Loading...
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,,' ,