to increase our income.
Cm Staley asked if the report includes lots of record that are
not developed and was told that it did. He stated that when they
discussed allocation for industrial and commercial reservation a
year ago, the capacity of the plant was 5 mgd and there was 4.6 mgd.
Of that difference .36 mgd was committed to lots of record, indus-
trial and commercial already and as he recalled there was .2mgd
for residential and .1 mgd for industrial and commercial, and this
report indicates only .024 mgd for industrial and commercial. He
would like to know where the remainder of that capacity has gone.
Mayor Tirse11 asked the Planning Director to explain his comment
regarding the Connelly - Haze1horst properties in which he indicated
these properties could not be served with the first sewer plant ex-
pansion.
Mr. Musso stated the 1mgd expansion was to be reserved for industrial,
however Mayor Tirse11 stated that the general plan and resolution
state that no less than 50% reserved, so she felt that statement
was incorrect.
Mayor Tirsell reminded the Council that a year ago this Council
adopted a resolution reserving all capacity for industrial.
Cm Turner stated they had reserved capacity for residential lots of
record, but Mayor Tirse11 replied that had to do with the remaining
40,000 gallons.
Cm Staley questioned the chart showing the commercial and industrial
commitments, and Mr. Musso stated that it only contains the approved
permits. em Staley asked about phase II of the downtown project,
and Mr. Musso replied there are no approved site plans or projects.
Mr. Musso stated that if the sewer capacity is used, there would
be none left for phase II, however the Council could allocate
a certain amount for phase II.
Mr. Lee explained that they are talking about a relatively small
volume, and Mayor Tirsel1 added that commercial connections are
only a number of toilet facilities, it does not have to be figured
like big water users.
Cm Staley stated he understood that, but his point is that they
have made all these other reservations that mayor may not come
about, and they have not made reservations to a project they
are committed to in the core of our City.
CM-33-30
August 16, 1976
(Lots of Record -
Sewer Service Commitment)
Mayor Tirse11 asked what he would suggest since there have been no
plans filed, and Cm Staley replied it could be done the same way
they have reserved capacity for lots of record. Cm Staley asked if
they had plans for those listed and was told they had. He felt
they could not do any prudent planning if they do not include some
reservations for the downtown project.
The Public Works Director explained that many of the reservations
listed will not develop, but the report is merely giving a magnitude
of what the commitments are. Others will develop that are not listed
and, cannot be anticipated.
Cm Staley restated his concern, and Mr. Musso explained that the
listing are those which were felt to be commitments in the way of
some formal city action that were approved. The Council could make
the same decision at this time and assign a certain number for the
S. P. Development.
Mr. Parness stated it would be a reasonable thing to do. There has
been an estimated 7,000 gal. allotted to the first stage, and there
would be about the same amount of property in the second stage.
Cm Staley stated that the SP development is about 75% complete now,
so to reserve the balance of the first phase and all of the second
phase would amount to about .002 mgd.
Mayor Tirsell stated she was concerned because they had worked with
figures and allocated the remaining capacity between industrial and
lots of record, and according to the report they haven't had that
many connections and yet they have lost capacity in the plant, and
she asked Mr. Lee what happened to the 40,000 gal. that was un-
committed.
Mr. Lee replied that he tried to make the point before and will again,
40,000 gal. a day cannot be measured that closely. They were pinned
down to just exactly what the capacity of the plant was, but they
might find it is possible to be 50,000 or 100,000 over and there would
be no problem with the plant.
Mayor Tirsell stated they recognized there is an average, but felt
they would be remiss in planning the connection of a subdivision
when the monthly figures are coming in around 5 mgd. Mayor Tirsel1
asked if they could have the old data with this and the resolutions
involved and have a study session on this matter.
Cm Staley stated he would also like to know what connections have
been made the past year to account for the .1 mgd. He asked how
accurate the measurement is.
Mr. Lee replied it could vary 4-8%, depending on the type of
equipment that is being used. The flow varies during the course of
the day in the neighborhood of 2 mgd to 8 mgd, so when you are talking
about average dry weather flow, there are times of the day when you
are handling about twice as much, and times of year when you handle more.
Mayor Tirsell stated it is important for the Council to know when
the capacity plus or minus is reached as you cannot grant commit-
ments and then have the State Water Quality Control Board tell
us to cease and desist.
Cm Kamena felt that they should be cautious, but he would like to
see some of the figures and resolutions and try to resolve some
of the concerns mentioned here tonight. On the other hand, he
felt that the general plan calls for some kind of orderly growth
CM-33-3l
August 16, 1976
(Lots of Record -
Sewer Service Commitment)
and they tend to have some emphasis on industrial and commercial.
What he had hoped to see was a report which would allow them to
have some alternatives with regard to infilling and some kind of
time frame that would allow, within the scope of the general plan,
the ability to plan ahead.
Mayor Tirsell stated it was clear to her last year when they were
working on this that they would not be developing anything except
a lot of record, and the last 32 lots were those considered for
Kissell. There was never a time that the Council discussed any-
thing not a1eady on a filed map.
Cm Kamena stated it might very well be that he would make the same
conclusions, but he would like to have the opportunity of making
those conclusions himself. As pointed out the memo does say that
under the present policy the development of the Hazelhorst property
would occur with the second planned sewer plant expansion and not
with the 1mgd pending approval. He noticed this same wording in
another memo on planning about four weeks ago.
Mayor Tirsell asked the Planning Director if he would delete that
particular paragraph.
em Turner stated that the issue of their application for 1 mgd.
was discussed before, and the allocation specified by the Council
was no less than 50% for industrial-commercial, 40% to residential
and 10% to low income housing. To keep cropping up with 100%
to industrial and commercial is wrong, and the records should be
set straight. The other point is that if the sewer capacity is to
be the subject of a study session, it should be done in the near
future. The old Council, under their policy, had agreed to hold
a sewer connection for each lot of record and this can be cleared
up when they read the comments. It was his intention to push for
200 building permits per year for the next five years or until
they increase the sewage facilities by 1 mgd.
Mayor Tirse11 asked if it was Cm Turner's intention to push to
make 200 building permits available per year for housing, to which
Cm Turner replied to the affirmative. Mayor Tirse11 said then
there would be no industrial capacity. She asked if he meant
in addition to the lots of record, and Cm Turner replied it was
his intent to forget the lots of record.
Mayor Tirse1l felt they should set this matter for discussion as
that would be reversing the prior intent of the city.
em Staley asked that in addition to discussing the past sewer policy
and what they had discussed this evening, if they could also re-
view the application for the grant and progress report on that
for the expanded capacity.
The staff was asked to get a package together, with the resolutions,
for the Council for the meeting of September 13.
GREAT AMERICAN LAND CO.
(Kissell - Tr. 2619)
The Great American Land Company has asked for the issuance of the
building permits for the last 32 lots in Tract 2619, a part
of the third amendment to the agreement with The Kissell Company.
The City Attorney has advised that any further commitment of the
32 permits will require Council's agreement that the sewer capacity
is available.
CM-33-32
August 16, 1976
(Great American Land Co.
Kissell - Tract 2619)
Mayor Tirse1l suggested that perhaps this item should be put over
until after they had discussed the sewer capacity.
em Turner felt they should ask the staff because they had anticipated
this request.
Mr. Lee stated these permits are included as the lots of record
and there is capacity allowed for them.
Mr. Parness stated that Mr. Schworer has advised him their experience
so far with their construction and lot sales has exceeded their
expectation. Of the first 52 permit issuances they have only four
left, so he is nine months ahead in applying for the second 52, and
the 32 lots are in excess of those 104. The Council had said they
would consider those 32 if at the time the sewage capacity was
available.
Mayor Tirsell stated she would not be willing to discuss this item
until they have the reports and make the determination on their
industrial capacity.
Cm Turner pointed out that these were included in the lots of record
so if they have the capacity the two issues should be independent of
each other and it should be considered this evening.
Mayor Tirsell reminded Cm Turner that he had made the statement that
he would forget the lots of record and issue 200 building permits
per year to people who were not lots of record, and yet very shortly
they may reach capacity and not be able to do any of the other things
called for in the general plan. They should discuss the matter
and if this Council does not agree that an industrial reservation
is correct, they should change their intentions.
Cm Kamena remarked that some of the lots of record have not applied
for permits, but this person has applied, and he felt the Council
was obliged to consider that issue tonight, and MOVED ACCEPTANCE
OF THE PROPOSAL THAT THEY ISSUE THOSE PERMITS, SECONDED BY CM TURNER
FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION.
Mayor Tirse1l stated that when they allocated the capacity there
was a mythical 40,000 gal. that were not committed, which is no longer
there, and if they keep issuing permits for a few lots at a time it
will be at capacity.
Cm Staley stated that as he understands it there are no plans to
build these 32 units until they build the other 52 units.
William Schworer, President of Great American Land & Development Co.,
stated they have completed 52 units and are starting the next 52
and expect to be in the last 32 sometime the last part of October,
before the year ends. The Kissell Company has moved their operations
to Ohio, and his company is acting as their agent now. They have
completed all of the requirements of the third memorandum and the
bond has been released. They have substituted their own bond as they
have taken over the development.
Cm Karnena apologized to the Council stating he thought it was for the
second 52 lots they were requesting the permits.
Cm Turner stated that he was confused because when they discussed
the issue it was his understanding that there was sewer capacity
available for all the lots of record in our present plant. Mr.
Lee has just said that the 32 permits are lots of record, and if
so there is the capacity, and if they allowed all 1294 lots of re-
cord tonight, there would still remain the 40,000 gal. He felt
we really do have the capacity for those 32 lots.
CM-33-33
August 16, 1976
(Great American Land Co.
Kissell - Tract 2619)
Mayor Tirse1l replied that it would depend on how they would want
to spend the capacity because they did not make the commitment
and Cm Turner stated we did not make the commitment, but said we
would consider it and that is what he is doing.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that is why she would like to consider it
after they have discussed the sewer capacity because there is almost
zero left for industrial development.
Cm Staley stated this commitment for 32 lots is the same amount
of sewage capacity needed for phase II of the downtown development.
A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION TO ALLOW THE 32 LOTS OF RECORD TO
HAVE SEWER CAPACITY AND FAILED WITH CM TURNER ONLY SUPPORTING THE
MOTION.
MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO POST THIS ITEM ON THE AGENDA AFTER THE
SEWER CAPACITY DISCUSSION ON SEPTEMBER 13. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY
CM STALEY AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Schworer was advised that this matter would be discussed on
September 13, after they have considered the sewer capacity issue.
The Council discussed what documents they would like to have for
the September 13 meeting on this item, and Mr. Lee mentioned these
documents as follows: what connections since the last report was
made~ staff report that was issued on flow policies in the form of
resolutions, pOlicy statements or ordinances that affect plant
flow capacity, the application for capacity that has been made
for the 1 mgd, the amendment to that, the status report on the
grant application and resolution on the 1 mgd expansion.
Mayor Tirse11 stated they would also like the minutes excerpts on
how they arrived at capacity and the resolutions.
Cm Staley stated he would also like to have a number in the form
of an estimate for the SP Development.
Mayor Tirsel1 stated she would also like the summary discussion
on the Brown and Caldwell report that established plant capacity.
LARPD FEE WAIVER
(Ravenswood)
A request has been made by LARPD that local fees pertaining to
reconstruction work at Ravenswood be waived. It is recommended
that the City fees be waived.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE THE CITY FEES WERE WAIVED AS RECOMMENDED.
REVISION JOINT POWERS
AGREEMENT - ACAP
The City Manager reported that because four additional public
jurisdictions in Alameda County wish to incorporate within ACAP
a revision of the original joint powers agreement was undertaken
by the staff. In that process the Community Services Administration
detected some structural defects in the original joint powers agree-
ment having to do with the governing board composition.
CM-33-34
August 16, 1976
(Revision Joint Powers
Agreement - ACAP)
The agreement has been reviewed by the City Attorney and found to
be in order. It must be approved for execution by all participating
agencies by the first week in September.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF THE
AGREEMENT, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
RESOLUTION NO. 208-76
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT
(Associated Community Action Program)
REPORT RE ADMINISTRATION
BUILDING
A report was submitted by the City Manager concerning the financial
prospects for the construction of the administration building.
eM TURNER MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM UNTIL SEPTEMBER 7, SECONDED
BY CM KAMENA, AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
ZONING FREEZE WITHIN
CBD ZONE
The Planning Director submitted a report concerning the possible
zoning freeze of areas within the CBD inasmuch as the CBD Plan
may suggest land uses and development regulations presently in
conflict with the present Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Plan. The
Planning Commission deem it necessary in order to protect the
public safety, health and welfare, to consider the adoption of
an interim ordinance as an urgency measure which would control
allowance of certain uses which may be in conflict.
The Planning Director further explained the area involved on the
map, stating he had also recommended that any freestanding restaurant
be included.
Cm Turner asked the time limit for freezing the commercial area and
was advised up to two years, however what the Planning Commission
has in mind is the time it takes to adopt the general plan and
adopt some new ordinances which have already been started - about
six months, however parking issues may take longer.
Mayor Tirsell asked the City Attorney if he had reviewed this with
regard to compliance with the moratorium.
Mr. Logan indicated that the Planning Director quotes the law rather
accurately as there is a specific length of time.
Mayor Tirse1l asked if this wasn't expended on the general plan review
and was told they had not and Mr. Musso explained the first time
it can be done without a public hearing for 90 days and then it
can be extended for two years.
Mr. Logan stated this was entirely a new project, and Mr. Musso
added that the moratorium two years ago did not apply to commercial
and industrial.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE STAFF BE INSTRUCTED TO PREPARE AN URGENCY
ORDINANCE, SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL.
em Turner stated he felt it was critical that the City not stay out
of the competitive commercial market for an extended period of time.
CM-33-35
August 16, 1976
(Zoning Freeze Within
CBD Zone)
ern Turner stated everyone in the Valley is after the commercial
building and commercial dollar. He would encourage the Planning
Department and Planning Commission to make a valiant attempt to
finalize this within this four month period. He would not be in
favor of extending the period.
Mr. Musso explained that retail will be allowed.
Mr. Logan stated the initial period would be 90 days, after which
it can be increased another nine months, and then another year.
A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION WHICH WAS TO INSTRUCT THE STAFF TO
PREPARE AN ORDINANCE AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
APPOINTMENTS
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that Mary Ellen Ludeman would like to be
reappointed to the Library Board. Leo Meisner has indicated he
would like to be reappointed to the Greens Committee. She was
unable to contact Robert Shroyer, but was sure he would like to
be reappointed to the Greens Committee. She was unable to contact
Gilbert Moomau who is interested in serving on the Noise Abatement
Committee.
Since there was not a full Council, no appointments were made.
REPORT RE TAX OVERRIDE
CAMPAIGN
The City Council wished to discuss a campaign format for the
public safety tax override. The City Manager reported that in
the March election about $1,000 was spent, all derived from dona-
tions from the Police and Fire Associations. Public monies cannot
be spent for this purpose. It is expected that the Police and Fire
Associations will again assist in this campaign issue by organiz-
ing and producing some form of revenue raising event. Assistance
from the newspapers will be solicited and citizen volunteers may
be of service. The City Council can be of assistance by partici-
pating in the special community meetings for the purpose of dis-
cussing this subject.
Cm Turner asked what member of the staff would be the coordinator,
and Mr. Parness it was difficult to do and he had tried to do
it the last time, a citizens' committee also failed. You cannot
get people enthused about supporting anything to do with finances.
To answer the question, he felt he would be the coordinating agent
unless they could get a group or committee who would be willing
to take it. Cm Turner stated he would like to meet with the City
Manager and maybe come up with some plan.
Cm Staley stated he was concerned as to how the City Manager's
time is spent on this. He felt if Cm Turner wanted to meet with
him they could have lunch together to discuss it, but he did not
think it should be on City time.
Mr. Parness stated what they are talking about is trying to amass
lIinformational materials for public dissemination" which is per-
fectly legal, and the Council agreed with that.
CM-33-36
August 16, 1976
CONSENT CALENDAR
Appraisal of Real Property
First Street Relocation
Grade Separation Proj.
RESOLUTION NO. 209-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPRAISAL OF REAL PROPERTY
(Livermore Car Wash)
RESOLUTION NO. 2l0-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPRAISAL OF REAL PROPERTY
(Quinn-River and Ng)
Settlement of Suit
RESOLUTION NO. 211-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT OF LAWSUITS
(City v. Stark, et all
Establishing Rates
for Taxicabs
An ordinance was recently adopted to become effective August 25, 1976,
which allows an increase in rates for taxicabs by resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 212-76
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING RATES FOR TAXICABS
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
CM KAMENA MOVED TO ADOPT THE ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR. MOTION
WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY STAFF
(Executive Session)
The City Attorney asked that there be an executive session to
discuss possible litigation.
Ballot Arguments
The City Clerk reminded the City Council that the arguments for the
override measure must be in shortly as the County has set the cutoff
date for September l.
Cm Staley wi1 revise the previous argument.
Special Meeting re
LAVWMA Decision
The City Clerk stated that perhaps the Council might like to hold
a special meeting after the LAVWMA decision if the need arises.
Mayor Tirse1l added there may be a contingency as they are working
so tight with the ballot closing and asked the Council to reserve
Thursday noon and this meeting will be adjourned to an executive
session and to a possible special meeting on Thursday, if necessary.
CM-33-37
August 16, 1976
September 7 Meeting
The City Clerk asked the Council if they intended to meet on
September 7 since Monday is a holiday. The Planning Commission
needs to know as that is their normal meeting date and they have
to set some public hearings.
The consensus of the Council was to meet on September 7.
Meeting with Grunwald
and Crawford
Mr. Parness asked the Council when they planned to meet with
Grunwald and Crawford, and the meeting was set for September 14,
before the Planning Commission meeting.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY COUNCIL
(Report re Industrial
and Commercial)
Cm Turner stated he would like a report from our Community De-
velopment Director Gorland as to his observation of Livermore's
industrial and commercial opportunities in both the short and the
long run; 2) what we can do as a City to increase those opportu-
nities; 3) what the estimated cost tools would be to increase
these opportunities~ 4) how the anticipated industrial and commer-
cial clients would benefit Livermore~ 5) his thoughts on a val1ey-
wide commercial and industrial development service agency.
This could be a commission to service the whole valley. He
stated the City of Fairfield has quite a bit of information on
such a commission.
Explorer Scout Canvass
Cm Kamena asked if the Council could have a report of the canvass
being done by the Explorer Scouts. This was given to him.
Freeway O~iented Signs
Cm Kamena asked if the Planning Commission could furnish the Council
with a report on the freeway oriented uses for the meeting of
September 7.
Mr. Musso advised they were working on a possible amendment of
the ordinance. There is a field trip scheduled for August 31 to
look at signs, and the visibility of signs. This item is on the
Planning Commission's agenda for their meeting of the 17th in the
form of a draft letter which summarizes their discussion.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO REMOVE FROM THE TABLE THE HOLIDAY INN VARIANCE
REQUEST AND SCHEDULE IT FOR THE COUNCIL AGENDA OF SEPTEMBER 7.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
Parking Lot Expansion
Cm Staley asked that the Council be furnished a report as soon as
possible on the merchant's parking lot expansion project.
CM-33-38
August 16, 1976
Retirement Plan
Cm Staley stated he would like some information on the City's
retirement plan - what is involved, what does it pay, what does the
City have to pay.
Charter City
Cm Staley stated the Council had raised the issue of possibly
becoming a charter city, and he would like to have this item placed
on an agenda before too long.
Mr. Parness stated he has been working on these reports and hoped
to have them ready for a study session the latter part of September.
Safeway Parking Lot
Mayor Tirsell stated that Safeway has not done one thing about
the parking lot.
Mr. Parness stated he has been in contact and received word that
they now have cost estimates for the installation and are re-
ferring it to the Safeway management so it should be done shortly.
LAVWMA EIS Report
Mayor Tirse11 advised the Council that a lot of questions they might
be asked concerning the LAVWMA Project are in the EIS, and asked
that anyone interested in the project read the EIS.
AB 3041 - BASSA
Mayor Tirsell stated that AB 3041 which is the dissolution of BASSA
has passed the Assembly and has passed to the Senate Conference
Committee.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE
RE TV COMMUNITY
ANTENNA SYSTEMS
CM TURNER MOVED TO INTRODUCE AND READ BY TITLE ONLY THE ORDINANCE
AMENDMENT RELATING TO TELEVISION COW1UNITY ANTENNA SYSTEMS. MOTION
WAS SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
Mayor Tirse1l asked if this ordinance established the franchise
fee of 3%, and was advised that it was close to that amount.
Mayor Tirse11 stated she was not willing to vote on this until
a survey is made on what other cities are getting for a franchise
fee.
The City Attorney explained the City has a contract by ordinance
for the antenna system - a unilateral contract. The franchise fee
paid by the CABL Industry has been 3% for the last couple of years
and all we are doing is bringing the ordinance into line with this.
The average franchise cable fee in southern California is actually 5%.
Mayor Tirse11 asked that the staff furnish a report on this matter.
THE MOTION WAS WITHDRAWN AT THIS TIME.
CM-33-39
August l6, 1976
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
An ordinance amendment to amend Chapter 30 of the Zoning Ordi-
nance has been prepared. This is the procedure for Zoning
Ordinance amendments.
CM TURNER MOVED TO INTRODUCE AND READ BY TITLE ONLY THE ORDINANCE
AMENDMENT, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA, AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Musso stated there is a question now if an applicant would
pay a fee if the initiative were left solely with the Council
and Planning Commission to amend the zoning or general plan.
The City Attorney was asked if the applicant should be charged a
fee if he requested rezoning, and Mr. Logan replied it would
be in order to charge an applicant who is requesting a zoning
change. It might be a problem if the Councilor Planning Commis-
sion initiated the change.
Mr. Musso explained that under the old process if a person filed
an application he was charged the whole fee. Now the initia-
tive rests with the Councilor Planning Commission.
Mr. Logan stated if the fee is based on an application there would
be no problem, however if the Councilor Planning Commission ini-
tiates action, people who live in the area that has a zone change
should not be required to pay.
Mayor Tirsell stated that by this ordinance the Planning Director
would have the administrative ability to set the fee.
Mr. Musso stated that if the City by virtue of a request for re-
zoning, initiates a rezoning action, under the EIR process the
City is the sponsor of that application and theoretically should
pay the fee.
Mr Logan responded in that instance a fee may not be appropriate
but it should be the decision of the Planning Director.
A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION WHICH PASSED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE
TITLE ONLY WAS READ.
REPORT FROM THE CITY MANAGER
The Murde11 Lane subdivision is underway - a 40 lot tract.
First Street Improvements
Mr. Parness reported that the electrician's strike is over and the
work will begin tomorrow on the First Street Improvements, and the
work at the Fire Station will be completed.
Social Concerns Committee
The Social Concerns Committee met this last week on the multi-
service building design, preliminary schematics were presented
and they are moving ahead with the designs and something should
be ready for the Council's review soon.
CM-33-40
August 16, 1976
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 11:20 p.m. to an executive session
and then to a possible adjourned regular meeting at noon on
Thursday. .. ~ / ~.. \._
APPROVE ~-r\-rr, ~12
ATTEST ~v~~~
~ty Clerk
I'v more, California
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
August 19, 1976
ATTEST
An adjourned regular meeting was set for this date at 12 O'clock
noon, however a quorum not being present (no Counci1members) the
meeting was adjourned by the City Clerk.
~ I G.'Y' .
'-J::jR4 ~ ~ ~ J",~
~-Mu~e-1-
L' rm e, ca~f~ornia
APPROVE
Regular Meeting of August 23, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
August 23, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:07 p.m.,
with Mayor Tirsell presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Staley, Dahlbacka and Mayor Tirsel1
Absent: Cm Kamena and Turner (Vacation)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirsell led the Councilmembers and those present in the
audience in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTE APPROVAL - 8/9/76
P. 9, 5th paragraph should be ~inear rather than premium rates.
P. 3, 1st paragraph, 8th sentence, after "his opinion," insert word
"it" and before benefit insert "overall". Strike "overall" in the
next line and strike "through" at the end of that line.
P. 3, same paragraph, 12th sentence, change gravel trucks to gravel
truck traffic.
CM-33-4l
August 23, 1976
(Minutes Approval)
P. 8, 3rd paragraph, 3rd line, after word "items" put a period and
strike out the balance of the sentence. Then add to the next sen-
tence "to get the 25% recovery".
P. 7, 4th paragraph from bottom, strike "lever to push with" and
insert word "leverage".
Page 10, 2nd paragraph, 10th line change 3.88 to 4.1 and strike out
"or approximately 4". - -
Page 11, 3rd paragraph from bottom, strike balance of sentence
after word "stated", small case "if" strike "on the ballot issue".
Page 18, 2nd paragraph under Tax Override Campaign, second line
insert "promotion of" before "initiative" strike "an".
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY eM DAHLBACKA, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 9, 1976, WERE APPROVED AS CORRECTED.
OPEN FORUM
The Mayor invited any member in the audience to address the Council
on any subject not on the agenda. There were no comments voiced.
PUBLIC HEARING RE PROPOSED
AMENDMENT OF LAND USE ELEMENT
LIVERMORE COMMUNITY PLAN
The Mayor explained a public hearing had been set for the proposed
amendment of Land Use Element of the Livermore Community Plan, par-
ticularly the following areas:
Springtown area, property located south of Bluebell Drive,
east of Las Flores Road
Madeira Way area, property located adjacent to the Southern
Pacific Railroad R/W, between School Street and Estates Street.
Trevarno Road Community.
The property owners have been noticed, and a letter was received
from W. L. Ranney, 3820 Madeira Way, voicing objecting to the
elevation of residences in the proposed Madeira Way area as it
would be an invasion of privacy since it would be about three
feet higher than the level of his yard.
The Mayor opened the public hearing, and it was the Council's
decision to take these item by item. She asked if there was
any testimony on the Springtown area, and there was none. Mayor
Tirse1l then asked if there was anyone to testify on the Madeira
Way area.
John Regan, 672 So. N Street, questioned if this was the property
between the SP tracks and Madeira way and was told it was. He
stated that two years ago he was hired by the owners of the pro-
perty to attempt to obtain a purchaser for it or to do something
with the property, but has been unsuccessful to date. In addition
to the property being so narrow, it is encumbered with the rail-
road easement, plus an easement for the Zone 7 pipeline and one
other easement. It is his opinion that until such time as these
easements are deleted as an exception to title, there will never
be single family residences placed there. He has attempted to
obtain some type of use for the property such as trailer storage,
CM-33-42
August 23, 1976
(P.H. re Livermore
Community Plan - Land
Use Element)
or something on that order. One thing they were primarily waiting
for was the completion of the overpass on First Street which might
make the property more attractive to a prospective purchaser. He
was sure the owners would oppose the designation of this as future
residential. .. . ... ,...,.J '1.- '/.
~ .A..:4--> ...e/'-a L,/k.,,__ t9k' Atl;.,t " t ~-t;:;f!fu c
Mayor Tirse1~stated Bt~tcd the redesignation ~ this area would
merely bring ~ into conformance with the Ge~ral,Pl~n and does not
change the zoning. ~
Mr. Musso explained that in the original General Plan this area was
zoned residential, but when the new GP was adopted it was redesig-
nated as commercial, mostly by error. The zoning should conform with
the General Plan, and so it is recommended that the General Plan be
changed as the Planning Commission did not feel a rezoning would be
appropriate at this time. There was a study made of the area to
determine a good use for the property, and a nursery was considered,
but the decision was to maintain the area as residential until such
time as a better use is found.
Mr. Regan remarked that if the easements were not there, it would
have been developed as residential long before this but developers
are unable to obtain financing on any land encumbered with easements.
It is not the track that has stopped development as there are housing
tracts in other areas that back directly onto the track and it has
not stopped the original sale, or the resale or appreciation of the
residences. The easement is 150 feet on either side of the 100 ft.
road bed.
Mayor Tirsell stated that a letter had been received by the Planning
Commission concerning the Madeira Way property suggesting that the
area be developed as a park, and this was referred to LARPD.
The Public Works Director explained this is grant land and legis-
lation provides that when it is abandoned by the railroad, the
cities have the first option to obtain it. There have been discussions
with Southern Pacific and this is part of the property the City expects
to obtain title to when the right-of-way is abandoned.
Mr. Regan remarked that he has an original document and he may be
wrong, but he believes title reverts to the U.s. Government and,
in turn, might come to the City of Livermore but does not revert
directly to the city.
Mr. Logan was asked to comment and stated that Mr. Regan is correct
in the fact that it does go to the U. S. Government, but legislation
was passed that allowed the railroad to convey it directly to the
cities for right-of-way purposes, but if it is not used for right-
of-way purposes there is another problem.
Mr. Regan stated he had no objection to the property remaining
residential as long as City does not use the crutch that the City may
one day acquire the abandoned right-of-way against any proposal that
may be made. He has been encouraged to seek some type of open space
use for the property which he believes would be correct for the area
as it would be an excellent buffer between the residences and the
railroad track.
Mayor Tirse11 stated the acquisition of the abandoned right-of-way
was not actually a part of the discussion, but this information had
merely been offered by Mr. Lee as a future use of the property if and
when Southern Pacific abandons the right-of-way, they have the right
to convey the land. She suggested that Mr. Regan discuss this point
with the City Attorney.
CM-33-43
August 23, 1976
(Land Use Element -
Liv. Community Plan)
Mayor Tirsell moved to the Trevarno Road Community, and Cm Staley
stated it seemed the staff recommendation was opposed to the Plan-
ning Commission recommendation and asked if this was true.
Mr. Musso stated this was the staff recommendation to the Planning
Commission and it is that the area be maintained as industrial.
Cm Staley asked if this could affect the zoninq, and Mr. Musso
replied that it could if you changed the General Plan designation
to residential it would follow that the zoning would be changed to
residential. It is now zoned light industrial.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, SECONDED BY CM
STALEY, AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
CM DAHLBACK MOVED TO HAVE THE STAFF PREPARE A RESOLUTION IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION, AND A
STATEMENT OF ACCEPTANCE OF THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION. MOTION WAS
SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
COMMUNICATION RE LANDSCAPE
PROJECTS - DEPT OF TRANSPORTAION
A communication was received from the State Department of Trans-
portation announcing their roster of landscape projects. The
location description of the proposed work in our area that would
qualify for a share of the funds would be Route 580 from Greenvi11e
Road to Route 680.
Cm Dah1backa asked if the plans might call for the moving of any
earth as he felt this would be a good opportunity to ask if they
could do anything to enhance the noise affect of the freeway on
adjacent property.
Mr. Lee stated he did not think they had any plans for moving any
significant amount of earth material because all of the freeway
is graded to drain. He advised the Council that the landscaping
would be watered by reclaimed effluent from the treatment plant,
for which there is an agreement with the state.
Cm Dahlbacka suggested that the staff ask that landscaping materials
be chosen that would maximize noise mitigation, and the staff was
asked to prepare such a letter.
NOTIFICATION - PUC RE RATE
INCREASE - CALIF. WATER CO.
A notice of hearing was received from the PUC concerning the rate in-
crease proposed by California Water Service Company to be held at
the Livermore Library on October 25, 1976 at 10:00 a.m. This was
noted for filing.
COMMUNICATION - VOLUNTEER
BUREAU ALAMEDA COUNTY
A communication was received from the Volunteer Bureau of Alameda
County outlining their function, goals and objectives and offering
their services in any appropriate way. This was noted for filing.
CM-33-44
A.ugust 23, 1976
REPORT RE TRACK RELOCA.TION
UNDERPASS CONSTR. SCHEDULE
As requested by the Council, a report was received from the Public
Works Director regarding the status of the railroad relocation
project and related work. The report also listed work yet to be
completed, information concerning the Railroad Avenue Extension and
the proposed traffic signal priorities.
Mayor Tirsell stated there had been a meeting with the car wash people
and she asked if there was anything to report, and Mr. Lee stated
he had made some assumptions in the report as to how long it would
take after the issue is resolved, as there is so much work to be
done.
Mr. Logan added that there is no way of determining how long these
things will take. The difficulty is that there are many preliminary
determinations to be made, one of which is who is the responsible
agency for the closing. There may be a major issue over who is
the controlling agency and there may be a big legal fight with the
state. If that occurs the matter could take a long time, and on
the other hand it may be settled out of court and they could argue
with the state later. He did not want the Council to be mislead to
think that it might be a short period of time. We are faced with a
30-day order to close and then a reasonable period of time after the
order is effective, to effectuate the close. After the close is
effectuated they land10ck the piece of property. If there is no
alternate access by that time, we start paying for the cost of busi-
ness that they lose, so it will not be closed until we have alternate
access or until we decide to condemn it.
Mayor Tirse11 asked if the state would be responsible since t~
WO.\:lldl'i 't aooopt the agreement: and \lO.nt to the p~~, - /j ()~h 6
r! tI. C. ,u.A-tJ.L<..L~;..;r a.~~-L-rz--I-- ~ al/t-u"'-H-/..-c~j--- -' t!J.k' ~lHt::./ - - r = _" _ <- -
Mr. Logan replied actually there are two state agencies - CAL Trans
which controls Highway 84, and they take the position they have no
responsibility whatsoever in this, and the California PUC which has
the police power to do exactly what they are doing. They are faced
with the battle of whether or not the CAL Trans will participate,
whether or not the railroad and the City will participate. Then
there is the question of to what degree each will participate.
Mr. Lee stated he felt there is a good chance the state will parti-
cipate in this as part of the First street overhead project.
Mr. Regan remarked that if the stop signs are removed from North
Livermore at Railroad Avenue he felt there would be a number of
accidents as there is poor visibility traveling south coming
from the underpass. Mr. Regan also stated that the speed along
First Street has increased since the street has been widened and
he is concerned with traffic exiting the "J" Street mall being
hazardous to the pedestrians.
Mayor Tirsel1 asked Mr. Bradley to note this situation to the
Police Chief.
Cm Staley asked if the crosswalks could be changed and make one
crosswalk at the exit from the municipal parking lot rather than
the two crosswalks at "K" Street.
Mr. Lee replied there is only one crosswalk at ~J" Street and there
is good visibility. He has not noticed an increase in speed although
there is that possibility. He felt when the intersection is com-
pleted it should be safe.
CM-33-45
August 23, 1976
TENTATIVE PM 2002
B & D Plumbing (Duterte)
A report was submitted by the Planning Commission recommending
approval of Tentative Parcel Map 2002.
Cm Dah1backa asked if this was previously one lot of record, and
was told it was. As one lot of record he asked if it received one
sewer connection now that it is being subdivided.
Mr. Musso replied that it is now entitled to one, but in accordance
with the policy relative to allowing minor subdivisions, it would
be allowed up to four.
Cm Dah1backa asked if these sewer connections were computed into
our sewer commitments to residential lots of record; Mr. Musso re-
plied it was as there were about twenty-four additional lots in-
cluded.
CM STALEY MOVED FOR THE PREPARATION OF A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR THE APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE
MAP AND ACCEPTING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION. MOTION APPROVED BY
MAYOR TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Duterte asked if he could have the Council's verbal approval
to apply for building permits.
Mr. Logan was asked to reply to the question and stated that the
action would not be official until the resolution is adopted in
two weeks, but it would be agreeable unless someone changed their
vote.
REPORT RE ANNEXATION
OF WORNOW PROPERTY
The Planning Director reported that at a recent meeting of the Board
of Supervisors, rezoning of the Wornow Property located north of the
City between the Fransworth-Waver1y Way area and Las positas, was
tentatively approved. The proposed rezoning would allow subdivi-
sion of the parcel into four parcels to be developed utilizing sep-
tic tanks. The Board continued the matter to August 24, pending a
response from the City relative to its willingness to annex the
property after development.
Cm Staley stated this is a real problem as there is a lot of area
susceptible to the sarne sort of manipulation, and felt that the
Council nee~s to ~eve1op a comprehensive policy on how to deal
with this.
Mr. Musso reminded the Council that there is now a policy in the
General Plan that would allow septic tanks for agricultural for
minimum 20-acre parcels. There are a lot of properties within
the city that are beyond the reach of sewer lines even though they
are entitled to a sewer connection.
em Staley stated they l)need to have an executive session to dis-
cuss a legal posi~ion; and 2) regardlpss of legal position, they
should develop a policy ann nerhans discuss with the Board
of Supervisors the Council's conce~~~~!t~~r problem.
Mayor Tirsell suggested that this ~be in the form of a
motion.
CM STALEY MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL HAVE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DIS-
CUSS THE CITY'S POSITION AS FAR AS ANY POTENTIAL LITIGATION AND
TO ASK THE STAFF TO PREPARE A REPORT OUTLINING THE AREAS OF PRIMARY
CM-33-46
August 23, 1976
(re Wornow Property)
CONCERN TO THE CITY IN DEVELOPMENTS ADJACENT TO THE CITY BEING GRANTED
REZONING AND DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS LIKE THIS BY THE BOARD, AND PLACE THIS
ON AN AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION AS WELL AS OPTIONS THAT MIGHT BE DISCUSSED
WITH THE BOARD.
Mr. Musso asked about a more definitive policy regarding septic
tanks.
Cm Staley stated that is a part of it, but it is broader than just
septic tanks, the concept of having the city entirely bordered on
one side by 10-acre parcels and septic tanks is another problem.
The problem of the City losing fees that would be required for in-
city development is a third problem.
Mr. Musso stated that this particular subdivision would block the
extension of a street.
Cm Staley stated that would be an excellent thing to point out in
a report. It was noted that this will come before the Board on
Tuesday, and Cm Staley suggested that the Board be asked for another
continuance until the Council has had time to discuss the policy
relative to the matter. The second thing they might do is in the
annexation procedure - charge the fees, under the circumstances.
Mr. Musso stated that under the old annexation policy, it was required
that upon development, any existing dwelling would be required to pay
an annexation fee.
A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION AT THIS TIME AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
Trudy Wornow, Walnut Drive, P1easanton, stated that the Board of
Supervisors indicated they were in complete approval of this rezoning,
and it was not conditional upon annexation, but merely a matter of
their making application for annexation. Whether or not the City
goes along with it, would not alter the Board's opinion - at least
this was her understanding.
Mayor Tirse1l stated the position of the Council is that they are
opposed to the manner in which this is proceeding, and they would
like to have more time to look it over and would request continuance.
Mayor Tirse11 asked that the Planning Director phone the first thing
in the morning because if they would not continue, she would plan
to attend the meeting.
It was decided that the Mayor and Planning Director would attend
the meeting to ask for the continuance.
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES July 20 and
August 3; SUMMARY OF
ACTION August 17
The minutes of the Planning Commission meetings of July 20 and
August 3, and summary of action for the meeting of August 17 were
noted for filing.
REPORT RE STATIC DISPLAY
MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
The Public Works Director had reported that the staff planned to
give permission to the California Aerospace Education Association
to hold a passive air display at the airport on October 22, 1976.
CM-33-47
August 23, 1976
(Display at Airport)
The report from Mr. Lee indicates that inasmuch as the visitors
to this display will be students who have insurance coverage,
when in the educational pursuit status, our insurance carrier
sees no need for supplementary coverage.
Mr. Don Bradley explained that he had further discussions with
the insurance agent who advises that although the City does have
insurance coverage for this static display, he recommends that
the City be named as additional insured on this organization's
insurance policy. This organization is not directly linked with
any particular agency that has insurance, and in order for them
to get insurance they may have to buy a separate policy to name
the City as additional insured.
Mr. Bradley suggested that perhaps this should be put over for a
couple of weeks to try to work something out.
Frances Grant, president of the northern section of the California
Aerospace Education Association, explained the reason they do not
carry an insurance pOlicy is that their dealings with the students
are such that the student is covered by his school district from
the time he leaves school on a project with his teacher or counse-
lor until he returns home. This is the first time this has come up,
and if i~ necessary to obtain the insurance it will depend on the
price as to whether or not they will hold the display. There is a
time element involved and they will have to go forward with what-
ever recommendation is made, and waiting two weeks will not help.
Mayor Tirse1l advised Ms. Grant that the Council would have to go
along with what the insurance carrier has recommended and evidence
of insurance will have to be furnished, and she explained the reason
for the request.
Ms. Grant asked if the permit would be approved if they meet what-
ever insurance requirements are necessary.
Mr. Bradley stated they would just require proot of insurance
naming the City as additional insured, and this could be investi-
gated in the next couple of weeks and this would still allow seven
weeks.
Cm Staley commented that the insurance they have simply protects
the school district in case the child is injured. It does not pro-
tect her or the organization unless they are named as additional
insured, nor does it protect the City, and for that reason he
would have to go along with the insurance agent's recommendation.
Mayor Tirsel1 indicated that the Council would endorse the event
and if they can furnish insurance, would have no objection to the
organization proceeding.
REPORT RE REMOVAL OF STOP
SIGN':" GUILFORD & MADISON
A report was submitted by the Public Works Director concerning the
stop sign at Guilford Avenue and Madison Avenue. This was prepared
at the Council's request since it was reported that a petition is
being circulated to have the stop sign reinstalled.
The report indicated that a field check showed no accidents at
that intersection; however Cm Dahlbacka stated it was his under-
standing there was an incident of a car driving 1nto someone's
front yard, causing considerable damage, and that was the reason
for the petition requesting the installation of the stop sign.
CM-33-48
August 23, 1976
(Guilford/Madison
Stop Sign)
Cm Dahlbacka stated it was the previous Council's decision to place
the stop sign, and he would be in favor of having it placed at that
intersection again.
Mayor Tirse11 stated ordinarily she would agree, but there are many
other streets that have ten times. the traffic count this street has
but they are designed as collector streets to carry the flow of traffic.
Placement of stop signs should not be an arbitrary decision although
she could understand reacting to a citizen's petition if an accident
had occurred there. Mayor Tirsell suggested that perhaps the Council
could ask for the intersection to be monitored.
Cm Dahlback asked if he could have a copy of the Council minutes
at the time this was previously discussed.
Cm Staley stated he saw no reason for postoonement of the item as
the report is very clear and there appears to be insufficient justi-
fication for stop signs at that intersection. To put up signs that
are blatantly disregarded by the citizens invites disrespect for
stop signs everywhere, so he felt it was a mistake to put up stop
signs that are not honored.
The consensus was that Cm Dahlbacka would get information from
Mr. Lee, and perhaps this could be discussed again at a later time.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Departmental Reports
Departmental reports were received as follows:
Airport Activity - June and July
Building Inspection - July
Municipal Court - June
Fire Department - quarterly report - April/June
Mosquito Abatement District - June
Police and Pound Departments - July
Cm Staley asked if the staff would write a letter to the Mosquito
Abatement District and ask them how many inspections or service
calls they made inside the city limits in the last two years.
Resolution Establishing
Tax Rate, 1976-77 Fiscal
Year
The proposed tax rate for the new fiscal year is as was estimated
in the new budget as follows:
General Fund
Retirement Fund
Library Fund
Park & Recreation
Bond - 1955
Bond - 1958
Bond - 1965
$ .825
.18
.22
.19
.02
.055
.02
$1.51
Mr. Bradley stated the assessed valuation was just received today
and was distributed to the Council and this indicates the distribu-
tion of the funds we will receive in addition to what was estimated.
Cm Dah1backa stated there was a correction made during the budget
session to the assessed valuation and asked it that estimate had
been changed and if there is an increase he would like to know the
amount.
CM-33-49
August 23, 1976
(re Tax Rate)
Mr. Nolan stated that according to the certified assessed valua-
tion we received, in addition to the change made at budget time,
$78,000 from the increased valuation on the pUblic utility rolls.
RESOLUTION NO. 213-76
RESOLUTION FIXING TAX RATE FOR FISCAL YEAR 1976-77
Report re Development
on Research Drive
A report from the Pulic Works Director indicates that the public
works improvements for Development No. 74-20, Research Drive, have
been completed satisfactorily, and it is recommended that the im-
provements be accepted for maintenance, subject to the signing of
an agreement regarding deferred improvements and the posting of a
bond for the work.
RESOLUTION NO. 214-76
A RESOLUTION CONDITIONALLY AUTHORIZING FINAL ACCEPTANCE
OF DEVELOPMENT 74-20 (SHAHEEN)
Memorandum of Under-
Standing - MEAN
The Council adopted a resolution authorizing execution of a memo-
randum of understanding with the MEAN group. The agreement was
reviewed during executive session, is for a term of 14 months,
effective August 2, 1976. The cost of the "package" which in-
cludes salary adjustments and fringe benefits is 6.4% over the
term of the agreement and approximately 5.5% annualized.
RESOLUTION NO. 215-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF MEM-
ORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (Municipal Employe-
es Agency for Negotiations)
Res. Amending Salary
Classifications re
Clerical & Technical
.
The Council adopted a resolution providing for adjustments to
certain management and mid-management positions as authorized
by the City Manager in accordance with authority extended by
the City Council during the budget session. The management
salary adjustments would be effective September 1, with an
annualized 6% average.
RESOLUTION NO. 216-76
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE ESTAB-
LISHING A SALARY SCHEDULE FOR THE CLASSIFIED
AND UNCLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF
LIVERMORE, ESTABLISHING RULES FOR ITS USE,
AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 86-76 AND 166-76.
CM-33-50
August 23, 1976
Res. Denying Claim
The Council adopted a resolution denying the claim of Carl Grutzeck.
RESOLUTION NO. 127-76
A RESOLUTION DENYING THE CLAIM OF MR. CARL GRUTZECK
Payroll & Claims
There were 70 warrants in the amount of $242,978.42, and 286
payroll warrants in the amount of $98,518.96 (payroll warrants
as of August 6, 1976), dated August 16, 1976, and approved by
the City Manager.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF MAYOR TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE (Cm Kamena and Turner absent) THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED.
~~TTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Ballot Statement)
The City Clerk reminded the Council that the ballot statement wording
must be submitted no later than 5:00 p.m., Monday, August 30th.
Cm Staley stated that he has prepared wording for the ballot and
he will review the wording with Cm Dah1backa prior to presenting
it to the City Clerk.
(Taxi Subsidy)
The Assistant to the City Manager, Mr. Bradley, stated that the City
has heard from the County concerning subsidized taxi service for
senior citizens. Livermore has been awarded a grant for the next
fiscal year but the County is able to give the City only interim
funding until they are certain revenue sharing will be torthcoming.
They have decided to ask the Board of Supervisors to adopt an
interim agreement that would take care ot Livermore on a montn-to-
montn basis, or until the tirst ot tne year, whichever comes first.
Mr. Bradley stated that he would like the Council to adopt a resolu-
tion authorizing the Mayor to sign the agreement so the City can
continue to receive $1,837.50 per month for taxi subsidization, until
the official agreement has been received.
Cm Staley wondered if this action would be legal and the Mayor
explained that the Council would only be changing its own policy.
HAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO SUSPEND THE RULES TO ADD THIS ITEM TO THE
AGENDA. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
01 STALEY MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF THE
AGREEMENT FOR INTERIt1 FUNDING FOR SENIOR CITIZEN TAXI SUBSIDY.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM-33-5l
August 23, 1976
RESOLUTION NO. 218-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREE-
MENT (Amendment to Contract: Term Extension
- City and County of Alameda)
(Sister City Week
Proclamation)
Cm Staley commented that the Sister City Committee is planning a
Sister City Week in September and he would like the Assistant to
the City Manager to prepare an appropriate proclamation for this
occasion.
(Complaint re
Dog License Fine)
Mayor Tirse11 stated that she received a complaint from someone
who licensed their dog late and paid the $2 fine for being late.
The person then read in the newspaper that people who haven't
licensed their dogs for years do not have to pay the fine.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that this does seem to be unfair and she
would like the Council to do something to make it fair for those
who are getting their dogs licensed, in good faith, during this
time period.
Mr. Nolan stated that the Finance Department would do whatever
the Council would ask of them but he would be concerned about
allowing retroactive amnesty.
Mayor Tirsell stated that an amnesty date would be included to
match the date of the dog licensing program.
(Letter to Gravel
Companies re Recla-
mation Plan)
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would like a letter drafted to be
sent to the gravel companies asking for a presentation of their
Reclamation Plan.
Cm Dah1backa stated that he is on the Gravel Committee and the
Plan is not finished for. presentation.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that the City of P1easanton is also interes-
ted in a presentation and the cities would like to join together
to review the Plan at the first opportunity.
The staff will prepare a letter expressing the City's interest
in joining with Pleasanton for a presentation when the plan is
complete.
ORD. RE ZOo ORD.
AMEND TO CHAPTER 30
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE ZONING ORDINANCE AMEND~1ENT TO CHAPTER 30 WAS ADOPTED.
ORDINANCE NO. 894
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 30, RE-
LATING TO AMENDMENT, OF ORDINANCE NO.
442, RELATING TO ZONING, OF THE CITY
OF LIVERMORE, AS AMENDED.
CM-33-52
August 23, 1976
INTRO. OF ORD. RE
CN -NEIGHBORHOOD COMM.
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE ZONING ORDINANCE N1ENDMENT RELATIVE TO CN DISTRICT WAS
INTRODUCED AND READ BY TITLE ONLY.
INTRO. OF ORD. A11END.
RE MOVING OF FOREIGN
BUILDINGS
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CH STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATIVE TO FOREIGN HOUSE MOVING WAS
INTRODUCED AND READ BY TITLE ONLY.
ADJOURNMENT
APPROVE
p.m. to an executive
(ii:~Lf
- Mayor
ATTEST
Regular Meeting of September 7, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
September 7, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:10
p.m. with Mayor Tirsell presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Kamena, Turner, Staley and l'1ayor Tirsell
Absent: Cm Dah1backa
PLEDGE OF .A.LLEGIANCE
[layor Tirsell led the Counci1memhers as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
CM-33-53
September 7, 1976
MINUTES 8/16 & 8/23
p. 43, 2nd paragraph should read: Mayor Tirsell stated the re-
designation of this area would merely bring the General Plan
into conformance with the zoning and does not change the zoning.
p. 45, 4th paragraph should read: Mayor Tirsel1 asked if the
state would be responsible since the PUC wouldn't accept the
agreement.
P. 46, second paragraph from the bottom: Mayor Tirsell sug-
gested that this be in the form of a motion.
ON I.lOTION OF CH STALEY, SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL AND BY UNANI-
~.mus VOTE, THE T'UNUTES FOR THE r"mETING OF AUGUST 16, HERE APPROVED
AS SUBHITTED.
ON MOTION OF CH STALEY, SECONDED BY ~1AYOR TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE THE ~UNUTES FOR THE MEETING OF AUGUST 23, 1976, HERE APPROVED
AS CORRECTED. (Cm Turner and Kamena abstaining due to absence at
that meeting) .
P.E. RE CONFLICT
OF INTEREST CODE
It is the intent of the Council to adopt a Conf1icet of Interest
Code applicable to members of the City Council, pursuant to the
Political Reform Act of 1974. A public hearing has been scheduled
to receive public testimony concerning this proposal.
THERE BEING NO PUBLIC TESTrlONY, ON MOTION OF cr~ KA1~EnA, SECO;:WED
BY Cr,l TUR~1ER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, TEE PUBLIC HEARING lIJAS CLOSED.
Cm Turner asked the City Attorney if he has a conflict of interest
with respect to Section IV and requested a written opinion in the
interest of protecting himself, at the suggestion of the City Attor-
ney.
0::-1 rmTION OF c~vr TURNER, SFC()~mpT) BY C'"l KA1~T::\E\ ,AND BY mJ.AnplOUS
VOTE, THE JTESOLUTIO!,l ADOPTPJG THE Cml"'LICT OF INTEREST CODE r;,-;rAS
APPROVBD.
RESOLUTION NO. 219-76
RESOLUTION OF TliE CITY COU~:CIL OF THE CITY OF
LIVERHORE ADOPTING A CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE
APPLICABLE TO THE HEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
PURSUANT TO THE POLITICAL REFORH ACT OF 1974.
CO~~1UNICATION FRO~
LARPD RE GREENVILLE
S'i'.JH1 CLUB
A letter from LARPD indicates that the Greenville North Swim
Club is being demolished at a very rapid rate. In view of
the problems the Board of LARPD is considering reassessment
of their position to restore the operation of the swim club.
Cm Staley asked if that area has been made safe and the City
.Attorney responded by saying that it has not. The City is
under a bankruptcy court order from Hawaii restricting the
City from taking any kind of legal action.
CM-33-54
September 7, 1976
(Cornm. from LARPD re
Greenville Swim Club)
The City Attorney continued to say that the City could take formal
abatement action but the question is whether or not the City would
want to expend money on a bankrupt corporation with no chance of
recovering the money spent.
Cm Staley commented that his concern and that of the Council has
been that people could be hurt on that property because of the
hazardous conditions. Vandalism hurts the property, but there is
a real danger of the neighborhood children being hurt and he would
like to know if this danger has been cured.
The City Attorney stated that as far as he knows the major problem
in the area is the vandalism that has taken place, rather than things
being a danger to the children. He is trying to pursuade the trustee
of the property, who is in San Francisco, to go along with splitting
the cost of a cyclone fence to close the entire area off.
Direction was given to the City Attorney to investigate the possi-
bility of taking some kind of action.
COMMUNICATION FROM COUNTY
RE MODIFICATION OF QUARRY
PERMIT
Mr. Musso stated that he had responded to the County's negative
declaration concerning the quarry permit, in March, and the Council
received a copy of the letter of response. He explained that
there would be a reclamation plan as far as the permit was concerned
and this requirement has not been deleted. It has been delayed how-
ever, and they have filed a negative declaration on what is a
mitigating measure, which he finds somewhat unreasonable.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would like the City Attorney to check
with the need for regulations on environmental impacts and the filing
of a negative declaration. She believes there are a certain number
of days in which an appeal would be allowed.
COMMUNICATION RE
TRUCK ROUTES
A letter was received from Mrs. Keith E. Switzer, asking that the
Council reconsider Ordinance 886 restricting 3 ton trucks to use
truck routes. She stated that the street standards are for a 6 ton
limit.
A letter of response was sent to Mrs. Switzer by the Director of
Public Works.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she has investigated the parking prOV1S10ns
for the large trucks and that there is still parking available on
Naylor Avenue, and on the Mig1iori property on Tesla Road.
REPORT RE HOLIDAY
INN SIGN VARIANCE
Mayor Tirsell stated that the matter of the request by Holiday Inn for
a variance to the present sign has been held in abeyance. In the
interim the P.C. was requested to consider the possibility of an
amendment to the sign ordinance re signs for freeway oriented businesses
so that such businesses may be identified in sufficient time for a
safe exit from the freeway.
The P.C. has reported that they feel this would not be a proper
amendment to the Sign Ordinance, for various reasons, as noted in
their minutes, dated July 6th, and July 20, 1976.
CM-33-55
September 7, 1976
(Report re Holiday
Inn Sign Variance)
It was noted that a letter was received from Jeanne and Stan
Thomas, 1044 Aberdeen Avenue, urging that the Council not weaken
the Sign Ordinance by approving the request of the Holiday Inn.
Ray Brice of the Planning Commission gave a slide presentation
of a field trip taken by the P.C. to observe other highway oriented
signs, as well as pictures taken of the Livermore Holiday Inn sign,
illustrating views of the signs from the various lanes of the free-
way.
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that the Holiday Inn has made a request for
a variance of either of the two following suggestions: a) a roof
sign of 363 sq. ft.: or b) a freestanding sign of 252 sq. ft.
At present the Holiday Inn has a freestanding sign that is 67 sq.
ft. The ordinance allows total signing of 159 sq. ft.
At the last discussion the Council agreed that the present free-
standing sign is not as visible as it might be with a different
design and using different colors. The question at this time is
whether or not the size of sign allowed by the ordinance would
be adequate or whether or not the variance should be granted.
CM KAMENA MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL GRANT THE VARIANCE APPLICATION
TO PERMIT THE HOLIDAY INN AN INCREASE IN ALLOWABLE SIGN AREA TO
252 SQ. FT., AN INCREASE IN ALLOWABLE HEIGHT FOR THE FREESTAND-
ING SIGN, WITH THE FOUR FINDINGS OUTLINED IN THE APPLICATION BY
HOLIDAY INN (Exhibit "B"). MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Mayor Tirse11 read the findings, as follows:
1. Because of exceptional or extraordinary circumstance,
applicable to the subject property including size,
shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the
strict application of the zoning ordinance is bound
to deprive this subject property of privileges en-
joyed by other properties in the vicinity and under
identical zone classifications.
2. The granting of such variance shall not constitute
the grant of special privilege inconsistent with
the limitations upon other properties in the vicin-
ity or identical zone classification.
3. That such variance is necessary for the preservation
and enjoYment of substantial property rights possessed
by other property in the same zoning district and in
the same vicinity.
4. The authorizing of such variance will not be a substan-
tial detriment to adjacent property and will not materi-
ally impair the purposes of the zoning ordinance or the
public interest.
Gloria Taylor, representative of the Design Review Committee,
stated that she is not speaking for the Committee but rather
as a member of the Committee. She stated that with respect
to signs while traveling through Oakdale, Manteca and Tracy,
there is "visual overload". Also, the essence of the vari-
ance is not the size of the sign, but rather the impact on
the Sign Ordinance. If a variance is granted for Holiday
Inn there is no reason it shouldn't be granted for Red Baron
and other businesses along the freeway.
Kenneth Gardner, 733 Del Mar, stated that his family held a
wedding reception at the Holiday Inn and people traveled from
CM-33-56
September 7, 1976
(Report re HOliday
Inn Sign Variance)
out-of-town to attend the reception. One of these people nearly
had an accident because they did not notice the sign until it was
time to exit from the freeway, traveling from the east. People
from the westerly direction ended up in Livermore asking for direc-
tions to the Holiday Inn.
Walt Davies, 791 McLeod Street, Livermore merchant, stated that
he can appreciate the Livermore Sign Ordinance by observing the
abundance of signs while traveling down East 14th Street in San
Leandro. In his opinion the applicant has not shown that the
lack of a larger sign has had any adverse affects on business,
since they have not utilized a larger sign, as is permitted.
Dick Christmas, 394 Pearl Drive, stated that for every person who
misses the turnoff for the Holiday Inn and goes to the next City
to spend the night, the City is losing tax money because the City
receives 1% of the sales tax. He urged the Council to allow the
variance so that people can find the Holiday Inn and stay in Liver-
more overnight.
Margaret Tracy, representative of the California Roadside Council,
whose goal is more beautiful highways, stated that she has
not been active in this capacity since I-580 has been designated
as a scenic highway. She would like to speak against allowing
the variance at this time because the Sign Ordinance was reached
through a period of compromises over a long period of time and has
been very effective in the improvement of signing in Livermore and
in making the community more attractive. If a variance is granted
to one highway oriented business it would be a serious precedent
in granting variances to other such businesses.
Mrs. Tracy stated that having vacationed in Oregon this summer
she would recommend consideration for what has been done in that
state whereby prior to coming to the offramps a series of freeway
signs are located indicating gas, food and lodging at the next
exit, with a series of logo signs for these particular services.
In addition to this suggestion, the Beautification Committee has
suggested the development of a roadside rest with a business direc-
tory indicating the location of various businesses, along with maps
illustrating where the services might be found.
John Kipper, 861 Las Flores, Assistant Holiday Innkeeper, stated
that he receives complaints from people on a daily basis because
they cannot find the Holiday Inn. He stated that their business
comes from people traveling on the freeway and the lack of visibility
is killing their business.
Mr. Kipper added that over the Labor Day holiday weekend, Carnation,
Denny's, and Howard Johnson's, all hired extra girls for the restaur-
ant business. If business continues downward, as it has been, he
will have to let 15 of his 35 people go. He blames the lack of
business on the lack of visibility of the Holiday Inn sign. He
also mentioned that the 15 people who would be losing their jobs
are all Livermore residents.
Paul Brown, 731 Wimb1edon Lane, stated that the Holiday Inn is
not listed in the recent AAA Motel listing book and this is the
major guide for people who like to use the book. The Sands,
El Dorado, and Townhouse Motel are listed in the AAA book and
it would be interesting to know how much business Holiday Inn
has lost over the years because they were not listed in the AAA book.
He contacted AAA who indicated that Holiday Inn would be listed in
the next book and he believes this will have a significant impact
on their business. Also, the major motels have large ads in the
yellow pages of the telephone book, while Holiday Inn lists only
a telephone number and address.
CM-33-57
September 7, 1976
(Report re Holiday
Inn Sign Variance)
Mr. Brown continued to say that he believes if the Holiday Inn
were to improve in certain areas they would gain more support
from the local people and they would get referrals from the
local people. He would wonder if the local manager is using
the small sign as an excuse for lack of business rather than
looking at some fundamental problems.
Mayor Tirsell stated that in view of what Mrs. Tracy has said,
the City has contacted the state relative to use of the logo
signs, and Assemblyman Mori be1ives it would not be proper
to introduce this as a legislative item. The City is writing
letters to CAL Trans but past experience has shown that CAL
Trans is very slow to respond to an item. Therefore, there
is no immediate hope for a solution in the way of a state sign
with logos.
Helen Dentici, 820 Adams Avenue, stated that as a merchant she
is in favor of beautification, and she appreciates the sign
she was allowed to have and she does support the Sign Ordinance.
However, in the case of the Holiday Inn, they have been the slow-
est Holiday Inn to get business going, and they have worked hard
to get business. In her opinion there should be some way the City
could help them get on their feet and get the business they need
to survive.
The owner of a truck parking area on Naylor Avenue stated that
along with parking for large trucks he has diesel fuel avail-
able, and he obtained help from the California Highway Patrol
in getting a sign on the freeway to let truck drivers know that
the service was available. He finds the Sign Ordinance to be
rather prohibitive.
Bill Moore, representing HOliday Inn, stated that he really
feels the sign Holiday Inn is requesting is not too large.
Ken Hall, stated that at one time he was in part ownership
of property across the street from Holiday Inn, which has
apartment complexes. It was very difficult to try to direct
people to where they were located by asking people to look for
the Holiday Inn sign. They really need the type of sign that
can be easily identified by people.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would like to clarify something
for information of people in the audience and that is that
the present Holiday Inn sign is not the maximum sign allowed
by the City. They are actually allowed to have a sign three
times that size, under the ordinance.
Bill Manis, 2353 Chateau Place, stated that the people from
Holiday Inn have indicated that they do not have a standard
sign for the freeway which would be allowed by the ordinance.
The business is freeway oriented and there is a need to recog-
nize these types of businesses. As a representative of the
Chamber of Commerce, they believe there is a definite need
for the larger sign for Holiday Inn.
Bill Zagotta, 5155 Lillian Court, stated that he would like
to urge the Council to deny the variance request. However,
if the Council believes that this particular variance request
has a speoia1 circumstance that they should be allowed a var-
iance, he would suggest that the ordinance be rewritten. He
added that the Council is pledged to uphold the ordinances
except under very unusual circumstances. The fact that the
Holiday Inn is not doing enough business and they may have
to leave town is not within the Council's power to change.
CM-33-58
September 7, 1976
(Report re Holiday
Inn Sign Variance)
It is within the Council's power to make a change, however, if the
ordinance is unfair and if this is the case it should be rewritten.
There is no evidence that the granting of a variance will increase
business for the Holiday Inn. He added that he would have to agree
with Mr. Brown in that Holiday Inn has not been very aggressive in
their advertising, through sources available to them.
Rebecca Hundoble, 1230 Asti Court, stated that she is very much
opposed to the granting of a variance for the Holiday Inn. She
believes this would be setting a precedent and that a variance
request will occur again and again.
Marjorie Leider, 1091 Batavia Avenue, stated that she is a noncamper
and relys upon her AAA book for information on motel services avail-
able in different cities. It is correct that they are not listed
as a motel in Livermore and they are listed in every other city in
the book. She would like to know why they do not advertise in the
telephone book and AAA.
Denis Hundoble, 1240 Asti Court, stated that while listening to
public testimony he has been swayed from one side to another and
would like to find out the answers to some questions. First of
all, if jobs are the important consideration he would urge that
the variance be granted. Many businesses have been forced to close
down, for one reason or another, in San Leandro. Approximately 5,000
people have lost jobs in that area and this is a very serious situa-
tion. He stated that if it were up to him he would grant the vari-
ance to anyone who needed a larger sign if it meant the difference
between staying in business or folding. The Council should also
consider whether or not they would grant another variance in a year
or so for a sign on the other side of the freeway for the eastbound
traffic - they wouldn't be able to see a 257 sq. ft. sign in its
present location. Perhaps it would help if local people start
referring out-of-town people to the Holiday Inn and possibly the
labs could make reservations from guests visiting the labs.
Don Miller, 2862 Waverly Way, stated that he personally feels the
Sign Ordinance should not be amended and that Holiday Inn can be
helped with the use of the small logo sign. If the state is not
willing to cooperate with the state logo sign then possibly the
City could sponsor logo signs on the freeways. In his opinion this
would be a reasonable compromise that would probably be acceptable
to everybody.
Homer Weed, 805 Los Alamos Avenue, stated that he would hope the
Council will not grant a variance and that a reasonable compromise
would be for Holiday Inn to construct a sign of 159 sq. ft., which
is allowed by the ordinance.
Ayn Weiskamp, 1413 Lillian Street, representative of the Beautification
Committee, stated that she is very sYmpathetic with the problems of
Holiday Inn. Nine of the committee members who were contacted are
in favor of upholding the Sign Ordinance. They believe that the use
of the logo signs such as are used in Oregon and a few other states,
is the answer to the problem. They would also be in favor of a
City sponsored logo type of sign and they would be very happy to
work on plans for a beautified rest stop area, such as suggested at
this meeting.
Jerry Wilverding, 4886 Primrose Lane, stated that he believes the
issue is what image this City wants to project. The City wants
to attract more industry as a means of tax relief but this is some-
thing the City does not have. At this time the City has a multi-
billion dollar corporation which is trying to tell the Council they
are in financial trouble, and they are asking for help.
CM-33-59
September 7, 1976
(Report re Holiday
Inn Sign Variance)
Mr. Wilverding stated that it is now up to the City to decide
which image will be projected. The City tells the world new
business is desired and that the City is willing to help them
get started and the question is whether or not the City is
willing to help the business it presently has. He would sug-
gest that the City do something even if it means granting only
a temporary one year variance. He would hope that the City demon-
strates that they are willing to help rather than to illustrate
a negative attitude.
Mrs. Dentici stated that she believes that something could be
worked out with the Beautification Committee as well as staying
within the ordinance to provide attractive signs. She stated
that in her opinion size is not all that important.
Aaron Latkin, 4609 Almond Circle, stated that he is opposed to
the granting of a variance to the ordinance and he is tired of
reading in the newspaper that variances are granted. He stated
that the Council should know how to say "no", and remain firm
in upholding the ordinances.
Ernest Collins, 146 Cameo, stated that he believes the variance
should be granted.
Al Souders, Holiday Innkeeper, stated that he has received three
letters apologizing to Holiday Inn for not including them in the
AAA book this year. They have increased their advertising in the
telephone book by 50% than before, and they have not made the state-
ment that they are in financial difficulty. This particular Holiday
Inn has been rated one of the five highest by their firm's standards.
Mr. Souders stated that people have asked why Holiday Inn doesn't
change their sign to make it more legible and up until four years
ago they were required to display the "great" sign. Now they
are allowed to use the HOliday Inn script on a freestanding sign
rather than to place it on the wall. Holiday Inn is trying to
make use of a sign that is smaller and could be seen from a reason-
able distance. It has been suggested that Holiday Inn use a sign
as identification such as those used at a gasoline station but since
there are some 600 different chains of hotel/motels it would be diffi-
cult to have a color that is different for each chain. In the case
of gasoline stations, if someone sees a big yellow sign they recog-
nize it as the Shell Gasoline Company sign.
Ayn Weiskamp stated that she would like to get the opinion of
Holiday Inn concerning the possibility of the state freeway sign
with the Holiday Inn logo on it, and if this would be a signifi-
cant advantage to them.
Mr. Souder stated that this would depend upon how many motels
were listed on the sign. If there are too many logos on a sign
the motel listings become confusing. If there were only a few
logos that were readily visible they would feel that this would
be very beneficial to them.
Dick Ryon, 1183 G1enwood Court, stated that he would like to urge
the Council to uphold the ordinance and not grant the variance
and not make any changes to the ordinance. In his opinion the
community is more attractive because of the enforcement of the
sign ordinance. People and committees spent a great deal of time
and effort in drafting the Sign Ordinance and it shouldn't be
changed.
Bill Zagotta stated that he is beginning to doubt the sincerity
of the statements being made by the people from Holiday Inn be-
cause first they say that 15 people may lose their jobs if busi-
ness doesn't increase and then they say they have no financial problems.
CM-33-60
September 7, 1976
(Report re Holiday
Inn Sign Variance)
Mr. Souder stated that, personally, he feels it is not advisable for
someone representing a firm to say exactly what their financial status
is.
One Livermore resident stated that she would like to know why Livermore
doesn't have a Mervyn's or a Liberty House, etc., and that if the City
would help merchants with their signs and other things, Livermore
might have some of these conveniences.
RECESS
Mayor Tirsell called for a brief recess after which the Council
meeting resumed with members of the Council present, as during
roll call.
Mayor Tirsell stated that the motion in front of the Council is to
grant the variance to allow 252 sq. ft., and the present ordinance
allows a sign of 159 sq. ft. The Councilmembers will discuss the
motion at this time.
Cm Kamena stated that it is really difficult for him to see a clear
issue at hand this evening. There are a number of people who have
expressed their concerns and he has mixed emotions in that he can
agree to some extent with both sides. Unfortunately, he must make
either a "yes" or "no" decision concerning the motion.
ern Kamena stated that in his opinion, philosophically, the ordinance
provides for identification and safe exit from the freeway and that
the ordinance does not embody a factor for advertising. He has had
the task of determining if there is a minimum size sign that would
allow a person traveling on the freeway to see the sign, identify
it, and exit safely from the freeway. In forming some of these
calculations he tried to make it as difficult as possible for the
absolute minimum sized sign. Some of the conditions were 1) a clear
day; 2) no traffic; and 3) the fact that there are four lanes.
He added that the Council needs to address itself to the problem
of visibility and whether or not it can be easily identified from
the freeway, and not whether Holiday Inn is making a profit.
At the time the Holiday Inn sign was erected the City did not allow
159 sq. ft. At that time the City allowed 64 sq. ft., and the 57.5
sq. ft. (present sign) was the maximum amount of square footage that
could be allowed to retain that particular shape. Subsequent to the
installation of the present sign, an ordinance was enacted which
allowed a larger sign than the one they presently have.
If ern Kamena could honestly believe that the 159 sq. ft. maximum
could allow for all the things he mentioned earlier he would cer-
tainly be in favor of denying the variance. However, he believes
the request for 252 sq. ft. which would meet the ordinance require-
ments with respect to script size, if it were on the wall or if the
background were not being counted in the overall size, is reasonable
and is the minimum size necessary to fulfill the requirements he
mentioned earlier.
For these reasons, em Kamena is in favor of the request for the
variance and will vote in favor of the motion.
em Kamena stated that he will personally pursue the matter of the
logo sign where gas, food, and lodging is listed, and he has gone
to the trouble of photographing that very type of project and he
will expend all the energy necessary to try to get this type of
thing available for the City of Livermore.
CM-33-61
September 7, 1976
(Report re Holiday
Inn Sign Variance)
em Staley stated that he believes this is one of the most diffi-
cult decisions that have come before the Council since he has
been with the Council. In his OP1P~9~ the underlying purpose
of the ordinance is of the highes~ivermore. &K~.1
The philosophy of the signs if one of identificatio~~ot of
advertising. He believes that the present sign ordinance does
not allow Holiday Inn the right of identification. Holiday Inn
cannot be identified in sufficient time to exit from the freeway.
ern Staley continued to say that when the issue first arose the
Council tried to find other means than allowing a variance, such
as exploration of the use of logo signs. He is very reluctant
to grant a variance, but at this point in time it appears to be
the only recourse. He will also support the motion to grant the
variance.
Cm Kamena stated that the fact that billboard signs in California
along scenic highway routes have to come down is increasing
the burden for freeway oriented uses. The billboards used to
indicate that a certain service would be available in a certain
number of miles or minutes.
Cm Turner stated that he has always supported the concept of a
variance for Holiday Inn. This is a special type of business
located out on the freeway and the City's Sign Ordinance has
not considered that particular type of business. He will vote
in favor of the motion to grant the variance.
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that she would like to be able to say some-
thing to convince the Councilmembers that a variance to the
Sign Ordinance would be a very destructive type of action.
This would be a granting of special privilege to the Holiday
Inn - one use on one corner of six interchanges.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would like to know how the Council
could prove that the" allowable signing could not be seen by the
freeway traffic. The Council is making an arbitrary decision
and is taking the word of the applicant that the allowable amount
of signing would not be sufficient.
The properties on the six interchanges are all different, the
topography varies, and it will mean another 24 requests for
variances from those people with highway oriented businesses.
Everyone believes that the sign for Holiday Inn does not properly
identify the Holiday Inn but to arbitrarily grant a variance for
one use seems to be a very special consideration for the Holiday
Inn.
Mayor Tirsell continued to say that perhaps the Councilmembers
feel Holiday Inn deserves a sign larger than the ordinance per-
mits, but she has to take into consideration what the other 24
property owners along the six interchanges will say about this
variance. Denny's restaurant went to the P.C. concerning the
property across the corner at the very same interchange and
she would be interested in knowing what the Council would allow
them in signing along the freeway. There is another property
owner within 500 ft. of the Holiday Inn with a small business
and who would also like a larger sign because his business is
not doing very well. She stated that she would like to emphasize
that a variance to the Sign Ordinance is violent destruction and
the Council should not deal on an individual basis every time
someone wants something for their particular business. The rea-
son the ordinance was written was to be fair and equitable.
CM-33-62
September 7, 1976
(Report re HOliday
Inn Sign Variance)
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that if the Council feels the amount allowed by
the Sign Ordinance is not sufficient signing then the ordinance should
be amended at the Council level. There should not be variances granted
to the ordinance. She added that the only reason the Sign Ordinance
has been effective is because there were no deviations. Everyone
received fair and equitable treatment, there were no variances, the
sizes were computed exactly, and the amortization schedule was set.
This discussion is nothing compared to the beginning discussions
concerning the original sign ordinance.
Mr. Musso stated that he would like some clarification as to what
the motion allows.
ern Kamena stated that the intent of the motion is to permit the
variance and to allow the 252 sq. ft. in addition to what they
now have, with the exception of the freestanding sign. They will
have to remove the present freestanding sign. The signing on the
building may remain.
Mr. Musso stated that the reason he would like to know, specifically,
if the wall sign can remain is because it is presently a nonconforming
sign, in some respects. One of the problems with changing the present
freestanding sign from 57 sq. ft. to the maximum allowable by the ordi-
nance is that they would have to bring their other signs into con-
formance.
Cm Kamena stated that the motion is simply to allow them to replace
the present freestanding sign with a freestanding sign of 252 sq. ft.
Mr. Musso asked if there is a time limit imposed on the variance, or
if the variance is in perpetuity. Normally there is an eight year
limit on a sign approval under a CUP, but the variance does not
specify a time limit.
Cm Kamena asked how a time limit can be imposed on a variance and
Mr. Musso stated that it could be made a condition of the variance.
The City Attorney stated that he would take the position that this
is a variance and not a CUP and he is not sure the Council can grant
a variance subject to several conditions. If he changes his opinion
prior to the next Council meeting, he will give the Council options
in resolutions to be adopted.
Cm Staley wondered why a CUP was not applicable to this particular
matter.
Mr. Musso stated that the concept of a CUP was tried on the basis
that this was a special use provided for in the ordinance; however,
the idea in the ordinance was for a major shopping center, sports
arena, etc., would be allowed a sign in excess of what the ordinance
allowed. It was felt that this use did not qualify for a CUP in that
respect.
A member of the audience asked if the sign will be subject to design
review and the City Attorney replied that it would not. There is
no requirement that something on a variance be referred to the Design
Review Committee.
em Staley commented that with respect to possible amendment to the
ordinance, he is not prepared to arbitrarily amend it. He would like
to investigate the identification problems relative to freeway uses,
relative to the ordinance.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would like to know if the variance isn't
also arbitrary, and if not, on what basis is it. being granted.
CM-33-63
September 7, 1976
(Report re Holiday
Inn Sign Variance)
Cm Staley stated that he will grant the variance on the basis
that it cannot be identified from the freeway.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she really believes this is setting a
precedent because if the Council selects an arbitrary number of
10-20%, everyone gets it. Shell can have it, Gulf can have it
and so can everyone at all four enterchanges, because they are on
a freeway. If it is found that visibility is not good because of
their location on a freeway, then every piece of property on the
freeway should have the same advantage. If the Council does one
at a time, piecemeal, the Council will be deluged with requests
and the Council will be arbitrary. She believes that the 252 sq.
ft. figure has been arrived at arbitrarily because calculations
indicated that a sign of 288 sq. ft. would be necessary for pro-
per visibility, so why should the Council choose 252 sq. ft.?
At this time, the size of the sign is in relationship to the size
of the parcel and Cm Staley commented that this is the part of
the ordinance the majority of the Councilmembers would like
amended at this time.
em Kamena stated that the problem with trying to amend the ordi-
nance is that the Council is sincere in wanting to pursue the
idea of having the small logos along with the state gas, food,
lodging signs. If the City is successful in getting this type
of signing the ordinance may not need amending because this
may solve the problem.
Mayor Tirsell asked if Holiday Inn would then be asked to remove
their 252 sq. ft. sign and Cm Kamena stated that this would not
be possible because the City cannot condition the variance.
Mayor Tirse1l stated that this would mean that Holiday Inn would
be the only freeway oriented use with a large sign.
Cm Kamena stated that this very well may be the case; however,
the need for identification and safe freeway exit would not be
as acute if the highway logo were available at this particular
time. He would not entertain the request for variance if this
were the case, but at the moment no such alternative exists.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that the majority of the Council is doing
this just for the Holiday Inn, and this is her objection.
ern Kamena stated that this is not true, because he believes this
is something necessary for the safety of the citizens. He added
that he feels it is not reasonable to deny this variance on the
basis of what future requests may come to the Council because
this is an unknown. Also, an identical situation cannot be
presented to the Council because no building of that size, shape,
configuration, and topography exists in that same location be-
cause two things cannot occupy the same space at the same time.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would take this to mean that any
other request for variance would not be granted because no other
property would have the same size, shape, configuration, or topog-
raphy.
ern Kamena stated that what he is saying is that he has not seen
any other variance request and it is inte1legent and prudent to
pass judgment on the individual request as they come before the
Council.
Mayor Tirsell stated that if this is the case there is no need
for an ordinance.
CM-33-64
September 7, 1976
(Report re Holiday
Inn Sign Variance)
Cm Kamena stated that the City is obliged to hear each request and
make a decision on each individual application, as it comes up, or
otherwise the process would not be provided for.
MOTION PASSED 3-1 (Mayor Tirsell dissenting, Cm Dahlbacka absent).
A resolution will be prepared by the City Attorney for adoption by
the Council at the next meeting.
APPEAL RE CUP &
VARIANCE FOR FREESTANDING
SIGN ON NAYLOR AVENUE
The P.C. has denied an application for a CUP to permit a freestanding
sign of 149 sq. ft., and a variance to permit an interior illuminated
sign, and for a wall sign in conjunction with a freestanding sign.
The application was made by the Federal Signal Corporation for the
business located at 5828 Naylor Avenue, Brad Ragan, Inc. An appeal
has been made to the Council.
Mr. Musso stated that the applicant is appealing the action taken
by the P.C. but the main request is to allow the signing on the
east side of the building, which is the side that does not qualify
for sign frontage. The request has been modified to delete the
freestanding sign and some of the other requests. The applicant
now wishes to change the sign on the building that used to be
MOBAT, and change it to Brad Ragan, Inc. The reason this cannot
be done is because the distance of the building from the property
line does not qualify as sign frontage.
Cm Turner wondered if this is considered a retail type of business,
and Mr. Musso commented that during the P.C. discussion it was noted
that there is a need for trucks to go to that business for new tires
to be placed on the trucks and for recapping, etc. Apparently it
is difficult for the drivers to find the location and they go from
the freeway down Vasco Road and miss Naylor Avenue because of the
lack of signing.
ern Staley commented that the primary business for that company is
the recapping of tires for the giant graders and earth movers - not
truck tires.
em Staley noted that in looking at the area he found that there is
nothing to indicate that the road is Naylor Avenue, from the direction
of the freeway and he would like to know what the City is doing about
this situation.
Mr. Musso stated that the P.C. has asked that the matter be referred
to the Public Works Department.
Cm Staley stated that a sign indicating that the street is Naylor
Avenue is posted for people going from Vasco Road towards the freeway
and he would like to know why the same type of sign is not available
for traffic exiting from the freeway.
It was noted that the P.C. would recommend that there be a sign
in the right-of-way showing that there is an intersection and the
name of the street, all the way along Vasco Road at the various
intersections.
em Kamena wondered how long it would take to provide this type of
sign, and Mr. Lee stated that it would take only a matter of days.
Normally, the County provides for a sign showing an intersection
when another major street intersects but even though Naylor is
not a major street this could be done if the Council feels it
is necessary.
CM-33-65
September 7, 1976
(Report re Holiday
Inn Sign Variance)
CM STALEY MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PLACE A WARNING SIGN
ON VASCO ROAD INDICATING THAT NAYLOR AVENUE WILL BE AT THE
NEXT INTERSECTION AND THAT IT BE REFERRED TO THE P.C. FOR
CONSIDERATION OF A VARIANCE AFTER THE SIGN HAS BEEN POSTED.
Mr. Lee stated that he believes the right-of-way in that par-
ticular area is located in the County, and the City would have
to get permission to place a sign there. He feels there will
be no problem in getting permission for the sign.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO DENY THE VARIANCE AND THE CUP ON THE
BASIS THAT THE FINDINGS CANNOT BE MADE IN THE POSITIVE. MOTION
SECONDED BY eM TURNER FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES.
em Turner stated that his understanding is that this is a non-
retail business and that the sign is to be used for directional
purposes. Most of the people who would be going to the site
would probably be those involved in transport of the tires or
looking for diesel fuel and the location can probably be iden-
tified by the dispatcher or the invoices, or the general knowledge
by truck drivers. In this particular case he sees no real need
for a freestanding sign. However, he might go along with appro-
val of a CUP for a sign on the building but he would like to
hear other discussion.
Mr. Musso stated that a sign on the wall wouldn't guarantee
identification forever, because there is a large vacant lot
adjacent and in the event a building were placed on the vacant
portion, the wall sign couldn't be seen. The owner is talking
about expansion, and in that case he would automatically be
allowed a sign.
Cm Kamena stated that he would suggest the request for a
variance be postponed until it is determined what kind of
impact the right-of-way sign might have.
Mayor Tirsell explained that a motion to table an item takes
precedence and is not debatable, if em Kamena would like to
make this as a motion.
Bill Manis, 2363 Chateau Way, stated that when the building
was owned by MOBAT, there was a large sign on the side of
their building. The Council is saying that it was alright
for MOBAT, but not allowed for Brad Ragan, Inc., and he
doesn't understand the reasoning of the Council.
Mr. Musso stated that Brad Ragan expanded to the east and
they are too close to the property line to be allowed a sign
on the wall.
Mr. Manis stated that he disagrees that the building should
not be allowed any type of identification at all and that
this company is a new company that will be locating in
various places allover the nation and that this is their
first location. They need the exposure and this should have
been made known to them when they came to Livermore.
It was noted that the applicant is not present and the Council
wanted to postpone the item until such time as Mr. Christian
could discuss this with the Council.
CM-33-66
September 7, 1976
(Report re Holiday
Inn Sign Variance)
THE COUNCIL AGREED TO TABLE THE ITEM UNTIL THE MEETING OF
SEPTEMBER 20, 1976, ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER
AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Res. Auth. Purchase of
Property for Grade
Separation Project
The Council adopted a resolution authorizing the purchase of property
as part of the Grade Separation Project.
RESOLUTION NO. 220-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF REAL
PROPERTY AND EXECUTION OF CONTRACT
(Barnard F. Farr, Jr. - Grade Separation
Project 38a,b)
Res. Approving Tent.
Parcel Map 2002
(B&D Plumbing)
The Council adopted a resolution approving Tentative Parcel Map 2002
for B & D Plumbing.
RESOLUTION NO. 221-76
A RESOLUTION APPROVING TENTATIVE
PARCEL MAP 2002
Res. Supporting
Revenue Bond Issue
The Council adopted a resolution supporting the revenue bond issue
for the wastewater export facilities program.
RESOLUTION NO. 222-76
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING REVENUE
BOND ISSUE WASTEWATER EXPORT
FACILITIES PROGRAM
Res. Auth. Settlement
of Claim (R. Lechner)
A resolution was adopted authorizing settlement of a claim by
Robert Lechner which reflects action in the executive session
which took place after the meeting of August 23rd.
RESOLUTION NO. 223-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT
OF CLAIM (Robert Lechner)
CM-33-67
September 7, 1976
Res. Rej. Claim
(Janet & Cleve Menan)
The Council adopted a resolution rejecting the claim of Janet
Lee Menan and Cleve Menan.
RESOLUTION NO. 224-76
A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF
JANET LEE MENAN AND CLEVE MENAN
Res. Auth. Airport
Supervisor to Exe-
cute Certain Agreements
The Council adopted a resolution authorizing the Airport Super-
visor to execute certain agreements for the rental of hangars,
tie-down spaces, space in the building, and the sale of fuel.
RESOLUTION NO. 225-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
CERTAIN AGREEMENTS (Livermore Muni-
cipal Airport)
Res. Amending Land Use
~lement of Community Plan
The Council adopted a resolution amending the Land Use Element
of the Livermore Community Plan, which reflects action taken at
the meeting of August 23, at the close of the public hearng.
RESOLUTION NO. 226-76
A RESOLUTION AMENDING LAND USE ELE-
MENT OF THE LIVERMORE COMMUNITY PLAN
Res. re East Stanley
Boulevard Construction
A resolution was adopted a resolution declaring East Stanley
Boulevard a County highway, in order to receive funds for
construction purposes.
RESOLUTION NO. 227-76
A RESOLUTION DECLARING PORTION OF EAST
STANLEY BOULEVARD IN THE CITY OF LIVER-
MORE TO BE DESIGNATED COUNTY HIGHWAY.
Payroll & Claims
There were 175 payroll warrants in the amount of $103,550.72
(as of August 20, 1976) and 179 claims in the amount of
$244,009.17, for a total of $347,559.89, dated August 19, 1976,
and approved by the City Manager.
There were 95 warrants in the amount of $71,240.33, dated
August 26, 1976, and approved by the Director of Finance.
CM-33-68
September 7, 1976
P.C. Minutes 8/18 & 8/25
The minutes for the Planning Commission meetings of August 18, 1976,
and August 25, 1976, were noted for filing.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Site Plan Approval)
Mr. Musso reported that the Planning Department approved the site
plan approval permit for expansion of the Orchard Supply and for
the old trailer court location. There will be some additional
parking in conjunction with that use but most of the activity
will be drive-through.
People will order supplies in the old Safeway building and then
drive through the building to pick up large items.
Mayor Tirsell wondered if the building for Orchard Supply has been
to design review because as it stands the building is not attractive,
and particularly with respect to the roof line.
Mr. Musso stated that it did go to Design Review and the roof line
is supposed to be similar to the roof line for the rest of the shop-
ping center.
(Executive Session)
The City Attorney requested that the Council meet in an executive
session immediately after the meeting to discuss matters of
litigation.
(Voting Representative
for League Conference)
Don Bradley stated that the League of California Cities conference
is scheduled for October and the cities have been asked to select
a voting representative, as well as an alternate.
Mayor Tirsell stated that, traditionally, the Mayor is the voting
representative with the Vice Mayor the alternate and such was
indicated in this case.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(CaVA Meeting)
Cm Turner stated that he will not be able to attend the COVA meeting
on Thursday.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she regrets this because they will be
discussing the gold card program for the whole valley.
Cm Turner stated that he will try to attend the meeting, but he will
request that they postpone discussion of extended bus service for
Livermore Valley.
CM-33-69
September 7, 1976
(Operation of
Golf Course)
Cm Kamena stated that as the result of disucssion at the last
town meeting he promised a citizen that he would ask the staff
for a report on the possibility of LARPD to accept the operation
of a golf course, such as the Springtown Golf Course.
He would like to know if this could be done, and if so, what
is the mechanism by which this could be accomplished?
Mayor Tirsell explained that this would be submitted to LARPD
because the City owns the land and they would have to accept
it.
Mr. Lee stated that it can be done the same as park land. The
City purchases park property which is turned over to LARPD for
development and maintenance. This could be done with a golf
course.
Mr. Lee stated that he believes LARPD has already indicated
that they would not be interested in maintaining and operating
a golf course.
(Wornow Property)
Cm Staley stated that he would like a report as to what happened
concerning the Wornow property, at the Board of Supervisors
meeting, and the status of that property.
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would also be interested in a
written report from the staff concerning the Wornow rezoning
as well as the Anderson rezoning, and the similarities be-
tween the two, and anything involving septic tanks, as well
as any conditions imposed on either rezoning.
Mr. Musso stated that he will furnish a written report cover-
ing these items.
(Letter from Congressman
Stark re Public Works
Employment Act of 1976)
Cm Staley commented that he received a letter from Congress-
man Stark concerning the Public Works Employment Act of 1976,
along with rules and regulations. It appears that a project
such as a City Hall for Livermore may qualify for 100% fund-
ing by the federal government through a grant.
Mr. Bradley stated that he and the Community Development
Director attended a meeting in San Francisco last week which
was sponsored by the National League of Cities and the League
of California Cities, on this very bill. They received infor-
mation that is being analyzed at this time and will be followed
by a report to the Council.
Cm Staley stated that he and Cm Kamena discussed this item with
Congressman Stark and his staff and they believe they would be
willing to help the City in any they could. He would like to
request that the staff send a letter thanking Congressman Stark
for following up on this issue.
CM-33-70
September 7, 1976
ORD. RE MOVING OF
FOREIGN BUILDINGS
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT RELATED TO MOVING "FOREIGN"
BUILDINGS, WAS ADOPTED.
ORDINANCE NO. 895
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 6,
RELATING TO BUILDINGS, BY REPEALING
SECTION 6.13, WHICH PROHIBITS THE
MOVING OF FOREIGN BUILDINGS, OF
ARTICLE III, RELATING TO MOVING
BUILDINGS, OF THE LIVERMORE CITY
CODE, 1959.
ORD. RE CN NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATIVE TO CN NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
WAS ADOPTED.
ORDINANCE NO. 896
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 442
OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, AS AMENDED,
RELATING TO ZONING, BY THE AMENDMENT
OF CHAPTER 10.00, RELATING TO CN-NEIGHBOR-
HOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Tirsell adjourned the meeting at 11:20 p.m. to an executive
session to discuss litigation.
APPROVE
~~
~~i!,
Mayor
Ai"rEST ni~L~~~L
~, C1ty Clerk
Liverm e, California
CM-33-7l
Regular Meeting of September 13, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
September 13, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:07 p.m.
with Mayor Tirsell presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Dahlbacka, Turner, Staley and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: Cm Kamena (seated later)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirsell led the Councilmembers as well as those present
in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
OPEN FORUM
(Springtown
Golf Pro Shop)
Jerry Wilverding, 4886 Primrose Lane, stated that the Council
authorized expenditure of funds for the purchase of property
in the Springtown area to serve as a site for a golf pro shop,
or something of this nature. He would like to know the status.
CM KAMENA SEATED AT THIS TIME.
Mayor Tirsell explained that as far as she knows the money for
the site for the pro shop was deleted during the budget session.
(4th Street Turning
Lane)
Mr. Wilverding stated that a few weeks ago he asked the Council
to consider a left turn onto Fourth Street and he would like to
know what has been done about this.
Mayor Tirsell stated that it was the Council's understanding
that Mr. Wilverding would be contacting the Director of Public
Works with specific recommendations.
Mr. Wilverding commented that he would contact Mr. Lee.
(Citizen Commending
Mayor & Councilmembers)
Mr. Dick Christmas, 394 Pearl Drive, stated that last Tuesday
he witnessed a demonstration concerning the Holiday Inn and
he would like to thank the Council for the way in which they
handled the issue.
COMMUNICATION PROTESTING
WIDENING OF EAST AVENUE
A letter was received from Roy A. Renner, President of the
Los positas Swim Club, protesting the widening of East
Avenue, as this will decrease the utility of the Swim
Club property because of the loss of 30 ft. of property.
Mayor Tirse1l suggested that the staff contact Mr. Renner
to inform him that public hearings are being held by the
P.C. and he may wish to attend.
CM-33-72
September 13, 1976
(Comm. Protesting
Widening of East Ave.)
Mr. Parness stated that over a long period of time, since this
project has been in the planning stage for some time, all of the
property owners along East Avenue, as well as the members of the
swim club, have been notified of the project at various intervals.
COMMUNICATION RE
WATER CONSERVATION
A letter was received from Zone 7 which indicated that they would
like water conservation encouraged and that the Board may desire
to promote and implement a specific program for the conservation
of water, in view of the fact that this area has experienced a
very dry winter.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he would like the staff to take a look
at the conservation measures suggested and try to determine how
much water could be conserved and then translate this into sewer
flows for the City's system to find out if conservation of water
could have a significant impact on the minimum dry weather flow
with the possibility of allowing more sewage capacity.
COMMUNICATION FROM
CAL TRANS RE LOGO SIGNS
A communication was received from CAL-TRANS concerning the City's
request for logo signs in the freeway right-of-way. The letter
indicated that they are restudying the problem and intend to
arrive at preliminary conclusions by the end of September. The
City will be kept informed of results of the study.
Item was noted for filing.
DISCUSSION RE WATER
RECLAMATION PLANT CAPACITY
The Council has asked the staff to prepare information from past
records concerning the estimated remaining and uncommitted sewage
treatment plant capacity, and how the uncommitted amount might
be allocated.
This information is pertinent to the matter of the pending application
from Great American Land Company for issuance of the 32 remaining
building permits for Tract 2619.
Mayor Tirse1l stated that the Council needs to discuss three items
relative to sewage capacity: 1) the ordinance reserving the capacity;
2) the suggestion by Cm Turner to abate the reservation for lots of
record to allow for 200 sewage connections, yearly; and 3) where is
the 40,000 gallons the City thought it had reserved for industry?
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that the question has also been brought up as
to whether or not the City should reserve capacity for Phase II of
the S.P. development.
Mayor Tirsel1 suggested that the discussion begin with where the
capacity is committed, such as lots of record and tentative maps,
and what happened to the 40,000 gallons of uncommitted sewage
capacity.
CM-33-73
September 13, 1976
(Disc. re WRP
Capacity)
Mr. Lee explained that in looking at Exhibit "A", attached to
his memo dated August 12, 1976, it shows a figure of 1,294
as the number of existing and potential commitments. This
figure takes into account vacancies of approximately 5.2%.
Mayor Tirsel1 commented that the General Plan took into
account a vacancy factor of 4-6% because this is a figure
that can fluctuate.
ern Staley stated that he would like discussion concerning
what has happened at the plant, in terms of flow, since the
report done for the City by Brown and Caldwell, in 1973. At
that time the City had a dry weather flow of 3.8 MGD, and a
projection was made for residential housing of .25 MGD. It
appears that in February of 1975 the City had an average dry
weather flow of 4.6 MGD. He stated that he would like to
know if the February, 1975, 4.6 represents the average dry
weather flow or the average flow. Also, he would like to
know where over 25% of the sewage capacity was used in the
12 months from early 1974 to February of 1975.
Mr. Lee explained that the Council probably discussed fig-
ures that were approximate rather than the figures from a
detailed study. When the Council discussed this in 1975
there was a lot of construction underway and prior to that time
there had been a moratorium with authorization to allow the
construction of 1,500 units.
Cm Staley commented that there have not been a significant
number of permits approved since the City's moratorium on
permits in 1972. The 1,500 permits that were allowed have
been issued over the past two years, but the report from
Mr. Lee in September of 1973 indicates that the City's dry
weather flow was 3.8 MGD and that 800 single family dwelling
units and 207 multiple family dwelling units had been issued
permits. Those permits represented .25 MGD and if added to
the dry weather flow of 3.8 there would be a total of 4.05
MGD projection.
Mr. Lee stated that at the time the report was written in
September of 1973, there were many more dwelling units in
the mill and under construction. In 1973, the estimated
dry weather flow was 3.8 MGD, three years ago, and it is
estimated at 4.7 MGD now. This means an additional .9 MGD
flow in the three years.
ern Staley commented that it appears the City was using
3.8 MGD from 1950 to 1973, and then in one year the City
jumped to 25% of the existing capacity. Furthermore, it
was projected in 1973 that 800 single family units would
be connected, and 207 multiple units.
Mayor Tirse11 explained that the 800 plus the 207 permits, as
mentioned above, were issued in addition to the 1,500 permits
allowed in the moratorium.
Cm Staley commented that it appears the instruments were not
correct in estimating the flow at the time Brown and Caldwell
prepared their report and the amount of flow available was
overstated.
CM-33-74
I
September 13, 1976
(Disc. re WRP
Capacity)
Cm Staley added that it is difficult to understand the difference
between the average dry weather flow and the average plant flow.
Mayor Tirse1l explained that in estimating the figures the Council
worked with final maps, etc. The Council did not work with building
permits, and how many lots should have permits.
ern Staley stated that he understands this to be the 1975 calculations
but what he does not understand is what happened between 1973 and 1975.
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that in 1973 no building permits were issued be-
cuase of a water moratorium. The question was how much water would
be available from Zone 7 to keep pressure in the pipe and for the
safety of our town. An arbitrary figure of 1,500 permits was chosen,
and this is how it was done.
Cm Staley
projected
.25 MGD.
other .6?
noted that in 1973 the City had a 3.8 MGD flow, with a
additional 1,000 units which would contribute another
\qbere did the City get the other units that used up the
Mayor Tirse1l stated that these are either not on the report or were
left over from the 1972 connections - at least this is all she could
think of as the reason.
Cm Staley stated that his only concern is that this is such a large
amount of our capacity that the City should really know where the
capacity went. He stated that 25% of the capacity was used and this
is a significant amount when it isn't accounted for.
Cm Dah1backa stated that he would agree, because this represents
connections or capacity for about 2,000 units.
Mr. Lee stated that 1,500 homes have been built and there were
others in the mill that would probably account for the number
not calculated. It is very difficult to estimate the use when
you are getting down to about 300 units.
Cm Kamena stated that he would also like to know where the capacity
has gone, but primarily he would like to know the absolute number
of connections the City has at this time, and the absolute number
available, as well as how many commitments have been made that will
probably be given out.
Cm Turner stated that he would like to know what will happen to
the properties in Tract 1666 (Trevarno Road) and Mayor Tirsel1
commented that this property is being rezoned so those lots will
be deleted from that figure of committed connections.
Cm Turner mentioned that S.P. has 22 lots and the Shaheen Industrial
property consists of 20 lots, and he would like to know if this will
be a two year development or what time scale.
Mr. Lee stated that he would estimate the time scale for the Shaheen
property to be about five to seven years, and he has no idea how long
it will take the S.P. property to develop.
Cm Kamena stated that in the absolute sense, what is the number of
hookups that could be made if everything is connected at this time?
Mr. Lee stated that if the entire capacity were taken into considera-
tion (.3 MGD) and used for residential capacity, there would be about
1,294 connections.
CM-33-75
~
Insert: ~~~.
Cm Turner stated that when the city made application for 1 MGD
he was not convinced that this was sufficient to service our
needs and he would now question whether the 1 MGD is a realistic
figure to apply for. Perhaps the City should consider a larger
figure.
September 13, 1976
(Discussion re WRP
Capacity)
It was noted that the memo dated August 12, 1976, shows that
about .318 MGD is needed and the City has only .3 MGD left.
Mr. Lee explained that in the figures shown in his report of
August 12, 1976, the plant flow estimates the remaining capacity
as .3 MGD and that the estimated commitments are .3l8 MGD. This
is roughly the same and the .318 MGD is made up of two parts. It
is composed of residential and industrial/commercial. If there
will always be a vacancy of 666 dwelling units, this would make
up for the difference in the .3 MGD and the .318 MGD.
It was noted that the estimated potential connections are 1,294,
and the number of lots of record could be subtracted from this
figure, to answer Cm Kamena's question.
Mr. Musso stated that the irrevocable commitments are the 69 d.u.
under construction, 289 d.u. final, but not occupied; and 562
d.u. final and not occupied.
Cm Kamena stated that if the City has reserved 10% of its capa-
city for low income housing, perhaps this is an artifical reser-
vation and the City has not committed itself to a particular
number of connections, because they do not exist.
Mayor Tirsell stated that in the calculations of reserving
45% residential; 45% commercial/industrial; and 10% low income
housing, this has been used up by residential anyway.
Cm Kamena stated that this may be the core of the problem be-
cause he is not sure he agrees with the 45-45-10%, and this
may be the reason Cm Turner brought up the item.
Cm Turner stated that in looking at the exhibits, out of the
1,294 houses that are committed for hookup, there are about
271 that are not committed to anybody. There was a question
as to whether or not there would be enough capacity or if
the 32 lots had been considered for Great American Land.
He stated that he believes they were considered and that
the exibit points out that the City had previousl~~~~iY~~~~
those lots. Also, as far as the apartment house~are con-
cerned, how long does the City have to reserve the capacity?
Mr. Lee stated that from a practical standpoint, once the
financing has been arranged for on the apartments on Murrieta,
they will become occupied. It would be reasonable to reserve
capacity for these units.
Cm Staley stated that the City was under a court order to fur-
nish those apartments with occupancy permits and if the Coun-
cil would refuse sewer connection the City would be in trouble.
Cm Turner stated that in Exhibit "A" of the report from Mr.
Lee (8/12/76) Item II. E., lists 562 dwellings which are final
but not occupied. He wondered if sewer connections are in-
cluded in this figure for which building permits have not
been issued. It was noted that all of these have been issued
building permits.
Cm Staley commented that he would like to refer to the memo
dated April 2, 1975, which indicates that the plant capacity
was 5 MGD and the present flow was 4.6. The estimated flow
commitments for residential was .305; for industrial, .026;
Sears development, .03; with a remaining .04 reserve after
counting all the commitments.
CM-33-76
September 13, 1976
(Discussion re WRP
Capacity)
ern Staley stated that with Sears no longer needing the sewage because
they are not going to develop, according to his calculations only
.006 of the industrial/commercial has been used. He cannot understand
why the City doesn't have the additional capacity projected. He stated
that he would like to know if the projections from April 1975 to
August 1976 differ, and how much did the City increase in terms of
the projections and how much capacity was actually used. The pro-
jections appear to be almost the same, and yet the City used .1 MGD
last year. He stated that in 1975 (April) the projection was .305
for residential and August of 1976 the projection was .306. Both
reports included Kissell and Arbor Development and he would like
to know where the variation comes from.
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that the problem is the Council believed the
City had uncommitted capacity and it seems to have disappeared, yet
there seem to be no accountable connections for the disappearance
of the additional capacity.
Cm Staley stated that this is what he has been trying to say, in a
nut shell.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that she realizes the Council is trying to work
precisely in an area that is not precise, but on paper, at least, the
figures should be able to show the connections.
Mr. Musso stated that part of the Livermore Gardens units have been
connected to the sewer line, and this would account for one of the
commitments made earlier.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that it would appear that what the City is saving
as a commitment in terms of the amount of capacity needed, is not suf-
fient. Those being connected seem to be using more than what was
projected.
Cm Staley stated that in one year the City has used up 100,000 of
sewage capacity. The projections for residential use are precisely
the same as they were one year ago, with a very small deviation, and
the projections for industrial/commercial are precisely the same as
they were a year ago. At the same time there was .04 MGD reserved
a year ago and in addition the City should have picked up .03 because
the Sears development has been canceled. How could the City have
used up the 100,000 gallons if the same projections are listed for
industrial and residential as were given a year ago.
Cm Staley added that the April 2 memorandum included the reservations
for the entire S.P. development downtown as .003 MGD and yet the pro-
jection as to what is left now is .0007 MGD.
Mr. Musso explained that in April the S.P. reservations were not
included in the downtown. This was a separate subdivision.
Cm Staley commented that according to the memo it did include S.P.,
and he then read the item listed in Exhibit "A", of the memorandum
dated April 2, 1975. Permit 108-73A was included and was for SP
Development Company, SPA commercial buildings, .003 MGD.
Mr. Musso explained that SP Development has a subdivision out on
Vasco Road, and the item Cm Staley is referring to is the remainder
of the project which has been approved and not yet on line.
Cm Staley stated that a year ago the City reserved .003 for this
project and now the project is 25% short of completion and there
is .0007 reserved. Where did this capacity go to?
Mr. Lee stated that perhaps some of the houses have been occupied
during the last year.
CM-33-77
September 13, 1976
(Discussion re WRP
Capacity)
Mr. Musso stated that the vacancy rate remains about the same.
Homes are being occupied as fast as they are being built and
this is about all he can offer as an explanation.
Mr. Lee stated that permits were issued quite some time ago
and these homes have been completed and occupied during the
last year.
ern Staley stated that these are 500 of the same houses the
Council discussed earlier when there was discussion about
jumping from 3.8 to 4.6 MGD. The houses in the moratorium
were included at that time.
Mr. Lee stated that occupancy of an additional 140 houses
would use up the 40,000 gallons.
Mayor Tirse1l stated that she intends to pursue this problem,
on her own, because she is also interested in where the capacity
went. However, the estimate is that there is no sewage available
and this is a problem the City needs to discuss.
ern Dahlbacka stated that he would like to know if the infiltra-
tion rate represents a significant fraction of the amount of
sewage and if there has been any change in the amount of in-
filtration in the system to make up the difference in the
projections. Actual measurements are taken in order to know
the capacity being used or remaining and it would seem reason-
able to have an idea of what the fluctuations are.
Mayor Tirse11 explained that it was pointed out by Brown and
Caldwell that the paper measurements could not be transferred
into actual measurements - they are nontransferable.
Cm Staley emphasized that the City has used an additional
170,000 gallons over a years time and yet the projections
for remaining capacity remain the same and he would like
to know where the 170,000 gallons went.
Mr. Lee stated that the estimates for plant flow come in 1/10
million gallon increments.
ern Staley stated that he can understand this; however, 40,000
gallons is a lot different than 170,000 gallons.
The Council then asked about the status of the priority list
for the funding of the next expansion of the sewage treatment
plant.
Mr. Lee stated that it was anticipated that the City would be
on the priority list with approval for the project in April of
1976, with plans completed, as step 1, about two months
later. It was anticipated that it would take about three
months for Council approval, and design completion would be
step 2, taking another seven months. It is estimated that
the contract would be awarded in June of 1977 but the City
is five months behind if the City were to receive approval
right now. It is estimated that the award of contract will
be in the fiscal year of 1978.
Cm Turner stated that there are only about 300 permits availa-
ble now, because of sewage capacity, and in the back of his
mind he felt there were about 1,200 permits available.
Mayor Tirsell stated that this could mean 300 warehouses
or other small capacity users.
CM-33-78
September 13, 1976
(Discussion re WRP
Capacity)
Cm Turner stated that he is very concerned because all of the capa~ity
~=~t ~~~~rued fornlit:ry, aRa 'th~ Ras t:~ last: 'the Ci'ty uRt:il at
least 1979. ~ &)C ~ L<<-e.:6.. d:J- UA'l--rJ-, /9"7J', ~~
Cm Dah1backa stated that he sees this as a matter'o~liCY that the
Council should discuss. This problem may significantly hinder the
capacity of development in the downtown commercial area.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that there are lots of record that should be
allowed hook up because the lots are not developing at a rapid
rate and the people have been paying taxes on those lots. However,
if it were necessary to phase out some of the commitments she would
urge that industrial/commercial have priority.
Cm Staley stated that the Council may wish to discuss a policy con-
cerning the lots of record that have not been developed, but he is
concerned about the fact that no capacity has been reserved for the
second phase of the downtown redevelopment. He would feel that the
downtown area should have priority over the lots of record that are
not developed.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that since the Council works with final tract
maps and building permit applications for making the reservations,
SP is further down the line and they may have an estimate of what
their water needs might be for Phase II of their development.
Cm Kamena stated that he doesn't mind discussing the policy of who
should be allowed connections for the remaining capacity, but it
is obvious that prudent growth is more important than the number
of connections remaining, whether this is industrial or commercial,
low income housing, or any type of growth. The number of connections
left (271) is not a realistic number in comparison to the demand
that will be placed on the City by industrial, etc.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that she disagrees with this because the City
could have a major department store with 50,000 sq. ft., and would
possibly need only three connectionsr there could be a tremendous
sized warehouse with only one connection.
ern Kamena stated that he would like some word from the staff as
to whether or not the City has been scratched from the five year
list, because he has heard that it has.
Mr. Lee stated that he may have interpreted the information incor-
rectly, but it would appear the City is not on the five year list.'
Cm Turner stated that when the City made application for 1 MGD
and he would now question whether the 1 MGD is a realistic figure
to apply for. Perhaps the City should consider a larger figure to
ask for.
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that the reason the Council agreed to apply for
the 1 MGD expansion was because the City had been denied requests for
grants for larger figures.
Mr. Parness explained that the City was denied its application for
2.5 MGD, but this was not because of the amount of capacity applied
for but rather the design for the treatment plant that was requested
at the same time and the cost involved because of the treatment
process that would be required.
Cm Turner stated that he feels the 1 MGD may not be realistic and
that this is one of the reasons the City is in trouble - because
realistic calculations were not done.
CM-33-79
September 13, 1976
(Discussion re WRP
Capacity)
Cm Staley stated that he would like to see a committee formed
of Counci1members to deal with the problems of sewage and to
review the application process as well as to gather information
and investigate. He stated that he feels there should be a com-
mittee of two Councilmembers.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that she would be opposed to this because
this item is political, as well as factual, and she feels
the Counci1members will not take anyone else's information un-
less it is a factual piece of information. She feels that all
of the Counci1members need to do homework on this issue and need
to be informed, and would be opposed to a subcommittee for this
reason.
Cm Kamena and Turner indicated that they felt the idea of a sub-
committee would be good and Cm Dah1backa stated that he would
have to agree with what the Mayor said.
Cm Dah1backa stated that he would like to see optomistic pro-
jections as to what the City could expect to use in terms of
sewer capacity for commercialization, in more detail, and to
review what the plan for downtown is, including areas not neces-
sarily in the core area of downtown. He would suggest that a
five year projection be reviewed because it may be this long
before additional capacity is available.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that it is difficult to project when the
City doesn't know what use will come in. This is done on the
basis of square footage and all of this is in the General Plan.
Cm Kamena stated that at one time there was a Business License
Tax Committee, and he believes that the Committee was very
effective .
Mayor Tirse11 stated that the only reason she objects to a sub-
committee of the Council is because she was elected by people
to do a job and she doesn't want someone else to do her home-
work. She stated that she will be happy to do her homework
and find out what she wants to know. The only two Council
appointments are those who attend the LAVWMA meeting and the
only reason two Counci1members attend is because of the poli-
tical makeup of LAVWMA.
Cm Kamena stated that he would not suggest that any information
collected by the subcommittee be withheld from the other Counci1-
members. For the sake of efficiency, he would suggest that two
of the Councilmembers gather information to be passed around to
all the Counci1members.
Cm Staley stated that he believes the Council cannot spend four
hours, one night a month, discussing the sewer problems, and
yet this item requires a lot of time and consideration. This
is the reason he believes a subcommittee is necessary and for
this reason will make a motion to that effect.
CM STALEY MOVED TO FORM A SUBCOMMITTEE FOR THE PURPOSE OF PRE-
PARING DATA FOR THE COUNCILMEMBERS FOR PURPOSES OF RENEWING
THE GRANT APPLICATION FOR SEWAGE EXPANSION. MOTION WAS
SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
em Turner stated that he would be interested in the formation
of the subcommittee because he would like to consider asking
for larger capacity for the sewer, than what has been applied
for.
CM-33-80
September 13. 1976
(Discussion re WRP
Capacity)
MOTION PASSED BY 3-2 VOTE (Cm Dah1backa and Mayor Tirse1l dissenting) .
Mayor Tirse11 asked how the selections to the subcommittee should be
made and Cm Staley indicated that he would be willing to serve on the
subcommittee. Mayor Tirse11 stated that she would also like to serve
on the subcommittee. The Council concurred.
ern staley and Mayor Tirse11 will investigate and gather information
relative to the sewage treatment plant and this information will be
forwarded to the other Councilmembers.
em Kamena stated that he would prefer that the two Counci1members
meet with other representatives from organized groups or people from
the public, such as was done on the Business License Tax.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that the motion has been voted upon and if there
is to be a change a new motion would be in order.
RECESS
Mayor Tirse1l called for a brief recess after which the Council meet-
ing resumed with all members of the Council present.
CONTINUED DISCUSSION
RE SEWAGE CAPACITY
Bill Manis, 2363 Chateau, stated that LLL and Sandia Laboratories
are the two largest firms in Livermore and they have been involved
in a number of new projects with hiring of additional personnel. It
is possible that the number of new employees, etc., could be the
cause of some of the discrepancy in the projections for sewage
capacity. He added that there may be the possibility of getting
additional capacity because Livermore does have a government facility
located in its town and is using the sewage facilities.
Mr. Manis added that it would appear that the Council is interested
in reserving any additional capacity for industrial/commercial
development but the Council should keep in mind that people who
might be employed by industrial development will need housing.
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that the City's lowest growth in commercial
and industrial connections happened during the years of Livermore's
highest residential growth. There was clearly never any relationship
between residential growth and attracting new industry.
Cm Turner stated that the City is interested in allowing balanced
growth and that in the past the residential growth rate has been
rampant.
Bill Zagotta, 5155 Lillian Street, stated that the point is that
there has to be enough residential growth to attract commercial
growth. How much capacity will have to be used before the reserved
amount for commercial/industrial development is gone?
REPORT RE REQUEST BY
GREAT AMERICAN LAND
FOR 32 BLDG. PER~ITS
Dewey Watson, representing the Kissell Company and Great American
Land Company, stated that Great American Land Company has asked
CM-33-8l
September 13, 1976
(Rpt re Request by Great
Amer. Land for B1dg Permits)
that he obtain a commitment from the Council that 32 building per-
mits will be granted within a period of six months. The reason
they cannot take out the 32 permits at one time is because of
the problems they are having with financing, because of Liver-
more's sewage problems, etc. He stated that he believes they
should have priority with respect to the number of permits that
will be allowed which are now remaining, because their lots have
full improvements. These lots should have priority over the old
lots of record with no such improvements.
Mr. Watson spoke to the Council about the original Memorandum
of Understanding and referred to an amended Memorandum of
Understanding which pertained to the dedication of a bike
path in exchange for a time commitment on the 32 permits but
which was never adopted by the Council. The Memorandum of
Understanding was adopted by the staff.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that her recollection of the discussion
concerning the bike path is quite different, but she could be
in error also.
Cm Staley commented that he feels the City should not promise
to allow up to six months to pick up their 32 permits.
The permits are available and the City should not guarantee
that they will be available whenever they decide to get them.
The City Attorney stated that they are asking for 32 permits
which are already in the allocated amount, and Mr. Watson is only
asking that they be allowed a six month period in which to
build out those 32 permits. Unless the Council changes its
pOlicy, they have the right to build the 32 permits because
there is no legal impediment and they are lots of record.
The City Council has the option of whether or not to allow
the six months and then at the end of that six months
the 32 permits could be put into commercial or whatever the
Council wishes. This can be done by resolution, contract,
or whatever.
Mayor Tirse1l stated that she believes what Cm Staley was
getting at is that the sewer capacity allocated on paper
is being rapidly depleted.
The City Attorney stated that this is the basic dilemma the
Council is faced with, if they are working on the wrong in-
formation to begin with.
Mayor Tirse1l stated that Mr. Lee's figures are correct and
the plant flow figures are correct and there seems to be a
missing link as to where some of the flow is coming from.
Mr. Lee stated that he is concerned about the figures also
but the degree of precision that the Council wishes is just
not in the calculations.
ern Dah1backa asked if the City is claiming that there is
capacity for all the lots of record, or is the City allowing
connections until the capacity is gone?
Mayor Tirse11 stated that the Council has reserved the ca-
pacity for lots of record, on paper.
Cm Dah1backa asked what the purpose is for making a
differentiation between other property and these lots of
record. He stated that he doesn't see any difference.
CM-33-82
September 13, 1976
(Rpt re Request by Great
Amer. Land for B1dg Permits)
The City Attorney stated that there are no limitations on any lots
of record. The lots of record have a right to come in and ask for
a building permit and, theoretically, there is sewer capacity
available when they ask for the permit.
The City Attorney explained that the resolution does not speak to
what capacity is remaining for those committed lots of record. It
spoke only to that capacity allegedly remaining after the lots of
record were taken into account.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION GRANTING THE
REQUEST BY GREAT AMERICAN LAND FOR 32 BUILDING PERMITS AND THAT
ONE OF THE CONDITIONS IS THAT THEY MUST TAKE OUT ALL 32 BUILDING
PERMITS WITHIN 180 DAYS, OR FORFEIT THE AGREEMENT. THE SECOND CON-
DITION IS THAT THE STAFF MUST CERTIFY THAT THERE IS SEWAGE CAPACITY.
Cm Turner stated that all of a sudden someone is saying that the
City has no sewage capacity at all and that the Council has been
working only with paper figures all this time.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that what has been said is that there is a
difference between the plant flow and the figures on paper.
MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Cm Turner stated that Cm Kamena has indicated to him that the motion
may be taken to mean that if the 32 permits are not taken out in the
180 days that all 32 permits will be forfeited.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that in view of the fact the staff has indicated
the sewer is near capacity she would be very reluctant to make a
six month commitment for 32 permits.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE A
RESOLUTION GRANTING THE ISSUANCE OF 32 BUILDING PERMITS, IN ONE
BLOCK, TO GREAT AMERICAN LAND WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE PERMITS
BE PICKED UP WITHIN 180 DAYS AND THAT THE STAFF DETERMINES THERE
IS SEWAGE AVAILABLE FOR THESE 32 PERMITS. MOTION WITHDRAWN.
CM TURNER MOVED THAT A RESOLUTION BE PREPARED BY THE STAFF ALLOWING
GREAT AMERICAN LAND UP TO 32 BUILDING PERMITS WITH THE FOLLOWING
CONDITIONS: 1) THAT THE PERMITS BE PICKED UP WITHIN 180 DAYS, AND
2) THAT THE STAFF DETERMINES THERE IS SUFFICIENT SEWAGE FOR THE 32
PERMITS. MOTION SECONDED BY CM KAMENA FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES.
Cm Kamena stated that if the motion passes he would like to know
what the difference would be between what the motion says and
what they can now do.
Mayor Tirsell stated that from one day to the next they can pick
up their building permits and the City can guarantee that there
would be sewage for the permits.
Mr. Lee stated that the motion sounds as if it would provide the
same thing that they presently have. They can pick up the permits
anytime they want to, as long as there is capacity.
am Turner stated that there is one difference in what they can do
now and what the motion says, and that is that the City is reserving
32 building permits if the capacity is available.
Mr. Lee stated that in the policy adopted by the Council, there is
already capacity reserved for their 32 lots of record.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that the motion guarantees that there is capacity.
CM-33-83
September 13, 1976
(Rpt re Request by Great
Amer. Land for B1dg Permits)
Cm Turner stated that the motion is to reserve the capacity
for the 32 lots.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that it is already reserved for lots of
record.
Cm Turner stated that it isn't reserved for Great American
:Uand, per se.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that the 32 lots are included in that
which has been reserved.
em Turner stated that without the motion, someone with 32 lots
of record can come in and take out permits for those lots and
Great American Land may not be able to take out permits because
of this.
Cm Staley stated that this is correct. If, in the next six
months other people come in and take out 32 permits and there
is no more sewage capacity, Great American Land would not be
allowed permits. This is no different than what the motion
states because it is conditioned upon sewer capacity.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that tonight the Council can say there
is sewage for the 32 lots of record, but in six months this
may not be the case.
Cm Turner asked what will happen if Great American Land gets
the financing for their 32 lots of record and in the meantime,
say in two weeks, the Council changes its policy and reserves
all of the remaining capacity for industrial/commercial develop-
ment. Where does this leave Great American Land?
Cm Staley stated that this leaves Great American Land with the
risk rather than the City.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that the City set aside 40,000 gallons for
development last year, and there is no longer 40,000 gallons
available. This is a lot of connections, on paper, that seem
to have disappeared. She would not be willing to say anything
other than "first come, first served". When Great American Land
is ready to pick up their permits the City will grant them, if
possible.
Mr. Watson asked if this means that if the staff is willing to
issue permits they will not have to come back to the Council,
and it was noted that this is correct.
MOTION WAS WITHDRAWN IN VIEW OF WHAT MR. WATSON ASKED.
Cm Turner noted that previously, the Council had asked that Mr.
Watson come back to the Council.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that this is correct and this has been
taken care of in the discussion this evening. Mr. Watson will
not have to appear before the Council on the permits after this
time.
Cm Kamena stated that apparently everything has been taken care
of and Great American Land understands their position. However,
he is concerned about the matter of the bike path which came up
in the fourth amendment to the agreement. Should the Council
take some kind of action on this matter?
Mayor Tirse11 commented that the bike path has been installed.
CM-33-84
September 13, 1976
(Rpt re Request by Great
Amer. Land for B1dg Permits)
Mr. Parness stated that he is somewhat confused, because over the
past months the staff has been in consultation with Great American Land
and Kissell with the understanding that they would have to make
reapplication for the issuance of the remaining 32 building permits.
Cm Staley stated that he recalls that this was Council direction,
but as far as the City knows at this time there are permits
available and if they apply for them tormorrow they can have them.
If they wait six months, however, they will not be guaranteed.
Mr. Parness stated that with this understanding, if they had come in
for the permits today or yesterday, he would have instructed the
Building Inspector not to issue them.
Cm Staley indicated that the action would have been proper but the
council is now saying that it would be alright.
CM STALEY MOVED THAT THE 32 LOTS OF RECORD FOR GREAT AMERICAN LAND
BE TREATED AS ANY OTHER LOT OF RECORD, UNDER THE CITY'S CURRENT
POLICY. MOTION SECONDED BY CM I~NA.
The City Attorney stated that this would be an administrative
determination that if they come in and ask for sewer connection
and it is determined by the Public Works Director that sewage
is available, they do not need to come back to the Council.
It was noted that this is correct and is implied in the motion.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT FROM P.C. RE
REZONING IN AREA OF
CHESTNUT & NO. LIVERMORE
The Planning Commission discussed a referral from the Council con-
cerning rezoning of the Chestnut Street/North Livermore Avenue area,
bounded by ilL" and "I" Streets, north of Oak Street, at their
meeting of July 6th and 20th.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that the Council had a public hearing on the
rezoning of this area. The matter was referred back to the P.C.
for a report on the entire area. She asked if it would be appro-
priate to act on the request for rezoning this evening, as well as
the report from the P.C.
The City Clerk stated that the Council has already acted on the
request for rezoning by denying the rezoning.
Mayor Tirse11 noted that the item was held in abeyance and referred
to the P.C. for a report. It was explained that only four Counci1-
members were present and that two voted for denying the rezoning
request and two Counci1members voted in favor of it. It was then
referred to the P.C.
The City Clerk stated that she had informed Mr. Trevino at the time
that the application had been denied but that it had been referred
to the Planning commission for reconsideration of the zoning in that
particular area as well as the broader question concerning the zoning
of the three block area.
Mayor Tirse11 asked for a legal ruling as to how the Council should
proceed.
CM-33-85
September 13, 1976
(Report from P.C. re
Rezoning in Area of
Chestnut & No. Livermore)
The City Attorney indicated that he cannot recall what took
place at the meeting and he would have to refer to the minutes.
He does recall that there was a 2-2 vote and this caused some
confusion.
Mr. Musso stated that there was a 2-2 vote to deny, and then
there was a motion to refer it to the P.C.
THE ITEM WAS POSTPONED UNTIL SEPTEMBER 20, PENDING A RULING
FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY.
The applicant agreed to the postponement of one week.
DISCUSSION RE CITY
ADMINISTRATION BLDG.
The Council postponed discussion of the administration building
until the meeting of September 20, 1976, ON MOTION OF MAYOR TIRSELL,
SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT - UPDATE OF
AIR QUALITY INFO.
The Air Pollution Committee submitted an update of air quality
information, at the request of the City Council, which will be
forwarded to the BAAPCD and the Air Resources Board. The Mayor
thanked Mr. Higgins, Chairman of the Committee, and its members
for the work done on the report.
Mr. Higgins stated that the information is not a significant
change from the previous report. The Committee tried to
summarize what has happened since the previous report and one
point is that there were fewer days in which the oxident level
exceeded the federal and state standards, by considerable amounts,
than in previous years. Part of that change was in calibration
of the instruments, but this does not account for the total change.
There was an actual reduction due to what the Committee believes
was a change in the weather pattern. This is generally the view
of the BAAPCD, and there is information on the shift of high
oxident from this area to the A1tamont and the San Jose area.
It appears that the hotter the summer weather, the more often
the number of high oxident days, but of course there are other
factors that have to be taken into consideration.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that she found the information on the
speculation of the carbon in the atmosphere due to the breakdown
of tires, etc., and she wondered if the BAAPCD has worked on
this at all.
Mr. Higgins indicated that he is not sure, but he believes
some simple and inexpensive measurements can be taken by
measuring distances from the freeway and whether this source
of carbon is significant.
The Mayor thanked Mr. Higgins and the Committee and asked that
the report be forwarded to the Bay Area Air Pollution District
and the State Air Resources Board.
REQUEST FOR RETURN
OF DEDICATED PROPERTY
Mr. Ha1yak, 1144 Xavier Way, dedicated land to the City on
the south side of First Street across from Kinney Shoe Store for
CM-33-86
September 13, 1976
(Request for Return
of Dedicated Property)
widening in connection with a new building~ and a letter from Mr.
Ha1yak indicates that he was told by a City engineer that if the
track relocation were approved it would not be necessary to dedicate
the property to the City. He is requesting that the property be
returned to him in compliance with his agreement with the City, in
view of the fact the track relocation was approved.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that from the staff report it is being recom-
mended that the Council abandon the widening of First Street. When
the Council worked with Mr. Kamp's property the Council, at that time,
did not abandon the future width lines for First Street because there
was no time scale to work with for the widening of First Street.
Mr. Lee stated that the Council did relieve Mr. Kamp of the bonding
responsibility. The Council did require dedication of property but
this was for sometime in the future, without any guarantees or bonding.
It was noted that the staff informed Mr. Ha1yak that an assessment
district may be formed and, if so, dedication along First Street
would be minimal or not at all. Mr. Ha1yak indicated that he
would like to proceed with construction of a building on his
property and the staff indicated to him that he could proceed and
wait until the building is ready to be occupied before giving the
City a bond. He was also told that he would not be responsible for
the improvements along the new alignment of First Street because
the improvements could not be required at the time the engineering
considerations were prepared and it would be unfair to request it now.
Mr. Lee stated that if the Council is not prepared to say that the
City intends to relocate first street, without any question, then
his recommendation would be premature.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that the problem is that the City definate1y
intends to relocate First Street, but can't be sure CAL-Trans
intends to relocate First Street. They may decide to proceed with
widening First Street prior to relocating it.
Cm Staley stated that he really believes this item is premature.
Mr. Parness stated that he can't offer any more than what the Council
has to work with. The City has been told by CAL-Trans and the PUC
that they accept the concept of working towards the relocation.
The City has everything except the grant funding, but it is diffi-
cult to say that First Street will never be widened.
Mayor Tirse11 wondered if it would be possible to revert the land
to Mr. Ha1yak, contingent upon the grant funding.
Mr. Parness stated that this would cause Mr. Ha1yak to wait as long
as perhaps several years.
Cm Turner wondered if the purpose of the agreement was for the
widening of First Street.
Mr. Lee explained that it really wasn't an agreement but rather a
condition of the issuance of the building permit. The condition
was to dedicate the additional street right-of-way, which has been
done, has been recorded, and at present is public right-of-way.
Mr. Lee stated that Mr. Ha1yak was told that the street dedication
would be minimal if First Street were relocated. He explained that
exhibit "A" shows what is dedicated to the City at the present time
and he then explained the portion that could be reverted back to Mr.
Ha1yak.
CM-33-87
September 13, 1976
(Request for Return
of Dedicated Property)
Mr. Ha1yak stated that he was told that if the railroad track
relocation were not approved the dedication of his property
would be required for the widening of First Street. However,
if the project were approved the dedication would not be neces-
sary and the land would be given back to him. The deed was
not to be recorded until it was determined whether or not the
tracks would be relocated but the deed was recorded.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that the Council works from official
documents and she has a copy of the application for site
plan approval, of which the deed seems to have been a condition.
Mr. Lee stated that as far as he knows there was no discussion
as to whether or not the deed should be recorded. The bond
was posted for public works improvements to be constructed
at a later time. If the deed is accepted by the City it has
to be recorded, and the City has no choice in the matter.
Mayor Tirse11 explained that the Council has not decided to
abandon the possibility of widening First Street. The City
has required dedication from Codiro1i, Kamps, etc., and
they have bonded for the public works improvements. The
Council will have to decide what the official policy will
be with respect to First Street, and bring it back on another
agenda for discussion.
Cm Turner stated that there seems to have been an agreement
made with Mr. Ha1yak in 1973 at the time he dedicated land
to the City. Now there seems to be a new proposal for giv-
ing him back a portion of his land and negotiating for the
purchase of another part for the widening of First Street.
He stated that he is not sure he understands the two proposals.
Mr. Lee stated that initially Mr. Ha1yak asked for site plan
approval which he received, conditioned upon the dedication
of additional right-of-way with guarantee of the installa-
tion of improvements with a bond. That is the official
action by the Planning Commission and the Council, and
Mr. Ha1yak complied. Recently he wrote a letter to the
City asking that the dedicated portion be returned to him.
Discussion took place between Mr. Ha1yak and the staff and
he asked if he would have to dedicate the right-of-way prior
to taking out a building permit. The staff indicated that
if First Street were relocated the Council probably would
not require dedication of right-of-way. He is now asking
that the property be returned to him and this is the reason
the item is before the Council.
Mr. Lee stated that if the Council is not in a position
to make a decision at this time, it should be postponed
until a decision has been made concerning the plans for
First Street.
Cm Turner wondered if all the dedications along First
Street will be released if the City abandons widening
of First Street.
It was noted that the dedications would revert back to
the owners if First Street is not widened.
CM-33-88
September 13, 1976
(Request for Return
of Dedicated Property)
Mayor Tirsell stated that there seems to be a basic misunderstanding
of what was to happen, and unless there is a decision on the part
of the Council to abandon the widening of First Street, there is no
further action that can take place.
Cm Turner stated that he really believes discussion of this item
is premature because the Council has not entertained the idea of
abandoning the widening of First Street.
~mYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO TABLE THE ITEM. MOTION SECONDED BY CM
DAHLBACKA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE POSSIBILITY
OF ANNEXATION - PROPERTY
NORTH OF I-SaD
A letter was received from Jack Jones, representative of Livermore
Investment Associates, asking the Council's opinion on the possi-
bility of annexation of 120 acres of property located north of I-580
near the Junior College site. They have an interested party for a
new automobile dealership, and General Motors has approved the site.
Mr. Parness stated that the property is proposed for development
of highway oriented types of business and one of the proposals
would be for a major automobile dealership, which would take about
10 acres of the total 120 acres.
The Livermore Community Plan places this property in the agricultural
category, but there have been times when light industrial and/or
highway commercial related uses have been considered for this area.
The property owners are ready and willing to annex to the City and
also to extend all utility services to their site, in the event the
zoning category would accommodate the kind of development they have
in mind.
The owners have asked for an informal opinion from the Council as
to this proposal.
Jack Jones, representing Livermore Investment Associates, stated
that the reason they would like to have an opinion from the Council
is because they do not want to expend funds until they know if the
Council would favorably entertain their proposal.
Cm Staley stated that he believes the City's Community Plan is very
specific about what zoning will be allowed for that area.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that she would like to point out that this is
at one of the freeway interchanges that has not been designated for
commercial development.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that the areas in the General Plan were discus-
sed very extensively, and the Council carne to the conclusion that
agricultural would be the best use for that land.
Cm Kamena stated that he has mixed emotions concerning the proposal
because he does not like the thought of turning away commercial
prospects, and yet the land is located in an area which has good
soil for agricultural purposes and he does not like to see the
disappearance of good agricultural land either.
CM-33-89
September 13, 1976
(Council Discussion
re Annexation of
Property No. of I-580)
Mayor Tirsel1 stated that since this is a request for an infor-
mal opinion from the Council, no Council action is required.
Cm Turner stated that there are already enough needs in the
City to be considered, to the point that he does not want to
consider annexation of this particular piece of property,
and particularly for commercial purposes.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that while the proposal is interesting,
she would have to consider the problems of policing the area
and fire protection, and basically establishing a new com-
mercial center. The amount of land (120 acres) represents
almost half of the downtown area of Livermore. This would
be another major commercial development that the City hasn't
anticipated, and at this time the majority of the Council
would not be interested.
~.kf!;;J;f~
Mayor Tirsel1 ~~At~(that the City may have difficulties with
sewage treatme~~lOf the City and this is one of the reasons
it wouldn't consider allowing additional commercial develop-
ment in an area designated for agricultural development.
The Council thanked Mr. Jones for coming to the Council with
his proposal.
REPORT RE AIRPORT
FBO LEASE ASSIGNMENT
The City Manager submitted a report concerning the airport
FBO lease assignment and indicated that Mr. Madis, the cur-
rent lessee, has applied for permission to assign the lease.
Mr. Parness stated that the lease modifications have been
distributed to the Council just this evening and perhaps
they would like to review this prior to discussing the matter.
The Council continued the item until September 20th, on MOTION
OF CM STLAEY, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Mr. Jan Schuyler, 1221 Stanley, stated that he would like the
Council to approve the lease amendment.
Mayor Tirse11 explained that the Council has decided to take
a week to review the modifications and they will make a de-
cision at the next Council meeting.
REPORT RE CALIF. WATER
SERVICE/CITY AGREEMENT
RE FIRE HYDRANT FIXTURES
The City Manager reported that under a new PUC order the City
has an option to assume certain maintenance and capital costs
for fire hydrant fixtures which have previously been the obli-
gations of the private water utility company. In return, the
annual rental charge of $2 per hydrant would be cancelled.
This was discussed by the Council during the preliminary bud-
get session and the Council concurred with the recommendation
to assume these obligations, resulting in an estimated net
savings of about $15,000 per fiscal year. It is recommended
that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing execution of
agreement.
CM-33-90
September 13, 1976
ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEHENT WITH
CALIFORNIA WATER COMPANY WAS ADOPTED.
RESOLUTION NO. 228-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
AGREEMENT (California Water Service Co.)
REPORT RE HORIZONS
YOUTH PROGRAM
Mr. Parness reported that the Council discussed the proposal of
incorporating status offenders from the unincorporated County
area in the HORIZONS program. This would provide for County
financial assistance for the continuance of the HORIZONS program
for the current fiscal year. It is recommended that the Council
adopt a resolution authorizing execution of agreement with the County.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED.
RESOLUTION NO. 229-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
AGREEMENT (Alameda County)
Prior to adoption of the resolution, Cm Turner stated that he would
like to have some information about the costs of equipment, such as
typewriters, desks, chairs, and filing cabinets. Exhibit "B" indicates
that they plan to purchase new items and he would like to know why
this would be necessary.
Mr. Parness explained that the program has increased from two to four
counselors and that more equipment will be needed for the additional
personnel. Under the original budget submission that was worked out
with the County, it was anticipated that there would be more personnel
costs because of an earlier starting date than October 1st. The bud-
get had to be modified and it made it possible to allot more money to
fixed equipment and this will be to the City's advantage because it
will become the property of the city.
Captain Essex, at the request of the Council, explained why the
additional equipment would be. necessary.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Res. Providing for
CETA positions thru
January, 1977
The Council adopted a resolution providing funding for CETA Public
Service positions with the City of Livermore, through January, 1977.
RESOLUTION NO. 230-76
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 129-72,
AS AMENDED, RELATING TO RESTRICTED PARKING
ZONES, BY THE ADDITION OF A PROHIBITION ON
PARKING OF VEHICLES EXCEEDING 6,000 POUNDS
ON ANY RESIDENTIAL STREET IN THE CITY OF
LIVERMORE.
CM-33-91
September 13, 1976
Res. Auth. Exec.
of Agreement re
Police Officers Assn.
provisions have been made in an agreement with the Livermore
Police Officers' Association for uniform allowance and safety
equipment. These will be considered as cost items in the next
agreement with the Association and it is recommended that the
Council adopt a resolution authorizing execution of agreement.
RESOLUTION NO. 231-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREE-
MENT (Livermore Police Officers Association)
Res. Auth. Exec.
ot Agree. with
~e1ls Fargo Bank
The Council adopted a resolution authorizing execution of agree-
ment with Wells Fargo Bank and the Hexce1 Corporation for Tract
1929, which is property located adjacent to the present Hexce1
plant at the end of Trevarno Road. This was approved at the
meeting of July 19, 1976.
RESOLUTION NO. 232-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREE-
MENT (Wells Fargo Bank; Hexce1 Corporation)
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED WITH DELETION OF ITEM
5.1 (Resolution re Restricted Parking Zones), AND 5.5 (Holiday
Inn Sign).
DISCUSSION RE RESTRICTED
PARKING ZONES (Item 5.1)
Cm Turner stated that the reason he would like to discuss the
restricted parking zones for vehicles exceeding 6,000 pounds,
is because many people have misunderstood and believe they
cannot park their truck in front of their home because of
the weight. It should be made clear that the Council is ref-
erring only to commercial types of vehicles, and not motor-
homes or trailers, etc.
One member of the audience indicated that they own a truck
and they have no place in which to park it. It is a commer-
cial type of vehicle.
Mayor Tirse11 suggested checking with Mr. Migliori or in that
area and find out if parking spaces are still available for
this type of truck.
Mayor Tirse1l added that in 1975 a survey was taken and the
truck owners were asked if they would like the City to pro-
vide some type of parking area, and the City did not receive
a response indicating that they would like this to be done.
Out of 100 truckers surveyed, two responded and the City
assumed that the parking area would not be necessary and that
they probably had places to park.
CM-33-92
September 13, 1976
(Discussion re Restricted
Parking Zones - Item 5.1)
The speaker in the audience stated that the trucks should not be
able to park in residential areas; however, they are no more
unsightly than large motorhome vehicles.
Cm Turner stated that the resolution does not apply to registered
commercial vehicles, but rather for trucks used in a commercial
type of business and engaged in that type of activity.
The speaker stated that a commercial license is a commercial
license, regardless of what it is on, and Cm Kamena and Staley
stated that the speaker is probably correct.
The speaker stated that the truck drivers have no place to stop,
even for a cup of coffee, from Tracy to San Leandro, because if
they get off the highway they are on a City Street, and this would
be in violation.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that the street in front of Smorga-Bob's can
be used by the truck drivers, and this is one reason two-hour limits
were posted - the City wanted cars to move out within two-hours so
the trucks could park there.
Mr. Lee stated that the street along Smorga-Bob's is not designated
as a truck route, but it does go to an industrial area and anyone
making deliveries would be allowed to travel down the street.
The speaker stated that making a delivery and stopping for lunch
or coffee are different, and this is where the problem lies.
Mayor Tirse1l stated that she agrees with what the speaker is saying,
in that those areas along the truck route, where truck drivers need
to stop, such as at Smorga-Bob's, parking is not allowed.
Mr. Lee stated that if trucks are allowed to park there then trucks
will be there every night. He stated that trucks are parking while
the drivers eat at Smorga-Bob's and that business would prob-
ably start complaining if the trucks were parking overnight.
The speaker stated that one of the reasons she is complaining is
because the commercial trucks are going to be cited and yet there
are many mobi1ehomes that weight over 6,000 pounds and are allowed
to park on City streets without being cited.
Mayor Tirse1l stated that she can understand this concern.
Tom Brown, 2377 Bluebell, stated that he owns a truck but does
not operate it. The Director of Public Works was quoted in the
newspaper as saying that the reason trucks are not allowed to park
on residential streets is because of safety reasons, and he would
agree with this; however, the recreational vehicles are as much a
hazard. As far as the survey is concerned, he does know that truck
drivers feel there is a need for additional parking and some of the
owners have considered purchasing property to provide this type of
parking for their vehicles.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that the City hesitates to enter into a business
venture that private enterprise can handle better, and it appears
that there are many acres available for truck parking at this time.
There is parking available on Vasco Road, Tes1a Road, and Southfront
Road.
CM-33-93
September 13, 1976
(Discussion re Restricted
Parking Zones - Item 5.1)
Mr. Brown stated that since the Council is going to adopt a
resolution prohibiting trucks over 6,000 pounds from parking
on City streets, perhaps the survey could be circulated again.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that she is afraid that if this were
. done people would say that the City passed a resolution to
~.~ l'!\a]t~ the truck drivers park on property provided by the City,
~~and at the present time parking is available.
~ Mayor Tirse11 stated that she will telephone the parking areas
to find out if they have parking available or if they have
finished paving, etc. and are ready for trucks, and she will
let Mr. Brown know the results.
Mayor Tirsell thanked people for speaking and giving the Council
new information to consider.
The City Attorney stated that a state law changed which now
allows a city to restrict parking of vehicles on residential
streets. State legislation allows this to be placed into
effect, either by adoption of a resolution or an ordinance.
Since the City already has an ordinance for the parking of
vehicles, this is not an attempt to amend or clarify that
ordinance. The resolution is an entirely separate item to
restrict the parking of larger trucks on residential streets.
The staff was directed to check into the aspects of making
the restrictions applicable to commercial licensed vehicles,
and also how this would relate to the recently held election
on recreational vehicles. The Council also asked that the
Chief of Police report as to the policing of the trucks.
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE ITEM WAS CONTINUED, PENDING INFORMATION
FROM THE STAFF.
RECESS
Mayor Tirse11 called for a brief recess after which the
Council meeting resumed with all members of the Council
present.
DISCUSSION RE HOLI-
DAY INN SIGN RESOLU-
TION (Item 5.5)
Cm Dah1backa stated that relative to the larger sign granted
for the Holiday Inn, the possibility of logos was discussed.
The City has received a letter from the Department of Trans-
portation which indicates that they are currently restudying
the problem of allowing the logo signs on highways and that
preliminary conclusions should be available by the end of
September.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that in view of the fact the results of
the study are near, he would like to know if any of the other
Counci1members would be interested in a continuance of the
adoption of the resolution granting the variance, until the
results of the study have been submitted to the City.
CM-33-94
September 13, 1976
(Discussion re Holiday
Inn Sign Resolution)
The Council indicated that they would like to discuss this item.
Cm Dah1backa stated that he would like to know what four requisite
findings were made to allow the variance, and the City Attorney noted
that they are included in items 1, 3, 6, partially in 7, and 8, of
the resolution.
There was discussion concerning billboards and the fact that they
are allowed in the County area.
em Turner stated that it was his understanding that the County was
going to take the billboards down as part of the scenic highway
designation.
Comments made by the Mayor during this discussion were not audible.
The City Attorney stated that the process for amending a resolution
is to amend the resolution, on its face, and then it never comes
back again. The staff can amend whatever the Council wishes to
amend and it can be done at this time. It can be very clear as
to what is to happen.
Cm Kamena had suggested that the word after Holiday Inn be changed
from "will" to "may", and at the conclusion of the statement the
period could be removed with the following added" "...as mandated
by the State of California", (Item 5.).
It was suggested that the Council discuss each item separately,
and adopt or deny the recommendation by voting on separate motions
for each item, as follows:
CM TIRSELL MOVED TO DELETE ITEM 4., IN THE RESOLUTION. MOTION
SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND FAILED 2-3 (em Kamena, Turner and
Staley dissenting) .
CM KAMENA MOVED TO CHANGE THE WORDING IN ITEM 5., AS FOLLOWS:
"5. Larger signs located further east on Interstate
580 which presently aid in the identification of the
Holiday Inn may not be available in the future be-
cause of impending removal, as mandated by the state
of California."
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED 4-1 (Cm Dahlbacka
dissenting) .
The Council moved to Page 2 of the resolution.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO CHANGE ITEM 1., TO READ AS FOLLOWS:
"Section 2l.72A6(a) to permit an increase in
sign height for a freestanding sign from
35 feet to 50 feet."
fetOTION WAS SECONDED BY CH TURNER AND PASSED 4-1 (r>1ayor Tirsel1
dissenting) .
CM KAMENA MOVED TO AMEND HORDING FOR ITEM 2. OF THE"BE IT FURTHER
RESOLVED ITEMS:" TO READ AS FOLLOWS:
"2. Sign design to be submitted for Design
Review approval if Exhibit "B", the design
of the sign for which this variance is granted,
is ever to be materially changed after erection."
MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
CM-33-95
September 13, 1976
(Discussion re Holiday
Inn Sign Resolution)
Mr. Musso commented that Exhibit "B" does not show the sign
but rather shows only the location for the sign.
CM KAMENA AMENDED HIS MOTION TO STATE "EXHIBIT C", ATTACHED
HERETO......ETC. AMENDMENT SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Prior to the vote on the motion Cm Kamena explained that if
the item is left as is, Design Review, would have to review
it now. Design Review is an advisory body to the Council
and the Council has done an inordinate amount of work with
regard to this particular sign and advice isn't necessarily
in order for the sign that is to be erected this time. The
advice may be wanted, however, if the design is ever mater-
ially changed. At the same time, if the present sign has to
go for design review it would create an unnecessary delay.
Cm Dah1backa commented that Design Review was commonly con-
sulted and a lot of material goes through Design Review
that the Council never sees. Design Review is a function-
ing organization in the City that normally passes on design
of routine nature. The Design Review Committee is advisory
as well as very functional.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that the motion would bypass Design
Review.
MOTION PASSED 3-2 (Cm Dah1backa and Mayor Tirse11 dissenting) .
em Kamena stated he had a problem with Item 3 in this series
also, and MOVED TO CHANGE THE WORDING TO READ AS FOLLOWS:
"3. Variance to be granted for a period of twenty (20)
years. II
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Cm Dahlbacka remarked that it would be ridiculous because if they
have a sign that accomplishes the purpose, it is the normal thing
to amortize the sign over a reasonable period of time and get
the eyesore off our public highways. He did not feel it was un-
reasonable to condition the use to allow removal of the sign once
another sign is erected that supplants it.
Mayor Tirse11 questioned the purpose of the motion, and Cm Kamena
stated that until he saw the resolution did he have any understand-
ing they could have the sign for any less time than perpetuity,
He felt that twenty years was much less than perpetuity, allowing
for the fact that a time limit can be conditioned, from an econom-
ical standpoint it is not reasonable to ask for an investment
of $21,000 for only a three year period when the lease is for
twenty years. These are his reasons for the motion.
Cm Turner stated he seconded the motion because he saw no reason
for any time limit, and he did not agree with the comment about it
being an eyesore.
MOTION PASSED 3-2 (em Dah1backa and Mayor Tirse11 dissenting).
CM KAMENA MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS A WHOLE AS AMENDED,
SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Bill Zagotta suggested one more condition to granting the variance
that the variance not go into effect until the billboard comes down.
CM-33-96
September 13, 1976
(Discussion re Holiday
Inn Sign Resolution)
Cm Karnena asked to respond to that suggestion, stating that he supported
the idea of enforcing the state law requiring the billboards to come
down, but that does not address the question of identification. The
billboard does indicate that so many miles down the road there will
be a Holiday Inn, but it does not coincide with the idea of both
identification and safe exit from the freeway.
Bill Zagotta reiterated that the Council could condition the variance
to go into effect when the billboard comes down, and Cm Kamena asked
if there was any support for that idea.
Cm Dah1backa felt it was a good idea and Mayor Tirsel1 stated either
that or ask Holiday Inn to request that the billboard be removed.
Al Souders, Holiday Innkeeper, stated that one of the billboards has
already been removed two miles west of the inn by highway beautifica-
tion and they plan to remove the others in response to the bill.
CM KAMENA STATED THERE IS ONE OTHER CONDITION HE WOULD LIKE INCLUDED
AS NO. 6 - THAT THE PRESENT GREAT SIGN BE REMOVED. He reasoned that
it would be additive to the 252 sq. ft. and in his opinion the
252 sq. ft. is the minimum size needed, as anything more than that
would be advertising; also it happens to be on the space where the
new sign is to be located.
~ TURNER SECONDED THE MOTION WHICH PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO INCLUDE THE CONDITION THAT THE VARIANCE DOES
NOT GO INTO EFFECT UNTIL ALL ~HE BILLBOARD SIGNS ARE REMOVED.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL.
Cm Staley stated the problem
question of identification.
was because he was convinced
distance on the freeway.
is that it does not address the basic
One of the reasons he supported this
you cannot see that sign a sufficient
MOTION TO WITHHOLD THE VARIANCE UNTIL THE BILLBOARDS ARE REMOVED
FAILED WITH CM KAMENA, STALEY AND TURNER DISSENTING.
The City Attorney added the following finding: The erection of the
sign, along with other signs of the Holiday Inn, shall be in conformance
with the ordinances and laws of the City of Livermore. MAYOR TIRSELL
MOVED TO ACCEPT THIS FINDING, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
Cm Kamena questioned the meaning of the finding, and Mr. Logan replied
it simply means that although this one sign has a variance all the
other signs still have to be in conformance because it is his under-
standing there are signs that are out of conformance now according
to Mr. Musso.
Mr. Musso stated his concern had to do with Item 3 that they not be
required to deduct the sign from the nearest comparable building
frontage. He is also concerned that all the signs on the building
will have to be brought into conformance with the present ordinance.
There is one sign on the west side that has to come down, but the
amortization period has not expired. Mr. Musso added that they are
allowed additional signing by this Variance and they do not have to
subtract from a comparable frontage. If they had come in for 152 sq. ft.
sign they would have been faced with a conformance issue, but now
they have a variance so there is no conformance issue.
Mr. Logan suggested that to save confusion the Council withdraw
the finding he had suggested.
MOTION WAS WITHDRAWN BY THE MAKER AND THE SECOND AGREED.
CM-33-97
September 13, 1976
(Discussion re Holiday
Inn Sign Resolution)
. 0 l
~~m Dah1backa stated he has nottseen a resolution that has
~he four findings stated explicitly. Perhaps the reason the
~ tinding about granting these special privileges is implicit is
~ because the Counci1members who are making these findings cannot
make that finding explicitly. He objects to this blatant grant
of special privilege and will vote against the motion.
VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION AND PASSED 32 WITH MAYOR TIRSELL AND
CM DAHLBACKA DISSENTING TO ADOPT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION:
RESOLUTION NO. 233-76
A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCE
(Holiday Inn, Inc.)
MATTERS INITIATED BY STAFF
(Executive Session)
The City Attorney asked for an executive session following the
meeting for discussion of proposed litigation.
MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCIL
(Business License Tax)
ern Turner stated he has had people approach him concerning the
minimum business license fee as it seems to be creating a hardship
on home occupancy type businesses, and asked if the other mem-
bers of the Council would be willing to reconsider this item. Cm
Dah1backa stated his willingness to reconsider and Cm Turner
asked that the matter be placed on the agenda just specifically to
discuss the minimum fee and no other portion of the ordinance.
Mr. Parness stated there is another item having to do with the busi-
ness license ordinance gross receipts formula to industrial users
as there is a great deal of confusion. The Industrial Advisory
Committee has done a study and are about ready to make a recommen-
dation to the Council for possible amendment, and he asked if the
Council would like to consider both of these items at the same
time, and the Council concurred.
em Turner asked when they would receive the report on the industria1-
commercial fees, and was told it would be included in the agenda for
the next meeting.
(Report re COVA Meeting)
Cm Turner stated that at the COVA meeting Brian May, VCSD Recreation
Department representative reported on the senior citizens gold card
provisions. There is a movement underway to standardize the card
which will be issued by one central agency and will be acceptable
anywhere these cards are honored. They are asking that in the
Valley the three Chambers of Commerce coordinate the program, and
the Dublin Chamber has adopted the program overwhelmingly. He
hoped that Livermore and P1easanton would also go along with this,
and he and Ken Mercer are planning a meeting with the two chamber
presidents shortly.
CM-33-98
September 13, 1976
(Freeway Logo Signs)
Cm Kamena expressed his interest in pursuing at great speed the
freeway logo idea, and he passed around pictures of such signs. He
asked if the staff could prepare an inventory in map form of those
areas where the City has control either through ownership or in
working with the County. Further to report on the legalities in-
volved in placing these signs in the right of way or next to it
even if the state does not permit the program at the conclusion of
their study.
George Musso displayed a map indicating the areas he had checked out
that are in the public right-of-way and visible and adjacent to the
freeway.
Cm Kamena stated he had not intended for this to be an agenda item,
but did ask the Council if they were willing to pursue this matter
in order to obtain more information.
Mayor Tirse1l indicated that she would not be interested in having
these signs at the taxpayers' expense, however the staff was asked
to continue with the study and to report back to the Council.
(Ice Cream Trucks)
Cm Staley commented that he has had complaints regarding the ice
cream trucks being parked on Tou1ane Court, and the staff was asked to
check into this.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE RE
WATER REVENUE
ON MOTION OF C~~ DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY, THE ORDINANCE
AMENDING SECTION 24.51 RE DISPOSITION OF WATER REVENUE WAS INTRODUCED
AND READ BY TITLE ONLY.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE
AMENDING CS DISTRICT
REGULATIONS RE SIGNS
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY, THE ORDINANCE
AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 442 RELATING TO ZONING BY THE AMENDMENT
OF SECTION 9.20 RELATING TO USES PERMITTED GENERALLY, SECTION 9.21
RELATING TO USES PER~ITTED WITH CUP APPROVAL, CH. 9.00 p~ CS
(CO!1MERCIAL SERVICE) DISTRICT WAS INTRODUCED AND READ BY TITLE ONLY.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE RE
MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT
RE SUBDIVISIONS
Several corrections had been made on page 9 of the subdivision
ordinance, however there was a question concerning the letter from
the School District and the ordinance was continued until the next
meeting, for clarification of this point.
URGENCY ORDINANCE
AMENDING ZO 442 re
INTERIM ZONING REGULATION
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, THE URGENCY ORDINANCE
AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE 442, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE INTERIM
CM-33-99
September 13, 1976
(Urgency Ord. re
Interim Zoning Reg.)
ZONING REGULATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF LIVERMORE WAS
INTRODUCED, READ BY TITLE ONLY, AND ADOPTED.
ORDINANCE NO. 897
AN URGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 442, THE ZONING
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE AS AMENDED, RELATING TO
THE INTERIM ZONING REGULATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES IN THE
CITY OF LIVERMORE, TO PROHIBIT EXCEPT BY CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT THE APPROVAL OF CERTAIN USES IN THE "CG" ZONE AND TO
PROHIBIT EXCEPT BY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT THE APPROVAL OF ANY
CHANGE OF USE IN THE "CB" AND "CO" ZONES.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further regularly scheduled business to come before
the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 12:55 p.m. to an executive
session to discuss possible litigation.
0ck 0Y\
CX?A/.U R.. (J
Mayor
e~
C1ty Clerk
Livermore, California
APPROVE
ATTEST
Regular Meeting of September 20, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
September 20, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:05 p.m.
with Mayor Tirse1l presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Dah1backa, Turner, Staley and Mayor Tirse11
Absent: Cm Kamena (Seated Later)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirse11 led the Counci1members as well as those present
in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES 9/7/76
P. 62, 1st paragraph, line 4 should read: of the ordinance is
of the highest priority to Livermore.
Cm Turner mentioned that the City Attorney is to respond to
the Council, in writing, concerning the Conflict of Interest
Code. The City Attorney indicated that he would respond, in
writing. This is not a correction to the minutes.
ON MOTIONOF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL AND BY UNANI-
MOUS VOTE, THE MINUTES WERE APPROVED, AS CORRECTED (Cm Dah1backa
abstaining, Kamena absent).
CM-33-100
September 20, 1976
OPEN FORUM
(Citizens Committee
re Tax Override)
John Shirley, 4218 Drake Way, stated that he has seen in the newspapers
that the Council intends to place a safety tax override on the next
ballot. He added that 43% of the people voted in favor of the measure
the last time it was on the ballot and he would suggest that there be
a citizens committee to work on this issue and to inform people as to
why the tax override is necessary. If the public is not informed
they may not vote in favor of the measure but if they are informed
there is a possibility it would pass. Dr. Shirley stated that
he does not want to lead such a committee but he would be willing
to help.
CM KAMENA WAS SEATED AT THIS TIME.
The Council offered to donate money of their own to help finance
the Committee for Public Safety, and then gave the City Manager their
checks as first contributors to this committee.
Discussion took place as to the formation of a committee and Cm
Staley indicated that he feels a committee should be formed as
soon as possible and he would be willing to take the responsibility
for the formation of the committee. The Council concurred.
COMMUNICATION FROM
SCHOOL DISTaICT RE
CROSSING GUARDS
The Council received a letter from the School District indicating
concern about the City's budget but they cannot help with the
financing of the crossing guards or institute their own crossing
guard program.
Letter was noted for filing.
COMMUNICATION FROM
ENERGY COMMITTEE RE
REFERRALS TO COMMITTEE
A letter was received from the Energy Conservation Committee request-
ing the City to explore alternative energy sources and energy con-
serving designs for future City buildings, such as the Multi-Service
Center Building and City Hall.
They also request that the Council make comments available to them
when items are being considered and that they might have the oppor-
tunity to review the plans when they become available.
Mayor Tirsel1 commented that the Council follows a certain procedure
for referring items to committees and in the case of the buildings
mentioned by the Committee, there are limited funds available and
there are not specific ordinances on this type of thing and the in-
depth type of review is probably not warranted at this time.
It was felt that the Committee might have some comments that would
be of importance at this stage and the Council directed the staff to
invite the members of the Committee to the meeting the next time the
building construction is discussed by the Council.
CM-33-101
September 20, 1976
CONTINUED DISCUS-
SION RE REZONING
APP. (Noe S. Trevino)
Some time ago the Council discussed the rezoning application of
Noe S. Trevino for rezoning of the area at the corner of No.
Livermore Avenue and Chestnut Street. The public hearing was
closed and the item was referred back to the P.C. for consideration
of that area as well as the three blocks surrounding the parcel.
It was noted that the Council action will be to act on the
rezoning application as well as the referral from the P.C.
Mr. Musso explained that the P.C. recommends that the area
not be rezoned because they would prefer that the frontage
on Chestnut not become commercial and because the property
which is zoned commercial, and is adjacent to the railroad
tracks, provides a fairly unique location for businesses.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO SUPPORT THE P.C. RECOMMENDATION FOR
DENIAL OF THE REZONING APPLICATION AND TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION
DENYING THE REZONING ON THE BASIS OF THE REPORT FROM THE P.C.
AND THEIR FINDINGS. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
Cm Staley commented that he specifically disagrees with P.C.
finding (c) which indicates that the access is quite good.
He also does not agree with (d) that if the properties front-
ing Chestnut are zoned commercial it would not increase the
volume in the back along the railroad tracks, it,_ is not
reasonable to have a different zoning in the middle of the
block and that access to the back properties is cut off. On
the other hand there is residential development in that area
and at this time he could not support an application for the
front part to be changed to CB.
Mayor Tirse1l stated that she does agree with the mid-block backing
lot treatment for different zonings but there is lot of sturdy,
good lOOking housing that fills a need in this community, and
she would be reluctant to rezone to something that might drive
the housing out, or to interrupt the present neighborhood.
Ray Herman, representing the applicant, 328 Michell Court, stated
that he believes the City hired consultants to plan the downtown
and commercial areas and he believes there was a recommendation
that this area be zoned commercial.
Mr. Musso explained that in the original draft plan that
was submitted to the City by the consultant, it was sug-
gested or recommended that the zoning be commercial.
This was on the original General Plan and not the CBD
Plan.
Cm Kamena stated that he is not particularly happy with the
present zoning for the area but he is not sure that CB-1
which is being requested would be proper either.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
The resolution will be prepared by the staff and will appear
as a Consent Calendar item.
CM-33-102
September 20, 1976
APPEAL TO COUNCIL RE
SIGN INSTALLATION
(H. E. Christman)
An appeal has been submitted by H. E. Christman concerning the instal-
lation of a sign at 5828 Naylor Avenue (Brad Ragan, Inc.).
H. E. Christman, representing the applicant, stated that he is in
the process of selling the building to Brad Ragan, Inc. (Goodyear)
and he just received a telegram from Mr. Ragan who is very upset
because the P.C. denied his request for the sign on his building.
Mayor Tirse11 stated that the last time the Council discussed this
item ~lr. Christman was not present but the action of the Council was
to direct the staff to place a sign out on Vasco Road indicating that
Naylor Avenue is at the next intersection. The Council feels that
this would solve some of the problems.
Mr. Christman stated that the sign on the building would still be
desirable and Mr. Ragan would like to locate in Livermore and Mr.
Christman would urge the Council to allow the sign on the build-
ing because this would be a large business for Livermore. If he
isn't allowed the sign he may not locate in Livermore.
It was explained that certain findings must be made before the Council
can grant a variance and the Council would like to know what evidence
could be presented to the Council in favor of the findings.
It was pointed out to Mr. Christman that if there is another building
in front of the proposed Goodyear building, the sign on the building
would not be visible an~vay.
Mr. Christman stated that there will be no other building on the
site - all of the area will be open space.
Discussion followed concerning the previous tenant of the building,
MOBAT, and how they obtained their huge building sign. Mr. Musso
explained that they probably had the sign when the property was
still located within the County. They would have been allowed the
large sign even if they had been in the City at that time because
of the open space requirements in force then.
Cm Turner wondered what the purpose of the sign is, and Mr. Musso
explained that the purpose of the wall sign (according to the ordi-
nance) is to identify a particular building.
Mr. ~lusso commented that signs are allowed on the buildings in both
commercial and industrial areas and in each case it is required that
frontage is the lineal length of a building facing an open area with
certain existing circumstances. The circumstances are as follows:
1) The open area has a width, measured perpendicular from the
wall to which the sign is to be affixed, is not less than 30 ft.
2) Open area is improved and is in use for off-street parking.
3) Open area is in the same ownership as the building to which
the sign is to be affixed.
4) Sign area for each use having such frontage does not exceed
32 sq. ft. (Applicant is proposing 67 sq. ft.)
It was noted that an alternative would be a freestanding sign which
they would be allowed and could be visible from Vasco Road. However,
this would have to be subtracted from what is allowed on the wall.
There can only be a freestanding sign or a wall sign.
CM-33-103
September 20, 1976
(Appeal to Council re
Sign Installation -
H. E. Christman)
There was discussion concerning the possibility of a freestanding
sign; the fact that the applicant would be allowed a maximum of
64 sq. ft. It was noted that they can't subtract from the amount
of wall sign - only one or the other can be allowed. If they
choose to have a wall sign they would be allowed 100 sq. ft. and
they are requesting a total of 134 sq. ft. a sign of 67 sq. ft.
in front and in the back.
It was suggested that Mr. Christman work with the staff to find
out if there would be a way the needs of the applicant could be
satisfied, within the ordinance.
Mr. Musso commented that there isn't much that can be done to
make the sign visible from Vasco Road. Someone would have to
be traveling down Naylor Avenue before they could see the sign
for the Goodyear building. A sign (freestanding) could be
allowed of up to 64 sq. ft. with a CUP, and this is one of
his requests, a sign on the side of the building would require
a variance.
It was explained that a variance is a legal document for which
various findings must be made. She stated that f!nQing can not be
made that couldn't be made for anyone in any industrial area. It
isn't really fair to compare this area with industry on Research
Drive, because this is a different type of use. Almost everyone
in town would like a sign on the side of their building perpendicular
to the street, which is not permitted by the ordinance. The findings
are very specific and the majority of the Council cannot make the
findings but the Council would like it if something could be
worked out with the staff.
Cm Kamena stated that with respect to the amount of frontage required,
he can see no real benefit to the City by requiring 30 ft. of front-
age. He suggested that while the land is open, this is the time
they need the most help as far as identification, and perhaps they
could be allowed a CUP until such time as buildings develop adjacent.
Mr. Musso stated that there is no CUP procedure for this par-
ticular circumstance - the Council could condition a variance.
Grounds for a variance could be a circumstance of hardship.
It was noted that a variance requires four findings and the majority
of the Council cannot make the findings for the variance. Hope-
fully something could be worked out at the staff level.
There was a question of where signs could be located, on a
map of the area, which would be allowed by the ordinance,
and Mr. Musso pointed out that there is no restriction - signs
could be placed in the front, back, or side yard.
Mr. Musso stated that a sign could be placed on the back of
the building which would give visibility from the freeway
interchange, and could be 100 sq. ft.
Mr. Christman indicated that they had not considered this
possibility. They have placed shrubery in that area which
could be removed, if necessary.
It was noted that the last time this item was discussed the
Council directed the staff to get signs placed in that area
for identification of Naylor Avenue, and this should be of
some help. Signs will be erected shortly.
CM-33-l04
September 20, 1976
(Appeal to Council re
Sign Installation -
The Council discussed the possibility of having industrial area
directories in which arrows will indicate where certain facilities
are located within a certain area. The P.C. went on a field trip
and looked for this type of sign in industrial parks but couldn't
find any examples, however Mr. Musso is sure they are used by
industrial areas.
Jerry Wilverding, 4886 Primrose Lane, stated that he would like to
speak in favor of doing something to help this business. He drives
by that location freqent1y, and from the freeway that area is very
anonymous. It doesn't seem reasonable that if the building were
set back only 20 ft. more that they would be allowed the sign they
are requesting on the building, but at this time they are allowed
nothing on the building if they have any type of freestanding sign.
Mr. Wi1verding stated that a very large sign was allowed on the
previous building and some type of sign should be allowed. He
added that he is sure people cannot tell the difference in whether
or not a sign is 20 ft. closer, and there are very few people who
even know where Naylor Avenue is located.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE P.C. TO DENY
THE REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE, AS WELL AS TO ADOPT THEIR RESOLUTION
80-76, WITH THE FINDINGS CONTAINED THEP~IN. MOTION SECONDED BY
HAYOR TIRSELL.
It was felt there should be a way to resolve this problem without
either approving or denying the request for the variance, when it
is possible that the matter could be resolved in a couple of days.
It doesn't make sense to act on something because of the mere fact
that the owner needs 20 ft. more of land.
Discussion followed concerning the possibility of a continuance of
this item.
CM TURNER MOVED TO TABLE THE ITEM, SECONDED BY CM KA~ENA AND PASSED
3-2 (Cm Dah1backa and Mayor Tirsell dissenting) .
The City Attorney asked the Council to ask Mr. Christman if he would
be willing to waive any time requirements.
Mayor Tirsel1 asked Mr. Christman if he would suspend the time limit
on the application or if the Council must take action at this time.
Mr. Christman agreed to the continuance and suspension of the time
limit.
The staff will work with the applicant to determine if something
can be done that would be agreeable to everyone.
REPORT RE FBO
LEASE ASSIGNMENT
The City ~lanager reported that as of this afternoon three applications
have been received requesting assignment of the FBO lease at the
airport. The requests for the lease assignment have come from
the partnership of Wm. V. Dougherty, Raleigh vJirth and Jim H. Vallee;
~1r. Norris Dutcher; and the present sub-tenant, Olef Landeck.
Mr. Parness stated that he just received a letter from Mr.
David Madis which indicates that Mr. Dutcher has refused to
CM-33-105
September 20, 1976
(Report re FBO
Lease Assignment)
provide necessary documents, personal and financial, relative
to his ability to handle the FBO, and that Mr. Dutcher has
failed to comply with personal agreements between Mr. Dutcher
and himself. For these reasons he is withdrawing the name of
Mr. Dutcher from consideration as the potential FBO operator.
Mr. Logan, the City Attorney, explained that as far as the City
is concerned, legally, the City is dealing only with one person,
that being Mr. Madis. The City is not concerned with any disputes
Mr. Madis might have with anyone else. He also advised that the
request by Landeck Aviation Corporation, which has just recently
been received, should be placed aside because the only request for
approval which the Council can consider at this time is a request
by the person who has the authority to assign, and this would be
Mr. David Madis.
Mr. Logan further indicated that the Council should act on the
first request for assignment, which was presented by Mr. Madis,
concerning the partnership of Dougherty, Wirth and Vallee. The
request concerning Mr. Dutcher was received at a later date and
should be considered secondly. If the Council approves the first
request, the second request becomes null and void. The Council
also has the choice of not giving consent to an assignment.
There was discussion as to whether or not the Council would have
to approve a lease which proposes certain amendments and is
different than the original lease.
The City Attorney advised that the Council not approve the lease
amendments unless, and until, the lease assignment becomes effec-
tive, assuming the Council agrees to the assignment. The Council
can approve assignment of the lease without approving all of the
amendments.
David Madis, 1011 Geneva, stated that his request is that the
Council approve the first application for assignment of the FBO
to people who are more capable to deal with the situations at
the Livermore Airport. He would request that the master lease
be assigned to Dougherty, Wirth and Vallee. As far as the lease
amendments are concerned, this would be something that would have
to be worked out between the City and the people who are request-
ing that they be assigned the lease.
It was pointed out that a fair tradeoff would be allowance of
the amendments dealing with the two year option and the 20 year
additional period of time on the tie-downs, in consideration
for what the City would recommend as a better forfeiture clause.
Mr. Parness noted that the lease amendments were strongly recom-
mended by the prospective assignee - the two acre addition and
the 20 year term extension, as well as the additional tie down
spaces. The staff holds some concern about adding these pro-
visions. As the City Attorney has written it, there is adequate
protection for the City in that the rights to the provisions of
the 20 year extension and occupancy of the two acres is condi-
tioned upon the preparation of a development plan and assurance
of adequate financing, as well as approval by the City. Mr.
Dougherty has indicated that they would be willing to forego
the 20 year extension and two acre addition, if the Council
feels it should not be included and this would be the recommenda-
tion of the staff.
Jan Schuyler, 1221 Stanley Boulevard, attorney representing the
prospective assignees, stated that there seems to be some confusion
CM-33-106
September 20, 1976
(Report re FBO
Lease Assignment)
over assignment of the lease, excluding the two acres. In talking
with his clients concerning their arrangement with Mr. Madis, their
offer to purchase the FBO from Mr. Madis is conditioned upon their
being able to obtain option on the two acres adjacent to the existing
FBO. As far as he knows, they will not continue with the lease assign-
ment if there is no granting of the option. They feel the existing
facility is inadequate, as it stands, and they want to develop an
additional facility for expansion of the FBO. Unless they can have
the two acres in the agreement, there is no assurance that the space
would be reserved for the FBO, and they want to know exactly where
they stand. A number of the additional amendments are included at
the request of the City staff and clear up a number of problems
that exist with respect to the 20% of the gross and this would clear
up the suit of the City against Mr. Madis. His clients would withdraw
and do withdraw the request for the additional tie-downs.
Discussion followed concerning the additional two acres requested
by the prospective assignees and it was noted that the City has
always reserved that property for the use of the FBO, and this is
so indicated in the Airport Master Plan. The City would have no
objections to the ultimate leasing of that property to the FBO.
The City would have to determine what the responsibilities would
be, such as extension of the storm drain line to the site, etc.
The Director of Public Works felt it would be premature to develop
the requirements for bonding, etc. at this time.
Mayor Tirse11 wondered if the amendments, as written by the City
Attorney, insure the City control and the City Attorney stated
that this would provide for only partial control.
Mr. Schuyler stated that he cannot speak for his clients
as to what they will do if the City does not allow the two acres and 201
year extension, but as far as he knows they would not be interested
in the lease assignment if these items were deleted. It would be
extremely difficult for his clients to obtain financing without the
option.
Mr. Lee felt there is probably a way something could be written
into the agreement to protect the City and yet give the FBO the
option on the two acres. Perhaps there could be a separate letter
provided concerning the option, with a time period specified.
The City Attorney explained that with the lease agreement they would
have the ability to exercise the option and if they exercise the op-
tion and want to develop it, they would be required to give the City
a development plan, which includes most of the items Hr. Lee would
want. The problem is that it can't be done at this time, the City
has to wait until they ask for the option.
The City Attorney also advised that if the lease agreement is not
entered into he would strongly recommend against approving any
assignment at all, unless the assignment is with the old lease
period.
Bill Bennett, Chairman of the Airport Advisory Committee, indicated
that the majority of the Committee believe the 25 year lease is
sufficient. It is also felt that allowing the two acres without
a guarantee of improvement would not be to the advantage of the City.
If there is a way, the Committee would like the City to acquire the
FBO at the airport and take advantage of the profits.
CM-33-107
September 20, 1976
(Report re FBO
Lease Assignment)
It was explained that the master lease is held by Mr. Madis and
that the City would have to apply, just as the others have done.
Mr. Madis was asked if he would consider the assignment of the
lease to the City.
Mr. Madis indicated that the City could condemn the property.
otherwise, he has a binding contract with the other gentlemen
which he has to abide by. If the City condemns the leasehold,
he would have no alternative. Litigation, more litigation, and
further litigation would take place if the City did condemn the
leasehold. He added that it would be better for everyone if
the gentlemen he is recommending would take over the FBO.
The City Attorney agreed that condemnation and litigation would
be very expensive for the City.
Discussion followed concerning the matter of the prospective
lessees and the fact that the Council does not know anything
about the gentlemen, other than what Mr. Madis has said, and
the City knows nothing about their ability to handle the FBO.
There was also discussion concerning the partnership and the
withdrawal of Mr. Dutcher from the partnership.
Mr. Schuyler explained some of the problems that had occurred
concerning the tie-downs, and the dispute between Mr. Dougherty
and Mr. Madis.concerning payments.
CM STALEY MOVED TO APPROVE THE ASSIGNMENT OF THE CURRENT LEASE
TO THE PROPOSED ASSIGNEES, AS REQUESTED BY MR. MADIS. MOTION
SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
Discussion followed concerning the sub-lease with Mr. Landeck
for tie-downs, and Mr. Schuyler commented that the sub-lease
cannot be modified. The people recommended by Mr. Madis will
merely become the master lessee.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RECESS
Mayor Tirse11 called for a brief recess after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present.
CONTINUED DISCUS-
SION FROM PREVIOUS
MEETING RE ADMINISTRA-
TION BUILDING
Mr. Parness stated that at the direction of the Council he has
prepared a report on the Administration Building and the report
handles, adequately, the history of the project and what plan-
ning has gone into it. Also included in the report is what the
estimated capital cost of the building would be as well as alter-
nates for financing the development.
The plans for the building comprise approximately 30,000 sq. ft.,
inclusive of the Police Department quarters, which is the lower
portion of the building. In total, the building would include
2~ floors, which the model displays. The estimated cost would
be an additional $2 million, and alternates for trying to obtain
the financing have been listed in the report by the City Manager.
CM-33-108
September 20, 1976
(Discussion re
Administration Building)
Mr. Parness noted that the City has just received the application
forms for grant funding through the Public Employment Training Act
funds. Applications are being prepared and will be submitted to
the Council prior to making application to the federal government.
This City is joining with every other local unit of government in
trying to get as many applications as possible submitted that might
qualify. The funds will be hotly contested and heavily vied for and
the City probably doesn't have much hope but there is one thing in
the City's favor, and that is that part of the design work has been
done. One of the criteria is a state of readiness for the work and
it will be necessary for the Council to pledge that if an award is
made for anyone of the three programs, to have construction work
underway within 90 days from and after the date of project approval.
Staging of construction progress will be permitted which will be
helpful.
Mr. Parness stated that he has been told that Los Angeles intends
to submit enough applications that could easily consume the entire
allocation for California and they have the unemployment rate to
allow them to be a high contender for the funds. The smaller units
of government will be hard pressed to come up with applications that
might be approved. Alameda County has several projects that they
are ready to proceed with which they were going to take care of
by other financing methods but when they found out that a grant would
be available they decided to take advantage of the opportunity for
federal funds for these projects. This is just an example of what
type of competition the City will be up against.
No action was taken by the Council, and there was no discussion.
REPORT RE DUARTE
PROPERTY LEASE
(Heritage Garage)
The City Manager reported that a lease has been prepared for the
Duarte property (heritage garage) in favor of the Heritage Guild.
The lease would permit occupancy of the garage structure and the
adjoining house in which a caretaker will reside. The term is
for 10 years with an option for a 10 year extension. It is
recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing execu-
tion of the agreement.
RESOLUTION NO. 234-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECTUION
OF AGREEMENT (Livermore Heritage Guild)
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE RESOLUTION AS MENTIONED ABOVE WAS ADOPTED.
REPORT RE INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPMENT FEES
A written report was submitted by the Director of Community Development,
concerning industrial development potential, as requested by Cm Turner.
Discussion took place between the Counci1members and Mr. Gor1and,
the Community Development Director, concerning the industrial bro-
chure that is distributed to prospective industrial developers.
~1r. Gorland observed that the industrial map is completely outdated
and it should be updated, as well as updating the information brochure.
He is presently working on these items.
CH-33-109
September 20, 1976
(Report re Industrial
Development Fees)
It was noted during the discussion, that the recommendations
for expanded industrial development are very good. Some of
the suggestions included providing incentives for location of
industry by reducing or converting development fees to user
fees; developing an industrial park to provide small parcels
of fully improved land at a reasonable cost to the user;
making budgetary provision for advertising the City's assets
through borchures, direct mail, etc.; cooperating more fully
with owners of industrial property; revising the ordinance
to provide zones for different uses in the industrial area;
and creating a positive image of the City by use of a logo
and/or descriptive identifications to be used on signs,
stationery, brochures, etc.
Mr. Gor1and explained that with reference to his recommenda-
tion to revise the zoning ordinance to provide for the dif-
ferent uses, the I-1, I-2, I-3, categories do not cover the
different uses - this refers only to the amount of floor
coverage allowed. He also explained how he came up with
the idea for the logo to be used on stationery, etc. and
the fact that at this time Livermore has no "image". People
should be able to drive past Livermore and think of something
in the way of a major asset with which to identify the community.
The Council indicated that they were very impressed with the
suggestion for using a logo, and in presenting an image for
Livermore.
It was noted that the City's interest is getting industry to
locate in Livermore and the items recommended by Mr. Gor1and
are just additional tools for obtaining additional industrial
firms and realtors, etc., interested in Livermore. The ulti-
mate question is whether or not Livermore has enough assets
as the other communities, or beyond those of other communities,
and Mr. Gor1and indicated that he believes Livermore does.
Interest was expressed in the possibility of the City develop-
ing an industrial park and it was requested that figures for
the cost be provided.
Mr. Parness stated that the staff is meeting with industrial
developers for the purpose of discussing possible development
of an industrial park with private money to be used for the
financing. This would require City Council participation to
the extent that the Council would allow the use of a financing
vehicle that would benefit the developers as well as the City.
This item will be coming back to the Council soon.
It was suggested that the staff try to find a common thread in
determining the reasons various interested industry/commerce
have located in other areas rather than Livermore. For instance,
is the business license fee causing them to seek other location?
It may be necessary to consider amending certain portions of the
ordinance - tighten some rules and relax others. This would
entail a certain amount of investigation but this could be
accomplished, for the most part, with telephone calls.
End of discussion - no Council action taken.
REPORT RE DEVELOPMENT
FEES - BUSINESS LICENSE FEES
The Director of Community Development submitted a written report
concerning development fees and the business license fee for
industrial/commercial development. In the report he noted that
CM-33-1l0
September 20, 1976
(Report re Development
Fees - Business License Fee
the Industrial Advisory Board, a sub-committee of tha Indua~rial
Committee, and the Chamber of Commerce, met to discuss the validity
of the fees and the possibility of reducing the fees and/or eliminat-
ing "front end" fees and converting them to user fees. It was recog-
nized that funds are necessary for public works improvements and yet
the high fees are detrimental in attempting to attract new commerce
and industry. This matter is still under review by the Industrial
Advisory Board; however, a resolution was adopted by the Board recom-
mending that the Council consider authorizing optional payment of
the water storage and sanitary sewer fees, as a user charge.
Mr. Lee was asked if the water storage fee would affect the City's
ability to pay and install public works improvements and Mr. Lee
responded by saying that the storage fee delayed payment would not
have a substantial effect on the City's ability to meet its com-
mitments for storage in the future. In the past, most of the storage
fees have been derived from residential development. Ultimately all
of the storage fee will be collected so the delayed payment should
not have a catastrophic affect.
Mr. Gor1and
the same as
buildings".
surcharge.
explained that the concept of the delayed fee would be
that currently in effect with respect to "sprinkled
It is calculated on a 10 year basis, with a continuing
It was felt that there is no real problem as long as this would
not affect the City's needed fire protection and as long as monies
are being received, as necessary.
Mr. Lee explained that in the guidelines of the Revenue Program,
it states that the cost of providing service must be fairly pro-
rated to anyone connecting to the sewer system. He would assume
that the deferrment of the connection fees will not be in conflict
with that requirement.
CM TURNER MOVED TO APPROVE THE SUGGESTED CHANGE AS INDICATED IN THE
RESOLUTION OF THE INDUSTRIAL ADVISORY BOARD,AMBNDING THE CITY'S
WATER STORAGE AND SANITARY SEWER FEE SCHEDULES. MOTION SECONDED
BY CM STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Mr. Lee will report back to the staff as to whether or not EPA
will allow for the optional payment of the sanitary sewer fee,
as noted in Item 2, of Resolution 1.
Item 3, of Resolution 1., was referred to the Director of Finance,
relative to adjustment of the business license fee for industria1/
commercial development.
There was brief discussion concerning the typical commercial develop-
ment fee, and surprise was expressed over this figure.
It was noted by Mr. Gor1and that the next time the Industrial
Advisory Committee meets they intend to discuss the validity of
the fees involved.
Mr. Tiecke, from the Advisory Board, stated that the fees should
represent user fees - not connection fees, and the Board will be
considering all of these items very seriously.
MOTION REFERRING CBD
PLAN TO P.C. FOR REPORT
The CBD Plan is ready for official City receipt so that referral
can be made to the Planning Commission to begin formal procedure
for adoption of the Plan.
CM-33-lll
Septemaer 20, 1976
(Motion Referring CBD
Plan to P.C. for Report)
CM KAMENA MOVED TO REFER THE CBD PLAN AND REPORT TO THE P. C. ,
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE PROPOSAL FOR
CONSTRUCTION OF LEAGUE
OF CALIF. BUILDING
The League of California Cities Board of Directors is proposing
to construct an office building in Sacramento rather than to
continue leasing a building. The only feasible method of finan-
cing would be a special assessment against all member cities.
The assessment has been calculated upon community size and the
proposed assessment for~tavermore would be $6,375. The assess-
ment may be paid at one time or over a three year term, in which
case the total would be $7,050. The matter will be voted on by
the official delegate of our City at the forthcoming League
conference in October. It is recommended that the Council
adopt a motion authorizing a favorable vote by the City delegate
approving an amendment to the League Constitution to authorize
a special assessment and approvaing a special assessment plan
for office building financing.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATION, AS LISTED ABOVE,
BY THE STAFF. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANI-
MOUS VOTE.
It was mentioned that the City would have been charged a very
large increase in dues this year because of the rental problems
of the League. The Board of Directors have pledged that there
will be no dues increase for three years if the cities help in
the purchase of a building for the: l!ague.
DISCUSSION RE
APPOINTMENTS
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, MARY ELLEN LUDEMANN WAS DAPPOINTED TO THE LIBRARY BOARD.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, CARLTON DOUGLAS WAS APPOINTED TO THE GREENS COMMITTEE.
ON MOTION OF MAYOR TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, LEO MEISNER WAS REAPPOINTED TO THE GREENS COMMITTEE.
The resolutions confirming appointments of members to committees
will appear as COnsent Calendar items next week.
The press was asked to advertise for applicants to serve on the
Social Concerns Committee, as alternates, and there was brief
discussion as to whether or not the appointments of alternates
is desirable.
Mr. Bradley commented that many of the alternates have been as
active as the regular members and it was concluded by the Com-
mittee that they would like to retain the alternate status.
There is one seat for a regular member which is vacant and needs
an appointment by the Council.
The press was asked to inform the public of the need for appli-
cants for a regular member of the Social Concerns Committee,
as well as alternates.
<M-33-1l2
September 20, 1976
(Discussion re
Appointments)
It was also noted that any alternate member of the Social Concerns
Committee should make formal application for the regular member
appointment. The Council will not assume that the alternate members
wish to serve as regular members and they will not automatically be
considered for appointment.
The City Clerk was asked to write to Gary Lindford explaining that
there are no openings for the Beautification Committee at this time.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, GILBERT MOOMAU WAS APPOINTED TO THE NOISE ABATEMENT COMMITTEE.
CONSENT CALENDAR
P.C. Summary of Action
The Council received the Planning Commission Summary of Action from
their meeting of September 14, 1976.
City Projects to be
Financed under Mayor's
Formula Program
A list of projects proposed for partial or total financing under
the Mayor's Formula Program was submitted by the Director of
Public Works. The City will request funds for widening and extension
of Railroad Avenue; a railroad crossing gate and Junction Avenue,
North "L" Street, and East First Street; design of a traffic signal
for Vasco Road and East Avenue; and reconstruction of Maple Street,.
The total amount requested will be $440,372.00.
Res. Auth. Exec. of
Lease - Motorola Corp.
The Council adopted a resolution authorizing an execution of the lease
with Motorola Corporation for radio maintenance for additional equip-
ment for a 5 year term, month to month. The matter was reviewed and
approved during the fiscal budget session.
RESOLUTION NO. 235-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION
OF AGREEMENT (Motorola Communica-
tions and Electronics, Inc.)
Res. Rej. Claim
(Mabel E. Raglin)
The Council adopted a resolution rejecting the claim of Mabel E. Raglin.
RESOLUTION NO. 236-76
A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM
OF MABEL E. RAGLIN.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Executive Sesion)
The City Attorney requested that the Council meet in an executive
session after the meeting to discuss litigation matters.
CM-33-113
September 20, 1976
(State Water Resources
Board Priority List)
Mr. Parness stated that he has spoken with people from the
State Resources Board about their priority list, and the
reports that our City has been deleted from the 5 year
priority list for construction grants. In speaking:with
a representative he found that Livermore never did make
the list. The Regional Board staff did transmit our project
to Sacramento for review which was followed by staff review.
Part of the regulation is that no agency is entitled to re-
ceive constructing granting for sewage treatment plant expan-
sion purposes more than once and Livermore has received two
state grants in the history of the plant. In 1960 the plant
capacity was increased from 2.5 MGD to 5 MGD, and the second
grant and expansion was just recently whereby the treatment
process was modified.
The City has the option of appealing to the State Board for
another review, and taking into account the valid set of cir-
cumstances. It is highly unlikely that the State Board will
revise their list in that it has never been done. The other
option is to reapply and the City is encouraged to do so.
The application should be made by the City to the Regional
Board, by November.
There seems to be a tendency on the part of the State Board
members, to give more attention to plants that are going to
practice reclamation programming and the City might want to
take this into acount prior to applying. However, this report
should be substantiated before the application is presented.
There was a question as to whether or not it is true that
sewer applications are subject to the E-O financing level
in which case any application which would go above E-O
population would have to be financed by the local community.
Mr. Parness indicated that he believes this is correct.
There was also a question as to which list the City would be
placed on if there was reapplication - whether or not it would
be placed on the old list or if there would be a new list.
Mr. Parness explained that the list is merely a planning tool
which is revised on an annual basis. Once an item appears on
the priority list it probably stays there. As he understands
it, there is not a lineup of projects, but rather a list of
categories and groups, and the City was in the lowest category
which is General Construction. It is a matter of how far the
funding goes for the highest priority groupings, on down, and
how far they can extend. In the event there is residual fund-
ing, they may get down to Category "H", General Construction.
It was the consensus of the Council to ask the City Manager to
appeal to the State Board. In the event it is felt this is not
an acceptable alternative, the City can then make reapplication.
The Council discussed which option they would prefer - appeal
or to make reapplication, and the amount of increase that would
be funded according to the E-O population regulations.
CM-33-114
Mayor Tirsel1 made the following rough calculations which excluded
industrial connections:
~(d, ~/e~
~
I
September 20, 1976
(State Water Resources
r- Board Priority List)
~
The City would have approximately $787,500 to pay the City's local
share for a 1 MGD expansion. The local share would be about $720,000
and the City would get approximately $787,500 from connection fees.
The 1 MGD would be the amount that would be funded along with the
City's share, and anything beyond that amount would have to be paid
for by the City because of the E-O regulations.
The City Manager was directed to pursue the appeal with the State
Board.
(BART Station Locations
re CBD Planning)
Mr. Parness stated that he spoke with the BART staff today concerning
the CBD Plan and the proposed location for the BART station and the
possibility that the station may be consumed by commercial development.
The BART staff has inquired as to whether or not it might be possible
to acquire the property for the location of the BART station.
If the City will indicate its interest in having the property reserved
for a future BART station, the BART staff would proceed with seeking to
obtain Federal Aid Urban Funding, which would cover a major portion of
the cost for the station. In the event funding is allowed, it is possi-
ble that BART could raise the balance of the money needed for the acqui-
sition and development of the station.
Mr. Parness stated that it has been his impression that the Council
strongly favors the reservation of the property for a public transit
type of facility, rather than commercialization.
The Council indicated that this is the general consensus of the
Council.
Mr. Parness asked if the Council desired that he relate this
to the BART staff on their behalf or if they would prefer to
think about it. He could send a letter over his signature indi-
cating there had been an informal discussion and it could be
formalized at a later date, and the Council concurred with this
suggestion.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY COUNCIL
(BART Bus Stops)
em Turner stated he has been approached by people concerning bus
stops in the Granada area and asked if any consideration had been
given to a stop in that area.
The Mayor reminded Cm Turner that it is not a local bus schedule
but rather a feeder bus to get people to the Bay Area. Cm Tirse11
asked if this could be placed on an agenda for Council consideration.
The City Manager was asked to duplicate the map of the various stops
for the Council also at that time.
(Update of Affirmative
Action Program)
Cm Turner asked if Personnel Director Ann Duncan could be requested
to update the affirmative action program as to our goals and the
present status of the program.
CM-33-115
,
I
September 20, 1976
(Industrial Sign Poster)
Cm Dahlbacka requested that some samples of an Industrial Sign
Poster be presented to the Council as an agenda item, together
with cost for the program.
Mr. Lee stated this should be given some study as there could be
very critical spots where signs are needed as there could be some
problems.
This matter was referred to the Planning Commission for a report.
(Propositions 3 and 12)
em Dah1backa reported on a League Environmental meeting which he at-
tended at which time the League took a position on Propositions 3 and
12 which provide for a $25 million bond issue for low interest rate
loans for people to insulate and install solar heating systems. He
personally favored the proposition, but asked for the Council's con-
currence to refer this to the Energy Committee, and the Council did
concur.
(League Transportation Committee)
Cm Staley stated he had attended a League Transportation Committee
meeting and was instrumental in having included in one of the resolu-
tions a tentative amendment taking into consideration the state
of readiness for a PUC grant. This will be voted upon on the 17th
in San Diego by the Transportation Committee and will be a floor
item.
(Attitude re Jail Location)
Mayor Tirse11 stated she had been asked by Cm Steele of Hayward
if she would be concerned if a jail was proposed for construction
near a residential area, and when she indicated she would be,
em Steele asked if she would write a letter stating she would be
concerned if such was being built in Livermore near a residential
area. Cm Steele asked if she would also ask the Council to express
their thinking on the matter and send it to the Hayward office.
Mayor Tirse11 stated she intended to write a letter and asked if
any members of the Council agreed, she would also include their
names.
em Dah1backa stated he would be concerned.
not know enough about the project to form a
have to study the project more in depth and
Cm Kamena asked not to be included, however
be concerned.
Cm Staley stated he did
valid judgment and would
asked to be left out.
Cm Turner stated he would
PROPOSED ORDINANCE RE
SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE
ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY, THE ORDINANCE AMEND-
ING THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE WAS INTRODUCED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Mr. Musso stated there is one minor correction on p. 30, and (c)
should read: "Sidewalks shall be required according to the standards
adopted by the City Counci1".
Title only was read by the City Attorney.
CM-33-116
September 20, 1976
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO
MUNICIPAL CODE RE TV
COMMUNITY ANTENNA SYSTEM
MOTION WAS MADE BY CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA, TO INTRODUCE
AND FILE THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE RE TV
COMMUNITY ANTENNA SYSTEM, AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. ORDINANCE WAS
READ BY TITLE ONLY.
ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY
CODE RE WATER REVENUE
DISPOSITION
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, THE FOLLOWING ORDINANCE
AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE RE WATER REVENUE DISPOSITION WAS ADOPTED
BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
ORDINANCE NO. 898
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 24.51, RELATING TO
DISPOSTION OF WATER REVENUE, OF CHAPTER 24, RELATING
TO WATER, OF THE LIVERMORE MUNICIPAL CODE, 1959.
ORDINANCE AMENDING Z.O.442
RE CS-COMMERCIAL SERVICE
DISTRICT
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, THE ORDINANCE AMENDING
THE ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 442 RE CS-COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT
WAS ADOPTED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
ORDINANCE NO. 899
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 442, OF THE CITY
OF LIVERMORE, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO ZONING, BY THE
AMENDMENT OF SECTION 9.20, RELATING TO USES PERMITTED
GENERALLY, AND SECTION 9.21, RELATING TO USES PERMITTED
WITH CUP APPROVAL, OF CHAPTER 9.00, RELATING TO CS -
COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT.
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
First Street Intersection
The work on the First Street Intersection is nearing completion
and is planned for groundbreaking ceremony by the Beautification
Committee either October 9 or 10. Turf is to be put in and planting
installed, and it should be very attractive. The design of the
fountain, Mr. Parness added, was done by the City Engineering Depart-
ment as they could find nothing in the industry to fill the need.
Mill Square Merchants
Mayor Tirse1l advised the Council there is a new organization in town
called the Mill Square Merchants who are planning a wonderful dedica-
tion program, and Miss Carlisle is planning to attend. They will be
celebrating their new foundation on October 9, 10 and 11.
Airport Hangars
The hangar work at the airport is proceeding and all the footings
and flooring are now poured.
CM-33-ll7
September 20, 1976
Storm Drain Projects
The storm drain work is going ahead on schedule. There was some
concern as far as Maple Street is concerned due to school opening,
but it was installed and covered temporarily before the opening.
Las Positas Golf Course
The two lower lakes have been emptied and filled with well water
as there is a great amount of chloride and it is hoped the greens
can be flushed in this manner.
Fire Training Program
On October 1 a uniform fire training program will be started for the
entire tri-va11ey area. There will be ten mutual aid departments
and 60 engine companies, which is quite unique, and our department
took the initiave in forming this program.
Testing - Fire Fighters
Danvi11e, San Ramon, VCSD, Pleasanton, LLL and the City of Livermore
are jointly recruiting and testing for firefighters. It is an
economy measure, but there is no point in having each agency do
their own recruiting and testing, and it is hoped it will work out.
Orchard Supply
The site plan has been approved for an additional building adjoin-
ing the old Safeway and it is quite an attractive structure and
should aid in the appearance of the whole area.
Site Plan Approval - Springtown
As reported in the press there has been an application made for site
plan approval for a shopping center at Springtown. He does not know
who the tenants will be but it involves 5~ acres.
Multi-Service Center
Architectural plans are proceeding on the multi-service center and
are to be presented to the Planning Commission tomorrow.
The Social Concerns Committee is fielding this, and everyone inter-
ested in the structure has been invited to be present in the general
architectural scheming, elevations, location, etc. There should be
good community participation in the building design.
Explorer Scout Research
In the sale of dog licenses he has been advised that over 600 addi-
tional new licenses have been purchased. He feels the inquiries
are meeting with success. This research is supposed to be completed
the end of this month.
Sales Tax Receipts
The sales tax receipts for the first quarter of this fiscal year show
a 20% increase over last year, and following that trend it will be
over one million.
CM-33-118
September 20, 1976
Quarry Plan
The Quarry Plan, prepared by the industry has been revealed and
indicates that the quarrying may be done on the Hagemann and Johnson
property, both situated south of our airport. It has always been
intended by our City that the property be devoted for eventual
industrial use. They have option on the property on the acquisition
of the land.
~ '1: ifO ADJOURNMENT
f-~~ r r'\ '
There being no further scheduled b siness to come before the
Council, the meeting was adjourned to an executive session to
discuss personnel and litigation matters, and then to an adjourned
regular meeting on Wednesday, September 22, 1976, at 8:00 p.m.
APPROVE ~jJ..i,,~ '""Yh
ATTEST
~~ il;
Mayor
~.1~
Adjourned Regular Meeting of September 22, 1976
An adjourned regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held
on September 22, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting convened at 8:00 p.m. and immediately
adjourned to a personnel hearing.
Present:
Absent:
Cm Dah1backa, Turner, Staley and Mayor Tirse11
Cm Kamena
APPROVE
"1~ 7hbAJH
Mayor
~~L
Live ~ e, California
ATTEST
CM-33-ll9
Regular Meeting of September 27, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
September 27, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:07 p.m.
with Mayor Tirse11 presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Dah1backa, Turner, Staley and Mayor Tirse11
Absent: Cm Kamena (Seated Later)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirse11 led the Counci1members as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MOTION TO HOLD
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mayor Tirse11 asked that the Council hold a brief executive session
at this time to discuss labor negotiations. This would require a
4/5 vote of the Council.
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE COUNCIL CALLED FOR A BRIEF EXECUTIVE SESSION AND REQUESTED
THAT THE COURT CHAMBERS BE VACATED DURING EXECUTIVE SESSION. CM
KAMENA WAS SEATED DURING THE EXECUTIVE SESSION.
REGULAR MEETING RESUMED
The regular meeting resumed with all members of the Council present.
MINUTES (9/13/76)
P. 76, 8th paragraph, 8th line, should read: those lots. Also, as
far as the apartment houses at Murrieta and Holmes Street are concerned,
.....etc.
P. 79, first paragraph should read: Cm Turner stated that he is very
concerned because the 300 hookups have to last until 1978.
P. 76, 10th paragraph, should read as follows: Cm Turner stated that
when the City made application for 1 MGD he was not convinced that
this was sufficient to service our needs and he would now question
whether the 1 MGD is a realistic figure to apply for. Perhaps the
City should consider a larger figure.
P. 98, first paragraph, 1st line should read: Cm Dah1backa stated
he has not seen a resolution that has the four findings stated expli-
citly. Perhaps the reason the finding about granting these special
privileges is implicit is because the Counci1members who are making
these findings cannot make that finding explicitly. He objects to
this blatant grant of special privilege and will vote against the
motion.
P. 90, 4th paragraph, 2nd line should read: sewage treatment capacity
for the City...etc.
P. 94 ,2nd paragraph, 4th line should begin: force the truck drivers
to park on property...etc.
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 13, 1976, WERE
APPROVED, AS AMENDED.
CM-33-120
\,
The argument was made that 1/3 of the population is located ~i
in the Granada Shopping Center area, within walking distance,~~~
and that the BART representative has indicated that they would,,' '~
be willing to consider a stop in that area. If the need is there,
perhaps the BART schedule could be adjusted or perhaps another bus
could be added.
I
,
September 27, 1976
OPEN FORUM
Mayor Tirse11 invited members of the audience to speak to the
Council during Open Forum, explaining the policy of the Open Forum.
No members of the audience addressed the Council.
COMMUNICATION RE SPECIAL
SESSION OF LEGISLATURE
The Council received a copy of a resolution adopted by the Alameda
County Board of Supervisors requesting a special session of the
Legislature concerning property tax rates, and various related tax
items.
The resolution was noted for filing.
COMMUNICATION RE
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
& LAND USE STUDY
The Council received a copy of a letter sent to the P.C. by the Direc-
tor of Public Works concerning the Airport Master Plan & Land Use Study.
The P.C. has discussed the question of a possible difference between
the projected populations for the Airport Planning area compared to
the General Plan population projections. The Council has also noted
the difference and has requested that the population projections in
the Study be modified to conform with the figures in the General Plan,
as recommended by the ABAG staff.
The P.C. will review information submitted by the consultant and
this matter will be referred to the City Council.
The Council transmitted the material to the P.C. for the purpose
of public hearings.
REPORT RE EXTENSION
OF BART SERVICE
The Council has agreed to consider asking that the BART service
be extended to the Granada Shopping Center area.
The Council reviewed the map showing the locations of the BART
route for both commuter and basic service, as well as the proposed
route to include the Granada Shopping Center area.
The Council discussed the proposed route along with discussion of
~urrent BA~ service to the Lab. BART is not a local bus service
but rather is a service to get people (commuters) from the main
BART line to the Lab and then back to the main BART line.
Mr. Bradley commented that BART may not have formally indicated that
they do not wish to extend service to the Granada area but he is
certain they will be very reluctant to extend the service.
The Council agreed that it is important that the service remain
an express type of service.
Faye Eagle, 1135 Concannon, stated that she has to take BART to
Oakland for jury duty. She stated that it costs her $2 to go from
her apartment to the BART stop, by taxi.
CM-33-121
I
,
September 27, 1976
(re BART Service)
It was explained that subsidized taxi service is available
to senior citizens in Livermore to enable them to ride in
a taxi for reduced prices. She was advised to contact City
Hall and obtain tickets for taxi rides.
The Council directed the staff to refer the matter to the
BART staff for their comments on the proposed route extension
to the Granada Shopping Center area, with a copy of the letter
to Robert Allen, BART Director.
REPORT RE TRUCK
ROUTES & CITA-
TION POLICY
A letter was received from Chief Lindgren, explaining the policy
for citing commercial vehicles going through Livermore who do
not use the truck routes. The letter indicated that with the
exception of recreational vehicles, there has been no differen-
tiation of gas, diesel, tractor, or truck tanker vehicles, with
respect to weight. Also included was the definition of "commercial".
Mr. Lee reported that the weight limit signs have been changed
from 6 tons to 3 ton limits. The City also intends to place
signs on the highway, pending a response from the state.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AMENDING A FORMER
RESOLUTION RELATIVE TO RESTRICTED PARKING ZONES. MOTION WAS
SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
Discussion followed the motion concerning a time delay of
the resolution so that truck drivers might be notified and
may have the opportunity to find truck parking facilities,
or to have the time to develop truck parking facilities.
CM TURNER MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE A TIME LIMIT.
THE RESOLUTION SHOULD STATE THAT THE RESOLUTION WILL GO INTO
EFFECT 90 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF ITS PASSAGE. MOTION DIED
FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
The Council discussed what period of time would be reasonable
for the resolution to become effective.
CM TURNER MOVED TO AMEND THAT THE RESOLUTION SHALL TAKE EFFECT
30 DAYS FROM THIS EVENING. AMENDMENT WAS SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
The City Attorney explained that delaying the resolution does
not affect the present ordinance. Tickets can still be given,
under the ordinance, as it stands. A resolution does not
amend an ordinance - anything which can be ticketed according
to the ordinance, can still be ticketed. The ordinance has
been in effect for about 7 years with amendment to the truck
route last June.
It was explained that the intent of the resolution is to
exclude the recreational vehicles from being ticketed due
to the new 3 load limit policy for truck routes. The resolu-
tion is a way of defining the policy for citing vehicles.
Norma Switzer, Livermore resident, stated that she feels this
is a type of discrimination against the truck drivers.
It was explained that the City is taking action they feel is
justified because of the damage the large trucks do to the
City streets.
CM-33-122
September 27, 1976
(re Truck Routes)
Mrs. Switzer stated that the City of Livermore received $19,000
from use taxes paid by truck owners last year and she cannot under-
stand why the streets cannot be maintained at the old 6 ton limit.
It was explained that residential streets are not designed or con-
structed to withstand more than a 3 ton load. Commercial and indus-
trial streets are built to withstand heavy loads, but the residential
streets are not.
Mr. Lee explained that the old signs which indicated a 6 ton limit
were not correct because the streets were never constructed to allow
this large a limit, and they did not conform to the ordinance that
was in effect at that time.
The action the Council is taking is a result of the advisory election
which took place concerning recreational vehicles and the majority of
the public voted in favor of allowing them to remain on the street.
The truck driver will still be allowed to make normal deliveries
and it was pointed out by the City Attorney that shopping centers
are located on private property and they cannot be cited while parked
on private property. The truck drivers may go to a restaurant or coffee
shop in a shopping center for lunch or coffee.
Don Reynolds, 2377 Bluebell Drive, indicated that trucks can be
ticketed if they park at the Holiday Inn to spend the night, or
even if they park there for dinner. They would not be ticketed if
they were in the parking lot, but the rigs are too large to park in
the parking lot so they are ticketed.
There was brief discussion concerning parking spaces available and
that anyone interested should contact Donald Bradley at City Hall.
It was explained that when the City conducted a survey of the truck
drivers/owners who might be interested in renting parking space, the
City received very little response. The City did not want to get
into the business of renting space, in competition with other private
enterprises involved in this type of business.
After discussion the Council concurred that staff input is needed
and the suggestion was made that the Community Development Director
report on the availability of truck parking facilities.
Mr. Halasz, 229 Garnet, stated that he would like clarification
concerning the intent of the resolution.
It was explained that the resolution is an attempt to define what
a "commercial vehicle" is.
The City Attorney commented that it may have been easier for people
to understand if the Council had modified the ordinance rather than
to adopt a resolution defining those commercial vehicles the ordi-
nance refers to. The resolution will not change the 3 ton weight
or anything else in the ordinance. The resolution speaks only to
the items in the resolution and affects only the commercial vehicles
mentioned in that ordinance.
Mr. Halasz stated that as he understands the ordinance, the owners
of recreational vehicles, in excess of 3 tons, cannot drive on City
streets into residential areas.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE ITEM WAS TABLED, PENDING INFORMATION TO COME FROM THE
STAFF.
CM-33-l23
September 27, 1976
REPORT RE REQUEST
FOR WATER FROM
CALIF. WATER SERVICE
The City received a letter from Mr. Ed Hutka, asking that the
proposed Roller King facilities be served by California Water
Service rather than by the City for economic reasons. If this
were allowed they would not have to build a water line to this
property because the motel next to the Roller King property is
presently serviced by California Water Service.
A report from Mr. Lee indicates that the Roller King property
is presently inside the adopted City Water Service area and he
would recommend that the request to change to California Water
Service be denied.
Mr. Lee illustrated the City Water Service area on a map and
explained the method of financing that has been arranged for
the development of water lines to serve the various areas.
It was noted that the motel was serviced by California Water
before the City adopted a water service area covering the area
along First Street.
There was discussion concerning benefit districts and the esti-
mated cost of pipeline construction, as well as the method of
reimbursement to the developer.
Mr. Lee mentioned that the requirement for the line along First
Street was a part of the parcel map, so the line would be in
that area and across Trevarno Road anyway.
Mr. Hutka, 1019 Angelica, asked why the benefit district is
to include only the properties on the south side of First
Street with none of the north properties sharing the cost
of the line.
Mr. Lee explained that the cost was prorated for properties
on the south side of First Street because it is anticipated
that future development will not be far off and development
to the north is not anticipated within a reasonable length of
time.
Mr. Hutka was asked if he would still pursue the application
for service from California Water Service, if he would not
have to bear the cost of the extension of the line.
Mr. Hutka stated that he would still request service from Calif-
ornia Water because they allow 50 ft. of line, free, to every
customer in an industrial area and each year they reimburse the
person who bears the line for 22% of the cost of the line.
Mr. Hutka is trying to cut costs for development and if he can
reduce the cost because of a reduction in cost to him for water,
he would prefer to be able to do so.
The Council discussed the possibility of including only the
Roller King property with the service from California Water
and what this would mean in terms of loss to the City.
Mr. Lee stated that each customer is important in making the
City's system more solvent and if the City allows one facility
to go with California Water, there will be other requests to
do the same. He stated that without looking at the matter in
detail he could not give an answer as to the dollar amount the
City would be losing in allowing California Water to serve this
customer.
CM-33-124
September 27, 1976
(Water Service/Roller King)
The comment was made that a roller skating rink would probably not
generate much use of water and the Council should consider the philoso-
phy of trying to attract more industry/commerce by providing develop-
ment with lower costs, if possible. The request does not seem to
be very unreasonable and perhaps the line could be straightened to
include the Roller King property in the California Water Service area.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION TO
REALIGN THE BOUNDARY TO INCLUDE THE PROPOSED ROLLER KING SITE,
WITHIN THE CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE AREA. MOTION WAS SECONDED
BY CM TURNER.
Discussion followed as to whether or not there should be a change
in the boundaries and how much loss of revenue this might mean to
the City.
Mr. Hutka stated that the City does not have money to extend lines
to commercial/industrial areas, but developers do not have money for
this purpose either. If the City insists that Roller King remain
with the City water, it is with the possibility of losing that
entire area of commercial/industrial development. The City would
gain more in revenue if the whole area were to develop as industrial
and commercial uses, than if it insists the area remain with City water
and it doesn't develop at all.
MOTION PASSED 3-2 (Cm Dah1backa and Mayor Tirse11 dissenting).
A resolution will be prepared by the staff.
RECESS
Mayor Tirse1l called for a brief recess after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present except
Cm Kamena (seated later).
REPORT RE AMES STREET/
RAYMOND ROAD PROPERTY
(Mr. Leo Manning)
Mr. Lee stated that if the Council is satisfied with extending service
to Ames Street/Raymond Road property (Mr. Leo Manning) an agreement
would be prepared and returned to the City Council along with a
resolution for consideration of the specifics.
Mr. Lee noted that if Mr. Manning wishes to develop all of the 20
acres, he would be required to extend the water line in front of his
property. If he does not comply with this the City could either with-
draw the service or limit the capacity that he would be allowed.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION AND AGREEMENT
TO BE BROUGHT BACK TO THE COUNCIL.
RESOLUTION RE HERITAGE
PRESERVATION DISTRICTS
The Council discussed Section 11..10 of the Ordinance relative to
Heritage Preservation District, concerning membership which calls
for membership comprised of the Design Review Committee members
and a member of the Livermore Heritage Guild. It was suggested
that there be a new committee established to eliminate people serving
on two committees at one time.
CM-33-125
September 27, 1976
(Heritage Preservation Dist.)
Mr. Musso explained that it was felt there would be very few
heritage items to be discussed and for this reason it was sug-
gested that the Design Review Committee members handle processing.
The Council concurred.
The Council agreed that there should be representation also
from the Beautification Committee, as well as those mentioned
or suggested as members.
On page 2 of the ordinance, there is reference to any change
and the Council agreed to a wording change in the ordinance
to read as follows:
"...any change in man made or natural features."
The staff was directed to prepare this item for first reading.
CM KAMENA WAS SEATED AT THIS TIME.
It was noted that to be designated as a heritage site, the item
has to go through the process of public hearing.
On page 5, Item "JII, of the Heritage Ordinance, should state
the city, county, state, and federal government, because there
is a federal register of historical sites.
ORDINANCE RE ANCESTRAL TREES
Mr. Musso commented that the inventory the City had concerning
ancestral trees will stand. The City will review it for the
purpose of redesignating trees with the proper public hearings.
A particular palm tree will be considered rather than to place
all palm trees in a category and then adopted as heritage trees.
Discussion took place concerning the financial burden of an
ancestral tree and what type of cost would be considered
reasonable, and whether or not this should be one of the
purpose clauses.
Cm Staley suggested a change in the wording for Finding 7, to
read as follows:
"...that while not unnecessarily imparing the value
and enjoyment of private property, or placing an
unreasonable financial burden thereon."
Page 1, 23.B.10.
The Council concurred with the change.
The item was referred to the staff for preparation of an ordi-
nance for first reading.
REPORT RE STUDY RE
I-580 SIGN LOCATIONS
The Planning Director reported that some planning studies have
been done concerning possible locations for placement of direc-
tional signs which would not be located in the freeway right of
way. Mr. Musso also illustrated four locations between Vasco
Road and Springtown Boulevard in which signs could be erected
if an encroachment permit would be allowed by the state.
CM-33-126
September 21, 1976
(I-580 Directional Signs)
There was brief discussion concerning the size of the sign being
considered for giving directions, as well as the setback, and
Mr. Musso was asked to provide information in a written report
as to the size of the sign, what would be placed on the sign, and
where a sign will be placed with respect to the interchange.
The City Attorney was also asked to check into the legalities of
providing the directional freeway signs, with respect to the Scenic
Highway Act, and in terms of interpreting such a sign as a billboard.
The signs are proposed for the City right of way area and not within
the freeway right of way.
The staff will report back to the Council on this item.
REPORT RE SEPTIC
TANK SITE LOCATIONS
The Director of Planning submitted a report concerning septic tank
site locations for developments approved by the Board of Supervisors.
The staff was directed to refer the report to Zone 7 as well as the
Regional Quality Control Board and posing specific questions, such
as are in the report. Items to be questioned would be: 1) Prolifera-
tion of septic tanks; and 2) Service of properties surrounding the City
of Livermore while it has limited sewer capacity, for residential
growth on septic tanks which will require urban services. What is
their position on these items?
It was noted that a subdivision map has been filed by Mrs. Wornow,
for 4 lots, and this will be before the P.C. and the Council later.
LIVERMORE ARCADE OFF-
STREET PARKING PROPOSAL
In discussing the problems of the off-street parking and traffic conges-
tion in the Safeway Store area (Livermore Arcade Shopping Center) the
manager of Safeway and their regional manager have agreed to a staff
suggestion to convert the six stalls in front of the store to two paral-
lel parking stalls to be labeled for use by handicapped or as a loading
and unloading zone. The staff believes that the two parallel parking
stalls indented from the roadway area would help to correct the current
congestion problem.
Discussion followed, concerning the proposed two stall diagonal parking,
and it was noted that perhaps this would not be a good place for handi-
capped people who need to fold wheelchairs, etc. It was also noted
that a parking and unloading zone may become a problem if trucks
decide to pull into the area to unload.
There was also consideration of the fact that six stalls may be removed
in an area that has inadequate parking.
Mr. Lee stated that the staff believes the conversion of the six slots
to indented parking for people to pullout of the path of traffic
to unload passengers would probably help considerably.
The suggestion was made to leave the six parking stalls and eliminate
left turns onto lip" Street.
CM-33-127
September 27, 1976
(Livermore Arcade
Parking Problems)
Mr. Lee commented that restricting left turns onto "P" Street
would create other problems for the public, and probably more
so than the present internal congestion problem.
It was suggested that perhaps the City could try using sand
bags on "P" Street to see if the proposed traffic pattern
for "P" Street, with no left turns would be a reasonable
solution before the City installs anything permanent.
It was concluded that if nothing else works, the City could
try the sand bags. In the meantime, the deletion of the
six parking stalls, with unloading/loading permitted, will
be tried to see if this will help at all.
REPORT RE PG&E CO.
METERING STATION
RELOCATION AGREE. AMEND.
Federal funding is available for the widening of stanley
Boulevard and it is necessary that the PG&E metering sta-
tion located on Isabel Avenue be relocated, and an amend-
ment to said agreement has been required.
It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution auth-
orizing execution of the amended agreement.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANI-
MOUS VOTE, THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED.
RESOLUTION NO. 237-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT
(Pacific Gas & Electric Company)
REPORT RE NEED FOR
SPECIAL STUDY SESSION
The City Manager reported that the Council has indicated interest
in considering several special subjects and it is recommended that
the Council hold a special study session to discuss these items.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE COUNCIL SET THE SPECIAL STUDY SESSION FOR THE 1st
MONDAY IN NOVEMBER TO DISCUSS THE FOLLOWING ITEMS:
1. Springtown Golf Course and its Advertising
2. Business License Ordinance Amendments
3. Administrative Surcharge
4. Airport Westerly Approach Purchase
5. Charter or General Law Cities
6. City Retirement Plan
CONSENT CALENDAR
Res. re Oakland
Scavenger Rates
The Council adopted a resolution authorizing execution of agree-
ment with Oakland Scavenger regarding the collection rate increase.
RESOLUTION NO. 238-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT
(Oakland Scavenger company)
CM-33-128
September 27, 1976
Res. re Application
for Medeiros Parkway
Project Funding
A resolution was adopted modifying the current application for
land and water conservation funds, citing the source of local
funding for the Medeiros Parkway Project.
RESOLUTION NO. 239-76
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE APPLICATION
FOR LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUNDS
MEDEIROS PARKWAY (STAGE 2) PROJECT AMEN-
DED RESOLUTION 116-76
Res. Appointing
Members to Committees
The following resolutions were adopted, appointing members to various
committees:
RESOLUTION NO. 240-76
A RESOLUTION REAPPOINTING MEMBER TO LIBRARY
BOARD (Mary Ellen Ludeman)
RESOLUTION NO. 241-76
A RESOLUTION REAPPOINTING MEMBER TO GOLF
COURSE GREENS COMMITTEE (Leo Meisner)
RESOLUTION NO. 242-76
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBER TO GOLF
COURSE GREENS COMMITTEE (Carlton Douglas)
RESOLUTION NO. 243-76
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBER TO NOISE
ABATEMENT COMMITTEE (Gilbert Moomau)
Res. Rejecting Claim
The Council adopted a resolution rejecting the claim of Carole Ann
Wilder.
RESOLUTION NO. 244-76
A RESOLUTION REJECTING CLAIM OF
CAROLE ANN WILDER
Report re Construction
Bids for Fire Station #4
The architectural plans and specifications are ready for bid on Fire
Station #4. It is recommended that the Council authorize solicitation
of bids for receipt on October 19.
The Council authorized solication of bids, as recommended.
Departmental Reports
The Council received a copy of the following Departmental Reports:
Airport - Activity - August; Financial - year ended 6/30/76
Building Inspection - August
CM-33-129
September 27, 1976
(Dept. Reports)
Finance Department - Financial Report of Revenue and
Expenditures - Year Ended 6/30/76
Golf Courses - Las Positas and Springtown - Year Ended
6/30/75 and 6/30/76
Pending Industrial and Commercial Inquiries
Mosquito Abatement District - July Activity
Municipal Court - July and August
Police and Pound Departments - August
Water Reclamation Plant - July and August
Payroll & Claims
There were 237 claims in the amount of $347,850.46, and 288
payroll warrants in the amount of $100,190.31 (as of 9/3/76),
and $100,172.84 (as of 9/17/76), for a total of $548,213.61,
dated September 21, 1976, and approved by the City Manager.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS ADOPTED.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Orchard Supply)
Mr. Musso reported that it is the intent of Orchard Supply to
open on the 1st of October, and they may be delinquent on some
of their improvements, such as landscaping, and they have agreed
to bond for these improvements.
The Council concurred with the proposal for bonding if the
improvements are not complete.
(Executive Session)
The City Attorney requested that the Council hold an executive
session after the meeting to discuss litigation.
(Holiday Inn Res.)
The City Clerk reported that the Council has received a copy of
the Holiday Inn sign resolution, and she should be notified if
anything is missing from the resolution.
(Clark Property)
Don Bradley,.. Assistant to the Gity Manager, ,r~por:fedth~t funds
have been budgeted for purchase of property (Clark, et a1) adja-
cent to the arroyo, south of Stanley Boulevard, for extension of
a parkway. Recently, the City was notified that the property has
been placed for tax sale and notification of the City's interest
must be placed with the County by October 1. Zone 7 may also be
interested because of some channel work they want to do; however,
they will not be meeting until after the deadline date.
CM-33-130
September 27, 1976
(re Clark Property)
The staff was asked to place some pressure on Zone 7 to assist in the
purchase of the property because the land they have needed in Livermore
has been dedicated to them and they have not had to put out money for
property purchase in Livermore.
The staff will notify the County of the City's interest in purchase.
(Multi-Service Center)
Mr. Bradley presented preliminary drawings of the Multi-Service Center.
The drawings will be coming to the Council after they have been reviewed
and discussed by some of the committees.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCILMEMBERS
(Arts Festival)
Cm Kamena reminded the Counci1members that the Cultural Arts Festival
will take place next weekend, October 1, 2, and 3.
(Public Safety Committee)
Cm Turner reported that the Public Safety Committee will be meeting
with Cm Staley and himself at 9:00 a.m. at L10yds Bank, on September 29.
He will report back to the Council concerning the outcome.
(Airport Advisory
Committee Bylaws)
Mayor Tirse11 asked that a meeting be held at 7:00 p.m. with the
Airport Advisory Committee, on October 25th, to discuss their bylaws.
The Council concurred.
(Springtown Agreement)
Mayor Tirse11 stated that she has been contacted about the Spring-
town agreement and she would like to know when this is scheduled
for discussion.
It was noted that this is one of the items to be discussed in the
study session on November 1st.
After brief discussion the Council agreed to remove this item from
the study session and place it on the October 11th agenda.
(Sewer Grant Application)
Mayor Tirse1l asked for a status report concerning the sewer grant
application and Mr. Lee explained what has happened to the grant.
The City has been turned down this year but it is not too late for
next year.
ORD. RE MUNI. CODE
AMEND. RE CATV PAY-
MENTS TO CITY
The staff was directed to find out from the Finance Director if
the Showtime Company needs a separate business license to sell
this service along with CATV service, and if this would alter
CM-33-131
September 27, 1976
(CATV Agreement)
the City's franchise agreement with CATV. Also, this may
entitle the City to revenues reported in their gross as a
result of that extra payment.
It was noted that the City of Newark is conducting an investi-
gation on this matter and the staff might contact the City
Manager of Newark as well as their City Attorney.
A report will be coming back to the Council from the staff con-
cerning these questions.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT RELATIVE TO CATV PAYMENTS
TO THE CITY, WAS ADOPTED.
ORDINANCE NO. 900
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 23.5, RELATING
TO PAYMENTS TO CITY, FILING OF STATEMENTS
AND ACCESS TO RECORDS, OF CHAPTER 23, RE-
LATING TO TELEVISION COMMUNITY ANTENNA SYSTEM,
OF THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 1959.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the City Council,
Mayor Tirse11 adjourned the meeting at 11:25 p.m. to an execu-
tive session to discuss litigation.
APPROVE
~~
' fn
. Mayor
ATTEST
~aLL
J City Clerk
Livermore, California
CM-33-132
Regular Meeting of October 4, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
Monday, October 4, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39
South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at
8:05 p.m. with Mayor Tirsel1 presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Dah1backa, Staley and Mayor Tirse11
Absent: Cm Kamena (ill); Cm Turner (Excused--Business)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirse11 led the Counci1members as well as those present in the
audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES 9/?-0/76
P. 1l5, before the first paragraph, add a sentence to read as
follows: Mayor Tirse11 made the following rough calculations
which excluded industrial connections.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 20, 1976, WERE
APPROVED AS CORRECTED.
OPEN FORUM
Mayor Tirsel1 invited people to speak during the Open Forum; however,
no comments were made by the audience.
LETTER OF RESIGNATION
The Council received a letter from Robert Selden indicating his
intention to retire from the Planning Commission upon completion
of his current term.
The staff was asked to prepare an appropriate proclamation to be
presented to Mr. Selden and to advertise for applicants to fill
the seat vacated by Mr. Selden. The closing date for applications
will be October 22nd at 5:00 p.m.
The Council then briefly discussed the interview process and asked
that this item be placed on the agenda for discussion next week.
COMMUNICATION FROM
OAKLAND SCAVENGER RE
CITY QUESTIONNAIRE
The City received a letter from Oakland Scavanger in response to
the questions proposed for the questionnaire to residents concerning
what they would like in the way of garbage pickup.
The City Manager explained that Oakland Scavenger plans to implement
a test program in the City which will utilize curbside pickup service,
with plastic bags, for two months. Very exacting records will be kept
of the experience and from this information the public can be told
what the cost would be. The questionnaire will then follow to de-
termine if this would be the preference of the citizens.
Lois Hill, from the Recycling Center, stated that when people are
asked if they would be willing to separate glass and paper, they
should be informed that this will be picked up by someone.
CM-33-l33
October 4, 1976
(re Garbage Service)
Mrs. Hill added that in Davis the paper separation is mandatory
and there have been many complaints from the public. People from
the recycling center at Davis and the garbage collection people
indicated that the mandatory separation had caused much anguish.
She then read a letter from the EPA which indicated that most
garbage separation"programs are voluntary with request for citizen
support. Mrs. Hill agreed with the question asking if.tw~ can,
service should cost twice as much as one can service.
Discussion followed concerning the possibility of twice a week
pickup and whether or not this would help combat the problem
of flies. In conclusion the Council agreed that this would prob-
ably not help significantly.
Jerry Maloney, 367 Estates Street, stated that he appreciates
the twice weekly garbage pickup because he has grass clippings
that he needs to dispose of. Most of his neighbors agree that
the twice weekly service is helpful.
COMMUNICATION FROM CORPS
OF ENGINEERS RE ALAMEDA
CREEK URBAN STUDY PLAN
A letter of response to questions concerning the Alameda Creek
Urban Study Plan, was received from the Corps of Engineers.
The staff was ,asked that a copy of the letter be sent to Archer
Futch, of the Zone 7 Board.
COMMUNICATION RE SUG-
GESTION FOR A MODERN
SOll.L DISCOTHEQUE
A letter was received from Sharon Holding, former Granada High
School graduate, suggesting that the City refurbish an old
building for a modern~sou1 discotheque to entertain people
from 16-25 years of age.
The staff was asked to refer the letter to LARPD and to send
a letter of response to Ms. Holding.
REPORT RE DONATION OF
MOTORCYCLE TO POLICE DEPT.
The City Manager reported that as an expression of gratitude
to the Police Department for some recent police service, Mr.
Robert Wing would like to donate a Honda 90 motorcycle, now
owned by him, to the Police Department. The motorcycle would
be useful in policing some of the off-street remote areas such
as the arroyos and it is recommended that the Council adopt a
motion accepting the donation with an expression of gratitude
to Mr. Wing.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA, AND BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE COUNCIL ACCEPTED THE OFFER, AS RECOMMENDED.
REPORT RE REWARDS FOR
REPORTS OF VANDALISM
The City Manager submitted a written report to the Council con-
cerning a possible public reward program for information regarding
CM-33-134
October 4, 1976
(Vandalism)
vandalism. It is estimated that the amount of damage to City property
amounts to $15,600 per year, and does not include damage sustained by
LARPD or the School District, who report that the problem is severe
and on the rise.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE REPORT WAS REFERRED TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THE HOUSING
AUTHORITY.
Lois Hill commented that a student from San Jose indicated that a
reporting program has been very effective in that city.
Jerry Maloney, representing the Livermore Housing Authority, stated
that the majority of the board members are interested in this problem
and they would like to be invited to attend any discussion concerning
this matter.
The Council agreed to send the suggested program to the Housing Author-
ity Board.
REPORT RE REQUEST FOR
LIMITED PARKING ZONE
The Director of Public Works reported that merchants at the southwest
corner of First Street and McLeod, have requested that there be a
one-hour parking zone established along both sides of McLeod begin-
ing at First Street, and extending 150 ft. south.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A PARKING ZONE FOR THIS AREA WAS
ADOPTED.
RESOLUTION NO. 245-76
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. l2~-72r
AS AMENDED, RELATED TO RESTRICTED PARKING
ZONES, BY THE ADDITION OF A ONE-HOUR PARKING
ZONE, TO WIT, BOTH SIDES OF MCLEOD STREET FROM
FIRST STREET 150 FT. SOUTH, CITY OF LIVERMORE.
REPORT RE TENTATIVE
TRACT 3758 (Dogwood Park)
A report from the Planning Commission concerning Tentative Tract 37!?8
(Dogwood Park site) was submitted to the Council recommending that
the tentative map be approved with certain conditions.
The staff has prepared a subdivison design to facilitate its sale
and it is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution approving
the tentative map; and a resolution authorizing formal solicitation
of bids for the purchase of the subject acreage.
Mr. Musso illustrated and explained the map design for the property,
and then discussed the plans with the Council.
It was suggested that perhaps the sale of eight lots would make
the property easier to sell. This was followed by discussion of
lot splitting, and sewer connections allowed for the property.
Details for the sale of lots were postponed until October 12.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE COUNCIL ADOPTED A RESOLUTION APPROVING TRACT MAP 3758.
RESOLUTION NO. 246-76
A RESOLUTION APPROVING TENTATIVE SUB-
DIVISION MAP (City of Livermore)
CM-33-j.35
October 4, 1976
REPORT RE HEALTH INS.
FOR PART-TIME EMPLOYEES
A written report concerning part-time employee insurance benefits,
was submitted by the Assistant to the City Manager. In summary
he has recommended that group health insurance coverage not be
extended to part-time employees.
It was noted that the Counci1members may be included in the City
health insurance program but by definition are not considered
"employees", according to state statute.
Item was noted for filing and no Council action was taken.
DISC. RE COMMUNICATION
CONCERNING DISCOTHEQUE
One member of the audience commented that she would like the
Council to discuss the item concerning the suggestion made
by Sharon Holding for a discotheque in Livermore.
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE COUNCIL RETURNED TO ITEM 2.4 ON THE
AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION.
It was explained that the City does not purchase or operate
recreational facilities and this is the reason the item was
referred to LARPD.
PROPOSED PROJECTS TO
BE FUNDED UNDER PUB.
WORKS EMPLOYMENT ACT
The City Manager reported that the staff is preparing the requi-
site federal applications for projects that would qualify under
the Public Works Employment Act program, which would allow for
100% funding. The projects are as follows:
1. Administration Building
2. First Street Overhead Structure
3. Patterson Pass Reservoir
4. Murrieta Boulevard Underpass
CM STALEY MOVED TO ADOPT THE ABOVE LIST FOR FILING OF APPLICATION.
MOTION SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
The City Manager commented that the applications are very com-
plex, intricate, thick, and a great deal of information is requir-
ed. All of this cannot be done in-house - technical information
is needed which is available only from our consultant sources. He
would request permission to go to the architectural firm retained
for the administration building and ask for their assistance. They
have agreed to help if the Council will approve. It is estimated
that the consultants would spend 60-70 hours. It is a matter of
having assistance and submitting an application, or not submitting
an application at all. There is a very slim chance that the City
might be awarded funding and, reportedly, those who get their appli-
cations in first will have a head start. The essence of the pro-
gram is getting people to begin work as soon as possible.
MOTION WAS WITHDRAWN.
CM STALEY MOVED THAT THE CITY SUBMIT ONLY THE APPLICATION FOR
THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING AND THE FIRST STREET OVERPASS.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
CM-33-136
October 4, 1976
(Federal Grant Projects)
It was explained by the City Manager that the administration building
is very important and that the City may also receive funding on the
First Street overhead because the City owns the property, the design
work has been done, and the City could begin in 90 days with construc-
tion. The state of readiness is very important in getting funding -
a project must be ready for commencement 90 days from the date of
approval of the funding.
A resolution will be prepared by the staff authorizing the expenditure
of funds for the preparation of application material for next week's
Consent Calendar.
REPORT RE GRANT DEED
- STANDARD OIL COMPANY
A report from the City Attorney's office indicates that as part of
the Grade Separation Project, land was purchased from Standard Oil
Company. The deed contained a gas and oil reservation but the City
had requested provision of clear title. Months have passed and the City
has been unsuccessful in getting clear title and the only alternatives
would be to accept title with the reservation or to file suit against
Standard Oil for breach of contract. Since the parcel is small and
the mineral rights would probably not be significant, it is recommended
that the City accept the deed containing the reservation.
MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO ACCEPT THE DEED CONTAINING THE RESERVATION,
SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
The Council discussed the alternatives and whether or not the deed
should be accepted with the reservations. Cm Staley expressed concern
concerning damages which might accrue because of breach of contract,
whether or not this is marketable title, and reservations in deeds.
The City Attorney felt it would not be worthwhile to file a suit
against Standard Oil, because the mineral value is considered nominal.
MOTION PASSED 2-1 (Cm Staley dissenting) .
REPORT RE RELEASE
OF CONTRACT MONIES
(Water Rec. Plant)
The Public Works Director submitted a report to the Council con-
cerning the release of funds to C. Norman Peterson Company, for
the water reclamation plant, Phase III Project. The contractor
has requested that retention of funds be reduced to an amount
sufficient to cover uncompleted work and it is recommended that
the Council adopt a resolution authorizing the release of funds.
CM STALEY MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION, AS RECOMMENDED BY THE
STAFF. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 247-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING RELEASE
OF FUNDS (C. Norman Peterson Co.)
REQUEST FOR WAIVER
OF FEES - LARPD
The City has a request from LARPD for waiving of fees pertaining to
the installation of lights at the Robertson Park stadium. The
fees amount to $136 and it is recommended that the Council adopt
a motion waiving the fees.
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE FEES WERE WAIVED.
CM-33-137
October 4, 1976
CONSENT CALENDAR
Report - P.C.
Summary of Action
The Council received the Summary of Action from the P.C. meeting
of September 28th which was noted for filing.
Res. - Grade Separa-
tion Bikepath Rail
The Council adopted a resolution authorizing the filing of a
Notice of Completion for the grade separation bikepath railings
installed on lip" Street,and North Livermore Avenue underpasses.
RESOLUTION NO. 248-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE DIRECTOR OF
PUBLIC WORKS TO RECORD NOTICE OF COMPLETION RE GRADE
SEPARATION BIKEPATH RAILING
Res. Denying Rezoning
App. - Trevino/Herman
A resolution was adopted denying the rezoning of property located
at the corner of North Livermore and Chestnut Street. The Council
took action denying the rezoning on September 20, 1976.
RESOLUTION NO. 249-76
A RESOLUTION DENYING REQUEST FOR REZONING
(Noe S. Trevino)
Res. Auth Exec. of
Agree. w/County re
Housing & Community
Deve1opmen1; Act
The Council adopted a resolution authorizing an execution of agree-
ment with the County concerning Community Development Block Grant
Funds.
RESOLUTION NO. 250-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
AGREEMENT - COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
Res. Granting Right
of Entry (Castle & Cooke)
- Value Giaftt Property
A resolution was adopted granting a right of entry permit to
Castle & Cooke (Value Giant property) which is necessary in
exchange of property between the City and Castle & Cooke as
part of the Railroad Relocation Project.
RESOLUTION NO. 251-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING RIGHT-OF-ENTRY
(Castle & Cooke)
CM-33-l38
October 4, 1976
Payroll & Claims
There were 103 claims in the amount of $89,657.53, dated Sept. 29,
1976, and approved by the Director of Finance.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Wornow Property)
Mr. Musso reported that the Wornow property (behind the portola hill)
was approved for a subdivision of four lots with septic tanks, last
Friday. In speaking with the Assistant City Attorney concerning
this matter he indicated that the City can appeal the approval of
the subdivision but the City will have to make sure there are sufficient
grounds for an appeal. It would be difficult to say there is a health
problem when the County Health Department has indicated there is not
a health problem involved.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCILMEMBERS
(League Conference)
Cm Staley commented that he would agree with the request by the City
Clerk to ask that there be a separation of departments at the League
of California Cities convention. The Mayor indicated that she would
vote in favor of this suggestion.
(Traffic Survey)
Cm Staley asked for Council discussion concerning traffic surveys
to justify posted speed limits; a traffic survey for the purpose
of allowing speed monitored by radar; and a discussion concerning
the problems of the color of the police cars in traffic enforcement.
Commissioner's Regulations require the traffic enforcement cars to
be either black or black and white. It is true that the City uses
the cars for purposes other than traffic control, but the Council
should discuss these items.
The staff was directed to prepare a report as to what streets are
currently being surveyed, which streets should be surveyed, and
whether the surveys support the speed limits posted. Also, is
there any problem with enforcement because of internal regulations
and is the City using radar in any area that has not been surveyed.
(Sign Ordinance)
Mayor Tirse11 asked for a report from the City Attorney concerning
signs on property within 500 ft. of a freeway interchange.
CM-33-l39
October 4, 1976
(Airport Lane Use
Commission)
Mayor Tirse11 reported that John Shirley has resigned from the
Airport Land Use Commission and he should be thanked for his
time served, on behalf of the City, by the adoption of a resolu-
tion. It was also suggested that the City propose a replacement.
The Council concurred that if Mr. Bill Bennett would be interested
he would be an excellent spokesman to serve on the Commission.
The staff was directed to contact Supervisor Murphy to recom-
mend Mr. Bennett as a member of the Airport Land Use Commission.
CITY MANAGER
STATUS REPORT
Telephone Company Lines
The Telephone Company is beginning to install the telephone ducts
along East Avenue.
Sunset Development Co.
Sunset Development Company has taken out building permits for the
professional office buildings to be developed at the corner of
Concannon and Holmes Street. They have also paid their share of
the traffic signal costs.
Exxon Corner Beautification
The landscaping for the beautification project on the Exxon property,
at the corner of Murrieta and Porto1a, is complete.
Underpass Handrails
The underpass handrails on "P" Street and North Livermore Avenue
have been completed and it would be nice to get the Council's opin-
ion concerning the handrails and the landscaping of the underpasses.
Multi-Service Center
The design for the Multi-Service Center building has been processed
through several parties. Invitations were sent to approximately
two dozen civic organizations that might have an interest in the
building and its eventual use. The architects plan to go to the
next stage in the design, which would be the development design
stage. All of this will be coming to the Council for comment.
Insurance Service Office
The Insurance Service Office will soon be appraising the City
as to its fire classification. This is very critical because
70-80% of the fire underwriters set their rates from the clas-
sification. The City has been trying to get them to wait on
the' appraisal until Fire Station *4 is complete and operational,
but they can wait no longer. The appraisal is supposed to be
done every 10 years and the last time the City was appraised
was in 1963. They will take into account that Fire Station *4
will be under construction. The appraisal will be done about
the middle of November and the City hopes that the present
4-A classification can be retained.
CM-33-140
October 4, 1976
(re Insurance - Fire)
It was noted that if the next ballot election passes allowing
the City to tax for safety purposes, the insurance people can
be informed of this and of the fact that the City will be increas-
ing its forces.
REPORT RE NEED FOR ADJOURNMENT
SPE
Mayor Tirse1l adjourned the meeting at 9:20 to an executive session
to discuss litigation.
APPROVE
-~ --m
~.
-'l J. J.f
ayor
ATTEST
Regular Meeting of October 12, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
October 12, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m.
with Mayor Tirse1l presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Absent:
Cm Kamena, Turner, Sta~ey and Mayor Tirsel1
Cm Dah1backa (t<20~ ..--e.Wv) .y(l~ikrt...-
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirse11 led the Counci1members as well as those present in the
audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES - 9/27/76
P. 121, insert a new paragraph between paragraph 3 and 4 under the
BART Extension discussion, to read as follows:
The argument was made that 1/3 of the population is located in the
Granada Shopping Center area, within walking distance, and that the
BART representative has indicated the BART people would be willing to
consider a stop in that area. If the need is there then perhaps the
BART schedule could be adjusted or another bus could be added.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 27, 1976, WERE
APPROVED, AS AMENDED.
CM DAHLBACKA SEATED AT THIS TIME.
CM-33-14l
October l2, 1976
OPEN FORUM
(Agenda Format)
Jerry Wi1verding, 4886 Primrose Lane, stated that em Turner has
suggested that the Council reverse the format of the Agenda to
have Matters Initiated towards the first of the meeting rather
than at the end. He would agree with this suggestion and he
knows that there are many people in town who would also favor
the suggestion. He would suggest the following format:
Call to Order - Roll Call - Pledge of Allegiance
Minutes Approval
City Manager's Status Report
Matters Initiated
Open Forum
This type of format would allow the people from the audience
to discuss items mentioned by the City Manager or the Council.
The Council discussed the suggestion briefly and it was men-
tioned that there is no real answer in preparing an agenda
format that would satisfy everyone. The majority of the
Council felt that the present format is working out as well
as any format that has been tried.
(Dedication of
Mill Square)
Linda Galas, representing the Mill Square Merchants Association,
invited Mayor Tirse1l, members of the Council, its staff and all
City employees, to celebrate in the dedication of Mill Square
and Lizzie Oliver fountain on Saturday, October 23, at noon.
She asked that people attend in turn of the century attire to
enjoy a celebration which will include silent movies, music,
street artists, food and commodities at turn of the centruy
prices. They would be happy if the Council would proclaim the
week of October 18 thru 23rd, as Mill Square Week. They would
also like the adoption of a resolution closing First Street to
through traffic, between "1." Street and Railroad Avenue between
11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. on that day, in the interest of pedestri-
an safety and to abate the noise that could otherwise make dedica-
tion unpleasant.
SPECIAL ITEM - PRESENTA-
TION OF FESTIVAL AWARDS
Linda Heiner, Chairman of the Festival '76 event, sponsored
by the Livermore Cultural Arts Council, presented two purchase
awards tQ__~~ge City and thanked the City for the $300 support.
The $300~liows the Committee to increase the award money given
for the art show and Mrs. Heiner encouraged the City to support
the festival again next year.
SPECIAL ITEM - SPRINGTOWN
GOLF COURSE FACILITIES
During the budget session the Council decided to reconsider the
Springtown Golf Course facility and its continuance as a munici-
pal enterprise. The Springtown Association and other people have
been asked to consider suggestions for increasing player accom-
modation and recommendations that might help ease the financial
burden of the golf course.
CM-33-142
October 12, 1976
(Springtown Golf Course)
The Director of Public Works has prepared material on this item as
well as a proposed agreement form, and it is suggested that after
it has been reviewed by the City Attorney, it be forwarded to the
Springtown Association for their formal response.
The point was made that during budget session it was brought to the
attention of the Council that the City is facing a deficit at the '~'A~?~
Spr~ngtown GOlf.. Course and that numerous people have ~a~~ PP~3 ~alls
ask1ng that ~~~€~ be cut from the budget to prov1deAfar po11ce
and fire protection. The Council felt the City could not continue
to operate two golf courses and to list the Springtown Golf Course
for sale or to allow it to go fallow.
The Springtown Golf Course Association has been working with Mr. Lee
in the hope of saving Springtown and they submitted a proposal to
the City the end of July. This proposal will be discussed this evening.
It was noted that the City has never discussed taking over the opera-
tions of the Springtown Association or any of their facilities. The
recreation in Livermore in handled by LARPD.
The recommendations made by the Director of Public Works, at the
end of his report, are as follows:
1) Approve the agreement, approximately as presented by the
Springtown Association.
a) Set a time of 20 years for the occupancy of the Arts
and Crafts building by the Springtown Association.
2) Authorize expenditure of up to $19,000 for the improve-
ments of the Pro-shop/Clubhouse.
3) Authorize a selection process for a Golf Professional,
subject to the Springtown Association's approval of
the agreement.
4) Authorize the draft of a revision to the Greens Committee
By-Laws to include two representatives.
~, ~ce.<----L
Mr. Lee explained that the 20 year limit he is suggesting is for
the occupancy of part of the Arts and Crafts building, by the
Springtown Association. He believes there should be a termination
of the occupancy of that portion of the building.
Mr. Lee then used a color coded chart to explain the proposals he
has made and those which have been made by the Springtown Association.
The concern was raised as to whether the suggestions made by Mr. Lee
would work in light of the large deficit in the City budget and the
suggestion to spend an additional $19,000 on the golf course.
The golf course has shown a downward trend since the beginning and
perhaps the City shouldn't continue to spend money for the course.
Mr. Lee explained that the City has a tremendous investment in the
golf course and it does provide recreational facilities for a segment
of the community, which is the older citizens. LARPD does not provide
recreation for the age group that plays golf at the Springtown golf
course. He believes that the golf course can become self-supporting.
Even with the lack of facilities at Springtown, it is getting almost
half the number of plays as the Las positas Golf Course. He stated
further that he is optomistic that the golf course could become se1f-
supporting within a couple of years. If there are 20,000 rounds being
played with no facilities, there would probably be at least 25,000
rounds played if there is a clubhouse, and facilities.
CM-33-l43
October 12, 1976
(Springtown Golf Course)
The suggestion was made to prepare a cash flow statement to
project over a number of years, including the proposed improve-
ments and all of the costs, for the golf course, to show the
point at which time the golf course might be expected to be
self-supporting. The statement should be prepared using fac-
tual information.
Mr. Lee indicated that he could provide such a statement and
that from this information the City should see that with
25,000-27,000 rounds of golf played at the golf course it
could be self-supporting.
It was noted that in 1973 Don Bradley wrote a memorandum to
Mr. Parness explaining why the golf course should be purchased,
etc. The Council would like a copy of the memorandum along
with the cash flow statement from Mr. Lee.
It was suggested that the Council review the agreement, this
evening, to see if the Council agrees with it, in principle,
subject to budgetary concerns.
The Council reviewed the agreement (blue), page by page, and
moved to page 3, item (10).
Mr. Parness felt the wording in this item binds the hands of
the City for the location of a driving range from where it
was originally planned, which would be outside of the bounds
of the property to be donated by the Springtown Association,
by virtue of this agreement. He suggested that the following
wording be adopted:
(10)".............Any decision on the location and size of
the driving range, if contained upon any or all of the
property to be donated by the Association as herein
described, shall be made with the mutual consent of
the City and the Association."
Council concurred with this suggested wording.
Mr. Parness felt item (13) is not worded clearly enough to define
all that is to be taken into account. The implication is that
another golf pro will be retained with a separate contractual
arrangement entered into between the City and the golf pro,
separate from Las Positas. Perhaps this is what will happen,
but possibly not. In his opinion, the City should retain the
option of considering the retention of the Las positas Golf
Pro staff, if the staff meets the criteria the Council wishes
to establish. The City may not wish to do this, but the way
item (13) is worded, the City is precluded from making an agree-
ment with the golf pro at Las Positas.
The Council felt that the contractual relationship between Las
positas and Springtown should be separate as to what the duties
and obligations are but there is no reason why this couldn't be
done by the same organization or entity.
The concern was raised that the two golf courses may~ompett7
with each other for golf rounds. ~~f)
It was explained that the two courses should be com~~~rY
and if professional services are provided for each gol course,
individually, as needed, one partnership or entity, etc., could
be contracted with.
CM-33-l44
October 12, 1976
(Springtown Golf Course)
Mr. Lee explained that the Springtown people wanted Item (13) worded
as it is because they were concerned that the Las positas Golf Course
is twice as big as the one at Springtown and if the same person were
to manage both courses the interest would be where the economic well-
being is most likely. This could very possibly be the Las positas
Golf Course. They felt these are two different courses with different
types of people and they should have different programs.
Discussion followed as to whether the City Manager should be allowed
to negotiate under one contract, or provide for a professional at
each golf course. It was the concensus that the criteria for a
good program for both courses is what is wanted and the City Manager
was instructed to provide wording which would fulfill the needs of
both courses in the way of programs and services.
The Council discussed the proposal for a 20 year occupancy agreement,
and it was felt that the City cannot tell what is going to happen
over the next few years and whether the City will want use of the
entire building or not (Section 6); therefore this section should
allow the City some flexibility. The City Attorney was asked to
review the wording to determine if the needed flexibility is
provided for.
The discussion and recommendations up to this point, with respect
to the agreement, are to be forwarded to the staff and the Spring-
town Golf Committee.
The Council returned to the recommendations made by the Director of
Public Works (noted on page 3 of these minutes), and continued the
recommendations of 2) and 3), pending more information from the
staff.
Mr. Lee explained that Item 4) would be contingent upon entering
into the agreement.
Jerry Atwell, 134 Amber Way, Chairman of the Greens Committee, stated
that he would oppose the last recommendation made by Mr. Lee (Item 4)
concerning a revision of the Greens Committee by-laws. It was pointed
out that any change in the by-laws should insure that at least one
member of the Greens Committee is someone who plays on the Springtown
Golf Course, as well as at least one person who plays on the Las positas
Golf Course. The intent is to have representation from people who play
at both courses on a regular basis.
This item was also referred to the staff, with direction to obtain
a response from the Golf Committee on this recommendation.
There was discussion concerning the storage area, which is one
of the major items of contention - the other contention was the
driving range, which has already been discussed. The Golf Committee
has agreed to let the City have the breezeway area to enclose, which
Mr. Lee indicates will probably not be large enough for a storage area.
It was mentioned that perhaps there is a possibility of expanding
the storage area, if needed, in the future. If there is not suf-
ficient storage it may mean that things that should be stored will
be sitting around giving the golf course a cluttered appearance.
It was suggested that the staff look for other options for storage
and discuss this problem with the Greens Committee, keeping the
proposal by Mr. Lee in mind. The City doesn't want items left
outside that should be stored, and this should be pointed out.
CM-33-145
October 12, 1976
(Springtown Golf Course)
It was mentioned also that if the coffee shop were to serve beer
it would allow more flexibility as far as what people may wish to
purchase and this might mean that there would be more business
from the coffee shop. Perhaps the question of the sale of beer
should be submitted to the Committee and the Springtown Associa-
tion to find out if there would be any objection to the sale of
beer on the premises.
The item was referred to the staff.
RECESS
Mayor Tirsel1 called for a five minute recess after which the
Council meeting resumed with all members of the Council present.
CITY OF WALNUT RESOLU-
TION RE SALES TAX REVENUE
The Council received a copy of a resolution adopted by the City
of Walnut, concerning the redistribution of sales tax revenues
on the basis of population.
There was brief discussion concerning distribution of sales tax
with the suggestion that perhaps a 50-50 split with half the
tax allocated on the basis of per capita income and the other
half on the basis of population might be more equitable, but
perhaps the resolution should be supported to the extent of
covering regional shopping facilities.
The staff was asked to express the Council's support of the
resolution with letters sent to our legislators and the League.
COMMUNICATION RE SOLID
WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD
The City received notice of the appointment of Joseph Bort, as
the County representative to the Solid Waste Management Board.
The City was asked to also select a representative and an al-
ternate to be present at the November 4th meeting.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, CM DAHLBACKA WAS SELECTED AS THE REPRESENTATIVE WITH
MAYOR TIRSELL AS THE ALTERNATE.
COMMENTS FROM ENERGY
COMMITTEE RE STATE PROP. #3 & #12
The Energy Committee expressed support for any concept which
will conserve energy, but did not make specific comments with
respect to the state propositions.
MOTION RE TRACT 3758
- DOGWOOD PARK SITE
During previous Council discussion, the Council approved the
tentative tract map for Tract 3758 (Dogwood Park site), and
a report will be given by the City Attorney concerning the
allowance of six or eight sewer connections for the property.
ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE COUNCIL AUTHORIZED SOLICITATION OF BIDS FOR SALE OF
THE LAND.
CM-33-146
October l2, 1976
(Tract 3758)
The City Attorney stated that the number of sewer connections to be
allowed (six or eight) will depend on how the Council approaches the
issue, and how the package is put together, which he then explained.
There are six lots, two of which are very large and could be split,
allowing for eight connections. This would not be inconsistent with
what the Council has done in the past.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO ALLOW THE SPLITTING OF THE TWO LARGE LOTS, ALLOWING
FOR EIGHT SEWER CONNECTIONS FOR THE PROPERTY, IN REFERENCE TO THE
SEWER POLICY. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
Mr. Parness stated that the staff has asked the Council to consider
allowing two types of bids: 1) bulk acreage; and 2) one or more lot
purchasers, based upon the tentative subdivision map which has been
approved. He would like to suggest a third alternative, which would
be to allow receiving construction bids for installation of public
works improvements. The bids could be received and held in abeyance
pending the receipt of bids on improved lots.
The Council concurred with the suggestion for the third alternative,
and some concern was raised with respect to offering it for bulk
acreage other than as a last alternative.
It was the consensus of the Council to allow all three alternatives.
RESOLUTIONS RE CLOSURE
OF FRONTAGE - LIVERMORE
CAR WASH ON FIRST STREET
The City Attorney explained the negotiations that have taken place
concerning the property along First Street in the area of the Liver-
more Car Wash. The closure of the frontage property is necessary
because of the First Street Overhead Project and will cost the City
approximately $43,000. This sum will be assigned to the First Street
Overhead Project and 90% of this cost will be paid by the state/rail-
road funds, as part of the project.
Mr. Lee illustrated the location of the fence to be erected in front
of the property, the paved area, and other improvements along the
car wash property.
ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
ALL THREE RESOLUTIONS CONCERNING THE CAR WASH WERE ADOPTED.
RESOLUTION NO. 252-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION
OF AGREEMENT (Livermore Car Wash)
RESOLUTION NO. 253-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
CONTRACT AND PURCHASE OF REAL PROPERTY
RESOLUTION NO. 254-7~
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
CONTRACT AND PURCHASE OF REAL PROPERTY
(California Water Service)
CM-33-147
October 12, 1976
REPORT RE RUBBISH COL-
LECTION TEST PLAN
The Livermore Disposal Company is .p1anning to implement a pilot
program for curbside, bag pickup, for the purpose of studying
the cost and what the experience might indicate for this type
of service. Apparently the cost of bags is quite high, but the
study has been done in Fremont and the residents were overwhelm-
ingly in favor of this type of pickup. However, the City of Fre-
mont decided not to offer this type of pickup because of environ-
mental concerns. At this time there may be no cost saving to the
customer, and this is something that should be pointed out in the
ssurvey that Livermore Disposal intends to conduct.
Mr. Alberti explained that the EPA has approved the method of
bag collection, but this would not necessarily mean a savings
to the customer. The one can customer might benefit from this
type of service, but it would not be less for someone with two
can service.
There was mention of the fact that the pilot program will take
place during the rainy season and this might make a difference
in the results of the study. Also, the City won't know how
this type of service might affect the fly problem that is
experienced during the summer months.
CM TURNER MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE GARBAGE COMPANY TO CONDUCT
THE TEST PLAN, AS PROPOSED. MOTION SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
Dick Christmas, 394 Pearl Drive, stated that he would object
to having to purchase bags and placing them out on the1curb be-
cause the garbage rates are so high.
It was explained that the City asked that a pilot program be
implemented to see if it could result in a cost savings be-
cause pickup service could be included in the cost of the
bag. customers wouldn't be billed for pickup - they would
be charged only for the cost of those bags purchased. If
the garbage company could eliminate the billing process it
might result in enough savings to the company to allow a
cost savings to the customer.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE FIRST STREET
WIDENING PROJECT
A report from the Director of Public Works indicates that there
is a growing concern over operational problems along First Street
from Junction Avenue to I-580 and the staff would like to recom-
mend that a letter be sent to the California Transportation
Agency requesting them to initiate the necessary studies and
corrective measures concerning roadway width and bicycle facili-
ties.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO SEND SUCH A LETTER TO CAL-TRANS.
It was noted that Mr. Halyak is concerned as to whether this
would affect his property and Mr. Lee explained that this act-
ion would not. The widening is planned from Scott Street on
out to I-580. When it is determined that First Street will
be widened, then the other properties would be affected.
CM-33-148
October 12, 1976
REPORT RE LAVWMA JOINT
POWERS AGREMEENT CHANGES
LAVWMA has approved the draft of the Joint Powers Agreement to be
referred to the signatory agencies. The City has received a copy
of the changes, and if there are no objections, a final draft
agreement will be prepared for formal adoption by each agency. It
was noted that the LAVWMA Board would like the City to approve the
amendments, prior to the November election.
There was some question as to why the agreement has to be adopted
prior to the election, which was followed by discussion.
Concern was expressed regarding the wording of the changes as they
relate to the full agreement.
It was decided that the item should be continued until the next
regular Council meeting so that the Counci1members may have the
opportunity to compare the latest draft with the original Joint
Powers Agreement.
P.C. REPORT RE DENIAL
OF CUP (Wm. Ferrell)
A report was submitted to the Council by the P.C. concerning reasons
for their denial of a CUP application submitted by William Ferrell
to permit use of a site within the RM-H District for retail sales
and a meeting hall (3028 First Street).
The Council, after hearing a report from the Planning Director,
and Mr. Ferrell, agreed with the findings and denial of the CUP.
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE COUNCIL UPHELD PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 86-76 RECOM-
MENDING DENIAL OF THE SUBJECT CUP.
COMMUNICATION RE
MAJOR STREET FEES
The Council received a report from the Planning Director recommending
a "street fee" in lieu of requiring property owners adjacent to major
streets to improve the streets, to major street standards.
It was also suggested that the creation of a major street fee
be referred to the City Attorney for determination as to its
legality and to be reconsidered by the City Council.
The Council discussed the suggestion and it was pointed out that
the City continually waits to improve certain streets until such
time as property fronting that street develops. The street fee
would allow the City to go ahead with the development of streets,
as needed, rather than waiting for development to take place.
Mr. Musso explained that the intent of the suggestion is to charge
a street fee rather than to require the property owner to improve
36 ft. of his property fronting a major street. This, in essence,
would be like the storm drain fee charged to property owners. They
are charged a fee for storm drains and then if they do work, they
are given credit towards this fee.
The Council referred this item to the staff and the Industrial
Advisory Committee for report and recommendations.
CM-33-l49
october 12, 1976
P.C. MINUTES
The minutes from the Planning Commission meeting of September 14,
1976, were noted for filing.
SUMMARY OF ACTION
The P.C. Summary of Action from the meeting of October 5, 1976,
was noted for filing.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Res. re App. for
Admn. Bldg. Const.
The Council adopted a resolution authorizing the filing of two
applications for federal funding for the City Administration
Building, and authorizing expenditures for the preparation of
the required applications.
RESOLUTION NO. 255-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FILING OF TWO APPLICA-
TIONS FOR FEDERAL FUNDS AND AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURES.
Res. Auth. Appraisal
of Real Property
(Livermore Car Wash area)
The Council adopted a resolution authorizing appraisal of prop-
erty in the area of the Livermore Car Wash.
RESOLUTION NO. 256-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPRAISAL OF REAL
PROPERTY (Livermore Car Wash, Gora1ka,
California Water Service)
Res. Requesting Closure
of Portion of Hwy. 84
The Council adopted a resolution requesting the Division of Highways
to allow the use of a portion of State Highway 84 for a park dedica-
tion ceremony which will take place on October 23, 1976, between
11:30 a.m. and 1:30 p.m.
RESOLUTION NO. 257-76
A RESOLUTION REQUESTING DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
FOR PERMISSION TO USE A PORTION OF STATE HIGH-
WAY 84 FOR PARK DEDICATION CEREMONY ON OCTOBER
23, 1976, BETWEEN 11:30 A.M. AND 1:30 P.M.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Executive Session)
The City Attorney requested an executive session after the meeting
to discuss personnel matters.
CM-33-150
October 12, 1976
(Lot on Bluebell Drive)
Mr. Parness stated that the Council looked at a small piece of
property off of Bluebell Drive, during budget session, for a
driving range. Because of the cost involved, after obtaining an
appraisal, the Council declined to pursue purchase. Reportedly,
someone is applying for a building permit for that lot and it would
be a shame if the lot were occupied by a building.
Discussion followed concerning the dilemma of the City in that there
is not sufficient money in the budget to purchase the vacant lot at
this time and if the City waits until a house is on the property and
then condemns it for use as part of a driving range, it will probably
cost the City $50,000-$60,000.
The City Manager will check the status of the building permit with
the Building Department and will report back to the Council conern-
ing this item.
(State Water Resources
Control Board Hearing)
Mr. Parness stated that per Council instruction he has applied to
the State Water Resources Control Board for a rehearing, contending
that due to their staff error the City's application was not properly
reviewed. There were considerations used by them which should not
have been used, which they have admitted. However, an oral response
from them has indicated that the City would probably not be granted
the rehearing. The five year priority list is reviewed annually and
it is recommended that the City make reapplication for reconsideration
at the time it is reviewed again.
(Quarry Report)
The P1easanton City Council has asked that a joint meeting be held
on November 18, 1976, between the P1easanton City Council and the
Livermore City Council to hear the report concerning the Quarry.
The Council concurred with this date.
(Negotiations)
Mr. Parness asked that the Council plan a special executive ses-
sion for the purpose of discussing personnel matters concerning
labor negotiations.
The Council agreed to meet on Wednesday, October 13, in the Con-
ference Room of City Hall, at 5:00 p.m., to discuss labor negotia-
tions with the staff and the firm which is helping with the negotiations,
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Halloween)
Cm Turner commented that he has received a phone call from someone
who has suggested that Halloween be celebrated on Saturday night
instead of Sunday night this year.
CM-33-l5l
October 12, 1976
(re Halloween)
The Mayor explained that different organizations used to set up
booths at the Recreation Center on Halloween for the support of
UNICEF and that night was often moved to accommodate a weekend
night. The City could declare a Halloween night, but the kids
will probably go out on Sunday night anyway.
(Gold Card Program
for Senior Citizens)
The Chamber of Commerce just t1y adopted the Gold Card concept,
which Cm. Turner and Cm Kamena have been working on, through COVA.
This is a good program for senior citizens and the Council is
happy that it has been adopted by the Chamber of Commerce in
Livermore.
Lillian Snorf, representative of the senior citizens, has been
contacted and will be helping the Chamber with the program.
(Various Reports)
Cm Turner stated that the Council had asked for a report con-
cerning the franchise fee for CABL-TV, and whether or not
Showtime would be subject to the business license tax.
The staff indicated that a report will be coming to the Council.
Cm Turner stated that the Council also asked for a final
accounting of status of the railroad relocation project.
The City Attorney indicated that the City is still involved
in the acquisition of the McDona1ds property as well as the
Trujillo property. Depending upon how negotiations go, the
City could be finished with negotiations by the end of the
month; however the McDona1ds property problems could go on
for as long as a year. Until all of these projects have
been closed, the project will be unfinished.
The staff will prepare a status report concerning the rail-
road relocation, which will include the delay costs.
(Copy of Audit)
Cm Dahlbacka commented that he requested that there be a copy
of the City audit, in the public library. Apparently it is
not available at the library and he would request that it
be made available to the public.
(Citizens Committee
for Public Safety)
Cm Staley noted that there will be a meeting of the Citizens Committee
for Public Safety at his office at 7:30 p.m. tomorrow evening.
(Cultural Arts Council)
Mayor Tirse11 asked that the staff write a letter to the Cultural Arts
Council , commending them of the outstanding job they did on the festival
this year.
CM-33-152
October 12, 1976
(Cultural Arts Festival)
Mayor Tirse11 asked that a separate letter of appreciation be sent to
Linda Heiner also.
ORD. RE FREEWAY SIGNS
The first reading and introduction of the sign ordinance relative
to amendment of freeway signs, and distance location from interchanges
was scheduled on the agenda.
It was noted that the ordinance was to have been drafted to restrict
the amendment to hotels, motels, and inns, within 500 ft. of the
freeway, but this is not included in the draft.
Mr. Musso explained that the ordinance does provide for additional
square footage for signs related to highway uses. Hotels or hotels
would probably be the only highway oriented uses that could qualify
for the larger signs.
The item was continued until October 25th.
ADJOURNHENT
Mayor Tirse1l adjourned the meeting at 11:15 p.m. to an adjourned
regular meeting on Wednesday, October 13, 1976, in the Conference
Room, City Hall, 2250 First Street at 5:00 p.m. The meeting will
immediately adjourn to an executive session to discuss labor nego-
tiations.
The adjourned regular meeting of Wednesday, October 13, 1976, will
adjourn to an adjourned regular meeting on Thursday, October 14,
1976, at 12 noon, in the Conference Room of City Hall, 2250 First
Street, for discussion of the League Conference resolutions.
APPROVE
;J~~
-:l?J ~'IA.//i!,
Mayor
ATTEST
CM-33-153
Adjourned Regular Meeting of October 13, 1976
An adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of Liver-
more was held on Wednesday, October 13, 1976, at 5:00 p.m. in
the Conference Room of City Hall, 2250 First Street, Livermore
California.
The meeting immediately adjourned to an executive session to
discuss labor negotiations.
APPROVE
Turner, Staley and Mayor
Dah1backayand Kamena
).La.L.L ,M,u
1rlL
Tirse11
Present: em
Absent: Cm
/h Z:~AJJ{J
- Mayor
ATTEST
aLc-~td_
C1ty Clerk
L erm , California
Adjourned Regular Meeting of October 14, 1976
An adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore
was held on Thursday, October 14, 1976, at 12 noon, in the Confer-
ence Room of City Hall, 2250 First Street, Livermore, California.
The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the League Conference
resolutions and the City's position on them.
Present: Cm Dah1backa, Kamena, Turner, and Mayor Tirse11
Absent: Cm Staley
The meeting adjourned at 1:25 p.m.
APPROVE
'-1JAn
--;17-)
~A1.l ff
/ Mayor
ATTEST
~~
C1ty Clerk
. !JL1 ore, California
CM-33-154
R~gular Meeting of October 25, 197~
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
October 25, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m.
with Mayor Tirse1l presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Dah1backa, Kamena, Turner, and Mayor Tirse1l
Absent: Cm Staley (ill)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirsell led the Counic1members as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES 10/4/76
and 10/12/76
P. 137, last paragraph should read as follows:
for an amendment to the Sign Ordinance from the
cerning signs relating to inns, hotel and motel
500 ft.....etc.
Mayor Tirse11 asked
City Attorney con-
property within
P. 143, 2nd paragraph, 4th line should read: asking that the
Springtown Golf Course be cut from the budget to provide more
funds for police and fire protection.
P. 152, 1st paragraph, line 4 should read: night. Even if
the City could declare a Halloween night, the kids.....etc.
P. 141, under Roll Call, indicate that Cm Dah1backa was seated
later, as follows: Absent: Cm Dah1backa (seated later)
P. 154, under Adjourned Regular Meeting of October 13th, the
minutes should reflect that Cm Dah1backa was seated after the
roll call.
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL AND BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 1976,
WERE APPROVED AS AMENDED, (Cm Turner abstaining due to absence
at that 'meeting) .
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 1976, WERE APPROVED
AS AMENDED.
OPEN FORUM
(League Conference)
Jerry Wi1verding, 4886 Primrose Lane, stated that he is concerned
about the Council's recent trip to San Diego and particularly with
the fact ~hat the Council supported the motion to amend the Brown
Act to relnact "secrecy in government". He asked for an explanation
as to why the Counci1members voted in favor of this motion.
It was explained that the matter was debated at San Diego, and of
the 400 cities who attend the League Conference, there were probably
300 people in the audience. There was only one city opposed to the
suggestion to amend the Brown Act.
The amendment will allow Councilmembers to meet to discuss prospective
appointments, or to gather personal information about people without
being subject to reporting in the press. The consensus of the League
is that appointments are not being as carefully considered or discussed
CM-33-155
October 25, 1976
(League Conference)
openly and freely. The Council is being considerably constrained
by the fact that they are not free to have an executive session
concerning the people to be appointed.
(Fairmont Hosipta1
Outreach Program)
Tot Green, 673 South "M" Street, Chairman of the Advisory Committee
for the Fairmont Hospital Outreach Program, stated that the hospi-
tal is supposed to serve the entire south county area. The hospi-
tal has a complete team to serve all of the cities except Livermore
because there is no place for the team to work at this time. They
need a large room that could be broken down into three small rooms,
or a building with three small rooms in it. She is addressing the
Council to find out if there are perhaps three public rooms that
could be used for this purpose.
Mr. Bradley, Assistant to the City ~anager, indicated that it was
his understanding the Outreach Team would be using the Red Cross
office facilities as soon as an arrangement was worked out with
the Red Cross people.
(Pedestrian Hazards)
Ms. Green indicated that it is extremely difficult for a pedestrian
to try to cross at the intersection of Holmes Street, at College
Avenue and Fourth Street. This intersection is very dangerous
and hazardous in trying to cross from any direction, and she would
like the Council to look into the problem.
Bonnie Bridgers, stated that she owns a shop on First Street in
the downtown area, and it is also extremely difficult for a
pedestrian to try to cross First Street in the crosswalk at "J"
Street. Last week someone was hurt when they tried to cross
First Street and she has suggested to the staff that stripes be
painted across the crosswalk to provide better identification
of these areas.
Mr. Lee indicated that the problem crosswalks could have wider
lines for better identification and the staff will look into
the problem.
Jan Bird, 2220 First Street, owner of the Flying Chef on First
Street, stated that she received a $10 parking ticket because
she parked along the red curb in front of the store to unload
merchandise. Her store has no back entrance access so she must
park in front to unload items for the store and she would like
the City to designate a portion of the red zone as a loading/un-
loading zone by painting it yellow.
Mr. Lee explained that if cars were allowed to park in that area
they would encroach into one of the lanes of traffic which would
be hazardous and would further complicate the problems at the
crosswalk. The alternative would be to paint some of the curb
yellow along the parking stalls but this would e1minate some of
the customer parking and the City would need the support of all
the merchants in that area to do something like that.
CM-33-156
October 25, 1976
(First Street)
Discussion followed concerning the proposal for the yellow zone
along First Street, to accommodate the merchants who have no
back entrance access.
Mr. Lee offered to ask the Mill Square merchants if they would
be in favor of converting one of the parking stalls to a loading
zone and the Council concurred. Mr. Lee was asked to bring the
results back to the Council before anything is done because there
may be some merchants concerned with removing a parking space.
SPECIAL ITEM - AWARDS
TO EXPLORER SCOUTS RE
ANnmL CONTROL SURVEY
The members of the Police F.xplorer Post were invited to attend the
Council meeting to receive a certificate of appreciation from the
Mayor and the Chief of Police.
The Chief of Police commented that he is very pleased with the job
the Scouts did concerning animal control survey and that any criti-
cism is overshadowed by the outstanding job that was done.
The Mayor thanked the Scouts for the work they did, on behalf of the
City and the Council. There is no way the City could have funded
the program this year and the Scouts helped to point out the impor-
tance of licensing dogs and because of this information the number
of dog licenses greatly increased.
Certificates of appreciation were presented to the following Police
Explorers:
Thomas A. Kramer
Valerie Cain
Laura Betsekas
Joseph E. Nichols
Louise A. Rinear
patricia A. willyard
Daniel P. McFarland
Scott Overby
It was suggested that the young people who helped with the program
present their ideas concerning the program, in writing, to the
Council for informational purposes.
COMMUNICATION RE
ROBERTSON PARK
OUTDOOR LIGHTING
The communication from the Rotary Club concerning lighting for
Robertson Park, was referred to LARPD. The Council does support
the suggestion for community service projects that would provide
outdoor lighting for the park and the staff was asked to send a
letter expressing this to the Rotary Club.
COM.~UNICATION RE
BART SERVICE TO
GRANADA SHOPPING AREA
A letter was received from W. F. Hein, BART Director of Planning,
which indicated that it would not be possible to add a BART bus
stop in the Granada Shopping Center area without advers1y affect-
ing the existing service.
The staff was asked to send a copy of the letter to Faye Eagle,
because she has addressed the Council concerning this matter.
C~1-33-l5 7
October 25, 1976
(BART Service)
It was noted that 1/3 of the City's population live in the
Granada Shopping Center area and it is disappointing to
receive this type of response from the BART people.
Letter was noted for filing.
COMMUNICATION RE SISTER
CITY IN YOTSUKAIDO, JAPAN
A letter was received from Samuel M. Cohen, Chairman of the Organi-
zing Committee for a Sister City, and Shinryu Akita, Co-Director
of the Japanese-American Cultural Exchange Program, who have
suggested that the City develop a second sister city in Yotsukaido,
Japann.
The letter was referred to the Sister City Committee, with the
request that the staff inform Mr. Cohen and Ms. Akita as to what
is involved in the formation of a sister city and how they are
to be financed.
COMMUNICATION RE APPLICA-
TION FOR APPOINTMENT
TO BAAPCD ADVISORY COUNCIL
The Council received a letter from the BAAPCD inviting applications
for appointment to membership on the District's Advisory Council.
It was suggested that this information be referred to the Air
Pollution Advisory Committee, and Cm Dah1backa indicated his
interest in possibly serving on the BAAPCD Advisory Council.
CM TURNER MOVED TO RECOMMEND CM DAHLBACKA TO THE BAAPCD ADVISORY
COUNCIL AND IF CM DAHLBACKA DECIDES NOT TO BE INCLUDED THE ITEM
WILL BE REFERRED TO THE CITY'S AIR POLLUTION ADVISORY COUNCIL.
MOTION SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
This item will be discussed by the Council next week.
COMMUNICATION RE PORTOLA
AVENUE DEVELOPMENT (Anderson)
A notice was received from the Board of Supervisors that it is
their intent to require an application for annexation to the
City of Livermore before the Anderson property along Porto1a
Avenue can be developed for sale.
Mr. Musso indicated that it is the intent of the County to do
the planning for that area and oversee its development, with
the requirement that after it is developed it will annex to
the City. It is doubtful that development can be financed
without sewage and it will be some time before the area can
be developed.
COMMUNICATION RE
SUPPORT OF PROP. #2
LARPD has requested that the Council support the passage of
Proposition 2, the Urban and Coastal Park Bond Act of 1976.
If the measure passes, the County would receive $4,000,000,
with LARPD qualifying for $200,000 of that amount.
CM-33-158
October 25, 1976
(re Proposition 2)
The staff was asked to notify LARPD that the Council has expressed
unanimous support of the passage of Proposition 2, which was in-
cluded in a resolution that the Mayor voted for at a League meeting.
COMMUNICATION RE
SAFEWAY PARKING
The Council received the copy of a letter sent to Mr. Hanesworth,
of the Southern Pacific Development Company, from Mr. Baker of
Safeway Stores, Inc., indicating that if the parking stalls in
front of the Safeway Store are not acceptable to the City, they
should simply be eliminated rather than converted to two parallel
parking spaces either for loading/unloading or handicapped.
The Council concurred with the recommendation to eliminate any
type of parking where the six stalls are presently located in
front of the Safeway Store adjacent to the exit/entrance area.
It was mentioned that the traffic congestion in the parking lot
is a problem and that a resident from the City has suggested that
the shopping center provide some type of traffic control.
COMMUNICATION RE
BALLOT MEASURE "N"
A letter was prepared by Cm Turner asking that the Council make
its position clear concerning ballot measure "N", the Public
Safety Tax Override. People have been asking if the City would
reduce its monitary commitment for fire and police services,
equal to the amount of the funds available if the measure passed.
The intent of the measure is to allow for additional funds to pro-
vide additional police and fire protection to the extent allowed
by the additional funds.
The Council unanimously expressed the intent to provide additional
services in the way of fire and police protection, if the measure
is passed.
If the measure passes, the first year's tax override will be used
to hire additional personnel and in the second year the City would
again be without sufficient funds and the City would have to dip
into the General Fund to support the added personnel.
Mr. Bradley commented that the Citizens Committee will be meeting
on wednesday, at 7:30 p.m. at Junction Avenue, for the purpose of
presenting information to the public on this item.
REPORT RE SPRINGTOWN
PROPERTY PURCHASE
The City Manager reported that during the budget session the Council
discussed the purchase of a lot (.7 acre) adjacent to Bluebell Drive,
to be incorporated with the Springtown Golf Course facilities. At
that time the Council declined the purchase because of financial
constraints; however, this property is being considered for resi-
dential development and the staff recommends that the Council adopt
a motion instructing the staff to negotiate the terms of the lot
for purchase by the City.
The eventual use of the lot would be for the purpose of a driving
range and clubhouse facilities.
CM-33-l59
October 25, 1976
(Springtown Property)
Discussion followed concerning the proposal by the staff to nego-
tiate for the purchase of the lot and the question was raised as
to which fund the money would be taken from. Mr. Parness explained
that the money would have to come from the City's reserves; however,
hopefully, the acquisition could qualify for the use of revenue
funds with the beginning of the new program in January. The.7
acres is a very minor portion of the land that will ultimately
have to be purchased for the extension of the golf course and
the driving range and other facilities.
This particular property has been appraised as a subdivided lot
and is rather expensive, compared to the rest of the property
which will have to be purchased and has been assessed as bulk
acreage.
There was a question as to whether the small parcel of property
must be the focal point of the plans for the golf course or if
the plans could be changed to include a different focal point.
Mr. Parness explained that facilities could be developed if a
house were located on the vacant lot, but the facilities would
not be very accommodating if this were the case.
The comment was made that there has not really been a strong
argument in opposition to development of a house on the vacant
lot and that often homes are developed along golf courses.
Mr. Lee felt that the vacant lot is vital to the ultimate
development of the golf course, and particularly if there
is no driving range provided in the vicinity of the parking
lot. This would be the only other place a driving range
could be located. Mr. Lee then illustrated the plans for
development around that area, followed by discussion.
It was pointed out that if the Council does decide that the
property should be purchased it would be paid back to the City
by the Springtown Golf Course, in time.
The comment was made that the City often is offered a good
deal and it is difficult to tell where to draw the line with
respect to purchases. It is difficult to agree to spend $9,000
or $10,000 towards a project that mayor may not ever be under-
taken.
Ray Fa1tings, 1018 Via Granada, stated that he would agree that
the amount of purchase for the lot is too high in light of the
City's budgetary problems. The amount of money to purchase
this property could go towards the salary for an additional
policeman or fireman, rather than for surplus property.
CM TURNER MOVED TO DENY THE REQUEST TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY,
SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
The argument was made that once a house is developed on the
property it would cost the City from $50,000-$60,000 to ob-
tain the lot as part of the golf course.
MOTION PASSED 3-1 (Cm Kamena dissenting) .
RECESS
Mayor Tirsel1 called for a brief recess after which the Council
meeting resumed with members present as during roll call.
CM-33-l60
October 25, 1976
DISCUSSION RE LAVWMA
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
The Council asked that the LA~~ Joint Powers Agreement and amendments
be reviewed by the Council at this meeting. It was suggested that they
discuss the agreement, page by page, omitting those items that would
be affected by failure of the bond issue to pass during the upcoming
election.
The City Attorney explained that the revised edition of the agreement
which the Council will be reviewing this evening has very minor
changes which were made by the Bo~d Counsel for the purpose of making
the language clear. He added that he has a copy of the agreement be-
tween LAVWMA and the City of Livermore, for industrial capacity. It
is something that should be adopted this evening or no later than next
week. It could be considered as part of the discussion or it could
be scheduled for discussion next week to be adopted or denied.
It was the consensus of the Council that this is an important item
that should be discussed when a full Council is present.
The point was made that the only problem with waiting until next
Monday to discuss this is that it must be adopted prior to the Tuesday
election, and if there is any wording problem it couldn't be adopted
the same night it was discussed.
The Council agreed to discuss the changes with final adoption next
week.
The agreement between LAVWMA and the City of Livermore will be
discussed immediately after the discussion of the Joint Powers
Agreement, ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE TO SUSPEND THE RULES TO INSERT AN ITEM IN THE AGENDA
WHICH ~HLL BECOME ITEM 3.3 - LAm--7HA AND CITY OF LIVERHORE AGREEMENT.
P. 1 - No changes
P. 2 - Item 1. "(f) and operate had been deleted. The Council
would like these two words left in the agreement.
Item 1. "(g) changes will be discussed after the election.
P. 3 - Item 2. "G - reinsert the original language (leave everything)
at the end of the paragraph add the following wording:
"......sha1l be subject to and evidenced by a certified
copy of the resolution of the governing board of such
member filed with the Agency, upon request of any member
of the board or councils of the parties of the Joint Powers
Agreement."
The staff was asked to work on the wording above and to
insert a time period.
P. 4 - Changes acceptable.
P. 5 - Item 4. "A. (6) will be discussed after the election.
(7) will be discussed after the election.
P. 6 and 7 - Part of Item 4. "A. (7) to be discussed after election.
P. 8 - Changes acceptable.
P. 9 - Mayor Tirsell will discuss a possible change concerning
records of the monitored effluent, with Ron, from EBDA.
P. 10 - Acceptable
P. 11 - Paragraph "XVIII., should be rewritten as it was originally.
CM-33-l6l
October 25, 1976
(LAVWMA Agreement)
P. 12 - First indented paragraph will revert to original
wording.
Item 9. "XXI., will be discussed after the election.
P. 13 - Will be discussed after election.
THE COUNCIL MOVED TO THE DISCUSSION OF THE LAVWMA/CITY OF
LIVERMORE AGREEMENT THAT THE CITY MUST SIGN PRIOR TO THE
ELECTION.
The City Attorney explained that he has no concerns with
the wording in the agreement, or with any of the provisions.
The item was postponed for discussion on November 1.
DISCUSSION RE APPEAL
RE HOLDENER DAIRY
SIGN VARIANCE DENIAL
The Planning Commission denied the request for a variance to
the Ho1dener Dairy sign to permit the sign to stand perpen-
dicular rather than parallel to the street. The denial is
being appealed by the applicant for consideration by the
Council.
There was brief discussion concerning the report from the
P.C. and the 25 mph zone in that area. It was noted that
if someone turns onto Stanley from Murrieta Boulevard,
there is no 25 mph sign posted until they get to the
hospital.
The question was raised as to why the hospital is allowed
a sign perpendicular to the street, and Mr. Musso explained
that people may need to find the hospital who may be strangers
to the Livermore area and that the perpendicular sign helps
to identify the location of the hospital in cases of emergency.
This was one variance given to the hospital and there were two
other variances requested for this type of sign. One was the
Union Station on Livermore Avenue, which was denied, and the
other was for the Standard Station on First Street, which was
also denied. Uses adjacent to freeways, such as the Holiday
Inn sign, are allowed to have perpendicular signs. He explained
that there are instances in which a sign happens to be perpendicular
to a certain street because it is located on corner property, or
a sign may be erected in a parking lot which would be parallel to
the parking lot but perpendicular to the street. He added that
there is not a distinction between the types of uses but rather
what constitutes frontage for a use.
Elsie Ho1dener, 943 E. Stanley Boulevard, stated that the
Towers Apartments has two large signs both
and Murrieta, and the Townhouse has a sign
street as well as two perpendicular signs.
understand why they would be allowed three
directions.
on Holmes Street
parallel to the
She cannot
signs in three
Mr. Musso explained that he will check on two of the signs,
but the other signs mentioned by Mrs. Ho1dener are being
abated.
CM-33-162
October 25, 1976
(re Holdener Dairy)
Mrs. Ho1dener stated that people have complained that the sign at
the dairy cannot be seen, and 850 customers signed a petition re-
questing that the sign be allowed to be perpendicular to the street.
She added that regular customers have complained that they often pass
the driveway to the dairy because the sign cannot be seen in suffi-
cient time, and the pace of traffic along the area is fast. They
have encountered many problems of this type since the new sign was
erected, that did not occur during the time their old sign was up.
She added that they disagree with the findings made by the P.C. in
denying their variance and this happens to be a legal point they
feel is in their favor. They are unique in that they are located "
within an agricultural zone, not commercial. She asked that the
Council consider the fact that small business finds it difficult
to compete with large business and to allow them a sign that can
be seen by customers.
Mr. Musso explained that the agricultural zoning is not in con-
formance with the General Plan, and the ordinance provides that
where there is a non-conforming use, the P.C. can determine the
allowable sign, which they did in this case. The use is a non-
conforming use in a legally zoned agricultural area.
Mrs. Ramos, 664 Murde11, stated that she is a Ho1dener Dairy
customer and she likes it because it is a convenience. When the
sign was removed she had difficulty finding its location. The only
time you can really see the sign is when you are leaving the dairy.
People are moving into the City all the time and probably the only
way new people would know about the dairy would be by "word of mouth"
because people who are not familiar with the dairy wouldn't notice
the sign.
Paul Linnes, 1236 Ki11arney, commented that the driveway for the
dairy is very narrow and he has seen people nearly collide because
people put on the brakes to turn into the driveway but cannot really
slow down sufficiently because of the speed of traffic on E. Stanley
Boulevard. In his opinion, the City should do everything possible
to help Ho1dener Dairy stay in business.
Jo1ene Dorn, 344 Helen Way, stated that the sign cannot be seen
from either direction until the car is about 30 ft. from the
driveway. In her opinion the smaller sign is creating a potential
hazard to drivers who are trying to find the dairy in time to turn.
In her opinion, beautification is not more important than safety.
Terry Ramos, 664 Murde11 Lane, stated that he works at the dairy
and he has received complaints from people who could not find the
dairy. He has seen cars backing up along Stanley Boulevard because
they missed the dairy entrance. He has also received complaints
because people missed the entrance, had to go on down Stanley Boule-
vard and then go back to the dairy.
Barbara Barton, 634 Starling Avenue, stated that one rainy evening
she found that it was extremely difficult to find the Holdener Dairy.
She feels that the bright lights from the adjacent State Savings and
Loan property make it very difficult to see the Holdener sign. The
contrast between the State Savings sign and the dairy sign is so
great that the Ho1dener sign just cannot be seen. At night and in
the rain, the sign is just impossible to see.
The Council discussed the variance application and the point was
made that the purpose of the Sign Ordinance is that a use is to
be identified by a sign. The Holdener sign cannot be identified.
CM-33-l63
October 25, 1976
(re Ho1dener Dairy)
The Ho1dener Dairy is at a disadvantage in that they are not
located in a downtown area where uses can readily be found,
and they are behind a residential home. The location is
rural-residential, much like the hospital, and the hospital
is allowed the perpendicular sign. The argument was made that
they should be allowed to have a reasonable sign and that there
are hazards involved in the restriction of the small sign which
is parallel to the street.
CM TURNER MOVED TO GRANT THE VARIANCE TO ALLOW HOLDENER DAIRY
A FREESTANDING SIGN, PERPENDICULAR TO E. STANLEY BOULEVARD.
MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
It was pointed out that the variance process is the legal
instrument to allow the Council to say that some business
is exempt from the law in this set of special circumstances.
In the variance process, the Council is required to make four
statutory findings in order to grant the variance. From an
emotional standpoint there may be many reasons to allow the
dairy sign to be placed perpendicular to the street; however,
the Council is faced with the charge of literally upholding
the ordinance. If four findings cannot be made, the variance
cannot be granted. ----
It was mentioned that it was necessary to deny the request
for a variance to the sign for another dairy located at the
other end of town, and this was a difficult decision also.
It seems that it would not really be fair if the law were not
applied uniformly and this is the reason the four findings
are required, by law. The four required findings allow.. for
uniform application of the law and all of the findings neces-
sary for granting a variance, in this case, cannot be made.
Perhaps other things can be done, within the law, to help
overcome the identification problems for the dairy. It might
be helpful, for instance, if 25 mph signs were posted between
the dairy and Murrieta Boulevard so that cars would have more
time to see the sign and make a safe exit from the street.
The comment was made that in looking for the Holdener sign it
is easy to miss the driveway and there is a hedge at the edge
of the street that obscures the driveway. The dairy out on
First Street also requested a variance for their sign, and
they too have problems because there is no sign visible from
First Street, traveling west, but their variance was also
denied. The Council could not make the four findings to
allow their variance at that time either. The Sign Ordinance
has been applied equally and equitably, one by one.
Since there were not enough votes to support the request for
variance, the Council discussed ways in which the dairy might
be helped.
It was suggested that perhaps the City could allow an encroach-
ment permit for a small sign in the median indicating a dairy,
with an arrow pointing to the driveway. It was also suggested
that the sign be moved in front of the hedge rather than at the
end of the hedge next to the driveway. This would give drivers
a chance to see the sign and then turn into the driveway.
The argument was made that an ordinance cannot be written to
cover every possible situation and that in this case a sign
that can be seen should be allowed.
Mr. Musso explained that the dairy could have as many directional
signs as they would like, as long as they don't exceed 3 sq. ft.
CM-33-164
October 25, 1976
(re Holdener Dairy)
Mrs. Holdener stated that all they want to do is make their new
attractive sign visible. They really don't want more directional
signs and they believe they would not be setting a precedent be-
cause they are different in that they are in an agricultural zone.
She wondered if the agricultural zone could be used as a reason
for allowing the variance. She indicated that she is upset because
they spent $1,500 for the sign which can't be damaged by rocks and
it can't be seen by their customers.
The majority of the Council felt that on a personal level they
would be in favor of granting the variance, but from a legal
standpoint the four findings could not be made.
The suggestion was made that perhaps the Holdeners could have a
white picket fence along E. Stanley Boulevard along their property
that could curve along the driveway to help guide customers into
the dairy service area.
Don Miller, 2862 Waverly Way, stated that he would like to encourage
the Council not to permit a sign in the median because this would be
setting a precedent in doing something for the benefit of private
property. He added that all of the people who signed the petition
found their way into the dairy which would indicate that people know
about the dairy but they may have difficulty finding the driveway
to it. The provisions of the Sign Ordinance does make it possible
to know where the dairy is located and if it is at the driveway,
people should be able to know where the driveway is situated.
The main problem seems to be with customers who come from the
west and possibly the sign could be lowered so it is more in line
with the driver's view.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO UPHOLD THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE P.C.
THE REQUEST FOR THE VARIANCE, AND TO DENY THE APPEAL, BASED
RESOLUTION NO. 87-76 OF THE LIVERMORE PLANNING COMMISSION.
WAS SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL.
TO DENY
ON
MOTION
The argument was made that Holdener Dairy is not allowed the normal
competition of business when a sign cannot be seen by people who
are not aware of the dairy. The sign just cannot be seen and this
does not seem fair to that particular business.
MOTION PASSED 2-1 (Cm Turner dissenting; Cm Kamena abstaining due
to the fact that a ruling concerning the findings had been requested
but did not receive a response from the City Attorney).
The City Attorney explained that the findings statutorily provided
for in the ordinance are not adequate. The Council will have to
make findings to support the conclusion.
THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO PREPARE THE APPROPRIATE RESOLUTION
REFLECTING COUNCIL ACTION, TO BE ADOPTED NEXT WEEK.
RECESS
A Councilmember requested a brief recess which the Mayor then called
for. The Council meeting resumed with all members of the present as
during roll call.
REPORT RE MTC FUNDS
FOR PROPERTY PURCHASE
The City Manager submitted a report to the Council which indicated
that it would be appropriate to use TDA funds, which have been
reserved by the MTC, for land acquisition which would be used for
BART station facilities in the future.
CM-33-l65
October 25, 1976
(re TDA/MTC Funds)
The City Manager indicated that it is very encouraging to receive
a response from the MTC expressing the possibility that the City
might receive funds for this purpose. The property the City would
like to purchase would be located at E. Stanley Boulevard and Mur-
rieta Boulevard which is planned for future development of a BART
station. He suggested that the Council adopt a resolution authoriz-
ing intent to improve transit services and then the City staff will
find out how much of the property can be purchased. It is estimated
that the purchase could be about 8.2 acres.
There was an inquiry as to whether or not the granting of some of
the TDA funds for this purpose might jeopardize capital acquisi-
tions the City might wish to make in pUblic transportation for
the City of Livermore. The City might not want to spend funds
on property acquisition when the funds might be better used for
capital equipment expenditures.
The City Manager explained that something in the order of $250,000
to $275,000 worth of TDA monies accrue to the City each year and
there is roughly $750,000 worth of TDA monies available. The use
of some of this money should not jeopardize purchase of equipment
for public transportation. He would estimate that there are more
funds available than the City could ever be able to use. He also
mentioned that the use of funds for the purchase of BART facility
land will not preclude the use of that land for parking facilities
for those who use the present BART bus system.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO IMPROVE THE
TRANSIT SERVICES, SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
It was noted that the City's share of the cost would be $14,000
and there was a question as to where this would come from. Mr.
Parness explained that he is sure the City can show that this
amount of money could be credited to the City because of in- kind
services.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 258-76
A RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO IMPROVE
TRANSIT SERVICES
REPORT RE ZONE 7
WATER RATE CHARGES
The City Manager reported that the Zone 7 Board is requesting the
formal consent of the City Council to maintain existing water rate
levels for the next fiscal year. It is recommended that the Council
adopt a motion recommending the maintenance of the existing Zone 7
water ~ate levels for the new fiscal year.
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE COUNCIL ADOPTED THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO MAINTAIN
EXISTING WATER RATE LEVELS FOR THE NEW FISCAL YEAR AND SO INFORM
ZONE 7.
REPORT RE REQUEST FOR
POLICE OFFICER REPLACEMENT
Chief Lindgren has requested that the City budget be amended
to allow for an additional police officer position to be filled
immediately, in light of the fact that Officer D. R. Lee has
been absent from the police force for the past 10 months and
CM-33-166
October 25, 1976
(Police Officer Replacement)
is doubtful that he will be able to return to duty. In the event Offi-
cer Lee is able to return to police duty, he would fill the first va-
cancy occuring in the Police Department.
It is the recommendation of the staff that the Council adopt a
resolution authorizing a budgetary amendment for the addition
of department personnel.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND BY UNANI-
MOUS VOTE, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO AMEND THE BUDGET WAS
ADOPTED.
A resolution allowing for an amendment to the budget for this
purpose, will appear on the agenda next week.
REPORT RE TRAFFIC
LAW ENFORCEMENT
The Chief of Police submitted a written report concerning traffic
law enforcement and which streets were surveyed in June of 1973.
The legislature requires agencies using radar for enforcement to
survey the streets to ascertain if the posted limits are reasonable
for the area and the radar surveys are required every five years.
Radar is not used on streets which have not been surveyed and there
are 12 streets in Livermore which need to be surveyed for this pur-
pose, as were also listed in the report. The Chief of Police indi-
cated that there are no major problems or difficulties in the City's
traffic law enforcement program, and that the palice cars are con-
forming as to color.
The report was noted for filing.
REPORT RE APP. TO
REGIONAL WATER QUALITY
CONTROL BOARD (Water
Rec. Plant Capacity)
The Director of Public Works submitted a report concerning the
application to the Regional Water Quality Control Board for
Phase IV - Water Reclamation Plant capacity increase. The report
included a draft of the application for a construction grant for
added treatment capacity.
The Council concurred that it would be satisfactory to apply for
the 1 MGD, and the report was noted for filing.
REPORT RE PENDING
CITY APPOINTMENTS
The City Clerk provided a list of City committees for which
appointments need to be made and the names of those who have
resigned from the committees or those whose terms have expired.
The information was noted for filing and future action.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Res. Rej. Claims
The following resolutions were adopted, rejecting claims:
RESOLUTION NO. 259-76
A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM
OF THE PACIFIC TELEPHONE AND TELE-
GRAPH COMPANY
CM-33-l67
October 25, 1976
RESOLUTION NO. 260-76
A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM
OF MR. ROBERT S. CUSTODIA
RESOLUTION NO. 26l-76
A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM
OF MARY JANE RANGEL
RESOLUTION NO. 262-76
A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM
OF EDWARD V. COLLOM
Res. re S.P. Co.
Contribution
The Council adopted a resolution formally approving the contri-
bution of $11,500 by SP Development Company towards the cost of
the First Street car wash matter.
RESOLUTION NO. 263-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
AGREEMENT - SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPOR-
TATION COMPANY
Res. Awarding Bid
for Turf Vacuum
Bids for a Turf Vac were received from the following companies
in the following amounts:
Tractor Equipment Sales
Western Lawn Equipment Company
San Francisco Equipment
$5,975.00
$5,650.00
$5,490.00
A resolution was adopted awarding the bid to San Francisco Equip-
ment Company for a turf vacuum.
RESOLUTION NO. 264-76
A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID (San
Francisco Equipment Company)
Res. Auth. Purchase
of Land & Execution
of Agreement
A resolution was adopted authorizing purchase of land located
south of Stanley Boulevard, west of Murrieta Boulevard, includ-
ing a portion of the channel.
RESOLUTION NO. 265-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF LAND
AND EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (Tax Sale)
CM-33-l68
October 25, 1976
Res. Auth. Appraisal
of Real Property re
Extension of Railroad Ave.
The Council adopted a resolution authorizing appraisal of property
concerning the extension of Railroad Avenue.
RESOLUTION NO. 266-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPRAISAL
OF REAL PROPERTY
Res. Amending Salaries
of City Employees
The Council adopted a resolution amending City employees' salaries
to reflect recent negotiations.
RESOLUTION NO. 267-76
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF LIVER-
MORE AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 216-76,
FOR THE CLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES OF THE
CITY OF LIVERMORE ESTABLISHING RULES
FOR ITS USE.
P.C. Minutes - 9/28/76
and 10/5/76
The Council received a copy of the minutes from the Planning Commission
for their meetings of September 28, 1976, and October 5, 1976, which
were noted for filing.
Departmental Reports
Departmental reports were received from the following:
Airport - Financial and Activity
Building Department - September
Emergency Services - Quarterly - July/September
Financial - Revenues and Expenditures
- Quarter Ending September 1976
Golf Courses - Las positas and Springtown
- Revenue and Expenditures, Quarter
Ending September, 1976
Library Activity - Quarter Ending September, 1976
Mosquito Abatement District - August
Water Reclamation Plant - September, 1976
Payroll & Claims
There were 101 claims in the amount of $218,610.99, and 306
payroll warrants in the amount of $104,420.74, for a total of
$323,031.73, dated October 12, 1976, and approved by the City Manager.
There were 103 claims in the amount of $388,544.90, dated October 14,
1976, and approved by the City Manager.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF:CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED.
CM-33-l69
October 25, 1976
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(First Street Crosswalks)
It was mentioned earlier in the evening that there are problems with
the First Street crosswalks, in that they are hazardous to pedestri-
ans. Cm Kamena indicated that he had intended to bring this item up
and would like brief discussion on the item.
Cm Kamena has spoken with the merchants in that area who feel
that a yellow curb near the crosswalk at "J" Street, would help with
the various problems concerning the crosswalk and unloading of mer-
chandise for those stores, as well as garbage pickup.
Mr. Lee stated that it is necessary to continue with the red
curbing and not allow it to be changed to yellow because if
a vehicle does park there it will encroach into the lane of
traffic.
Cm Turner stated that he looked at this area with Mr. Lee and
he is also convinced that allowing any type of vehicle in that
area would create a hazard. The Council will have to try to
suggest an alternate solution.
The Council concurred that perhaps Mr. Regan (owner of the
buildings) could be persuaded to permit access to the rear
of the buildings for the merchants and this would solve the
loading/unloading and garbage pickup problems. The suggestion
was also made that this item should be discussed at the next
Mill Square Merchants meeting.
(First Street Intersec-
tion Beautification)
Cm Kamena stated that he is pleased with the beautification
of the corner of First Street and South Livermore Avenue
and he has heard comments from some of the local artists
to the effect that they would be interested in painting
a mural on the brick wall in back of the First Street mini park.
He would like to know who owns the property and if the City
could get permission for a mural to be painted on the wall.
The comment was made that it
The comment was made that it is doubtful the owner would
agree to any type of artistic endeavor pertaining to the wall.
(Escrow re Arroyo
Mocho Property)
Cm Dahlbacka stated that it is his understanding that the
escrow has not closed for the property between the Arroyo
Mocho and Anza Way. As he understands the agreement, that
property can revert to the City if the escrow is not closed.
He would suggest that the staff try to expedite the close
of escrow or to check into the possibility of obtaining
the property.
The City Attorney commented that escrow can take as long
as three years before the City can claim the property.
(Celebration
of Halloween)
Mayor Tirsell stated that she has received numerous requests
to declare Halloween on Saturday night because many parents
CM-33-l70
October 25, 1976
(re Halloween)
will not let their children celebrate Halloween on Sunday for re-
ligious reasons.
Mayor Tirsell would suggest that if children come to the door
to trick-or-treat on Saturday night people should be kind enough
to give them something.
(Unitarian Church)
Mayor Tirsell wondered why the Council has not received any material
concerning the Unitarian Church. She stated that she is getting
letters from Fred Cooper concerning the item and she doesn't know
anything about what he is referring to.
Mr. Musso explained that it was first referred to the staff as
a sewer connection. The sewer connection was processed in the
normal manner, given to the church, and after about a year they
met with the staff to discuss the conditions. The individual
from the church disagreed with the conditions and he was told
that he would have to discuss his differences with the Council
but the item was never brought back to the Council. The applicant
went ahead and filed his request with the County which was referred
to the Planning Commission who acted on it. It did not come to
the Council.
There was brief discussion concerning the application and the
history concerning it.
No action was taken by the Council.
INTRO. OF DOG LICENSE
ORD. AMEND. RE FEES
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY A 3-1 VOTE,
(Cm Turner dissenting), THE ORDINANCE RELATIVE TO THE AMENDMENT OF
DOG LICENSE FEES AND PENALTIES, WAS INTRODUCED AND READ BY TITLE.
IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT MAYOR TIRSELL VOTED IN FAVOR OF THE INTRODUC-
TION OF THE ORDINANCE ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXPEDITING COUNCIL
BUSINESS AND THAT SHE HAD PLANNED TO VOTE AGAINST THE MOTION. CM
STALEY WOULD HAVE VOTED IN FAVOR OF THE ORDINANCE IF HE HAD BEEN
PRESENT AND THE ORDINANCE WOULD HAVE BEEN INTRODUCED.
RE. ORD. AMEND. RE
FREESTANDING FREE-
WAY SIGNS
ON MOTION OF MAYOR TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA, AND BY UNANI-
MOUS VOTE, THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATIVE TO FREESTANDING FREEWAY
SIGNS, WAS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
Mayor Tirsell had asked that the ordinance specifically state, "Inns,
motels, and hotels within 500 feet of the interchange........ That
change should be included in the ordinance for adoption.
CITY MANAGER
STATUS REPORT
Airport
The hangars at the airport are nearly complete and they should be
ready to rent by the end of the month.
CM-33-l7l
october 25, 1976
(City Manager Report)
A new pump has been installed at the airport which is closer to
where people are working.
Car Wash
The car wash improvements are being installed and they are to be
complete by November 5th. The contractor has been contacted and
should begin work on November 8th which will allow train traffic
on the new tracks shortly after that time.
Mill Square Dedication
Closing of First Street for the Mill Square dedication caused a
lot of trouble in the way of trying to divert traffic during
that time, it cost the City about l4 man hours in erecting and
then removing the barricades, and there were many complaints
registered by merchants who were not involved in the dedication
of Mill Square.
Springtown Golf Course
Mr. Parness met with the Springtown Association concerning the
Springtown Golf Course. Everything is in order concerning the
facilities and the agreement with the City. The revised agreement
will be before the Council for discussion on November 8th.
EIR - Administration Bldg.
The EIR for the administration building has been completed. The
EIR is in conjunction with the application for a federal grant
for the construction of an administration building. The applica-
tion will be submitted in the next two or three days. The first
day for sUbmitting an application is October 26th, and the City
wants to be included in the first group of applications received.
Hopefully, everything will be in order because if not, the applica-
tion will be sent back to the City.
Wagoner Property
A subdivision map has been filed for the remaining part of the
Wagoner property which consists of approximately 250 lots and
will go through the usual process. The City is legally obligated
to accept subdivision tract maps, notwithstanding the fact that
the owners realize the subdivision map will not be approved be-
cause of the City's utility problems.
CBD Plan Hearing
The CBD Plan hearing with the Planning Commission has been set for
November 16th, and will probably be back to the Council shortly
after that time.
Airport Master Plan
The Airport Master Plan will be discussed by the Planning Commission
on November 29th.
CM-33-l72
October 25, 1976
Noise Element
The Noise Element is being re-edited and will be submitted to the
Council about the middle of next month.
Noise Committee
The Noise Committee has been doing a lot of work and study. They
have been measuring sounds of every type imaginable.
Insurance O~fice Survey
The Insurance Office survey for fire rating will begin in about
two weeks. Hopefully the survey will work out to the best interest
of the City.
LAVWMA Committee
The LAVWMA Committee met to discuss the business management aspect
of the new arrangement. The reason there was not much notice of
the meeting was because of the lack of time remaining for the
solicitation of interests, receiving them, and scheduling interviews,
then making a selection by the 1st of December.
Mr. Parness will be keeping the Council informed concerning meeting
times and any results.
ADJOURNMENT
~here being no further business to come before the Council, Mayor
Tirsell adjourned the meeting at l2:20 a.m.
APPROVE
Mayor
ATTEST
City Clerk
Livermore, California
CM-33-l73
Regular Meeting of November l, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
November l, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:10
p.m. with Mayor Tirsell presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Dahlbacka, Kamena, Turner, Staley and Mayor
Tirsell
Absent: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirsell led the Councilmembers as well as those present
in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
PROCLAMATION
Mayor Tirsell read a proclamation which proclaimed the days of
November 5, and 6, White Cane Day, as suggested by the Livermore
Lions Club, and in recognition of those who are blind. Assis-
tance given the blind by the Lions Club was also recognized in
the resolution.
MINUTES - None
OPEN FORUM
(Election Code)
Larry Bakken, 875 Lido Drive, stated that he has spoken to the
Council in the past concerning the unconstitutionality of
Ordinance 875. In talking with Cm Kamena and Turner this summer
he was told that the ordinance would be revised, relative to the
election code, and he would like to know when it is going to be
revised.
It was noted that any action on this item had been deferred,
pending a suggestion from the City Clerk.
The City Clerk explained that suggestions will be coming to
the Council, shortly, concerning the problems aassociated with
some of the provisions.
(Access Problems)
Bob Hebert, 779 El Rancho Drive, new manager for Granucci's
Cocktail Lounge, stated that the island on First Street is
creating problems for his business because anyone coming
from the west, on First Street, cannot turn into his driveway.
He received a complaint from someone who had to go on past
his business, for about three blocks, before he could turn
around and travel east on First Street to enter. This was
his only customer for lunch today, and this is an example
of what is happening to his business. The whole street has
been closed off to east or west traffic just today.
Mr. Lee stated that the entire street is generally not
closed to traffic and he will check to make sure people
can get into Granucci's from at least one direction.
There was brief discussion concerning the problem of a
median blocking the entrance to a business so that cars
can enter only from one direction. It was sU9gested that
CM-33-l74
November 1, 1976
(re Access Problems)
the Council study this type of problem to;determine if the City
is doing everything possible for the merchant.
Mr. Lee explained that where there are left turning lanes provided
at various intersections, it is impossible to allow traffic to cross
from one side of the street to the other, for the puropose of getting
to businesses. There is a stacking lane for the left turns that has
to be long enough to hold cars waiting to turn, and this is where the
problem lies. The median has to be extended from First Street
to McLeod, in this case, because it is a short block with a left
turning lane provided at First Street, with a stacking lane.
MOTION SUSPENDING RULES
TO INCLUDE ITEM - APPTS.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO SUSPEND THE COUNCIL RULES TO INCLUDE AN ITEM IN
THE AGENDA RELATIVE TO APPOINTMENTS. MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER
AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
The Council unanimously selected William Zagotta to fill the vacant
seat on the Planning Commission.
DISCUSSION RE LAVWMA
AGREEMENT RE INDUSTRIAL
DISCHARGE CAPACITY
The Council had discussed the changes to be made in the agreement
at the last meeting, with a week to review the agreement.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO STRIKE ITEMS 6 AND 7 OF THE RECITALS, BASED
ON THE OPINION THAT SEWER ALLOCATION SHOULD BE BASED ON POPULATION
PROJECTIONS RATHER THAN LAND AVAILABILITY PROJECTIONS. MOTION
FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO ADOPT THE LAVWMA AGREEMENT, SECONDED BY CM
STALEY, WHICH PASSED BY A 4-1 VOTE (Cm Dahlbacka dissenting).
REPORT RE REFERRAL FROM
COUNTY RE UNITARIAN
FELLOWSHIP SEWER CON-
NECTION APPLICATION
The Unitarian Fellowship, located at 4260 First Street (County
jurisdiction) has submitted an application for building expansion,
which is pending with the County. The City staff met with the
Unitarian Fellowship representatives to discuss conditions of
annexation and site improvement which was then referred to the County
with the possibility that some of the improvements could be delayed.
The matter has been reviewed by the County and the Council has
received a report from Supervisor Cooper which indicates that
the County will allow a septic tank but would urge that the
City conditions be modified in order to allow applicants to
connect to the City's sewer system more reasonably.
Mr. Musso explained the history relative to the permit for sewer
application, and noted that the requirements are standard City
requirements applicable to anyone who wants to connect to the
City sewer and agree to annexation upon request by the City.
Harold Weisner, 883 Adams Avenue, Chairman of the Unitarian Fellow-
ship, stated that the costs that would be imposed by the City would
amount to approximately $30,000. The estimate for their building
expansion is $50,000. They felt it would not be worthwhile to try
CM-33-l75
November 1, 1976
(Unitarian Fellowship App.)
to discuss the possibility of a sewer connection with the City
Council and this is the reason they went to the County to ask
for approval for a septic tank. The City had indicated that
perhaps a bond could be posted for some of the improvements to
be done at a later date, but they felt this would also be economi-
cally unfeasible because the improvements could be required at any
time during the next 10-15 years.
It was noted that Cm Dahlbacka is a member of the Unitarian Fellow-
ship and would abstain from any discussion or vote concerning this
item.
The item was informational in nature and no action was required.
A letter had been prepared by the Mayor, in response to his
letter to the Council, concerning what the issues are. The
Council then discussed the issues and the problems concerning
a use that should be in an urban area but because of a desire
to expand will need City services in the way of sewage and fire
protection, and the fact that an expanded use will generate more
traffic. The applicant is not satisfied with having to meet
the conditions, even if they are delayed.
It was noted that the Council sYmpathizes with the problems
of the Unitarian Fellowship expansion plans, but there are
very few sewer connections remaining and the City would be
reluctant to give a connection to someone in the County.
Mr. Weisner commented that the church does not expect the
City to make exceptions to City policy, but they were trying
to find out if it would be feasible to connect to the City
sewer and they believe it would not be economically possible
to pursue connection to City services.
It was concluded that the City would write to the Board of
Supervisors asking that they withhold action until the prob-
lem of expanding septic tanks could be resolved or discussed
with them. The staff was asked to prepare and send such a
letter to the County, in addition to the one prepared by the
Mayor.
The question was raised as to whether or not Mr. Cooper is
possibly suggesting a reconsideration of the action concerning
Livermore's Sphere of Influence, but the Council majority felt
the letter was more a statement or warning that if a sewer con-
nection is not allowed a septic tank will be allowed.by the County.
The Council asked that a paragraph be added to the letter pre-
pared by the Mayor, asking that any action by the Board be
postponed until the septic tank proliferation situation has been
discussed between the Council and the Board of Supervisors.
AIRPORT WESTERLY
APPROACH PROPERTY PUR~HASE
The City has received approval for FAA financial participation
in the purchase of about 36 acres of West clear lone property.
A subsequent appraisal indicated a higher value for the land
and since the FAA grant is fixed, the City will probably be
forced to purchase less land than anticipated.
CM-33-l76
November l, 1976
(Airport Property Purchase)
Mr. Lee explained that the first appraisal had been made, which
w~s too low, but in the meantime the City entered into an agreement
w~th the FAA. The FAA will be allowing a certain amount of money
for the purchase of property for the clear zone and since the property
has been appraised at a higher value, the City will not have enough
money to purchase the amount of land originally discussed.
There was a question as to why the City shouldn't make reapplica-
tion to the FAA, for the original amount of land. They have indica-
ted that they would provide funding for the remaining amount at a
later date, under a different agreement.
Mr. Lee explained that the original agreement with the FAA is binding
and the only way the City could cancel the original agrement and make
reapplication, would be if they would agree to cancel the first agree-
ment. In his opinion, it would be risky for the City to go to the
FAA asking that the agreement be cancelled because it is possible
that another FAA office might require the entire acquisition as the
original agreement provided for. The compromise, at this time, is
that they will allow the City to purchase the land that can be
paid for, with subsequent acquisition at a later time.
Mr. Lee stated that the FAA has agreed to pay 80% of the value of
the first appraisal with the provision that they can increase this
amount by lO% and Mr. Lee would assume the City could get them to
pay 90%, but this would be the limit.
Discussion followed concerning the modified appraisal and the
options available to the City.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO APPROVE THE PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY, AND
THAT A RESOLUTION BE PREPARED EXECUTING THE AGREEMENT WITH THE FAA.
MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY WHICH PASSED 4-1 (Cm Turner dissenting).
Cm Turner had mentioned during the discussion that he feels the
City should make reapplication to try to save the City $10,000.
This is the reason he voted against the motion.
RE AIRPORT ADMINISTRA-
TIVE SURCHARGE
During the last budget session the Council asked for an analysis
of the administrative airport surcharge. The Finance Director
has submitted a written report to the Council which includes
services rendered to the airport and the cost of these services,
as provided by each City department.
Discussion followed concerning the report and the question was
raised as to what would happen if fuel was removed from the
items listed and the surcharge recomputed. Mr. Nolan explained
the reasons behind the calculations, as they have been made and
what would happen if they were recalculated, deleting fuel.
The suggestion was made that there be a fund for the airport in
the way of a capital improvements fund, rather than being concerned
with different categories and determining what is fair, etc. This
proposal was discussed by the Council.
Bill Bennett, representative of the Airport Advisory Committee,
stated that they have concerns with the amount of airport surcharge
and the itemized statement of costs for services rendered to the
airport by various City departments. They feel that many of the
items listed are assumptions or estimates that collectively add
up to an excessive figure.
CM-33-l77
November l, 1976
(Airport Administra-
tive Surcharge)
The Airort Advisory Committee would recommend reconsideration of
the 8% surcharge, to eliminate the cost of fuel, and that the 8%
should apply to the materials and supplies budget, without the
cost of fuel. They would agree to the fuel markup inclusion.
He also reviewed the figures for which the 8% surcharge could
be based, such as supplies and equipment, deleting the fuel,
but including the markup, and other methods of calculating
the surcharge.
Discussion took place between the Council and Mr. Bennett as
to why the surcharge is considered reasonable by the City,
and is necessary, with Mr. Bennett expressing his side of
the argument as to why it is not reasonable.
Bill Zagotta, 5155 Lillian, stated that he attended the meeting
of the Airport Advisory Committee, and they are not asking that
the City favor the airport for the purpose of attracting industry,
even though he believes the argument could be made. The Airport
Committee is really trying to point out that gas prices have
doubled in the past couple of years, and they could double
again in this amount of time. They could go from a $17,000 sur-
charge, on the gas alone, to $34,000, because of an Arab boycott.
He is sure this is not the intent of the City, but this is the
type of action that would have a very heavy impact on the air-
port. They believe the technique for assessing the surcharge
is incorrect. There is the possibility that the airport could
be assessed twice as much, because of the cost of fuel, and
yet the airport wouldn't be getting one bit more of service
from the City. They would argue that the gas prices should not
be reflected in the surcharge formula.
The Council discussed the suggestion made by Mr. Bennett and
by Mr. Zagotta to delete the fuel charge from the surcharge
formula, and the comment was made that if fuel were to be de-
leted from the surcharge, this philosophy should be extended
to all municipal operations.
Mr. Parness stated that it would be difficult to define what
items should be deleted and questioned if items such as
chlorine and fertilizer, for example, should be deleted
because the costs of these items are unpredictable also.
The Council then discussed the proposal to place the library,
water, golf courses, and airport into one fund, and the
argument was made that the water is the only enterprise
making a profit, which means they would be subsidizing all
the others.
The staff was asked to provide an analysis of all the minor
costs (such as chlorine, fertilizer, gas) so that these things
can be considered at the next budget session. It was noted that
the staff is busy and cannot provide this information until later.
If there is a way to solve the problems discussed concerning the
airport and the cost of gas, this should be recommended; however i
if there is no better solution the City should stay with the 8%
current formula. These things will be considered during the
next budget session.
RECESS
Mayor Tirsell called for a brief recess, after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present.
CM-33-l78
November l, 1976
REPORT RE BUSINESS
LICENSE ORD. AMEND.
Amendments to the Business License Ordinance have been suggested
by the Director of Finance relative to reassessment of the minimum
fee and the method of charging for industrial applicants. A written
report concerning this matter has been submitted to the Council.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT THE SEVEN RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL.
CM STALEY MOVED TO DELETE ITEM 4, (eontractors and their subs)
OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS, SECONDED BY CM TURNER FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES.
The Council discussed the basic philosophy behind Item 4, and the
reason Cm Staley moved to delete the item.
It was noted that there were many discussions and debates over the
items and that there are many reasons as to why the Council should
accept the fourth recommendation.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO AMEND THE AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE DELETION OF
ITEM 1, (minimum annual tax) SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
Discussion followed concerning the amendments to the motion and
the suggestion was made that perhaps the minimum fee should be
the original $20 fee for people whose businesses gross $5,000 or
less. The Council concurred with the $20 minimum.
AMENDMENT MADE BY CM KAMENA WAS WITHDRAWN.
THE AMENDMENT TO DELETE ITEM 4, PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO AMEND THE MAIN MOTION TO READ THAT THE MINIMUM
TAX FOR PEOPLE WHO GROSS FROM 0-$5,000 WILL HAVE A MINIMUM ANNUAL
TAX OF $10, AND THOSE ABOVE $5,000 WILL PAY A TAX AS PROVIDED FOR
IN THE ~a~J.MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY, WHICH PASSED BY UNANI-
MOUS VOTE. fjk'~:lG-
MAIN MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE CHARTER
VS. GENERAL LAW
The Council received a report from the League of California Cities
regarding Charter Law vs. General Law.
The Council concluded that they would prefer to discuss this item
in about 30 days.
CITY EMPLOYEES
RETIREMENT PLAN
The City Manager furnished information for the Council concerning
City employees retirement plan which required no action on the
part of the Council.
There was discussion concerning the problems with the PERS system
and whether or not there would be an alternative means of paying
the retirement for City employees. No action taken.
CM-33-179
.
November 1, 1976
(Architect Contract)
proof that the City has an architect working on the plans for the
building. The contract providing for the design of the building
expired in 1967, and $16,000 has been expended for architectural
fees, to date. Certification must be provided, that there is
an architectural contract, or engineering contract in effect.
The one suggested by the staff is the form contract always used
by the City and it should be noted that the City will receive
credit for the previous architectural services.
CM STALEY MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
AN AGREEMENT, SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
Mr. Parness was asked who was considered and how the City selec-
ted this particular architectural firm. He explained that the
firm was retained in 1967, following a very extensive search,
interviews, and screening of applications.
The architectural firm has agreed to a fee of 8.5% of construc-
tion costs and the question was raised as to whether the City
couldn't have negotiated a smaller fee. It was explained that
during the interviews it was expressed that a fee of 8.5% of
construction costs would be the lowest fee acceptable.
Mr. Parness explained that the architectural firm has agreed to
use the local architectural firm for whatever supplementary
services may be involved.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 268-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN A CONTRACT
EMPLOYING THE SERVICES OF RATCLIFF-SLAMA-CADWALADER,
AS ARCHITECT/ENGINEER IN THE CONSTRUCTION or A MUNI-
CIPAL ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
CONSENT CALENDAR
Res. re Police
Dept. Budget Amend.
The Council adopted a resolution authorizing an amendment to the
Police Department budget, as per discussion at the last meeting.
RESOLUTION NO. 269-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING POLICE DEPART-
MENT BUDGET AMENDMENT
P.C. Summary
of Action lO/26
The Planning commission Summary of Action for their meeting of
October 26, 1976, was submitted for informational purposes.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED.
CM-33-l80
.
November l, 1976
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(BAAPCD Advisory
Board Appointment)
The City Clerk reminded the Council that appointments will be made
for the BAAPCD Advisory Board, and that names are to be submitted
by November 5, 1976.
It was noted that the City Manager's secretary is contacting people
from the Air Pollution Study Committee, to find out if someone from
that committee would be willing to serve.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Reclamation of
Mined Land)
Cm Dahlbacka requested that a letter be sent to the State Mining
and Geology Board concerning the proposed policies for reclamation
of mined land. He believes it is necessary to support a bonding
or method of funding reclamation and that the City send information
relative to the City's experience with the slope of Shadow Cliffs
and the deaths that have been caused by the slopes, through drowning
accidents. He would suggest that the City strongly urge that the
gravel pits to be filled with water be sloped in such a way that
they do not constitute a public health hazard.
Cm Dahlbacka agreed to draft such a letter for review by the Council.
(BASSA Suit)
Cm Dahlbacka asked that the City write a letter to BASSA concerning
its suit against ABAG.
The Mayor indicated that she believes ABAG would like a representa-
tive from the Council to attend the meeting to try to persuade
BASSA to drop the suit and to convince them that this would be
a waste of taxpayer money. The meeting will take place at the
Claremont Hotel on Wednesday, if anyone can attend.
(Track Relocation
- Leonard Property)
Cm Kamena stated that he has been asked questions by Mrs. Leonard
about why the City took the action it did concerning her property
for the track relocation project. Since he was not on the Council
when the project began he would like information concerning some of
these questions.
Cm Kamena was asked to meet with the staff to discuss these issues.
(Consent Calendar
Resolutions)
Cm Turner stated that the Council discussed the intent of resolu-
tions on the Consent Calendar reflecting the vote during the
original discussions. For instance, the Consent Calendar was
approved this evening, but Cm Staley was not present during the
original discussion which prompted the resolution on the Consent
Calendar which he approved this evening.
CM-33-l8l
November l, 1976
(re Consent Calendar
Resolutions Policy)
The resolution on the Consent Calendar should indicate which
Councilmembers approved it, which voted in oposition to it,
and those who were absent the evening the item was decided.
It was suggested that the vote be indicated on the resolu-
tion, in standard form, for adoption on the Consent Calen-
dar.
(Amador Valley
Investors Case)
Cm Turner discussed with the City Attorney, the letter from
him concerning the Amador Valley Investors suit, and he indi-
cated that he feels the Council should have the option of
saying whether or not the judgment would be acceptable. He
would suggest that if the City Attorney feels action should
be taken immediately, a special Council meeting should be
called for the purpose of making such a decision.
The City Attorney explained that the City was under court
order to pay the judgment and this is the reason he met
with the City Manager and the Mayor, rather than bringing
it to the Council. The City had a deadline in which time
the City had to agree to pay the judgment, or the City would
be eventually forced to make payment by a writ of mandate.
This would have cost the City attorney fees on top of attorney
fees for the writ of mandate. He would agree that the Council
had the choice of not paying and taking the chance of being
sued, but in this particular situation it was a clear cut case
of being forced to pay, one way or another, and it was an emer-
gency situation. (Discussion and motion on this item took
place at the end of the meeting.)
(East Avenue Sidewalks)
Mayor Tirsell stated that she received a telephone call from
Jack OWens who is concerned that the City has torn up the
sidewalk on East Avenue, but not placing the new sidewalk on
the new setbacks for the widening of East Avenue. In a few
years the sidewalk will have to be torn out again because of
the widening. .,
Mr. Lee explained that the sidewalk cannot be placed on the
future widening setback because that property has not yet
been acquired by the City.
(Christmas Decorations)
Mayor Tirsell stated that she would like to remind the Council
that in review of the business license ordinance, this year,
no provision was made for Christmas decorations. This is
the third year of the contract with the Chamber, and after
this time, there will be no provision of public money for
this purpose. In times past, it was paid in the business
license tax. The merchants will have to find another method
for financing holiday decorations.
Discussion followed concerning the previous arrangements
for holiday decorations.
CM-33-182
November l, 1976
(Attorney's Fees in
Amador Valley Investors
Law Suit)
The City Attorney asked if the Council would be interested in
ratifying the act of payment for the fees and settlement of
the suit that was brought up by Cm Turner.
CM TURNER MOVED TO RATIFY THE ACT OF PAYMENT OF FEES, SECONDED
BY CM KAMENA, WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Council, Mayor
Tirsell adjourned the meeting at ll:20 p.m. to an executive session
to discuss litigat~~
APPROVE ~ --m ~~J/J
Mayor
,1
ATTESM& ,-
" .~~--
J~~ty Clerk
ermore, California
Regular Meeting of November 8, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
November 8, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:05 p.m.
with Mayor Tirsell presiding.
ROLL CALL
f
Present: Cm Kamena, Turner, Staley and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: Cm Dahlbacka (ill)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirsell led the Councilmembers as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
SPECIAL ITEM -
PRESENTATION OF FLAG
MADE BY BLUE BIRDS TROUP
Carol Roberts and her troup of Blue birds, made a bicentennial flag
of sequins, which they presented to the Council.
The Mayor thanked the girls for the flag which will be displayed
at City Hall.
CM-33-l83
November 8, 1976
MINUTES - lO/25/76
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE (Cm Staley abstaining due to absence at that meeting) THE
MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF OCTOBER 25, 1976, WERE APPROVED AS
SUBMITTED.
OPEN FORUM
(re Public l-7orks
Requirements - So. "L"
and College Avenue)
Rick Corbett, 2498 Merrit Place, stated that he is one of the
people restoring a home located at College and "L" Street and
they have run into a problem in that they have provided a curb
and driveway for the lot but the City is requesting that they
install a different curb, gutter and drain. This would mean
that they would have to destroy some of the present curb and
gutter. He would like to come to some type of agreement with
the city this evening because continuance of the project depends
on a resolution of this problem.
There was brief discussion concerning this matter and Mr. Corbett
indicated that this requirement was listed on their permit but
it was inadvertently overlooked because it was not discussed
with the other items discussed at the time they received their
permit.
CM TURNER MOVED TO SUSPEND COUNCIL RULES THAT WOULD ALLOW THE
COUNCIL TO ACT ON AN ITEM NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA. MOTION
SECONDED BY CM KAMENA, WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Mr. Lee explained that it is the usual policy of the City to
require gutters with construction or reconstruction of a home
in an area which is developed. Sometimes there are old gutters
which were made of asphalt, and are not up to standards, and
these would have to be replaced. It is possible that this is
an item that was not discussed at the time this was brought
to the attention of the P.C.
If the curb is in good shape the City generally does not ask
that it be replaced, and this may have been the case with the
church across the street. This was followed by discussion which
included comments relative to eventual widening of Arroyo Road
and the fact that eventually the public works improvements would
have to be replaced along South "L" at this location.
At this time the City is requiring the curb and gutter to make
them more functional. They would tie into the College Avenue
drainage pattern.
The question was raised as to whether the installation of the
curb and gutter would destroy the sidewalk and trees, and Mr.
Musso felt the staff had arrived at a plan that would save
both.
The discussion cenetered around the question of whether the
Arroyo Road /"L" Street widening fee was paid into curb,
gutter and sidewalk fees, or as part of the widening.
Inasmuch as this item was not scheduled for discussion, the
staff did not have all the information available to answer
some of the questions raised by the Council. It was not
certain what the arrangement had been with the church property
across the street.
CM-33-l84
November 8, 1976
(re Public Works Improv.)
There were no strong objections on the part of the Council to allow
the request and ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND
BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE COUNCIL APPROVED THE REQUEST TO WAIVE .THE
REQUIREMENT FOR THE INSTALLATION OF CURBS AND GUTTERS.
COMMUNICATION RE
NOISE EMISSIONS
The Council received a letter of response from the Noise Abatement
Committee, to inquiries concerning noise emissions of garbage trucks
and loud speaker systems.
The letter was noted for filing.
COMMUNICATION RE
BART BUS SERVICE
A letter was submitted to the Council by the Rhonewood Park Homeowners
Association requesting a change in time for BART bus service in the
afternoon, to begin at 3:30 p.m. rather than 4:30 p.m.
The item was referred to the BART staff.
COMMUNICATION RE
ASSESSMENT PRACTICES
A letter was received from the Assessor's office which indicated
that little could be accomplished by meeting with the Council con-
cerning assessment practices. According to the letter, the assess-
ment practices have remained constant during the term of Don
Hutchinson and are consistent with the laws mandated by the state.
The letter was noted for filing.
COMMUNICATION RE
SEPTIC TANKS
A letter was received from the Regional Water Quality Control Board
concerning the City's request for a statement concerning the use
of septic tanks in areas adjacent to Livermore.
The Council interpreted the letter to read that there really should
not be a proliferation of septic tanks but the Regional Quality
Control Board does not want to be involved with the problems between
the City and the County.
It was noted that there is a problem with the septic tanks because
the water goes into the underground water that the citizens of
Livermore have to keep clean. The citizens pay taxes for this pur-
pose, and then more septic tanks are being allowed which will create
more water cleanup problems for the citizens.
It was suggested that the staff write to the Regional Water Quality
Control Board concerning the policy they have established relative
to septic tanks. It appears that they have established a policy
but do not wish to enforce it and would rather leave the matter to
the decision of the County. The City should find out if they do
have a septic tank policy and if they intend to enforce it, as
well as the penalty for violation of the policy.
CM-33-l85
Nove~er 8, 1976
(re Septic Tanks)
The Council continued to discuss the problems of septic tanks
being allowed by the County, around the Livermore boundaries,
noting that 14 septic tanks have been permitted in the Lomitas
Avenue area recently, despite the ban on septic tanks by the
Health Department.
The staff will write to the Regional Water Quality Control
Board concerning the items mentioned by the Council.
COUNTY RESOLUTION RE
UTILIZATION OF HWY. FUNDS
A copy of the County Board of Supervisors resolution urging
utilization of highway funds, was submitted to the Council
for informational purposes.
COMMUNICATION RE REVIEW
OF SIGNS BY DESIGN
REVIEW COMMITTEE
A request has been received from the Design Review Committee
that they be permitted to review and approve design of signs
to be installed on buildings.
The Council felt it would be appropriate to allow review and
comment or recommendation by the Design Review Committee, but
approval should be the responsibility of the Planning Commission
or Council.
A staff letter will be sent to the Design Review Committee encourag-
ing their review and comments of signs to be installed on buildings.
COMMUNICATION RE ESTABLISH-
ING SECOND SISTER CITY
A letter has been received from william S. Neef, Jr., Chairman of
the Livermore Sister City Organization. Mr. Neef indicated that
the Committee has encountered various problems, including financial
problems, with the Sister City Program and at this time a second
sister City could not be developed. His suggestion would be to
urge a separate committee of citizens who would like to implement
a relationship with Yotsukaido, Japan.
Samuel M. Cohen, 5120 Norma Way, thanked the Council for consider-
ing the establishment of a second Sister City Committee. He was
one of the people requesting the establishment of the second
Sister City Committee and they would appreciate the establish-
ment of such a committee, hopefully, during the Bicentennial year.
Mr. Cohen indicated that at this time they would like endorse-
ment from the Council for the formation of a second Sister City
Committee, with no financial obligation on the part of the City.
However, they have no way of knowing what another board might
request in another five years, for example. Also, they have
no objection to whatever financial arrangement the City might
have with the existing Sister City Committee.
It was quickly pointed out that the City, in no way, funds the
Sister City Committee.
CM-33-l86
November 8, 1976
(Sister City Committee)
Mr. Parness explained the basic relationship between a city in this
country and a foreign nation, in that it is not made a part of the
city government, or a city is not supposed to officially participate
in the relationship. A sister city committee is a people-to-people
relationship. Certain cities may wish to participate, financially,
to the efforts of the committees, but this is not specifically
recommended. Official gifts are sometimes presented to the foreign
city, but often this is done under the auspices of a local club
such as the Rotary, etc. The only contribution the City has made
has been the air fare to the delegate sent to Quezaltenango each
year. It is the official policy of the National Affiliation Com-
mittee, that city governments are not to participate financially.
The Council had no objection to formally approving the formation of
such a committee, if the City has no financial obligation.
It was suggested that if a second Sister City is to be formed, perhaps
it would be best to discontinue providing the air fare for the Quezal-
tenango delegate. If the City is to continue providing air fare, the
second committee may also request air fare and the City wouldn't be
able to allow air fare for one but not the other committee. If the
intent of these committees is a people-to-people relationship, they
should raise money of their own for expenses.
It was noted that the air fare has been budgeted for this fiscal
year, but after this year it will be discontinued.
CM STALEY MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ENDORSE THE CONCEPT OF A SECOND
SISTER CITY WITH YOTSUKAIDO, JAPAN. MOTION SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
CM TURNER MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO STATE THAT WITH THE EXCEP-
TION OF THE 1976-1977 BUDGET, THE COUNCIL WILL NO LONGER MAKE A
MONITARY CONTRIBUTION TO THE SISTER CITY COMMITTEE, WITH THE
EXCEPTION OF MEMBERSHIP FEES. AMENDMENT SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
The argument was made against the amendment that the members and
people in the community have spent a great deal of money in housing,
feeding and entertaining delegates from Quezaltenango and it would
seem a little unfair to cut the air fare that the City has provided
once a year. People have provided a great deal of out-of-pocket
expenses for the privilege of having students from Guatemala come
to Livermore for the school year. It is quite expensive to house
someone for an entire school year and to purchase clothes for them
as well as taking them to school events and ball games. At the same
time, a Livermore student has the privilege of going to Quezaltenango
for the year with the same type of exchange.
Mr. Cohen emphasized that his committee would have no objection if
the City continues to finance the air fare for the Sister City to
Quezaltenango, and they did not intend to disrupt their activities.
Discussion followed concerning the problem of whether or not the
City should continue to provide the air fare.
It was concluded that before making a decision on the air fare,
perhaps the Sister City should be given the opportunity to respond.
AMENDMENT WITHDRAWN, PENDING A REPLY FROM THE SISTER CITY COMMITTEE.
MAIN MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RECESS
Mayor Tirsell called for a brief recess after which the Council
meeting resumed with members present as during roll call.
CM-33-l87
November 8, 1976
DISCUSSION RE SPRINGTOWN
GOLF COURSE AGREEMENT
The Council previously discussed a proposed agreement concerning
the springtown Golf Course for execution with the Springtown
Association. A revised draft has been prepared, as a result
of discussion among the Council and with the Association which
the Council has received.
The agreement would provice for dedication of property and
facilities at the site and there had been discussion concerning
the composition of the Greens Committee and matters pertaining
to the snack bar.
Mr. Nolan, the Finance Director, was asked if 22,000 rounds of
golf at the Springtown Golf Course would seem a reasonable
estimate with the new facilities planned for, and Mr. Nolan
indicated that he believes the 22,000 rounds is a very con-
servative estimate.
There was discussion as to how rounds of golf might be in-
creased, including the suggestion to hold tournaments at
the golf course.
Mr. Parness reported that prior to the City taking over the
golf course, the golf pro at Springtown was getting 30,000
rounds of golf. He had a small pro shop, and offered various
types of programs to attract play at the course. However, the
golf course was not being taken care of properly and the City
took over the operations and had to incur a substantial amount
of expense in restoring it. He would estimate that it would
take a number of years to realize 30,000 rounds of golf at
springtown because of the competition at Las positas.
Concern was expressed over the declining trend in the number
of rounds, and how the city might have some assurance that
the 22,000 rounds is a good estimate.
Mr. Nolan stated that the City has had 22,000 rounds at
springtown in the past and with the new facilities he would
assume that the 22,000 figure is not unreasonable.
Ray Faltings, lOl8 Via Granada, reported that in reviewing
and comparing the first quarterly statement for last year
and the first quarterly statement for this year, it shows
that there was a loss of $5,500, during which time the restaur~\~0~
ant was not occupied. . . .. fJ'fJi: /
.c... . . His concern at this time-
is the rounds of play because there were a little over 2,000
rounds less played this year than last year at Las positas.
Neither golf course has showed an increase in rounds of golf
played during this quarter and yet the estimates from the
Director of Finance are based on increased rounds played.
Is it reasonable to assume that the decrease is only temporary,
or is there an over saturation of golf courses in the Valley,
or is the public turning to other forms of recreation? Perhaps
the City should find out if other golf courses in other areas
are experiencing a drop in the number of rounds played before
a long range decision is made.
Mr. Faultings indicated that if people are going to other
types of recreation in other areas and golf rounds are de-
creasing everywhere, perhaps the land could be put to other
types of uses such as agricultural, tennis courts, or some
type of activity provided by LARPD.
CM-33-l88
November 8, 1976
(Golf Course Agreement)
It was explained that last year was a very bad year at the golf
course and shouldn't be considered as an indication of how things
will go in the future. That happened to be a year of bare maintenance.
The comment was made that the City paid $lOO,OOO for the Springtown
Golf Course, and the City has been continuing to lose money on it.
It could be used for open space, but money could not be generated
from open space and other suggestions would not necessarily solve
the problem either. If the City tried to sell the property there
could be no sewer connections allowed, so the property really can't
be developed either and therefore probably could not be sold. It
seems to be a matter of allowing one of three choices: 1) doing
nothing and allow weeds to grow; 2) not bother with trying to balance
the expenses and the income operations; or 3) invest $20,000 in an
effort to provide facilities to enhance more rounds of play, with
the risk of subsidizing that public facility for a number of years.
A fourth suggestion was made to operate the golf course as a minimum
facility without making the $20,000 investment, and continue to take
a loss. ,'Jrz7
~~
- F/
/
CM STALEY MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF THE
AGREEMENT WITH THE SPRINGTOWN ASSOCIATION AND AUTHORIZING AN
EXPENDITURE FOR REQUISITE BUILDING MODIFICATIONS, NOT TO EXCEED
$20,000. MOTION SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
CM TURNER MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO STATE THAT THE $20,000
WILL BE DERIVED FROM THE PARK FUND. AMENDMENT SECONDED BY MAYOR
TIRSELL.
AMENDMENT PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Mr. Parness had explained that there is one contingency to the
entire agreement arrangement which is that the City acquire a
qualified golf professional for the Springtown Golf Course. This
is very necessary in revitalizing the economics at the facility.
He also suggested that the $20,000 for structural improvements be
held in abeyance until the City is assured that such a golf pro
can be retained.
CM STALEY MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE IN THE AGREEMENT
THAT IT IS SUBJECT TO THE CITY'S ABILITY TO FIND A QUALIFIED GOLF
PROFESSIONAL AND THAT NO MONIES WILL BE SPENT BY THE CITY, NOR WILL
THE ASSOCIATION BE OBLIGATED TO CONVEY THE PROPERTY TO THE CITY UNTIL
SUCH TIME AS A QUALIFIED PROFESSIONAL IS RETAINED. AMENDMENT WAS ~
SECONDED BY CM KAMENA. ~
AMENDMENT PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. ~
"'--~
It was mentioned by Mayor Tirsell that people may complain that the ~
City is always wasting money on golf courses. A community is a lot ~
of things which City taxes provide such as schools, parks, ball field~~
soccer fields, bike paths, a library, sailing instruction at1U . 1..... IU,1(
Camp Shelly near Lake Tahoe, and many things that the citizens north
of the highway are not able to participate in. The golf course is a
worthwhile subsidy and the Council will never be able to please all
the taxpayers. The City is subsidizing a life style for senior citizens
who pay taxes and have paid them longer than most of the people in
town. These people are proud of the community and like to partici-
pate and the subsidy for the golf course is deserved.
CM-33- 189
November 8, 1976
(Golf Course Agreement)
MAIN MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. IT WAS ALSO NOTED THAT
IF CM DAHLBACKA HAD PRESENT HE WOULD ALSO HAVE VOTED IN FAVOR
OF THE MOTION.
RESOLUTION NO. 270~76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
AGREEMENT (Springtown Association)
RESOLUTION NO. 271-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A BUDGET AMENDMENT
The Council then discussed membership of the Greens Committee
and whether there would be a conflict of interest if a golfer
living in Springtown would have a conflict of interest if allowed
to serve on the Committee. Jerry Atwell, member of the Greens
Committee had objected to the appointment of anyone living in
Springtown, to the Committee, on this basis.
Mr. Lee explained that Mr. Atwell had interpreted the member-
ship suggestion that the person had to live at springtown.
This was not the intention and the suggestion was that the
person had to be interested in springtown and play at spring-
town and it is possible that they may live there but it is not
a requirement. He has talked with Jerry recently and he does
not object with the recommendations.
Mr. Lee added that the Greens Committee prefers the recommenda-
tion that two members of Las positas, two members from springtown
Golf course, and I member at large, serve on the Greens Committee.
It was mentioned that this would result in a change to the present
constitution of the Greens Committee, and will have to be brought
back to the Council.
CM TURNER MOVED TO AMEND THE
IN MEMBERSHIP, WHICH WILL BE
TO THE COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL.
PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CONSTITUTION, TO INCLUDE THE CHANGE
PREPARED BY THE STAFF AND RETURNED
MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND
Dan Lippstreau, the golf professional at Las positas, stated
that the City has had difficulty finding a golf professional,
during the past, to serve Las positas. In his opinion, if the
City is willing to pay a good salary for this position the City
would have no trouble locating a good golf pro. He believes
that the City will have a great deal of difficulty in trying to
retain a golf pro at the salary they now have in mind.
REPORT RE COMMERCIAL
TRUCK PARKING FACILITIES
The item concerning truck parking facilities and restriction
of 3 ton trucks on public streets has been discussed by the
Council in the past. There was concern raised over the fact
that the 3 ton limit could also include recreational vehicles
and since this was not the intent of the ordinance the City
Attorney was asked to make a recommendation.
The City Attorney explained that this problem could be corrected
by using the term, "commercial vehicle, for hire", which would
limit the 3 ton restrictions to the commercial type of vehicle.
CM-33- 190
November 8, 1976
(re Truck Parking)
THIS ITEM HAD BEEN TABLED BY THE COUNCIL. ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA,
SECONDED BY CM TURNER, AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE ITEM WAS REMOVED
FROM THE TABLE FOR DISCUSSION.
It was mentioned by the City Attorney that it would be necessary
to change Section 13.14 of the ordinance relative to truck parking
to include the wording he has suggested. Until the ordinance is
changed, the City can selectively not enforce this section.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION RELATIVE TO PARKING ZONES,
SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
There was discussion concerning the areas from which the commercial
vehicles will be restricted, and those areas in which they will be
allowed.
It was explained that the Chief of Police must have a resolution
adopted in order to have rules to follow, concerning citations of
trucks exceeding the 3 ton limit.
The Mayor reported on all of the parking facilities available for
the commercial trucks, in the City, and the status of the parking
sites. The most expensive rate for truck parking is $25/month.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 272-76
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. l29-72 AS
AMENDED, RELATING TO RESTRICTED PARKING ZONES,
BY THE ADDITION OF A PROHIBITION ON PARKING OF
VEHICLES EXCEEDING 6,000 POUNDS ON ANY RESIDEN-
TIAL STREET IN THE CITY OF LIVERMORE.
REPORT RE CROSSING
GUARD ON OLrVINA AVE.
,
The Director of Public Works reported that the Council discussed
the need for a crossing guard at the intersection of Olivina Avenue
and Albatross Avenue, in April. At that time there were not enough
warrants to allow a crossing guard and the Council requested that
a survey be taken after the opening of the underpasses to determine
if the warrants could be met.
A survey has been conducted, and the new pedestrian and vehicle
counts provide the new data to meet the state criteria established
for allowing adult crossing guards. It is recommended that a crossing
guard be approved by the Council for this intersection.
CM TURNER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION APPROVING
THE CROSSING GUARD AT ALBATROSS AVENUE AND OLIVINA AVENUE. MOTION
WAS SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
The resolution will appear on the Consent Calendar next week.
REPORT RE FIRE STATION
#4 CONSTRUCTION BIDS
The following bids were received for construction of Fire Station
#4 and due to the extended time in completing the project the staff
regretfully requests additional funding - approximately 10% more
than originally planned. It is recommended that the bid be awarded
to the low bidder, McClellan Construction, Inc.
CM-33-l9l
November 8, 1976
(Bids)
McClellan Construction, Inc.
Wallace Webb & Son Construction
M & H Construction
Nelson T. Lewis Construction
Hodgson Construction, Inc.
$161,734.00
177,300.00
162,905.00
167,370.00
l80,201.00
Mr. Parness explained the method for soliciting bids, which was
through the Daily Pacific Builders, and the bids were small
enough to attract small builders. He is not sure why local
contractors did not submit bids.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE BID WAS AWARDED TO THE LOW BIDDER, McCLELLAN CONSTRUC-
TION, INC., AND THE BUDGET ADJUSTMENT WAS APPROVED.
RESOLUTION NO. 273-76
A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID
(McClellan Construction company)
A resolution approving the budget amendment will appear on the
Consent Calendar next week.
REPORT RE CUP APP. FOR
ARCO SERVICE STATION
The ARCO Service Station, at the corner of Stanley Boulevard
and Murrieta Boulevard, has applied for a CUP to permit con-
version of the existing service station to a convenience
market and self-serve gasoline station.
The Planning Commission reviewed the application, made the
five requisite findings and recommends that the Council
approve the CUP application. The Planning Commission
adopted Resolution 89-76 recommending approval of the CUP.
It was noted that the item was approved by the P.C. about
five weeks ago and it really wouldn't be fair for the Council
to decide to deny the application after that length of time.
Mr. Musso was asked why the Council has not seen the report
sooner. He explained that the staff was waiting for a copy
of the P.C. minutes to be typed and included in the report
to the Council.
Mr. Musso explained that most of the conditions were met with
the development of the gasoline station and the CUP is a re-
iteration of those conditions and replacing the old permit.
There was brief discussion concerning the sign that would
be allowed and Mr. Musso noted that the only concern over
the sign was the visibility within the building. They
have assurred the City that their sign will conform with
the ordinance. The Planning Commission discussed the sign
visibility relative to the use of smoked glass for the
building, which he explained would be similar to that used
at 7-ELEVEN.
Mr. Howell, with Atlantic-Richfield (ARCO), Walnut Creek resident,
stated that they have agreed to the installation of a burglar
alarm system, also, acceptable to the City.
CM-33- 192
November 8, 1976
(ARCO Station)
There was a question as to whether an area with limited access
would have many problems as a result of the new proposal, and
in connection with being relatively close to Granada High School.
Mr. Lee felt there are medians and turns provided in order to
make safe exits from the street to the gasoline station, regardless
of what type of product is offered - food or gas. A different type
of convenience really shouldn't cause a problem.
It was also mentioned that a mixture of the business of selling
gasoline and the business of selling food items may place the
business in a different business license tax category and Mr.
Howell indicated that they are aware of this possibility.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION FOR A CUP TO PERMIT
THE SALES OF CONVENIENCE ITEMS AND SELF-SERVICE GASOLINE. MOTION
WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
The Mayor spoke against the motion because she believes a conver-
sion of the gas station to a mini-market type of service would be
of no real benefit to the local citizens. Most of the items to be
offered at the gas station are already being sold at the Holdener
Dairy, just down the street. She will be voting against the motion.
The intent of a CUP is to allow a use that would be an advantage to
the City and is to be issued at the discretion of the Council.
The argument was made that competition should be allowed and there
is no real reason to deny the request.
MOTION PASSED 3-1 (Mayor Tirsell dissenting, Cm Dahlbacka absent).
A resolution will be prepared by the staff for the Consent Calendar
next week.
REPORT RE CROSSWALK
AT FIRST & "J" STREET
A report from the Director of Public Works, concerning the crosswalk
problem at First and "J" Street indicated that the matter was referred
to the State. Cal Trans intends either to remove the crosswalk or to
warn motorists that they are nearing a crosswalk. Since the crosswalk
is heavily used, Mr. Lee would suggest that the crosswalk be removed
only as a last resort.
The staff was asked to continue to monitor the crosswalk to determine
if the new methods are satisfactory.
REPORT RE EXTENSION
OF CONCANNON BOULEVARD
Prior to discussion concerning the extension of Concannon Boulevard,
Mr. Parness suggested that the Council wait until January when the
new Board of Supervisors will be seated. The new Board may have a
different view concerning the extension of Concannon Boulevard.
It was noted that the County is opposing the widening of Arroyo
Road and perhaps the funneling of traffic across Concannon might
affect the widening of Arroyo Road.
CM-33-l93
November 8, 1976
REPORT RE EXTEN-
SION OF MINES ROAD
The staff was asked to bring the report to the Council, concerning
the extension of Mines Road, at the same time the extension of
Concannon Boulevard is discussed.
APPOINTMENTS
Due to the absence of Cm Dahlbacka, the appointments were postponed
until a full Council is present.
REPORT RE COUNTY GENERAL
PLAN AMEND. HEARING
Mayor Tirsell reported that she will be attending a hearing for
the County's General Plan. The first hearing on a proposed amend-
ment to the County General Plan, pertaining to the Livermore area
has been scheduled for November 9th. A second hearing has been
planned for November 18th, and a third hearing is to take place
in December.
The City has not received notice of any of the hearings, nor have
we received a copy of the plan amendment other than a partially
complete copy.
Mr. Musso stated that the City did receive notice of the hearing
just today.
Mayor Tirsell asked for permission to testify, on behalf of the
City, the past position of the City concerning New Town, tomorrow.
She would also like permission to testify to any position the
Council has taken with regard to land use around the City and
to present testimony that is in the City's General Plan considera-
tions.
The Council concurred.
CONSENT CALENDAR
P.~. Summary
The Council received the Summary from the P.C. meeting of November
2nd, for informational purposes.
Res. Auth. Settlement
of Lawsuit (Freisman)
A resolution authorizing settlement of a lawsuit, City of Livermore,
V. Freisman, et al, was adopted h?the Council.
RESOLUTION NO. 274-76
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT OF LAWSUIT
(City v. Freisman, et al)
Payroll & Claims
There were 160 claims in the amount of $3l3,992.l0, and 295 payroll
warrants in the amount of $lOO,905.95, for a total of $4l4,898.05,
dated October 25, 1976, and approved by the City Manager.
CM-33-l94
November 8, 1976
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, WITH
REMOVAL OF ITEM 5.3 (Holdener Resolution) (Cm Kamena and Dahlbacka
absent).
L _ INTRO. OF ORD. AMEND.
~vtJiP RE ANCESTRAL TREES
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM-~ AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE (Cm Kamena and Dahlbacka absent) THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
RELATIVE TO ANCESTRAL TREES WAS INTRODUCED AND READ BY TITLE ONLY.
ADOPTION OF MUNI. CODE
AMEND. RE LICENSES, FEES,
ETC., RE DOGS/ANIMALS
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY 2-1 VOTE (Cm
Kamena and Dahlbacka absent) (Cm Turner dissenting) THE MUNICIPAL
CODE AMENDMENT RELATING TO LICENSE FEES, ETC., RELATING TO DOGS,
ANIMALS AND FOWL, WAS ADOPTED.
IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT MAYOR TIRSELL VOTED IN FAVOR OF THE ORDINANCE
ONLY IN THE INTEREST OF EXPEDITING BUSINESS. IF ALL COUNCILMEMBERS
HAD BEEN PRESENT SHE WOULD HAVE OPPOSED THE MOTION.
ORDINANCE NO. 90l
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 4.38, RELATING
TO AMOUNT OF LICENSE FEES, 4.40 AND 4.4l, RELAT-
ING TO PENALTIES FOR FAILURE TO OBTAIN LICENSE,
OF ARTICLE IV, RELATING TO DOGS, OF CHAPTER 4,
RELATING TO ANIMALS AND FOWL, OF THE LIVERMORE
CITY CODE, 1959.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Staff Member Resignation)
Don Bradley, Assistant to the City Manager, reported that he submitted
a resignation to the City Manager this morning, and tomorrow he will
be in the City of Pinole for a public announcement that he has been
appointed City Manager of the City of Pinole.
The Council expressed congratulations to Mr. Bradley as well as the
fact that the City is sorry to lose him.
(Closing of Street)
Mr. Lee stated that he has checked into the complaint of McLeod
Street being closed, between First and Second Street, and found
that the street was closed for only a very short time during the
time PT&T was doing some work that necessitated closure of the
street.
(Executive Session)
The City Attorney requested an executive session to discuss two
items in litigation.
CM-33- 195
November 8, 1976
(Homestead Savings)
The City Clerk reminded the Councilmembers that they need to
RSVP, either to Mr. Parness' secretary, or Homestead Savings,
concerning the Homestead Savings invitation.
(Resolutions)
The City Clerk asked if the note concerning the voting represents
the best way to handle the situation with votes on resolutions
which reflect action or a decision and the Council agreed that
it is.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Conference)
Cm Turner stated that there is a conference in Sacramento on
December 8th and 9th, which would cost $35. He would like to
attend the conference as a City representative.
The Council thanked Cm Turner for volunteering to attend and
the City will make the necessary arrangements.
(Order of Moose)
Cm Turner stated that a representative from the Loyal Order of
Moose, in Tracy, has contacted him concerning the establishment
of an Order in Livermore. It is necessary to have lOO members
to establish a charter and they are requesting the City's approval.
Cm Turner was asked to respond, in writing, informing him that
the City has many good civic organizations and the City would
welcome their organization.
(Death of Leading Citizen)
Cm Turner expressed sorrow over the death of a leading citizen,
Ray Walker. Mr. Walker was a State Farm Insurance representa-
tive in Livermore for the past 20 years, and a member of Rotary.
Mr. Walker brought many benefits to the City of Livermore and
was a very active citizen; the City will miss him.
The staff was asked to send condolences to Mr. Walker's family.
(Appt. to Airport
Land Use Committee)
Mayor Tirsell stated that it will not be possible for Mr. Bill
Bennett to accept the appointment to the Alameda County Airport
Land Use Committee, should he be selected.
Dr. Shirley has indicated that Dr. Pete DeBruin has been the
regular alternate representative and that he would be willing
to serve on the committee.
CM STALEY MOVED TO SUBMIT THE NAME OF PETER DE BRUIN, TO THE
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMITTEE, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, WHICH PASSED
BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM-33-l96
November 8, 1976
(Card of Congratula-
tions re Election)
Mayor Tirsell asked if the Council would like to send a card congratu-
lating Valerie Raymond for winning the election and becoming a new
member of the County Board of Supervisors, and to send cards to
Congressman Stark and Assemblyman Mori for their victory during
the last election also.
The Council concurred with the suggestion to send letters of
congratulations.
(County Hearing re
Unitarian Fellowship
Church Application)
Mayor Tirsell reported that the County Board of Supervisors intends
to review the application of the unitarian Fellowship Church tomorrow.
She wondered if anyone from the staff will be attending the meeting.
Cm Turner stated that he would be happy to attend the hearing with
Mr. Musso.
(Reconsideration
re Driving Range)
Mayor Tirsell asked if the Council would like to reconsider the
purchase of a driving range for the Springtown Golf Course.
A report on this item will be prepared by the staff for later
discussion by the Council.
RES. RE HOLDENER DAIRY
The Council had removed the resolution concerning the Holdener Dairy
(Item 5.3) from the Consent Calendar in order to allow Cm Kamena to
return to the meeting and vote on the item. Cm Kamena is present
at this time.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION DENYING THE .APPEAL OF A
VARIANCE DENIAL (Holdener Dairy). MOTION SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL.
Prior to a vote on the motion, the question was asked as to whether
or not the Council would possibly reconsider this item before voting
on the resolution. The majority of the Council indicated they would
not be willing to reconsider.
MOTION PASSED 3-1 (Cm Turner dissenting, Cm Dahlbacka absent).
RESOLUTION NO. 275-76
RESOLUTION DENYING APPEAL OF VARI-
ANCE DENIAL (Holdener Dairy)
CITY MANAGER'S
STATUS REPORT
Departmental Activity
The Planning Department is finishing the EIR reports for two major
projects applied for under the Public Works Employment Act Program.
Even if the City doesn't receive funding, this is a large step that
will be taken care of for future applications.
CM-33-l97
November 8, 1976
Subdivision App.
Application has been made for a new subdivision in the Waggoner
property area. The subdivision will cover about 270 lots and
will soon be before the Planning Commission for hearing.
CBD Plan
The first hearing for the CBD Plan will be held with the Planning
Commission next week.
Track Relocation
The construction work will commence again, this coming Wednesday,
for the track relocation work. The SP Company is planning to
shift to the new trackage on this day and the removal of the old
rails and ties should be accomplished in about two weeks with
repairs to the intersections to follow. Also there will be
the construction of the access roadway to the Standard Oil bulk
plant. The entire project may be completed in 6-8 weeks.
Railroad Avenue
As a companion feature to the track relocation work, is the
extension of Railroad Avenue. The engineering design for this
project is nearly finished and bids will be solicited this month.
The City is contacting two private property ownerships for the
purpose of obtaining property for the project.
Construction for extension of the road will not be undertaken
until after the 1st of the year.
"P" Street Signals
Signals will be installed at the intersection of "P" Street
and Railroad Avenue, but they will not be actuated until
the Railroad Avenue highway is extended and signals are
installed at Stanley and "S" Street, since the two signals
are to be compatible.
Advertising Brochure
The Airport Advisory Committee and the staff are preparing an
advertising brochure for the airport and restaurant as well as
the golf course. The ~ity is soliciting volunteer service from
the Lab's Graphic Arts Division, and the City will be receiving
production: lay-outs.
When the time nears for production of the brochure, the Council
will be asked for input.
Personnel
The City is recruiting for 8 positions, at this time.
CM-33-l98
November 8, 1976
Industrial Subdivision
Western Pacific has contracted with Earl Mason and Associated
Professions for the preparation of an industrial subdivision.
The Council may recall that Southern Pacific Development Company
was in the process of establishing an industrial park but had
to abandon the project because of financial problems. They are
now going ahead with industrial subdivision plans for their property.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further Council business, the Mayor adourned the
meeting at 11:20 p.m. to an executive session to discuss matters
of litigation.
~iJ-~ ~
APPROVED
.(~~v')
Mayor
OclLilL~ifL
rfJ,er re, C:~~fornia
ATTEST
Regular Meeting of November 15, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
November 15, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:05 p.m.
with Mayor Tirsell presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Dahlbacka, Kamena, Turner, and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: Cm Staley (Seated Later)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirsell led the Councilmembers as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES - 11/1/76
P. l79, lOth paragraph (motion), line 4 should begin: IN THE
ORDINANCE........ETC.
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF NOVEMBER ll, 1976, WERE
APPROVED, AS CORRECTED.
CM-33-199
November 15, 1976
OPEN FORUM
No comments.
PUBLIC HEARING RE HOUSING
& COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
ACT FUNDS (Soc. Servo Bldg.)
As part of the federal regulations concerning Housing and Commun-
ity Development Act funds, a public hearing has been scheduled.
This is the third year allocation of our local grant under the
program and it might be noted that the entire three year alloca-
tion has been committed to the proposed multi-service center
(Social Services Building) at the Civic Center site.
Mayor Tirsell opened the public hearing; however, no public
testimony was offered.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA, AND BY UNANI-
MOUS VOTE, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
COMMUNICATION - LETTER
OF RESIGNATION
The Council received a letter of resignation from the Airport
Advisory Committee, from Bill Zagotta.
The staff was asked to send a letter thanking Mr. Zagotta for
his service on this committee.
COMMUNICATION RE STATE
RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD
PRIORITY LIST
The City has received a letter from the State Water Quality
Control Board, acknowledging the fact that their staff worked
with misinformation. They are removing the City from the list
of items not to be funded and they are notifying the Regional
Board that there was an error in the priority list and that
the City will be reviewed on the November schedule of the
Regional Board.
Item noted for filing.
COMMUNICATION RE EXPAN-
SION OF AC TRANSIT BUS SERVo
A letter was received from the Superintendent of Schools, Leo
Croce, indicating that if AC Transit were to expand service,
this might help alleviate the school bussing problem as well
as reducing the hazards to students who walk home.
It was mentioned that the staff has referred the letter to
AC Transit.
DISCUSSION RE LAVWMA
BALLOT ISSUE
It was noted that Cm Staley is ill, but intends to attend the
Council meeting later.
CM TURNER MOVED TO SUSPEND COUNCIL RULES TO DELETE THE LAVWMA
BALLOT DISCUSSION (Item 3.l) AS WELL AS ITEMS 4.5, 4.6, AND 4.7,
CM-33-200
November IS, 1976
UNTIL CM STALEY ARRIVES. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND
PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE CITY'S
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAM
The Personnel Director has prepared a report and tabulation of how the
City is conducting its Affirmative Action Plan.
It was suggested that this type of report be furnished, annually,
for review at the time the budget is reviewed.
The City Manager was asked about recruitment advertising for posi-
tions, and he explained that it depends upon the job description.
sometimes it is advertised locally, sometimes it extends to the
Bay Area, and there are times it is advertised in the entire state.
It depends on where the recruitment field is for the particular
type of job advertised.
Preference is given to local applicants.
Item noted for filing.
RES. RE AMENDMENTS TO
PERSONNEL RULES & REG.
In order that the Personnel Rules and Regulations be in compliance
with the Supreme Court of California's decision on Skelly, it is
recommended that the Council adopt a resolution incorporating the
garnishment pOlicy and disciplinary action policy in the Personnel
Rules and Regulations concerning City employees.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION INCORPOPATING THE GARNISHMENT
POLICY AND DISCIPLINARY ACTION POLICY IN THE PERSONNEL RULES AND
REGULATIONS. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
It was noted that the employee has a right to request a hearing,
and at the discretion of that employee the hearing can be either
private or public.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 282-76
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO PER-
SONNEL RULES AND REGULATIONS AND ADOPTING
SAME AS AMENDED
REPORT FROM P.C. RE CUP
REQUEST FOR SEWER CONN.
A report was received from the Planning Commission concerning a re-
quest for two sewer connections, for property southwest of Bluebell
Drive, between the Altamont Creek and Hollyhock Street.
The P.C., unable to make the prerequisite findings to allow the
CUP, recommended denial of the CUP application to allow use of
the land as a two parcel residential subdivision with sewer
connections.
IT WAS NOTED THAT THIS ITEM IS THE PROPERTY THE COUNCIL IS CON-
SIDERING PURCHASING AS PART OF THE SPRINGTOWN GOLF COURSE (Item 4.6)
AND THAT THIS ITEM SHOULD BE DISCUSSED AFTER ITEM 4.6.
CM-33-20l
November 15, 1976
(re CUP App. re Lot
Split & Sewer Conn.)
CM TURNER MOVED TO SUSPEND THE COUNCIL RULES TO ALLOW ITEM
4.3(a) TO BECOME 4.6(a) AND THAT ITEM 4.6 WILL BECOME ITEM
4.6(b), SO THAT THESE TWO ITEMS CAN BE DISCUSSED CONCURRENTLY.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM KAMENA, WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
The Council will discuss this item after discussion of Item
4.5.
REPORT RE CREATION
OF FUTURE WIDTH
LINES FOR EAST AVE.
The public hearing concerning the creation of future width lines
for East Avenue was scheduled for December 6, ON MOTION OF CM
TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA, AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE AMENDMENT
TO ARCHITECTURAL SER-
VICES CONTRACT (Fire Station #4)
The architectural services agreement for the design of the two
fire stations was awarded in October of 1974. At that time it
was intended that bids for both stations would be solicited simul-
taneously; however, due to site selection problems the archi-
tectural design for Station 4 could not proceed until May of
1976. During this time delay the architect has experienced
escalation of costs and has submitted a request for a fee in-
crease of $6,350.
It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authoriz-
ing an architectural fee adjustment in the amount of $6,350.
The City Manager was asked where this additional money will
come from, and Mr. Parness indicated that the only hope would
be from the prospects of the income derived from the revenue
sharing funds that should arrive soon. The other option would
be to use some of the City's reserves.
The Council questioned whether this was arranged for in the
original contract. Mr. Parness explained that it was not -
the fee was set, but the original agreement did specify that
in the event the service charge exceeded a year, the fees
would be subject to further negotiation. This is what has
happened - this item has gone past a year, due to no fault
of the architect.
Mr. Schlientz, with Associated Professions, stated that one
of the reasons he is asking for this increase in fees is be-
cause extra work was involved in the preparation of two sepa-
rate contract documents for the two fire stations, rather than
one, as originally planned. These were designed as two sepa-
rate projects which involves a great deal of work. In addition,
there have been two years of wage increases and other cost in-
creases that account for the increase in fees request.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ARCHI-
TECTURAL FEE ADJUSTMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,350. MOTION
WAS SECONDED BY CM KAMENA, AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 279-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING BUDGET AMENDMENT
(Architect: Fire Stations I and 4)
CM-33-202
November 15, 1976
REPORT RE ACQUISITION
OF PROPERTY FOR PART
OF MEDEIROS PARKWAY
A report was submitted by the Director of Public Works, concerning
the acquisition of property behind the Pentecostal Church, as part
of the Medeiros Parkway project. Mr. Lee illustrated the location
of property to be acquired for the project, as well as three al-
ternates for the area of acquisition.
Mr. Lee explained the area he would recommend as the minimum amount
of land to purchase, which would include some of the trees. The
property will cost about $6,000 per acre, and the money will come
from the Park Fund.
The question was raised as to whether state legislation restricts
certain uses along the arroyo on each side. Mr. Lee stated that
there is not a set amount of land that has to be used as a flood
plain, for example; it depends on the terrain.
The City Attorney explained that an appraisor would look into
any restrictions concerning property along the arroyo and would
report any pertinent information with his appraisal.
There was discussion concerning the alternate plan which would
mean a severance of the triangular piece of property and the
recommendation by both the City Attorney and the Public Works
Director that the best way to handle the severance problem would
be to acquire the entire parcel.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO AUTHORIZE APPRAISAL OF THE PROPERTY AS SHOWN
IN ALTERNATE "A", FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONDEMNATION. MOTION WAS
SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
It was noted that the property is currently on the market for
sale and there is the possibility that some future owner might
be willing to donate property to the City for parkway purposes.
There was brief discussion concerning some of the problems in-
volved, such as the buildings that are located on the property
which might become the property of the City.
The suggestion was made that if ownership of the property is to
change within the next few weeks, perhaps the City should wait
to get an appraisal after the City tries to meet with the new
owner to negotiate. The City might also have the option of getting
a joint appraisal with the prospective property owner.
The City Attorney commented that state law requires that the City
obtain an appraisal at the earliest time it decides to purchase
the property. If the City is going to conduct negotiations, an
appraisal is needed.
Mr. Lee explained that there has already been a delay because of
the City's negotiations with the owners. He would estimate that
this property might be on the market for two or three years and
this would mean a long delay in completing the project.
CM KEMANA ADDED TO THE MOTION THAT THE APPRAISAL SHALL BE AUTHORIZED
FOR CONDEMNATION AT THE END OF A PERIOD OF 60 DAYS. MOTION SECONDED
BY CM DAHLBACKA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
&f./... ~tl r!d;;0t2UL/
The staff was~~e~ to notify the School District and LARPD that
the ~ ~11.S ":for sale. They probably cannot afford to purchase
the property because of their budget problems but there may be a
grant available to them for the purchase of property with historical
buildings.
CM-33-203
November 15, 1976
REPORT RE POLICE DEPT.
EQUIPMENT PURCHASE
A memo from the Chief of Police indicated that the suggestion
that the City and the Police Association jointly purchase
Universal GYm Equipment was presented to the Council in
July. The Council requested that the item be brought back
for discussion and the Chief of Police has requested that
the Council discuss the item at this time.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST TO ALLOW FOR THE DONA-
TION OF HALF THE COST OF GYM EQUIPMENT FROM THE POLICE ASSOCIA-
TION, AND TO PAY FOR THE OTHER HALF OF THE COST FROM THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT FUNDS. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
The concern was raised that the gym equipment will be placed
in the men's locker room, and that the women on the police
force would not be allowed to use it.
CM KAMENA ADDED TO THE MOTION THAT THE EQUIPMENT SHALL BE
PLACED IN A LOCATION THAT WOULD ALLOW USE BY BOTH MALE AND
FEMALE POLICE PERSONNEL. MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER, AND
PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE BEAUTIFICA-
TION COMMITTEE SERVICES
The Planning Commission informed the Council that they met with
the Beautification Committee to discuss beautification of the
Central Business District and the need for unifying structural
theme along the downtown street frontages.
The P.C. and Beautification Committee concluded that a land-
scape architect or design professional be hired by the City
as a temporary employee or consultant firm, to undertake the
project of designing the beautification of the downtown area.
CM TURNER MOVED TO POSTPONE THIS ITEM UNTIL THE CBD PLAN
HAS BEEN ADOPTED. MOTION SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL AND
PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
APPOINTMENTS
It was noted that Council policy is that appointments shall
not be made without the presence of a full Council. Cm
Staley should be attending the meeting later in the evening
and appointments can be made at that time.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Res. Confirming
l' . C. Appointment
The Council adopted a resolution confirming the appointment of
William E. Zagotta to the Planning Commission.
RESOLUTION NO. 276-76
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING PLANNING COMMIS-
SIONER (William E. Zagotta)
CM-33-204
November l5, 1976
Res. Auth. CUP
fo:t",NRCO Station
-,..'
The Council adopted a resolution approving the CUP application
for the ARCO Station located on the corner of Stanley Boulevard
and Murrieta Boulevard.
RESOLUTION NO. 280-76
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT (Atlantic Richfield Company)
Res. Auth. Notice
of Completion -
1976 Storm Drain Proj~
The Council adopted a resolution authorizing Notice of Completion
for the 1976 Storm Drain Project.
RESOLUTION NO. 28l-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING
THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO RECORD
NOTICE OF COMPLETION RE 1976 STORM
DRAIN PROJECTS.
Payroll & Claims
There were 98 claims in the amount of $l47,857.56, and 298 payroll
warrants in the amount of $101,3Il.40, for a total of $249,168.96,
dated November 12, 1976, and approved by the Director of Finance.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CH TURNER, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED WITH THE DELETION OF
ITEM 5.1 CONCERNING BUDGET AMENDMENT.
DISCUSSION RE RES.
AUTH. BUDGET AMEND.
(Fire Station &
Crossing Guard)
Cm Turner had requested that the item concerning the budget amend-
ment to provide for the construction of the fire station, and to
provide for a crossing guard be deleted from the Consent Calendar
because the Council did not receive a copy of the crossing guard
resolution and because he does not remember voting to approve a
budget amendment for the fire station.
Mr. Parness explained that the Council made the decision at the
last meeting to allow for the budget amendment to provide for
beds and lockers as well as landscaping for the fire station.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE COUNCIL ADOPTED RESOLUTIONS RELATIVE TO BUDGET AMEND-
MENTS FOR THE FIRE STATION AND A CROSSING GUARD.
RESOLUTION NO. 277-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING BUDGET AMENDMENT
(Fire Station NO.4)
CM-33-205
November 15, 1976
RESOLUTION NO. 278-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A BUDGET AMENDMENT
(Crossing Guard)
ORD. AMEND. RE
ANCESTRAL TREES
.
ON MOTION OF CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, AND BY UNANI-
MOUS VOTE, THE MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT RELATIVE TO ANCESTRAL
TREES, WAS ADOPTED.
ORDINANCE NO. 902
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE II, RE-
LATING TO ANCESTRAL TREES, OF CHAPTER
23, RELATING TO TREES, SHRUBS AND PLANTS,
OF THE LIVERMORE MUNICIPAL CODE, 1959.
INTRO. OF ORD.
RE TRUCK ROUTES
ON MOTION OF MAYOR TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT REGARDING TRUCK ROUTES, WEIGHT
LIMITS, AND EXCEPTIONS, WAS INTRODUCED AND READ BY TITLE ONLY.
One member of the audience asked that all vehicles be included
in the 3 ton limit for City streets, and the Mayor explained
that the Council would like to do this but because of the vote
taken on the trailer ordinance, they must allow vehicles, other
than commercial vehicles to travel and park on City streets.
The staff was asked to prepare information as to what would be
a reasonable limit for recreational vehicles that are very heavy
and also damage City streets.
INTRO. OF REVISION
TO CODE SECTION RE
SUBDIVISIONS
Prior to introducing the rev~s~on of the Code section pertaining
to subdivisions, it was suggested that perhaps in the dedication
of park land, the developer could somehow pay a fee for the
development of the land.
Mr. Parness explained that the money collected for park fees
is restricted to a given neighborhood. All of the money col-
lected for a neighborhood park, goes towards the development
of that park.
Discussion followed concerning fees for parks, and Mr. Musso
explained that the "bedroom tax" provides for the land, and
the park fee goes towards the development of that land. A
certain percentage of the bedroom tax is assigned to the
Park District, with the remainder going to the City.
Don Miller, 2862 Waverly Way, stated that the park development
fee is to be paid every January, in cash, and if it is deter-
mined that the fee is not sufficient the fee should be raised
prior to January when the fees start coming into the City.
Mr. Parness explained that the current fees are sufficient
to provide minimum development of a neighborhood park. The
change in the ordinance pertains to donation of land or in
lieu fees.
CM-33-206
November l5, 1976
(Code Revision re
Subdivisions)
Steve Riggle, 5235 Sundance Drive, stated that he had asked some
questions concerning Resolution 120-76, of Cm Kamena and Cm Turner.
He would like to get some information from the Council also.
Mayor Tirsell explained that Res. 120-76, pertains to a special
subdivision relative to lots of record remaining in town and how
the City is allocating sewer connections. This resolution is not
applicable to the item being introduced. The Council would be
happy to discuss this during Open Forum anytime Mr. Riggle would
like to bring it up.
Mr. Musso commented that he believes Mr. Riggle would be interested
in Item 4.3(a) on the agenda, which will be discussed later.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING SUBDIVISIONS WAS INTRODUCED AND
READ BY TITLE ONLY.
RECESS
Mayor Tirsell called for a brief recess, after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present.
CM STALEY WAS ALSO SEATED.
APPOINTMENTS
The following people were selected to serve on the following
committees:
Social Concerns Committee
John King (regular member)
Virginia Watchempino
Noise Abatement
Thomas Thomsen
Beautification Committee
Linda Galas
Airport Committee
Alan M. Dishman
FORMAL RESOLUTIONS CONCERNING THE APPOINTMENTS WILL BE PREPARED
FOR THE CONSENT CALENDAR NEXT WEEK.
DISCUSSION RE LAVWMA
BALLOT ISSUE
The Council has been asked by the LAVWMA staff to discuss the
LAVWMA project. The recommendation from the Board of Directors
was to reconsider applying for a 19.72 MGD project and this is
what needs to be discussed by the Council.
CM-33-207
November 15, 1976
(re LAVWMA Pipeline)
The City of Livermore must appear tomorrow, at 2:00 p.m., before
the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) because the City
is violating its NPDES permit. VCSD is the other agency discharging
water down the Alameda Creek and they must also appear before the
RWQCB tomorrow.
There is doubt that funds will be available for the next fiscal
year, from federal funding, and the LAVWMA staff has authorized
engineering studies to begin, relative to right-of-way acquisi-
tion, etc. Funds that might be available would be in jeopardy
if everything is not ready for checking in July of this year.
The LAVWMA people authorized proceeding with the engineering.
It was noted that in the last election, the 19.72 MGD was turned
down by the voters and the comment was made that perhaps the
Council should consider an E-O project of l5.62 MGD, because
anything larger would have to go to the vote of the people
again.
The Council concurred that the 19.72 should not be submitted
to the voters again.
It was suggested that perhaps the Council could word the ballot
measure in such a way as to provide flexibility to pay for the
pipeline project as well as alternate projects, if these projects
were feasible and financially within the ability of the bond issue
to carry out.
The comment was made that in order to obtain the money for the
project, the Council had to adopt a project report for 15.62,
or whatever, and there would be no way to consider alternative
measures. This is listed in the grant procedures. The City
selected a project and the RWQCB indicated that this would be
the particular project they would fund.
The argument was made that there are alternative means that
could be reviewed; unfortunately, there is a time constraint
in that something has to be ready for the ballot on December 3,
and information concerning alternative methods has not been
received.
At present the federal standard is 250 ppm TDS, and perhaps
Mr. Lee could comment on what the comments have been by the
State and Regional Board, to us, on the ppm standards.
Mr. Lee stated that water in Southern California is used with
a TDS much higher than the 250 ppm - almost twice this amount,
for land disposal. He would believe there could be some flexi-
bility in establishing the standards the City could meet and
still provide land disposal. It has not been demonstrated
that land disposal degrades the deep or even shalloww aquifers.
There has not been enough monitoring of the wells done in
the golf course areas, to know whether or not the land disposal
in that area is adversely affecting the water supply.
The upper aquifers are not being used as a water supply, and
to Mr. T,p'p"s knowledge, there is no degredation or affect on
the deeper aquifers that are used for water supply. The
Corps of Engineers has been doing research on the golf course
and airport lands where reclaimed water is being used, as well
as land adjacent to these properties on which reclaimed water
has not been used, as a comparison. The results of the study
have not been made available to the City, as yet.
The fact that trees died at the golf course has to do with
the upper layers of the soil and plants or trees being watered
with reclaimed water have to be able to tolerate large amounts
of salt, boron, etc. Certain crops, such as hay, are grown very
successfully with this type of water.
CM-33-208
November 15, 1976
(re LAVWMA Pipeline)
Mr. Lee stated that in his op~n~on, the City could reclaim all of
the effluent, under present standards, if the City had a place to
impound water during periods in which the water could not be used
for irrigation - during the wet weather months.
The comment was made that there have been suggestions made or
questions raised as to whether or not the gravel pits or Doolan
Canyon might be used for the purpose of impounding water, and
it would seem reasonable to ask the state to reserve the funds
for Livermore until alternatives can be explored. If Livermore
went along with its share of the cost for the pipeline, it would
take a large amount of money, making it difficult to ask for money
in the future, from the voters, to do other projects. The large
pipeline is being the basic mandate for solving the wastewater
problem, if everything else fails, but it would seem reasonable
for Livermore to want to reclaim its water.
It was noted that LA~m has been meeting for two years and that
Livermore has had two representatives regularly attending the
meetings. It was the decision of LAVWMA that the best way to
handle the effluent problem was the pipeline. It may be that
there are other alternatives that could be explored, but at this
particular time, this evening, the problems concerning other means
cannot be solved. The Council is working under a time constraint
and this is what should be discussed this evening. If the state
would be willing to grant the City additional time to explore
alternatives, this would be fine, but only if this would not
jeopardize federal funding for connection to the EBDA line.
Questions could be posed to the Regional Board, tomorrow, concerning
what some of the requirements would be for reclaiming all of our
water, etc., and LAVWMA could be asked to request that the state
allow additional time to study means of reclaiming our water and
solving the discharging problems. Tonight, however, the problem
of what to do about the pipeline has to be discussed by the Council
and a decision made.
The Council discussed the possibility of a 15.62 MGD project, and
it was pointed out that the City is mandated to proceed with such
a project and it would seem inappropriate to go to the voters.
It would seem impossible to plan a project any smaller than 15.62
MGD, and even this size would not provide for industry. It seems
that the City really doesn't have a choice - the l5.62 MGD will be
built, regardless of what is done. Perhaps the Council should begin
from the 15.62 MGD, and discuss it further.
The Council concurred.
The majority of the Council agreed to amend the Joint Powers Agree-
ment to reflect the l5.62 MGD project, and to insert the amount of
money which would represent the local share of the project. The
amount of the local share would be approximately $675,000.
CM TURNER MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE BUILDING OF THE BASIC PROJECT,
15.62 MGD. MOTION SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
Concern was expressed over not going to the voters for approval
of the l5.62 MGD project, aRQ ~~ provide the local 9Ra.e, at a
cost of nearly $.5 million to the voters. ak~~~
It was noted that it would seem prudent to authorize the project
rather than go to the voters and run the risk of not providing
a project that is mandated.
CM-33-209
November 15, 1976
(re LAVWMA Pipeline)
The 15.62 is the basic project and it would seem reasonable
for the Council to approve the basic project. If additional
capacity is desired, then it would be fair to ask the voters
if they would be willing to pay for the additional capacity.
The comment was made that it really wouldn't be fair to go
to the voters and ask if they would approve the l5.62 project
while planning to go ahead with it, regardless of the vote. It
is a mandated project that will go ahead, regardless of what is
done or said by the voters, and they will understand if the
council agrees to something that is mandated.
George Bing, 4128 Colgate Way, representative of the local
Sierra Club, stated that they believe the pipeline which was
proposed on the November 2, 1976, ballot, is too large (19.72)
and they would recommend consideration of a bond issue which
would provide for 15.62 MGD pipeline, of which 2 MGD should
be committed to industrial use.
Don Miller, 2862 Waverly Way, stated that he would agree with
the position of the members of the Sierra Club and would sup-
port the l5.62 MGD. Anything beyond the 15.62 capacity should
go to the voters. The mandate is for the purpose of cleaning
up the water - not to expand. The 15.62 MGD represents about
a 50% increase in population and, in fact, is an expansion.
Ray Faltings, lOl8 Via Granada, stated that his understanding
has been that with a l5.62 MGD pipeline, there would be no
additional input in the pipeline for commercial/industrial.
It was noted that this is not correct. Industrial and
commercial can be added to the line, but this would mean
that there would have to be less residential growth.
Cm Dahlbacka stated that the majority of the Council intends
to vote in favor of the motion to amend the JPA, and he would
also vote in favor of the motion if it does not refer to a
project specific.
It was noted that the agreement will not refer to Project
Specific, but rather a maximum in the local share before
going to the local voters, which will be adjusted, and it
will refer to the l5.62 MGD.
Mr. Miller commented that the first year bond interest is
a small number and the first year's cost is a small number,
but the overall project is about $3.5 million for Livermore.
Discussion followed as to whether the local share refers to
the entire Valley, or Livermore alone. It was noted that
whether it is for the entire Valley, or Livermore, the
Council is more concerned with what the figure should be
in the JPA - not which agency is paying. The JPA will
reflect the local share of the cost for the 15.62 MGD
project.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
There was discussion concerning industrial capacity for the
pipeline and the suggestion that this item go to the voters
and whether or not they want capacity reserved for commercial
and industrial, beyond the 15.62 MGD amount.
CM-33-2l0
November l5, 1976
(re LAVWMA Pipeline)
The 15.62 MGD will allow for the reservation of no less than 500,000
gallons for industrial/commercial development, without going to the
voters, and engineers feel that this takes into account the statistical
error of a sewer treatment plant. It would seem that since this amount
has been reserved for industrial/commercial, it might be reasonable
to ask the voters for 1 MGD for industrial/commercial.
It was noted that anything in excess of the 15.62 MGD would not be
federally funded and would require lOOt payment by the City and
this should go to the voters.
CM TURNER MOVED TO PREPARE A BALLOT MEASURE ASKING THE VOTERS IF THEY
WOULD BE WILLING TO PAY FOR AN ADDITIONAL 1 MGD IN THE LAVWMA PIPELINE
TO BE USED ONLY FOR INDUSTRIAL/commRCIAL DEVELOPEMENT. MOTION WAS
SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO DELETE ANY REFERENCE TO INDUSTRIAL CAPACITY
TO STATE THAT ANY INDUSTRIAL CAPACITY WOULD HAVE TO GO TO THE VOTERS.
AMENDMENT FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Cm Dahlbacka dissenting) .
Mr. Parness commented that the Council should discuss advance pay-
ment funding for engineering costs because he is sure this will be
discussed at the meeting tomorrow.
The Council expressed concern over the fact that the state wants each
agency to make advance payments, and the City will lose $5,000 to
$6,000 worth of interest in about six months, if it makes advance
payments, and the City is paying for what the state owes the City.
The Council felt there should be some way to charge the cost of
the City's share in order to gain the interest that would otherwise
be lost in making an advance payment, and Mr. Parness indicated that
this might be possible.
REPORT RE POSSIBLE PUR-
CHASE OF PROPERTY FOR
DRIVING RANGE (Springtown)
Spruill - Pashote Property
At the meeting of November 8th, the Council discussed the possibility
of purchasing a lot adjacent to the Springtown Golf Course, to be
used as a driving range, which is part of the master plan for the
golf course. The property is presently being sold to a private
individual who has requested a lot split of the parcel with plans
for development on the two lots.
Mr. Lee illustrated the area on a map, explaining future plans for
the golf course and the reasons he would recommend purchase of the
property. He commented that it would be possible to reorient the
pattern of the driving range, if a building is located on the
property in question, but the building would be located in the middle
of the area which would require the installation of a fence and there
would be some incompatibility with the driving range.
Dan Spruill, 1900 Buena Vista, stated that he is representing the
owner of the property, Donald A. pashote. The property was pur-
chased by him in October, the title has been in escrow and is supposed
to be transferred to him. He has graded the lot, has had a survey
done, and will have material delivered this week for starting with
the foundation. The owner does not want to continue putting money
CM-33-2ll
November l5, 1976
(Springtown Property)
into the property if the City intends to purchase it. He would
rather stop all work now, if this is going to be the case.
The Council discussed whether or not the City should purchase
the property as part of the golf course driving range, and the
comment was made that the purchase would be one way of protect-
ing the City's options at the Springtown Golf Course, but this
would depend on the cost of the purchase.
The Council expressed regret that the owner of the property has
spent time and money to develop the property since the City is
interested in the lot as part of the golf course driving range
in the future.
It was noted that the City is furnishing a recreational facility
in the Springtown area and there is some question as to whether
it will ever become an asset to the City of Livermore in terms
of profits. The argument was made that there are many pressing
needs within the City, which require money, and there is no
justification for purchasing property in various areas of the
City for the purpose of keeping the City's options open.
The suggestion was made that if the golf course begins to
be a profit making facility, the City could look at the
property for purchase at that time.
NO ACTION WAS TAKEN BY THE COUNCIL CONCERNING PURCHASE OF THE
PROPERTY.
DISCUSSION RE CUP APP.
RE PROPERTY ON BLUEBELL
The Council returned to the item concerning the CUP application
for a lot split and two sewer connections, for property located
on Bluebell Drive. This is the property adjacent to the golf
course, which the Council may decide to purchase, at a later date,
as part of the golf course driving range.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED TO DENY THE CUP APPLICATION FOR MR. PASHOTE,
ON THE BASIS OF THE FINDINGS MADE BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN
THEIR RESOLUTION NO. 9l-76, AND THAT A RESOLUTION BE BROUGHT BACK
TO THE COUNCIL, AS WELL AS ACCEPTING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION.
MOTION SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL, WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
It was explained that according to Council policy, Springtown is
receiving the majority of sewer connections for finishing up with
the development in that area. It is the lots of record which are
allowed lot splits and are located in the older sections of town
where the taxes have been paid for a long time.
Steve Riggle, 5235 Sundance Circle, stated that he believes the
Council policy concerning sewer connections and lot splits for
old lots of record is unfair and that there are lots in other
areas of town which should be allowed to split because of their
size, and in order that they might be sold.
The Mayor explained the reason the Council arrived at the policy
concerning sewer connections and lot splits for old lots of
record, etc.
Discussion followed, concerning the spirit of the resolution and
Council policy.
It was suggested that the item follow proper channels and that
it go through the Planning Commission, if Mr. Riggle wishes to
file a subdivision for his particular piece of property.
CM-33-2l2
November 15, 1976
REPORT RE S.P. DEVELOP.
CO. COMMERCIAL IMPROVEMENTS
The City Manager reported that the staff has been in contact
with officials of the SP Development Company, concerning their
intentions for the property situated between E. Stanley Blvd.,
and the Western Pacific railroad tracks. The area consists
ot approximately 20 acres of land, of which 10 acres is pro-
posed for a public transportation facility. S.P. has indica-
ted that they would like to discuss the allowable land uses
for the area remaining which is not to be reserved for trans-
portation purposes.
Mr. Parness added that in speaking with their staff today,
they would prefer that the item be referred to the P.C., since
the P.C. has the CBD Plan under study.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA, AND BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE ITEM WAS REFERRED TO THE P.C.
CM STALEY LEFT THE MEETING AT THIS TIME.
REPORT RE CBD
OFF-STREET PARKING
Cm Turner requested that the item concerning the CBD off-street
parking be postponed until a full Council is present. However,
in the meantime he would like to request that the staff check
with Mr. Regan to find out what 'options might be available to
the City in 1977.
The item will be placed on the December 6th agenda, ON MOTION
OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Thanks re Help on
Ballot Measure)
Mayor Tirsell asked that the staff send Nick DeTota a letter
thanking him for the work he and the members of his committee
did concerning the ballot measure for the Safety Tax Override.
(County Gen. Plan)
Mayor Tirsell reminded the Council that the Alameda County General
Plan will be discussed tomorrow evening at 8:00 p.m., in Pleasanton
at the Foothill High School.
Mayor Tirsell commented that the third meeting for discussion
of the County General Plan will be held the middle of December,
and the City needs to have submitted its input by that time.
The Council needs to work on the item and take a position, no
later than December 6th.
CM-33-2l3
November 15, 1976
(Quezaltenango Visit)
Mayor Tirsell stated that, for personal reasons, she will not
be able to make the trip to Quezaltenango this year, and she .~
has asked Cm Turner to make the trip since he has expressed ~~
interest in doing so, in the past; however, he is also not ~t~iPJ
able to make the trip. ~~t
Any Councilmember who might be interested and could make the
trip, should inform the Council by next week; the trip has been
scheduled for December llth.
(Chester Anderson Property)
Mayor Tirsell asked the City Manager to help her write a letter
to Zone 7, concerning the application by Chester Anderson for
a sewer treatment plant.
Mayor Tirsell requested the complete file on Mr. Anderson and
as to whether or not he has ever asked to annex any of the
property and to include the City's sewer allocation report as
well as a review of Planning Unit ill, and what the City's plans
are for that area. The City also needs to check the application
for 1 MGD, and what the City would envision for the property in
the way of a time scale, for submittal to Zone 7.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Council,
Mayor Tirsell adjourned the meeting at ll:20 p.m.
ATTEST
~~
APPROVED
CM-33-2l4
Regular Meeting of November 22, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
November 22, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:05 p.m.
with Mayor Tirsell presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Absent:
Cm Turner, Staley and Mayor Tirsell
Cm Dahlbacka and Cm Kamena (Kamena seated later)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirsell led the Councilmembers as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES - 11/8 /76
P. 188, 8th paragraph, beginning with line 6, should read:
ant was not occupied. His concern at this time is the rounds
of play because there were a little over 2,000 rounds......etc.
P. l89, delete 4th paragraph.
P. l89, last paragraph, at the end of line 4, El Charro should be
changed to Del Valle.
P. 195, 2nd paragraph should read: On MOTION OF CM TURNER,
SECONDED BY CM STALEY.......etc.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 8, 1976, WERE
APPROVED, AS CORRECTED.
OPEN FORUM
(re Property)
Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, speaking on behalf of Elba Leonard,
asked who was in charge of the negotiations concerning the City's
purchase of property from Mr. Leonard for the extension of Railroad
Avenue to East Stanley Boulevard.
Acting City Attorney, Gary Reiners, indicated that a notification
had been sent to Mr. Leonard informing him that an appraiser would
be making an appraisal of the property and the approximate day this
would take place.
CM KAMENA SEATED AT THIS TIME.
Mr. Tull inquired as to why this particular property had to be
taken. It is quite near the bedroom area and the street will be
noisy.
Mr. Tull was informed that the area in question is very small and
the City's plans would probably not be a detriment to the property.
CM-33-2l5
November 22, 1976
RESIGNATION FROM
DESIGN REVIEW COMM.
A letter of resignation from the Design Review Committee was
received from William F. Owen. The resignation date is
effective January 1, 1977.
The staff was asked to send a letter to Mr. Owen thanking
him for his service on the committee.
COMMUNICATION RE
PROPERTY TAXES
A letter was received from Joan Chavez, 263 Swan Drive, concern-
ing outrageous property taxes.
Mr. Parness was asked to respond to the letter and to explain
the property tax situation.
COMMUNICATION FROM PUC
RE GRADE SEPARATION PROJ.
The Council received a copy of a letter sent to the Public Works
Director, Dan Lee, praising the City for the construction of the
Grade Separation Project in Livermore.
In summary, the letter indicated that the construction of the East
First Street grade separation not only provides an excellent oppor-
tunity to improve traffic management and insure prompt emergency
response from the City of Livermore, but it also eliminates two
hazardous grade crossings which have taken two lives and injured
10 others.
COMMUNICATION RE BELLS
ON ICE CREAM TRUCKS
A letter was received from the owner of Debbie's Ice Cream, which
indicated that they have been told from a policeman that they are
not allowed to use a manual bell on the ice cream truck and that
they have been losing business since the ordinance concerning
noise on ice cream trucks, was adopted.
It was noted that it was not the intent of the Council to put
anyone out of business and that the ordinance was adopted with
the intention of eliminating the mechanical type of noise makers,
and that a manual, non amplified, device is allowed.
Mrs. Manna, owner of Debbie's Ice Cream, spoke to the Council
concerning this matter and commented that she feels the hand-held
bell is unsafe for use by the driver.
Discussion followed concerning the problems of the amplified type
of noise and the fact that children run towards the moving vehicle
when they hear the sound of the ice cream truck, which is very
dangerous.
Concern was also expressed regarding employees of the firm parking
their private vehicles in the court, and also turcks belonging to
the business being parked in the residential are, and whether or
not a home occupation permit is held by this commercial business.
CM-33-2l6
November 22, 1976
(re Debbie's Ice Cream)
The staff was asked to check and bring back the information as well
as to inform Mrs. Manna that a manually rung bell is permissible.
DISCUSSION RE LAVWMA
PIPELINE PROJECT &
ADVANCE PAYMENT REQUEST
At the last Council meeting the Council discussed the financing of
the LAVWMA pipeline project and the matter of the request for advance
funding from the LAVWMA signatory agencies, for engineering costs.
At that time the Council expressed the desire that LAVWMA find an
alternate borrowing source.
The Council discussed the problem of the advance payment and it
was suggested that perhaps the money could be borrowed from the
State Water Quality Control Board.
Mr. Parness indicated that other alternates would be: 1) vote of
the electorate; or 2) vote of the legislature.
The comment was made that if the City advances the funds, it would
mean a loss of $6,000 in interest to the City.
Don Miller, 2862 Waverly Way, stated that he believes the comment
was made during the LAVWMA meeting, regarding hardship cases, and
possibly this type of circumstance would apply in this case.
A discussion followed, concerning the alternatives, including the
City lending the funds for this purpose; however, the staff was
asked to investigate and report the alternatives available.
REPORT RE MAJOR
STREET FEE PROGRAM
The Council received a letter from the Planning Commission, urging
that there be a Major Street Fee Program implemented for the pur-
pose of developing major streets. The recommendation was submitted
to the Industrial Advisory Board for comment.
A letter from the Director of Community Development indicates that
the Industrial Advisory Board has unanimously opposed the recommenda-
tion of the P.C. for a Major Street Fee Program. They believe the
proposal would substantially increase the "up front" money that
would have to be paid by the developer and they would oppose the
increase of fees to the developer.
Mr. Gorland indicated that the Committee was concerned with the
present fee structure and, in addition, the fees are a significant
deterrent to industrial development in Livermore.
The Council briefly discussed this issue and decided that the
matter should be referred back to the Planning Commission and
the Industrial Advisory Committee for further study and recom-
mendation.
REPORT RE GRADE SEPARA-
TION FINANCIAL REPORT
A staff report was presented to the Council concerning the current
status of the financial data for the Grade Separation Project.
CM-33-2l7
November 22, 1976
(re Grade Separation)
The Finance Director fully outlined the property costs, construc-
tion and engineering costs, the legal fees and bonding costs. He
explained the project revenue estimates covering the period from
its inception in the 1972-73 fiscal budget to the present time.
Brief discussion followed, and Cm Turner expressed his appre-
ciation for the effort made in preparation of such a comprehensive
report, inasmuch as it was he who had requested the repor~.
Mayor Tirsell praised the City Manager and the Public Works Dir-
ector for their foresight in proposing and carrying through the
tremendous project, adding that such a project has not been done
by many cities the size of Livermore and the project is even
unique for the state.
REPORT RE MTC GRANT
The City Manager reported that MTC is considering the City's
grant application for State Transportation Development Act
monies which would be used for the purchase of approximately
10 acres of property abutting Stanley Boulevard, east of
Murrieta Boulevard. The site is indicated in the recently
completed BART rail line extension study and the City's CBD
Plan, as a future public transportation station location. The
grant approximates $500,000. Final action by MTC is expected
in about lO days.
REPORT FROM P.C. RE
CUP APPLICATION FOR
AUCTION SALES (T. Lewis)
The Planning Commission submitted a report concerning the CUP applica-
tion by Tom Lewis to allow used furniture and auction sales within
the CN District, at 839 Rincon Avenue (Valley Furniture Auction) .
The Planning Commission discussed the application, was able to make
the requisite findings to allow approval of the CUP and recommends
that the City Council approve the CUP application, subject to con-
ditions listed in the findings.
The Council briefly discussed the issue.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE COUNCIL ADOPTED A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CUP, BASED
ON THE RECOMMENDATION AND FINDINGS MADE BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION,
IN THEIR RESOLUTION NO. 93-76.
RESOLUTION NO. 283-76
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PER-
MIT (Tom Lewis - Valley Furniture Auction)
Prior to adoption of the resolution, ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA,
SECONDED BY CM TURNER, THE COUNCIL VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO ALLOW
ADDITION OF THE RESOLUTION TO THE AGENDA. IT HAD NOT BEEN
PREPARED BY THE STAFF BUT MR. LEWIS WAS IN NEED OF FINAL ACTION
ON THE PART OF THE COUNCIL IN ORDER TO FINALIZE HIS LEASE.
P.C. SUMMARY OF
ACTION - ll/16/76
The Planning Commission Summary of Action from their meeting of
November 16, 1976, was noted for filing.
CM-33-2l8
November 22, 1976
P.C. MINUTES - 10/26/76
The Planning Commission minutes for the meeting of October 26, 1976,
were noted for filing.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Res. of Appointments
The following resolutions were prepared, reflecting appointments
made at the meeting of November 15th:
RESOLUTION NO. 284-76
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBERS TO THE
SOCIAL CONCERNS COMMITTEE (Jack King
and Virginia Watchempino)
RESOLUTION NO. 285-76
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBER TO NOISE
ABATEMENT COMMITTEE (Thomas Thomson)
RESOLUTION NO. 286-76
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBER TO BEAUTI-
FICATION COMMITTEE (Linda Galas)
RESOLUTION NO. 287-76
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBER TO AIRPORT
COMMITTEE (Alan Dishman)
Res. Denying CUP
App. (Pashote-Spruiell)
A resolution was adopted reflection action at the meeting of
November l5th, denying the CUP application for Mr. Pashote con-
cerning property located on Bluebell Drive.
RESOLUTION NO. 288-76
A RESOLUTION DENYING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
(Donald A. Pashote by Dan C. Spruiell)
Res. Auth. Exec.
of Agree. (PM l666)
The Council adopted a resolution authorizing execution of agree-
ment with David S. Madis concerning Parcel Map l666 (Trevarno
Road) .
RESOLUTION NO. 289-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREE-
MENT (David S. Madis)
IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT CM STALEY VOTED AGAINST THE RESOLUTION.
CM-33-219
November 22, 1976
Departmental
Reports
The following departmental reports were noted for filing:
Airport Activity - October
Building Inspection - October
Police and Pound Departments - September
Water Reclamation Plant - October
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED WITH CM STALEY VOTING
AGAINST THE RESOLUTION CONCERNING PARCEL MAP 1666 (Madis/Trevarno).
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Resolutions)
The acting City Attorney asked that the Council adopt two resolu-
tions, relative to property dedications for Chestnut and "P"
Street areas - Castle Cook (Value Giant) and the Livermore Car
Wash on First Street.
He explained that the resolutions are not on the agenda but
they must be adopted this evening because of a time problem.
eM KAMENA MOVED TO SUSPEND THE COUNCIL RULES TO ALLOW THE
COUNCIL TO ACT ON AN ITEM NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA. MOTION
SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTIONS WERE ADOPTED:
RESOLUTION NO. 290-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION
OF DEED (Value Giant - Robertson et al)
RESOLUTION NO. 291-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION
OF DEED (Livermore Car Wash - Goralka)
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Railroad Avenue Extension)
Cm Staley inquired about the plans for the Railroad Avenue
extension bid and it was explained that the extension will
be done soon, and this will be done by the developer.
The "P" Street improvements will also be installed shortly.
CM-33-220
November 22, 1976
(General Plan - County)
It was mentioned that the County General Plan hearings have been
scheduled and the next hearing will take place on December 14, 1976.
MUNI. CODE AMEND.
RE TRUCK ROUTES,
WEIGHT LIMITS, ETC.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT RELATIVE TO TRUCK ROUTES, WEIGHT
LIMITS AND EXCEPTIONS, WAS ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL.
ORDINANCE NO. 903
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 13.4 RELATING TO
TRUCK ROUTES, TO WEIGHT LIMITS, AND EXCEPTIONS,
OF CHAPTER 13, RELATING TO MOTOR VEHICLES AND
TRAFFIC, OF THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 1959.
MUNI. CODE AMEND
RE SUBDIVISIONS
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE COUNCIL ADOPTED THE MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT RELATIVE TO SUB-
DIVISIONS.
ORDINANCE NO. 904
ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20, RELATING
TO SUBDIVISIONS, OF THE LIVERMORE CITY
CODE, 1959.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Council, the
meeting was adjourned at 9:l5 p.m. to noon, on November 29, 1976,
in the Conference Room at City Hall.
APPROVE
--jj"<-n
,~
'~'''Ji';
I '. .-/
'-- " /
ATTEST
CM-33-221
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 29, 1976
An adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Livermore was held on Monday, November 29, 1976, in the Confer-
ence Room of City Hall, 2250 First Street. The meeting was
called to order at l2:45 p.m. by Mayor Tirsell.
Present: Cm Turner, Staley and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: em Kamena and Dahlbacka
The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the advance payment
requested by LAVWMA for the basic pipeline engineering.
LAVWMA is asking a total of $342,000 from the signatory agenices
at this time and the Council discussed whether or not the City of
Livermore should advance the $180,000 noted as the City's share.
CM STALEY MOVED TO APPROPRIATE THE $180,000 WHICH WILL SUPPLY
THE CITY'S SHARE OF THE FUNDING FROM 12/1/77 THRU 9/1/77.
MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER, WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Council, the
meeting was adjourned at 1:05 p.m. to an adjourned regular meet-
ing on Wednesday, December I, 1976, at 1:15 p.m. in the Conference
Room of City Hafl to discuss the JPA draft revisions.
APPROVE ~1 -1Y7 'Z;{j1d
ATTEST
C~ty C er
L ore, California
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF DECEMBER 1, 1976
An adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Livermore, was held on Wednesday, December I, 1976, in the City
Hall Conference Room, 2250 First Street. The meeting was called
to order at 1:25 p.m. by Mayor Tirsell.
Present: Cm Turner, Staley and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: Cm Dahlbacka and Cm Kamena (Cm Kamena seated later)
The Council generally discussed the proposed changes to the JPA
and whether the agreement should be a "project specific" or in-
clude others in the future; how and/or if withdrawal from the
agreement can be accomplished; being responsible for bonds
already issued and the current budget at the time of withdrawal;
unanimous vote or other requirement when approving the business of
the agency; on capital expenditures should the vote be a mandatory
unanimous vote?; define the "voters of electorate" of the
agency; financing methods now in existance and those which may
be in the future; some availability of the records of the moni-
tored effluent should be available for inspection and/or some
reporting system should be discussed further; "this" ballot measure
should be stated.
Further discussion will be held when the revised draft has been
prepared.
Cm Kamena was seated during the above discussion. Mayor Tirsell
left the meeting at the close of the discussion and the meeting
was then conducted by Mayor pro. tempore Turner.
CM-33-222
December I, 1976
(re LAVWMA Pipeline)
Don Miller, 2862 Waverly Way, spoke generally regarding the purpose
of- the formation of LAVWMA - sewage disposal and treatment, and
indicated his feeling that the commitment was to clean up the water
pollution problems. There was no commitment to industrial capacity,
originally, and any changes made now are irreversible.
ADJOURNMENT
APPROVE
There being no further business to be discussed, the meeting was
adjourned at 2:20 p.m.
-1J,J1~ fl1 y;:::,pJ,.t
~ /J j MaYOr?;,
~~d~p)0
1/ ty C erk
~ve or~ California
ATTEST
Regular Meeting of December 6, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
December 6, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m.
with Mayor Tirsell presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: em Dahlbacka, Turner, Staley and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: em Kamena (Seated Later)
PLEDGE OF
ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirsell led the Councilmembers as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES ll/l5 & ll/22
P. 209, 2nd paragraph, 3rd line from the bottom, begins with
pipeline is being - strike the word being.
P. 209, next to last paragraph, in the second line, strike
and to p~vide the local share.
P. 203, last paragraph, line 2: delete the first two words, the
~roperty and insert the Bible College site.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF ll/lS/76,
AS AMENDED. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM STALEY, AND PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT THE MINUTES OF 11/22/76, AS SUBMITTED.
MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
(Cm Dahlbacka abstain~d due to absence at that meeting).
CM-33-223
December 6, 1976
OPEN FORUM
(East Ave./Fourth
street Intersection)
Jerry Wilverding, 4886 Primrose Lane, stated that the item concern-
ing the left turn onto Fourth Street from East Avenue has never
been resolved, to his satisfaction. In speaking with Mr. Lee he
has been told that something could be worked out if people are not
permitted to turn left onto Fourth Street from South Livermore
Avenue.
It was noted that the Council had voted unanimously in favor of
leaving the intersection, as is. If Mr. Wilverding would like
to present another suggestion to the Council they would be willing
to review it.
CM KAMENA WAS SEATED AT THIS TIME.
(Advertising
Brochure)
Mr. Wilverding stated that it has been suggested, in the past, by
Mr. Gorland, that the City have an advertising brochure. Mr. Wil-
verding would usggest that the monies from the fines coming from
the weighing station be used to support advertisement for Livermore.
Mr. Parness indicated that the City has been asking the County to
forward the money from fines owed to Livermore because of the weigh
station, but nothing has been received, as yet.
(Counc i 1 Agenda)
Mr. Wilverding stated that he would again urge the Council to re-
verse the items on the agenda so the public may hear the City
Manager's report early in the meeting, with Matters Initiated
after that time, followed by the Open Forum.
No action taken concerning possible change of agenda format.
P.H. RE FUTURE WIDTH
LINES FOR EAST AVENUE
A public hearing has been scheduled for the purpose of discussing
and hearing testimony concerning the future width lines for East
Avenue from Vasco Road to Nielsen Lane, and concerning special
building lines.
Mr. Lee explained that the City entered into an agreement with
the County about three years ago for the cooperative preliminary
design for the widening of East Avenue. The County worked on the
design for about a year, during which time the question of the
future width lines arose. There was a period of negotiations with
the County who had proposed a 120 ft. right-of-way width. The
City's standard was l04 ft. right-of-way, and a compromise was
agreed upon with a l08 ft. right-of-way.
While the County was completing the study for the future width
lines, the item was referred back to the City, through the P.C.
At that time the environmental impact report was written with
public hearings held on the EIR, the width, and the future
building'lines', by ,the Planning Commission.
CM-33-224
December 6, 1976
(East Avenue Widening)
Mr. Lee stated that Mr. Dondro, the City Engineer, has been working
on this item with the P.C. and he will review the details of the
future width lines.
Mr. Dondro stated that the main purpose of the project which will
take place at this time, is maintenance, safety, and increased bike
facilities for East Avenue. The County has had a very difficult time
trying to maintain East Avenue and the basic problem is that the road
needs to be reconstructed. Livermore probably has the highest bike
commuter rate in the state, and hopefully bike facilities can be
provided that would help encourage bike riding to the labs.
The engineers have tried to provide for a roadway which would
incorporate all the items needed at this time as well as future
needs which might arise during the next 20 years. He then explained
the facilities to be provided for within the 108 ft. right-of-way,
such as two 7 ft. sidewalks, (one on each side); two 8 ft. bike lanes,
in the street; one 16 ft. left turn lane and divider strip, for each
intersection; five vehicle lanes - two eastbound and three westbound.
Mr. Dondro explained that the reason an additional lane was provided
for, going westbound, is because bike riders going home will be turning
off of East Avenue, and this will cause cars to back up - the three
lanes will provide for two lanes of flow traffic without interruption.
The three lanes will also allow more traffic to flow through the
green lights at the intersections, during the shorter green light
time.
Discussion followed concerning the projected capacity and number
of vehicles anticipated within the next 20 years, as well as future
growth of the Lab and Sandia. It was mentioned that the County did
not take into consideration any industrial growth and therefore the
figures concerning the number of employees at the labs could be
considered reasonable, even though they might appear a little high.
It was noted that the traffic projection seems to be inconsistent
with the number of jObs projected over the next 20 years in the
Livermore Plan. The figures presented by the Lab as to what the
increase in the number of employees will be, means that all of the
Valley jobs projected in the Livermore Plan, will be going to the
labs.
Mr. Dondro stated that the County strongly supports the five lane
concept and in providing the five lanes the City has had to sacri-
fice other items, such as wider bike lanes, sidewalks, etc.
If the Council would like to reconsider and select a different width
than the 108 ft. right-of-way, the public hearings and the whole
process would have to start from the beginning, once again.
em Turner commented that he has contacted people at the Lab and
they have indicated that they have no plans for expansion of employ-
ment; however, it is feasible that there might be fill-in of the
East Avenue area and there might be the amount of traffic projected.
Mr. Dondro stated that the report does not show a substantial increase
in the number of cars over what travel on East Avenue at present. If
the road were constructed it would be running at 80% capacity, even
with the five lanes. Most of the land for the project will be taken
from the south side, because of the Wagoner Farm area presently lo-
cated along the north right-of-way.
CM-33-225
December 6, 1976
(East Ave. Widening)
Mayor Tirsell opened the public hearing, inviting public testi-
mony concerning the widening of East Avenue.
Roy Renner, representing the Las positas Swim Club, 5791 East
Avenue, stated that the club is located on the south side of
East Avenue near Vasco Road, and the members would like to voice
opposition to the plan shown. He noted that a letter was sent
to the Council earlier explaining the loss they would sustain
as well as their complaints concerning the plan. He indicated
that the club is located in an area where most of the land will
be taken from the south side, with very little taken from the
north side. They agree with the need for safe bike paths but
not with the need for 7-10 ft. sidewalks, a 16 ft. median, and
12-14 ft. lane widths.
Mr. Renner stated that he would also like to express his op~n~ons,
as an individual, and as a professional engineer. His business
address is 2020 Research Drive. He uses both an automobile and
a bicycle to commute to his place of business and he can appre-
ciate the problems involved. He would like to suggest that per~
haps this is the time to consider whether or not the automobile
should be allowed to grow in its use, or whether or not it would
be reasonable to push for public transportation or other alterna-
tives.
Russ Bargman, 5763 East Avenue, stated that he lives on the south
side of East Avenue, and if the City takes 31 ft. from the south
side of the street his front porch will be only 9 ft. from the
street. He would strongly object to this much land being taken
from the south side.
A letter was received from Ed Hutka, indicating that if the City
takes a greater portion of land from the south side than the
north, it will result in a loss of parking for the HBW Building
on the corner of Research Drive.
A letter from the Energy Conservation Committee indicates that
there may be a potential negative impact as related to energy
uses, if East Avenue is widened. They have not had sufficient
information to make a detailed comment and they would request
that the Council defer any decision until they have had the
opportunity to respond.
A letter of protest to any change or widening along East Avenue
was received from Ruth L. Hitchcock, 4277 East Avenue.
Mrs. Shelly, 4303 East Avenue, stated that she would like to know
how much land in front of her property will be taken for widening
of East Avenue, because if much more is taken from her property
she will be sitting in the street.
Mr. Dondro explained that additional land will not be taken be-
tween Madison and Nielsen Lane, and this is the area in which
Mrs. Shelly is located.
Alex Willis, 4336 East Avenue, wondered if no change from Madison
to Nielsen, means no change in parking. Will there be parking
restrictions with red curbs in this area, to provide for a bike
lane?
Mr. Dondro commented that the project will be
ject and no striping change is planned for in
a left turn into Madison or provisions for an
would be nice and could be considered later.
issue, unrelated to the project, and would be
merit at another time.
a construction pro-
that area. However,
on-street bike lane
This would be a separate
decided on its own
CM-33-226
December 6, 1976
(East Ave. Widening)
The resident from 4609 Almond Circle, stated that he rides his bike
to th7 lab, has been bike riding to the lab for the past 9 years,
and f~nds the present bikeway quite adequate. He objects, in prin-
ciple, to condemnation of property for a project such as this, and
there have been no rules established for bikes, pedestrians and
autos along East Avenue. The bike riders use the bike path as a
speedway, and children and older people use the bike path as a
sidewalk. He believes rules for the use of the bike path, etc.,
along East Avenue would be very helpful. He would suggest that
there be traffic flow studies to determine what the needs really
are and that quality of the street, not quantity, is the answer
to many of the problems.
Greg Davis, 316 Ontario, commented that the 8 ft. width proposed
for the bike lanes, is not a proper width for a combined bike/auto
parking lane.
Mr. Lee stated that he would agree that red curbing along the
street, on both sides, would be appropriate. He would agree with
Mr. Davis that an 8 ft. lane is not sufficient to allow for a bike
lane as well as parking.
Mr. Bargman stated that he would like to know why the road will
be wider at Charlotte Way and Mr. Lee explained that the plans
for the widening in that area have to do with the fact that the
area was zoned for commercial development which provide for greater
widening and turning lanes.
THERE BEING NO FURTHER TESTIMONY FROM THE PUBLIC, ON MOTION OF
CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM ~MENA, AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE
PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
The question was raised as to why the intersections couldn't be
flared if the major problem is with the intersections.
Mr. Dondro explained that if the intersections were spaced far
enough apart, this would be a good approach, but there is not
enough space between intersections to provide for this. Also,
it is best to keep the roadway as straight as possible because
people tend to go straight. If a street curves, people change
lanes, or cross over medians, etc., which causes numerous problems.
Discussion took place concerning the intersections and it was noted
that a continuous right turn lane is planned at Vasco Road, which
will create a significant design problem with respect to the merging
of bikes and cars. The County is designing the Vasco Road intersec-
tion.
There was also discussion over the 12 ft. road width, the 7 ft.
minimum sidewalk, and the 16 ft. medians, and the reasons these
widths are necessary. Mr. Lee indicated that he would not recom-
mend moving the north side right-of-way because it would mean remov-
ing curb, gutters, sidewalks, and moving utilities.
Discussion followed concerning the number of lanes, the lane
widths, and the capacity anticipated for East Avenue, as well
as the speed that will be allowed. The Council asked Mr. Dondro
various questions which he responded to briefly.
CM-33-227
December 6, 1976
(East Ave. Widening)
The question was raised as to whether or not fewer lanes could be
constructed at this time (four lanes) and provide for additional
lanes in the future by establishing the future width lines that
would accommodate another two lanes.
Mr. Dondro commented that the only problem with this concept is
that three lanes will be on the north side and when the median
is constructed it is permanent. This suggestion would be fine
if the three lanes were to be on the south side.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF
THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND ADOPT THE 94 FT. RIGHT-OF-WAY.
MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
The comment was made that the Council should know how the problem
of the continuous right turn across the bicycle lane will be solved.
Until this problem is solved it is difficult to determine what is
needed for the width line.
Mr. Lee stated that there is a problem with the traffic from cars
and bicycles because of the relative size and speeds. The state
law places the bicycle in the category of a vehicle, and they move
across the intersections with the traffic signals fairly successfully.
He believes the plan for the bike lane will be quite satisfactory.
If there is to be a free right turn, there will probably be a yield
sign for the purpose of yielding to bicycles the same as a yield for
an automobile. In his opinion it would be dangerous to provide a
major street which includes bicycle traffic, at a width less than
104 ft.
Discussion took place concerning the hazards involved with the
suggestion for the continuous free right turn lane across the
bike lane, when there is a large amount of bike traffic and when
bicyclists are traveling at high speed.
Mr. Lee continued to hold firm to the opi~ion that this sugges- .
tion should not create a serious problem. With the merging lane
proposed prior to the free right turn, and the yield sign, he
believes the situation will be handled quite adequately.
It was noted that the major problems occur only during the peak
traffic hours and there should be no real reason to turn East
Avenue into a major street, even though a major employer is
located at the end of the street.
The argument was made that a bike lane is needed, a median is
needed for the various intersections, but perhaps the Council
should have more information before determining whether the
third lane on the north is really necessary. If additional
public hearings are held on a smaller right-of-way, the Council
may find that there is less public objection to less width.
The Planning Commission discussed the lesser- width, and
there was public testimony supporting less width and the
P.C. recommendation seems reasonable.
Another argument was made that there has been no public testi-
mony in favor of a major street for East Avenue and it is diffi-
cult to know to what extent the Lab will expand. If the Council
does not design the street to carry the traffic at peak hours
then it is committed to providing some type of public transpor-
CM-33-228
December 6, 1976
(East Ave. Widening)
tation. If the street is limited so that the traffic will not flow,
then the Council will have to mitigate that. People cannot be forced
out of their cars without being offered some type of transportation.
A major street is needed for East Avenue but there has been no public
testimony to sup?ort it during this public hearing and the only choice
would be to vote in favor of the motion.
THE MAKER OF THE MOTION INDICATED THAT THE MOTION DOES NOT INCLUDE
ACCEPTANCE OF THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION.
MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE ACCEPTANCE OF
THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION. A~ENDMENT SECONDED BY CM TURNER, WHICH
PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
PRIOR TO THE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT THE CITY ATTORNEY CO~MENTED THAT
THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION APPLIES TO THE 94 FT. RIGHT-OF-WAY.
Concern was expressed over the 94 ft. right-of-way, at the inter-
sections and it was suggested that perhaps the Council could adopt
the 94 ft. right-of-way width for the street with possible design
modifications at the intersections to provide for a bike lane or
something that might be considered safer for the bicyclists.
CM STALEY MOVED TO TABLE THE ITEM, PENDING A REPORT FROM THE
ENGINEERING STAFF ON OTHER POSSIBLE CONFIGURATIONS FOR EAST
AVENUE, WITH THE BASIC 94 FT. WIDTH, AS WELL AS AN ANSWER ON
THE PROJECTIONS FOR EMPLOYMENT AT THE LABS, A SOLUTION CONCERNING
THE BIKE LANES, WITH THE POSSIBILITY OF WIDER INTERSECTIONS TO PRO-
VIDE FOR A RIGHT TURN LANE. MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO M1END THE MOTION TO ACCEPT THE P.C. RECOMMENDA-
TION FOR THE 94 FT. RIGHT-OF-WAY AND TO SET FUTURE WIDTH LINES AS PER
SECTION 20.71 a (2) LEAVING THE CONFIGURATIONS TO THE STAFF. AMEND-
MENT SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
~~IN MOTION PASSED BY A 4-0 VOTE (Cm Staley abstaining on the
grounds that the item needs further study).
RECESS
Mayor Tirsell called for a brief recess after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present.
COMMUNICATION RE
RESIGNATION
The Council received a letter of resignation from the Community
Affairs Committee, from Marilyn M. Lane.
The staff was asked to send Ms. Lane a letter thanking her for
serving on the Community Affairs Committee.
COMMUNICATION - RESIG-
NATION FROM INDUSTRIAL
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
A letter of resignation from the Industrial Advisory Committee was
submitted by Herman R. Leider.
The Council asked that a letter thanking Mr. Leider for his service,
be prepared by the staff.
CM-33-229
December 6, 1976
APPOINTMENTS
The Council decided to discuss appointments at the December 13th
meeting.
It was noted that the Chairman of the Beautification Committee
has requested that a seat be vacatated by someone who has been
absent for six consecutive meetings. The by-laws state that a
seat may be declared vacant if someone misses three consecutive
. .....J
meet~ngs . I ~..I"., -
ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE COUNCIL DECLARED A SEAT OPEN ON THE BEAUTIFICATION
COMMITTEE.
The name of Bobbie Hadley was submitted for consideration of
membership on the Design Review Committee.
COMMUNICATION RE REGIONAL
WATER QUALITY CONTROL
BOARD HEARINGS SCHEDULE
The Council received a schedule of hearings to be held by the
Regional Water Quality Control Board. Hearings will take
place on December 9th and 2lst, relative to the City's
violations of waste discharge requirements.
The Board will be considering the issuance of a cease and
desist order prohibiting the restriction of additional
sewage discharge.
The Council discussed the possible cease and desist order
and what this might mean to the City.
The Acting City Attorney commented that the notice of inten-
tion indicates that the cease and desist order exists to any-
body taking out a building permit. The hearing will consider,
not only the pipeline project and the NPDES violations based
on time schedule for the pipeline project, but also technical
violations of effluent standards.
The staff report for the hearing indicates that the cities do
have the capacity to correct the technical chemical violations,
and the City should be prepared to respond to that point, in
addition to the pipeline project.
The comment was made that if someone can present testimony on
behalf of the Council, t...."i~ 1;lelil~ ~: ~~'A:, ~l:1t. i:;-:..~ometJjling is
R.-O~ l're;>"re~"..y e.,.....i1~. 8J!.64l< as a giU8DA #~ .M~,tL
k;''z/-t<-t.:TX ..a. ...u.-y~-<p ~ '
APPEAL RE REQUEST FOR
VARIANCE RE PATIO COVER
(Bel Aire Engineering)
The Planning Commission denied the application made by Bel Aire
Engineering, Inc., for a variance to allow a patio cover to
encroach into the required rear yard set-back at the Robert
Hastings residence, 910 Curlew Drive. The application was
denied on November 3, 1976, and is being appealed by Bel Aire
Engineering, Inc.
Bernie Norquist, representing Bel Aire, illustrated the type of
cover they wish to use on the back of the home and the reasons
the variance is necessary.
CM-33-230
December 6, 1976
(Variance - Bel Aire)
It was noted that there is a prov~s~on in the ordinance for the
variance, which is requested, but it is up to the Council to make
four findings to allow the variance.
When the P.C. discussed the 25 ft. setback for rear yards, it was
not intended that it be restrictive as to what a homeowner might
wish to do with it.
Mr. Gorland, Community Development Director, stated that patios
had been allowed in rear yards with only l5 ft. setbacks. At
the time the P.C. discussed the rear yard setbacks, regarding this
application, this information was not available.
It was mentioned that the Council might want to review the ordinance
prior to granting or denying the variance. There should be proper
input concerning the awning type of covers and in the future the
Council may wish to allow awnings and shades into areas in which
they were not previously allowed.
It was suggested that the Council grant the variance and refer the
ordinance to the P.C., aSking that they take into consideration
the allowance of patios. At that time, if they wish to have testi-
mony, they will refer it for comment.
It was noted that the Planning Commission's concern at the time
the setbacks were discussed, was the closing in of a patio, or
the addition of a room. The Planning Commission should be
instructed to amend the ordinance to read that temporary screening
does not constitute a room, and that only the applying of a building
permit to encroach into the backyard setback, would constitute a room.
It was suggested that the City Attorney prepare the findings to
support a motion to approve the appeal.
MAYOR TIRSELL MOVED TO ACCEPT THE APPEAL, GRANT THE VARIANCE, AND
AUTHORIZE THE STAFF TO MAKE THE APPROPRIATE FINDINGS AND THAT THE
ITEM BE RETURNED TO THE P.C., INCLUDING THE DISCUSSION RELATIVE TO
THE FACT THAT OTHER PATIOS HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED IN THE AREA AND THAT
IT WAS NOT THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE TO PROHIBIT APPURTENANCES
INTO THE BACK YARDS. IT WAS THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE TO PROHIBIT
ROOMS BEING BUILT INTO THE SETBACK. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY
AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Prior to the motion there was a question as to the procedure that
should be followed in granting the variance while intending to
amend the ordinance. It was explained that there is a problem in
that the City is without a Planning Director, and the backlog of
work for the P.C. is considerable. The ordinance will probably not
be amended for some time.
REPORT RE UNITARIAN
FELLOWSHIP SEWER
CONNECTION APPLICATION
A request has been received from the Unitarian Fellowship as to the
terms, conditions, and fees relating to their request for a City
sewer connection agreement. Dependent upon the City Council's
final decision as to the public works improvements and fees
initially required, and which fees might be postponed, a sewer
connection agreement will be prepared accordingly.
CM-33-23l
December 6, 1976
(re Unitarian Fellowsh~p)
The acting City Attorney noted that the City does have a sewer
allocation policy in effect at this time, and it was not really
addressed when this matter was first brought to the Council's
attention. It is also something that has"a lot of relevance
in the situation. The property requesting a sewer connection, tech-
nically does not fall within the definition of a lot of record in
the City, and beyond that there is some question regarding the
extent to which the provision of a sewer connection to the property
would fulfill the requirements of the resolution setting up the
allocation policy, which were established to further the General
Plan goals.
Mr. Reiners added that if the General Plan policy and the alloca-
tion policy is to be upheld and protected to its maximum, these
issues should be addressed and resolved.
Mr. Reiners was asked if his opinion would change if the property
were to annex to the City, and Mr. Reiners responded by saying
that the policy specifies, "lot of record" as of the date of
the adoption of the resolution. The problem with this particular
property is that it falls between the category of residential
and the category of industrial/commercial. The intent of the
policy was to limit the residential, as opposed to the other uses,
with 90% of the allocation to commercial, industrial, and public
and quasi-public uses, with 10% to low income and moderate income
housing.
Mr. Reiners also indicated that if a good planning policy were
served by requiring annexation, then he would prefer to see
annexation.
Susan Mayall, President of the Livermore Unitarian Fellowship,
explained the history surrounding the Fellowship building.
Harold Weisner, Chairman of the Building Committee, stated
that in the original planning they wanted to connect to
the City sewer system. However, in meeting with the Planning
Department and discussing the conditions that would be imposed,
and it was concluded that they couldn't afford to pay the fees
involved.
Mr. Weisner indicated that the fees shown in the report from
the Planning Department show $26,000, but this does not take
into consideration the paving of the parking lot or the fact
that the line must go under the highway to connect to City
sewage. These additional items amount to approximately
$lO,OOO more than what was estimated by the Planning Depart-
ment. A $60,000 building is planned, and they feel $35,000
for fees and conditions is too high.
The County Board of supervisors has indicated that prior
to allowing a septic tank, the Unitarian Fellowship should
find out if some of the conditions or fees could be waived.
Mr. Weisner indicated that the sewer agreement does not
legally mandate the requirements.
Mr. Weisner was asked if there would be conditions imposed
by the County if the Fellowship were construct in the County
and not annex to the City and he indicated that there will
be conditions imposed, but the only delay at this time has
to do with sewer connection.
CM-33-232
December 6, 1976
(re Unitarian Fellowship)
Mr. Lee explained that the County generally does not impose many
requirements concerning public works improvements. They are more
lenient.
It was pointed out that one of the requirements by the County was
the paving of the parking lot and that the Fellowship is in violation
of their CUP at this time because the parking lot has not been paved.
Mr. Weisner was asked if the Fellowship has discussed how improvements
might be paid if some were delayed and required at some future date,
and Mr. Weisner indicated that this would depend upon how long the
delay might be.
It was explained that the delays are generally from 3-5 years or
until adjacent property develops. At this time the adjacent property
is not included in the lots of record and they would not be under the
current sewer allocation. They will have to develop as the City has
additional capacity.
Mr. Parness suggested that the Council may wish to grant a continuance
of this item to allow the staff to draw up the conditions to the sewer
agreement. The agreement could always be modified or accepted by
the Council.later. This is a very complex problem and there are
planning questions that have to be resolved as well as considerations
for the public works requirements, and fees which might be involved.
It was suggested that perhaps the staff could work out something
with the Fellowship by preparing some type of agreement whereby
annexation at some future date would be agreed to, with a delay in
a number of the costs or improvements.
Mr. Mayall, member of the Fellowship, asked for clarification as to
the costs for the sewer connection, which Mr. Parness explained.
It was noted that the members keep talking about a $50,000 to
$60,000 building and that they hadn't taken into consideration
the other costs such as those required by the County or the City.
Everyone has to realize that if they wish to build something, these
types of costs are integral costs of building. The City, in this
particular case, recognizes the fact that the Fellowship is an
organization with limited resources and this is the reason the City
is trying to help.
Tot Green commented that usage would be only one day a week and that
this type of connection would be nothing like the type of usage from
a single family connection.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE AN AGREEMENT WHICH
WILL BE REVIEWED BY THE FELLOWSHIP AS WELL AS THE COUNCIL FOR
APPROVAL. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER. MOTION PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE (Cm Dahlbacka abstaining due to a conflict of
interest) .
RES. AUTH. EXECUTION
OF LAVWMA JPA
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE COUNCIL POSTPONED THE ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING
EXECUTION OF A JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT (LAVWMA).
DISCUSSION RE POSSIBLE
BALLOT MEASURE RE
LAVWMA PIPELINE SIZE
The Council discussed the possibility of asking the electorate if
they would like to purchase 1 MGD for industrial capacity, in the
LAVWMA pipeline.
CM-33-233
December 6, 1976
(re LAVWMA pipeline)
It was noted that the only deadline, with respect to a ballot
measure, is in getting the issue submitted for placement on
the ballot and Mr. Parness indicated that the staff could
get a dollar figure to the Council by the deadline date.
The Acting City Attorney commented that there is a possibility
that prior to getting bond counsel's opinion on the measure,
they may have to prepare the resolution, or the resolution
drafted by the City may have to be submitted to them before
it goes on the ballot.
CM TURNER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION
CALLING FOR THE BOND ISSUE, AS WELL AS A RESOLUTION ASKING
FOR CONSOLIDATION OF THE BOND ISSUE ON THE BALLOT, FOR THE
MARCH, 1977 SCHOOL BOARD ELECTION. MOTION SECONDED BY CH
STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
The resolutions will be ready for the Council at the next
Council meeting.
The Council then discussed the problem with the LAVWMA pro-
ject in that the City has already advanced funds for the
engineering of the project and after that time it was dis-
covered that Corollo Engineers had made a gross error in
their estimated cost for engineering. Corollo had been
hired by LAVWMA for the engineering and they have now indi-
cated that because of the error, Corollo will not be doing
the project. Hearings have been scheduled concerning this
matter and the Council discussed the City's and LAVWMA'S
legal position after the hearing, and the requirements for
the selection of a new engineering firm.
Concern was raised over the possibility of other disposal
methods, and that they should receive fair consideration
by engineering firms.
The Council discussed the problem that the pipeline is man-
dated by the state and if the LAm~ agency hasn't begun
engineering by a certain date, the state will take over.
At this time however, the primary concern is the fact that
by March 3lst. ~ft~ liRe ha~~e he w~nectea te .he EBD^~o/h~,~~ .
Ii . _~ iL "ill l.e~ h_ .ll~"~d. The other problem is~[6~~
the constraint of the date for obtaining the state funds4
which will end in September. If plans have not been sub-
mitted, checked and approved by September 30, 1977, the
state bond monies will be allocated elsewhere.
RECESS
Mayor Tirsell called for a brief recess, after which the
Council meeting resumed with all members of the Council
present.
REPORT RE RIGHT-OF-WAY
CONVEYANCE TO CITY
The Director of Public Works reported that a portion of the
Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way being abandoned as a
result of the railroad project, was obtained by the railroad
company as the result of a land grant act in 1862.
CM-33-234
December 6, 1976
(re Conveyance to City -
Right-of-Way Property)
In 1922, Congress also adopted an act which states that cities have
the first right of reversion of such grant lands when they are aban-
doned by the railroads, and it is recommended that the City conduct
a title search, and to determine the beneficial uses for which the
land can be utilized.
CM STALEY MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE AN APPROPRIATE
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TITLE SEARCH, MOTION WAS SECONDED BY
CM DAHLBACKA, WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE FIRST STREET
(Route 84) REALIGNMENT
A report from the Director of Public Works, indicates that up until
this point it has been uncertain as to whether or not realignment
of First Street would take place, and frontage along First Street
has been conveyed to the City for the purpose of possible widening
of First Street.
It is now recommended that the Council make a firm commitment to the
relocation of First Street, and reconvey the properties reserved for
the purpose of widening. It appears that the relocation is certain
with the only question being the date it can be accomplished.
CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION RECONVEYING CERTAIN PROPERTIES
TO OWNERS, AND TO ADOPT THE REALIGNMENT OF FIRST STREET. MOTION WAS
SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
Mr. Lee explained that a portion of the Halyak property will still
be needed for rights-of-way.
THE MAKER OF THE MOTION AMENDED THE MOTION TO INCLUDE RECONVEYANCE
OF THE PROPERTIES AND INCORPORATING EXHIBIT "B" CONCERNING THE HALYAK
PROPERTY. AMENDMENT SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA.
Mr. Halyak, owner of property on First Street, asked for clarifica-
tion as to Council action, which was explained by the Mayor.
Mr. Halyak indicated that he conveyed the property to the City for
the purpose of widening and now it will not be widened and he
feels all of his property should be reconveyed to him.
Mr. Lee stated that realignment amounts to the same type of thing
as widening, in that it takes care of the same highway traffic
and there is a certain portion of Mr. Halyak's property that the
City will have to have, whether the street is widened or realigned.
Mr. Lee added that it would be his suggestion that the deed, when
reconveyed, be written in such a way as to allow the City to keep
any rights it might have through the Grant Lands Act. If the City
has something, it will not be conveyed back at this time.
The Mayor felt Mr. Halyak has a point in that he conveyed the property
for the widening of First Street and it would seem that the City needs
to be consistent. If the City has an underlying right in that property,
it should be revealed in the conveyance of the lands and the railroad.
Mr. Reiners indicated that he believes the City would have rights
along property within the 400 ft. strip of grant land. The two
issues are really separate and he would suggest that the City
execute a reconveyance by quit claim to get rid of the City's
interests as it relates to the City's present interests.
CM-33-235
December 6, 1976
(re Route 84 Realign-
ment & Halyak property)
The City does not have any underlying interest in that grant land.
Any interest that the City would obtain would ripen in the future
by virtue of acts by the railroad, or Congress, or both in conjunction.
MOTION WAS REWORDED TO STATE THAT THE COUNCIL SHALL ADOPT A RESOLU-
TION TO ADOPT THE REALIGNMENT OF FIRST STREET, AND TO QUIT CLAIM OR
USE OTHER CONVEYANCE, FOR ALL THOSE PROPERTIES ACQUIRED FOR THE FIRST
STREET WIDENING, AND TO CONFORM TO EXHIBIT "B", AS WELL AS TO RE-
LEASE MR. HALYAK'S BONDS. REWORDING SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA AND
PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
REPORT RE CBD
OFF-STREET PARKING
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE ITEM CONCERNING CBD OFF-STREET PARKING WAS POSTPONED
UNTIL DECEMBER 20.
The staff was asked to prepare a report concerning recommendations
consistent with the terms of the lease for City parking.
It was noted that the Mayor and Don Bradley had met with Miss
Carlisle to encourage her to sign a lease to allow parking on
property adjacent to the City parking area, which she refused
to sign. In the opinion of the Mayor, Miss Carlisle will never
sign the lease.
REPORT RE
SPEED SURVEY
The Director of Public Works prepared information concerning
the establishment of speed limits within the City.
It was suggested that speed limits for the City be set in
accordance with state law as well as referring the item to
the police Department for their comments concerning enforce-
ment.
Mr. Dondro commented that it would be easy to survey the major
and collective streets, if the Council wishes.
It was noted that the League of California Cities is supporting
legislation to allow the posting of speed in residential areas
to 25 MPH, even if the traffic is less than the 85 percentile
speed.
The item was referred to the staff for a report back to the
Council, after new information is received on this item.
REPORT RE PROPOSED
WATER RECLAMATION
PLANT EXPANSION
A report was submitted to the City Council from the Industrial
Advisory Board, concerning the expansion of the water reclama-
tion plant.
It was noted that there seems to be a discrepancy, and perhaps
the Community Development Director should explain that expansion
grants are 10 year projects and that the LAVWMA project is a
20 year project.
Brief discussion followed, concerning the report and no action
was taken by the Council.
CM-33-236
December 6, 1976
REPORT RE REZONING
OF SPRINGTOWN AREA
CM STALEY MOVED TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON JANUARY 3, 1977, FOR THE
POSSIBLE REZONING OF PROPERTY IN THE SPRINGTOWN AREA, SECONDED BY CM
DAHLBACKA, AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
P.C. SUMMARY OF
ACTION - ll/30/76
The Planning Commission Summary of Action from their meeting of
November 30, 1976, was noted for filing.
P.C. RECOMMENDATION
RE COUNTY GEN. PLAN
The Planning Commission submitted a recommendation concerning the
County General Plan, in addition to a report prepared by Commis-
sioner Zagotta.
The Mayor wondered if everything will be presented to the Council
and all of the P.C. discussion shown in the minutes in order to
establish a Council position next week, and Mr. Gorland indicated
that he believes everything will be available for Council review
and discussion next week.
P.C. MINUTES - 11/2/76
The Planning Commission minutes from the meeting of November 2, 1976,
were noted for filing.
REPORT RE RAILROAD
AVENUE EXTENSION
A report concerning the extension of Railroad Avenue, was submitted
to the Council by the Director of Public Works, for informational
purposes only.
Cm Turner commented that for the record he would like to make the
statement that the problems on lip" Street should be solved along
with any discussion concerning the extension of Railroad Avenue
and that these two streets should be discussed collectively - they
are not separate issues.
The comment was made that with the extension of Railroad Avenue
and the opening up of access to the shopping centers from that
street should relieve the traffic on "P" Street but Cm Turner
indicated that he does not agree that this will solve the "P"
Street problem.
Further discussion was postponed.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Report re Subsidized
Transportation - Seniors
The City Manager submitted a report concerning subsidized trans-
portation for senior citizens. The Council adopted a resolution
authorizing execution of agreement with LARPD for transportation
service for seniors.
CM-33-237
December 6, 1976
(Transportation
for Senior Citizens)
The comment was made that the staff did an excellent job in
obtaining continued subsidized transportation for the senior
citizens and it should be recognized that Mr. Dunn, from the
Chevrolet firm, donated a station wagon to be used as trans-
portation.
It was noted that the service was the parting good work done
by Don Bradley, for this City. His negotiations with the County
were done under very difficult circumstances and he did an excel-
lent job in getting the service subsidized for Livermore.
RESOLUTION NO. 293-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREE-
MENT (City of Livermore and Alameda County)
RESOLUTION NO. 294-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREE-
MENT (LARPD - Senior Citizens Transportation)
Report re East Ave.
& Vasco Rd. Signal
The Director of Public Works submitted a report concerning the
signal for Vasco Road and East Avenue. The Council adopted a
resolution authorizing the City's financial participation to
the extent of $500 per year.
RESOLUTION NO. 295-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING BUDGET
AMENDMENT (Traffic Signals)
Report re Employee
Disability Retirement
The City Manager submitted a report concerning a request by a
City employee for disability retirement, and recommended that
the Council adopt a motion authorizing transmittal of the request
to the State Public Employees' Retirement System.
Proclamation of
Greeting to Quezaltenango
The Council adopted a proclamation of greeting to Quezaltenango,
Guatemala.
payroll & Claims
There were 46 claims in the amount of $63,116.50, dated ll/l9/76,
and approved by the City Manager.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED WITH REMOVAL OF ITEMS
5.1 AND 5.4.
CM-33-238
December 6, 1976
DISCUSSION RE RES.
AUTH. USE OF CRIMINAL
HISTORY INFOR~TION
The resolution authorizing the use of criminal history information
was removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion.
The Council asked questions relative to which types of instances
the information would be used, and Mr. Parness explained that this
is primarily for the purpose of hiring. There are some instances
in which a person who had committed a felony could not be hired
for a particular job. It would not mean that the City would
discriminate against people with criminal records.
Mr. Reiners commented that the Attorney General's office requires
that before the criminal record information can be used in areas
of licensing and certification, that guidelines or ordinances be
adopted by the cities that specify only two types of crimes that
can be considered - felonies or misdemeaners involving moral
turpitude. All of the ordinance are being changed, systematically,
and the Council will be seeing the changes.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED.
RESOLUTION NO. 292-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING USE OF CRIMINAL
HISTORY INFORMATION FOR EMPLOYMENT, CER-
TIFICATION, AND LICENSING PURPOSES.
DISCUSSION RE RES. FOR-
MALLY INVITING SISTER
CITY RELATIONSHIP
The item concerning the resolution inviting a Sister City relation-
ship with Yotsukaido, Japan, was removed from the Consent Calendar
for discussion at this time.
Cm Turner had indicated that he believes the City intended to wait
to adopt the resolution until the Sister City Committee for
Quezaltenango, Guatemala, had responded to the suggestion of
having another Sister City and that the City is considering eliminat-
ing the annual air fare for one delegate to visit Quezaltenango.
The majority of the Council felt that the issue of inviting another
country to participate in a Sister City program, is separate from
the issue of the air fare to the Sister City Committee.
CM STALEY MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AND ASK THAT THE CITY
MANAGER REFER THE ITEM CONCERNING WITHDRAWAL OF FUNDS, TO THE
SISTER CITY COHHITTEE OF QUEZALTENANGO, FOR THEIR COMMENTS.
MOTION SECONDED BY CM KAMENA, AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 296-76
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA, U.S.A., EXTENDING
AN INVITATION TO THE CITY OF YOTSUKAIDO,
JAPAN, TO BECOME A SISTER-CITY AND INVIT-
ING THE PEOPLE OF YOTSUKAIDO, JAPAN, TO
PARTICIPATE IN SAID PROGRAM.
CM-33-239
December 6, 1976
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Regional Water
Quality Board Hearing)
Mr. Lee commented that relative to the Regional Water Quality
Control Board hearing coming up on December 9th, they have
mentioned in the staff report that the City is in violation
of the NPDES standards in three areas, which are TDS, chloride,
and pH.
The Council will be receiving a memorandum from Mr. Lee on this
item with the recommendation that the Council authorize a budget
amendment to install an automatic injection system to bring the
pH into conformance with the standards. This will amount to
approximately $6,000 and is proposed to come from the existing
budget.
CM STALEY MOVED TO SUSPEND THE RULES TO ALLOW THE COUNCIL TO
TAKE ACTION ON AN ITEM NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA. MOTION WAS
SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA, AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE COUNCIL AUTHORIZED A BUDGET AMENDMENT.
RESOLUTION NO. 298-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING BUDGET AMEND-
MENT (Water Reclamation Plant)
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Filming of Mural)
Cm Kamena stated that he has been asked by the Chairman of the
Beautification Committee, if the City would be willing to donate
$90, along with the Beautification Committee, the School District,
and LARPD, for the filming of the painting of a mural for the
Rincon Shopping Center wall facing the May Nissen Park.
Mr. Parness indicated that he would discuss this item with
Bernie Segal, the art teacher at Granada High School and will
report back to the Council.
(Sale of Red Baron)
Cm Kamena asked how the sale of the Red Baron will affect the
City's lease.
Mr. Parness reported that the staff is looking into the matter
and will have some information for the Council later.
(Dry Weather)
Cm Dahlbacka indicated that he is very concerned over the dry
weather and the fact that it will be difficult to fill the
reservoirs. He would like to request that a letter be written
to Zone 7, asking when they plan to proceed with conservation
measures because it appears that we may be in a critical situa-
tion very soon.
CM-33-240
December 6, 1976
(Informal Bikeway)
Cm Dahlbacka stated that he has received a complaint about people
using some right-of-way property as an informal bikeway. He illustrated
the area to the Public Works Director which was located near the
Standard Oil bulk plant. The path is used by pedestrians and bi-
cyclists to cross the tracks from the north side, to get to Livermore
High School. This is located on private property and with the new
railroad relocation, they have to carry bicycles across a different
set of tracks. Barricades are being placed along the old Standard
Oil bulk station access road and people will continue to make a path
to cross the tracks.
The City's won't discourage the use, but it certainly will not be
encouraged.
Cm Dahlbacka commented that his point is that in the area of one
of the colleges in the east, wherever a path is discovered, a
sidewalk is provided. This is a type of response to the demands
of what people want. He wondered if there would be any way to
formalize the crossing of the railroad tracks.
Mr. Lee indicated that the right-of-way would have to be purchased
by the City. Eventually there will be access from School Street
to First Street, and perhaps this will help eliminate the problem.
(Engineer's Presentation)
em Dahlbacka commented that the presentation by Rick Dondro, this
evening, was very well done, and he thanked Mr. Dondro for the
work that went into presenting the information.
(Policy re Rota-
tion of Mayor)
em Dahlbacka asked that the Council consider discussing the policy
concerning the rotation of Mayor, before the issue arises again,
and that this be scheduled for a January agenda.
It was explained that while Cm Dahlbacka was absent the Council
accepted the Council Policy booklet, which included the method
for rotation of Mayor.
(Child Development
Center Committee)
Mayor Tirsell reported that she has been contacted by Jerry Jones,
who indicated that the Valley Child Development Committee will
be formed this week. They will be using federal funds which means
that it has to follow federal guidelines, requiring public members,
private members, etc.
Mr. Jones has volunteered to serve as a public member of the
Committee and it has been requested that the Council appoint
him as the public member.
CM TURNER MOVED TO SUSPEND COUNCIL RULES TO ALLOW THE COUNCIL
TO ACT ON AN ITEM NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA, AND TO APPOINT MR.
JONES TO THE COMMITTEE AS THE PUBLIC MEMBER. MOTION WAS SECONDED
BY CM KAMENA, WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM-33-241
December 6, 1976
RESOLUTION NO. 297-76
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING REPRESENTATIVE TO BOARD
OF DIRECTORS OF TRI-VALLEY CHILD DEVELOPMENT
CENTER (Jerome F. Jones)
(Irrigation)
Mayor Tirsell stated that she has received calls from farmers
who would like to use the water from the treatment plant for
irrigation purposes. She wondered what capability the City has
for making this type of agreement.
Mr. Lee stated that the City would be very receptive to this
type of suggestion and it would be very simple to provide water
to properties located downstream from the treatment plant.
INTRO. OF ORD. RE
CULTURAL HERITAGE
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT RELATING TO PRESERVATION OF
CULTURAL HERITAGE, WAS INTRODUCED AND READ BY TITLE ONLY.
INTRO. OF ORD. RE
HERITAGE PRESERVATION
DISTRICT ESTABLISHMENT
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATIVE TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF
A HERITAGE PRESERVATION DISTRICT, WAS INTRODUCED AND READ BY
TITLE ONLY.
INTRO. OF ORD. RE
MISC. OFFENCES
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT RELATIVE TO MISCELLANEOUS
OFFENCES (Ponds, Fountains, Uses Prohibited) WAS INTRODUCED
AND READ BY TITLE ONLY.
ADJOURNEMENT
Ther being no further business to come before the Council, the
meeting was adjourned at l2:45 a.m.
~ fVl %, A.uU-
./ Mayor
APPROVE
ATTEST
exf)~A.)~Q~
City Clerk
L~ ore, California
CM-33-242
Special Meeting - December 13, 1976
A special meeting of the City Council was called by Mayor
Tirsell for ~onday, December l3, 1976, at 7:30 p.m. in the
Council Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue, Livermore,
California.
The purpose of the meeting was to discuss labor negotiations.
Present:
Absent:
Cm Kamena, Turner, Staley and Mayor Tirsell
Cm Dahlbacka (Seated During Executive Session)
ATTEST
The meeting convened at 7:35 p.m. and immediately adjourned to
an executive session for discussion of labor negotiations. The
meeting adjourned at 8:10 p.m.
~~ 'in ~%~. .eP.
Mayor
~~~
t Clerk
L' ore, California
APPROVE
Regular Meeting of December 13, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
December 13, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:15 ?m.
with Mayor Tirsell presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Dahlbacka, Kamena, Turner, Staley and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Prior to leading the Pledge of Allegiance, Mayor Tirsell indicated
that a flag was sent to her by Congressman Stark which flew over the
Nation's Capitol the 4th of July during this bicentennial year. The
flag will be presented to the City.
The staff was asked to send a letter to Congressman Stark thanking
him for the flag.
MINUTES - None
OPEN FORUM
(Livermore Station)
Janet Newton, representative of the Livermore Heritage Guild indicated
that the Livermore Station has been sold and it is her understanding
that the new owners intend to change the name. According to the
provisions of the new Preservation Ordinance, it would take too
long to designate the Station as a heritage landmark and they
would like the Council to help the Heritage Guild maintain some
control over the proposed changes.
CH-33-243
-4
December l3, 1976
(re Livermore Station)
The Acting City Attorney explained that the ordinance has pro-
visions prohibiting demolition of the building for 180 days
and there may be provisions relative to alteration of the
exterior features of the building. He offered to meet with
Mrs. Newton to discuss some of her concerns and to determine
if the City can help.
(Sewage Problems)
Leo Von Gotfried, 3847 Yale Way, stated that the people turned
down the LAVWMA Pipeline measure on the last ballot and now
the Council is talking about going ahead with it anyway. He
would call this taxation without representation. There seems
to be no way of reaching the Regional Water Quality Control
Board, concerning this matter, other than through the Council.
It was explained that the Water Quality Control Board hearing
will take place on December 21st, and people who are concerned
should attend the hearing to testify on the cease and desist
order.
The Mayor explained the reason for the cost effective project
and the reasons for the new engineering survey as well as
the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
It was suggested that if Mr. Von Gotfried would like to contact
someone politically responsible for the project, the Governor
should be contacted, because he is responsible for appointing
people to the Regional Board.
Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, commented that he would like
an answer as to why the Council is going ahead with a project
voted down by the electorate.
Mayor Tirsell responded by saying that Mr. Tull has attended
all of the Council meetings and has heard all of the discussion
concerning the item and is aware of the reasons the Council is
required to proceed with the most cost effective project in
order to keep on the time schedule and off the cease and desist
list.
COMMUNICATION RE CORPS
TECHNICAL ADVISORY GROUPS
The Council received a letter from the Corps of Engineers
inviting the Councilmembers to participate on any of their
technical advisory groups and to notify interested citizens
who might wish to serve.
Mr. Gorland commented that the Industrial Advisory Board also
received the letter and two of the members were designated
and agreed to serve on respective committees. The Corps
of Engineers has been notified of those who will be serving
on the committees.
Mr. Parness asked permission to select a couple of employees
to serve as liaison, and the Council concurred.
CM-33-244
December 13, 1976
COMMUNICATION RE
REFUNDS FOR BEVERAGE
CONTAINERS
A letter was received from Senator Rains, thanking the Council for
supporting SB 1384, relative to refunds for beverage containers.
Unfortunately the bill was killed in a Senate committee, but he
intends to reintroduce the proposal for the 1977-78 session, under
SB 4.
The staff was asked to write to Senator Rains, reaffirming the City's
support of the bill. If the staff can obtain the names of the
committee members who voted against the bill, the City can supply
them with information on this item.
COMMUNICATION RE
LEGISLATION PROVIDING
PARK/REC. PROJECTS
A letter was received from the Alameda County Parks Advisory
Commission concerning Proposition Two on the November ballot
which passed, and provided for a $280 million bond issue for
various park and recreation projects. $4 million will be allocated
to Alameda County for local projects and will be allocated to cities
and districts authorized to provide park and recreation services,
at the discretion of the County. LARPD is participating.
The item was noted for filing.
RES. REQUESTING
CONSOLIDATION OF
ELECTION
The Council must decide, by Friday, whether or not to consolidate
with the March School Election ballot. The City will have to go
to Pleasanton and VCSD to ask them to change the JPA to allow an
individual election. Secondly, should the measure pass, neither
VCSD or Pleasanton are considering going to the March ballot which
would mean that the City would have to pay for the industrial alloca-
tion, if it is passed, and this would have to be paid for by
March 31st, if it goes into the EBDA line.
The Acting City Attorney read the two resolutions; one outlining
the measure, the second asking for consolidation with the School
District election. He explained that the amount should read
$1.5 million, which has been left blank in the resolution.
Mr. Parness indicated that the $1.5 million figure is a very
liberal figure but it reflects the amount of bonds that could be
considered. Of course, the amount sold will be only the amount
necessary, based upon bids.
Concern was raised over this approach because of what the bond
counsel has said in the past, and with reference to the necessity
of a JPA amendment.
CM KAMENA MOVED THAT LIVERMORE NOT CONSOLIDATE WITH THE SCHOOL
BOARD ELECTION IN MARCH 1977. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY.
It was noted that there will be a May ballot, with which it is
possible to consolidate this issue, and consolidation at this
time may be premature.
CM-33-245
December l3, 1976
(re Consolidation
of Election)
The comment was made that the City does want to clean up the
effluent and at this time the only alternative seems to be through
the pipeline. Asking for the I MGD for industrial purposes would
be a way to solve many of the problems and once the pipeline goes
in, it may be impossible to increase the capacity. Perhaps the
electorate should have the option of having the additional
capacity to allow for industry, employment, a broader tax base,
and other advantages to the City.
The argument was made that the City should build exactl~ the amount
that will be funded, and no more, because there is no m~nimum or
maximum size for the project. Any amount the City may wish to
put through the pipe will be possible, and the only item which
will be a controlling factor on the sewer will be how often and
how large the expansions at the treatment plant. There are enough
ways to use the effluent, that this project will not be the con-
trolling factor.
Discussion took place regarding whether or not the Council feels
the pipeline is the most cost effective means of solving the
problems of effluent disposal. The comment was made that between
now and the election, if it is determined that there is a better
means, the people won't vote in favor of the measure. Also, the
people weren't well enough informed when the issue appeared on the
last ballot.
Jerry Wilverding, 4886 Primrose Lane, stated that he feels people
did not vote down industrial capacity, but rather they voted down
the additional cost to the taxpayers. He asked if the present
treatment plant would handle the additional 1 MGD the Council is
considering asking the electorate about. It was explained that
the present plant will not handle the additional 1 MGD, but the
City has made application to upgrade the sewer plant to handle
an additional 1 MGD.
MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Cm Turner dissenting) .
The Council then discussed the cost that should be presented
to the voters and the comment was made that most of the pro-
jects have room for future changes and more effluent can be
pumped through the pipeline~~~~~~.~~s also no limitation
to the Doolan Canyon 1J~~~o~th-e Reclamation Project.
The only limitation is tbe funding to come from the state
for the City's sewer plant expansion. It would not be reason-
able to ask for $1 million from the voters for I MGD of addi-
tional capacity for industrial use because this is more than
would be necessary. Perhaps the electorate should be asked
if they would like to spend $l million to develop an industrial
park rather than for expansion that can be done at a later time
when it is needed.
Mr. Von Gotfried indicated that he believes dumping effluent
into the Bay is not a reasonable way to solve the effluent
problem. The public should be given a choice as to what
they want, when the item is placed on the ballot, because the
Council does not know why people voted against the measure the
last time it appeared on the ballot.
It was explained that unfortunately there is only one project
that is grant fundable from the state, and this is the reason
there are not a list of choices from which the electorate can
select.
CM-33-246
December 13, 1976
DISCUSSION RE CHARTER
OR GENERAL LAW CITY
The Council received information from the League of California
Cities concerning whether a city should select the Charter or
General Law type of government. The City Attorney responded to
the material by indicating that a General Law city has a broad
police power and is considered to be the modern trend, but not
the traditional rule. The practical problems of administering
a Charter are critical and in terms of legal matters there can
be problems that rise in the future to cause trouble.
Mr. Parness commented that the document presented by the League
covers only the highlights, and statements he could make about
the Charter form of government as opposed to the General Law form,
could take weeks. There are some distinct advantages in having
the Charter form of government, but there is a great deal of com-
promise that would have to be allowed in the formulation of the
document and in the approval of the electorate and when this occurs,
weakening filters in. He added that he could not advise the Council
as to which form would be the best, because cities are operating under
both forms, each of which have distinctive features.
In the discussion concerning the two types of government, the comment
was made that there doesn't seem to be a problem that can be solved
in changing to a Charter form of government.
It was mentioned that Charter government allows a city to do creative
types of things, as a corporate body under a charter. For instance,
being able to make the Subdivision Map Act more specific and making
the findings more specific. In land use problems, there are no
court opinions by which to make decisions, under the general law
form of government. The City could write a charter to cover the
creative things the City would like covered; however, this may prove
to be a problem in later years.
em Staley is the proponent of the Charter Law city and he explained
that he believes the population has a better opportunity to influence
the course of local, municipal affairs with this form of government.
With a charter, a citizen may express an opinion as to what that
government is doing, what powers it should have, and what powers
should be taken away. Other advantages would be resisting outside
governmental influence, the Council would have a more direct control
of the taxing power and an opportunity to allow the citizens choices
as to how the government will be organized.
It was suggested that the City obtain a copy of the model charter
from the League of Cities for review, before making a decision con-
cerning this item.
It was also mentioned during the discussion that most charter cities
have an elected mayor.
RECESS
Mayor Tirsell called for a brief recess, after which the Council
meeting resumed with all members of the Council present.
MOTION TO SUSPEND RULES
RE NEW AGENDA ITEM
Mayor Tirsell asked for a motion to suspend the rules to allow the
Council to take action on the Alameda County General Plan, which
is not listed on the agenda. MOTION MADE BY CM DAHLBACKA, SECONDED
BY CM TURNER, AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM-33-247
December 13, 1976
DISCUSSION RE ALAMEDA
COUNTY GENERAL PLAN
Mayor Tirsell will be presenting testimony at the hearing for
the Alameda County General Plan and she requested that the
Council discuss and form a Council position that she can pre-
sent at the hearing.
The consensus of the Council was to select Alternative 2C
and that the City would like the County to adopt the City's
General Plan because at this time the time scale of the County
does not match the City's which means that the maps will not
match. The County Plan, extends to 1995, but the City's Plan
goes to Year 2000 which extends into the north Livermore area.
CM DAHLBACKA MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL SUPPORT THE POSITION THAT
THE COUNTY BASICALLY ADHERE TO THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN DIAGRAM.
,.~ MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER.
'~~.~ .The Mayor indicated that the hearing will take place tomorrow
~ \~at 1:30 p.m. in the Public Works Building in Hayward and would
'~elcome any support from anyone interested. She added that in
~' talking with the Assistant City Attorney, Maury Engle, and
~ Mr. ~~ an advocacy position is needed for our General
~ Plan explaining why municipal growth is good and why it is
I a general plan developed by the people who live in that area
t and plan to stay in that area, and planned for a more acceptable
form of growth than one planned by a consultant in an office.
Candace Simonen and Brenda Souza will be presenting testimony
at the hearing concerning the advocacy of the General Plan,
with Mayor Tirsell presenting the City's position at the end.
During the discussion conerning the alternatives it was noted
that Alternate 2B calls for a net increase in dwelling units
for the City of Livermore, of 450, in the next 20 years. This
would not allow the City to develop any property in the City
limits. They estimate (County) that the number of people per
dwelling unit will go down and the population in 20 years will
be 43,000.
In Alternative 2A, the population projection for the Valley
is an increase of 65,000 people within the next 20 years. It
might be difficult to support this because of the air quality
constraints and it may be in excess of the E-O funding. This
plan also provides for a net increase of 5,000 people for Liver-
more in the next 20 years. The figures do not seem to be reasonable.
In the Summary of policies, Policy 6-4, refers to the LAFCO
policies for the two Valley Spheres of Influence, and per-
haps this would be an opportunity to politically challenge
the LAFCO decision at the hearing.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
The Mayor will present the Council position at the hearing
tomorrow.
REPORT RE AUTO-
MOTIVE BIDS
CM STALEY MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AWARDING LOW BIDS FOR
AUTOMOTIVE EQUIPMENT, FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES. MOTION SECONDED
BY CM KAMENA.
CM-33-248
December 13, 1976
(re Automotive Bids)
The City Manager was asked if the cost in driving to another town
for maintenance on a vehicle purchased from that town, is taken
into consideration when the bids are received. Mr. Parness indi-
cated that it is discussed but it is very difficult to determine
what the cost might be, in this regard. Some of the vehicles pur-
chased from Fremont Dodge are virtually maintnenace free. The
police vehicles require considerable maintenance, but the warranty
period passes quickly because of the amount of mileage expended.
The point was made that if the City purchases vehicles from out
of town, it is a tax benefit to the City of Fremont rather than the
City of Livermore, and also a business license tax benefit for Fremont
because of the sale, while the bids are very close.
The Council then discussed the bids that were received and whether
or not any of the bids should go to Fremont Dodge.
MAIN MOTION WITHDRAWN.
CM STALEY MOVED TO AWARD ALL FOUR BIDS TO THE LOCAL DEALER, DUNN
CHEVROLET. MOTION SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
Prior to the vote, the Acting City Attorney stated that he would
like to check the Government Code with reference to making tech-
nical adjustments, prior to finalization of the resolution.
CM STALEY ADDED TO THE MOTION THAT APPROVAL OF AWARDING THE BID
WILL BE SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE ACTING CITY ATTORNEY.
SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
RESOLUTION NO. 299-76
A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID FOR AUTOMOTIVE
EQUIPMENT (Dunn Chevrolet and Free-
mont Dodge)
REPORT RE INDUSTRIAL
CLIENT (PolYmir)
The firm of POlYmir Industries is interested in developing on the
Western Pacific property on South front Road. The client has
requested that the City allow the payment of development fees
over a two year term, rather than paYment at the time of the
issuance of the building permit. They would also request that
the requirements for the public works improvements be reviewed
and that the City grant a waiver of the improvements.
Mr. Parness stated that he would suggest allowing the development
fees to be paid over a two year term, but rather than allow con-
tinuance of the situation along Southfront Road, or to allow
a waiver of the public works improvements, that the City Council
refer the entire matter back to the Planning Commission for review.
The Planning Commission can then confirm or modify the requirements
and report back to the Council within the next couple of weeks.
Mr. Gorland asked if the Council would indicate its position con-
cerning prorating the development fees, and the Council explained
that they would like some time to consider the item and it may be
that the City will be in a better position after the December 2lst
Water Quality Control Board hearing.
Mr. Gorland indicated that his client is interested in building
the structure by July l, 1977, so time is of the essence.
CM-33-249
December l3, 1976
(Report re Indus-
trial Client (poIYmir)
Mr. Parness was asked if the City has ever deferred payment of the
development fees for two years, and Mr. Parness indicated that it
has not been done in the past. They would prefer deferment of the
fees rather than a long pro rate schedule because they will be pur-
chasing the property for development purposes which will be quite
costly.
Mr. Gorland was asked what the major concern is, with respect to
"development fees and requirements, and Mr. Gorland explained that
the main concern seems to be with the requirement for the improve-
ment of sidewalks. The client believes that, generally, in indus-
trial areas, sidewalks are not required or desired. There is a
sidewalk on one side of the street and they see no reason for the
requirement of an additional sidewalk.
The City Manager was asked to come back to the Council next week
with information and a recommendation concerning this item.
The P.C. will not be meeting in time to get information back to
the Council next week, so the staff was asked to submit information
on the funding mechanism, next week, with the land use considera-
tions, and public works information back to the Council as soon
as possible.
REPORT RE ABATEMENT OF
RESIDENCE ON McLEOD ST.
The Heritage Guild has requested that the City postpone abatement
proceedings initiated by the Building Department relative to the
unsafe building located at 29l McLeod Street, for a period of one
year.
Gary Drummond, representative of the Livermore Heritage Guild
indicated that they are asking for a delay only to allow time
to arrange for facilities and resources to rehabilitate and re-
store the building to single family residential occupancy.
CM KAMENA MOVED TO AUTHORIZE EXTENSION OF ABATEMENT PROCEEDINGS
FROM NOVEMBER l5, FOR ONE YEAR, WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE
BUILDING BE SECURED FROM UNAUTHORIZED ENTRY. MOTION SECONDED
BY CM TURNER.
CM KAMENA ADDED TO THE MOTION THAT THE COUNCIL MAY TAKE APPRO-
PRIATE ACTION OF THE ORDER OF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL IS NOT COM-
PLIED WITH, AND THAT THE PREMISES MUST BE SECURED AGAINST UNAUTH-
ORIZED ENTRY, CLEANED, AND KEPT FREE OF TRASH AND DEBRIS. MOTION
SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
PRESENTATION OF
HIGHWAY SIGNS
Mr. Gorland presented samples of highway signs proposed for identi-
fying the City. The staff recommended that the item should be de-
ferred until the preliminary budget session.
The Council suggested that in the meantime, the signs should
be reviewed by the P.C., Design Review Committee, and the Beautifi-
cation Committee for comment.
CM-33-250
December 13, 1976
REPORT RE FIRST ST. &
SO. LIVERMORE PARKING
The Director of Public Works presented a diagram showing the change
in parking in the area of First Street and Livermore Avenue, which
was followed by discussion, generally, concerning parking in that
area.
Item was noted for filing.
REPORT RE GROUND
LIGHTING FOR WATER
RECLAMATION PLANT
A report was submitted to the Council by the Director of Public
Works, concerning ground lighting for the water reclamation plant.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY MAYOR TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE ITEM WAS REFERRED TO THE STAFF FOR CONSIDERATION DURING
THE BUDGET SESSION.
REPORT RE INTERIM
EMERGENCY ORDINANCE
RE CBD ZONING MORATORIUM
The City Manager reported that the interim emergency ordinance for
the CBD Zoning moratorium was invoked due to the current study of
the proposed CBD Plan, and will expire on January 13. It can be
extended for eight months after a public hearing has been held.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, A HEARING WAS SCHEDULED FOR JANUARY 3, 1977.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Res. Auth. Expend.
for Title Searches
The Council adopted a resolution authorizing expenditures for
title searches relative to property abandoned by Southern Pacific
Railroad.
RESOLUTION NO. 300-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURES
FOR TITLE SEARCHES
Res. Designating Auth.
re Issuance of
Explosive Permits
The Council adopted a resolution designating the Fire Chief as
the issuing authority for the issuance of explosive permits.
RESOLUTION NO. 301-76
A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE FIRE
CHIEF AS ISSUING AUTHORITY FOR ISSU-
ANCE OF EXPLOSIVE PERMITS.
CM-33-25l
December l3, 1976
Res. re Use of
LLL Firing Range
A resolution was adopted authorizing execution of agreement with
LLL for use of the LLL firing range facility.
RESOLUTION NO. 302-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
AGREEMENT (Use of LLL Firing Range)
Res. Granting Variance
(Bel Aire Engineering>
The Council adopted a resolution granting the appeal for a variance,
for Bel Aire Engineering, Inc., concerning a patio cover, and per
Council action taken at the meeting of December 6, 1976.
RESOLUTION NO. 303-76
A RESOLUTION GRANTING APPEAL FOR VARIANCE
(Bel Aire Engineering, Inc.)
Resolutions Relative
to CETA Program
The following resolutions were adopted by the Council, relative to
the CETA Program:
RESOLUTION NO. 304-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREE-
MENT (Alameda County - PWEDA Title X)
RESOLUTION NO. 305-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREE-
MENT (LARPD - CETA Title VI)
RESOLUTION NO. 306-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREE-
MENT (Alameda County - CETA Title VI)
P.C. Summary of
Action 12/8/76
The Planning Commission Summary of Action from the meeting of
December 8, 1976, was submitted for informational purposes.
Payroll & Claims
There were 103 claims in the amount of $l88,268.01, and 303 pay-
roll warrants in the amount of $106.408.02, for a total of
$394,676.02, dated November 30, 1976, and approved by the City
Manager.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED.
CM-33-252
December l3, 1976
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Invitation to Lions
Club Luncheon)
Cm Kamena invited everyone interested, to attend a noon meeting of
the Lions Club, December l6th, at which time the Ambassador from
Great Brittan will be present and will speak. People are invited
for the lunch and to say hello to the Ambassador.
(Council Meetings)
Cm Staley asked if the Council intends to meet on the last Monday
in December. The Council concluded that there will be no meeting
on December 27th.
APPOINTMENTS
By unanimous vote, the Council selected Jerry Gerich and Charles
Hartwig to serve on the Industrial Advisory Board.
By unanimous vote, the Council selected Gurnam Sidhu, pricilla Payne,
and Gary Linford to serve on the Beautification Committee.
Roberta Hadley was nominated to the Design Review Committee.
Cindy Miles was nominated to serve on the Transportation Committee.
Resolutions confirming the appointments will appear on the Consent
Calendar next week.
INTRO. OF ORD. RE
LICENSE TAX
ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE ORDINANCE RELATIVE TO BUSINESS LICENSE TAX, WAS INTRODUCED
WITH THE DELETION OF SECTION l2.23.l(a). TITLE ONLY WAS READ BY THE
ACTING CITY ATTORNEY.
SECOND READING AND
ADOPTION OF VARIOUS
ORDINANCES
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE FOLLOWING ORDINANCES WERE ADOPTED:
ORDINANCE NO. 905
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE,
1959, BY REPEALING CHAPTER llA, RELATING TO HERI-
TAGE SITES, AND ENACTING A NEW CHAPTER II, RELATING
TO THE PRESERVATION OF CULTURAL HERITAGE.
ORDINANCE NO. 906
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 18, RELATING TO COM-
BINING DISTRICTS, OF ORDINANCE NO. 442, RELATING
TO ZONING, OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, BY THE ADDI-
TION OF SECTIONS l8.40 THROUGH 18.46, RELATING TO
HERITAGE PRESERVATION DISTRICT.
CM-33-253
December l3, 1976
ORDINANCE NO. 907
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER l4, RELATING
TO MISCELLANEOUS OFFENSES, OF THE LIVERMORE
CITY CODE, 1959, BY THE ADDITION OF SECTION
l4.18.l, REGULATING THE USE OF PONDS AND
FOUNTAINS.
CITY MANAGER
STATUS REPORT
Safeway Parking Lot
The safeway parking lot is being modified and they have borrowed
barricades for blocking the first six parking stalls. Hopefully
they will get their permanent improvements installed soon.
Water Reclamation Plant
The new surge tank installation is nearly complete, at the water
reclamation plant, which is a very important installation. The
new surge tank was necessary because of some water hammer prob-
lems in the line.
Traffic Signals
The track project is complete with the exception of minor work
such as the traffic signals at the intersection of "P" Street
and Railroad Avenue. They will be installed soon.
Railroad Avenue project
The Railroad Avenue project is in its final stages of design.
Hopefully, bidding will be obtained next month. If the Council
is not happy with the plans that they have reviewed the staff
can prepare some alternate plans to submit.
There was brief discussion concerning the problems of lip" Street
and the Railroad Avenue traffic.
Cm Turner presented sketches of suggestions concerning the
traffic pattern which he will be discussing with the staff
and the Council will be reviewing the item later.
Fire Insurance
The Fire Insurance Office is in the final stages of the survey
of the Fire Department. The Fire Department was concerned about
the hydrant pressure and in the survey it was found that virtually
all of the hydrants have excess pressure of what the minimum fire
flows require.
Personnel
The City is giving a test to 530 applicants for the position of
Police Officer, next Saturday. Among the applicants are 20 women.
CM-33-254
December 13, 1976
Springtown Golf Course
There has been no word concerning ~he agreement for the Springtown
Golf Course. Their legal counsel ~s reviewing the agreement and
Mr. Parness will be meeting with one of the committee members tomorrow.
Red Baron Restaurant
The Red Baron Restaurant has not been sold, as was reported in the
newspaper. The manager of the restaurant was reassigned or left
the service, but it was not sold.
ADJOURNMENT
APPROVE
Mayor Tirsell adjourned the meeting at 10:55 p.m. to an executive
session to discuss litigation and personnel matters.
~li t. 7h 'J:(1l -(, , J 1.
-- Mayor
ATTEST
~.! -tll}
...~
erk
. L e ore, California
CM-33-255
Regular Meeting of December 20, 1976
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on Decem-
ber 20, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore
Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:20 p.m. with Mayor
Tirsell presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Dahlbacka, Kamena, Turner, Staley and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirsell led the Councilmembers as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES - 12/6/76
P. 230, 3rd paragraph from bottom should be changed to read as
follows: The comment was made that if. someone can present testi-
mony on behalf of the Council, they should inform the Council.
P. 234, 3rd paragraph from the bottom, line 5 should read:
by March 3lst, (strike remainder of line and insert the
following) at which time LAVWMA must be in or out of the
EBDA line.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF DECEMBER 6, 1976, WERE APPROVED
AS CORRECTED.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETINGS OF NOVEMBER 29, AND DECEMBER
1, 1976, WERE APPROVED, AS SUBMITTED. (Cm Dahlbacka abstained
due to absence at both meetings).
OPEN FORUM
(re Cease & Desist
Order - Sewer Conn.)
Dewey Watson, representing Great American Land, stated that the
Council will be speaking before the Regional Water Quality Control
Board tomorrow concerning the cease and desist order. He would
like the Council to request that the Board limit the effect of
the order to exclude the permits which were fully processed as of
November 23, 1976.
The Acting City Attorney indicated that all permits for con-
nection fall under the order and there is no distinction
between commercial and residential.
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA, AND BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE COUNCIL SUSPENDED THE RULES TO ALLOW
DISCUSSION AND A DECISION ON AN ITEM NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA.
The Mayor explained that the City's position is that the entire
cease and desist order should be lifted because of the City's
good faith effort. Livermore's argument is that action con-
cerning the LAVWMA project is an example of good faith on the
part of the City and that the City has determined that the
LAVWMA project is the most cost effective project and is pro-
ceeding.
CM-33-256
December 20, 1976
(re Cease & Desist)
The question was raised as to whether the building permits would
not have fallen under the scope of the letter from the Regional
Quality Control Board, if Great American Land had paid the money
for the permits and were issued the building permits.
Mr. Reiners stated that the Board first indicated that it was up
to the City to make the determination as to whether or not the
permit had been issued to Mr. Watson. He has been discussing this
with Mr. Watson and concluded that the permits had been issued be-
cause it was subject only to the deposit of money. Mr. Reiners
took this position back to the Board at which time they immediately
strengthened the requirements and began asking about prior policies,
written policies, etc. In other words, they want the make the
blanket ban as tight as possible.
Ray Faltings, 1018 Via Granada, stated that San Francisco was once
in the same position as the City, and they were able to issue build-
ing permits. He believes that all cities should be treated equally.
COMMUNICATION RE
MILL SQUARE
A letter was received from the Mayor of Pleasanton, complimenting
the City on the addition of Mill Square.
The Council expressed appreciation for the nice letter.
COMMUNICATION RE
MEMBERSHIP - LIV.
HERITAGE GUILD
A letter was received from the Livermore Heritage Guild, indicating
that Garrett B. Drummond, Jr., has been appointed as the ex-officio
member of the Guild, to the Heritage Preservation Commission, as
outlined in the newly adopted ordinance.
COMMUNICATION RE
REGIONAL WATER QUAL.
CONTROL BOARD AGENDA
The Council received an agenda and two tentative orders that will
be considered by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, at their
meeting of December 21, 1976.
Item was noted for filing and it was mentioned that the staff and
Councilmembers will attend.
REPORT RE SEWER CONN.
AGREEMENT W/LIVERMORE
UNITARIAN FELLOWSHIP
Mr. Parness explained that the Unitarian Fellowship, at the suggestion
of the County, asked for a sewer connection. The Fellowship felt
that the terms and conditions posed a financial burden upon them
and they have requested that some consideration be given to possible
delays in some of the requirements for improvements.
The staff has meet with a committee of the Fellowship, at the direc-
tion of the Council, to discuss draft agreements, which have been
prepared and presented to the Council.
CM-33-257
December 20, 1976
(Unitarian Fellowship)
Mr. Parness reviewed the various exhibits (draft agreements)
explaining the difference in the agreements. Exhibit "A",
requires observance of some of the review conditions of the
City's various ordinances and standards. Exhibit "B" lists
requirements for physical improvements and it is suggested
that these requirements be delayed or postponed until there
is development on either or both sides of the property, or
within five years from and after the date of execution of the
agreement, unless the term is further extended by the Council.
Exhibit "c" is the same, but with reference to the public
works requirement. Items I, through 3 were explained and
are related to fees.
The Acting City Attorney was asked if the City would have the
right to disconnect, if the conditions are not met, and he
indicated that there is a provision in the sewer connection
agreement which allows the City to issue a disconnect order.
This would be a contract for property not within the City
limits and the City would have the right to discontinue
service to that property if the terms are not met. The
problem is the practical problem of trying to disconnect
something already connected.
Stuart Stone, representing the Fellowship, explained some
of the history concerning the application for sewer con-
nection, and discussed some of the points of the exhibits.
The Acting City Attorney advised that in the cancellation
portion of the contract, on the last page, that wording be
inserted indicating "....or any breach of this contract....
would give the City the right to cancel. Line 6, of page
6, shall read as follows: "Whether or not such misuse could
constitute a violation by law, or any breach of contract;
the city and contractor agree........etc."
The Council agreed to the recommended change.
CM TURNER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE A SPECIFIC
RESOLUTION. MOTION SECONDED BY CM KAMENA.
The Acting City Attorney was asked if the City could justify
this action if the City were involved in a suit, relative to
sewer allocation, because they are outside the City limits
nut they are Livermore people.
Mr. Reiners indicated that the reservation of allocation
policy seems to include quasi-public uses which would pro-
vide for this connection.
CM TURNER AMENDED THE MOTION TO INCLUDE THAT THE RESOLUTION
STATE THAT THIS CONNECTION IS CLEARLY WITHIN THE SCOPE OF
THE GENERAL PLAN. AMENDMENT SECONDED BY CM KAMENA, AND
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE (Cm Dahlbacka abstaining
due to conflict of interest).
REPORT RE CBD
PARKING
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE COUNCIL DIRECTED THE STAFF TO CONSULT WITH PROPERTY
OWNERS, MERCHANTS, AND THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE IN FORMULATING
AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT.
CM-33-258
"
December 20, 1976
REPORT RE COMMUNITY
ART PROJECT - MURAL
The City Manager reported that a high school art instructor, Mr.
Bernie Segal, is proposing an artistic wall covering for the
structure at the Rincon Avenue shopping center, for the portion
of the wall exposed to May Nissen Park.
Mr. Segal explained the project he has in mind, to the Council,
and noted that the paint store is donating approximately $200
worth of materials for the project. LARPD has agreed to contact
some of the local artists to help supervise ~he project and he
would also like to have a visual record of the progress. They will
need to spend some money for video tape, but not a lot. He explained
the design and indicated that he needs to have some release time
from the School District, for eight days. Sony may donate the
video tape needed but he may have to rent some of the equipment.
The Mayor explained that the City has a policy with prohibits the
donation of money for any project which is not a City project, or
to any committee that is not a City committee. Perhaps there is
some way in which the City could assist in raising the needed
money.
The Acting City Attorney commented that a section has been added
to the Government Code which permits a City to adopt an ordinance
that would authorize the expenditure of public funds for the removal
of graffiti, etc., on private property. The law is effective January
l, 1977. However, removal is restricted to graffiti and not the
repainting or repair of a more extensive area.
It was suggested that the Council could adopt the project as a
worthwhile project and ask the School Board to provide the release
time. The City could also provide the money for the video tape with
the condition that completed copies of the video tape be made a part
of the City archives, which would clearly be for a City purpose.
The City might not be able to pay for the release time, but it could
pay for something that could be placed in archives and used by the
City.
The comment was made that interpretation of the law seems to be
that the City would not be able to help, in this instance, and
that many worthwhile projects have been turned down by the City
because of the City's policy of not giving money to anyone other
than City committees or City projects.
The suggestion was made that perhaps the owner of the shopping
center could donate $100, and that the Chamber of Commerce
might be able to donate since their merchants have businesses in
that shopping center.
Mr. Faltings wondered if it would be possible to have a project to
clean up the graffiti on the bridge across the Arroyo, and the
shopping center on Vineyard Avenue, as well as the shopping center
on Railroad Avenue.
Mr. Parness was asked if the City has video equipment, and he indi-
cated that the City does own video equipment.
The Council suggested that if the City has video equipment that Mr.
Segal could use, the City should loan the equipment for the project
so that it will not have to be rented, SO MOVED BY CM STALEY AND
SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA. MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Mayor Tirsell dissent-
ing) .
The staff was directed to contact the Chamber of Commerce and other
groups who may be able to help with financing of the project, ON
MOTION OF C~~ TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA, AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
CM-33-259
December 20, 1976
REPORT RE LIVERMORE
ARCADE SHOPPING CENTER
IMPROVEMENTS
A letter from the Southern Pacific Development Company, relative
to improvements to the Livermore Arcade Shopping Center, indicates
that because of inflation, they are proposing to substitute the
kiosks which were originally shown as part of the future plan,
identifying the entries from Railroad Avenue to the north side
of the center.
The staff has recommended that the item be sent to the Design
Review Committee, prior to discussion of the item. The Council
concurred.
A representative from the Southern Pacific Development Company,
presented illustrations of the design proposed which will be
reviewed by the Design Review Committee.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE ITEM WAS REFERRED TO THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE.
REPORT RE POLICY
RE EIR PREPARATION
The staff has recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution
establishing objectives, criteria and procedures for implementation
of the Environmental Quality Act of 1970.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED.
RESOLUTION NO. 307-76
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 47-76 ESTAB-
LISHING OBJECTIVES, CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES FOR
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
OF 1970, AS AMENDED
REPORT RE CITY's
PURCHASING POLICIES
A report was submitted by the Acting City Attorney, relative
to the City's purchasing policies on awarding purchases other
than the low bidder. The item was in reference to the City's
recent vehicle purchase.
According to Mr. Reiners, the City cannot award a bid to any-
one unless they are the low bidder, under the present ordi-
nance, policy, and state law. The City can draft an ordinance
that would take care of this problem in the future which can
be brought back to the Council for review. The Council concurred.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Resolutions of
Appointments
The following resolutions of appointments to various boards and
committees, were adopted by the Council. It was noted by the
Council that the resolutions should reflect the original vote.
CM-33-260
December 20, 1976
RESOLUTION NO. 308-76
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING NEW MEMBERS TO
THE BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE (Gurnam
Sidhu, Gary Linford, pricilla Payne)
RESOLUTION NO. 309-76
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING ROBERTA HADLEY
TO THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
RESOLUTION NO. 310-76
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING CHARLES HARTWIG
TO INDUSTRIAL ADVISORY BOARD
RESOLUTION NO. 311-76
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING JERRY W. GERICH
TO THE INDUSTRIAL ADVISORY BOARD
RESOLUTION NO. 312-76
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING CINDY MILES TO
THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
Resolution Reject-
ing Claims
RESOLUTION NO. 313-76
A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIMS OF
VALLEY APPLIANCE & FURNITURE
P.C. Summary of
Action - l2/l4/76
The
The Planning Commission Summary of Action from the meeting of
l2/l4/76, was removed from the Consent Calendar because the
Council decided to appeal the approval of the home occupation
permit for James J. Dickman.
Report re Emergency
Rescue Vehicle
A report from the City Manager indicated that the County Emergency
Medical System Agency has purchased six emergency vehicles, with
a number of conditions to be imposed to any city accepting one of
the vehicles. The County has decided that Livermore should not
receive an emergency unit and this is reported to the City Council
for information only.
Mr. Parness was asked for a verbal explanation of why the City
did not receive a vehicle and Mr. Parness explained that at one
time the City did not have personnel trained to use the emergency
equipment, etc., but they have now had the training and the City
has six employees who could be assigned to the unit, but these
are principal officers. Part of the requirement is that the units
have to be manned 24-hours, with two persons who meet the training
requirements, and that the unit would be the first to respond to
all emergency calls.
CM-33-26l
December 20, 1976
(re Rescue Vehicle)
Mr. Parness indicated that there were various cost obligations
that had to be considered, as well, and the City concluded that
the matter should not be pursued.
The comment was made that the Council has really not had the
opportunity to review this item and the request was made that
the City Manager bring this item back to the Council for con-
sideration. It would be an advantage to the community to have
a full-time emergency vehicle, first in response to an emergency
call.
Mr. Parness indicated that the ambulance service available in the
City at the present time has the highly qualified personnel and
responds to. emergency calls, and the fire units will respond
to emergency medical calls for backup service.
Mr. Parness was asked if the equipment is different for the
ambulance than the emergency vehicle in question and Mr. Parness
responded by saying that one is an ambulance and the other is a
rescue type of vehicle, but the County decided that the City should
receive neither type.
Report re Indus-
trial Employment
The Director of Community Development submitted information con-
cerning Livermore industrial employment, as of November l, 1976.
Payroll & Claims
There were 144 claims in the amount of $133,742.l7, and 28l
payroll warrants in the amount of $100,636.77, for a total of
$234,378.94, dated December l3, 1976, and approved by the
City Manager.
APPROVAL OF
CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE COUNCIL ADOPTED THE CONSENT CALENDAR NOTING THAT THE
ORIGINAL VOTE IS TO BE RECORDED ON THE RESOLUTIONS AND THAT
THE P.C. SUMMARY OF ACTION IS DELETED.
RESOLUTIONS RE
TAXI SERVICE
ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM STALEY, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE COUNCIL ADOPTED TWO RESOLUTIONS RELATIVE TO TAXI
SERVICE.
RESOLUTION NO. 3l4-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
AGREEMENT (Third Amendment to Agree-
ment - Alameda County)
RESOLUTION NO. 315-76
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
AGREEMENT (First Amendment to Agree-
ment - Alameda County)
. CM-33-262
December 20, 1976
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE STAFF
(Poll re Rufuse Service)
Mr. Parness reported on the poll taken by the local garbage collectors
concerning garbage service and the use of plastic bags for curbside
pickup.
Letters have been sent to people in the pilot program area, explain-
ing the program, what the collection service will be, and asking
for the cooperation of the residents. Of the 390 residents con-
tacted, 240 indicated that they would cooperate, l26 indicated
that they would not, and 24 did not respond to the inquiry. It is
the recommendation of the Livermore Disposal Company that the pilot
program be cancelled.
The Council asked for the statistics to be included in the next
agenda packet for consideration at the time they are to meet with
Livermore Disposal.
MATTERS INITIATED
BY THE COUNCIL
(Disclosure Statements)
em Turner stated that early in 1976, the Council discussed the possi-
bility of considering disclosure statements. He asked that this be
scheduled on the agenda in the near future.
It was concluded that this could be discussed at the meeting of
January lOth.
(Volunteer Bureau)
Cm Dahlbacka stated that Mrs. Stallings, from the Valley's Volunteer
Bureau has placed many people in volunteer positions in the City.
She has a presentation that Cm Dahlbacka would like her to give
to the City if the staff could contact her.
The staff was asked to contact Mrs. Stallings to find out when
she can give the presentation.
(re Wedding of Resident
from Livermore and Resi-
dent of Quezaltenango)
em Staley commented that recently there was a wedding in Livermore
which should be recognized in terms with the City's relationship
with our sister city in Guatemala. It is the first marriage between
a resident of Livermore and a resident of Quezaltenango and Cm Staley
would suggest that the City present a resolution recognizing the
event and the good relationships that it embodies.
The staff was asked to prepare an appropriate resolution bestowing
the Council's best wishes on the bride and groom.
(Livermore Station)
Mayor Tirsell commented that Janet Newton has reported that the
Livermore Station's exterior will not be altered.
CM-33-263
December 20, 1976
(Livermore Station)
Mayor Tirsell suggested that the City write a letter to the
owner of the Livermore Station informing him of the historical
nature of the name of the building and requesting that the name
not be changed.
Cm Kamena noted that he believes there is something about the
sale of a business and changing the name when ownership changes.
This may be the reason they are considering a name change.
The Council concluded that a letter would be written asking
that the name have some relationship to the historical interest
of the railroad.
(LAVWMA Meeting)
Mayor Tirsell reminded the Council that on December 30th, there
will be a LAVWMA meeting, in the Council Chambers. She asked
that the staff prepare copies of all the information needed
at that meeting.
INTRODUCTION OF
ORDINANCES
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CODE AMENDMENT REGARDING PAYMENT OF FEES FOR SEWER CON-
NECTION, WAS INTRODUCED AND READ BY TITLE ONLY.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE CODE AMENDMENT RELATIVE TO FIRE SERVICE CONNECTIONS IN-
SIDE AND OUTSIDE THE CITY, WAS INTRODUCED AND READ BY TITLE ONLY.
ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM DAHLBACKA, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT RELATIVE TO CARD ROOMS, TAXICABS,
(PERTAINING TO LICENSING OF APPLICANTS, EMPLOYEES WORK PERMITS, AND
APPLICATIONS THEREFOR) WAS INTRODUCED AND READ BY TITLE ONLY.
ON MOTION OF CM KAMENA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT RELATIVE TO THE LICENSE TAX
FOR RETAIL AND WHOLESALE SALES AND THE MINIMUM TAX, WAS POSTPONED
AND WILL BE INTRODUCED LATER.
THE MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT RELATIVE TO THE WATER SERVICE CON-
NECTIONS AND STORAGE CHARGES, WAS REMOVED FROM THE AGENDA AND
WILL BE PLACED AS AN AGENDA ITEM FOR DISCUSSION LATER.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further Council business, the meeting was adjourned
at 10:15 p.m. to an executive session to continue personnel matters.
APPROVE
~L fJ1 c;r;llllLi~
..--- Mayor
ATTEST
, CJ. ty Cler
~ivermore, California
CM-33-264
Special Meeting - December 30, 1976
A special meeting of the City Council was called by Mayor Tirsell
for Thursday, December 30, 1976, at 12:00 noon, in the Conference
Room of City Hall, 2250 First Street, Livermore, California.
The purpose of the meeting was to discuss litigation regarding
property acquisition.
Present: Cm Kamena, Turner, Staley, and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: Cm Dahlbacka and Kamena (seated during meeting)
The meeting convened at 12:05 p.m. and immediately adjourned to an
executive session. The meeting adjourned at 1:00 p.m.
ATTEST
J!f;. ,
7J? . 1,. ;' , (//1
" <-
Mayor
~~L
'. t City Clerk
Livermore, California
&
.~ q[y,
APPROVE
Regular Meeting of January 3, 1977
A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on
January 3, 1976, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South
Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:08 p.m.
with Mayor Tirsell presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Cm Kamena, Turner, Staley, and Mayor Tirsell
Absent: Cm Dahlbacka (Excused - Ill)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Tirsell led the Councilmembers as well as those present in
the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES - 12/13/76
P. 246, 3rd paragraph from the bottom, line 5, delete the word
pipeline and insert project.
P. 248, 4th paragraph, line 5 should begin: Mr. Williams rather
than Mr. Parness.
ON ~mTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM KAMENA, AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE SPECIAL MEETING OF DECEMBER 13, 1976,
AND THE REGULAR MEETING OF DECEMBER 13, 1976, WERE APPROVED AS
CORRECTED.
CM-33-265
January 3, 1977
OPEN FORUM
(re Signs)
Jerry Wilverding, 4886 Primrose Lane, wished the Council a happy
new year and would hope that the new year will be fruitful and
profitable for the community.
Mr. Wilverding commented that in listening to the Holdener
Dairy sign issue, he understood that the sign had to be
parallel to the street. Since that time he has noticed that
the small sign being errected by the Texaco Station on Springtown
Boulevard is not parallel to the street.
The Zoning Administrator was asked to check the sign at the station
and report back to the Council by next week.
PUBLIC HEARING RE CON-
TINUATION OF INTERIM
ORDINANCE - ZONING CATEGORIES
A public hearing has been scheduled for the purpose of possibly
continuing the interim ordinance holding property in existing
zoning categories pending finalization of the CBD Plan. It is
the recommendation of the staff to refer to Item 7.1 on the agenda
for adoption of the ordinance, at the close of the public hearing.
According to state law, the City may initiate the zoning mora-
torium for four months the first time, and for an additional
8 months with a public hearing, for a total of one year.
The suggestion was made that perhaps an additional four month
moratorium is all that is necessary, and the City Attorney com-
mented that he will have to check because he believes the mora-
torium can be made in 4 mo., 8 mo., and 12 month increments only.
It was pointed out that a moratorium is not a moratorium on build-
ing, but rather a moratorium on any rezoning in the area. If the
Council adopts an additional 4 mo. moratorium, it may then be neces-
sary to hold another public hearing for another extension.
AT THIS TIME MAYOR TIRSELL OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING.
THERE BEING NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY, AND NO WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS,
ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, AND UNANIMOUS VOTE,
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
ON MOTION OF eM KAl~EN~, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE, THE ORDINANCE EXTINDING ORDINANCE NO. 897, FOR A PERIOD
OF 8 MONTHS, TO PROHIBIT REZONING OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES, WAS
INTRODUCED READ BY TITLE ONLY, AND ADOPTED.
ORDINANCE NO. 908
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE EXTENDING FOR A PERIOD
OF EIGHT MONTHS ORDINANCE NO. 897 TO PROHIBIT THE REZONING OF
CERTAIN PROPERTIES IN THE CITY OF LIVERMORE EXCEPT BY CONDI-
TIONAL USE PERMIT THE APPROVAL OF CERTAIN USES IN THE "CG"
ZONE AND TO PROHIBIT EXCEPT BY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT THE
APPROVAL OF ANY CHANGE OF USE IN THE "CB" AND "CO" ZONES.
The staff was directed to contact the Planning Commission and
request a schedule for adoption of the CBD Plan.
CM-33-266
em Turner later indicated that he had been misinformed ,
at the library concerning information which should have B~'I~~' ~,~.I i,
been there for the public. This information ~ available N' , W'c">
to the pUblic and all the revisions were included. ~
em Turner later indicated that he had been misinformed !
at the library concerning information which should have ell'~'~1 ~ ,~! \,
been there for the public. This information was available~,jJ.) Q.>>f(,ItJ
to the pUblic and all the revisions were included. 0,,' ,