Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutCC MINS 1975 Regular Meeting of January 6, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on January 6, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8 ~O p.m. with Mayor Pritchard presiding. ROLL CALL /--.." / " \ Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Tirsell and Mayor Pritchard Absent: Cm Futch (seated later in the meeting). PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Pritchard led the Council members as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. CM FUTCH WAS SEATED AFTER THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. MINUTES On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Tirsell and by a 4-0 vote (Cm Futch abstaining due to absence at that meeting) the minutes for the meeting of December 16, 1974, were approved as submitted. OPEN FORUM (No. Livermore Traffic) Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, stated that at the last meeting he brought up the matter of the amount of traffic on North Livermore Avenue and the need for an EIR for North Livermore Avenue. There is no mention of anything about this in the agenda and he asked if anything is being done. Mr. Lee explained that he is working on a report concerning this item and it may possibly be ready by next week. P.H. RE ZOo ORD. AMEND. TO RS DISTRICT Mayor Pritchard asked that Mr. Musso report some of the background concerning the proposed zoning ordinance amendments to the RS District, prior to opening a public hearing. ~\ Mr. Musso explained that a minor amendment has been suggested by the Planning Commission relative to the industrial regulations to provide that in the event there is a backing lot treatment to a major street, in an industrial area, the setback provision would be the same for the backing lot, as would be the front. He then explained the reasons for suggesting addition of RS-l.5 and 2.5 Zones, deleting the average thirty (30) feet rear yard in the RS-5 District, consideration of a change in rear and side yards and Maximum Developable Floor Area. He explained that the discussion on the floor area was a major item of discussion and it has been recommended that the 30% for the RS-5 be deleted and that 25% develop- able floor area be allowed for the RS-l, 2, 3, 4, and 5 Districts, with an increase of 35% after two years if not in violation of setback requirements. He stated that the major change would be with the recommendation concerning the developable floor area. CM-29-l59 January 6, 1975 (P.H. Re. z.o. Amend. to RS District) MAYOR PRITCHARD OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME. THERE WAS NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY VOICED AND ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. CM TIRSELL SYTATED THAT BASICALLY SHE IS IN AGREEMENT WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND MOVED THAT THE RECOMMENDATIONS BE ADOPTED, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH. Cm Miller stated that the City Council had asked the Planning Commission to consider recommendations for side yards and the back yard and that these items should once again be discussed. em Turner stated that the reason he recommended 12 foot side yards was because this would allow access to the back yard from either side of the house. Normally, 10 feet would be sufficient but because of the overhangs he would suggest 12 feet because the full 10 feet cannot always be utilized, with which Cm Miller concurred. Mr. Musso commented that the 14 feet on one side and 10 feet on the other (which the P.C. has recommended) guarantees that one side can be used as side yard access. em Turner stated that he would like to recommend that if the Council approves the recommendation for the 14 feet and 10 feet for the side yards, that the 14 feet be on the garage side of the house so that the driveway can be expanded with concrete to accommodate access to the side yard, which was followed by discussion. CM TURNER MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO STATE THAT THE SIDE YARDS BE A MINIMUM OF 10 FEET WITH THE LARGEST SIDE YARD PROVIDED ALONG THE GARAGE SIDE OF THE HOUSE, WITH A TOTAL OF 24 FEET OF SIDE YARD, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Cm Turner stated that under Purpose, Section 5.10, there is mention of provision of a wide range of housing costs for all income groups and wondered if the Council should discuss this aspect and it was felt that this should be a General Plan consideration that would apply to all the residential ordinances and em Miller added that the Ramapo:Ordinance provides that one house out of every ten will be dedicated to the Housing Authority which provides low income housing allover the J G.ty rather than in a designated area. Cm Miller noted that the Planning Commission has recommended that in the RS-5 District, the average of 30 feet rear yard be removed and to provide for a minimum twenty-five (25 ft.) rear yard. He explained that the reason the average 30 feet may be deleted from RS-5 is because a calculation indicated that this could not be done if the developable floor area was expanded to 35%. The solution to this problem would be for the initial plans to provide an average of 30 ft. with a minimum of 25 ft. after two years. CM MILLER MOVED THE FOLLOW AMENDED WORDING FOR SEC. 5.42 (b) ......Minimum twenty-five (25) feet, average thirty (30) feet. Rear yards may be reduced to twenty-five (25) feet after two years from the date of final inspection by the City Building Department........ SECONDED BY CM TURNER. em Futch stated that he feels the change suggested by Cm Miller is not necessary and that this would be more difficult to use and em Miller stated that actually what he has suggested would loosen the standards. He added that the idea is that people should be allowed to expand their houses and should not be prohibited from CM-29-l60 January 6, 1975 (P.H. re Z.O. Amendments to RS District) doing so by virtue of backyard setbacks. He explained his point by using illustrations on a blackboard, while discussing it with the Council. ( \ Mayor Pritchard stated that what Cm Miller has suggested will mean that originally there must be an average of 30 feet, and if this is removed, as suggested by the Planning Commission, there can be a minimum of 25 feet immediately which em Miller stated is correct. AT THIS TIME THE AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION MADE BY CM MILLER PASSED 4-1 (Cm Futch dissenting). THE MAIN MOTION THEN PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. The staff was directed to prepare the ordinance for introduction. CONSENT CALENDAR Res. Auth. Exec. of Agree. - Railroad Ave. The Southern Pacific Development Company has granted a small parcel of property from the existing operating trackage area that will per- mit the extension of Railroad Avenue so as to intersect E. Stanley Boulevard and it is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing execution of agreement. RESOLUTION NO. 1-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT AND ACCEPTING EASEMENT FOR STREET DEDICATION. (Southern Pacific Development Company) Res. re Grants for STEP & Youth Services The City Manager reported that in order to qualify for the new program budget allocations for STEP (Strategic Team Enforcement Program) and Horizons (Youth Services) the City Council must adopt resolutions authorizing our application for a new grant. It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to make application for the grants and to complete the necessary materials therefor. RESOLUTION NO. 2-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR FEDERAL GRANT FOR THIRD YEAR FUNDING: VALLEY YOUTH SERVICES CENTER RESOLUTION NO. 3-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR FEDERAL GRANT FOR SECOND YEAR FUNDING: STRATEGIC TEAM ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ( Payroll & Claims There were 55 claims in the amount of $73,584.63 and 279 payroll warrants in the amount of $86,874.77, for a total of $160,459.40, dated December 19, 1974, ordered paid by the City Manager. There were also 98 claims in the amount of $352,417.52 dated December 30, 1974, ordered paid by the City Manager. CM-29-l6l January 6, 1975 Various Minutes Minutes were received from the following: Planning Commission minutes of December lO, 1974 Greens Committee minutes of November 14, 1974 Investment Committee minutes of December 18, 1974 APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. REPORT RE SEWER CON- NECTION AGREEMENT (Calvary Temple - Arroyo Rd.) Mr. Musso reported that the Calvary Temple of Assembly of God, 2200 Arroyo Road, is a use that was established in 1967 as a church and developed with a septic tank. They now wish to expand and have come to the City of Livermore requesting sewer connection. The staff has processed the sewer connection request and most of the planning con- siderations were routine and reflect what the County previously ap- prover. He stated that there is some problem with respect to the pro- posed widening of Arroyo Road in that the right-of-way will end up being within five feet of the church structure. There will be five feet between the bike trail and the church wall. There was discussion and an illustration on the blackboard concerning the footage from the center line of the road to the curb and Cm Futch pointed out that at one time there was discussion of placing the bike path on the other side of the street and Mr. Musso explained that the placement of the Sunset homes along Arroyo Road dictates that the bike trail will have to be on one side of the road with the horse trail on the other side of the road; now the County wants them both on the east side. Mr. Musso explained that, originally, when the church was approved there were plans for an 88 foot right-of-way, rather than the l02 ft. right-of-way considered necessary at this time. Cm Futch wondered if the Council is considering whether or not the bike path should be on the church side of the street and it was noted that it has to be on the church side because of a decision made a long time ago and that this cannot be changed. Cm Miller stated that he would assume the people from the church are concerned about the fact that the bike path will be only five feet from the church and wondered if something could be adjusted so that the right-of-way may be moved further from the church with- out compromising too much on what the City wants to do with respect to the bike paths. He stated that one thing which could be done would be to paint the curb red where emergency parking is indicated/ which would mean another five feet from the building. ~~~ ~.d-~tJJ. em Futch commented that perhaps it could be conveyed to the County that the City would consider allowing a narrower right-of-way than normal and should discuss, at this point, what would be considered reasonable for the width. Ed Hutka, speaking on behalf of the church board, stated that the proposed widening of Arroyo Road has nearly destroyed the master plans for the church and he feels since the Veteran's Administration Hospital has reduced the facility down to lOO beds that Arroyo Road no longer should receive major access treatment. CM-29-l62 January 6, 1975 (Sewer Connection Agreement Calvary Temple) ( Mr. Hutka continued to state that I-580, between Dublin and Oakland is only four lanes with treatment less than what is proposed for Arroyo Road, and that I-580 is sufficient with the four lanes except during the peak commute hours. He stated that widening of Arroyo Road will cost approximately $5 million - more than what the County receives in a year from gasoline tax - and would suggest that the public be allowed the opportunity to discuss widening of a road which no longer handles a large amount of traffic. He asked if the Council would consider forming some type of benefit district for the sewer connection since the sewer facilities are not used on a daily basis. He pointed out that the City has changed the lines for the parking lot and yet they have to satisfy the County and they feel very frustrated in having to deal with both the City and the County. He stated that Calvary Temple is willing to par- ticipate, on an equitable basis, with adjoining property owners in the widening of Arroyo Road, provided it is widened within l5 years. Mayor Pritchard stated that he would like to see the proposals made by Mr. Hutka, on behalf of the board, in writing with staff comment on them with no action taking place at this time. CM TURNER STATED THAT HE WOULD AGREE HE WOULD LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW WHAT HAS BEEN SAID AND MOVED TO POSTPONE THIS ITEM UNTIL JANUARY 20th - TWO WEEKS, SECONDED BY CM MILLER. em Futch mentioned that the widening of Arroyo Road is a joint pro- ject with the County and would suggest that Mr. Hutka and the other representatives speak with people from the County before the City comes to a decision. CM TIRSELL MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION AS TO HOW A BIKE PATH AND EQUESTRIAN PATH COULD BE PROVIDED USING LESS SPACE. Cm Miller stated that he feels a more reasonable approach would be to look at how we can narrow the widening and try to accommodate the church property as much as possible. As far as the other re- quirements of the City for sewer connection, he would not be willing to abandon until the staff has reported as to what is felt to be necessary for the protection of the City. THE AMENDMENT WAS INCLUDED IN THE MOTION WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RECESS Mayor pritchard called for a brief recess at this time after which the Council meeting resumed with all members of the Council present. REPORT RE BUS STOP LOCATIONS FOR PIONEER BUS LINE The City Manager reported that the Pioneer Bus Line proposed the addition of two stops on Livermore Avenue so as to inter-connect with the BART bus stops and it is recommended that the Council adopt a motion authorizing the two bus stops, as proposed. r\ ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE RECOMMENDATION WAS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION NO. 4-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TWO BUS STOPS (Pioneer Bus Line) CM-29-l63 January 6, 1975 REPORT RE STATUS OF CROSSWINDS LEASE Mr. Parness reported that several months ago the Director of Finance pointed out that the lea see of the Crosswinds restaurant was delin- quent in rent payments which further compounded the problems of the City in confronting the leasee about the administration of the lease. Mr. Parness stated that upon being notified that the rent was in arrears he contacted Mr. Casey, the owner of the corporation, who responded by indicating that these matters had just been brought to his attention also. Apparently the company was suffering from an internal management problem which necessitated the bleeding of proceeds from this operation in favor of two others that the cor- poration had been come involved with in the Bay Area that proved to be unsuccessful. Rent payments to the City were diverted to other parts of the corporation structure and Mr. Casey has in- formed Mr. Parness that amends would be made and full rent pay- ments would be received by the City very soon. It has been approxi- mately two months since he first contacted Mr. Casey to speak about this matter. He stated that the rent is quite deficient which dates back to about five months in the base payment which is $850 and creditable upon the gross which is a variable figure - now set at 5% of the total gross and graduates upward to 6% in a couple of months. He stated that a base payment was received today but there is a deficiency of about five months in both the base payment as well as the gross amount. The total amount of de- ficiency is quite large - amounting to about $l6,000. Mr. Parness stated that in defense of the Crosswinds Restaurant Corporation they have been beset with a series of bad management difficulties in their operations here and not reflective upon the service to the public. The service has been especially good over the past six weeks since the management has been assumed by a local firm which intended to take over the ownership and operation of the business; however, the purchase intended by the local firm has been cancelled. A new arrangement has just been made by Cross- winds Corporation for a presently operating restaurant entrepreneur and with the Council's permission this firm will assume managerial responsibilities beginning tomorrow. Mr. Parness has been assured that this will mean full-time, on the job, determined, management of this operation, to the extent that the gross will show a signi- ficant increase over the succeeding months. He then read a letter filed this afternoon with the City which indicates what the Cross- winds Corporation intends to do with regard to their obligations. The letter stipulates that they will pay half of the amount owed to the City no later than Friday and that the balance will be paid in the subsequent six months in equal monthly installments. In addition, the plumbing deficiencies will be repaired and the downstairs snack bar area will be fully reconditioned and well appointed. Mr. Parness added that the amounts due and payable to the City will include interest for the unpaid balance and Mr. Parness is suggesting 7% interest. It has been suggested that the outer patio area which is open be enclosed to incor- porate this into the bar area to allow dancing which they feel would be a great advantage in the new operations. Mr. Parness would suggest that the capital cost be a responsibility of the City and that the Crosswinds Corporation bear this amount with credit toward the amount of rent payable to the City. Mr. Casey explained to the Council the various problems that beset the Crosswinds restaurant in both Alameda and Belmont which were relieved when Mr. Gentile and Mr. Fisher, a CPA, started managing these two restaurants and Mr. Casey indicated that he regrets he did not know of these people three years ago. The Belmont restaurant was grossing $9,000 in September and in October at which time Mr. Gentile and Mr. Fisher undertook management, the bar sales were $l3,20l, in November it went to $l7,000 and in December $l9,905. Prior to their taking over the management the bar had been very small but through imaginative removal of walls on Friday and Saturday nights more people can be accommodated. He stated that he is very hopeful CM-29-l64 January 6, 1975 (Report re Status of Crosswinds Lease) with respect to the future of the Livermore Crosswinds restaurant under this new management in view of the fact that they feel Liver- more is in a better location than the Belmont restaurant. ~ ( \ Mr. Gentile, stated that he plans to live in Livermore and devote full time to the management of the restaurant and that his wife will be helping also because he feels there is great potential for the Livermore restaurant. He stated that he would be happy to bring the Belmont menu to the Council because they do specialize in gourmet dinners and they feel it is second to nothing. In his opinion the restaurant should be run by professionals rather than young people with no experience even though the idea of having fresh young faces was previously felt to be appealing to patrons. He would have people who are interested only in the restaurant business and not intending to work for a short period of time while attending college or planning to leave the restaurant after a short time for one reason or another. Mr. Parness reviewed the plans suggested by Mr. Casey and Mr. Gentile, including the back rent and added that with the expansion of the bar area to include the patio the City would be responsible for the ex- terior portion to a maximum cost of $5,000, creditable against the rent. The upstairs plumbing would be improved to meet the satisfac- tion of the City staff and the downstairs snack bar area would be completely renovated. em Futch wondered if the expansion will alter the architectural design and Mr. Parness indicated that it would, to some extent, because there will not be a building indentation. However, it was anticipated when the building was originally designed that the indented areas would one day be consumed. Mr. Gentile commented that he feels the expansion will create a very pleasant appearance from the outside and should actually be a very good addition to the appearance of the inside. He also agreed, at the suggestion of em Futch, to work with the Design Review Committee on this item. Cm Turner noted that the first past due payment is due on January lO, and asked if they have the money to meet the first payment and Mr. Casey indicated that they have every intention of making the payment on time. Cm Turner also indicated that he feels the $5,000 the City will spend for the exterior and to be credited against the rent should not be credited to any of the rent in arrears. Cm Miller and Tirsell also agreed with this point and Cm Tirsell pointed out that the back rent is supposed to be paid to the City with interest. Cm Turner stated that in his op1n1on the $5,000 should be done through a separate agreement and to go towards future payments rather than towards any delinquent payments. He added that he feels this would be an indication of good faith on the part of the corporation in that they intend to make the back payments. There would be a credit towards future rent from this date forward. The six payments due the City should take place regardless of whether or not the improvement or expansion is approved. r~\ Cm Miller asked about the amortization for the $5,000 and Mr. Parness stated that this has not been spelled out, as yet, but can be worked out by the staff by calculating what the approximate gross would be with the allowance of a fair return to the company less the amount that would be payable to the City for future rent, probably in the area of eight months. CM-29-l65 January 6, 1975 (Report re Status of Crosswinds Lease) CM FUTCH MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY MANAGER WITH THOSE ADDITIONS SUGGESTED BY CM TURNER AND THAT IF THE FIRST PAYMENT IS NOT RECEIVED ON JANUARY lOth THE CITY WILL PROCEED WITH DEFAULT CHARGES, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. em Turner suggested that perhaps the Council should consider re- quiring that the improvements and funding for the downstairs snack bar take place prior to expansion and improvements for the upstairs area. He pointed out that already there are delin- quent payments due to the City and feels uneasy about spending more money for improvements. Mr. Casey indicated that the City's $5,000 will be spent over a number of months and yet he intends to spend at least this amount just in the coffee shop. COMMUNICATION FROM VMH RE PHYSICIANS A letter was received from Valley Memorial Hospital listing hospitals that provide residency programs in General or Family Practice throughout the United States. Mayor Pritchard stated that in talking with doctors about the lack of general practice physicians it was noted that many areas are suffering from a lack of physicians engaged in general prac- tice. One of the reasons is because if anything goes wrong people ask why a specialist was not consulted and the doctor is taken to court. Unfortunately, this discourages the number of doctors going into general practice and the reason doctors are specializing. COMMUNICATION RE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT Alameda County Planning Commission has approved a status report on the Solid Waste Management Plan for Alameda County for distri- bution and authorized distribution of the draft report which was forwarded to the Council for their information with a note to contact Mr. William Fraley with comments or questions. Cm Miller commented that the portion of the report related to recycling was interesting and was done well. COMMUNICATION FROM COUNTY RE FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DIST. (Zone 7) A resolution adopted by the Zone 7 Board of Directors establish- ing an increase in the basic charge of a Zone 7 water connection was submitted to the Council for information. em Miller stated that there have been questions raised as to whether or not the connection fee is adequate to take care of Project 2 and as he recalls, the staff was directed to provide an analysis of the rate structure and projections and would like to see such an analysis. MTC MEETING NOTICE A letter was received from Joseph P. Bort, Chairman of the Plan Revision Committee for the Metropolitan Transportation Committee (MTC) informing the Council that all comments relative to re- vision of the Regional Transportation Plan are welcome. CM-29-l66 January 6, 1975 COMMUNICATION FROM STATE WATER RESOURCES BOARD RE KAISER LANDFILL PROPOSAL The City Council received a copy of Resolution 74-74 adopted by the State Board of Water Resources Control authorizing a contract with Converse, Davis and Associates for review of the proposed Kaiser- Radum sanitary landfill. COMMUNICATION FROM CITY OF CERRITOS THANKING CITY FOR PARTICIPATING AS FRIEND OF THE COURT A letter of thanks was received from the City of Cerritos with respect to our participation as a Friend of the Court in the matter of HFH, Ltd. and Von's Grocery Company vs. Superior Court, Nos. 44,246 and 44,247. COMMUNICATION FROM MRS. HOWE RE KGO TV EDITORIAL RE NEW TOWN Janice L. Howe submitted a copy of a letter sent to Don Sutherland of KGO TV in response to an editorial aired on his station with respect to New Town. She indicated that she was very distressed and disagrees with the whole tenor of the editorial which supported the development of the new town and wished the Council success in the battle against its development. REPORT RE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT r'~ The City Manager explained that the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 - Title I is a new federal program whereby the federal government has aggregated many of the former categorical grant pro- grams under one umbrella scheme. This includes open space grants, water and sewage, urban renewal, housing assistance, etc. The allowance for expenditure of the funds is not as generalized as was the case with general Revenue Sharing but is not as restrictive either. However, there are limitations and the program is going to be very carefully regulated. The essence of the program is that the intent of the federal government is to improve the lot of the low and moderate income groups in a community through housing betterment. We are joinning together with seven other cities for joint application of funds, which happens to be the only viable option available to the City, for a total amount of $4.5 million for Alameda County and its seven participating cities, over three succeeding year terms. The apportionment will be based on a formula that includes the factors of population, housing overcrowding, and poverty and the last factor is to be doubled. Using this formula and applying it against all the participants in this consortium it would appear that Livermore would qualify for approximately l3.67% of the total $4.5 million or about $620,000 over a three year period. Unfortunately, there is little time available for the City's consolidation of supportive material and documentation because this must be forwarded to the county and assimilated with information from all seven cities into one application for submittal to ABAG and to HUD. Our information must be submitted to the county by January 30, 1975. Most of the information has been obtained and with the Council's prior permission there has been the addition of a staff member to help in getting this ready. He then introduced Chuck McKinley, the new staff mem- ber, to the City Council. Mr. Parness continued to say that the contract which is appearing before the City Council this evening has been drafted by the county (which was prepared by Martha Whittaker our former Assistant City Attorney) and is being transmitted to all of the participating cities this week. The contract specifies CM-29-l67 January 6, 1975 (Report re Housing and Community Development Act) that we must comply with the stipulations of the federal government and must honor the county time scale, etc. It should be noted that the county has no authority to dictate how Livermore's apportion- ment should be spent, this is entirely up to the decision of the Council. In this respect the federal statute is adamant about the input from the community as to how the funds should be utilized and requires that the City holds at least two public hearings and more meetings if it is felt to be necessary. Mr. Parness has scheduled the first hearing for Thursday, January 9th, at which time the staff will handle the reception of the public input and would hope that the Councilmembers might be able to attend this meeting which is for the purpose of hearing how the citizens feel the funds should be spent. The second hearing is recommended to take place with the City Council at the regular meeting of January 20, 1975, and would leave the remaining week for compilation of suggestions and input from the two hearings. It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing execution of agreement with the County for this program and also a resolution approving a tempor- ary staff addition of an administrative aid at a salary rate of $l,OOO per month. em Turner stated that in the agreement that goes to the county he would like wording added to reflect that the cities would like to receive a portion of the advance monies as was mentioned by Bill Zaner, City Manager of Union City. The City Attorney suggested that the Council adopt the resolution of agreement, as it is presented to the Council, and he will make the addition as suggested by Cm Turner to the agreement which will be attached to the resolution. CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE RESOLUTION OF AGREEMENT BE ADOPTED AND THAT WORDING BE INCLUDED IN THE AGREEMENT ATTACHED TO THE RESOLU- TION WHICH INDICATES THAT THE CITIES WOULD LIKE TO RECEIVE A POR- TION OF THE ADVANCE MONIES, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 5-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (County of Alameda) CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT OF MR. MC KINLEY, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. RESOLUTION NO. 6-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE AIDE (Charles C. McKinley). em Miller stated that he would like an answer as to whether or not these funds could be used for the fOllowing various things and does not need an answer this evening: (a) purchasing and upgrading of old houses (under the auspices of the Housing Authority) (b) purchase of new houses for low income housing (scattered allover the City) (c) some type of replacement for Tubbsville residents (d) for public transportation (e) for child care (f) for health clinics CM-29-l68 January 6, 1975 REPORT RE FIRE STATION NO. 4 SITE em Miller stated that he would like to see the resolution authorizing condemnation of a parcel for Fire Station No.4, prior to discussing the matter and Mayor Pritchard stated that he would also be interested in knowing who conducted the appraisal. ~ CM MILLER MOVED TO POSTPONE THE MATTER OF THE FIRE STATION SITE UNTIL JANUARY l3, 1975, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Parness commented that he would appreciate it if the Council would look at the site and give an indication as to whether or not the Council approves of the site in order that the City might find a means of gaining occupancy of the grounds prior to the date when eminent domain may be completed. At this time the Council reviewed the proposed site at the corner of Holmes Street and Concannon Boulevard, and Mr. Parness stated that the City might be able to arrange for occupancy of the site with possibly some type of lease arrangement with the owner until condemnation proceedings have been concluded. Mr. Parness stated that the owner is insistent that this go through condemnation and refuses to talk about a price. CM TURNER AT THIS TIME RAISED A POINT OF ORDER - The matter has been postponed. Cm Miller stated that when this item comes before the Council on January l3th that he would like a report as to what other sites were considered and the pros and cons regarding location at other sites. REQUEST FROM COUNTY RE APPOINTMENT TERM - MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DIST. Mayor Pritchard stated that if it meets with the approval of the Council he would like the matter of the appointment term of William Jenkins to the Mosquito Abatement District to be discussed during an executive session, with which the Council concurred. REPORT RE LIABILITY INSURANCE PROGRAM ( The City Manager reported that our local insurance broker has alerted the staff to an impending cancellation in March by our carrier of our public liability insurance. This is being done due to the current economic fluctuations and insurance market conditions, as explained in a letter submitted by our agent Gene Morgan, It is recommended that in view of the current status of affairs it is considered advantageous to authorize our local broker to ne- gotiate a public liability insurance policy with proper market sources and with the most economic result possible. It is the expert con- clusion of Mr. Morgan that the City would gain nothing in competitive bidding at this time for insurance coverage and would like to nego- tiate a coverage for the City's liability insurance plan. Mr. Parness stated that he would like to add that this be done for one year only because next year in March our fire insurance coverage will expire. A~ that time he would come to the Council and request permission to retain outside expert service in reviewing our entire insurance program for all of the various facets - liability, bonds, airport, fidelity, and general liability. At that time specifications can be prepared for use in competitive bidding. A service such as this may be obtained for something in the area of $2,500 and should be done in the fall. Mr. Parness stated that the staff recommendation would be to allow our present insurance agent to negotiate the extension of our general liability insurance coverage CM-29-l69 January 6, 1975 (Report re Liability Insurance Program) for a one year term from and after a termination - March of this year - with the anticipation that next year we will go to competitive building with professional assistance for a combined insurance package plan. SO MOVED BY CM TURNER AND SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL. Cm Miller stated that he will have to vote no on the motion as he was very uneasy two years ago at which time the City did not go to the bid system and what he feels is the only reasonable protection for the public. em Turner stated that, normally, he would agree with the point made by Cm Miller; however, the Council is considering no more than a one year extension and it would not seem reasonable to go to the expense of preparing for a bid process for this short period of time. If the City were looking for a long term insur- ance plan he would fully agree that going out to bid would be the only reasonable method by which a choice should be made. Cm Tirsell stated that she would agree with the statement made by em Turner in this respect. AT THIS TIME THE MOTION PASSED 4-l (Cm Miller dissenting). REQUEST FOR QUITCLAIM TRACT 273l - NO ACCESS STRIP At the request of the City Manager the request for the City to quitclaim a one foot no-access strip in tract 273l was postponed for one week, ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT RE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT - SB 4177 The Personnel Officer for the City of Livermore submitted a report with respect to SB 4177 - Fair Labor Standards Act - which is a bill to amend the Act of 1938 with respect to effective dates of overtime provisions relating to employees in fire protection activities and law enforcement activities. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE A RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED SUPPORTING SB 4l77. RESOLUTION NO. 7-75 A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING SB 4177 REPORT RE NEW EMPLOYEE CLASSIFICATIONS AFTER A BRIEF DISCUSSION CONCERNING THE REPORT FOR CITY EMPLOYEE RECLASSIFICATION CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE STAFF BE DIRECTED TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CLASSIFICATION CHANGES, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT RE SALARY RESOLUTION CHANGES The City Manager reported that in accordance with our labor rela- tions agreements, certain changes in wage levels must occur, CM-29-l70 January 6, 1975 (Salary Resolution Changes) effective January l, 1975. This is based upon a survey conducted by us among predetermined public employer agencies. The wage level changes vary but the average is approximately 3.6%. ~ ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE A RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED REFLECTING THE CHANGES. RESOLUTION NO. 8-75 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE ES- TABLISHING A SALARY SCHEDULE FOR THE CLASS- IFIED AND UNCLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, ESTABLISHING RULES FOR ITS USE, AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. l05-74. REPORT RE SB-lO SURFACE MINING RECLA- MATION ACT OF 1975 A report was submitted by the Director of Planning concerning SB-lO (Surface Mining Reclamation Act of 1975) and it was noted that industry members of the Quarry Committee are concerned with various provisions of the legislation, which were listed in a written report submitted to the Council and Cm Miller stated that he would agree with their concern in Item 4 which would require that the site be reclaimed for the highest and best use, with which Cm Tirsell agreed. It was noted that they would not be in favor of any other changes. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DOES NOT AGREE WITH THE CON- CERNS MENTIONED IN ITEMS l, 2, and 3 OF THE REPORT BUT WOULD ENDORSE THE CONCERN OF THE QUARRY COMMITTEE NOTED IN ITEM 4, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. ORD. INTRODUCED RE UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE 1973 EDITION ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE - 1973 EDITION, WAS INTRODUCED AND READ BY TITLE ONLY. A public hearing will be held on January 20, 1975, with respect to this ordinance, as required by state statute. WEEKLY STATUS REPORT RE VARIOUS PROJECTS At this time the City Manager presented his weekly oral report con- cerning the status of the following projects: Water Reclamation Plant: l. Transmission line complete 2. Reservoir not yet started 3. Telemetry equipment not finished under highway 4. Plant construction approximately 40% complete 5. About to begin with lift station to service Junior College (' .", ..... Railroad Relocation: Status report distributed to Council CM-29-l7l ___"_"__"__"__'M___.'_'_~__,,_,~_,__ .__._ ..__......_._.M_.._._..~<".,.,._._.."._._,."._____.__'_'_"_'''''_''''. January 6, 1975 Railroad Reloca- tion (Continued) l. All property has been cleared 2. New track right-of-way partially constructed and graded 3. In process of pouring abuttments on the "p" Street installation 4. Fencing being relocated along Railroad Avenue 5. Currently designing loop street and preparing to go to bid 6. Status letter sent to merchants 7. Additional grant fund applied for applicable to First Street improvements 8. Acquisition for First Street over- pass in process at this time Traffic Signals: l. State has called for bids on the Holmes/Concannon signals (a) bids will be received by l-29-75 (b) work is to be completed within three months or even sooner 2. First Street/Livermore property acquisition in process (a) tentative settlement obtained for the northwest corner (Hub) (b) bids should be ready for Feb. Water System: l. Lift station is in place and func- tional for the Junior College water transmission line - interconnection with the Zone 7 line. 2. Water rates are being studied. Building Department: l. Engaged in concentrated in-service training program among inspectors by virtue of the new Codes adopted. 2. Most inspections being done are for the S.P. commercial development Street Department: l. Concern re "L" Street traffic during holidays 2. Has notified RR people of the problem re railroad crossing in that area. Golf Course: l. Oakland Scavenger has vacated Corporation Yard premises l. Improvement completed 2. Median strips will soon be planted l. New sod for Tee #4 2. Unable to get to Tee #5 at present 3. Ten evergreen trees destroyed in recent storm Corporation Yard: No. Livermore Avenue: Public Works: l. Fee revision will be submitted 2. Access problems to Junior College Finance Department: l. Capital Improvement budget underway 2. Operating budget to follow planning Department: l. Window survey 2. Staff work near completion for Planning Unit #ll 3. Application by Pleasanton Garbage for transfer station CM-29-l72 January 6, 1975 (Weekly Status Report re Various Projects) IT WAS NOTED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL IS OPPOSED TO ANY PLAN WHICH MIGHT ROUTE GARBAGE TRUCKS THROUGH THE CITY OF LIVERMORE. ,~ Police Department: 1. Junk dealer has been charged on some type of offense and no longer can take junk cars. Fire Department: 1. New vehicles should arrive in two weeks 2. Preliminary plans for Fire Station #l (a) complete by January l5, 1975 (b) plan to go to bid by May l5, 1975 (c) estimated completion - September 3. Dispute over whom is responsible for taxes on condemned property for Station #l Transportation Study: Proposed contract deed will be coming to the Council soon - four firms interviewed. Federal Emergency EmploYment Program: New enactment - $3.3 million will be made available to Alameda County as a result of the percentage of unemploYment in this county. Our City will receive some funds also. ADDITION OF MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL Matters Initiated by the Council and staff was not listed as an agenda item in accordance with new Council policy. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS CM MILLER MOVED TO ALLOW MATTERS BY THE STAFF AND THE COUNCIL AND FOR THIS ITEM TO BE PLACED ON FUTURE AGENDAS, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL. em Turner stated that he did not prepare anything for discussion at this meeting because of the new ruling and that Mr. Parness was not allowed to proceed with discussion of Fire Station #4. In his opinion there should not be a discussion of anything unless some type of emergency exists. AT THIS TIME THE MOTION PASSED 4-l (Crn Turner dissenting). (Report re Stark and Urban Planning Study) Cm Futch stated that he visited with Congressman Stark in order to find out more about who asked the Corps of Engineers to conduct a study on urban planning and Congressman Stark indicated that John Murphy made a personal visit to Washington D.C. to speak with Don Edwards who in turn called Pete Stark. Mr. Futch stated that he has a copy of a letter subsequently sent to Pete Stark by John Murphy regarding the Corps of Engineers. Cm Futch felt this should resolve the questions presented to Mr. Elmore as to how the Corps of Engineers became involved. /~\ Cm Futch stated that if it meets with the permission of the Council he has prepared a letter he would like to send to Pete Stark with information Mr. Stark has requested. The Council agreed that the letter could be sent as written. CM-29-l73 January 6, 1975 Campaign Expenditures of Supr. Hannon Cm Futch asked if there was any information on Supr. Hannon's last filing, and Mr. Logan replied that it had not been determined who made contributions, however he plans to meet with Mr. Engel soon to proceed forth on whatever course is appropriate and he would then advise the Council. ern Futch then asked if a discussion of Geldertown this evening would be premature since he had not met with Mr. Engel, and Mr. Logan stated he had no objection to an executive session to discuss the status now and possible future moves on a legal front. He felt it might be advantageous to meet so that he could have some direc- tion from the Council. Council Procedure ern Futch stated that he felt the previous location of matters in- itiated by the Councilmernbers should be reinserted. Mayor Pritchard indicated this would be a good time to discuss Council Policy and asked if there should be a subcommittee.of the Councilor if they would prefer a study session to discuss Council policy. The Council concurred that a study session would be preferable, and it was their decision to meet at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, January l3, to discuss Council Policy regarding this matter. Letter from Supr. Cooper ern Tirsell referred to the letter from Supervisor Cooper, regarding his reasons for voting to amend the Alameda County General Plan to allow county urbanization north of the City of Livermore and stated it was her intent to rebut the letter and that she would furnish the Councilmembers with a copy for their perusal. ABAG BUDGET Mayor Pritchard stated he had received a copy of ABAG's budget and told the Councilmernbers that if they had any changes, additions or deletions they would like to make to the budget or any comment, he would like to have these given to him so he would know how to vote when he attends the quarterly meeting. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at ll:45 p.m., to an executive session to discuss one legal matter and one committee appointment. ATTEST Pro Tempore APPROVE C1ty Cler Livermore, California CM-29-l74 Regular Meeting of January 13, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on January l3, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at B 14 p.m. with Mayor pro tempore Futch presiding. ROLL CALL Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Tirsell and Futch Absent: Mayor Pritchard (Excused-Illness) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor pro tempore Futch led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. CONSENT CALENDAR Minutes Minutes were received, as follows Airport Advisory Committee - December 2, 1974 Planning Commission Minutes - December 17, 1974 Payroll & Claims There were 57 claims in the amount of $48,099.95 and 284 payroll warrants in the amount of $85,Ol9.86 for a total of $133,l19.8l, dated December 31, 1974 and approved by the City Manager. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Tirsell and by unanimous vote the Consent Calendar was approved. NOTICE OF BOARD OF SUPERVISORS HEARING RE PROPERTY AT NO. "P" ST. & PORTOLA AVENUE The City Council received a notice of a public hearing to be held by the Alameda County Board of Supervisors with respect to rezoning of property located on the north side of portola Avenue at the inter- section of North "P" Street from A to C-l District. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL FOLLOW THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR DENIAL OF THE REQUESTED REZONING AND THAT A REPRESENTATIVE BE SENT TO THE HEARING, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL. Cm Miller noted that this property is within the Sphere of Influence for the City of Livermore and the rezoning would be in conflict with both City and County General Plans. r-" Cm Tirsell volunteered to attend the public hearing on behalf of the Livermore City Council. Mr. Musso mentioned that he would like to point out that an EIR was not done for this and it would be a rather major rezoning and also the General Plan was not amended to accommodate the rezoning. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CM-29-l75 January l3, 1975 RE USE OF ACCESS THROUGH RESIDENTIAL AREA TO GAIN ACCESS TO ARROYO ROAD The County Director of Public Works responded to the complaints about people driving through the residential area between Valle- citos Road and Arroyo Road for the purpose of gaining access to ~ croyo Road by indicating that no extension or realignment of Wetmore Road is planned at this time. Members of the Council felt that such realignment might prove to be the means of access to Arroyo Road from Vallecitos Road. ) m Turner indicated that the letter from the County was not a very satisfactory response to the question of how this matter might be solved and suggested that the staff or Planning Com- mission be asked to respond. It was mentioned that a report is forthcoming from the Planning Commission and ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE MATTER WAS TABLED PENDING RECEIPT OF A REPORT. REPORT RE SITE FOR FIRE STATION #4 Mr. Parness reported that several sites have been studied and brief statements submitted to the Council as to the reasons some of the sites were rejected. The location recommended by the staff for selection is the property located at the corner of the commercial property located on Concannon Boule- vard, northeasterly of the intersection of Concannon Boulevard and Evans Avenue. Mr. Parness explained the reasons for select- ing this particular site, noting that the station would be a neigh...,.-' ; borhood station, small in size, and would require use of approxi- mately l/2 acre of land. Qeuestions have been raised as to how this use might affect the intended use of the rest of the property and Mr. Parness indicated that it has been designed so as not to interefere with plans for that area. Cm Futch commented that when the CO Zone was allowed on this property owned by Mr. Mehran, that the perimeter of the property was supposed to remain a "greenbelt" area for the purpose of bike paths and walkways and greenery connecting homes to Con- cannon Boulevard. The proposed location for the fire station is right in the middle of this greenbelt area which somewhat destroys the usefulness of what was intended, and Cm Futch is concerned about the proposal because of this. Mr. Parness stated he is not sure the development of the station would harm any plans for the area and has been told that the dimensions of the station would still allow the proposed in- ternal street so as to exit onto both Concannon and Holmes Street and will not block anything. Cm Futch commented that the proposed station would be a devia- tion from what is proposed in that area and really does not to see different uses than those planned for. Mr. Musso explained that at one time Mr. Mehran offered to let the City or LARPD take this property for its use and at that time neither body was interested and this was the reason other plans were made for its use. He feels it is possible that a plan could be submitted by Mr. Mehran without a street and, in fact, one of the plans they submitted did not have a street in the loop and the green zone was backyards for the proposed offices. CM-29-l76 January 13, 1975 (Report re Site for Fire Station #4) CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE RESOLUTION DIRECTING CONDEMNATION OF THIS PROPERTY BE ADOPTED, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL. ern Futch stated that he would oppose the motion because he would like to have the building moved slightly, and for the green area to be a useful area. It would appear, by viewing the plans, that it would not be very useful and in his opinion this would be a planning mistake. Discussion followed concerning the plan and the amount of green area that will be provided and Cm Futch commented that if one of the proposals could be worked out he would be in favor of the motion. AT THIS TIME THE MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 9-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING CONDEMNATION OF FEE SIMPLE ESTATE FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES, TO WIT: A FIRE STATION AND APPURTENANCES, OF REAL PROPERTY LO- CATED AT THE SOUTHWESTERN CORNER OF LOT 6l, TRACT 29l4, MORE GENERALLY DESCRIBED AS NORTHEASTERLY OF THE INTERSECTION OF CONCANNON BOULEVARD AND EVANS AVENUE, CITY OF LIVERMORE, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA. RES. ADOPTING CITY EMPLOYEE RECLASSIFICATIONS The City Manager reported that the resolution approving classification changes for City employees was not adopted at the last meeting because the Council had not had the opportunity to review the resolution. The resolution has since been submitted to the Council for review. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE RESOLUTION APPROVING CLASSIFICATION CHANGES WAS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION NO. 10-75 A RESOLUTION APPROVING CLASSIFICATIONS CHANGES RES. RE LENGTH OF TERM - MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DIST. Mr. Roberts of the Alameda County Mosquito Abatement District has requested that the resolution appointing William A. Jenkins to the District Board be changed from a one year appointment to a two year appointment to conform with their policy of two year appointments. Cm Miller stated that he would abstain from the vote because he feels eight consecutive years in office should not be exceeded and appointment of two years would mean nine consecutive years in office for Mr. Jenkins. (~" ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY A 3-0 VOTE (Cm Miller abstaining and Mayor Pritchard absent) THE RESOLUTION APPOINTING MR. JENKINS TO A TWO-YEAR TERM WAS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION NO. ll-75 APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER TO MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT (William Jenkins). CM-29-l77 January 13, 1975 REPORT RE CO~n1UNITY DEVELOP. DEPARTMENT The City Manager reported that three months ago the Council dis- cussed the possibility of establishing a Community Development Department for the purpose of promoting industry and commercial development in the City of Livermore. In view of major impending cost obligations the matter was continued and a staff report on the matter was requested. The staff was instructed to submit a list of the obligations from the General Fund and those obliga- tions expected to be taken care of through the General Fund re- serve. It was noted in the report that there is concern as to whether or not the City has the financial ability at the present time to undertake such an expense and some comment relative to the effectiveness of such a department. Cm Tiresll commented that in light of the present economic situa- tion and concern for the reserves from the General Fund she would agree with the City Manager's recommendation not to institute a department at this time or to hire additional staff members for industrial promotion at this time. She added that a new industrial handbook has been published and it would appear that Livermore is making progress on the processing of industrial applications and would hope that this process continues to improve. Cm Tirsell added that with the high rate of interest for loans and the lack of investment capital available at present, she feels it would be hard to justify the hiring of an additional staff member for approx- imately $30,000jyear since this person would need to recruit about $3 million worth of industry each year to compensate for the salary. CM TIRSELL THEN MOVED THAT THE MATTER BE DEFERRED UNTIL BUDGET TIME WHEN THERE CAN BE RECONSIDERATION, SECONDED BY CM MILLER. ~PJY' em ~ noted that if the matter is tabled there can be no discussion and in view of this CM TIRSELL AND CM MILLER WITHDREW THE MOTION AND SECOND. Cm Turner stated that he would agree with the suggestion to con- tinue until budget time but would like to point out that industry provides employment for those people who might need the low cost housing the City is going to provide, as well as tax revenue, and each year industry is delayed here in Livermore it means that we must keep dipping into reserves for various expenses and commented that perhaps something could be done through the Federal Housing and Community Development Program. He stated that he would like to see the Council take a positive stand on the funding for this item at budget time or to go the the Chamber of Commerce to ask that they help obtain industrial clients, on a contract basis. Mr. Parness stated that use of the reserves for this year is in a critical situation and there is no forseeable means of replenish- ing the money used for the salary of an additional staff member. CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE ITEM BE TABLED UNTIL BUDGET TIME AND THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM MILLER WHICH PASSED BY A 3-l VOTE (Cm Turner dissenting) . REPORT RE PROPOSED COUNTY GOVERNMENT SITE LOCATION The City Council has requested a brief presentation concerning the proposed location of the County government center suggested for the Sunol Boulevard site - one of six sites studied. Mr. Ratcliff, the location consultant, (Ratcliff, Slama, Cadwalader) stated that in reviewing site locations they did not find one particular location to be satisfactory from every aspect. CM-29-l78 January l3, 1975 (Report re Proposed County Government Site Location) Mr. Ratcliff commented that a criteria was set up by which to evaluate the sites and ratings were applied to the various sites. One of the sites considered was the Livermore Civic Center site but it was felt to be too far from the center of everything and really on the edge of Alameda County. He pointed out that in the Livermore-Amador Valley there are presently two government centers, Livermore and Pleasanton, and there is some question as to whether or not a third would be reasonable. The conclusion has been that it would be best to eliminate a third government center in this valley and that it would strengthen existing services in the valley if the center were located near existing County facilities. Cm Miller stated that he is perfectly willing to agree that a site selected in Livermore would not be centrally located enough for the entire valley; however, the same argument would apply equally to a Pleasanton location and the services provided by Pleasanton are irrele- vant to those services provided by the County. In his opinion, a location off the freeway would be more reasonable. Mr. Ratcliff stated that many people have felt that Santa Rita would be a good site for adding County government services but in reality there were many problems encountered when consideration of this site took place. Cm Miller stated that the information provided for the Council with respect to criteria for evaluating the sites was not complete and it is not clear why some of the sites were rejected. Mr. Ratcliff explained the reasons various sites were rejected and the problems brought to light when they were evaluated. Cm Miller stated that it would appear the consultants reviewed the sites from the aspect of another community and that this is not the case. There is a need for centralized facilities to handle court cases, welfare and health cases for the people in the valley with easy access from the freeway and both the Staples Ranch or Santa Rita meet the criteria; Pleasanton does not and the Livermore Civic Center site does not. Mr. Ratcliff stated that some of the land presently owned by the County in the area of the Pleasanton Fairgrounds was one of the areas considered to be a good site because there is access by way of Stanley Boulevard for Livermore residents and I-680 for other people in the valley. Cm Turner commented that he would be in favor of services at Santa Rita because of the centralized location and wondered if considera- tion had been given to New Town proposed for development by Geldermann, and Mr. Ratcliff stated that he did not consider a location in New Town because he was not aware of the proposed development. It was noted that the County Board of Supervisors approved the General Plan amendment to include development of New Town and indicated that future growth for the valley would be used up in this area for an estimated 50,000 people, and it was felt by the City Council that this should be given consideration because it will mean that there ~ will be 100,000 people located at this end of the valley which will become the center of the population for the County. The proposals by the County indicate that the majority of the population will be at this end when the capacity allowed has been met. Mr. Ratcliff stated that it was his impression that the population growth would be spread allover the valley somewhat uniformly. He CM-29-l79 January l3, 1975 (Report re Proposed County Government Site Location) added that one major consideration was that it would be best to locate facilities on property already owned by the County and the Sunol site is owned by the Catholic church and the City of San Francisco. CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL REAFFIRM ITS POSITION IN FAVOR OF A SITE THAT IS CENTRALLY LOCATED, SECONDED BY CM MILLER WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. Mr. Ratcliff commented that a great deal of importance was placed on the availability of mass transportation and urged that the Council submit its views to the Board. REPORT RE AFF~RMATIVE ACTION PROGRAM The City Manager reported that by virtue of federal law, local governmental units are now mandated to have an Affirmative Action Program which is a very complex type of employment dictate that has been very carefully evaluated by the City staff, and asked that Bob Masik, summer intern for the City, report on this item. Bob Masik, stated that research was done to determine federal legislation requirements and as to what would be included in an Affirmative Action Program. Staff preparation included ob- taining information as to the availability of people in the area and the type of people who might be affected by such a program which was provided in the 1970 census information. Mr. Parness stated that it is recommended that the Council adopt the Affirmative Action Program by adopting a resolution and that the report is data which substantiates the need for the program. CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING ACTION NECES- SARY, WITH RESPECT TO THE PROGRAM, WITH THE AMENDMENT OF PAGE 2, OF THE RESOLUTION TO STATE THAT "IT IS THE REQUIREMENT OF THE COUNCIL THAT MANAGEMENT, ......etc....GIVE THE PROGRAM THEIR FULL AND UNQ tALIFIED SUPPORT. ", SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cm Turner stated that on Page l6, under Meetings it states that the Personnel Department will schedule periodic meetings to review affirmative action policy and the progress of each employee and wondered if the meetings will be written up and filed for future reference, if necessary, and Mr. Parness re- plied that it would be the City's intention to keep a record of the minutes and Cm Turner asked that there be an inclusion TO STIPULATE THAT MINUTES WILL BE RECORDED AND MAINTAINED IN CITY FILES, INCLUDED IN THE MOTION AND SECOND. Cm Turner asked the meaning of Recruitment of Underutilized Applicants noted on page lOO of the report which Mr. Masik explained by saying that existing in the population there is a certain percentage of workers who perform a certain level or classification of work and the City of Livermore must hire the same percentage in this classification as the percentage of the population who can perform this work. It was noted that there have not been applications made with the City of Livermore by many ethnic minorities and one of the reasons is because Livermore does not offer the housing and transportation for these people and there are very few located in Livermore. CM-29-l80 January 13, 1975 (Report re Affirmative Action Program) Mr. Parness responded by saying that the federal government is going to be extremely restrictive about the administration of this new law and there probably will come a time through the assessment of our conformance, or lack thereof, whereby we will be dictated to by the federal courts regardless of whether or not there is an availability or lack of people for certain positions; they will not accept this as an excuse for nonconformance. We will be re- quired to conform to the standards and dictates. Cm Tirsell pointed out that the affirmative action program does not mean that only ethnic minorities must be hired but that women also fall within this category and that there are many qualified and well trained women within the valley who could be hired. AT THIS TIME THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. RESOLUTION NO. 12-75 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE SUPPORTING ALL ACTIONS NECESSARY TO ~~KE EQUAL EMPLOY- MENT OPPORTUNITY A REALITY FOR ALL. REPORT RE APP. FOR REZONING SITE W. OF CORDOBA & CONCANNON (Sunset Development Co.) The Planning Commission has considered the application of Sunset Development Company for rezoning of a site located at the corner of Cordoba and Concannon from RL-6 to RS-5, and has recommended that the rezoning to RS-4 be allowed because the rezoning conforms to the General plan, would be compatible with adjacent residential use and provides flexibility in development not found under "RL" Zoning District regulations. Mr. Mehran (Sunset Development Co.) has indicated his desire to withdraw his application but it was felt that the recommendation should be forwarded to the City Council to allow a choice of terminating action or proceeding with the rezoning because of the application or because of Planning Commission recommendation. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL SET A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE POSSI- BLE REZONING FROM RL-6 TO RS-4 FOR FEBRUARY 3, AND ALSO TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR POSSIBLE REZONING OF INDUSTRIAL AREAS AT THIS SAME TI~1E, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Prior to the motion Cm Turner expressed some concern for continuing with possible rezoning of the property owned by Mr. Mehran since the application has been withdrawn and the Councilmembers pointed out that this particular property has not been in conformance with the General Plan and the rezoning would make it conform. REPORT RE TRLR. STORAGE IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS ('" '. The report from the Planning Director relative to the enforcement of the trailer storage restrictions WAS NOTED FOR FILING ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. It was noted that the Planning Commission is currently working on a trailer storage ordinance that will soon be before the Council for review. CM-29-l8l January l3, 1975 REPORT RE PROPERTY ANNEXATION PROPOSAL (Wornow property) The property owners for the area abutting the northerly city limits and extending to Las positas Road have requested that the matter of annexation be continued. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE MATTER WAS TABLED. REPORT RE BICYCLE LICENSING PROPOSAL Assistant ity Manager, Donald Bradley, stated that the report he has submitted to the City Council with respect to the bicycle licensing proposal made by Cm Turner covers most of the questions ern Turner has asked and that the report recommends that the C~ty get into the statewide program as soon as administratively possible and to try to license as many bicycles as possible through using school sites both during the week and on Saturdays, and in general, making bicycle licensing more convenient and available to the gen- eral public. ern Turner commented that he feels the report made by Mr. Bradley is very good and that the reason he has suggested licensing all bicycles is to help curtail theft of bicycles and according to the Police Department there are quite a number of bicycles that have not been licensed. He added that he would agree a $lO fee for attaching the license to the bicycle is expensive but is a lot less than purchasing a new bicycle. He also added that in his opinion the suggestion for the major bicycle retail stores to license bikes is good and the owners of both the Schwin bike store and the Bicycle Tree have indicated that they would be very happy to license new bicycles. Mr. Bradley stated that it may be true that the owners of major bicycles stores would be willing to issue licenses; however it would be difficult to have an ordinance that retailers would comply with on a regular basis and it is felt that there are already enough problems with the handling of cash for this purpose with just the City departments involved. em Miller stated that he would agree with Cm Turner's suggestion to let local bike retailers help license the bikes because it means that more bikes may become licensed which otherwise might not become licensed, particularly if the owners of the store have agreed to help with the licensing. Cm Futch agreed that if licensing by the bike stores would help to cut down on the amount of theft it would be worthwhile to ask for their assistance. CM MILLER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE A PROGRAM OF BICYCLE LICENSING ,GENERALLY ALONG THE LINES. OF THE MEMORANDUM FROM MR. BRADLEY BUT INCLUDING LICENSING THROUGH THE DEALERS, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. ORD. RE UNIFORM BLDG. CODE The City Attorney stated that there have been changes in the Plumbing Code with respect to some figures and asked that the ordinance not be introduced at this time. CM-29-l82 ~TTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (re Comprehensive Com- munity Development Scheme) The lity Attorney reported that with respect to the Comprehensive Com- munity Development Scheme application, the County had a paragraph in the agreement which indicated that the County would not be responsible if the tity failed to submit particular items and therefore lost money from the federal government. Mr. Logan added to this paragraph "unless said county has failed to comply with proper notice as set forth herein above", to protect the City when the circumstance arises in which the county failed to notify us of something and as a result certain material is not submitted and, consequently, a loss of funding. Martha Whittaker, attorney representing the county, has indicated that this is unacceptable to the county and they do not want to be liable for anything that is not properly submitted which Mr. Logan stated is true even in the situation of where it is the county's fault that the City does not submit the proper material. We are in a dilema because the county has the upper hand in this matter and if we back out of this completely it will not affect the fact that the county can still obtain funding. If Livermore wants funding we will have to take some type of action and Mr. Logan's recommendation would be to strike the language he added at the end of the paragraph and which the Council approved last week - "unless said county has failed to comply with the proper notice as set forth herein above". The members of the Council agreed that this situation is very irritat- ing and wondered if there is any recourse and Mr. Logan replied that he could include, in the letter, some language indicating our concern that they are unwilling to accept responsibility in an adhesion con- tract and at least inform them of the fact that Livermore is upset about this. CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE AGREEMENT CHANGE, SECONDED BY CM TURNER WHICH PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Weekly Status Report) At this time the I l,ity Manager presented a weekly oral report with respect to the status of the following items: Fee Changes: Sewer Connection Storm Drain Water Storage Bedroom Tax Park Fund Water Rates Airport : l. New tower chief from Stockton 2. Airport Study - 35% complete 3. Waiting list for T-hangar facilities (approximately 20-30 people) (a) staff report coming recommending an addition of l6 T-hangars (b) availability of state loans for this purpose - $50,000 Sewer Construction: Lift station complete and utility services have been installed. I~\ R. R. Project: l. All subgrades completed to "K" St. 2. Pier columns and caps finished at "P" St. 3. Storm drainage on "P" Street being installed CM-29-l83 January 13, 1975 (Weekly Status Report) Trees: Golf Course: Public Deposits: Finance Department: Politics: General Plan Amendment: Fed. Emer. Employment: Housing & Community Dev: Fire Department: Transportation Consultant: CM-29-184 1. Approx. 55 hours of overtime expended because of storm damage. 2. Rash of vandalism to trees 1. Soil expert has met with Greens Committee re soil problems (a) badly constructed greens (b) irrigation causing damage to grass growth 2. Reconstruction of greens planned (a) $5,000 per green estimated (b) there will be greens with sand 3. Crosswinds Restaurant lessee has paid 50% of the rent due and has executed a Memo of Agreement for balance. l. Three bids received l. Five businesses being taken to small claims court becuase of business lic- ense defaults. 2. Annual audit underway l. Superior Court decision declaring local government has no authority to regulate size or number of political signs. l. Consultant has sent suggested General Plan amendment proposed for Council review and adoption in advance of the action forthcoming on the major Gen- eral Plan document. l. City will receive $119,509 for this current calendar year. (a) will allow employment of l2 people (b) group assignment category most feasible 5 - Park and Tree Department 5 - Street 2 - clerical (1) Police Dept (1) City Clerk (d) more money to be available in March (e) projects will be median construction and and civic center landscaping (f) about $lO,OOO can be used for materials l. Meeting held by staff on January 9 and turnout was good - good suggestions. 2. Meetings to be held on January 20 and 27 before City Council as required by HUD 1. Conducting daily inspection services, as off-duty exercise, of retail stores. l. Nearing final recommendation - Transportation Consultant 2. Tour held of Merced who had used consultant services - they are well pleased with system. 3. Dial-a-ride being used and being considered as one alternative. . . January l3, 1975 MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCILMEMBERS (EIR re Livermore Gardens) Cm Miller stated that he had been discussing the question of an EIR for Livermore Gardens and the fact that HUD claims the Council should have looked at the EIR statement and done something about it, however we were not furnished with one. He felt that perhaps the Council should have asked for one, and in projects of this kind where an EIR is required, even though not by the City, the City should make sure a copy is received for review. Mr. Musso stated that HUD should have furnished the city with a copy of the EIR. Cm Miller agreed that they should have sent it, but HUD is now saying the city should have requested it, and perhaps we should make sure that we get these statements in the future. COVA Meeting Cm Tirsell reminded the Council members about the COVA meeting to be held on January 23, 1975, and asked if they would make their reservations if they intended to attend. Greenville North Mayor pro tempore Futch asked the City Attorney about his meeting concerning Greenville North, and Mr. Logan advised he had a meeting scheduled for January 6 with Tom Bevilacqua, but had to cancel the meeting, and has not been able to arrange another meeting, but will attempt to set up a meeting to talk about the case. Gelderman Letter to ABAG Mayor pro tempore Futch stated he felt that the Council should respond to the letter that Gelderman wrote to ABAG, requesting 45 minutes in front of the executive committee. They will give testimony that the City of Livermore will not have a chance to rebut, and Mayor pro tempore Futch felt that the City of Livermore should submit a letter requesting to be heard, and he volunteered to write the letter and he asked the Council's permission, AND OFFERED THIS AS HIS MOTION, SECONDED BY CM. TIRSELL, WHICH PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Council Policy Study Session The study session concerning Council Policy had been continued to this time, and CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL CONTINUE THE STUDY SESSION TO 7:00 P.M., ON JANUARY 20, 1975. MOTION WAS SE- CONDED BY CM MILLER AND APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT ~ I The meeting was adjourned at lO:45 p.m., to an executive session ::P:~::USS pendin~, ti::~ ~~ ATTEST ity Clerk ~6're-, California CM-29-l85 Regular Meeting of January 20, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on January 20, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard presiding. ROLL CALL Present: ~m Miller, Futch, Tirsell and Mayor Pritchard Absent: Cm Turner (excused absence) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Pritchard led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. MINUTES January 6, 1975 Page l62, third paragraph from bottom, next to last line should read as follows: would be to paint the curb red where emergency parking is indicated and narrow the street, which would mean another five feet from the building. ON MOTION OF CM FUTCH, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF JANUARY 6, 1975, WERE APPROVED, AS CORRECTED. P.H. RE HOUSING & COM- MUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT Mayor Pritchard stated that a public hearing has been scheduled to allow public input with respect to expenditure of a $622,000 grant (Housing and Community Development Act program) through the federal government. The application for the funding is a joint application along with other Southern Alameda County cities and dit is expected that Livermore will receive $622,000 for its portion of the grant. One of the requirements for receiving the grant is that public hearings are held to receive public input as to how the money should be spent. City employee, Chuck McKinley, has presented guidelines which include programs eligible for funding and those programs which would not be eligible for funding. At this time the public hearing was opened. Doug Bell, representative of LARPD, stated that LARPD would like to propose development of a Senior Citizens Center on the side of the present recreation center in the area now occupied by the softball field at that site, and that sources of matching funds be investigated for construction of the center. He explained that the construction would be in addition to the present building. It is suggested that remaining funds be used to relocate the soft- ball field to Robertson Park and to develop the arroyo in Robertson Park at Wente Road working westerly for as far as the funds allow. These suggestions would be consistent with their master plan and construction of the center would allow facilities to provide for low-cost nutritional meals for senior citizens, would provide a sense of belonging in the community and a location for social interaction and recreation and a base of operations for their community projects and other matters relevant to senior citizen concerns. CM-29-l86 January 20, 1975 (P.H. re Houing and Com- munity Development Act) Lillian Snorf of the Senior Citizens Center, presented a petition in favor of the proposal made by LARPD which contained l50 signatures of senior citizens. Mrs. Snorf added that there is a need for senior citizen housing here in Livermore also but is not sure that the grant could go towards this type of development. Cm Futch commented that it is his understanding the grant can be used to purchase land for senior citizen housing but it cannot be used for the construction of such and Mr. Parness replied that this is correct. Jim Lyle, representative of the Interfaith Housing, stated that he has nothing to add to the comments made at this time but they are very much interested in building 26 more units and possibly the City could help by purchasing land. He added that more units could be placed anywhere in the City and they are not limited to building where they are presently located on Hillcrest Avenue. William Hurdlow, 1143 Aberdeen, stated that he would hope the City does not receive the funding because this would mean taking money from the pockets of everyone. Gib Marguth, ll52 Farmington \lay, Chairman of the Bicentennial Committee, stated that he would like to comment as to the desires of three committees: 1. Heritage '76 Committee would like to have funds spent to bring the Carnegie Building up to code; 2) the HORIZONS' Committee would like to see improvement of the duck pond in Springtown and 3) HORIZONS '76 would like the development of Robertson Park to begin. He added that HORIZONS '76 is a forward looking project that will go on into the 1980s and will give the community something to build for and a dream for the future of the community. This committee was appointed by the Community Affairs Council and they would like to suggest that the committee be expanded by the City Council and be given an opportunity to plan for the HORIZONS '76 activities. He stated that the project in its total perspective would be the construction of community property from Quezaltenango Parkway to Granada High School, and would include ~ senior facility, and a youth center. Clyde Highet, stated that at this point there is really nothing to go on as far as what type of senior center will be constructed and opinions cannot be given as to whether people want such a building or not. Mayor Pritchard stated that one of the problems is that the City has been given very little time to discuss concrete proposals. Sally Bystroff, 330 Scott Street, spoke to the Council on behalf of the Buenas Vidas Youth Ranch and its project as well as saving the old sanitarium site. She stated that Buenas Vidas is a ranch oper- ation designed to assist youths who are troubled and is presently located on Greenville Road and there is a possibility that they may be issued a license for the foster care of only two children and the reason they must move. They are presently seeking use of the old sanitarium buildings and in conjunction with her appeal for funds for this project gave a slide presentation on the facilities available at the sanitarium site and their plans for use of the buildings. Use of any funds received would go towards the restoration of the buildings they would like to use which is primarily roofing, glass for the windows and replacement of some of the floors and road work. Anna Brown, 11450 Tesla Road, speaking for some of the members of the Livermore Heritage Guild, read a statement concerning the value of the physical remains of our past such as the sanitarium and their desire to preserve these buildings. It is felt that use by Buenas Vidas would be the best alternative for use of the buildings. CH-29-l87 January 20, 1975 (P.H. re Housing & Com- munity Development Act) em Tirsell stated that during the presentation by Mrs. Bystroff she indicated that the county would like to get rid of the sani- tarium sites and wondered if this is a firm commitment and Mrs. Bystroff commented that it is not firm until the county acts on the matter the first of March but from the indications she has received it is felt that Buenas Vidas has a good chance of being allowed the use of the buildings. The county wants to be rid of all the considerations for the whole area - upper and lower - the well, the pump. However, because of the number of letters the county has received asking that the property remain in public ownership the county is not at liberty to sell the property. She feels if no one shows interest in using the buildings the county will level them. Cm Futch asked if Buenas Vidas is a non-profit, private, organiza- tion and Mrs. Bystroff replied that it is a non-profit incorporated agency which is private though they are public in their service, and explained their program. She added that many of the people are on welfare or low-income people and the reason they are seek- ing sources of funding. Their primary concern is for helping children before they get to juvenile hall. Julia Kleinecke,spokesman for the Emergency Fund Center, commented that the Center is a private corporation organized by the Valley Covenant Ministry to help low-income people during times of finan- cial emergency and that the principal means of assistance is food for the hungry. She reported on the work being done by the Center made possible through personal donations and donations from clubs and churches in Livermore. She suggested that the City purchase an old building, centrally located, renovate it and lease it to the Center for 99 years and if they stop doing business in the future the building could revert to the City's use. In response to a question posed by the Mayor she noted that they normally do not need to provide lodging for people in an emergency and when the circumstance arises they are sent to a local motel and also that they have no particular building in mind at this tim , but they would like to be located in downtown Livermore. Anna Brown, stated that the Livermore Heritage Guild would like to see the house on Fourth Street across from 7-ll preserved and suggested that perhaps the Emergency Fund Center could make use of it. She then stated that one of the things the Guild would like to see the grant help pay for would be to bring the tank house, located at Ravenswood, up to standard so that the house could be used as a permanent caretakers place of residence. If this is done the big house could be renovated and available for public use. It is estimated that $3,000-$6,000 would be required for this purpose. John Monser, representative of the Twin Valley Chapter of the Alameda County Association for the Mentally Retarded, stated that there are over 400 people in Livermore who are retarded and there is a need for expansion of their workshop and school facilities to help serve these people. They would appreciate assistance through this program to help meet their needs. Frank Maloney of the Livermore Housing Authority stated that they would be willing to make a contribution in the way of property or construction of a building for the purpose of a day care center to be operated by someone else. He stated that they do not have a firm proposal at this time but wanted to mention it so that the proposal is not lost among the eloquence of other speakers tonight. He stated that they would like to see development of a day care center to aid children of families that are not able to make enough money to hire a babysitter. He felt the people in Villa Gulf (Leahy Square) could greatly benefit from such a center. CM-29-l88 January 20, 1975 (P.H. re Community Development Act) Cm Tirsell asked if any research has been done with respect to inital capital cost for such a project and Mr. Maloney indicated that none has been done and they have no idea what the cost would be. He stated that at the time Leahy Square was developed the matter was discussed and they were not able to adapt any of the buildings for this purpose because of the Fire Code and other such matters and a building will have to be specially designed. He indicated that there is not sufficient room on the property for a childcare center but there is adjacent land that could be purchased or even land nearby. Cm Tirsell asked how the determination will be made as to which group or project should receive funds and Mr. Parness replied that the testimony, as to how the funds should be spent, will be incorporated with the testimony from the next public hearing in addition to input from the City staff and then presented to the Council by some means of priority listing including dollar amount and selections will be made by the Council. It was then suggested that any group requesting funds include dollar figures with project proposals. Mayor Pritchard stated that there is a need for a Senior Citizens center and the Emergency Fund Center needs to expand and wondered if some of these similar services might be incorporated into one center where many services might be housed under one roof or into one building. CM MILLER MOVED TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING UNTIL 8:00 P.M. NEXT MONDAY, JANUARY 27th, SECONDED BY C~1 FUTCH AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. P.H. RE ADOPTION OF UNIFOR~ MECHANICAL CODE Mr. Street explained that there is not much to report with respect to the Uniform Mechanical Code other that it is proposed that the City adopt the latest edition of the code previously used. There are no dramatic changes involved and is the usual code updating pro- viding for new methods, materials, etc. r1ayor Pritchard opened the public hearing and no public testimony was offered. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. ON MOTION OF CM FUTCH, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THE COUNCIL THE ORDINANCE WAS ADOPTED - SECOND READING WAS WAIVED AND THE TITLE WAS READ AT A PREVIOUS r1EETING. ORDINANCE NO. 856 ( \ " AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE VIII, RELATING TO UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE, OF CHAPTER 6, RELATING TO BUILDINGS, BY THE AMENDMENT OF SECTIONS 6.42, RELATING TO ADOPTION OF UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE, 1967 EDITION, 6.44, RELATING TO VIOLATIONS AND PENALTIES, AND 6.45, RELATING TO WHOM PER- MITS MAY BE ISSUED, OF THE LIVERHORE CITY CODE, 1959. CONSENT CALENDAR Resolutions Denying Claims RESOLUTION NO. l3-75 A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF ROBERT A. LOVELESS CM-29-l89 January 20, 1975 RESOLUTION NO. l4-75 A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF DONALD LOVELESS Report re Police Complaint Form The City Manager reported that some time ago the Council reviewed the citizens complaint form used by the police Department, which now is mandatory by state law, and felt that changes should be made in the text of the complaint form. A revised form has been submitted to the Council for review and unless there is objection to the text, the proposed form will be used. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (Petition re R.R. Proj.) The City Clerk commented that Mr. Tull submitted another petition last Friday with respect to "unfair taxation" because of the rail- road relocation project and underpass projects. The petition was presented too late to be included in the agenda for this evening which contains approximately 448 signatures to be included with the first group of petition signatures. She indicated that the City Attorney has again directed that the petition should not be certified. The City Attorney stated that many of the criticisms contained in the original Memorandum of Law still apply and in his opinion the petition is not valid. He stated that Mr. Tull disagrees with this opinion. At this time no action is required of the Council and they are being informed that the petition has been resubmitted. (P.u. #l2 and 18) The City Manager reported that the planning consultants have asked that they be allowed to review neighborhood Planning Units #12 and #l8 even though this is not part of their contractual obligation because of the affect it would have on their General Plan studies. permission was granted by the Council. Mr. Parness also commented that a joint meeting is scheduled with the consultants and LARPD next Wednesday, January 22nd. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL (Lot Markers) Cm Miller reminded the staff that the Council expressed interest in requiring that survey markers indicating lot lines not be removed because they are helpful and a convenience to the property owner. It was noted that a report is being done for this item. CM-29-l90 January 20, 1975 (Supervisors Agenda Item re Night Meetings) Cm Miller stated that Supervisor Santana has proposed night meetings for the Board of Supervisors which happens to be one of their agenda items and Cm Miller suggested that this idea be supported and that Livermore should indicate to the Board that some of their public hearings should be held at night and at least some of their meetings also be held at night. (Questions Arising re Oak Street) Cm Miller stated that in conjunction with the railroad relocation project there have been remarks in some of the reports about Oak Street not being done by the consultant. The question arises as to why Oak Street was not done by the consultant and this matter should be open to some negotiation because of the very large fee the consultant is receiving from the City. Mr. Lee explained that when the plans were originally prepared some of the phases were prepared in skeleton form with the idea that the City would finish up some of the design afterwards and Mr. Lee added that there will be a written report on this matter which will soon come to the Council and then further discussion can take place if they wish. (Federal Funds for Housing in Las Positas P.rea - New Town) Cm Futch stated that the Council had mentioned communicating with HUD concerning federal funding for housing in the Las positas area and wondered if it is too premature to begin correspondence with HUD. Mayor Pritchard commented that Mr. Geldermann has indicated that he is not seeking federal funding for a New Town proposal under the Hun program. Cm Futch stated that there are other sources of federal support such as FHA mortgages and VA mortgages and would suggest that there be a staff report along with a letter draft which would include something about the environmental aspect and have the federal government look at what is going on. Cm Futch added that he would also like the letter to mention the fact that approximately $'00,000 of the taxpayers money has been spent to provide servi&Je to the same area and that any housing in that area could be provided at a less costly rate by the City of Livermore. '~/~~ (Greenville North Park) Cm Tirsell stated that she met with one resident of the Greenville North area to talk about what is happening with respect to the Green- ville North park and asked the City Manager to comment on the status. ~/ ( :1r. Parness stated that eminent domain proceedings are under way and the City is waiting for this litigation to begin in the courts. The court calendar is full and we will have to wait. We have no preference for the right of occupancy and it will probably take another three to four months to get to court. The City Attorney has tried to personally contact the owners but to date has not been successful. CM-29-l9l January 20, 1975 (re Greenville North) Mr. Logan commented that his secretary telephoned Mr. Bevilacqua six times in one day and was not able to contact him. The last communication he has had from Mr. Bevilacqua was a note indicat- ing that he would call Mr. Logan Tuesday or Wednesday of this week. (Safeway Lot) Cm Tirsell asked if she is correct in assuming that the highway maintenance people she saw today intend to fix the left turn lane into the Safeway lot and Mr. Parness indicated that this is correct. Cm Tirsell stated that she wanted this confirmed because she has received a number of calls relative to it. (CaVA ~1eeting) Cm Tirsell reminded the Council that the first meeting for COVA will take place this Thursday and asked that the Councilmembers who are interested in attending contact Mr. Parness' secretary. (Bd. of Supervisors Meeting re Status of Women) Cm Tirsell stated that the Board of Supervisors has scheduled a public hearing for 9:00 a.m. tomorrow on the Commission for the Status of Women and that if anyone is interested, they are more than welcome to attend and join in the lobby to recommend establishment of such a commission by the Human Relations Com- mission. (re Planning Consultants) Cm Tirsell asked when we will be meeting with the planning consultants again and Mr. Parness replied that the staff met with them last week to review some very important documents which are now being circulated among the staff for review of the grammer, etc. and possible effects or contradictions in other parts of the law. It is anticipated that the material will be ready for the Council in 2-3 weeks with interim measures the consultant recommends for the Council's adoption. The consultant would then like a second public meeting for the purpose of furnishing a status report and hopefully all of the Councilmembers, Planning Commission and other interested parties will be present. This meeting has been tentatively scheduled for February 6, 1975. Cm Miller stated that at this point he is becoming concerned with the time scale and whether or not the City will be able to accomplish those things which should be done by the 23rd of March and Mr. Parness stated that this is the purpose of the documents being reviewed with the consultant. There are legal considerations that must be reviewed by the City Attor- ney but it is felt that there are about two weeks leeway in getting the material ready for the Council. (re Newspaper Article) Cm Tirsell commented that Mr. Leonard has written to the editor of the newspaper with respect to opposition to the railroad relocation project in the name of the Building Trades Union and she felt that he might consider the heavy industrial unions that are very much involved in this project and would assume that the unions working here on the project would take a very dim view of Building Trades Unions calling off a pro- ject that happens to be their "bread and butter". CM-29-l92 January 20, 1975 cm1MUNICATION FROH COUNTY RE SEPTIC TANKS - LOMITAS ( \, A letter was received from the County Board of Supervisors which indicated that at their January 9th meeting a motion was made to allow issuance of a building permit to those lots with an approved public water supply, and the motion failed. The Board directed the Planning Director of the County to ascertain the costs of installing a public water supply and the matter of abatement of any existing septic tanks within the study area was referred to the County Council. COMMUNICATIONS FROM BEAUTIFICATION COMM. RE TREES IN CENTENNIAL PARK Two letters were received from the Beautification Committee with respect to the tree located at Centennial Park which they feel should be moved because the tree is obstructing the view of the totem pole which is also located at that site. They suggested that the Council also meet with them to discuss the Ancestral Tree Ordinance. They indicated that the staff seems to be reluctant to move the tree and it was their understanding that the tree would be moved during the dormant season. Mr. Lee explained that the staff did not refuse to move the tree but did question the advisability of a move because it would be compromising the natural beauty of the park. Cm Miller stated that apparently the Beautification Committee got the impression that there was some type of agreement made as to moving the tree and he felt some consideration should be given to their request. Cm Tirsell commented that possibly, as the tree matures, the lower limbs will be removed and will allow added visibility and perhaps this should also be considered. THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO PREPARE A REPORT IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE SO THAT THE COUNCIL MIGHT BE INFORMED AS TO WHAT THE FULL ISSUE MIGHT BE AND FURTHER ACTION WILL BE TAKEN AFTER THIS TIME. THE COUNCIL ALSO AGREED TO MEET AT 7:30, FEB. 10th, WITH THE BEAUTIFICATION COI1MITTEE TO DISCUSS THE ANCESTRAL TREE ORDINANCE. RE REQUEST FOR ANNEXA- TION OF PROPERTY ON LAS POSITAS ROAD Mr. Parness reported that the Pleasanton Investors have requested annexation of 44 acres on Las positas Road which is land owned by them. Hr. Parness added that the property is contiguous with the City on the southerly side and is within an area under study by the City (PU #l2). The consultant's report will be coming to the Council in a couple of weeks and because of his recommendation Mr. Parness would question whether it would be advisable to annex this property. One of the recommendations is that there be no further annexation of property that may be develooed for residential purposes by virtue of the City's inability to service it, particularly with respect to sanitary sewage. Mr. Parness recommended that the matter be tabled pending a complete review of the consultant's report. The applicant stated that he does know about the study taking place for that area and understands the reason the matter may be tabled. Mayor Pritchard questioned why it would not be advantageous to the property owner to annex and Mr. Musso replied that the basic problem is sewage; however, it would be an advantage to the City to have him annex. CM-29-l93 January 20, 1975 (Annexation - Wornow property) Cm Miller stated that it might also be advantageous to the owner as well as the City because he could take advantage of the density transfer for Planning unit #12, if the City goes ahead with the density transfer policy. If he is in the City limits he would be able to transfer development rights but if he remains in the County he may be faced with development problems. Mayor Pritchard stated that whatever development occurs will be determined by the City, at any rate, and it would seem advantageous for the property owner to annex because he will have to be serviced by the City and particularly where sewage service is concerned. Mr. Musso felt that the disadvantage would be that if development could not take place for five years during which time he would have to pay City taxes if he annexes. Mr. Parness pointed out that there is a technical aspect that the Council should consider and that is the legality of not allowing development of certain properties by virtue of the inability to service them. It is true that we do not have to service them now because it is not incorporated and the City Attorney is looking at what rights the City would have in not allowing development in the event it is incorporated. Mr. Lee commented that the Council has expressed a desire to reserve sewage capacity for industrial and commercial development but would like to point out that the City is not reserving capacity at present. Morgan Howell, architect and part owner of the property indicated that they are willing to wait for a staff report on this item but would like to get on the priority list for sewage service and asked what is being done at this time. The Mayor explained that the City has hired consultanting planners to help with the General Plan and they are the people who are sug- gesting that the Council wait until they have reported to the Council before annexation is considered. As far as the sewage capacity, we are still allowing hook-up on a first come, first served, basis. He also explained that about four years ago the City was proceeding with plans for expansion of sewer capacity which was to be subsidized by federal and state funds and then the EPA withdrew all federal and state funds because we are located in a critical air basin. We went to the EPA and requested that we be allowed to expand to l.5 million gallons instead of the planned 5 million and were refused and in a third request to allow us to upgrade the quality of the effluent, which was mandated by the Water Quality Control Board, we were allowed to do this. Therefore, we are not gaining any capacity by spending $6 million, but rather are gaining upgrading of the effluent. The likelihood that we will receive state or federal funding to expand is very slim. Cm Futch stated that at a recent LAVWMA meeting the subject of funding for expansion of sewage facilities was discussed and the EPA indicated that funding would be allowed to serve a maximum of 132,000 for this valley. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE MATTER WAS TABLED. JAYCEES REQUEST TO USE AIRPORT FOR AIR SHOW A letter requesting permission to use the Livermore Municipal Airport on Sunday, May ll, 1975, for their sixth annual air show was received from the Livermore Jaycees. CM-29-l94 January 20, 1975 (Jaycees Air Show) CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING USE OF THE AIRPORT FOR THE AIR SHOW WITH WORDING TO INDICATE THAT THE JAYCEES SHOULD HAVE APPROPRIATE INSURANCE COVERAGE, CLEANUP, POLICING, AND TRAFFIC CONTROL, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL WHICH PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. l RESOLUTION NO. 15-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING JAYCEES AIR SHOW REPORT RE DISPOSAL SITE RATE INCREASE Mr. Parness reported that the owner of the dump site has come to the City staff requesting consideration for an increase in the commercial dumping rates at the site, as specified in the contract executed with their firm in 1964. The contract specifies that rate changes for disposal would be taken into consideration at the end of five years, providing there was an escalation in the consumers price index and there was a quoted amount that would be required. That escalated amount certainly has occurred to the extent of something in the area of 67%. There has not been an application for consideration of a price change from them in 10 years and the owner is now requesting that the rate be increased for commercial dumping only to 75~/ton - going from $3.00/ton to $3.75/ton. They have indicated that if they are allowed the increase the figure will remain firm for a period of five years. The computed amount comes to 4~~/can per month. It is felt that this is a reasonable adjustment for the Council to allow, providing that the contract does specify the conditions recommended as follows: l) the rate increase for commercial disposers only to be increased from $3.00 to $3.75 per ton; 2) that this rate will remain firm for a period of five years from and after February 1, 1975; 3) no further charge will be made against the City government for the cost of disposing of materials collected during the annual free community pickup schedule. William Ralph, owner of the dump site, stated that they have been very happy to cooperate with the City during the 15 years they have done business with them and would appreciate allowance of the 50~ increase they are requesting at this time. CM FUTCH MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION APPROVING THE RATE INCREASE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECO~ENDATIONS OF THE CITY r.1ANAGER, SECONDED BY CJ\l HILLER, WHICH PASSED BY UNANHlOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 16-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (First Amendment to Agreement for Dump Site) (Ralph Properties, Inc.) Lou Alberti, owner of Livermore Disposal indicated that they would be happy to change the schedule for free pickup if people want a different time; however, he indicated that if they go around early people complain that it is too cold and if they do the pickup later and it is raining people say they waited until the rainy season. Presently they have tried to make the free delivery just before the double pickup for the summer months so that people get everything cleaned up and taken away. RECESS Mayor Pritchard called for a brief recess after which the Council meeting resumed with all members of the Council present (Cm Turner excused absence). CM-29-l95 January 20, 1975 REPORT RE BIKEWAY DESIGNATIONS & LEGAL PROBLEMS The matter of the bikeway designations has been pending for several weeks and involves a proposal for proper identifica- tion of bikeways and the conflict of standards between the City and the County regarding the East Avenue bikepath. Communica- tions have been received from the Livermore Bikeways Association, Judge Lewis, Alameda County and interested citizens. Mr. Lee stated that Judge Lewis has questioned the legality as well as the safety regarding the treatment of the bikeway employed on East Avenue, and generally, bikeways providing for two-way bike traffic on one side of the street. Mr. Lee stated that he would recommend elimination of these as early as possible and in the meantime to take whatever action neces- sary to make them as safe as possible. The County Director of Public Works has indicated that they expect to have the ultimate construction of East Avenue completed within five years. In the meantime they are considering an additional bike path on the north side of East Avenue to carry the west bound traffic. There was discussion regarding the prov1S1on for additional signs to help motorists and bike riders as well as the plan for a bike lane on the north side of East Avenue. Cm Futch stated that if the two-way bike lane is not legal the City should urge the County to proceed with great haste to make the lanes legal, and the City Attorney explained that the County's impression of setting off the area by berm treatment is that they have separated the bike lane from the main right-of-way and therefore the rule that re- quires bike riders to remain on the right applies within the bike path area and they are assuming that it is a legal two-way bike path. Cm Futch stated that this is the impression the County Adminis- trators have but not the impression of the local judge and Mr. Logan explained that the County Legal Department is in the process of passing a resolution setting off that bike path and setting up rules and regulations that apply to it. In other 1 brds, they are initiating proceduers that would resolve further conflict with the judge. It was the feeling that even if the legal matter is corrected the primary concern is the safety of the bicycle rider and the County should be urged to install a bike lane on the north side of East Avenue. CM FUTCH MOVED THAT THE CITY SEND A LETTER TO THE COUNTY ACKNOWLEDGING WHAT IS BEING DONE AND ALSO TO ADVISE THAT THEY PROCEED AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE TO ADOPT THE RULES AND TO DESIGN A TEMPORARY BIKE PATH ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE ROAD IF POSSIBLE, AS THIS IS THE ONLY WAY THE SAFETY PROBLEM CAN BE SOLVED, SECONDED BY CM MILLER. CM FUTCH ALSO INCLUDED IN THE MOTION TO ADOPT THE SIGNING, AS PROPOSED BY THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING, SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Cm Tirsell suggested that Judge Lewis be informed of all action concerning this matter because she is concerned about the lia- bility involved until this item is cleared up, and the City Attorney remarked that he intends to communicate, verbally, with Judge Lewis adding that it is the responsibility of the judge to remain impartial in matters between the City and County. CM-29-l96 January 20, 1975 (re East Avenue Bike Lane) r Charles Hartwig, representative of the Livermore Bikeways Association, stated that from the discussion which has taken place it is obvious to everyone that there is a problem of adequate bicycle right-of-way and bicycle safety. He pointed out that there are long term plans which will be in effect in approximately five years, a suggestion has been made for a bike lane on the north side of the road which they would like to see implemented, and that there is an immediate need for a solution with respect to legal and physical difficulties concerning bicycling along the East Avenue bike path. He then re- ported to the Council the Bikeways Association's proposal for imple- menting a northern bike path almost immediately, and other immediate solutions. Cm Miller stated that he would be interested to know if these legal questions are taken care of by our ordinances, within the City, be- cause according to what the judge has said concerning the bikeway, the City has made all the proper findings and that we are alright. It seems that it is the County which isn't okay - this mayor may not be true. However, if the City is not covered he would suggest that the necessary changes are made to cover the legal aspects so that we can move on something immediately. The City Attorney stated that, without committing himself, it is also his understanding that our ordinance does provide for the two-way bike path on East Avenue but does not apply to other marked bike lanes within the City. If, in fact, the ordinances do not cover everything we are authorized under state law to create ordinances setting forth rules and regulations for bike lanes which can be adopted. If a situ- ation arises for which there is no ordinance an urgency ordinance could be adopted. Franklin Halas, 229 Garnet Drive, commented that regardless of the differences between the County and Judge Lewis the fact remains that the status of bicyclists on East Avenue is uncertain, regardless of the intent of the County. He stated that he has reviewed both the City and County ordinance on this matter and that the basic defect with the County ordinance is that the language is very general and he quoted portions of the County ordinance. He added that in his opinion the problem could be eliminated by coordination between City and Couunty to assure that the rules which apply to the bike path on East Avenue are uniform. The City Attorney commented that he neglected to mention the fact that someone from the County Counsel's Office has indicated that they are very interested in urging the state to pre-empt the field of bicycle regulations and we will probably be going before the state legislature during its session in an attempt to get them to act. Mr. Logan has indicated that if the Council is willing we would go along with this type of approach so that there will be a consistent state-wide ruling for all bike lanes. Bill Raymond, 2368 Buena Vista Avenue, member of the Livermore Bikeways Association, commented that he would like to present more specifics to the Council for a north side bike lane and that, in general, the East Avenue bike route is probably the most unique bike route in California and it probably has the largest number of bike riders on a daily basis than any other bike route. There are approximately 500-600 bicyclists using the route each work day during the summer. Just last ~eek a count was taken and there were 250 bicyclists using the route just in the month of January. He then summarized a letter he submitted to the Council by saying that the Association feels the needs of the users should be determined before alterations are made. The Bikeways Association has met with various people, surveys have been done concerning this bike path and based on this information it is felt that the berm is preferable and a safety feature. They do not want the berm to be removed. If the County insists on removing the CM-29-l97 January 20, 1975 (East Ave. Bike Lane) berm they would like a questionaire to be circulated among the 500-600 bicyclists that use the path on a good day to find out how they feel about removing the berm. He agreed that the situa- tion of hazards at the intersections is a current problem but asked that there be serious consideration of the possibility of substituting a new set of problems for the old if a north route is developed and noted that there are additional intersections on the north side that bicyclists do not have to contend with by using the southerly bike route - LLL parking lot, Mitra Way, Charlotte Way, etc. He stated that from information gathered it is estimated that the northside route would cost approximately $115,000 if an adequate lane is provided. Greg Davis, 316 Ontario, spokesman for the Touring Club, commented that they endorse everything that has been said this eveining Mith respect to the bike lane on East Avenue and would like to add that it is felt the proposal by the County for a temporary solution is totally inadequate. He suggested that signs also indicate whether or not a motorist should yield to the bike riders in the areas of the bike lanes because it appears that motorists are not sure what the rules are concerning various matters such as this. Arnold Rivenes, ll93 Avineda de Las Palmas, stated that he was one of the unfortunate people to have been hit by a car while using the East Avenue bike lane and would like to suggest that bike paths are arranged so that bicyclists are not forced to ride the wrong way while approaching an intersection. If a two-way bike path crosses any number of intersections they really should be eliminated because they are extremely hazardous. In his opinion the berms are dangerous rather than beneficial because the pedals of the bike can hit the berm and flop the bike and tires on cars can also rub along the berm and the increased friction can throw the car into the bike lane. other types of separation such as the raised buttons would be much more desir- able for this reason. He stated that he would feel safer with a narrow painted stripped bike path on each side of East Avenue rather than the current situation. Bob Reedy, 414 Stanford, as a daily bicycle rider using the East Avenue bike lane stated he is primarily concerned with what his legal rights are, as a bike rider. He stated that one thing which has not been mentioned is that it is imperative that the bike lane be swept and kept clean. In one area the street sweeper does not have accessibility and there is glass and trash in this area. In his opinion the raised button would be preferable to the berm for a divider. AT THIS TIr1E THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. The City Attorney asked if the Council would like to state whether or not they would be in favor of state legislation regulating the bike lanes and whether or not the Council would like the City Attorney to participate in supporting this type of legislation. Cm Miller stated that perhaps East Avenue is different than any of the other bike lanes in California becuase of the amount of bicyclists using it and if the state pre-empts we might not be able to do what we want. The City Attorney commented that he feels the state would set up rules of the road for bike paths such as bike riders shall stay to the right and if motorists pass they must honk a horn or something of that nature. CM-29-l98 January 20, 1975 (East Ave. Bike Lane) Cm Miller asked if the council is being asked to formulate pre-empted state legislation, or state legislation - there is a difference. Mr. Logan replied to the extent that if the state legislates, it will ~. pre-empt local laws. To the degree it will pre-empt will probably ( be determined by the state, and perhaps that is where we should have \ our input. The more that bicycles are used and the more problems that exist will generate that kind of legislation on a state level, and the County will generate it whether the City does or not. Cm Miller suggested that the Bicycle Association state their reaction to pre-empted state legislation. DeWitt Allen, 1076 Via Madrid, stated he was not a member of the Bike- ways Association, but an advisor to the statewide bicycle committee which has been meeting during most of last year in Sacramento and con- sidering the very things that the Council has been discussing. Some of the current consideration is to revise the current vehicle codes, one of which is 21207 that permits local authorities to make their own rules; also 21206 allows local authorities to design and construct their own bicycle facilities. Their recommendation to the state legislature will be made at the end of this week. As he understands it, if the legislature goes along with the recommendations, it will be to the effect that the local authorities can still design and con- struct their facilities, but they will no longer have the authority to make their own rules. This will be according to the vehicle code. Mr. Logan stated that he was merely looking for some directions as to how the City Council wished to approach the matter. Cm Futch stated he has heard the discussion and shared the belief expressed by Mr. Allen, and it looks like there will be state legis- lation. In vie~ of that, he felt it would be to our benefit to cooper- ate with the County Counsel to try to get the views of the bicyclists included in that. CM FUTCH MOVED TO INSTRUCT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO COOPERATE WITH THE COUNTY COUNSEL IN PURSUING BICYCLE LEGISLATION, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL, AND THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Bill Raymond asked if there were any existing proposals to remove the berm on East Avenue from Charlotte Way east, and Mr. Lee replied that the berm does serve a useful purpose; however in areas where there is a confining width, it can also be a hazard, but he felt it should be retained at this time. Cm Miller agreed that the berm should be left until there is a response from bicyclists at least. Mr. Raymond stated that what the Bikeways Association would like to do is to survey the bicyclists regarding their feeling about the berm. Cm Miller stated that perhaps they should recommend to the County that they do nothing about the berm until there is a survey. Mr. Raymond stated they have made a proposal with some cost estimates as far as the north side route is concerned and asked if the City Attorney planned to make a recommendation to the County to seriously look into it and try to implement it within a given time. Cm Miller replied that the best thing to do would probably be to have the Public Works Director give the County the proposal, and then follow up on it in a month or so as to whether it is feasible and retain what we have until it is determined what the best course is. Mr. Rivenes stated that the Council should take into consideration the safety of the bicyclists and especially the children and his concern regarding the berm was mostly for the bicyclists, not the cars. CM-29-l99 "'-~-,.~--'~,.,-'---________,_~_..,..^_... m_.'~"_,__,__,_,,_.-,,...~_ January 20, 1975 (East Ave. Bike Lane) Don Patterson, 757 Avalon Way, member of the Valley Spokesmen stated that he did not feel the berm was acceptable and that traffic dividers were a preferable solution. His reasoning was based on actual test- ing he had been involved in and as he rides every day, rain or shine, he is aware that you cannot ~ee the top of the berm when it is raining as it is reflected in the headlights of the cars, but the traffic dividers being white are clearly visible. Mayor Pritchard suggested that perhaps Rick Dondro meet with the Bikeways Association and get together on some appropriate wording for a survey on the berm, and he asked Mr. Raymond if he would be willing to circulate the survey. REPORT RE MOBILEHOME INSTALLATION FEE A report had been submitted by the Chief Building Inspector last summer pertaining to mobilehome installation fees however no action was taken at that time. Under Sec. 5078.2(a), Ch. 5, Title 25, C.A.C. requires installation fees to be established by local ordi- nance or resolution. Cm Miller stated that his only question is whether the fees are high enough and Mr. Street replied that the fees were calculated last July which is something new and there have been only about half a dozen inspections of mobilehome installations since then. Mr. Street felt the fee substantiated the time involved. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE STAFF BE INSTRUCTED TO PREPARE A RESOLU- TION OR ORDINANCE, AS THE CASE ~ffiY BE, SECONDED BY C~1 FUTCH, AND APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. REPORT RE WORK ORDER CHANGE GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT-BICYCLE PATHS The Public Works Director explained that it had been calculated that the combination walkwa~bike path, using unit prices in the contract, would amount to $58,000 for the two grade separations. The contractor has calculated the amount at $75,000, or a differ- ence of $l7,000. He bases this on change in character of work. Mr. Lee stated that originally the underpasses were designed with walkways adjacent to the curb, 5 feet in ~ idth. After that the Council decided to include the combination walkway-bikeway to be located up on the slope, and the amount was included in the esti- mate of cost. Now that the redesign has been made, the contrac- tor has come up with the figure of $75,000. Mr. Lee stated he had considered the possibility of not having it done at this time, and after the project is completed, to simply widen the sidewalk adjacent to the curb and gutter, which would not be as good or look as good. This is estimated to cost $38,000. He suggested that the Council authorize the staff to negotiate with the contrac- tor and attempt to come under the estimated figure. CM FUTCH MOVED THAT THE STAFF BE DIRECTED TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE CONTRACTOR, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL. Mr. Parness explained that the contractor had told him they would prefer having a subcontractor do the work under their direction, but any reduction in cost would inure to the City. It could be done that way or negotiate with the contractor for a modification of the design. CM-29-200 January 20, 1975 (Change Order - R.R. Proj.) Mr. Lee pointed out that the change order should include a part of the project and the state is participating in the amount of 45%. Mr. Parness reminded the Council that the contractor may not be willing to negotiate and Cm Futch stated that the motion implied that the staff should use their judgment in negotiating with the contractor. Bill Raymond asked if there had been any negotiating regarding the width of the bikeways they intended to negotiate for, because if they are negotiating on width in terms of cost, the end result may be an inadequate bikeway, and Mr. Lee replied that the width is not negotiable as it has been set at eight feet. Mr. Raymond suggested that they might concentrate the funds on the "P" Street crossing because that is the most important one and Mr. Lee stated that un- fortunately, "P" Street is the most expensive and has the most problems. A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION AT THIS TIME AND PASSED 3-l WITH THE CHAIR DISSENTING. PROPOSED ORD. RE ADOPT. OF UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE An ordinance was prepared amending Chapter 15, relating to Plumbing, of the Livermore City Code, 1959, by the adoption of the Uniform Plumbing Code, 1973 Edition and amendments thereto which was to be introduced and set for hearing. Cm Miller stated that he would like to suggest some amendments to the proposed ordinance and asked if the matter could be continued and MOVED THAT THIS ITEM BE CONTINUED FOR TWO WEEKS, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. REPORT FROM CITY MANAGER - WEEKLY STATUS Publie-Works: There has been a delay for some time with the line crossing I-580 that will interconnect our treatment plant with the reservoir because of the need of installing telemetry lines underneath the highway. That work has finally been done by the contractor and the project should be completed in about two weeks. This will permit filling in of the excavation on the golf course. Installation has been completed on the five monolite poles that the Council agreed to. There are two on "J"-Street, two on "K" Street and one on Livermore Avenue. The salvaged fixtures are being trans- ferred to Airway Boulevard. The Industrial Advisory Board and Planning Commission recently con- ducted a walkthrough of the Planning and Building Departments at their request to acquaint them with our staff and physical facilities and just what type of response may be offered to an inquirer. They composed a hypothetical type of project and they were quite satisfied with what they learned. One criticism they had to offer was the disgusting physical facilities and they agree it is most difficult to try to do anything orderly because of this. Crosswinds Restaurant: The new tenant at the Crosswinds Restaurant has been in contact with the staff regularly over the past few weeks regarding the building CM-29-20l -~_,_.__,_._.M_~_'."'__M'_"'_'_'_~,<_,~____,__",,_,'_~________'_'_"_" .".~.__ January 20, 1975 (Crosswinds Restaurant) modification and he has been referred to the building architect who has presented a building modification plan for him which seems satisfactory and it has been referred to the Design Review Committee who were satisfied with it, and they are now proceeding with the changes. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the regular meeting was adjou ATTEST APPROVE Regular Meeting of January 27, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on .January 27, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:05 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard presiding. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Cm Miller, Tirsell, Turner and Mayor Pritchard ABSENT: Cm Futch (seated during Open Forum) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Mayor asked Pat Roshe, a 5th Grade Student at Jackson Avenue School, to lead the Councilmembers and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES January l3, 1975: Page l78, paragraph 3, Cm Turner noted, etc. rather than Cm Futch. ON MOTION OF eM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER, AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF JANUARY l3, 1975, WERE APPROVED AS CORRECTED. CM-29-202 January 27, 1975 OPEN FORm.! Petition re Taxation ,~ Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, spoke of the letter dated January 24, which he had received from the City Clerk and the enclosure therein, titled "Memorandum of Law" which had been prepared by the City Attorney on December 13, 1974. Mr. Tull stated that when he presented the petition the second time he had attached a letter which he read at this time. He did not feel that the letter had been referred to five of the six officials of the City and asked the Council to determine now whether or not the petition was good since there were 3,027 signatures which is more than 20% of the voters who voted at the last election, asking for a vote on whether the City should continue with the Railroad Project and Underpasses. As a basis for his request he quoted from the Constitution of the State of California, Art. I, Sections 1, 2, lO and 22, and asked that the Council call a vote. Mayor Pritchard advised Mr. Tull that the members of the Council had seen the petition and have no quarrel regarding the number of names affixed thereto, however the Clerk has not certified it to the Council, and will not, for the reasons stated in the City Attorney's letter. Mr. Tull stated that the petition was not an initiative because it did not ask for a resolution or an ordinance; secondly, it is not a referendum since it is not attacking any former resolution or ordi- nance; therefore, it comes into a third category which is information to our legislatures. Mr. Logan was asked to comment and stated that it is technically known as an advisory initiative and, to his knowledge, there is no procedure and no right under California law to have an advisory ini- tiative put on the ballot at the request of private individuals. His opinion has not changed in the matter, and if Mr. Tull does not agree with his legal opinion, there are always courts that can settle these matters. Mr. Tull gave a rebuttal to Mr. Logan's opinion by again quoting Article I, Section 2. He asked the Council if they refused to accept the petition, and Mayor Pritchard stated he felt it would out of place for the Council to comment since the petition had not been certified to the Council by the Clerk. PUBLIC HEARING RE CITIZEN INPUT RE HOUSING AND COHHUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT The public hearing regarding the Housing and Community Development Act was continued from the meeting of January 20 to this time. Mayor Pritchard advised the Council that it would be necessary to meet again before the end of the month regarding this matter after the close of the public hearing and asked when they could meet, and the Council agreed to meet at 7:30 p.m. on Thursday, January 30, in the Council Chambers. ~!ayor Pritchard stated that if a change is necessary the Clerk will post the door. Gloria Taylor, Chairman of the Design Review Committee, stated the Committee had submitted a proposal which in brief was their concern for the development of downtown between P Street and L Street. They have worked with the Planning Cornruission in drawing up goals for that area and the Committee has drawn up a visual plan which they feel has possibilities. They are concerned at this point that if a developer submits an idea for that area, as long as it meets the CM-29-203 '--'-~'--_.'<."-""'~'-'---'-''''''''''- -'""._~~._.,._,,------~,--,,-,.. "-'~"'~--'-'~--",,~--~--- ---.... - ,.., ---"-'-'-"'~"--"---'-----_.. .. -_._~.__.,. ,.--. January 27, 1975 (P.H. re Citizen Input re Housing and Community Development Act) requirements, there is nothing to prevent the development, and they feel it is important that a plan is drawn up for the area. Lois Hill, of the Community Recycling Committee, stated one of their members had made suggestions for use of the money, of which several were ineligible, but one was a child care center and the other a community vegetable garden for which she presented a concrete pro- posal. The Committee recommended the use of some of the Community Development funds for several community vegetable gardens which they feel would help beat inflation and recession, promote commun- ity spirit, provide recreation for the participants, utilize soil resources and preserve open space. She stated that Berkeley has participated in this type of program for three years, and there was also a community garden in Milpitas. The suggested areas were: l) adjacent to Robert Livermore Park on East Avenue, 2) on Kitty- hawk Avenue near the sewage treatment plant. The funds could be used for land purchase, site preparation and initial operating ex- penses and continued expenses could be covered by fees. LARPD has been considering such a project for some time and this additional money would enable them to activate their plans. She also presented the Council with a specific recommendation for a garden program with cost analysis. Cm Tirsell asked Mrs. Hill if there was any available land that had water and Mrs. Hill stated there was not. Cm Futch was concerned about vandalism, and Mrs. Hill stated there would be fencing which was included in the cost analysis, and also the suggested areas were near the treatment plant and fire station, which she felt would be a deterrent as far as vandalism is concerned. A proposal was entered into the record by Mayor Pritchard from Interfaith Housing and also from the Garnet-Austin Center for the Hentally Retarded. Sally Bystroff, 330 Scott Street, stated that John pitts, Chair- man of the Ecology Center, who is also on the Board for the Buenas vidas Youth Ranch, is looking into the potential of setting aside a large portion of the land in that area for a garden spot which they hoped to make available to the community, probably for organic gardens. CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING BE CLOSED, AND ASKED THAT THE TESTIMONY GIVEN TONIGHT BE INCLUDED FOR THE MEETING ON THURSDAY. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CONSENT CALENDAR DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS The following Departmental Reports were received: Airport - Activity, December Financial - July-December, 1974 Building Inspection Department - December Emergency Services-Quarterly, October-December 1974 Finance Department-Revenues-Expenditures, July-December Golf Courses - springtown and Las positas, July-December Library Activity - October - December Mosquito Abatement District - November Municipal Court - November and December Planning-Zoning Activity-January-December, 1974 Police and Pound Departments - December Water Department - November Water Reclamation Plant - November CM-29-204 January 27, 1975 (Departmental Reports) Cm Futch stated that in the Water Reclamation Plant report it indi- cated there was excess fluoride in the sewage effluent discharge during the last six months and questioned which industry was respon- sible for this increase and what can be done to clear it up. (' " Mr Parness explained that this matter had been discussed by the staff today, and the source is a local industry which has been con- tacted and the staff is working with the management of the company to correct the situation. In reply to a question from Cm Miller as to who is responsible for the contamination, Mr. Parness replied it was Intel Corporation. Cm Miller asked at what point the Regional Quality Control Board might begin to assess a fine. Mr. Lee was asked to reply, and stated they are concerned about it and a report is being prepared for the Regional Board staff, explaining the difficulty the industry has experienced, the cause and the remedy. Intel has been advised that they must control the elements to avoid problems at the treat- ment plant and it is felt they will cooperate. They are being re- quested to initiate a self-monitoring program which will be closely followed. Cm Futch asked at what frequency the discharge is sampled, and Mr. Lee replied we are not in a position to take a continuous composite sample. Cm Futch asked who detected the metals, and Mr. Lee stated the City has been aware of the problem and there have been meetings; it was detected at the sewage treatment plant, where samples are taken daily. There are some composite samples taken over a week's period and others over a month's period also. Cm Futch suggested that it would be appropriate that the staff prepare a report regarding this matter for the next meeting and Mr. Lee agreed to have a report. Payroll and Claims There were 260 payroll warrants in the amount of $8l,820.63, dated January 10, 1975 and l63 claims in the amount of $306,545.l9, dated January 20, 1975 ordered paid as approved by the City ~anager. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON r.lOTION OF CH MILLER, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH, AND BY UNANIMOUS APPROVAL THE ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR villRE ACCEPTED. IffiTTERS INITIATED BY STAFF (Executive Session) The City Attorney asked that there be an executive session following the regular meeting concerning pending litigation. //-- MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL (Field Investigation Report - Police Dept.) Cm Turner stated that due to a complaint made by a citizen with respect to the policy of a field investigation report being done by the Police Department, Cm Miller, Cm Turner and Sgt. Lee met last week at City Hall to discuss this matter with Mr. HcNicholl, the person who had made the complaint. The result of the meeting was that Mr. McNichol! is still not satisfied with the policy but CH-29-205 January 27, 1975 (Field Investigation Report Police Department) it seems that this is the best method available to the Police Department at this time. Cm Miller stated that the City is uneasy about the field investi- gation reports but there does not seem to be a reasonable alterna- tive and in view of the problems of crime we have in Livermore this seems to be the best compromise available. (Political Signs) Cm Miller stated that there have been articles in the paper about political signs being used and particularly concerns about the size of the signs. A recent court decision has now made it unclear as to how much authority the City has with respect to political signs and it would seem that our City Attorney should review what is and is not plausible and whether or not the Council would wish to enforce our ordinance and accept a court challenge or to change our ordinances. (LAFCO Hearing) Cm Miller stated that he would like to know what the City is doing toward preparing for the LAFCO hearing and Mr. Musso replied that he intends to review the LAFCO Sphere of Influence and prepare something for the City Attorney to review. Cm ~U.ller wondered when the final date for submitting material might be and Mr. Musso stated that the date of the hearing is the final date. (City Assets) Cm Miller stated that recently there was an inventory of City property and an estimate made of the replacement value. He stated that he would encourage such reviews because this would allow the City the opportunity to review annexation fees which are presently built into the business license tax, and requested a listing of the itemized breakdown of the assets and the replace- ment value for distribution among the Councilmembers. He stated that he would also like the Council to discuss, after review of the report, the annexation fee. (Park Dedication) Cm Miller stated that the City has ordinances requ1r1ng park dedication as well as a clause in our annexation agreement which requires park dedication and, in essence, this is double regula- tions. He stated that if something goes wrong this is a type of double insurance that the City will receive park dedication and suggested that the policy with respect to annexation agreement should be reviewed to insure that there is also school site dedication. (Stark's Response re Corps of Eng.) Cm Futch stated that a letter of response has been received from Congressman Stark with respect to the Corps of Engineers study and that he has asked that the Corps state their previous assur- ances, in writing, that the study will not enhance the development potential of Las positas and that a flood control or water manage- ment study will not be done for this area. CM-29-206 January 27, 1975 (CBD Plans & Goals) Cm Tirsell asked about the CBD Plans and Goals and Mr. Husso stated that there has been no further action by the Planning Commission. There is still discussion taking place in the committee and they have submitted one interim report several months ago. Cm Tirsell stated that she is anxious to finalize something by the end of this year and a specific plan filed and suggested that the matter be discussed as an agenda item. The City Clerk was directed to place the Goals and Objectives of the CBD Committee on the February lOth agenda. (AB 337) Mayor Pritchard stated that AB 337 has been introduced and will eliminate SB 90. It is considered that this legislation would be worse than the present SB 90 and the League urges that the City oppose AB 337, as soon as possible. CM FUTCH MOVED THAT THE STAFF BE DIRECTED TO INDICATE THE COUNCIL'S OPPOSITION, BY LETTER, TO AB 337, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. COMMUNICATION RE WALL ST. REPRESENTATIVES MEET- ING WITH STEP PERSONNEL A letter was received from Cm Turner with respect to the meeting be- tween the STEP personnel and the residents of the Wall Street area. Cm Turner stated that the letter he has submitted to the Council is based on comments made at the meeting which was arranged by Sharon Heinz and that all the people were not receptive to the STEP involvement but most of the people were in agreement. He suggested that his letter and input from Mrs. Heinz be reviewed by the staff and that the staff report back to the Council. Sharon Heinz stated that in her opinion the facts reported with respect to lighting were not clear because even though there are poles located at regular intervals all of the poles do not have lights and wanted to clarify this point. Mr. Lee reported that the spacing for lights in residential areas varies because of the limitations as to where poles can be located. They are located on lot lines and are not done with even spacing but as he recalls the spacing for Wall Street is quite typical of residential areas and not unusually close or far apart. She stated that Wall Street is a collector street, children from two schools are using the street and Chabot College courses will always be given at night at Granada High School and for these reasons feels that there should be more lighting and that this street is not a typical residential street. The staff was directed to submit a report on the lights and a diagram as to where the lights are located and which poles do not have lights and Mr. Lee commented that perhaps he and the Chief of Police could take another look at the situation during the evening and re-evaluate that street. Cm Turner asked that when a report is submitted to the Council there be staff comments on his letter. CM-29-207 January 27, 1975 REPORT RE CALVARY TEMPLE SEWER CONNECTION Consideration of the sewer connection for the Calvary Temple Church located on Arroyo Road was delayed for two weeks due to a forecasted problem concerning the future widening of Arroyo Road. The planned right-of-way would require encroach- ment to within a few feet of the existing church structure and the staff has been considering possible modifications. Other considerations are modifications for right-of-way widths and the design features to the alignment of the Arroyo bridge. Mr. Lee explained that the county standard provides for 15 ft. of right-of-way from the basic curb to the property line while the City's standard is for 10 feet from the curb to the property line with 20 ft. for a trail system. In addition there is a problem at the bridge crossing the arroyo and the City staff has proposed two 445 ft. radius "S" curves going across the bridge to limit the posted speed to 25 mph which agrees with the recommendation of Mr. Mason. The county has suggested a 600 ft. radius curves be provided with a straight section be- tween them which would cut into the subdivision area south- west of the bridge. The design would be safer and taken at greater speeds and the posted speed would probably be 30 mph. He then explained the plans for widening Arroyo Road and the fact that some of the houses will have to be moved back on the east side of the road. Cm Tirsell wondered why the study regarding the widening went all the way to the V.A. Hospital, and Mr. Lee explained that nearly the entire length of Arroyo extends to the hospital which will be widened and the county does have an interest in resolving the future right-of-way lines, alignment and grades, etc. out in that area. Because this was a cooperative study the county property was included in the study along with the City property. Cm Tirsell stated that it is her understanding that if the lO ft. standard is used there will be a lO ft. bike trail on the east side of Arroyo Road and a lO ft. equestrian trail on the west side of Arroyo Road and Mr. Lee stated that this is correct. Mr. Lee then illustrated the proposal by using diagrams of the area. It was noted that the church building would be located 45 ft. from the vehicular traffic area. Mr. Lee explained that the future widened Arroyo Road will in- clude medians, emergency parking areas, and will be four lanes including through the Arroyo bridge area and Mayor Pritchard wondered what the plans \V'ill be for South ilL" Street north of the bridge because there is one house located very close to the present narrow two-lane road on Peppertree Lane and the back yard is practically in the street. Mayor Pritchard expressed concern for a wide four-lane road that will narrow down to a two-lane street going through town and Mr. Lee pointed out that ultimately Concannon Blvd. will be widened, will be a through street and it is anticipa- ted that the bulk of the traffic will travel east and west rather than continuing north through town. Mayor Pritchard then asked how much land will be taken from the west side of Arroyo Road and Mr. Lee indicated that half will be taken from the west and half from the east for the widening, and that at the time the standard was less for a major street; therefore, there are 5 ft. available for the widening at present. Cm Miller stated that our present major streets have smaller rights- of-way, smaller parking space, and smaller medians than those of the county and it seems that there might be merit in proposing CM-29-208 January 27, 1975 (Report re Calvary Temple Sewer Connection) (' \ " this to the county because less properties bordering Arroyo Road will be "chopped" and also there would be less expense in paving and building the road. This street will probably never be a major freeway and he has the feeling that the City will end up doing the whole job and will have to pay for it also. The county has com- mitted us to a much larger scope but they will probably manage to get out from under the obligations involved some way or another. Mr. Lee stated that the county can make a very good case for support- ing their standards and would recommend that the city use theirs. Mr. Musso stated that there have been some changes from the original application for sewer connection but that the primary change in- volves the street dedication which the Council is now discussing and which Calvary Temple disagrees with. He added that Calvary Temple does not disagree with conditioning to Exhibit "B" but they do object to the content of Exhibit "B". The church does not want the City to review their building design, does not want to conform to the City sign ordinance, and does not want a requirement for fencing which Mr. Musso added was intended to be provided for day care facilitie. They wish no indication as to location of trees. Also they would like the County Zoning Administrator to amend the sewer connection agreement. Mr. Musso indicated that this would not be possible because this would have to be amended by the City Council. With respect to a requirement for curbing around landscaping, they feel that this also should be eliminated. Rather than installing sewer lines along the entire frontage they wish to extend the line only to their lateral which would present future problems at a time when someone else would like to develop to the south. They object to the installation of street lights. The agreement indi- cates that they will not receive a credit on the storm drain fee and Mr. Musso stated that this is because they choose not to pay the City storm drainage fee. The also propose not to join in the improvement of Arroyo Road and do not want to pay in lieu taxes because a church does not pay taxes. ~1ayor Pritchard asked if the conditions are to be met in a short period of time and Hr. Husso explained that the normal procedure is that either they are met at the time of connection, bonded for, or otherwise assured. Mayor Pritchard stated that Calvery Temple has already developed, some landscaping has been accomplished and since the buildings are already there he would like to know why their building elevations must be subject to design review approval and Mr. Musso stated that this is assuming a new building is to be built and the City has no intention of reviewing something that exists. Ed Hutka, spokesman for Calvery Temple, stated that their concern is being in the middle of City and county requirements and Mr. Musso noted that the City cannot eliminate any requirement the county might have because their regulations would apply. At this point it has to be determined what additional requirements the City might wish to impose for this particular development. There was discussion regarding their sign and Mr. Hutka stated that presently the sign does not conform to the City ordinance and it was erected at a very large cost and they do not want to have to remove it and Cm Turner wondered if they would be willing to pay for a new sign through amortization. Mr. Hutka stated that he would ask the church board if they would be willing to remove the old sign which was followed by discussion regarding the length of time other people were allowed to have to pay for a new sign. CM-29-209 -~---'_.~,._-,.~._-~'"._------_...~ January 27, 1975 (Report re Calvary Temple Sewer Connection) Mayor Pritchard stated that he would like to know what the City intends to do about an adjacent property owner who is in the county and might have a sign that does not conform to our ordi- nance but is allowed by the county and Cm Miller stated that if someone applies for sewer connection they should be required to conform to our ordinances. Mayor Pritchard stated that perhaps it would be better to ask them to conform at the time they annex to the City rather than at the time they connect to the sewer. It was noted that presently the most critical problem is the street width and that this should be discussed prior to getting into other areas. Mr. Hutka stated that he realizes there is a problem with the width of Arroyo Road and pointed out that the width from curb to curb varies at Concannon Boulevard, at Arroyo bridge, at the First Baptist Church and at the presbyterian Church, going all the way from 90 ft. to 50 ft. at the narrow portion where there is residential development. He suggested that to solve this prob- lem the plans for Arroyo Road to become a major street should be eliminated. Cm Futch stated that in the first place he feels the City made a mistake in not requiring the bike path on the other side and at that time the Council was assured that there would be no oroblem in placing it on the opposite side of the equestrian trail, and it would appear that it is creating a problem. He stated that he is firmly convinced that we do need a bike path and a sidewalk on the east side of the road and that this system will connect the main recreational areas with the residential areas, and will prob- ably be the most useful trail system Livermore has for some time. He stated that, basically, he would be in favor of a decrease in the standard street { idth and if the county chooses to adopt some- thing less this { ould be satisfactory but he would like to see the trail provided for. Cm Miller stated that he feels it would not be unreasonable to suggest that this particular street does not need to be as~ide as the general major street standards of the county and that our City standards should be sufficient for this area. Cm Tirsell stated that in her opinion the additional width is the addition of the trails and the parking lanes but would agree that there could be some reduction in the median area. Mr. Musso pointed out that the total difference between the county standards and the City's is 6 ft. and Cm t1iller stated that even 3 ft. on each side would make a considerable difference, particular- ly where the church is concerned. Mayor Pritchard wondered if the county would be willing to make a change in the standards and Mr. Lee replied that if it is written up a certain way in the agreement he is sure they will want us to adhere to it, and he believes it is in the agreement. Discussion followed relative to the street width, the bike trail and equestrian trail and the provision of some type of median separating the trails from the street, as well as the possibility of including the sidewalk and the bike trail together with the equestrian trail between the sidewalk and property line. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL TRY TO ACCOMPLISH THE FOLLOWING: l) PERSUADE THE COUNTY TO HAVE A SMALLER FUTURE WIDTH LINE: AND cm-29-2l0 January 27, 1975 (Report re Calvary Temple Sewer Connection) 2) IN FRONT OF THE CHURCH TRY TO REDUCE THE WIDTH AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE WHILE STILL MAINTAINING THE BIKE TRAIL AND EQUES- TRIAN TRAIL. r " fv10TION WAS SECONDED BY CH TIRSELL. Mayor Pritchard stated that he sees little chance in getting the easement reduced but would suggest that the Council set a policy for this area, of keeping the equestrian trail and the combined bike and sid~ hlk as close to the curb as possible with as little landscaping or space between the two as possible so that there can be more room between the trails and the church structure. He stated that he would suggest a footage of within l8 ft. Cm Futch stated that the 25 ft. suggested by Mr. Lee :Iould seem to be a reasonable amount and a lot of the last 10 ft. would be used for landscaping and a few bicycles passing would not be very noisy; also, the traffic would be located 45 ft. from the building. In order to provide for the equestrian trail, the bike trail, and some landscaping there probably should be an allowance of 25 ft. Mr. Lee indicated that a combined bike trail and sidewalk would necessitate only 8 ft., and the equestrian trail could be provided with an additional 8 ft. area. CM MILLER AMENDED HIS MOTION TO STATE THAT THE CITY FORMALLY REQUEST THE COUNTY TO REDUCE THEIR STANDARDS TO CONFOID1 TO CITY STANDARDS FOR THIS AREA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, WHICH PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Mayor Pritchard suggested that the Council establish a policy con- cerning the width for Arroyo Road and Cm Tirsell pointed out that there is other construction on Arroyo Road and if the Council arbi- trarily picks a width, anyone who owns a home along Arroyo Road can ask for an arbitrary figure and would like to pick a design for Arroyo Road that the Council could abide by for the length of the road. Cm Miller stated that he feels the ideas of Cm Futch and Mayor Pritchard are synonymous in that the Council should not worry about the overall easement but in places where there is conflict, such as there is where the church is located, the bike trail, etc. can be designed so that they are out closer to the street and close together and where there is no conflict there can be a more meandering attractive design allowed. Cm Futch stated that because there is a pr~existing building he would agree there is a problem and perhaps only 25 ft. should be required but this does not mean that 35 ft. for the trail, etc. should not still be required for other areas. CM FUTCH MOVED TO RETAIN THE EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY DIMENSIONS (35 ft.) WITH A REDUCTION TO 25 FT. IN FRONT OF THE CHURCH AND THAT THE STAFF BE DIRECTED TO PROVIDE A DESIGN FOR THE AREA BET~mEN THE CHURCH AND TRAILS FOR MAINTAINING SEPARATION BETWEEN THE TRAILS, SECONDED BY CN MILLER. r ~mYOR PRITCHARD MOVED TO N1END THE MOTION TO STATE THAT THE REDUC- TION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY SHOULD BE KEPT WITHIN l8 FT., SECONDED BY CM TURNER WHICH FAILED 2-3 WITH CM MILLER, FUTCH AND TIRSELL DISSENTING. It was noted that Cm Futch and Miller might agree that this could be done with 18 ft. allowance but would prefer to see a design first. CM-29-2ll January 27, 1975 (Report re Calvary Temple Sewer Connection) The Council, at this time, returned to the item of the sewer connection agreement and Cm Miller stated that the standard practice with respect to the sewer connection is to impose the conditions as if it i ere property within the City and he feels it is not necessary to change this policy - the only difference in this case is that a church does not have to pay taxes and their request to delete the portion concern- ing the City tax rate for the assessed value is axeasonable request. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE SEWER CONNECTION SUBJECT TO THE STANDARD SEWER CONNECTION AGREEMENT WITH THE EXCEPTION THAT THE CITY TAX RATE ON THE ASSESSED VALUE BE DELETED, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH. Cm Miller stated that with respect to the sign, the Sign Ordi- nance says that a sign which is not in conformance with the Section at the time of annexation to the City shall be removed or otherwise be made to conform to the Section within a period ending five (5) years after the date of annexation and he stated that in his opinion since the City has the power to require annexation to the City, in the sewer agreement, at any time he would suggest that the time of the annexation should be the date at which the amortization should begin for the five year amortization. The other alternative would be for amortiza- tion to begin upon the date of annexation. CM TURNER MOVED TO BEGIN AMORTIZATION FOR A PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS AFTER THE DATE OF ANNEXATION, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRITCHARD. (This motion was later withdrawn) . It was noted that the sign would be in the way when the street is widened and Mayor Pritchard suggested that the motion state that the sign should be removed at the time of widening or that amortization could begin at the time of annexation for a period of five years. Mayor Pritchard stated that it is becoming increasingly clear that the costs involved in annexation I ill be prohibi ti ve for the church property which was followed by discussion concerning various requirements such as curbs, gutters and sidewalks, etc. Cm Miller stated that as he recalls there were similar questions raised regarding public works improvements for the church located on Vasco Road and as he recalls they were given a longer time period such as five years to install the public i orks improvements and he would be willing to have the motion include allowing the time the previous church was given for getting the public works improve- ments in. AT THIS TIME CM TURNER WITHDREW HIS N1ENDMENT. CM MILLER ADDED TO THE MAIN MOTION THAT CALVARY TEMPLE BE ALLOWED THE SAl4E LENGTH OF TIME THE CHURCH ON VASCO ROAD WAS ALLmvED FOR INSTALLING THE PUBLIC WORKS IMPROVEMENTS, AGREED TO BY THE SECOND. Prior to voting to the motion Mayor Pritchard reviewed the vari- ous exhibits and conditions imposed by the City. Mayor Pritchard stated that he feels it is ridiculous to require that they place six inch curbing around their landscaping be- cause their landscaping has already been done. MAYOR PRITCHARD MOVED TO DELETE ITEM. 12 OF THE CONDITIONS RE CURBS AROUND LAND- SCAPING, SECONDED BY Cf1 TURNER AND l'1HICH FAILED 2-3, CM FUTCH, MILLER AND TIRSELL DISSENTING. Cm Futch stated that he feels it is not appropriate to change the ordinance by omitting a condition and sewer connections are supposed to be considered as if the property is within the City. CM-29-2l2 January 27, 1975 (Report re Calvary Temple Sewer Connection) THE MAIN HOTION THEN PASSED BY A 4-l VOTE WITH THE CHAIR DISSENTING. ~, It was noted that Exhibit "C" does not apply and discussion followed concerning bonds. Mayor Pritchard commented that the action taken was to approve the conditions. The City Attorney asked if he is to prepare an agreement that the Council can f~rmally adopt and the Council indicated that they are only approving the form of the agreement they would like the City Attorney to draw up. Mr. Musso commented that the normal procedure for a sewer con- nection is that the paper work go through all the departments the same as any other permit, sent to the City Attorney for final agreement preparation and then would come to the Council. The reason the matter is before the Council at this time is because of the major issues involved with the application. Mr. Parness asked the Council if they wish to suggest to the County that the width standards for Arroyo Road be reduced regardless of whether or not Calvary Temple continues with their application for sewer connection, and the Council indi- cated that they would like the County to be notified of their suggestion. Emily Crowley, 2667 Palm Avenue, stated that she has property on Arroyo Road and that there are others in the audience who also have property in that area and that they knew nothing about what is happening with respect to the sewer connection application until they read about it in the paper. She stated that they are concerned about the length of the widening be- cause they have heard that Arroyo Road may be widened to as much as l60 ft. which would eliminate entire houses in some cases. She asked if anything could be done to scrap the plan for this street becoming a major street going nowhere. Mr. Lee explained that it is best for the City to know what the needs are going to be and to establish an ultimate width and if there are conflicts, as there would be with some homes, then we should know it nO\\1. There will be notice of a study for this area with respect to widening and the property owners will have the opportunity to take part in such discussions. Cm Miller stated that the future width lines, even if they are set now, do not mean that houses have to be moved at this time. At the time the road is eventually widened it will have to be determined as to what will happen to some of the houses. This will be a long time from now that the road is ultimately widened. It is the county that is insisting on wider standards and it would be advantageous for the property owners to talk with the supervisor for this district and to the County Public Works Department to try to encourage them to adopt the standards the City is suggesting for this street. ~. Mrs. Crowley commented that her major concern is that nothing at all has ever been mentioned to the property owners and that people are very concerned as to what might happen to their homes and Mr. Musso indicated that he is sure the County will have a public hearing for establishing future width lines and special building lines and that all of the property owners will be notified to attend the hearing and may give public testimony, but they will have to finish the study first. Mayor Pritchard stated that there is a lot of money spent on engineering studies and maybe something should be said to the county before the study is undertaken and Mrs. Crowley interjected that perhaps the study is not necessary at all. CM-29-2l3 - ----...-'---.------..--- ..~ .._~....'"--_."_.,,.- January 27, 1975 (Report re Calvary Temple Sewer' Connection) Cm Miller stated that the reason the City is involved is because of the amount of traffic on Arroyo Road and Mrs. Crowley stated that she would disagree - there should be provisions for bikes and horses but a four-lane road is completely unnecessary unless futur major development is anticipated. Cm Miller stated that plans and information can be obtained from both the City and County Public Works departments and that the planning stage is really the time to exert pressure for getting changes made and would agree that there is merit in informing the property owners as to what is being planned. MAYOR PRITCHARD MOVED THAT LETTERS BE SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS ALONG ARROYO ROAD NOTIFYING THEM THAT A STUDY IS TO BE UNDERTAKEN WITH RESPECT TO WIDENING OF ARROYO ROAD, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL. Discussion followed concerning the motion and it was mentioned that the public hearing will be held in Hayward and that many of the pro- perty owners will probably not be able to attend the hearing and that they should have the opportunity to contact the county about the study and plans before things progress too far to make changes. Cm Futch suggested that perhaps since these people are located in the county the letter should come from the county and Cm Miller agreed that there might be a problem about the City sending letters to county residents. MAYOR PRITCHARD AT THIS TIME WITHDREW HIS MOTION AND CM FUTCH MOVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL REQUEST THAT THE COUNTY INFOm~ THE PEOPLE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED WIDENING AT WHAT TIME AND PLACE THEY MAY BE ABLE TO GIVE TESTIMONY AND WHERE THE DRAWINGS MAY BE REVIEWED, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Morris Swenson, 1439 Lexington, asked who initiated the study and Mayor Pritchard stated that the County of Alameda asked that the City join in a study. Mr. Morris then asked what traffic counts have been taken or why the county wants to widen Arroyo Road and Mr. Lee indicated that there were City and county problems on Arroyo road that needed answers and this was the reason the study came about. AT THIS TIME THE MOTION PASSED UNANIHOUSLY. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE RECO~1ENDATION FOR A S~mLLER RADIUS ON ARROYO BRIDGE BE SUPPORTED, AS RECOW1ENDED BY THE CITY STAFF AND TO BE RECm>1HENDED TO THE COUNTY, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. RECESS AFTER A BRIEF RECESS THE COUNCIL MEETING RESUMED WITH ALL r.1Er.omERS OF THE COUNCIL PRESENT. cm,mUNICATION FRDr1 SENATOR CRANSTON RE REVENUE SHARING A letter was received from Senator Cranston with comments about the usefulness of revenue sharing and asked for continued support of revenue sharing. COMI'1UNICATION RE INDIRECT SOURCE REGULATIONS Congressman Stark submitted a letter of thanks on the Council's action urging implementation of the Indirect Source Regulations CM 29-214 January 27, 1975 (Communication re Indirect Source Regulations The postponement, in his opinion, would be a setback in the fight against continued dp.gradation of the environment and he had attempted to stop Congressional action that precipitated the delay. COHl'1UNICATION RE FUTURE OF HOSPITAL A letter was received from Thomas Andrews, Administrator of Valley 1'1emorial Hospital which explained some of the plans for the future of the hospital. He indicated that while Livermore residents enjoyed health care services and the convenience of a local hospital, the citizens in the western sector of the valley were not being served; therefore a consultant was asked to do a report on long range planning. The result of the study ..'1 as the Gorsline Report which they have been following and which called for development of an additional facility and resulted in a health care center in Dublin/San Ramon. Additional property was acquired to house a major hospital facility which will be built near Pleasanton at the population center of the valley. It is intended that they will proceed with the program as needs dictate and as financing will permit. The Livermore facility will continue to provide basic hospital services. Cm Tirsell stated that she and probably most of the members of the Council are concerned about the construction of a new facility and would like to suggest that there be a meet- ing with representatives of the Board of Directors of Valley Memorial Hospital so that the concerns can be discussed and questions can be asked. She stated that during the General Plan Review one study committee devoted itself to health and education needs for the community for an entire year and feels that there is valuable information that can be presented to the hospital people. CM FUTCH MOVED TO APPOINT CM TURNER AND CM TIRSELL AS A SUB- COMMITTEE OF THE COUNCIL TO MEET WITH THE APPROPRIATE OFFICIALS OF VALLEY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL TO DISCUSS THIS SUBJECT AND REPORT BACK TO THE COUNCIL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cm Miller stated that the issues involved should have some public interest and particularly to the Hospital ~eaxd members who helped finance Valley Memorial and the kind of issues Cm Miller would like to be discussed are: ~~, iJ..I2) ~/~oJ' 3) ~ 4) l) the need for a 450 bed hospital that cannot be provided at Valley Memorial; ~~e ~~e~f~rJ~~acilities in Pleasanton and Dublin; ~~~ to a~~ a single central location; and the desire to pre-empt private hospitals from "ripping off" the profitable parts of community care and sticking the public hospital (Valley Memorial) with the losing part. ;- ~f Cm Miller stated that it seems there should be responses to these kinds of questions. A 450 bed hospital on the present usage of the hospital corresponds with 600,000 people in the valley which is ridiculous. A 250 bed hospital corresponds with 330,000 peoR~,And would be double what we expect to have, based on t~~ral Plan. He stated that it is his understanding that Valley Memorial could add/'50 beds at ~+. the present site. There is no question that there is a need for facilities at Pleasanton and Dublin and it seems that the present clinics could furnish a feT 1 beds to aid in the health care services for that part of the valley. Pleasanton is not a central location and particularly if New Town is CM-29-2l5 January 27, 1975 (Communication re Future of Hospital) developed and the economics of the situation is more important than the central location. Last of all, the pre-emption of the "rip off" private hospital could be taken care of if all the valley wide agencies would support VMH and let the health clinics remain in Dublin and Pleasanton. The point should be made that the population projections do not justify the need for a move. The llO beds we presently have correspond with the usage rate for l47,000 population and that exceeds the l32,000 people that will be funded for sewers, so that the present bed capacity should be sufficient for even more than the number of people who can receive sewage service. It is most unreasonable to plan for a hospital to serve more people tha~_~~~} the popula- tion projections are. If it is desirable to hav~centralized location for one large hospital then the obvious implication is that valley Memorial will be abandoned and statements to the con- trary cannot be true. To move and build a new building and to vacate an old facility is extremely expensive and any elaborate new hospital construction is going to come from much higher patient fees and all of us will end up paying for something that appears to be unnecessary. He stated that he could be wrong but it is his under- standing that federal funding is not being given for building new hospitals and it is very difficult to obtain enough money to build a very expensive n~hospital from private contributions and it will have be done by loans at very high interest rates and, again, these will come from patient fees. The reasonable solution would be to retain Valley Memorial and expand the health clinics - possibly 10-l5 beds for each clinic which could take care of the kinds of overloads that do not require hospitalization in a highly technical hospital. In looking at the map it appears that the property which has been purchased is close to the Pleasanton Fault and if this is true it would be a very poor place in which to locate a health care center. He would hope that these items would be brought to the attention of the people on the Hospital Board and staff by Cm Tirsell and Cm Turner and perhaps will inspire discussion among the public. Cm Tirsell stated that she feels the citizens are very concerned about this item because she has received more telephone calls about it than for anything else since she has been a member of the City Council. THE MOTION PASSED BY UNANn~OUS VOTE AT THIS Tnm. COMMUNICATION RE HEALTH EXAl'HNATION SURVEY A letter was received from the Department of Health, Education and Walfare with respect to plans for conducting a health examination survey for persons aged 25 through 74 to be conducted by the U.S. Bureau of Census, calling on selected households for demographic data and selections for examinations. RECYCLING CENTER REPORT Mayor Pritchard stated that he is very pleased with the report from the Recycling Center which indicates a $l,5l7.67 net profit for this year. REPORT RE FEE ADJUSTMENTS Mr. Lee reported that annual fee adjustments are routine and are based on the Cost of Construction Index. CH-29-2l6 January 27, 1975 (Report re Fee Adjustments) Cm Futch asked if the City should have public hearings for adjust- ing fees and Mr. Lee explained that the ordinance does not require hearings and that it requires only a resolution adopted by the City Counci. ,~ / CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTIONS APPROVING ADJUSTMENTS FOR ALL FOUR AREAS IN WHICH FEE ADJUSTMENTS ARE RECO~mENDED, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL, AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. \ " RESOLUTION NO. l7-75 A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ADJUSTMENT OF PARK FEES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1975 RESOLUTION ~O. 18-75 A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE 2\DJUSTHENT OF THE RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION BUSINESS LICENSE TAX FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1975. RESOLUTION NO. 19-75 A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR ADJUSTMENT OF STO&~ DRAINAGE FEES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1975 RESOLUTION NO. 20-75 A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ADJUSTMENT OF SANITARY SEWER CONNECTION FEES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1975 REPORT RE RATE INCREASE FOR WATER The Public Works Director reported that a study has been conducted as to proposed changes in our City water rates by virtue of the recent increase enacted by Zone 7 and it is recommended that a resolution be adopted authorizing the fee adjustment. A written report was also furnished for additional information. Mayor Pritchard wondered if the City should hold a public hearing when there is a rate increase involved and the City Attorney ex- plained that the present ordinance does not require a public hearing and allows change by resolution which he expanded upon and indicated that if the Council wishes it certainly may hold a public hearing but such is not necessary. Cm Miller stated that it seems that our water rate should be less than Cal Water's rates - there is only an in lieu of City tax that gets paid by the Water Department. ;-- !1r. Lee stated that during the past l3 years we have been in the area of l5% lower than the Zone 7 rates and at this time we are asking for an increase for the amount that Zone 7 has raised our rates. For some reason Cal Water did not increase their rates as much and there was approximately only a 7% increase and there will probably be another increase next year. Cm Futch stated that he can understand that because Zone 7 charges the City higher rates the City must raise their rates to correspond with the increase but is not sure why the City must change the rates for the meter sizes because this is not a reflection of water usage. Mr. Lee explained that the fees come from the meter charge and the quantity rate and there must be some relationship between the two CM-29-2l7 January 27, 1975 (Report re Rate Increase for Water) because if the wholesale rate for the quantity is raised then it means that the person using little water is not paying his fair share because the system is there for his use and he should pay whether he uses a lot of water or not. Cm Futch stated that he would rather see an increase for the amount of water used and possibly this would encourage conservation of water use. Mr. Lee explained that if the rate for quantity is increased but the rate for the meter size is not increased this would result in an inflation of the quantity rate and would be above Cal Water's. Cm Miller stated that he is really dissatisfied over the sliding rate structure which means that the more water you use, the cheaper it is. Sliding rates encourage use and wasting of energy and other resources in which this method is used and possibly we should abandon the sliding rates. Cal Water does not use the sliding rate method and applies a fixed rate. Mr. Lee stated that right now it really wouldn't make a significant difference to use a fixed rate because Livermore does not have much industry that would take advantage of the lower rates for higher consumption. Intel probably is the greatest consumer on the City's system. It is not likely that we will have high water consumers on the City's system because of the sanitary sewer situation and the cost for sewage service. Cm Tirsell stated that in principle she would agree with what Cm Miller has said about getting charged higher rates when consuming less, such as was the case thermostats in homes were turned down to 68 degrees and everyone ended up paying higher rates; however in this case if all residences pay the same rate she has no objection. Cm Miller agreed that argument is justified and there probably is some merit in allowing the sliding rate to help attract industry. C~1 TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION APPROVING THE RATE INCREASE FOR CITY WATER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL WHICH PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. RESOLUTION NO. 2l-75 A RESOLUTION ADJUSTING WATER RATES - 1975 REPORT RE AIRPORT T-HANGAR CONSTRUCTION The City Manager reported that there are 28 applicants awaiting T-hangar space and it is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing application to the state for a $50,000 loan and to authorize the staff to solicit proposals from local lending institutions for an interest rate for the balance over a lO year term. The matter will be referred back to the Council when results have been obtained, for formal consideration. C~ FUTCH MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR STATE FUNDS AND THAT THE STAFF BE AUTHORIZED TO SOLICIT BIDS ON A LOAN FOR THE BALANCE, SECONDED BY CH TURNER, WHICH PASSED BY UNANumuS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 22-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING REQUEST FOR FUNDS FROM THE CALIFORNIA AIRPORT LOAN PROGRAM. CH-29-2l8 January 27, 1975 REPORT RE LEASE DEFAULT - COURTESY AVIATION ~.. The City Manager reported that the lessee at the airport site is in arrears in the lease rent (Courtesy Aviation) estimated at $1,400 to $1,800 depending upon the certification of gross receipts. Half of this amount was due October 31, 1974 and the balance is due January 3l, 1975. Unless full payment is received or satisfactory installments are approved in addition to certified accounting records submitted within five days, it is recommended that the Council instruct the staff to proceed with lease default action. ~.. Mr. Parness stated that just today the lessee brought the rent up to-date and he has requested that the matter of the certifica- tion of gross receipts be delayed for about two weeks so that he can discuss the matter with the staff and the Airport Advisory Committee because the certification would be a very large expense to both the lessee and the sub-tenant. Mr. Parness indicated that he is concerned about the certification of the accounting statements but feels there should be allowance of a postponement of action on this item for two or three weeks so that the staff may have the opportunity to discuss this item with the lessee and the Airport Advisory Committee. CM TURNER MOVED TO ALLOW THE THREE WEEK DELAY, AS REQUESTED, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL. Cm Turner mentioned that certification is very expensive and would be something in the area of $l,SOO-$2,000 and Cm Miller stated that this is the only way the City can be assured that it is receiving its fair share of money. Both Lowell Dye and Olaf Landek, sub-tenants commented about the requirement for the certification and the Council explained that the City's contract is with Mr. Madis, the lessee, and that it is Mr. Madis who is responsible for the certification or the costs involved. CM TURNER MOVED THE QUESTION AND THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. POLICY DRAFTS Draft statements with respect to Council policy were prepared and submitted to the Council, as per Council instructions on the follow- ing items: l) building permits for site grading and construction; 2) use of eminent domain authority for private property development; 3) benefit districts ON HOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL and by unanimous VOTE THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED TO FEBRUARY 18th AT 7:00 P.M. REPORT RE DISPOSABLE CONTAINER LEGISLATION ~ A report regarding disposable container legislation was submitted to the Council per their instructions including responses from the State of Oregon and the League of California Cities. Dale Hhite of Owens-Illinois Glass Company stated that his company would like to offer assistance to the City Council in obtaining the summation of the Oregon Bottle Bill study and/or the complete study. C~l- 2 9 - 21 9 January 27, 1975 (Report re Disposable container Legislation) Cm Tirsell stated that recovery of resources is best accomplished when people cooperate to do it rather than having something imposed and would hope there could be some type of information available as to what other cities are doing. Lois Hill from the Recycling Center spoke briefly about the Oregon Plan and from contacting someone from the Senate-Congress Committee in Washington D.C., she has been told that the plan is working as litter has been reduced dramatically, consumers are saving money and the people from Oregon are pleased and proud of the results. She then reported on various articles and information she has obtained with respect to banning disposable containers. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE MATTER WAS CONTINUED FOR ONE MONTH TO ALLOW RESPONSES FROM VERMONT, DAVIS, SO. SAN FRANCISCO AND BOWIE. TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT HOLMES ST. & CONCANNON BLVD. The Public Works Director submitted a report concerning the traffic signal at Holmes Street and Concannon Boulevard and recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing City payment of the non-state share ($65,800). The City Attorney commented that he has not had the opportunity to review this matter and there is no resolution in the file at this time and would ask that the matter be continued for a one week period. Cm Turner stated that he is disappointed that Sunset Development Company is not going to follow through with their agreement be- cause they did not obtain the zoning they requested and would suggest the City undertake legal proceedings against them. em Miller stated that he is surprised to hear that Mr. Mehran is "welching" on a traffic signal after City Councils for 20 years have hailed his words. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE MATTER WAS CONTINUED FOR ONE WEEK. REPORT RE HOME OCCUPA- TIONS RE FIREARMS A report from the Planning Director was submitted with respect to mailing of firearms as a home occupation and there was dis- cussion as to whether or not this should be allowed. CM TURNER MOVED TO DIRECT THE PLANNING CO~~ISSION TO STRIKE THE WORDS HOME OCCUPATION FROM PER~ITS FOR SELLING FIREARMS, SECONDED BY CH TIRSELL. Cm Miller stated that he cannot see the distinction between a mail order sale of firearms from a home or from a store. They have to follow the same rules and be licensed the same as well as keeping records and there is no effect on the neighborhood. Cm Turner stated he was not opposed to the sale of guns, but did not feel it is proper as a home occupation but should be conduct- ed from a commercial building, in the downtown area. CM-29-220 January 27, 1975 (Report re Home Occupation re Firearms) ~r. Tull commented that the federal firearms regulations state they cannot mail order guns except to dealers if they have to cross a state line. //r--'" A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION AT THIS TIME AND PASSED 3-2 WITH CH HILLER AND MAYOR PRITCHARD DISSENTING. PLANNING UNIT NO. 12 A report was received from the Planning Commission regarding the possible revision of Planning Unit No. l2 with regard to the Spe- cific Plan. The Planning Commission reports it is intended that the Specific Plan will be adopted at their February 25th meeting. WATER PRESSURE ON WP1BLEDON LANE The Public tvorks Director reports that an investigation has been made into the actual water pressure on Wimbledon Lane in the area of its highest point and charts submitted indicates that the pressure was a constant 3l psi. ~.va,Jr . 'fJI"-""- Cm Miller questioned what the pressure was at his house~ a0]~e.d. -tll.:J.t. tlH~ .f:?JLUL.:tJbl.LU 1ru laJ_uJJ. .l lllal A.. < ilr~.. HOUSING AND COt~1UNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT GRANT A resolution is required which formally authorizes the assumption of reasonable expenses for the preparation of the grant applica- tion in the event that HUD rejects our plan and reimbursement for its preparation. CH MILLER HOVED TO ADOPT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION, SECONDED BY CM TURNER WHICH WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. RESOLUTION NO. 23-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXPENSES FOR PREPARATION OF APPLICATION FOR FEDERAL GRANT PURSUANT TO THE HOUSING AND CO!~1UNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974. RAILROAD CONSTRUCTION PROJECT PROGRESS PAYMENTS Mayor Pritchard questioned whether the Council should take action regarding the payment to Hensel Phelps for materials that are on hand in the state but not yet delivered to the job site. CM FUTCH MOVED TO APPROVE THE PAYMENT TO HENSEL PHELPS FOR MATERIALS THAT ARE ON HAND WITHIN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL. /- Cm Turner suggested that the City Manager have the authority to disperse funds without concurrence of the Council according to the terms of the contract. He could advise the Council in his weekly report how much money had been paid. Cm Futch stated that was the intent of his motion. Mr. Logan explained that there are two things involved if they take Cm Turner's suggestion: l) You have to deal with the agreement and the section regarding materials in the state of California as CH-29-22l January 27, 1975 (Railroad Construction Project Progress payments) there are limitations in the specifications which require that they be subject to inspection and under control of the Public Works Dept. The question is whether the Council should accept the policy to pay for materials that fall within those requirements that are within the State. 2) Instead of coming to the Council with everything that involves this contract, that the City Manager be allowed to administer the agreement in accordance with the terms. There are actually two suggestions involved. Mr. Logan suggested that the motion for payment be subject to the approval of the City ~1anager . CM FUTCH AGREED THAT HIS MOTION CONTAIN THE ADDITION SUGGESTED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY. He wondered if the material should be inspected, and Mr. Logan stated that was included in the agreement, and you can require a lot of protections, but some of those protections are rather meaningless. A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION AND PASSED 4-1 WITH CM MILLER DISSENT- ING. CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE CITY ~fANAGER BE ALLOWED TO ADMINISTER THE AGREEMENT AND MAKE PAY~1ENTS AND REPORT TO THE COUNCIL ON A WEEKLY BASIS, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 12:30 a.m. to an executive session to discuss two legal matters and one personnel matter, and then to an adjourned regular meeting at 7:30 p.m., January 30, 1975 in the Council Chambers. ATTEST APPROVE CM-29-222 Regular Adjourned Meeting of January 30, 1975 An adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on January 30, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard presiding. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Futch, Miller, Tirsell, Turner and Mayor Pritchard ABSENT: None SPECIAL STUDY SESSION RE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT Mayor Pritchard stated that the Council should keep in mind two things: l) the overriding guiding criteria is that they must relate to moderate and low income uses in our City; 2) in SUbscribing to the guidelines in order to obtain this money, is the housing assis- tance needs of lower income households. Basically what this means is that the Council subscribes to the principle of aiding and helping the development of lower income housing throughout the City. This is a point he has personally favored for many years, that we would be better off to intersperse the lower income families throughout the City. The purpose of this meeting is to come to a decision as to where the money is to be used that might be received from the federal government. Mayor Pritchard opened the meeting for discussion. Mr. Parness explained that there are several parts to the application that must be completed such as a housing assistance plan, community development plan, community development program, EIR, budget, project listing and several other related project listings. All of this is to give the federal government an indication of where our problem areas are and where the funds should be applied in comparison to what the City might suggest. Mr. Parness stated that in Livermore there is a relatively small number of houses in need of upgrading, about l%, whereas there are cities with as much as 25%, and those cities are devoting a great deal of these funds to rehabilitation of those housing units. This has been looked at in the composition of our housing element and it has been concluded that this is not the place where the money would best be spent to service the City of Livermore. Also, all of the oral and written input has been considered, and there have been a great many very valuable suggestions offered for the use of the funds, but there is only a limited amount of money and the staff is suggesting how it should be applied to benefit the greatest number of people. Mr. Parness referred to the chart posted which listed the problem areas which it is felt the money can best address. Also listed were all of the projects suggested to which an approximate dollar value had been assigned. In addition, there have been listed the projects which are felt to be ineligible. Chuck McKinley explained the proposals which had been suggested: l. Construction of a multi-service center, which would probably take all the funds, to house a variety of social service agencies that do not now service this community unless people drive to East Bay to get these services. This could also include child care facilities, senior citizens center and possibly an emergency shelter facility. 2. A senior citizens center which which would add to the present services available. 3. Buenas Vidas Ranch repair which could be done for approximately $9,000 for one portion and $l5,000 for both. CM-29-223 January 30, 1975 (Housing & Community Dev Act) 4. Informational/Advocate Unit - this was not discussed at a pub- lic hearing, but was received in a written form. This is a proposal to fund two or three staff members, one of whose duties would be to be informed of all available governmental and other programs which would be beneficial to the poor people of Liver- more and to make those known to both the people and proper offi- cials. The second employee would act as an advocate and aide to poor persons in their dealings with the various welfare agencies, and a part time secretarial position. 5. To fund a central business district plan as a means of insuring that the area opened up by the track relocation would not be adverse to the communities desires, and the cost of this would be approximately $lO,OOO to pay a private consultant. 6. Emergency shelter facilities which would be basically a facil- ity to house people on the street either through some disaster or because they are newly arrived in the community and do not have the funds to locate. The proposal suggested that it be housed in the same building with supportive services probably needed by people in this situation. 7. Child care center and the contribution mentioned is an indica- tion from the Livermore Housing Authority that they would be willing to contribute money to that end especially to help families located in Leahy Square. 8. purchase of scattered site housing, which would be an attempt to disperse low income people throughout the community especi- ally in those tracts which now have a low percentage of low income people, The whole sum of $622,000 would be used for this project. 9. Rehabilitation fund which many cities are using their money for in an attempt to upgrade the quality of the housing for low income people. Mr. McKinley pointed out that within the Community Development legislation there is also authority through HUD to make loan guaran- tees to local governments who wish to sell bonds in order to create re- habilitation funds. lO. Purchase of a site for seniors housing which is a proposal by Interfaith Housing - that the City purchase either or both parcels which are now adjacent to the present seniors housing on Hillcrest. ll. Neighborhood assistance officer which is a proposal to try to foresee deterioration of the housing stock and make sure that deterioration does not continue. This would be more of a vol- unteer type approach rather than the use of code enforcement to try to create community pride. The $20,000 figure represents the possibility of hiring a personnel officer and a part time secretary and other costs. l2. To buy Tubbsville and relocate the citizens in comparable hous- ing and this proposal was made by several people in the original hearing and the $200,000 figure represents the present market value and the cost of relocating present residents. l3. Is to implement the park plans now existing, more specifically the Sunken Gardens and Robertson Park and that could take the full amount. l4. Proposal by the Planning Department to purchase the park site between "P" and "L" Streets north of Chestnut Street which would CM-29-224 January 30, 1975 (Housing &Cornrnunity Dev.Act involve buying land which now has houses and closing off the street and the estimate for this is approximately $lOO,OOO. l5. Community vegetable garden and the figure of $7,000 is the minimal cost of site improvement of one of the proposed parcels, and the $65,000 would be for converting both parcels. l6. Study of a plan of a town in New York which is generally a plan to guarantee dispersal of low income people and the estimated cost for this would be $60,000. l7. A proposal to remove any architectural barriers or other types of barriers that prevent handicapped or elderly people from being mobile and this could range from zero to the whole sum. Mr. McKinley briefly explained the ineligible proposals or those that were conditionally ineligible. One of the proposals was the restoration of the Carnegie Building, Buckley Estate, May School and Ravenswood and HUD explained that historic buildings must have gone through the process of being a National Register nominee in order to be eligible. Transportation was not eligible except for a mini bus service in conjunction with the senior citizen center, or for the multi-service center for seniors and handicapped people. Health care is another one that is excluded, but HUD has indicated it is allowed as a part of the senior citizen or neighborhood community center. Bike trails may be permissible but it would be hard to justify, and the same for sludge for fertilizer. One proposal which is not listed but is eligible is the Emergency Fund Center - housing for this, which could come into the community service center. Mr. Parness pointed out that the listing posted was in no way a priority listing but simply an aggregation of the projects sub- mitted, and the ones carefully appraised by the staff in trying to come up with something that may be considered. He stated that the project the staff thinks deserves consideration is the multi-service center, which would be lO,OOO to l2,000 sq. ft. building that would be located at the community park-civic center site and would house, among other things, a senior citizens facility, child care area, quarters for emergency housing to include emergency fund programs and office facilities for such necessary welfare contacts as legal aid, probation officer, county health, food stamp programs, etc. This would be only nominally outfitted and they would expect the services to be housed there to assist in that regard. He stated that they are using $50/ft. for the estimated amount on construc- tion from the advice of the architectural consultants who feel this is a reasonable figure and does include some basic essentials. Secondly, the Council might be interested in the acquisition of land and the provision of public works installations for low cost housing and he added that he is sure this would receive a positive reception from HUD. We have not had this as an oral input from anybody and there is no low cost housing faction in this City though there are many people who would like to live here or already do live here that just cannot afford housing. This type of program would suggest that the City purchase property in various sizes and in different areas and see that public works improvements are afforded and then try to entice building interests that would put up housing that would be in the market level of perhaps $20,000 for a single family resi- dential structure. Next is open space, parks and beautification, and there is an unlimited need in this area. There is also a need CM-29-225 January 30, 1975 (Housing & Community Development Act) for long range planning for the economic heart of our community in providing for its rejuvenation and some of the principal improvements that go along with it. Any amount the Council may wish to spend could be applied starting with the plan on up to the cost of pub- lic works improvements to be installed in it. He stated that he has mentioned four programs extracted from the list submitted to the Council by the community and the ones the Council should dir- ect its attention to and the programs felt to be of the most benefit to our City. Mayor Pritchard asked if there had been any consideration to the architectural design that would permit an actual physical separa- tion of some sort between the senior citizens and other needs for the multi-service center and Mr. Parness noted that this is a very good point and this was discussed just the other day and it is felt that this would be a demand and it is felt that this can be done if the building is large enough. Cm Miller stated that he has heard of places where the interaction between senior citizens and youth is encouraged and is very success- ful. In his opinion there is too much isolation between the ages these days compared to 50 years ago when the family was much more compact and where babies and grandparents were in the same household. There are a lot of advantages to interaction between older people and young people. Mayor Pritchard stated that the senior citizens are presently shar- ing the same building with the youth center people and this has created a lot of problems and would tend to feel that they should have separate areas and still be able to mix as much as they wish. Mayor Pritchard then asked the estimated cost of moving the ball field and bleachers away from the Recreation Center to Robertson Park and there was a comment that the estimate was in the area of $lOO,OOO, and a lot of this cost is getting water to the Robertson Park site and for fences and lights. The Mayor then asked if there has been consideration for abandoning the ball park located at 8th & "H" Streets and Mr. McCracken stated that there is a shortage of ball fields in Livermore and they really can't just abandon it with- out providing for another one and they would like to see the senior citizens occupy the entire area at 8th & "Hit Streets because this is a centralized location and there are many senior citizens in the locality. There has also been consideration of providing for a senior center at the Civic Center site but they would recommend that the location for the senior citizens remain at 8th Street. Cm Futch mentioned that there really isn't another park area close to the 8th Street site and this would mean that if more buildings were built on the site it would eliminate the green playing area for that neighborhood. He then stated that there should be con- sideration as to whether one or two projects should be funded or whether the money should go to many groups for many projects. If one or two projects are to be funded there is no reason to discuss a dozen small projects. i_ Mayor Pritchard commented there is an excellent multi-purpose room at the Recreation Center now that is large and lends itself to meeting rooms for various groups and agencies and would hate to lose the advantage of existing facilities and improvements by moving from there but would like to know how much green space would be left if a lO,OOO sq. ft. building was added at the 8th Street site, which was illustrated by Mr. McCracken. The Council concluded that it would be best to determine which projects would be funded as mentioned by Cm Futch. CM-29-226 January 30, 1975 (Housing & Comm. Dev. Act) Cm Turner stated that he has received many telephone calls from people interested in various projects and that many of our citizens who are really involved in community services have had very good ideas such as the vegetable garden suggestion by Lois Hill and the restoration of the sanitarium buildings by Sally Bystroff for Buenas Vidas Ranch and Gloria Taylor had a very good idea concerning the central business district. However, he would like to endorse the idea of pouring all the money into one multi-service center which could be the beginning of a long range plan for a complete community center. He would like to see the City accomplish one major project that the entire City would benefit from with visual results of what the City did with the funds rather than to divide the money between numerous interests with each group receiving a small amount. Cm Miller stated that the intent of the Act is to help low income and moderate income people, primarily with respect to housing, and consequently his first choice would be for one project and that would be to purchase housing throughout the community to be rented to people on a sliding scale, depending upon the incomes of the people. A portion of the rent could be used for upkeep and the remainder would be used to continue to purchase more housing until the City could provide the need for low income people. There are 250-300 families on a waiting list for Leahy Square housing at present and it would seem that this is the closest project which would follow the intent of the Act. His second choice would be to provide varying amounts to a large number of locally sponsored and primarily volunteer organizations which are doing things for this same group and is more interested in having thigs grow from this "seed" money than in having something to show for the money. He would like to see money go towards repair of the build- ings at the sanitarium for Buenas Vidas, the emergency shelter facility, which could be combined with the Emergency Fund Center; a child care center for which the Housing Authority is willing to provide some cooperation; purchase of housing site for the Interfaith people; neighborhood assistance; and the community vegetable garden. He stated that the small groups would take approximately $280,000 worth of money and the remainder could be used to purchase about lO houses in various areas in the community or alternatively to contribute $300,000 towards the Senior Citizens Center in hopes that matching funds would come from LARPD or the Housing Authority or other organizations. He stated that this money should hit at the needs of low income families more than to provide a multi-service center and that the programs he has sug- gested would do this. He added that the small amounts of money for a wide variety of groups would be the "seed" money which would permit them to go on with their program and in another five years there will be more than what would be provided with the $620,000 expenditure for one project. Cm Futch stated that he would agree with a lot of what Cm Miller has said; however, SACEOA tried the philosophy of spreading the money around in hopes that many people would be helped and that the results would grow and in the analysis it was very difficult to see that the "seed" money multiplied as it was supposed to have done. He stated that his first choice would be a multi-service center in which various organizations could be located and could assist the low income family. Cm Tirsell stated that she is on the ACAP Board and some of the philos- ophy is changing and some of the evaluations of "seed" money are bad because in our case we have to create all of our own institutions and do not have lOO-200 years of cultural, ethnic, and social institutions behind us. She has had the opportunity of interviewing people for a Director of ACAP and in this process spoke with people involved in social work the old SACEOA and OEO for many years. She asked everyone what was wrong with OEO and SACEOA and the most eloquent and best answer came from a well versed person who had been in the sit-ins in Georgia and had been a personal friend of Martin Luther King and he answered that it is because no institutions have changed. The low income people cannot say my life or lot is better because of some program and the ethnic groups cannot say that they are better off because programs do not affect institutional change. This thought CM-29-227 January 30, 1975 (Housing & Community Dev. Act) has remained with her while evaluating the requests concerning com- patible uses and began to think of some type of multi-use. She felt the project that would serve the most people with things that now exist and ongoing programs would be to put the funds into a multi-service center. She stated that she does have some questions concerning specifics for the multi-service center, such as the child care center and also senior citizen services which she would not want to see a duplication of in that LARPD already has a senior citizen program. She stated that she is tremendously committed to two other projects and those are the CBD plan and the community vegetable gar- den. She added that these two projects are small $10,000 projects and possibly they could be absorbed in the budget. Cm Turner stated that he would like to say that the county has been very non-comrnital where the sanitarium buildings are concerned for the Buenas Vidas project and because of the county's attitude he is somewhat hesitant about funds for this project. Mayor Pritchard stated that he would have to agree with some of the things mentioned by all the other Councilmembers but would lean towdrus provision of a multi-service center for various reasons. He stated that he has had many people stop by his office to find out where they should go for various services, how to fill out forms and how to untangle red tape with respect to City, county and federal agencies. The senior citizens could have a place for their activities and there could also be offices for giving information to these people and would require very little floor space, and he listed numerous groups that would be very helpful and would require a small amount of floor space. He stated that his first choice would be a multi-service center because he feels this is where the most good could be done but secondly if the Coun- cil is setting priorities would be in favor of a Senior Citizens Center, alone, and the third would be the scattered funding to various groups with Buenas Vidas at the top of that list. He would like to see funds go to house the emergency shelter facility, the Emergency Fund Center, a child care center and purchasing hous- ing site for senior housing. He added that he does not want to disparage what Cm Miller has said but SACEOA was such a dismal failure when it came to handing out seed money and having done good with the exception of the CAPE Headstart Program and a few others. Mayor Pritchard asked if the Council must decide at this time which site a multi-service might be located on and Mr. Parness stated that this doesn't have to be decided now. Mr. Parness stated that he would like to say that the Council does not need to put a limit as to what is going to happen because this program will probably continue with federal monies or the City's for expansion. Cm Turner stated that he would agree that the priority mentioned by Cm Miller has merit but it is his understanding that the City already has a program that would provide for scattered housing for low income people. Also, the vegetable garden as suggested by Lois Hill could possibly be done at very little cost which he feels is a wonderful idea. Mr. McKinley stated that he would like to make the Council aware of the fact that as part of this legislation there are new monies and new programs for low income housing with primary emphasis on rent supplements and in talking with people from the county they have indicated that there will probably be a substantial increase in funding which, over a three year period, may amount to 205 units for Livermore with subsidized rent at a greatly increased rate and will meet some of the needs that Cm Miller is concerned about. He noted that this is only a lease program and would not involve mort- gages and Cm Miller stated that he was interested in the City pur- chasing homes and using the rent money to buy more homes; however, CM-29-228 January 30, 1975 (Housing & Comm. Dev. Act) the need is for the City to provide housing and whether it comes from rent subsidized through a federal program or from City owned property really doesn't make any difference - the object is to provide the housing assistance but there really is merit in acquiring houses in various areas in the City for the Housing Authority to administer. Cm Futch stated that he really was impressed with the information as to what this City has done in terms of providing low income housing and housing for senior citizens and we really have more than what any other city in Alameda County has, clo~e to our population. J ~~i~--r~-<9i(M,~~ Cm Miller stated that he is glad Cm Futch spel~ed out the fact~t I we have provided quite a bit of housing for low income families but the reason he expressed concern is because there is a waiting list for this type of housing. He commented that what he called "seed" money has been transformed to be programs a la SACEOA and he apparently chose a loaded word without realizing it. What he had in mind was the support of existing institutions that will stay here to assist, such as the Emergency Fund Center, Good Samaritan, Buenas Vidas, and other organizations that are not beginning with seed money in the hopes that they will make it. There are existing organizations that need some cash to continue to go further with their programs. The argument that East Bay agencies are going to come to a multi-service center does not seem to be reasonable because if they are going to go anywhere it will be the county center when it is ultimately built. He stated that in his opinion it is not necessary to build a $620,000 edifice so that people can receive information and that the previous suggestions to have someone located in City Hall for this purpose is a very good idea. He stated that he is not impressed with a building, as such, but what is important is what goes on inside and would like to provide for the people who would use it. The multi-service center would not solve the problems for the senior citizens because they have a need for lO,OOO sq. ft. and the entire service center is supposed to be used for a series of uses and would consist of only lO,OOO sq. ft. He stated that he is really happy about the information Mr. McKinley has just given about housing being possible through other means because this is one major concern he has at this point and what he feels to be a major priority. CM FUTCH MOVED TO ADOPT THE MULTI-SERVICE CENTER AS THE FIRST PRIORITY FOR THE FEDERAL GRANT FUNDS, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND WHICH PASSED 3-2 (Cm Miller and Turner dissenting). Cm Turner explained that his dissenting vote was because he prefers to see the start of something and his preference would be for the senior citizens center. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE SECOND PRIORITY BE FOR SUPPORT OF THE FOLLOWING PROJECTS, WITH SOME VARIATIONS TO BE DISCUSSED: a) Buenas Vidas, b) Emergency Fund Housing, c) Child Care Center, d) CBD Plan, e) North Park Site, f) Vegetable Garden, g) Neighbor- hood Rehabilitation, and h) Interfaith Housing, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL WHICH PASSED 3-2 (Cm Turner and Futch dissenting). CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE THIRD PRIORITY GO TOWARDS A SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER AND FOR LOW COST HOUSING IN VARIOUS AREAS OF THE CITY, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. It was noted that there is a possibility something can be worked out for providing for the community vegetable garden through the cooperation of the Recreation Department without using these funds to accomplish it. RECESS MAYOR PRITCHARD CALLED FOR A 5 MINUTE RECESS AT WHICH TIME EACH COUNCILMEMBER WAS ASKED TO LIST PRIORITIES FOR THE VARIOUS PROJECTS TO RECEIVE FUNDS AS IN THE MOTION MADE BY CM MILLER. CM-29-229 January 30, 1975 (Housing & Community Dev. Act) AFTER THE RECESS THE COUNCIL MEETING RESUMED WITH ALL MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL PRESENT. Mayor Pritchard stated that the Council has agreed to the following priority list for programs receiving funds: l. Buenas Vidas 2. Emergency Fund Shelter & Housing 3. Child Care Center 4. Interfaith Housing 5. Senior Citizens Center Contribution ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR THE FEDERAL GRANT WAS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION NO. 24-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR FEDERAL GRANT PURSUANT TO THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Pritchard adjourned the meeting at 9:30 p.m. to a study session to discusss agenda policy to be held Monday, February 3, 1975, in the Court Chambers, at 7:00 p.m. and adjourned to an immediate exe- cutive session tO~iSCU a legal mat~h ;1he ~ty Attorney. APPROVE ____________--~ ~ Mayor ATTEST ~fornia Regular Meeting of February 3, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on February 3, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:l0 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard presiding. ROLL CALL Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Futch, Tirsell and Mayor Pritchard Absent: None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Pritchard led the Councilmernbers as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. CM-29-230 February 3, 1975 PROCLAMATIONS Mayor Pritchard stated that this evening he has signed the following proclamations: ----- Declaring Feb. 9-l5th Beta Sigma Phi Week Declaring the Week of March 8th as March of Dimes Walkathon Week and March 8th March of Dimes Walkathon Day and noted that Mayor pro tempore Futch will participate in the walkathon. Declaring the month of March, Youth Art Month MINUTES - JAN. 20, 1975 P. 19l, under Federal Funds for Housing---it was noted that the figure of $lOO,OOO of taxpayers money should be corrected to read $800,000. ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE (CM TURNER ABSTAINING) THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF JAN. 20th WERE APPROVED, AS CORRECTED. OPEN FORUM (Complaint re Police Harrassment) Steven Santos, 309 North Livermore Avenue, stated that he had been arrested by a pOlice officer, had to spend the night in jail and was told the next day that the charges were dropped and complained about the procedure used in arresting him and that the police officer would not give him his correct badge number and would not read the list of personal belongings when he was booked. The Council thanked him for reporting to them and stated that they would like a report on this incident from the staff. (Holmes Street) Ray Faltings, lOl8 Via Granada, stated that Holmes Street has been re-lined between Concannon Boulevard and Alden Lane. He stated that the new lines have created a problem in the area where one can turn left onto Hampton, drive towards San Jose, or turn right onto Alden Lane and would suggest that the City observe this area and endeavor to correct the big hump of a white line that progresses into the middle of the street. Cm Futch agreed that if someone follows the white line and then triesto turn right onto Alden Lane there is the possibility of running into someone that thinks you may be going on towards San Jose. Mr. Parness indicated that the matter will be investigated and the state will be contacted. (Intersection of Second and "L" St.) Dr. Martin Plone, 2127 First Street, commented that he would like to suggest that a study be done for the intersection of Second Street and "L" Street because it is very difficult to cross "L" Street when traveling east or west on Second Street because there are stop signs for the people on Second Street but none for the "L" Street traffic. Possibly a 4-way stop could be implemented at this intersection. CM-29-23l February 3, 1975 (Intersection of Second and L Streets) Mr. Parness commented that this particular intersection is one of the priority intersections for automatic signalization. It would be rather difficult to stop traffic on "L" Street unless there is a compelling reason. An automatic signal would stop the flow to some extent but not like a 4-way stop which can create a great deal of congestion. (re Petition) Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, stated that on December l7, 1974 and January l7, 1975, City Attorney, Robert Logan, did incorrectly identify the petition against unfair taxation, causing Dorothy Hock, the clerk, to return the petition against unfair taxation to Mr. Tull and again on January 25, the City Attorney did again incorrectly identify the same petition but did correctly say that no regulations have been written concerning such a petition. He stated that in the name of 3,029 petitioners he again brings the petition against unfair taxation before the City Council and the City Clerk of the City of Livermore. He stated that the petition cannot be denied on procedural grounds because no such procedure has been established. (Mr. Tull had the petition with him, but did not submit it to the City Clerk again, and retains it in his possession.) P.H. RE REZONING OF SITE AT CORDOBA & CONCANNON BLVD. Mayor Pritchard stated that a public hearing has been scheduled to hear public testimony concerning the application of Sunset Development Company for rezoning of a site located at the corner of Cordoba Street and Concannon Boulevard from RL-6 to RS-5. Mr. Musso explained that this property is left over from the subdivision activity that occurred in that area, beginning about 1958 and it is zoned RL-6. It was so zoned in 1960 and there are two streets that stub-end to the property and a portion of the property is in use for the Cabanna Club. Adjacent properties are basically single family residential with the exception of the apartment house in that area which he pointed out on the map. He then explained the application history which involved the request for a CUP for building townhouses and the applicant was advised that this type of development could not be developed in the RL-6 zone. It was noted that development would have to be in conformance with the General Plan and an EIR would have to be furnished and the applicant, after discussing alternatives, decided to withdraw the application but the Planning Commission did not accept the withdrawal and sent a recommendation on to the Council for the RS-4 zoning. Letters have been received from the following people in the area supporting the Planning Commission recommendation: Judith and Charles Turner, Jr., 912 Via Del Paz; John Trecek, l745 Niagara Dr. and Suzanne Bauer, 9ll Via del Paz. Mr. Musso explained that the rezoning, as recommended by the Planning Commission would not allow development of townhouses and that to initiate this it would require a CUP and public hearings. Mayor Pritchard opened the public hearing at this time. ~u JW,~ Walter :Q8ue~, 9ll Via del Paz, stated that he is one of the people who wrote to the City in favor of the rezoning and would like to point out that the rezoning would be consistent in lot size with the residences of the immediate neighborhood CM-29-232 February 3, 1975 (P.H. re Rezoning of Site at Cordoba & Concannon) and feels that this is an important consideration to go from 33 to 27 houses and is a step in the right direction. Wayne Graham, 914 Desconsado, stated that the street he lives on /~, dead-ends into the property being discussed and the reason they are concerned as to what happens. They like their neighborhood and would like the same type of zoning retained - single family resi- dential. His family would very much support the RS-4 zoning proposal. Mr. Mehran, President of Sunset Development Company and property owner stated that the initiation of the rezoning by the Planning Commission is an indication that the City Council can and does initiate down zoning on various properties within the City. He stated that the present RL-6 zoning is for single family development and the RS-4 zoning proposed by the Planning Commission would allow more varied development on the land than the present zoning. He stated that the reason he requested rezoning and asked for a CUP for development of townhouses was because this would offer the type of housing not offered in Livermore at present. There have been numerous requests from people who would like to purchase large condominium units and do not want to be bothered with the normal upkeep involved in owning a home. He stated that there is no advantage to a developer to build condominiums. This type of use would be com- patible to the area and it was his feeling that if the property were developed to some nice residential units, it would increase the value of the property owners on the periphery. He suggested that the matter be set aside until a future time when they decide what the best use would be for that land. Mr. Mehran stated his company cannot develop the land without the Council's permission and at the time they submit a proposal then the Council can reject it. CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING BE CLOSED, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH, AND THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Mayor Pritchard asked the Planning Director if there was a prOV1S1on in the ordinance for holding the zoning, such as for open space, and Mr. Musso replied that there are open space and agricultural zones but there is a question if that would be a proper zoning. The Mayor asked if the Planning Commission had ever discussed holding zones in an urbanized area, and Mr. Musso stated they have and this is called a study zone, which allows them two years to make a study. Cm Tirsell questioned the Planning Director with regard to some of the problem properties where density transfers had been considered and Mr. Musso stated that letters had been sent to the owners of problem properties suggesting that they contact the local developers for the possibility of arranging for density transfers, but there was no response. He had suggested to Sunset Development that they might be interested in transferring some of the density in on some of their properties, but he did not address a letter to Mr. Mehran discussing density transfer. Cm Turner stated that it is his understanding that in the RL-6 the uses that can be developed are single family units, and in the RS-4, single family residential, but also townhouses, cluster houses, etc. and asked if this was correct and was advised that it was. CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMIS- SION FOR REZONING OF THE PROPERTY TO RS-4, FOR THE REASONS PROPOSED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. He stated he was particularly interested in consistency with rezonings that should have taken place on all the parcels in the City when RL was rezoned to RS, and secondly, to obtain consistency with the General Plan density. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL. Cm Turner stated he had read the petition and talked to several people concerning the rezoning, and in reading the Planning Commission CM-29-233 ~'-~-"'""-"~.~"_."""'''.'''~''''''-' ~ .,.....,-,._".,--,._.__.__.~..__.'_..._..__....._-_._-+-..,~_.~,._.. - February 3, 1975 (P.H. re Rezoning of Site at Cordoba & Concannon Blvd.) minutes, the first thing he noted was that Mr. Mehran wanted to withdraw the application and he felt he should have been allowed to do so. He also noted that to ensure single family residential in that area, the RL6 zoning would be best for them as RS-4 would also include town houses, cluster homes, etc. which would not be in keeping with the type of homes now located in that area. The Cabana Club generates noise and development there could cause conflict. He would vote against the motion as he felt Mr. Mehran should be allowed to withdraw his application and second the residents in the area would have a better guarantee of conformity in the area with the RL6. Cm Miller commented that the RS standards are far better than the RL as far as setback and yards. As far as town houses are con- cerned, that is up to the Council to decide, and he personally feels there should not be. Any decision would be that of the majority of the Council. Cm Futch remarked if he lived in that area, he would not be opposed to townhouses or even the RS-5, but since the General Plan speci- fies 4 du/acre, they should be consistent. Cm Tirsell stated that in her neighborhood there is no place for pre-school children to play. As far as the Cabana Club, the people who purchased homes there did so with the knowledge that the club was there. She mentioned that there are three ancestral trees on the parcel which could not be saved with RL Zoning. Four years ago a petition containing 200 signatures asked that the land be dedi- cated for a park, but there were no discussions on it. Anything that can be done to lower the density and so the trees can be pre- served and some of the open space be preserved would lead her to think favorably of it. She also felt very strongly about the par- cel conforming to the General Plan. A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION AND PASSED 4-l WITH CM TURNER DIS- SENTING. MAYOR PRITCHARD STATED THAT THE MOTION WOULD ALSO BE TO DIRECT PREPARATION OF AN ORDINANCE. PUBLIC HEARING RE REZONING PROPERTY SO. OF I-580, EAST & WEST OF VASCO RD AND PROPERTY ALONG RESEARCH DR AND NW CORNER EAST AVENUE AND VASCO ROAD Mayor Pritchard stated that the public hearing was regarding possi- ble rezoning from ID and IM Districts to I-l, I-2, or I-3 Districts property generally south of I-580, east and west of Vasco Road to the Western Pacific Railroad tracks, and the property along Research Drive and the northwest corner of East Avenue and Vasco Road. The Planning Director explained that the intent of the rezoning action by the Planning Commission was to bring the present zoning into conformance with the General Plan and to the new I-l to I-3 standards. It was agreed that the basic industrial zone would be the I-3 which has 70% coverage. In preparing the plan they started out with the I-3 zoning and then indicated more restrictive zones to be established which he pointed out on the map. The I-l is pro- posed because of the proximity to residential areas; the other two departures from the I-3 are for properties having frontages on South front Road which the staff and commission felt that the prox- imity to the highway and visual impact it should have lesser density. In the Research Drive area it was felt that I-2 could be allowed because it was not adjacent to residential, but yet it is not a heavy industrial area. CM-29-234 February 3, 1975 (P.H. re Rezoning Proper- ty So. of I-580, East & West Vasco Rd, etc.) Cm Futch stated he had heard that the smaller businesses have less capital to start with and desire something like I-3 coverage, and Mr. Musso explained that if any lands in the I-3 zone were subdivid- ed the same argument could be advanced; they are small parcels and available for small businesses which need greater coverage, econom- ically. Mr. Musso stated they were only looking at one criteria, i.e. how it relates to adjacent property. Cm Futch asked what the use was adjacent to the other parcel which is recommended for I-2, and Mr. Musso explained it was agricul- tural to the south, and future industrial across the street and this was the reason I-2 was recommended. Mayor Pritchard declared the public hearing open at this time, and announced that a letter had been received from Associated Professions regarding to the industrial subdivision of Roger Shaheen's property, requesting consideration of I-3 zoning, and he asked Mr. Musso to point out this property, which is south of the present end of Research Drive. Mr. Musso pointed out the property and indicated that there is a tentative map before the Planning Commission presently for that pro- perty. The Planning Commission has also discussed properties owned by Southern Pacific, Western Pacific and Hexcel. Warren Sands, representative of the Southern Pacific Development Company, stated they are satisfied with the zoning because most of their parks usually require only 60% coverage. He felt that Western Pacific was also satisfied although they have no representative present Ed Barnes, 322 Martin Avenue, representing the Livermore Chamber of Commerce in Mr. Mason's absence, stated the recommendation they would like considered is the area between the WP and SP tracks which is shown as I-l. The railroads have indicated that this would never be used more than 60% coverage, and he felt it should be shown as I-2 instead of I-3. The portion between the two tracks by Hexcel's property they recommend to be I-3. Mayor Pritchard asked if I-2 uses would be permitted in I-3, and Mr. Musso stated there was no difference in the uses, it would be just a matter of preference. ,~Mr. Barnes stated there is a large area designated as I-3 that could ~be used as an offset against someone getting into an I-3 zone because ~it will never be used as an I-3 as the railroads do not layout their ~industrial tracts to be more than 60%. ~Cm Turner stated that Mr Barnes has a good point because if all the ~I-3 is located in the SP area, and they will not allow any I-3 zon- ~ ing, it doesn't make sense to have all the I-3 in an area where no ~ one can use it as I-3. ~ ~This point was further discussed, and Cm Miller commented that he '~lWould offer a response. Two major industrial land owners are talk~ b ' in I-2 when they are allowed I-3. He felt perhaps ~~are being ~ \, told how industrial parks should be developed and that I-3 is not a reasonable zoning classification. Cm Miller went on to say that originally they had light and heavy industrial, and the 50% coverage was relaxed for heavy industrial type development. Now they are talking about what should be light industrial with heavy industrial coverage. If the parcels with rail access and heavy industrial pieces should be I-3, and if the railroads decide some particular heavy industry suitable for I-3, they have the option of using some of the land for it in the right place. CM-29-235 February 3, 1975 (P.H. re Rezoning Property So. of I-580, East & West of Vasco Rd etc.) Mr. Barnes stated they have had meetings with SP and WP at the same time and they designated 60% was their requirement, and their property can never be used as I-3. Cm Futch asked Mr. Sands if they would have a preference, and Mr. Sands stated either zone would be okay, but it would be very unusual if they ever required I-3 and it would only give them a little more flexibility. Cm Miller stated he was under the impression that SP would consider the sale of small parcels within their large development, and asked Mr. Sands if that was the intent of their statement at a recent meeting, and Mr. Sands stated they had considered some small parcels, probably as small as 3 acres. Mr. Barnes then went on to say they would also recommend that the area south of East Avenue, the Research Drive area, be rezoned I-3 because of the size of the area available as it would be hard to develop in that small an area. Also the area on the opposite side, where it is designated I-l, that it be zoned I-2 for two reasons. There are two main streets bordering that property, and the arroyo in the back and with the setbacks required, it would limit that and it would have to be 60% coverage on that small section. THERE BEING NO FURTHER TESTIMONY, ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH, AND BY UNANIMOUS APPROVAL, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. CM FUTCH MOVED TO ADOPT THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION, MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM. TIRSELL. Cm Futch stated he felt the Planning Commission had considered this at great length and they wanted to protect the residential area. He felt that the parcel on the corner of East Avenue and Vasco Road should remain residential, but if it is industrial, it should be a zoning that would have protection for the residential adjacent to it. Also the railroad companies were happy with either zoning. Cm Turner asked about the testimony at the Planning Commission hear- ing which Mr. Musso reported, and Cm Turner stated that he feels with the new information about the development plans by the railroad, the matter should go back to the Planning Commission. ern Miller stated that he feels the area at the end of Research Drive should be zoned I-l rather than the I-2 recommended by the Planning Commission and if the Council would give any indication of support for this suggestion he would be willing to amend the motion. Cm Tirsell mentioned that the Planning Commission based its recom- mendation on the following criteria: l) the proximity to the free- way, and 2) the proximity to residential uses. If I-l is put on the Research Drive piece, the piece below Colgate has railroad access - it should have more coverage under that criteria but because of the proximity to the residential was the reason for the recommendation and she stated that she agrees with their cri- teria and therefore agrees with the way the zoning was recommended. Cm Miller stated that he also agrees with the criteria used by the Planning Commission but would add one additional criteria that being in the areas designated generally light industrial he would like to see more suitable zoning. Cm Turner emphasized that in his opinion it is a waste to put I-3 on property that will never be used by 1-3 uses and Cm Tirsell stated that this would give SP and WP the flexibility that sometime in the future~ because of their rail access, they may use I-3 zoning. CM-29-236 February 3, 1975 (P.H. re Rezoning So. of I-580, East and West of Vasco Road, etc.) MAYOR PRITCHARD CALLED FOR THE QUESTION AND THE MOTION PASSED 3-2 WITH CM TURNER AND THE CHAIR DISSENTING. THE STAFF WILL PREPARE THE AMENDING ORDINANCE. eONSENt.P CALElNDAR RES. AUTH. EXPENDITURE FOR TRAFFIC SIGNALS The staff has recommended that the Council adopt a resolution auth- orizing expenditure for the Holmes Street/Concannon Boulevard traffic signals. Ray Faltings, lOl8 Via Granada, stated that it would appear that the City intends to ask the taxpayers to pay for the installation of signals at Concannon and Holmes Street because the developer has reneged on his promise to pay some $60,000 towards the installation of the traffic signals in exchange for the rezoning of property at Cancannon and Holmes Street, which he received in hopes that there will someday be reimbursement. Cm Futch commented that it has not been determined as to who will have to pay for the installation of the signals because this is a legal matter that will have to be discussed in an executive session. Mayor Pritchard explained that the resolution is one that would be used regardless of where the money would come from and the City Attorney commented that adoption of the resolution does obligate the City's funds for the traffic signal; however, this does not foreclose action the City might take subsequent to adoption of the resolution if it is felt necessary in the interest of recompense to the City for the expenditure. Cm Miller stated that he would like to know if there is anything in the form of the resolution that would preclude the Council from recovering the $65,000, and the City Attorney replied, absolutely not. Cm Miller then asked if the City had a check from Mr. Mehran, would the City still have to adopt a resolution of this form and the City Attorney commented that he is sure they would and the method by which the City would work the matter out would be to put the check in escrow for use by the City for the traffic light and the Council would adopt a resolution doing that and a resolution of this form would have to be used to authorize expenditure of the money. Mr. Faltings stated that he is still not really satisfied because he feels the City is digging into his wallet for something that was clearly understood would be taken care of by someone else. Mayor Pritchard stated that the Council understands the point Mr. Faltings is making and Mr. Faltings indicated that he is happy to hear it because this is another example of where a promise has been made to the taxpayer, not completely followed through, and because of some error the problem is coming back to haunt us. Now and in the future when arrangements are made and donations are offered we must see that legally binding documents are used and that the City follows through to see that we get these donations. Cm Futch stated that he feels the City would like a traffic signal at that intersection regardless of who pays for it because it is a matter of safety for the citizens of Livermore and would hope that Mr. Faltings would also realize this point. Mr. Mehran stated that he does not deny he has accepted the condition of payment for the traffic light as a part of the CO Zoning and that his share was to be $40,000. What has happened is that he has been CM-29-237 ~~~-"~________'~'."_'.__H_"____________......____"..,..^'.~w. .. ___.__....._._,._.__~~__...___._...__.,_ February 3, 1975 (Resolution Authorizing Expenditure for Traffic Signals) advised that if he does not use the zoning he is not obligated to meet the conditions in connection with such zoning. If it would be the desire of the City Council to hold the CO zoning on that land firm, as it now stands, he would be agreeable to meet the condi.- tions connected with that zoning forthwith, and would like to set the records clear. He stated that he asked for legal advice as to whether or not he would have to pay for the traffic signal even if he did not use the zoning on the land and the legal advice was that he would not be obligated to pay. He feels that a bad settlement is better than a law suit and does understand the position of the City Council and its problems. He is not refus- ing to pay but it should be said, for the records, that the type of signal designed to be installed at that intersection is a far cry from what was originally discussed. The design of the signal has become one of the most exotic in California. He had instructed his attorney to go ahead with the $40,000 payment regardless of his legal rights and hopefully the Council would agree that he has done a great deal of good for this City and he is proud of the work he has done. He would agree with the Council when they say "don't tell us what you have done yesterday, tell me what you will do for us tomorrow". He stated that he is willing to say what he will do for the City tomorrow and that is to cooperate and compromise with the City on the acquisition of the fire station site and begin ne- gotiating with Mr. Parness. If, at anytime, in the future, the City down zones the l4 acres, which is now Co zone, would the City be obligated to pay him back the monies the City now receives for the traffic light, with reasonable interest? Mayor Pritchard commented that his question should be discussed with the City Attorney and that it would be improper, at this time, to respond. Mr. Mehran stated that he understands this point but wants to make it clear that he is quite willing to pay, he has agreed to pay and he wants to pay but just wants to know what the zoning will be. Because of the recession and business conditions, par- ticularly for small businessmen, he cannot use the CO zoning for these businesses that would normally be potential tenants. His company would hope that they could develop on this property in two or three years. Cm Turner asked what Mr. Mehran intends to pay and how much and Mr. Mehran noted that the agreement is in writing and is open to interpretation. Mr. Mehran added that he has never reneged on an agreement and does not intend to at this point but would like to know what his position is in that he wants to be assured there will not be down zoning on his property as the Council has been doing on other properties. Mr. Faltings stated that in his op1n1on the CO zoning now in effect should remain unless the owner of the property requests a different zoning or a down zoning, and in which case his original activity for obtaining the CO zoning should also remain in effect with respect to the traffic light. RESOLUTION NO. 25-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE FOR TRAFFIC SIGNALS (Holmes Street and Concannon Boulevard). REPORT RE PURCHASE OF TYPEWRITERS The City Manager submitted the following typewriter bids and it is recommended that a resolution be adopted authorizing purchase of typewriters from the State of California. CM-29-238 February 3, 1975 (Re Purchase of Typewriterf VENDOR MODEL PRICE Valley Office Equipment Blaisdell's Typewriter Gene's Business Machines Olympia SG3-L Adler Model U390 Royal Standard Facit l730-35 Facit l730-35 Facit l730-35 $239.00 244.50 259.00 3l0.00 396.00 l54.00 (2%/20 Dis.) ( B&R Business Machines State of California RESOLUTION NO. 26-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES OF THE STATE OF CALIF- ORNIA TO PURCHASE CERTAIN ITEMS. REPORT RE COLLIER CAN- YON ROAD IMPROVEMENTS The Public Works Director reported that the County of Alameda is undertaking a project to improve a portion of Collier Canyon Road and the roadway is being improved to provide adequate access to the college site. It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution declaring a portion of Collier Canyon Road to be designa- ted a County highway in order to save a tree and accommodate a bicycle lane. RESOLUTION NO. 27-75 A RESOLUTION DECLARING A PORTION OF COLLIER CANYON ROAD IN THE CITY OF LIVERMORE TO BE A DESIGNATED COUNTY HIGHWAY. COMMITTEE MINUTES The following committee minutes were submitted to the Council for review as well as Planning Commission minutes: Horizons Board Meeting - January l5 Greens Committee Meeting - December l2 Planning Commission Meetings - January 7 and l4 PAYROLL & CLAIMS There were l37 claims in the amount of $l94,233.20 dated January 27, 1975, and 283 payroll warrants in the amount of $94,932.94, dated January lO and January 24, 1975, for a total of $289,l66.l4, approved by the City Manager. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (Executive Session) Mayor Pritchard noted that the City Attorney has requested an executive session to discuss a personnel matter and two legal matters. CM-29-239 February 3, 1975 (re Form Contract - Emer. EmploYment Act) Mr. Parness reported that he has recently received the form con- tract, as specified by the County, per the format directed by the federal government with respect to the employment of people under Title VI of the Emergency Employment Act. The City has already employed the people and he would recommend adoption of a resolution that would authorize execution of the contract. The contract has been reviewed by our staff, including the City Attorney, has been prepared by the County and there is very little the City can do about it. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE RESOLUTION, AS RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY MANAGER, WAS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION NO. 28-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR GRANT PURSUANT TO THE EMERGENCY JOBS AND EMPLOYMENT ACT OF 1974 (TITLE VI) AND AUTH- ORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH ALA- MEDA COUNTY RE PARTICIPATION UNDER COMPRE- HENSIVE EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING ACT. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL (Reports from Legal Department) Cm Turner stated that he would like to receive monthly reports from the Legal Department outlining what law suits the City is presently involved in. Mr. Logan explained that it had been his intention to prepare quarterly reports, if the Council has no Objection, because monthly reports would indicate that there is very little change from month to month with respect to legal proceedings. He added that he has been with the City exactly one quarter and would hope to furnish a quarterly report this month on the status of all the law suits with the City and including all outside law suits. If the Council is interested he would be happy to re- flect the cost of the outside suits and probably give some reasonable projection about the ultimate cost to the end of anyone law suit done by outside counsel. Cm Miller stated that he would like to point out, as a matter of public interest, that most of the law suits the City is involved with have been brought against the City - not initiated by the City of Livermore. (Reserving Sewer Capacity) Cm Miller stated that there has been some discussion concerning the policy for reserving sewer capacity for commercial and industrial use and there is general agreement on the Council that some or all capacity should be reserved, and would suggest that this be formalized quite rapidly. Mr. Logan noted that he is presently in the process of doing research on this item. CM-29-240 February 3, 1975 (K&B - Illegal Signs) Cm Miller stated that the Planning Commission turned down a request for a variance for the K&B signs and asked if K&B has complied with our ordinance and the staff indicated that they have. (' \ (Additional Response from Congressman Stark and the Corps of Eng.) Cm Futch stated that there has been additional response from Congress- man Stark and the Corps of Engineers concerning the study on urban planning and it appears that the Corps of Engineers did not really answer the questions posed by Congressman Stark. Cm Futch stated that he may have the opportunity to discuss this matter with the Colonel representative of the Corps of Engineers and would like the permission of the Council to express their viewpoints on the develop- ment in the Las Positas area, etc. Cm Miller stated that he would be very happy to allow Cm Futch to act as Council representative. He would agree that the letter from the Corps is completely unsatisfactory and what it really says is that they are going to do the Geldermann study and if they want water management studies by their sponsor, which they have already defined to be Alameda County, they will go ahead and do the studies. This is completely unsatisfactory, it is what Mr. Murphy asked for and what Mr. Geldermann wants. (Murrieta Bike Traffic) Cm Futch stated that he is particularly concerned about the bicycle traffic that goes along Murrieta Boulevard to the high school and especially with the increased amount of automobiles on Murrieta. He stated that he would really hate to see a child hurt because of aI- dangerous situation, while going to school. The Bikeways Association, in conjunction with the Engineering Department, have developed plans for an underpass underneath the road and railroad tracks and would like to see that the City initiates some type of action to get the necessary property appraised so that acquisition can be made and the City may proceed with the bikeway that would provide a safe access from the other side of Holmes Street to the high school. HE MOVED THAT THE CITY OBTAIN APPRAISALS AND COME BACK TO THE COUNCIL WITH A REPORT AS TO HOW SOON ACQUISITION CAN BE IMPLEMENTED. Cm Futch added that he feels everyone is concerned about the automobiles also and that we would like to see a 4-lane street developed to the proper standards as soon as possible in that area but there is no way the City can develop major streets with tax money or other funds. The only way this can be done is when the property develops. At this time the main safety aspect which the City can control would be the pedestrians and bicycles. / (County Trucks Parked on Stanley & Portola) Cm Tirsell stated that she observed large trucks parked along Stanley Boulevard and Portola Avenue all during the week and the weekend and asked that the staff check to find out if something can be done about them. It was noted that Mr. Parness is taking care of the matter. (Funding CBD Plan) Cm Tirsell stated that pertinent testimony was received with respect to expenditure of the Housing and Development funds and it was felt that other funds should be used for the Central Business District plans. CM-29-24l February 3, 1975 (Funding CBD Plan) She stated that last week she suggested that the CBD goals and conceptural drawing come to the Council and asked when this will be discussed as an agenda item. Mr. Musso replied that it should be before the Council in two weeks. Cm Tirsell suggested that the staff come back to the Council with a recommendation for architects, etc., to implement the plan. (ABAG Meeting) Cm Miller noted that an ABAG meeting has been scheduled for this week and there should be Council representation at the meeting. ern Tirsell stated that she plans to attend the meeting and Cm Futch commented that he may also be able to go to the meeting. (Air Pollution Con- trol District Meeting) Cm Miller stated there is an Air Pollution Control District meeting about indirect sources on the same day as the ABAG meeting which he will try to attend. It is his understanding that they will take public testimony and felt it might be reasonable for him or someone else to represent the City's views about indirect sources, and par- ticularly to emphasize Cm Futch's original suggestion that large scale general plan amendments should be included in indirect source permits, which was followed by discussion as to what should be said at this meeting. Cm Miller commented that there was a text prepared for a previous hearing on indirect source regulations and he would comment, essentially, about those points. The Council indicated that Cm Miller could point out that the Council has not taken any formal action, etc. (Shortage of General Practice Physicians) Mayor Pritchard stated that he has spoken with Mrs. Combs whose hus- band is on the Lorna Linda university staff, about the problem of general practice physicians shortage in Livermore. Mrs. Combs has indicated that it does not do much good to talk with students who have not yet graduated because most of them go on to further training and do not want to make commitments. The best suggestion would be to place ads in the alumni association journal. Mayor Pritchard asked permission to place an ad in the Loma Linda Uni- versity School of Medicine alumni magazine as well as other school magazines expounding upon the virtues of moving to Livermore if one is a general practice physician. The Council concurred with the suggestion. (Parking Limits) Mayor pritchard stated that he has received calls from the people living in the area of McLeod, Second Street, and around the old Police building, about a two hour parking limit. They feel it is far enough away from the central business district that there should not be a two hour limit, many of the merchants park in those areas so as not to use parking space that would be used by customers and in one case someone received a ticket because while his car was parked there a red curb was painted during the same day. Mr. Parness indicated that the reason the two hour limit is used in the area of McLeod and the old~police station is because volunteer firemen must have a place to park their cars when responding to the fire horn. A report will be made to the Council. CM-29-242 February 3, 1975 ~ (Meeting with Hospital Board) Cm Tirsell stated that she and Cm Turner will be meeting with the Valley Memorial Hospital board members on next Tuesday, the llth at 7:30 p.m. in Mr. Andrews' office at the hospital. RECESS After a brief recess the Council meeting resumed with all members of the Council present. COMMUNICATION RE COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER A letter was received from Ratcliff, Slama & Cadwalader, architects and planners, concerning the recommendation for a county government center to be located either at Santa Rita or Hopyard Road sites rather than at the Sunol Boulevard site now being considered for the offices. The letter explained the reasons they feel the Sunol site would be preferable and their justifications for choosing the site. VCSD RESOLUTION RE ARROYO SANITARIUM A copy of the VCSD resolution (6-75) requesting the Board of Supervisors of Alameda County to keep the old county sanitarium facility until studies can be conducted to determine whether or not certain buildings could be improved and utilized for a youth rehabilitation center was submitted to the City Council. Mayor Pritchard stated that the VCSD should be commended for adopting such a resolution. REPORT RE NO. LIVERMORE AVE. TRAFFIC COUNT A copy of the North Livermore Avenue traffic count was submitted to the City Council and noted for filing. In view of the fact that Mr. Tull's name was mentioned in the report he was allowed to comment, because he indicated that he does not agree with the figures presented in the report. REPORT RE INTEL DISCHARGE The Public Works Director reported that a letter has been sent to Intel Corporation instructing them to cease their toxic fluoride effluent disCharge. Intel has begun using modified operating procedures to collect the fluoride solutions but the rinse water from the manufactured items is still being discharged resulting in a residual. The City is continuing to monitor the discharge from Intel. ~et..~' . Mr. Parness commented that the City has been .8R.'I~ld by Intel that the large amount of toxics found in the effluent was due to an inadvertent dumping by some employees who weren't aware of what was happening but precautions have been taken to eliminate another such mistake. CM-29-243 February 3, 1975 AIR POLLUTION STUDY COMMITTEE REPORT Cm Turner stated that he has some rather lengthy comments to make concerning the Air Pollution Study Committee report and he is sure his comments will encourage discussion and would therefore MOVE THAT THIS ITEM BE CONTINUED FOR TWO WEEKS AT WHICH TIME CM FUTCH WILL BE PRESENT, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. ---,,/ REPORT RE INDUSTRIAL PARK GRADE CROSSING A letter has been received from the Southern Pacific Transportation Company concerning their industrial park fronting on Vasco Road and in which they indicate the extension of drill tracks will make it necessary to cross at Vaughn Avenue and have asked that the crossing be approved. ON MOTION OF eM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE RESOLUTION APPROVING THE GRADE CROSSING WAS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION NO. 29-75 A RESOLUTION APPROVING GRADE CROSSING AT VAUGHN AVENUE (Southern Pacific). INTRO. OF ORD. RE UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE There was discussion concerning the Municipal Code amendment to adopt the Uniform Plumbing Code, 1973 edition and it is recommended that a date be set for the public hearing. Cm Miller suggested the following change for page 6, last sentence: Before such work can be recommenced a new permit shall be first obtained so to do, and the fee therefor shall be the amount required for such work, etc. Mayor Pritchard stated that rather than delete the word "one half" he would prefer to change the wording that "abandonment has not exceeded one half year (~) or six (6) months.", with which Cm Miller concurred as did the remainder of the Council. Mr. Kerin pointed out that this ordinance concerns only the plumbing fees for a building. Cm Miller suggested the fOllowing wording for Section l5.ll, page 9: "During periods of heavy activity the actual time of inspection will be scheduled on a first come, first served, basis as soon as possible consistent with the normal inspection load." When there is a heavy demand and the Building Department does 30 inspectionsa day instead of the normal load of l5 a lot of mistakes are made and he would like to prevent these mistakes. Mr. Parness stated that the way this can be accomplished would be to set an administrative policy that the field inspectors shall do no more than l5 residential building inspections per day. Cm Miller stated that this is a matter that has been irritating him for many years and that people do complain about inspections and mistakes are made when inspections are rushed. There should be some means by which everyone will understand that the Building Dept. will conduct their standard number of building inspections per day so that proper building inspections will be made. --," CM-29-244 February 3, 1975 (Ordinance re Uniform Plumbing Code) Cm Futch felt the proper approach would be to direct the City Manager to take the necessary steps to insure that the amount of work and the competence for the load is consistent. ~. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE ORDINANCE WAS INTRODUCED WITH WAIVING OF THE FIRST READING, AND A PUBLIC HEARING SET FOR FEBRUARY l8th. WEEKLY CITY MANAGER STATUS REPORT Mr. Parness stated that the City is cooperating with the county in the compilation of a series of projects they are going to submit, on behalf of both the City and county, under the Federal Aid Urban Designation - projects the federal government will grant up to 90% of the funding for street work. The list amounts to about $4 million of street work taken from the list approved by the Council for improve- ment needs. The Zone 7 turnout the City has installed for the water line that will service the junior college has an excessive amount of pressure and it may be necessary to install pressure reducers. A new building has been installed at the Corporation Yard and the Park and Tree Department is very happy to have a place to park a few trucks. The new employees under Title VI, just approved this evening, have been at work for one week. There are II new employees in the public works area, a woman has been hired for the Park and Tree Department, and there is also a woman working for the Police Department and one in the City Clerk's office. The good weather has allowed the City to take care of street patching and we are ahead of the normal schedule for this work. "Bike Only" signs are being painted in the bike paths around town. Benches have been delivered for use at the Springtown lake and if they are not already installed they soon will be. The Noise Committee is in the process of taking sound readings around Livermore and they have found that the noises tabulated in and around Holmes Street have been excessive compared to those found at the air- port and I-580 areas. The studies have been quite revealing and the Committee hopes to have something for the Council in about two months. The computer runs for our recent census have been received and it is felt that they will be of value in the future for comparing future information. At the last minute the City was asked to submit an application for funds for programs that might qualify under the Economic Development Act and the City has complied with this request. Only $l25 million is to be allocated nationally but it is the hope that Alameda County will receive a portion of the money and that the valley will receive some of this money. projects are limited to $300,000 in worth and are to be regulated by 75% for labor costs and 25% for materials. '''''--- We are still waiting for the new Police Department vehicles. We will be receiving smaller cars and the Council will be hearing recommenda- tions for the City to go to medium compact vehicles for pOlice use. We have received the final accounting certification for the Cross- winds Restaurant and the bill has been sent to them in accordance with Council direction. The amount due as of January lO, 1975, was CM-29-245 February 3, 1975 (Weekly Status Report) $9,99l.00 which is just slightly higher than what the City assumed was due, and with the added interest and payments due to the City the amount comes to $10,630. There have been 8l Company inspections done by the Fire Department during the month of January. This is a program whereby the entire Fire Department will go out, fully manned, to do retail, commercial, or industrial inspection. He noted that over the past calendar year there were l02 grass fires and no fire losses which is a direct re- sult of the weed abatement program. ; -..-./ ADJOURNMENT Mayor Pritchard adjourned the meeting at ll:05 p.m. to an executive session to discuss a personnel matter and legal matters, and in memory of Mr. Eldred Chance, and as a prerogative of the Mayor would order that the flags of the City be flown at half-mast tomorrow, Tuesday and again Wednesday until after the memorial services for Mr. Chance. ~q~4 ~ Ii / ~.~~ APPROVE ATTEST City Clerk Livermore, California Regular Meeting of February 10, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on February 10, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 So. Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:l0 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard presiding. ROLL CALL Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Tirsell and Mayor Pritchard Absent: em Futch (Excused Absence) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Prior to the Pledge of Allegiance, Gib Marguth, Chairman of the Bi- centennial Committee and Ralph Condit presented the Bicentennial Bennington flag along with brief comments concerning the flag's history. The Bennington flag was the first flag ever flown on land in this country during a war - August 1777. Mr. Condit mentioned that Governor Regan had suggested using the flag dur- ing the bicentennial celebration, and that the display of the flag would be a positive symbol of patriotism. Gib Marguth introduced Boy Scout Troup 939, the oldest Boy Scout troup in the Bay Area - 50 years, who led the Councilmembers and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. -.-'" CM-29-246 February lO, 1975 (Flag Presentation) The Boy Scouts presented the flag to the Conuncil and it was noted that the flag can be purchased at local banks. ~ In conjunction with the presentation of the flag, Bill Owens gave a slide presentation of historical buildings and sites, and he commented that two sets of slides will be at the library - one for viewing by the public and the other for storage. MINUTES - 1/27/75 P. 215, third paragraph from bottom, second line should read: public interest and particularly to the Hospital members..... P. 2l5, Item 3) should read: 3) should there be a single central..... P. 2l5, last paragraph beginning line 5 should read: with 330,000 people and would be double what we expect to have based on valley general plans. He stated that it is his understanding that Valley Memorial could add l50 beds at the present site......etc....... P. 2l6, l3th line should read: population projections are. If it is desirable to have another centralized location.....etc..... P. 22l, last paragraph re water pressure, should read: Cm Miller questioned what the pressure was at his house. (remainder omitted) ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR JANUARY 27, 1975, WERE APPROVED AS CORRECTED. OPEN FORUM (Letter from County Grand Jury re R.R. Investigation) Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, Secretary of the American Taxpayers Union, read a letter sent to the ATU from the Alameda County Grand Jury concerning the investigation of the railroad consolidation pro- ject which indicated that there is no evidence of wilful or corrupt misconduct on the part of any person or the governing body of the City of Livermore and that all procedures for property condemnation and formation of the assessment district have been followed, legally. It is felt that the City of Livermore failed to keep citizens fully aware of plans for the track consolidation which may have resulted in citizen distrust and suspicion. (No. Livermore Ave. Traffic & Smog) Mr. Tull read a newspaper article which was six years old concerning the valley smog problem and noted that he has not had a response as to what the City intends to do about the smog problem related to increased traffic on North Livermore Avenue when it is again open for thru traffic. l Cm Miller stated that he does not know how Mr. Tull has come to the conclusion that there will be 35,000 trips made on No. Livermore Avenue when it is open and that it is the number of cars in the valley which creates the smog. It really does not matter which street the cars use because the overall contribution to smog would be the same. The key to controlling smog in the valley would be to reduce the number of trips and cars that make the trips and in- creased population in the valley means an increase in the number of cars. CM-29-247 February lO, 1975 (Smog - No. Livermore Traffic) Mr. Lee responded to the estimated 35,000 trips for No. Livermore Avenue by saying that he assumes Mr. Tull is referring to an MTC projection of traffic on No. Livermore Avenue and when they show a certain projection for this street they are taking all of the streets on both sides of it whereby it is considered a corridor, and projections are made for a corrider - not just No. Livermore Ave. Mr. Lee indicated that there probably is more smog while the under- pass construction is underway because of all the detours cars are having to make than there will be at its completion. J em Miller stated that he would like to make the point that there were a very large number of adverse smog days last year (93-98) and although emission levels have come down, per car, in the last 10 years because of auto emission control devices, the increased number of cars in the valley has made the total amount of emissions go up but not as much as the emission controls have come down. (Unemployment Problems) patricia Eden, 644 Meadowlark, stated that she has recently become unemployed and knows of others who are faced with the same situation and without means of getting to the Unemployment Office which is located in Hayward and wondered what could be done. Mayor Pritchard stated that this same problem was raised last year when there was a severe gasoline situation and that the City had asked that someone from the Unemployment Office come to Livermore once a week so that everyone out of work in Livermore would not have to drive to Hayward every week. Mr. Parness stated that as he recalls special arrangements were made so that those out of work would not have to report every week but to his knowledge there was no representative coming to Livermore. Cm Miller suggested that this matter be pursued, as it was last year, to get someone to come to Livermore and that the Unemployment Office, Senator Holmdahl, and Carlos Bee's office be contacted and asked to help with this problem. Cm Turner stated that in many cases the woman is the head of the household, is unemployed and does not have transportation and also does not have money to hire a babysitter while going out of town for weekly benefits. These hardships should be mentioned when contacting people about helping Livermore. It was noted that the Council would request that there be letters and telephone calls made to those mentioned. Cm Turner suggested that perhaps the press would be willing to urge the public to write letters or contact our representatives and to obtain addresses of these people from City Hall. CONSENT CALENDAR Bids - Grazing Lease Bids were received for lease of airport area property for use as ) grazing land but the City Manager commented tha t the City has been --/ asked to consider allowing use of a portion of the property as a mechanical park and requested that the item be oostponed for a week. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE MATTER WAS CONTINUED FOR ONE WEEK. CM-29-248 u c February lO, 1975 Gen. Plan Progress Report No.3 The third progress report for the Livermore General Plan program was submitted by Grunwald Crawford Associates and was noted for filing. Report re Intel Toxic Discharges Mr. Lee reported on the toxic effluent being discharged from Intel at the last meeting and a fOllow-up report was submitted with respect to monitoring of this problem. Resolution Approving Change Orders The City Council adopted a resolution approving change orders for the 1973-74 Capital Improvement Project - Phase I. RESOLUTION NO. 30-75 A RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGE ORDERS The following resolution was also adopted concerning notice of completion: RESOLUTION NO. 3l-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO RECORD NOTICE OF COMPLETION RE 1973-74 CAPITAL IMPROVE- MENT PROJECT - PHASE I. Report re Request for Exemption of Levy re County Fire Protection The City Manager reported that in order to obtain a mandatory exemp- tion from any tax for the cost of rural fire services to unincor- porated areas, a resolution requesting exemption must be transmitted to the Board of Supervisors prior to March 1 and he recommended that the Council adopt such resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 32 75 A RESOLUTION DECLARING EXEMPTION FROM LEVY OF TAXES FOR FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES. Res. Requesting Assessed Valuation Est. Upon application to the County for an estimate of local assessed valuation, the county must provide an estimate for our City by May l5 and it is recommended that a resolution requesting this information be adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 33-75 A RESOLUTION REQUESTING ESTIMATION OF LOCAL ASSESSED VALUE. CM-29-249 February lO, 1975 Minutes The following minutes were submitted and noted for filing: Housing Authority - November 19 and January 7 Board of Appeals - January 30 \~ Payroll & Claims There were 77 claims in the amount of $57,856.74, dated January 3l, 1975, approved by the City Manager. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF The City Attorney requested that there be an executive session after the meeting to discuss legal matters. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL (Removal of Parked Car) Cm Turner stated that there has been a car parked on Lillian Street which was tagged a few days ago and wondered how long a car can remain on a street after it is tagged before someone hauls it away. Mr. Parness indicated that the car could be removed at any time after it is tagged and if he is given the address where it is parked he will see that something is done. (City Boundary Line) Cm Turner stated that some time back future boundaries of the City were established and asked if the Lone Star area would be in the Pleasanton area. Someone has asked if this area could be within Livermore's boundary bedcause this might be advantageous to our tax base. Mr. Musso indicated that he would look at the map and report back to the Council on this item. (Zone 7 Rate Increase Staff Analysis) Cm Miller stated that he asked that the staff analyze the Zone 7 water rate increases to determine l) whether or not the charges and costs are reasonable and what the assignment of those costs and charges for the paYment of Project II were; and 2) should there be a larger water connection fee? \ i .~ Mr. Parness indicated that a report which includes this information has been submitted to the Council but he would be happy to extract the information and present the analysis to the Council. Cm Miller stated that people have indicated to him that the water connection fee may not be high enough and therefore the water users are being asked to subsidize Project II. CM-29-250 February lO, 1975 L/ (Health Care) Cm Mi~ler stated that Cm Tirsell has written the Pleasanton City Counc1l about the need for general practice physicians in the valley and about the Valley Memorial Hospital problem and apparent- ly Cm Kinney did not understand that two separate issues were men- tioned and suggested that the next time someone meets with him it should be pointed out that the City Council was really discussing two different things and that the Council did not mean tha~ VMH '4.:t },-.,'o more docto~s <:>n the staff....d- ~ "ff-er~ 'If ~-6I<~'~c~. ~ ~, COMMUNICATION FROM SENATOR TUNNEY RE INDIRECT SOURCE REG. Senator Tunney wrote that he and Senator Cranston had joined in the support of postponement of Indirect Source regulations until June 30, 1975, so that hearings may be held on the economic and social effects of the regulations prior to implementation. Cm Miller suggested that the staff be directed to write a letter to both Senators Cranston and Tunney aSking that they support no more delays or postponements of the Indirect Source regulations and that, in fact, they use their offices with EPA to include residential and general plan amendments as well as major zonings to be subject to Indirect Source regulations. The Council concurred. COMMUNICATION RE BD. OF SUPERVISORS NIGHT MEETINGS Mayor Pritchard stated that in response to requests for nightly meetings of the Board of Supervisors, they have written and indi- cated that night meetings will be held the first Tuesday in the months of April, May and June, at 7:00 p.m. COMMUNICATION FROM S.P. RE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT Southern Pacific Industrial Development Company has written to the Council to inform them that because of the present economic situation it has been necessary to postpone several projects and that the Livermore area is included in the list of projects to be deferred. They emphasized that this is a postponement and not abandon- ment. COMMUNICATION RE RESIGNA- TION OF COMMIS. LINDGREN A letter of resignation was received from Robert C. Lindgren Jr., from the Livermore City Planning Commission, effective March 1, 1975, due to change in job and extensive traveling. l Cm Tirsell suggested that with respect to filling the vacancy anyone interested who has not filled in an application should do so and will be interviewed; those interviewed last summer could notify the City Clerk that they would like to again be considered. Mayor Pritchard felt the list from previous applicant interviews would be sufficient and that there were a number of very good people on the list. Cm Tirsell and Miller felt that perhaps there are people with different circumstances at this time who might be interested and should be allowed interviews, and Cm Miller added that he CM-29-25l February lO, 1975 (P. C. Vacancy) would have to agree with the Mayor in that sometimes interviews do not make a difference but would still like to give people the oppor- tunity and would suggest that there be a February 24, 5:00 p.m. deadline for anyone interested in submitting an application or reconsideration of anyone who has already been intereviewed; SO MOVED BY CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. , \~ COMMUNICATION RE SB 275 A letter was received from the Lawndale School District concerning the Collective Bargaining Bill SB 275 and encouraging the City to oppose the bill which would give public employees far-reaching bargaining power. No action was taken. COMMUNICATION RE CON- SOLIDATION OF COURTS The City Council received a report concerning the consolidation of the Livermore Municipal Court and the Pleasanton Justice Court to form the Livermore-Pleasanton Judicial District. Cm Miller noted that if the courts are going to be consolidated on a temporary basis there is also going to be a temporary increase in the parking demand at the court and he regularly receives complaints from First Street merchants who worry about the court taking up cus- tomer parking. : If the demand is going to increase perhaps the City should renegotiate the amount of money the county should pay for their share of parking facilities. Mr. Parness indicated that the City would observe the amount of park- ing taken by people using the court. COMMUNICATION FROM PUC RE RATE INCREASED - FRAN- CISCAN LINE & COMMUTE SERVICE The PUC has written to the Council about appeals from the Franciscan Line and Commute Service, Inc. for transportation rate increases - approximately 29%, as a matter of information. REPORT RE CENTENNIAL PARK TREE RELOCATION The Beautification Committee has requested that the City relocate the tree located in Centennial park so as not to obstruct the view of the totem pole and a staff report was requested concerning this item. Dan Freitas, Superintendent of the Park & Trees Department, reported that the purchase value of the tree is over $lOO and if it is re- located its chance for survival is about 65% and that no commitment was made by his department to relocate the tree. Mayor Pritchard stated that two letters urging that the City leave the tree in its present location have been received, and members of the Beautification Committee are asking that it be moved. It would appear that everyone will not be satisfied by its removal and would suggest that it remain in its present location. \ ! J Cm Tirsell commented that the Indians lived in great harmony among the trees and would assume that a totem pole would too. No further action was taken on this item. CM-29-252 February lO, 1975 REPORT RE FIRST STREET WIDTH LINE /" G Mr. Lee reported that several months ago the relocation of First Street was discussed by the Council and it was agreed that the relocation of First Street would be pursued but the existing First Street would be protected. Mr. Lee stated that he would assume that the reason for this would be in the event relocation does not occur for some reason the Council would still have the option and ability to widen First Street. Mr. ,Kamp proposes to relocate his future store on First Street opposite Junction Avenue and the protection of the existing First Street widening is causing a design problem for Mr. Kamp. The development agreement has been prepared with the provision that Mr. Kamp dedicate the additional width, in the future, in case it is needed and that he bond for the improvements to do so. In the event the relocation of First Street is abandoned, and existing First Street is widened, Mr. Kamp would lose his parking and would have substantial public works costs. Mr. Kamp is being required to dedicate two additional feet on the south line of his property adjacent to the future relocated First St. and to agree to install curb, gutter and sidesalks and street paving to conform to the future relocated First Street. In view of the relocation plans for First Street, Mr. Kamp is requesting that the City Council eliminate the widening requirements for the existing First Street. He has agreed to dedicate the right- of-way width south of his property and public works improvements at such time as he wishes access on the relocated First Street or expands his building and in any event not later than five years from the date of the agreement. He is also agreeable to improving the existing First Street improvements and to curve the street where it presently protrudes into the street. Mr. Lee indicated that the City definately does intend to pro- ceed with the realignment for First Street, the state will pay for 80% of the cost and it is a state highway and for this reason he feels it will be high on the state priority list. Cm Miller stated that several months ago the Council made a ruling that it would keep the options open as to what would happen with First Street and this would be to impose conditions on the development of the property. Mr. Kamp does not like the conditions and is appealing the conditions. Mr. Lee commented that the City would not require Mr. Kamp to pay for improvements for the realigned First Street, right now, but would require that he straighten out the corner, which comes to a point into the street, and make improvements on the existing curb, gutters and sidewalks, and Mr. Kamp would develop his parking lot as indicated on his plan. He would provide the City with a bond to guarantee that the curb, gutters and sidewalks would be developed in the future if the City widens the present First Street. The City is requiring a bond for both the front and back improvements. Cm Tirsell stated that she really can't be as optimistic as Mr. Lee because it has taken years to get the state to cooper- ate in getting First Street straightened in the area of First Street and North Livermore Avenue and, in fact, it is still ( not complete. While the realignment is a good planning move i it does not mean that it will become a reality and Cm Miller ~ indicated that the state has not given their approval to move the highway over where the tracks are located south of First St. CM-29-253 February lO, 1975 (First St. Width Line) Mr. Lee commented that when the City was planning the railroad relocation project, in 1969, the state committed $500,000 to re- locate First Street to the railroad track area and to participate in the overpass. They did consider it and agreed to it once before. Cm Miller stated that he realizes the property owners and merchants on First Street are concerned about what will happen and that there are uncertainties involved but the Council is also uncertain as to what is going to happen and the property owners will have to take this into account and develop accordingly. ~ Mr. Parness stated that approximately $l70,000 worth of property is presently being acquired just to accommodate the realigned First Street overpass and it would seem that there already has been a commitment and the project is already down the road. Randy Schlientz, ~~i~~~K~ stated that Mr. Kamp is willing to take care of the public works improvements for the exist~ ing First Street and is also required to put in the improvements for the future relocated First Street. The major concerns are: l) the expense for existing improvements and the parking lot and 2) the effects of First Street widening to these items if the realignment is not possible. If First Street is widened the City will require that the improvements are removed and this land dedicated to the City. It is felt that the requirements are not reasonable because the City has made a commitment to realign First Street. Mr. Kamp also has made commitments concerning this property and he has been placed in a very difficult situation. There was some discussion stated that dedication of front and back but ~. Cm Miller stated if required for the nor will be expected for concerning the agreement and Cm Tirsell right-of-way would be required for both . ,~~~-~~-~.. treet is widened improvements will be h and if realignment takes place improvements the south and that these are alternatives. Mr. Schlientz stated that Mr. Kamp has been forced to relocate and has gone through the preliminaries involved for using this particular parcel and would urge the Council to take a stand as to whether First Street will be widened or relocated. Cm Miller stated that he feels it is necessary to see that all bases are covered and that the City is protected and does not like the con- cept that when the Council tries to protect the public interest by making sure all bases are covered, that it is attacked because of it. He would agree that this may cause a hardship for Mr. Kamp and the Council will do what they can. Mr. Schlientz indicated that he did not mean to be attacking the Council but it is difficult to have requirements imposed for all of the options. Cm Tirsell asked if Mr. Schlientz and Mr. Kamp were aware of these potential problems all along and Mr. Schlientz indicated that they were aware of the plans but did not realize they would be required to dedicate and improve on both frontages. The reason they have a 38 ft. setback is because of the possibility that First Street might be widened. Cm Miller stated that in any case the applicant will be required to put in two curbs, gutters, and sidewalks, and illustrated this point on the blackboard. Mr. Kamp must take care of the public works improvements on the present First Street and if realignment does occur - which it probably will - improvements will have to be made south of his property. If we don't require both, they may have to be done at the expense of the taxpayers. ..J CM-29-254 February lO, 1975 ( U (First Street Width Line) Mr. Kamp stated that according to the Planning Department they weren't sure how wide First Street would be made if the realign- ment does not take place. It could be as much as 38 ft. or it could be less and this is the reason they have allowed a 38 ft. setback. He stated that the first time he ever heard of the requirement for improvements to the rear of the property was at the time he obtained papers for proceeding with the site plan. He felt it unfair to require that he dedicate l7 ft. on both the north and the south side. Cm Miller stated that this would be unfair and a point the Council would agree with; however the point which has been made is that the north side was designed and set back to accommodate for the possible widening of First Street and it would seem that Mr. Kamp has taken this possibility into consideration. Mr. Kamp stated that the City is going forward with plans for relocating First Street and yet the City is asking that he make improvements for First Street that is to be abandoned - just in case. Cm Miller stated that what the Council is aSking is that Mr. Kamp agree to do the public works improvements for either the north or the south side but not both and would assume that this would be satisfactory and would remove a portion of the problems for Mr. Kamp and Mr. Schlientz indicated that this certainly was one of the concerns. Mr. Schlientz pointed out that the other factor of concern is that Mr. Kamp is making an investment on First Street and, assuming First Street is not realigned, he is making an investment in the parking lot and if the street is later widened it will mean that all the money which has been put into paving, etc., will be lost. Mr. Schlientz suggested that perhaps an arrangement could agreed upon whereby Mr. Kamp could be given credit for public works improvements made now, towards future improvements, in the event First Street is widened, and the Council commented that if First Street improvements are requir- ed Mr. Kamp will save money on the south side improvements by not having to develop on the south side. Mayor Pritchard stated that he would like any debate to come to a close and would like to summarize what has been said in the interest of moving Council business. The Council is: l) Keeping its option open concerning the realign- ment of First Street; 2) Mr. Kamp will not be required to pay for public works improvements on both the north and south side; and 3) the Council has every intention of, and is proceeding with, realigning First Street. ( \ "'--~ Mr. Regan, realtor, stated that when he and Mr. Kamp looked for a site for his business all the factors were considered and there were many discussions with the staff and he would like to mention that there was indication from the staff that if the track reloca- tion project went through the Council would probably have a more lenient attitude as to First Street improvements and also that it would be practically a foregone conclusion that First Street would be realigned. They proceeded with the assumption that funds for the improvement of the present First Street would come from some other source. Cm Miller stated it is true the staff has been urging the Council not to be too strong about conditions on existing First Street. It was the Council, not the staff, that insisted the City be fully protected; therefore the position of the staff, as men- tioned was correct and there is no inconsistency there. CM-29-255 February lO, 1975 (First St. width Line) Cm Miller added that for the past 20 years it has been the policy of the Council to require that that at the time of development the public works improvements must be put in, and it seems that everyone involved with any type of development would know this. Mr. Parness noted that it has always been a policy that a property owner would be required to dedicate and improve the usual amount of widening and the balance or excess would be satisfied by the City and perhaps this can be cranked into the agreement formulation. Mr. Kamp asked if this would mean that a portion of the widening would be borne by the City and Mr. Parness indicated that this is correct. Mr. Kamp stated that he is being pressed with deadlines because of the railroad relocation project and it is very difficult to deal with three locations and trying to put everything into one location and noted that he really needs to know a timetable that he can work from. J Mayor Pritchard stated that it is the City's intention to proceed as fast as possible with the railroad rightt-of-way for realignment of First Street and is proceeding with land acquisition for this purpose. There was no further discussion concerning this item. RECESS After a brief recess the Council meeting resumed with the same Councilmernbers present. REPORT RE NEED FOR ENGINEERING MANPOWER The City Manager reported that the City's temporary engineer was dividing time between the Water Reclamation Pland project and the Grade Separation project and with the increased construction activity it was necessary to assign one of our permanent staff engineers to the Grade Separation project. This has depleted the engineering staff of permanent engineers and it is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing and amendment to the Engineering Department budget to provide for temporary emplOYment of an assistant Civil Engineer for a term not to exceed six months. Mr. Parness added that during the next budget session he would like consideration to be given towards possible permanent employ- ment of another person for this department. CM TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION, SECONDED BY CM PRITCHARD FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES. Cm Miller felt the Engineering Department could get by with the present manpower until budget time and that the City should not commit itself to hiring another employee either on a temporary or permanent basis. Cm Turner commented that the Engineering Department has asked for another employee based on the number of engineers hired by other cities and Cm Turner felt the justification should be based on the work load and not what other cities are doing. Also, there was nothing in the report from Mr. Lee to indicate that there is a need for a temporary staff member and also would rather wait to consider staff addition at budget time. I -..-/ Cm Tirsell stated that the Council wanted someone to be on the Railroad Relocation project at all times and presently the engineer is dividing his time between this and the reclamation plant. CM-29-256 c February lO, 1975 (Request for Additional Employee - Engineering) Mayor Pritchard stated that this is not correct - a man has been assigned to the railroad relocation project full time. THE MOTION FAILED 3-l (Cm Turner, Miller and Chair dissenting). REPORT RE POLICE RADIO EQUIPMENT LEASE - MOTOROLA The City Manager reported that one of the five year radio leases with Motorola for police radio equipment has just expired and it is recommended that the lease be renewed with new equipment and additional communication provided. Motorola has submitted a list- ing of the equipment and prices and the Chief of Police has submitted a statement concerning description of the equipment. The replace- ment is limited to lO mobile radios and 4 Handie-Talkies. The balance of the equipment was provided for in this year's budget. With all of the new equipment and based upon a 7 year lease term the monthly rate would increase from $750.50 to $454.93 ( $84.43 more). Cm Turner mentioned that in the letter to Chief Lindgren from Motorola he noticed they provide for an add on rate of 8.2% which is equivalent to a l5% annual percentage rate or simple interest and most leases are computed on a simple interest basis and unless they have misquoted, this amount seems excessive. Mr. Parness stated that the City is now having to be assessed for these leases and all other forms of taxes are included within the price. Cm Turner and Miller noted that it is illegal to make a quotation and not include the annual percentage rate. CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT EXECUTION OF THE LEASE, SUBJECT TO CLARIFICATION OF THE INTEREST RATES, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 34-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF LEASE FOR LIVERMORE POLICE DEPARTMENT (Motorola Communications and Electronics, Inc.) REPORT RE PUBLIC PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT FUNDS STATUS The City Manager reported that the Business License Tax on construc- tion of residential construction levied for park development purposes shows a total of $llO,626.28, on hand. No appropriations have been budgeted against this tax in the 1974-75 budget and it is obvious that the Council shall appropriate this sum for park development purposes. The Director of Finance has indicated that in his opinion the expenditures may take place in any area the Council wishes, in- Cluding the areas in which the taxes were collected. This particu- lar tax was levied for the common benefit of park development pur- poses and is distinguished from fees, service chages and assessments which are levied for specific benefits against particular persons \,~, or property. LARPD has requested the transmission of $32,382 to pay the low bid cost for the improvement of Vista Meadows park in the Los Altos tract and the request is being reviewed by our City Attor- ney as to the appropriate method of expenditure, but the City Attor- ney has indicated that such can probably be accomplished by means of a simple contract between the City and LARPD for transfer of the funds. At present, there is no way the City can legally author- ize transfer of the funds. The staff will be reporting back to the Council. CM-29-257 February 10, 1975 (Property Improvement Funds) Cm Miller noted that at the time the Council adopted the ordinance it was intended that the monies raised in a certain subdivision would be spent in that subdivision or on properties directly adjacent to the subdivision so that the people who paid for park development would benefit from it. ~~ Mr. Parness indicated that this is a policy of the Council but that ~ this is not mandated and it might be advisable to leave this option open as there may be other means of capital expenditure to satisfy the park improvement needs, such as has been the case with storm drain fees. Cm Miller felt that at this point it would be useful for the records to show that the intent of the Council is that the money will be spent on the area in which it was raised. PUBLIC HEARING SET RE PLANNING UNIT #18 ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR PLANNING UNIT NO. 18 WAS SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 3. Planning Units 8 and 9 will also be discussed for possible action. REPORT RE INDUSTRIAL INQUIRIES Cm Turner stated that in reviewing the industiral inquiries it appears that the departments of the City are not coordinating their responses and that if something comes to the Planning Dept. and is referred to Public Works, the Planning Department should be notified as to what action was taken or what happened to the inquiry. He also added that from the report it would appear that the City is not initiating follow-up on an inquiry and would suggest that industrial applicants be pursued. Cm Turner stated that he would like the Council to be informed as to the final action on an inquiry. The Council agreed that the City should show some interest in iIl:dU. . stri~l inquJ.rie.s s. wi thout b~coming oV~l:'bearin.. g. .2)'-'-.' c~,..., ~,,:-c IU-"t...u..~aJ:c~~~/Y~ ~Cli~-n./-Q, ctft/L- --'-'t^\'o,~l'-C" ~ GENERAL PLAN -~G ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS Mayor Pritchard commented that he neglected to mention during Matters Initiated by the Council, that during discussions with the staff the planning consultant for the General Plan has sug- gested that there be adoption of amendments to the zoning ordinance and would suggest that the proposed ordinance regarding General Plan amendments be referred to the Planning Commission for comment. ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE MATTER WAS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. WEEKLY STATUS REPORT Mr. Parness reported that the lift station at the treatment plant ~ has been completed and therefore all of the public utility features to service the junior college are in place and operational. The Zone 7 line in the airport vicinity is in place and is connected. The western section of the airport is not connected, as yet, because we have to wait for pressure reducing facilities but it is anticipated that the line will be connected throughout within two to three weeks. CM-29-258 February 10, 1975 (Weekly Status Report) v The Intel sewage discharge is under control and the City is satisfied that they are doing everything they can to correct discharge of toxic material. The deposit of fluorides is down to 20 ppm which means something in the area of .5 ppm in our effluent. Mr. Parness has just been informed, today, that terms have been agreed upon by the property owners concerning the corner of No. Livermore Avenue and First Street and the deeds are about to be submitted to escrow. A letter is being sent to Mr. Parness' office concerning the value of the settlement which was very slightly above the state's appraisal, which they negotiated on our behalf. The Council has asked about the prospects of additional BART stops along Stanley Boulevard in the vicinity of the hospital and the BART staff has indicated that they are willing to do this but wants the City to tell them where a stop can be placed for westbound travel. Mr. Parness stated that if one observes this area there just is no place for a stop for the westbound traffic. They presently stop at Stanley and Murrieta, west- bound, and at Stanley and Murrieta eastbound and they can stop at the hospital for eastbound routes and this at least would allow for travel from the west end of the valley to the hospital and for them to get back they would have to go to the Stanley stop. Cm Miller commented that where Stanley Boulevard makes an S curve bv the hospital in the area of liS" Street there is some room on the north side and maybe a stop could be provided in that area without being in the lane of traffic. It was mentioned that it would be difficult for people to cross to that side of the street because of the traffic problem there and also this is where the extension of Railroad Avenue will connect with Stanley Boulevard. There was also mention of the fact that the City would not want the BART bus to interfere with the business Pioneer is doing. ADJOURN There being no further business, Mayor Pritchard adjourned the meeting at lO:30 p.m. to an executive session to discuss legal matters as requested by t City Attorney. ATTEST APPROVE CM-29-259 Regular Meeting of February 18, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on February 18, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard presiding. ROLL CALL J Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Futch, Tirsell and Mayor Pritchard Absent: None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Pritchard introduced Boy Scout Troop 932, attending the Council meeting in the interest of earning badges, and the Mayor asked Tom Wainwright, member of the Troop, to lead the Pledge of Allegiance. MINUTES February 3, 1975 p. 243 - last paragraph, top line should read: Mr. Parness com- mented that the City has been assured by Intel...etc.. p. 232 - Walter Bower should be Walter Bauer p. 235 - last paragraph, line three should read: ......He felt perhaps we are being told something about how industrial parks..etc.. January 30, 1975 p. 229 - second paragraph, last line should read: any other city in Alameda County has per unit of population. ON MOTION OF CM FUTCH, SECONDED BY CM MILLRER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETINGS OF JANUARY 30, 1975, AND FEBRUARY 3, 1975, WERE APPROVED, AS CORRECTED. SPECIAL ITEM (School Tax Election) Clarence Hoenig, representative of the School District's School Building Election Committee spoke to the Council with respect to the School Building Tax Election for a lease-purchase plan and a revenue limit plan and asked that the Livermore City Council endorse the forthcoming measure. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE COUNCIL ENDORSED THE TWO MEASURES ON THE BALLOT. It was noted that the School District has printed information indicating exactly where the dollars will go and for what pur- poses and areas and that the measure can pass by a simple major- ity vote of the community. J Contributions to support the measures can be made by contacting Pat Crawford, 4222 Colgate Way, and checks should be made payable to the School Building Election Committee. CM-29-260 February 18, 1975 OPEN FORUM (Complaint re Police Officers & Conduct) I ~) Kay Parra, 819 Brennan Way, stated that she has written to the Police Department concerning conduct of police officers during civil disruptions at her residence and that the Chief of Police has responded by indicating that incidents Mrs. Parra is complaining about have taken place some months in the past and there is not suf- ficient evidence available to substantiate her complaints. Mrs. Parra stated that there have been verbal discussions between Mayor Pritchard, the Chief of Police and her since the incident and resents the fact that Chief Lindgren has indicated she waited eight months to do anything about the situation. She also felt it unfair that the officers involved were asked what happened and also other officers who were not involved were asked questions and yet the neighbors across the street who were witnesses were not questioned. In her opinion a complete investigation was not made. She stated that she has contacted Cm Futch and Cm Turner and has asked that they conduct a complete investigation. Cm Futch stated that he indicated to Mrs. Parra that he would be available to help with an investigation if the Council wishes to pursue the nature of the complaint. Cm Turner commented that he was not contacted and Mrs. Parra ex- plained that she has requested that he work with Cm Futch in seeing that a complete investigation is undertaken. He noted that he and Cm Miller have been appointed as a subcommittee to work with the Police Department to investigate citizen complaints and Mrs. Parra stated that she has no objection to Cm Miller's help with an investi- gation. CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE SUBCOMMITTEE MEET WITH MRS. PARRA AND CHIEF LINDGREN TO DISCUSS THIS ITEM AND THAT THE CITY MANAGER BE DIRECTED TO ARRANGE A MEETING WITHIN THE NEXT TWO WEEKS, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH, WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. (Field Investigations) Ron McNicol, reporter, stated that he had spoken to the Council in the past about the Police Department field investigations and still feels this is unconstitutional; however, it seems that there is little that can be done about it. He stated that after speaking with Chief Lindgren and the Council it appears that the field investigation is the best means of helping to eliminate problems. P.H. RE ADOPTION OF UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE - 1973 EDITION c Mr. Street, the Building Inspector, stated that the Uniform Plumbing Code has been in effect in Livermore for approximately 10 years and a public hearing is being held so that the code can be updated and that no changes have been made on a local basis but rather changes made by the publisher of the Uniform Plumbing Code. The only dif- ference in fees relates to the charge for the trailer park sewer lateral. THERE BEING NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY, ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. CM-29-26l February 18, 1975 (P.H. re Adoption of Uniform Plumbing Code 1973 Edition) Mr. Street commented that the fee for trailer park sewer inspections varies according to the size of the trailer park and if there are 150 spaces it would be a fee of $150 ($1 per space). He also mentioned that the City will now be able to inspect mobile homes to see if they are substandard with respect to plumbing and electrical wiring but other problems will have to be reported to the state and the City will continue to work through the state for the other problems. ..~ ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE ORDINANCE APPROVING THE UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE WAS ADOPTED, WITH THE SECOND READING WAIVED AND TITLE ONLY READ. ORDINANCE NO. 857 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 15, RELATING TO PLUMBING, OF THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 1959, BY THE ADOPTION OF THE UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE, 1973 EDITION AND AMENDMENTS THERETO. CONSENT CALENDAR Report re Budget Transfer The City Manager reported that in order to qualify for a $5,000 allocation from the California Airport Aid Program we are re- quired to deposit $5,000 of matching monies in the Special Aviation Fund (82). The deposit must be made before submittal of our yearly application (deadline March 1) and it is requested that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing transfer of funds. RESOLUTION NO. 35-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING TRANSFER OF FUNDS (Airport) Report re CETA Contract The City Manager reported that we have been notified that the E.E.A. program will terminate on February 1, 1975 and employees under the program will be transferred to CETA, Title II which is scheduled to terminate on June 30, 1975. It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing execution of the agreement with the County. RESOLUTION NO. 36-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREE- MENT ALAMEDA COUNTY: RE FUNDING UNDER CETA, TITLE II. Departmental Reports The following Departmental reports were submitted for Council information: ) J Airport Activity - January Building Inspection - January Planning/Zoning Activity - January Police Department r Janaury Mosquito Abatement - December 1974 CM-29-262 c c February 18, 1975 (Departmental Reports) Cm Futch commented that there was not a report concerning sewage and wondered why and Mr. Lee commented that the report is not ready at this time and the last report was submitted approximately two weeks ago. Mayor Pritchard asked about the monitoring of the Intel effluent and Mr. Lee reported that the City has been monitoring, continuously, and the plant is satisfying the requirements and it would appear that we are now in good shape. Payroll & Claims There were 72 claims in the amount of $592,658.32, and 287 payroll warrants in the amount of $87,448.01, for a total of $680,106.33, dated February 18, 1975, and approved by the Director of Finance. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (P . H. re PU # 12 ) The City Clerk reported that the Planning Commission has submitted a report on the 15th General Plan amendment and asked if the Council would like to set a public hearing this evening to help save time. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE PUBLIC HEARING RE PLANNING UNIT NO. 12 WAS SET FOR MARCH 10th. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL (Social Functions) Cm Turner stated that there have been social events for which there was no representation by the City Council because invitations have been received by the Council after the event has taken place. He stated that he has received a complaint from someone who was very upset because there was no Councilmember present at a certain func- tion and wondered if Mr. Parness' secretary could be responsible for a Council social calendar and to notify the Mayor or someone from the Council that an event is scheduled for a certain weekend so that invitations are not lost or overlooked. It was noted that the City Clerk would be responsible for notifying the Mayor of an event. (Request for Reports) Cm Turner stated that he would like to have another report on the bicycle licensing program, and also a report concerning the Wall Street lighting matter. CM-29-263 February 18, 1975 (East Ave. at Fourth Street) Cm Turner stated that at the end of East Avenue going home from the labs one must get into the left lane on East Avenue to go down Fourth Street and it has been suggested that the right lane also be allowed to go onto Fourth Street with the option to go towards town on South Livermore Avenue. The one lane access is causing cars to stack up in the left lane and there are many near acci- dents because of this problem. ~, ", ..~ Mr. Lee commented that this matter has been mentioned in the past and he will report back to the Council. (Departmental Reviews) Cm Miller stated that he would like the Council to review one City department a month and ask each department head what the department does, who his employees are, and what they do. This information would give the Council a feeling as to what the City staff does for it and also would be educational for the public because there are many things done that the citizens are not aware of. Cm Tirsell stated that she feels it would be difficult for the Council to read a bundle of information as to what each depart- ment's employees do and would rather visit each department and see what each person is doing. The Council agreed that they would like to visit each department and perhaps after the visits there could be suplemental written information submitted to the Council. It was also mentioned that the Council would be interested in meeting each of the City employ- ees and perhaps various departments could be invited to attend a Council meeting and the head could introduce his employees to the Council. THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO ARRANGE FOR SOME TYPE OF VISITATION TO THE DEPARTMENTS. (Adjusting Income for Police Department) Cm Futch stated that during negotiations with the Fire Department it was recognized that the Police Department, by previously negotiat- ing a three year contract, had placed themselves at a disadvantage as far as maintaining their income and would like a staff report on a fair and equitable means for adjusting the income for police personnel. Mr. Parness stated that the staff intends to bring something like this to the Council for review but the proposal is presently in the formative stages. (Prospective Industrial & Commercial Clients) Cm Futch suggested that perhaps when someone is interested in commercial or industrial property in Livermore the City Manager could be contacted and introduced to the propspective client as there may be additional information he could provide. -.-/ CM-29-264 February 18, 1975 (ABAG Meeting) Cm Tirsell reported on the February 5th ABAG meeting and plans for the March meeting at which time Livermore will be allowed time for a rebuttal on the Geldermann development proposal. (An additional l~ hrs. has also been requested by Geldermann) . u ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, CM TIRSELL WAS ALSO NOMINATED ALTERNATE ABAG DELEGATE FOR THE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 19TH. COMMUNICATION RE BEAUTIFICATION COM- MITTEE RESIGNATION A letter of resignation from the Beautification Committee was received from Wes Nelson. It was noted that Wes has been a very hard worker and the Council expressed its appreciation of the work he has done and regrets that he has decided to resign. The staff was asked to send a letter of thanks to Wes, SO MOVED BY MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT RE GRAZING LEASE - CITY PROPERTY The City has received bids for surplus land owned by the City for grazing purposes, as listed below. FIRM BID Vargas Brothers Ernest Basso Donald Mandeville John DePonte $14,560.00 13,075.00 10,155.60 9,000.00 During the time the City called for bids LARPD asked that a portion of the property be used for a "mechanical park" and a representative from LARPD will be giving an oral report on this proposal. Mr. Vargas has been leasing the property from the City and his attorney will also be addressing the Council on this item. c Hugh Walker, attorney representing the Vargas brothers, stated that the bid was submitted on or before January 31st at 4:00 p.m. and was notified at that time that his bid was accepted but was not for- mally approved by the City Council. Mr. Vargas has used the property for the past five years and it was his understanding that he could continue to lease the total acreage which is presently stocked with 88 head of livestock. For the rest of the season Mr. Vargas has no place to go with his cattle. He stated that he has not had the time to review the legalities involved but feels something can be worked out in the way of a shorter term lease during which time Mr. Vargas can find another grazing area, or at least to allow him to remain on the property through this bgrazing season which should last through Mayor June or possibly early July. Mr. Vargas was told that the only formality necessary would be for the Council to sign the original lease which Mr. Vargas would then have to sign and send back to the City with his rent for the first year. When he did not receive the papers he telephoned the City (February 14th) and was told that there is a problem. This was the first he knew of another proposal for the property or that he might not be able to lease the property. Jerry Ingledue, representing LARPD, stated that there is a need for a mechanical area to provide for motor bikes, model airplanes, model boats, etc. and they are requesting the use of 27 acres for this purpose. He stated it would take some time to develop and ready the property for this use and would be happy if Mr. Vargas could continue to use the remainder for grazing purposes. CM-29-265 February 18, 1975 (Report re Grazing Lease) Cm Futch asked if there is a potential problem with the proposal for a portion of the land used for a purpose that will create noise in the area of 88 decibels and Mr. Walker stated that he does not recall how intense 88 decibels are but there is a poten- tial problem of having livestock graze in the immediate vicinity where there is noise. Cm Turner asked the distance of the nearest residential unit and someone from the audience replied that it measures 1200 ft. from the nearest Greenville North home and about 1900 ft. from the near- est Springtown home. \J It should be noted that the property is adjacent to Raymond Road. There was discussion concerning the noise and the effect to the neighboring homes and Cm Turner stated that he feels there would be disruption to the homeowners to allow noisy weekend planes and motorcycles and Mayor Pritchard pointed out that not only would there be noise generated in this area by motorcycles but also there would be noise of the motorcycles going through the residen- tial areas on the way to the mechanical park. Mayor Pritchard stated that he feels the City has a moral obliga- tion when something has been put up for bid, pending Council approval. Lowell Bergman, of LARPD, stated that their intention is for the mechanical park to allow controlled use and a place for the bikes during the weekends, and it would be many years before all of the proposed activities could be accommodated. Cm Miller asked if the park would be used all day during weekends and all during the summer when kids are not in school and Mr. Bergman indicated that the area would be fenced and open during only certain times. Cm Tirsell wondered what generally happens to the cattle when the grazing season is over and Mr. Walker indicated that the cows are kept year around. Bill Older, Springtown resident, stated that he is just one of about 1,000 Springtown residents who would oppose the LARPD proposal for the mechanical park which they feel would be very disruptive because of the noise and the additional mini-bike traffic this would create. He suggested that if LARPD wants to provide a mechanical park that this be made available near the airport where there is already a high noise level and where youngsters will not have to be transported by parents. He noted that if people are hauling their small bikes to areas where they can ride, proximity should be no concern, and they may as well find a place to ride out by the old Altamont Road or Tassajara Road. He stated that he feels there will be further development in the Greenville area, in time, and does not want LARPD to permanently disfigure the area with development of a mechanical park and urged the Council to confirm the lease with Mr. Vargas for another five years. Mayor Pritchard stated that he would like to point out that he is sure LARPD has no intentions of casting aspersions on the Springtown residents by proposing a mechanical park and that if youngsters are not on public streets they do not need to have a drivers license to ride the motor bikes. ~ Cm Futch stated that he realizes there is a need for the type of park LARPD is proposing but a noise level of 88 decibels per motor bike across an open field will mean a noise level that he feels would exceed the recommended level for a residential neighborhood. CM-29-266 February 18, 1975 (Report re Grazing Lease) There are no trees or other barriers to help break the noise level and a change of this magnitude in a relatively quiet area would be very noticeable, and this would be the major reason he would not be in favor of the proposal for this particular location. ~/ CM FUTCH MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE LEASE BETWEEN THE CITY AND MR. VARGAS, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cm Miller stated that he will vote in favor of the motion but feels something should be said in favor of efforts by LARPD to provide a type of park needed and which would help eliminate complaints about kids using areas that shouldn't be used for this purpose on weekends. LARPD is trying to provide something like this away from the central core of Livermore and without spending excess taxpayer money and he feels they should be commended. They have asked about using property in the area of the airport and the City indicated that they do not want valuable industrial land to be used for this purpose and also because some of the areas would be unsafe for this use. Cm Tirsell stated that LARPD is one of the most innovative agencies in Livermore and make do with very little and are very flexible and wondered if some other alternative can be suggested since this proper- ty appears to be unsatisfactory for this use. She suggested that the City look around for property LARPD might be able to use because there really is a need to get the kids out in areas that are not disruptive to neighborhoods. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 37-75 A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID (Vargas Bros.) P. C. REPORT RE APP. FOR CUP - PEOPLE'S CHURCH The Planning Commission reported that the application of the People's Church for a Conditional Use Permit to allow construction and use of a church on a site located on the east side of Bluebell. The Planning Commission unanimously voted in favor of approving the application based on findings and subject to conditions mentioned in their report to the City Council. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE CUP APPLICATION WAS APPROVED, AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. RESOLUTION NO. 38-75 RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO PEOPLE'S CHURCH. REPORT RE AIRPORT MANAGE- MENT & GROSS RECEIPTS CERTIFICATION REQUEST l The City Manager reported on a meeting held between the Airport Advisory Committee, City staff, and fixed base operator and each of the sub-tenants of the airport to discuss airport management, its services and the method of reporting lessee's gross receipts. The current lease requires an amount equal to 1% of the gross receipts of all business operations and a certified accounting statement is required. The cost of the certification in some instances is CM-29-267 February 18, 1975 (Report re Airport Management & Gross Receipts Certification Request) excessively high and greater than the payment due. Historically it has been found that the lessee does not comply with this requirement and it is recommended that the City allow the filing of a federal and/or state tax statement by the lessee and sub-tenants which would show the business activities of the enterprise, accompanied by an accountant's statement that the tabulation represents a valid reporting of the subject business volumes. It is recommended that the City Council authorize preparation of a modification to the FBO lease conforming to this provision. I J Cm Miller suggested that perhaps a compromise to a request for a yearly CPA certification would be a requirement for a certification every five years. Mr. Parness stated that this could be a consideration but would rather allow the tax statements and approval by an accountant on a trial basis and then if the Council feels this is not suffici- ent another alternative may be instituted. Cm Futch stated that he would be willing to give this a try AND SO MOVED, SECONDED BY TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. David Madis, fixed base operator, stated that some of the sub- tenants made adverse statements against the City that were publicized and would like to state, for the record, that in his opinion those criticisms of the City of Livermore were "grossly unfair to the City" and did not reflect the past history and that the City was diligent in pursuing their public trust to the citizens of Livermore and that City officials were very fair and criticisms were overstated and did not reflect what was fairly and honestly derived at through negotiation with the City. REPORT RE WALL STREET PROPERTY PURCHASE The City Manager reported that owners of a small parcel of property on Wall Street, adjacent to Pioneer Memorial Park, have offered to sell this holding to the City and this item was discussed during a joint meeting with the LARPD Board. The owners have requested a formal response from the City and due to financial limitations and other priorities it is recommended that acquisition of this property be denied. Mayor Pritchard stated that, historically, he has always been in favor of acquiring more property for the City of Livermore and would not want to see more residential development take place on this property and it appears that this would add to the park; however, he was not present during the discussion with LARPD and was not able to hear the pros and cons. Cm Miller stated that the price is relatively high and LARPD would have a difficult time finding a use for it and this was some of the tenor of the discussion. CM MILLER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO SEND A LETTER TO THE PROPERTY OWNER REGRETFULLY DECLINING ACQUISITION, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. J DISCUSSION RE COUNCIL POLICY Cm Tirsell stated that there should be some change on Page 5 of the Council Policy with respect to election and duties because there is not an election every year. CM-29-268 February 18, 1975 (Discussion re Council Policy) The City Clerk suggested that the first paragraph read as it now stands with the following insert: In addition, the Council shall reorganize the second Monday in March in each non-election year. The Council concurred with this wording. L/ Cm Miller suggested simplified wording for Item 6 on Page 2: No later than the Wednesday preceding the Council meetings, deliver a copy of the Agenda and complete folder to each Council- member, the Mayor, the City Attorney, and to the library. The news media, which has on file in the office of the City Clerk a request therefor, may also obtain an Agenda folder at the City Clerk's office. Page 10 regarding Time Limit, Longer presentations should be in writing was changed to must be in writing and should be summarized in five minutes~ Page 13, Q. 1. second shall be prepared for by a majority vote of City Manager, ...etc. line (middle) should read: No ordinance presentation to the Council unless ordered the Council, two Council members or the (or requested by the Mayor was deleted). CM TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE CITY COUNCIL POLICY. AS CORRECTED, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 39-75 ADOPTION OF COUNCIL POLICY RE MEETINGS AND PROCEDURES INTRO. OF ORD RE INDUSTRIAL AREAS ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY A 3-2 VOTE, (Cm Pritchard and Turner dissenting) THE AMENDMENTS OF ZONING ORDINANCE 442, AS RELATED TO INDUSTRIAL AREAS, WAS INTRODUCED AND READ BY TITLE ONLY. Prior to the motion Cm Turner stated that this ordinance will be creating a zone for which development of this standard will never take place, according to representatives, and is for 75-80% of the 1-3 Zone. He stated that he feels it is a mistake to zone such where it will never be used. According to Mr. Musso the Planning Commission was not aware of the fact that it will not be developed when they made their recommendation. Last of all, the Industrial Committee of the City of Livermore was not con- sulted about this item and in his opinion they would have had good input. He suggested that this item be referred back to the Planning Commission based on the points he has mentioned. Cm Futch and Tirsell commented that they cannot believe the Planning Commission was not aware of all of this information and they did have a public hearing for receiving testimony and feels referral back to them is unnecessary. Cm Turner stated that this is what he has been told and Mr. Musso commented that the Industrial Committee was notified and they chose not to respond. l Mr. Musso explained that the Planning commission did not discuss the item in the context that S.P. owns most of the land and does not plan to develop and Cm Turner stated that in his opinion this is important information and the matter should be referred. Cm Tirsell stated that it is not true that only a certain limited amount of land will be zoned 1-3 and that all of the 1-3 has been used for these two parcels. Each parcel, as it is reviewed, is given a zoning and criteria has been established for 1-3 which this property meets and she happens to agree with the criteria. CM-29-269 February 18, 1975 (Introduction of Ordinance re Industrial Areas) Cm Tirsell stated that she also agrees with the criteria the Planning Commission set up for 1-2 which is near the freeway and not adjacent to residential. The criteria for I-I has been established because this will be used for property which abuts residential property and logical reasons have been used for estab- lishing the various zones. She stated that when Research Drive was reviewed the owner was not consulted as to what he would like to develop in that area but rather there was consideration as to what compatible uses would be for the existing area. J Discussion followed concerning this area as well as the various zones and Cm Miller stated it was his understanding when the three zones were being reviewed that they were to be used for heavy industrial purposes and now 1-3 has been transformed into Mr. Hutka's development which means that 1-3 is now to be used for small, non-heavy development, and he opposes this. He stated that he felt our industrial standards were adequate. His argument is that 1-3 should be used for the large parcels of land and the reason he felt the S.P. property should be zoned 1-3. INTRO. OF ORD. AMEND. REZONING CONCANNON & CORDOBA STREET ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY 4-1 VOTE (Cm Turner dissenting) THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REZONING THE COR- NER OF CONCANNON BOULEVARD AND CORDOBA STREET WAS INTRODUCED AND READ BY TITLE ONLY. REPORT RE LIVERMORE AIR POLLUTION STUDY SUPPLEMENT Cm Turner stated that even though the Air Pollution Study Report speaks to the whole valley there has not been a response on the report from Pleasanton, VCSD, or the County Board of Supervisors, to his knowledge and when Dr. Higgins spoke to the Council about the report he indicated that it would be possible to interpret the report as a no growth matter and would furnish the Council with an addendum to show that this is not true. Cm Turner added that the supplement to the Council is not really an addendum to the report, as such and Mr. Higgins has indicated that there are really no conclusions in the supplement. Cm Turner stated that he would disagree there are no conclusions in the report and in his opinion the conclusion is that further development in the valley should not be allowed. Cm Turner read portions of the report which indicate that the committee assumes air pollution is due to local sources and that at the end of the report it states that the committee does not espouse any view about growth or no growth which Cm Turner feels is in conflict with the con- clusions of the report. The report states that "without some action it does not appear that federal standards can be met unless all future growth is prohibited". Cm Turner stated that those who accept the report at face value are, in a sense, giving lip service to the points of promoting low cost housing, industrial and commercial development and a positive solution to the City and valley needs. He felt the effective way to deal with the report would be to take the facts and develop an economically feasible solution to our air quality deficiencies. The report offers only one possible solution - no growth and Cm Turner stated he feels we can do better than that and can comprehend the long range needs of the valley and residents and that the children may wish to live here during their adult years and would suggest that we undertake an ambitious " J CM-29-270 February 18, 1975 ~. (Report re Livermore Air Pollution Study Supplement) valley wide goal to solve the problem. He would suggest that the goal be to provide employment, housing, shopping, transportation, and educational opportunities for every qualified resident of the valley and would also suggest that a Goals Committee be established for outlining ways these things could be accomplished. Cm Miller stated that Cm Turner has stated he feels the report to be as strong conclusion for no growth and Cm Miller reads the report as having "if" statements about a no growth stand as well as two suggested alternates. The "if II statements were that 1) if things do not change from the usage of cars, then there can be no more growth in the valley or the probability is very high that we will never meet the federal air quality standards; 2) if there is a change in the transportation and 1/3 of the trips are taken on public transportation then growth will be allowed to about the 1% level. These are two alternates - one no growth and the other limited growth which Cm Turner is ignoring. Cm Miller stated that the conclusion is that if things continue the way they are it is likely we will not meet the federal air quality standards but there are things that can change so that the conclusion may not hold and these things were also listed and it seems that Cm Turner is not taking into account those other things which would, if come to pass, would allow growth in the valley. Cm Turner stated that he would like to respond by saying that it is clear that the point of the report and the overriding factor is a no growth stand. Cm Miller also pointed out that the other point which bothered Cm Turner is that the report was based on assumptions and Cm Miller stated that everything was clearly labeled for what it was and were assumptions based on what the committee could ascertain from the data available to them. Many of the things mentioned cannot be based on known facts and most of the decisions made in life are not dependent upon everything known exactly. They have made assumptions so that if one disagrees with them you can recalculate with something different and they clearly laid out the assumptions. Cm Miller read the portion that troubles Cm Turner: "without some action it does not appear that federal standards can be met unless all future growth is prohibited". Cm Miller stated that this was underlined because it did suggest that there were other actions that could take place, i.e., reduce the number of miles per person, reduce the number of miles per vehicle, replace current engines with cleaner types of engines. There are several ways that some of the above can be achieved and some of the actions that can be taken and if this is done growth could be allowed. Cm Turner stated no alternatives are laid out other than no growth and Cm Miller retorted that growth can be allowed if 1/3 of the people go to public transportation, which they pointed out. Cm Turner asked how this can be done and Cm Miller emphasized that this is the problem' l Cm Miller then stated that it was not the committee's charge to look for goals to solve the problems of employment, housing, etc. and feels it is unfair to impute this to them and Cm Turner stated that their charge was also not to draw conclusions and Cm Miller stated that he would disagree that conclusions were made. Cm Miller then stated that the concept of employment, etc. has no necessary connection to the air quality. Cm Miller stated that he cannot understand why Cm Turner is so upset about the conclusion because if action is not taken it is concluded that growth should not take place and this same stand has been mentioned in the A. D. Little report, implied by the MTC Transportation Study for the value about the air quality effect. The point is, all of the reports lead to the conclusion that if things continue as they are, we will never reach the federal air quality standards unless growth is prohibited, without other alternatives. CM-29-27l February 18, 1975 (Report re Livermore Air Pollution Study Supplement) It is true that developers, the Chamber of Commerce, and the Herald and News editorial writers do not like this conclusion but the fact of the matter is that this is what independent studies show for the valley. Cm Futch stated that with respect to other agencies not respond- J ing he would like to point that the report was a technical report and the VCSD, etc. would not necessarily respond to technicalities. Cm Tirsell stated that she feels this is a ridiculous discussion because if Cm Turner wishes to disagree it is his prerogative but would like to point out that the first page of the Livermore General Plan, there is a half a page of assumptions, and all state- ments have assumptions so that the whole world will not have to be studied. Cm Miller stated that unless something is written about mathematics, technical reports are not tied down to something locked in and there are unknowns that affect the results, and there are margins of error. Calculations were based on the most probable evidence they had before them and was the whole point of the report. Cm Turner admitted that Cm Miller made some good points, but in spite of those comments, he still reads the report as a "no growth" statement. Cm Futch remarked that Cm Turner had a different viewpoint because of the company he worked for, and Cm Turner denied the implication. Cm Miller stated his thinking was due to his background and train- ing, and he, too, felt that Cm Turner's viewpoint came about due to his background and training. CITY MANAGER'S WEEKLY REPORT Mr. Parness stated a decision must be made regarding the site for Fire Station #4, and he added this was a part of the negotiations now underway with Mr. Mehran. Mr. Parness pointed to the various locations being considered for the site and he asked for the Coun- cil's permission to formally refer these sites to the Planning Commission, which is required by law, for their report back to the City Council. Cm Tirsell indicated that she would like to have the lot now being used by Sunset Corporation as a corporation yard also con- sidered as one of the sites. CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE THREE SITES BE REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THEIR CONSIDERATION AND REPORT - THE CORNER LOT, THE ONE ADJACENT TO THE CORPORATION YARD AND THE ONE ADJACENT TO THE HOME; MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 11:15 APPROVE ~ ATTEST CM-29-272 Regular Meeting of February 24, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of l~ivermore was held on February 24, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. ~he meeting was called to order at 8:07 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard presiding. /---'" ROLL CALL ~/ Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Futch, Tirsell and Mayor Pritchard Absent: None INTRODUCTION OF BOY SCOUTS TAKING PART IN COUNCIL MEETING Mayor Pritchard, the other Councilmembers and staff introduced the following Boy Scouts acting as counterparts for the Council- members and staff in observance of Scout Government Week: David Scheloske, for Mayor Pritchard Justin Fullmer for Councilmernber Futch Jeff Cofer for Councilmember Miller Jeff Lee for Councilmember Tirsell Chris Dittmore for Councilmernber Turner John Humphrey for City Hanager Parness Brad Lowe for City Attorney Logan John Field for Director of Public Works Director Lee David Harms for Director of Planning Musso Eugene Hale, Jr., for Fire Chief Baird Andrew Turnbull for Police Chief Lindgren Glen Inouye for Chief Building Inspector Street Scott Sessions for City Clerk Hock Santo Guido for Assistant to the City Manager Bradley PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE David Sche10ske led the members of the Council and those in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. lHNUTES February 10, 1975 Page 251, first paragraph, last two lines should read: two different things and that the Council did not mean that if VMH had more doctors on the staff, it would affect the hospital move issue. P. 254, typo after Randy Schlientz. ( \ P. 254, sixth paragraph, last line should read: front and back but we would not require both improvements. Page 258, last paragraph under Industrial Inquiries: Add another sentence after the vmrd "overbearing", as follows: The Council requested that ~lr. Parness phone the potential applicant to offer information. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE lCm Futch abstaining due to absence at that meeting) THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 10, 1975, WERE APPROVED, AS CORRECTED. CM-29-273 February 24, 1975 CONSENT CALENDAR P. C. Minutes Minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of January 28, were submitted to the City Council. Res. Rejecting Claim The Council adopted a resolution rejecting the claim of Acord Investors for damages allegedly arising from the City's eminent domain action against Acord Investors. J RESOLUTION NO. 40-75 A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF ACORD INVESTORS Progress Report re General Plan Grunwald Crawford Associates submitted Progress Report No. 4 on the Livermore General Plan program. Certification of Census Notice was received from the State Department of Finance, of certification to the Controller that the estimated population for the City of Livermore on November 6, 1974, was 48,349. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM FUTCH, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (Introduction of Scout Executive) Don Bradley introduced the Scout executive, Mr. Ray Sutliff, attending the meeting with the Scouts this evening. (LAFCO Sphere of Influence Hearing) Mr. Musso reminded the Council of the Sphere of Influence Hearing by LAFCO to be held Thursday, and it was noted that the Council would hold an executive session after the meeting to discuss this item. (P. C. Interviews) ...-/ The City Clerk noted that the final filing date for Planning Commission applications has passed and asked when the Council would like to interview applicants. The Council agreed to meet next week prior to the Council meeting to interview applicants. CM-29-274 February 24, 1975 (Legislative Item) L/ Mr. Parness stated that a legislative item will be heard, inital1y, this week and is probably the most potentially disastrous piece of legislation that will come before the Legislature this year, with respect to local government. He stated the bill is SB 275 of the Labor Relations bill offered by Senator Dills. Unless amendments are made on controversial aspects of the bill he would urge the Council to allow the City to forward our opposition to this measure. The League has already taken a position of opposing the bill. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE CITY MANAGER WAS DIRECTED TO SEND A LETTER OPPOSING THE BILL TO THE APPROPRIATE PEOPLE. It was mentioned that the Mayor should sign communications opposing such measures. (Weekly Reports) Cm Turner stated that in the weekly progress report he would like a brief statement as to whether the City is on schedule or behind schedule if a major variance is involved and Mr. Lee stated that he would try to incorporate this and at least once a month a work progress chart will be provided. (re AB 280) Cm Turner commented that he is somewhat concerned about AB 280 with respect to the BAAPCD and setting up Board members. There are to be 9 appointments and 13 elected and any mayor or councilmem- bers are to be excluded from the governing body. This would mean that there is a possibility there would be no representation from Livermore and seems improper. Cm Miller noted that he just read a notice which indicates the bill has been dropped from the Committee. (re AB 378) Cm Futch stated that he feels the City of Livermore should support AB 378 concerning public path and trails grants AND SO MOVED AND ADDED THAT THE STAFF BE DIRECTED TO SEND A LETTER OF SUPPORT, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. (Nat. League's Energy Conservation Booklet) c Cm Futch stated in reading the energy conservation booklet from the National League, he feels the portion concerning EIR's and the suggestion that they contain a section on energy impact analysis is very important and appropriate in light of the problems facing our Country today. He suggested that the City Manager look into this matter and report back to the Council and Mr. Parness stated that he would be happy to do this. Mr. Musso stated that he thought there was already something about this in the guidelines and they have been directed by the Planning Commission to include this. CM FUTCH MOVED TO REFER THIS ITEM TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM-29-275 February 24, 1975 (OGO Pads) Cm Tirse1l stated that bicyclists have phoned her to report that it appears some of the OGO pads which have been poured are either on the bike path or possibly only one foot away from the bike paths and asked that the staff check into this matter. Mr. Musso stated that a request for the staff to check the pads was received today at 5:00 p.m. in the Planning Department and they have not had the opportunity to check the pads but will be making a check. He stated that it is foundations they are pre- paring and Cm Futch stated that if it is foundations the staff should waste no time in making a check. ) J (EIR Committee) Mayor Pritchard stated that with the Council's permission he would like to appoint Cm Miller and Futch to meet with the staff tomorrow regarding the LAFCO EIR hearing on Thursday so that we will have something in writing and to have everything ready to go. Mr. Parness stated it is his understanding that the developers are to give testimony at 3:00 p.m. and it might be advantageous tor someone from the Council to be present during the time the developers speak and LAFCO has indicated that they would hope that most of our presentation would be in response to the presen- tation by the developers. (Personnel Session) Mayor Pritchard stated that he would like to adjourn the meeting this evening to a Friday personnel session at his office on East Avenue. COMMUNICATION RE UNEMPLOYMENT OFFICE A letter was received from Mrs. K. W. Smith of Pleasanton, urging that some type of unemployment office be located in Livermore be- cause of the inconvenience of having to go to Hayward and stand in line with small children. She stated that when one is out of work they cannot afford to hire a babysitter and must take child- ren with them. Mr.Parness indicated that he had responded to Mrs. Smith's letter and what the City plans to do about getting an office in the valley and Cm Miller suggested that Mrs. Smith be asked to con- tact the Pleasanton Council and ask them to help. REPORT RE REQUEST FOR CAB RATE INCREASE A request has been received for a taxi cab rate increase for Tri-Valley Cab. The staff indicated that there is justification for the requested increase because of the company's financial loss and rates charged in surrounding communities but rather than allow- ing 70~ for the first 1/7 mile or fraction thereof with 10~ for each additional 1/6 mile or fraction thereof (they requested 70~ for the i first 1/6 mile or fraction thereof); 10~ for each one minute of wait- ~ ing time or fraction thereof ($6.00/hr); with no charge for extra passengers. It was noted that one letter was received from Gene Stiles of Pleasan- ton asking that the increase be denied, and it was explained that at present the cab service does not service Pleasanton and would not affect their rates. CM-29-276 February 24, 1975 (Taxi Cab Rate Increase) Cm Miller stated that he has done some calculations using the new proposed fee schedule and feels the charge is excessive for people without transportation and particularly if they must travel from the Springtown area. L: Cm Futch stated that he can sympathize with what Cm Miller has said but in looking at the list of rates used in other cities in the area Livermore is the lowest and the company is losing money and would like to know what alternative could be suggested. Cm Miller stated that instead of giving a IO% discount rate for the Springtown people he would like to suggest that a larger discount be given to people who use the cab on a regular basis. Cm Tirsell stated that she also was concerned about people in the Springtown area and those on fixed incomes who rely on the cab for transportation and would like to see some alternative for these people and perhaps something could be done to allow them a free ride after so many rides have been paid for or something of this nature, rather than the lOt discount. CM TURNER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO REFLECT THE COUNCIL DECISION TO ALLOW THE INCREASE. He stated that this is the motion but would also like the staff to speak with the owner about some alternative for Springtown people and regular users of the cab service. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM FUTCH. Mayor Pritchard stated that the City of Antioch or Pittsburgh has a special system they are using for their senior citizens and asked if the City Manager would be able to get a copy of what they are doing, as maybe something like this could be used by Livermore until our transportation system gets going. He then asked what the City of Merced is doing and Mr. Parness stated that they have a dial-a-bus system and there is no more taxi cab service. The rate is 50~ for anywhere in town for anybody. The Mayor mentioned that as of today there are five people in Liver- more who are eligible for the state Meals Program in Pleasanton and are without transportation and Mr. Bradley noted that there is a bus service from Livermore to Pleasanton for health care services, etc., and they can get to the convalescent hospital for these meals each day. Mayor Pritchard stated that if the Council has no objection he would like to give Mr. Bradley the name of the person who called him and see if Mr. Bradley can get something worked out so that the people in need of the service can continue to receive it. Cm Miller stated that there was nothing mentioned in the motion about amending the 10% discount for Springtown people and the time to make a change is now rather than after the ordinance is passed. CM MILLER MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO STATE THAT THE ORDINANCE BE PREPARED WITH SOME ALTERNATIVES FOR SPRINGTOWN RESIDENTS, AFTER DIS- CUSSION WITH THE CAB COMPANY. l/ The City Attorney stated that to effect a differential is to have some reasonable justification for it, and this can probably be created. He added that he believes some cities have based a differential on age. Cm Turner stated that he feels the Council is getting into a dilemma because there are many people in the City in need of transportation and though it is true many of the senior citizens may need the discount while others may not and the same is true of people in the City who are not senior citizens. Cm Miller stated that he was also thinking of the Greenville North people and that everyone in that area should qualify for a discount because of distance rather than age. CM-29-277 February 24, 1975 (Taxi Cab Rates) The City Attorney explained that it should be realized a public subsidy should not be created unless the City wants to pay for it, because the City is dealing with a private company. The City can justify discounts for reasons which make it less expen- sive for the company to operate the cabs over a long distance as opposed to a shorter, stop and go, distance. For reasons other than this the City might find itself in great difficulty of justifying it unless the City is willing to subsidize, in cash, the operation. -.J Mr. David Rezendes, stated that his company chose to provide a 10% discount for the senior citizens for the simple fact that a great many of the senior citizens live in the downtown area and they hope that this would be fair to everyone involved. Also, most of the fares are less than $1.00 and they feel it would be a financial disaster to have to drive to the Springtown area and give the whole area a discount because many of the people in that area can afford the service. CM MILLER MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO WORK OUT SOMETHING SATISFACTORY, LEGALLY AND OTHERWISE, FOR TRI-VALLEY CAB, WITH A REPORT BACK TO THE COUNCIL PRIOR TO FORMULATION OF A REVISED ORDINANCE. The City Attorney commented that Mr. Rezendes has asked that there be other changes in the ordinance such as the number of cabs allowed to stop at one location at the same time and if the Council has no objection these changes can be included in the revised ordinance. MAYOR PRITCHARD SECONDED THE AMENDMENT. Mayor Pritchard added that the amendment does not hold up preparation of the ordinance. AMENDMENT PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. MAIN MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. REPORT RE FUTURE PROGRAMS AND FACILITIES - LIBRARY A report was received from Arthur L. Henry, Chairman for the Board of Trustees for the Livermore Library with respect to the need for professional advice on the development of future programs and facilities for the Livermore Library. The staff has recommended that the Council adopt a motion authorizing the staff to prepare an agreement providing for the consultant services, as proposed. ON MOTION OF CM FUTCH, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE COUNCIL ADOPTED A MOTION TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE THE AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES. Prior to the motion Cm Turner noted that Robert S. Meyer & Assoc. have been suggested as the consultants and he wondered if this had gone to competitive bidding and was told that it had not but that it is felt there are no other consultants in this area with the qualifications of this firm and the reason they were selected to do the consulting services. SEWER CONNECTION - OAKLAND SCAVENGER , J' Oakland Scavenger has requested that they be allowed connection to the City sewer in the area of South front road and Waxlax Way which Mr. Musso illustrated on a map. The company would like to have a corporation yard and later add an office. Essentially it would be to develop the middle portion of the land with development to take place in the front and rear at a later date. CM-29-278 February 24, 1975 (Sewer Connection for Oakland Scavenger Co.) c Mr. Musso stated that the sewer connection agreement is a standard sewer connection agreement with attachments and one attachment is the Planning Department review and the plan, as submitted, is in conformance with most of the City regulations. There are, however, two issues that must be addressed and those are: I) whether or not Waxlax Way should be a future street with the developer improving his portion; and 2) whether or not Naylor Avenue should be improved. Mayor Pritchard wondered if a decision must be made tonight and Mr. Parness stated that the Council decision would be inserted in the sewer connection agreement if improvements are to be required. There was discussion concerning the future of Preston Road and whether or not it would become a City street and should be improved. The staff is requiring that the frontage along Southfront Road be improved immediately because it is the major access point; however, they do not intend to improve Waxlax at this time because there would be no access from that direction. The City would require bonding for it and could require it within a specified length of time. II ~~ Jb. ef! l1Jtu?~,/. Cm Futch ~~iO~c eaR aee R& reason for delaying improvements for Waxlax Way this is not the City's normal pOlicy?aaa Mr. Lee stated that there is no justification for a delay other than the fact that there is a substantial cost for the frontage road. improvements and there will not be access from Waxlax Way. CM TURNER NOTED THAT IF THIS IS A PLANNING COMMISSION MATTER AND THERE WOULD NOT BE UNDUE DELAY HE WOULD MOVE THAT THE MATTER BE REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THEIR CONSIDERATION, SECON- DED BY CM TIRSELL. Cm Tirsell stated that she is concerned about changing standards for industrial areas and if Preston is going to be an industrial street the Planning Commission should look at Waxlax and determine if this is going to be a bisecting north and south street all the way through. Randy Schlientz of Associated Professions, stated that one thing brought out which is very crucial is the fact that Waxlax is a private road and does make it different than Preston or the frontage road. He then gave history concerning development proposals and noted that the City indicated there would be no requirement for a road on Waxlax Way. The County said that Waxlax was not a dedicated road and no improvements would be required on that frontage and based on this information Oakland Scavenger proceeded with acquisition of the site. Unfortunately Oakland Scaven- ger was not able to develop at the time they acquired the property and the sewer connection agreement with the City was the first indica- tion of improvements for Waxlax Way. This was a surprise to them and if this is to be a requirement the owner may decide not to build on this site, and they would appreciate postponement of the matter. Mayor Pritchard explained the motion and indicated that this would result in a delay. CM-29-279 February 24, 1975 (Sewer Connection - Oakland Scavenger) Cm Miller noted that the agreement does say that improvements for Waxlax Way would be delayed until such time as the adjacent property is developed and Mr. Schlientz stated that he understands this but in addition there would be a requirement for dedication of a 36 ft. strip the length of the property, with improvements, and this would be a sizeable amount of land and money - neither of which the owner intended to dedicate or spend. \ ) -.-/ CM TURNER CALLED FOR THE QUESTION AND MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. RECESS A brief recess was called after which the Council meeting resumed with all members of the Council present. REPORT RE SEWER CONN. AGREE. - ROLLINS PROPERTY The Planning Director reported that an application for sewer line and connection to the City sewer has been filed by Mr. and Mrs. G. Rollins for property located on the west side of Arroyo at the intersection of Arroyo Road and Concannon Boulevard. The property consists of approximately five acres and the problem is the requirement of a dedication of 60 ft. on one frontage and 47 ft. on the other. Also the City would normally require instal- lation of curbs, gutters and sidewalks as well as a backing lot wall and the cost for these improvements would be prohibitive to a single residence. The County is not allowing septic tanks and this means that they will have to connect to the City sewers if they wish to develop. There was discussion as to how the problem of the cost for the improvements might be handled and Mr. Parness stated that the Council might consider apportioning the improvement costs as if the dwelling unit were a singular one, against all the others containable within the area, so that the Rollins would be asked to dedicate the widening requirements for the street improvements but they would not have to be installed now. The Rollins could be asked to pay an amount proportionate to what a single lot out of the five acres would pay if it were abutting one of the streets. The money could be held until other properties eventually come in and at which time the improvements could be installed. It was noted that there would be allowed 1.5 d.u./acre and would mean approximately $lO,OOO for the improvements for the Rollins in addition to dedication of the land. Mr. Lee stated that it would also be important that the City have a "no access" strip along the frontages and initially there would have to be at least one access, probably onto Concannon Boulevard. There could be a provision to state that in the event adjacent properties develop and an alternate access is allowed into the property, the no access could be closed. Mayor Pritchard stated as he recalls there is a sharp dip in that area and wondered who would be responsible for filling it in and Mr. Lee explained that at present it would remain as it is but ultimately when the property develops the owners would ) be required to put in all the improvements. The access may have ~ to be through the interim access allowed by the City but it is likely property along Lomitas will develop and the City would require access from Lomitas into the property. Mr. Lee mentioned that from a traffic standpoint, access at the west end of the prop- erty along Concannon would be advisable. CM-29-280 February 24, 1975 (Rollins Property) There was discusson concerning access and Mayor Pritchard stated that there is no reason to discuss this at this time because it will have to be considered at the time approval is given for the sewer connection. ~/ Cm Futch stated that this whole item should be considered very carefully because it seems to involve Council policy which may apply to other properties as they develop. Cm Tirsell stated that the majority of the people between Lomitas and Concannon wish to retain a rural atmosphere and be allowed to have horses, etc. and she would not want to encourage development in that area even though an excessive amount of money is involved. If it is assumed that seven residences could develop it may be a wrong assumption and if the money for public works is to be divided among the number of dwellings possible it may mean that they would have to subdivide in order for the City to get the public works improvements required. Cm Miller noted that if subdivision does not take place the public works improvements would come from public funds and Cm Tirsell stated that this is the point and she isn't about to allow that to happen. Cm Tirsell wondered if the agreement could state that if the County subdivides the property, in any manner, the total amount ($86,000) would have to go to the City and the City Manager stated that this could be so stated without any problem. Cm Turner stated that many good points have been brought up in this discussion and would suggest that the staff work with the Rollins family and try to come up with an agreement that would be acceptable both to the City and the Rollins family. Mrs. Rollins stated that she purchased the property so that her children could have horses and does not want further development on her property at this time or in the future and also she is not interested in putting sidewalks and the public works improvements required on this land because she desires the rural appearance of the area without sidewalks or any subdivision. Mayor Pritchard explained that what the Council has proposed is that the total amount of public works costs would be divided by the number of dwelling units possible for the property and the City would charge the Rollins family the amount one dwelling unit would pay. In the event development ever does take place the other units would pay their share but it does not mean that development would be forced. Nothing else would be paid if development does not occur. CM TURNER MOVED THAT THIS ITEM BE REFERRED BACK TO THE STAFF AND ASK THAT THEY COME BACK WITH A RECOMMENDATION AND ALSO THAT THEY TALK WITH MRS. ROLLINS PRIOR TO MAKING A RECOMMENDATION, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. l Prior to the motion Mayor Pritchard asked if Mrs. Rollins had been informed at the time she purchased the property that an easement on both frontages would have to be dedicated for possible street widening and she indicated she was not told and was not aware of this. CM-29-28l February 24, 1975 REPORT RE EAST AVE. FUTURE WIDTH LINES The Director of Public Works reported that the City and County, an a cooperative agreement, are presently determining the align- ment and cross section for East Avenue from Madison Avenue to Greenville Road and proper street dimensions must be decided upon at this time so the design may proceed. Mayor Pritchard stated that before discussion takes place he would like to comment that: I) this seems to be an item the Planning Commission should have reviewed; 2) this appears to be a little late if OGO is already pouring foundations; and 3) the Council has been asked to adopt a resolution this even- ing which the Council has not seen. \ J Mr. Lee stated that first of all a resolution is not necessary in this instance and the matter is in the study stage with no decisions having been made. He would like the Council to express views and send them to the County Public Works staff by way of a letter. with respect to OGO, it has always been anticipated that there would be 104 ft. width to accommodate four lanes and now it appears that the County has suggested five lanes and a width line of 120 ft. and that is the reason there is a problem in the OGO area and it would be difficult to allow the additional rigbt-of-way. Mr. Lee stated that he is hopeful the City can con- vince the County to go along with our standards. Mr. Lee stated that right now the City is planning to use the emergency lanes for bike lanes and if there is a car parked in the emergency lane there should still be room for a bike to pass with no problem. He pointed out that if one looks at Murrieta Boulevard, there is very seldom the need for emergency parking and the same holds true for portola Avenue. CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT THE STAFF REPORT FOR TRANS- MITTAL TO THE COUNTY, SECONDED BY CM MILLER, RECOMMENDING THE STAN- DARD 104 FT. WIDTH, WITH PLANS FOR A BIKE LANE ON BOTH SIDES. Mayor Pritchard wondered if the recommendation would require the adoption of an ordinance and Mr. Lee explained that it would not because the standards for East Avenue are in the formulative stage. We are going to have to come to an agreement, ultimately, and hope- fully they will agree to the 104 ft. Cm Turner asked if the plans include a left hand turn into Charlotte and Mr. Lee stated that there will be a left hand turn into this street for east bound traffic. Mayor Pritchard pointed out that the City has gotten into a hassle with the County over street widening on Arroyo Road and there have been problems because of our bike and equestrian trails and if we say 104 ft. is satisfactory there may be problems in the future. Mr. Lee explained that additional easement will be provided for a bikeway and trailway system on the south side and the Council felt this should be spelled out. Mr. Lee stated that at this time future width lines are not being established but the City is telling the County that we wish to proceed with 104 ft. width for the travel way and in addition the bikeways on the outside, and at a later time if future width lines must be established, other than what is on record, it will go back to the Council and Planning Commission for public hearings and public testimony. Mayor Pritchard felt if we say to the County that we want 104 ft. it is, in essence, setting future width lines and Mr. Musso ex- plained that a public hearing is required before future width lines can be established. J CM-29-282 February 24, 1975 (Width Lines - East Ave.) Mayor Pritchard stated that it may be true the City is not setting future width lines because they have not taken formal action but you can be sure that if they say they want 104 ft. for that street the County will end up taking this as our final decision. c Bill Raymond, 2368 Buena Vista, representative of the Bikeways Association stated that bicycles having to ride on the sidewalk on East Avenue would be inappropriate. The bicycles will travel in the street anyway or bicycle traffic will have to be eliminated. The Bikeway Association feels it is essential to have a 10 ft. bikeway on each side of the street and be delineated from the street by low profile concrete channelization bars, which would also allow for emergency parking. They would suggest that the 14 ft. travel lanes be reduced to 12 ft. lanes for automobiles and that the 8 ft. emergency parking lane be increased to 10 ft. which could still be accommodated within the standard 104 ft. Discussion followed concerning the bike path and what should be done and Cm Tirsell stated that this was discussed by the Planning Commission and she does not want to decide tonight to take two feet from the travel lanes; they discussed this item for eight months. CM FUTCH MOVED TO TABLE THE ITEM FOR ONE WEEK, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT RE POLICY STATEMENT DRAFTS In accordance with Council direction additional policy statements have been prepared on Building Construction and Site Grading, Benefit Districts, Use of Eminent Domain Authority for Private Property Development and Certificate of Occupancy provisions and Property corner Markers. Permit Requirements for Building Construction and Site Grading: Cm Miller stated that he would like to eliminate D. underBuild- ing Permits on Page 2. If the paragraph is not eliminated it would mean that a project may be allowed to proceed without the issuance of a partial or full building permit if the Chief Building Inspector and Director of Public Works feels it is justified. Mr. Parness explained that D. was added to allow a project to proceed without a permit if there is a special reason. There are times when weather conditions, etc., prompt hurried activity on the part of the contractor and these are business matters. The City is always getting appeals, in this regard, and this is only suggesting that they be allowed to install concrete footings - not to erect a structure or any part thereof. .~. Mr. Street cited an instance in which material was in danger of being destroyed because of an impending rainstorm and with the concurrence of the structural engineer and the City's inspec- tion the City took it upon itself to allow them to pour concrete so that the entire work of the excavation would not be lost. If the provision is not left in the Policy possibly there would never a problem, but on the other hand if there is a problem it may prove to be a salvation for somebody. ( I Cm Miller stated in his opinion it is just plain "sloppy" to allow a building to proceed without having everything properly accomplished by the conditions of our ordinances and codes. If someone proceeds before this has been accomplished then they have begun too soon and it is wrong to allow anything to proceed without the permit. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THIS ITEM BE DELETED. SECONDED BY CM TURNER. CM-29-283 February 24, 1975 (Council Policy) Mayor Pritchard asked, if permission was granted to pour a founda- tion and for some reason the permit could not be granted, would we legally have de facto granted a building permit by allowing the foundation to be poured? The City Attorney stated that this is a question still undecided. There have been cases in which the party doing construction is ~ given notice that any activity he conducts on the property is at his own risk and in other cases work done considered substan- tial progress has allowed them to obtain a writ of mandate to force the local public agency to issue the building permit. The law is really not clear where this matter is concerned. Cm Turner stated that his justification for seconding the motion is that he feels it is not proper, from a financial standpoint, to allow someone to put money into the ground when there is a possibility they may not be able to obtain a building permit. He feels that allowing them to proceed without a building permit may mean that if they are denied a permit the City would have to show that denial was based upon something that clearly, and without a doubt, could not be challenged in court. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. The Council then discussed III. Grading Permits, Page 3: Cm Miller stated that A. I. states, "Grading in an isolated, self contained area if there is not danger apparent to private or public property" may be done without a permit and he is concerned about the person who may have an acre of land who levels the hill and fills the valley and then procee~~~9~p~~~ a subdivision on it. We had a similar case in which~~~f~re taken from the top and used to fill in land in one of Mr. Mehran's tracts, and this was done between the time of the tentative and the final map. The point is this could be done without obtaining a grading permit and yet it would be contrary to the General Plan and principles about leveling hills and filling valleys. CM MILLER MOVED THAT ITEM III. A. 1. READ: GRADING IN AN ISOLATED, SELF CONTAINED AREA IF THERE IS NOT DANGER APPARENT TO PRIVATE OR PUBLIC PROPERTY, PROVIDING THE PARCEL IS LESS THAN ONE ACRE. Cm Turner wondered who determines if there is no danger to private or public property, from a legal standpoint, and Mr. Logan replied that he feels this would be left to the discretion of the administra- tion and in this particular instance he would assume this would be by Mr. Street. Mr. Street commented that he is not opposed to any changes in the grading permits but would like to mention that these particular conditions are a part of the Grading Ordinance and changes would require an ordinance change. He stated that it would be his responsibility to determine if there is danger to private or public property and he would not assume a judgment without consulting the Public Works Director and, if necessary, with a private consulting engineer. Mr. Lee commented that Number 9. on Page 4 specifies the amount of fill that can be done and perhaps this would cover the con- cerns of Cm Miller and the Council. ~ Cm Miller stated that 1. and 9. relate to different issues and 9. does not modify l. Cm Tirsell stated she is opposed to the arbitrary one acre be- cause there is a possibility that some of the industrial property consists of l~ acres. CM-29-284 February 24, 1975 (Council Policy) Cm Turner stated the Planning Commission ran into some difficulty when foundations were poured for a trailer park and at that time it was determined that one condition does not really supersede another and that Cm Miller has a good point - each condition should be clear and concise. L CM MILLER ADDED TO THE MOTION THAT THE WORDING BE ADOPTED, AS MEN- TIONED ABOVE AND THAT THE STAFF BE DIRECTED TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE REFLECTING THE CHANGE, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cm Futch asked if the change proposed by Cm Miller for Item 1 is a reference to Item 9 and Cm Miller stated there is no reference to 9. because these conditions are separate. Cm Miller stated that the point of all of this is that the City should discourage grading without grading permits, and is the reason he specified one acre. Mr. Parness stated that he feels 1. and 9. are complimentary and that grading cannot be done if one is in violation of one or the other item. Mr. Street wondered if, rather than changing the wording, the policy of not allowing grading for property larger than an acre without a permit could be applied. MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Cm Tirsell dissenting). The Council next discussed II. A. 6., Page 3, Grading Permits: Cm Tirsell stated she is concerned about the gravel on the small parcels that extend into the arroyo along Arroyo Mocho and the fact that mining can be done in quarries. Mr. Street explained that he believes mining cannot be done without a quarry permit, even for the small parcels. Cm Miller questioned II. A. 8., Page 4, as to whether this item is restrictive enough and that a five ft. height for grading seems a little excessive without a grading permit. Mr. Street felt there would be no problem unless the grading were to take place close to a structure or property line and those things are covered else- where in the ordinance. With respect to III. B., Page 4, Cm Miller stated that in his opinion if there is to be construction of a building then there should be a grading permit involved. Mr. Lee felt a grading permit should not be necessary because the City would have reviewed the site plan and Mr. Parness commented that from the aspect of being a practical business matter he felt it was also unnecessary for the City to require this type of paper processing. The majority of construction sites require a nominal amount of grading and he feels it is unnecessary to require grading permits for this type of activity. eM MILLER MOVED TO DELETE B., SECONDED BY MAYOR PRITCHARD. Cm Turner questioned why the staff would object to removing B. and Mr. Lee explained that a grading permit would be a duplication of effort and that this would be the same as requiring a separate permit for the sidewalk or parking lot or lighting. CM-29-285 February 24, 1975 (Council Policy) Cm Miller asked if the building permit covers all the grading on the site, or the building and Mr. Lee replied that the building permit covers all of the items, and Cm Miller asked if this means all of the grading, including shuffling the dirt around. MOTION FAILED 1-4 (Cm Futch, Turner, Tirsell and Chair dissenting). J Cm Miller stated that he would like to add to the Grading policy that I} any use of City property shall not take place without the approval of the City, or 2} the taking of City property without permission. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT THE POLICY THAT THERE BE NO USE OR TAKING OF CITY PROPERTY WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE COUNCIL. Cm Miller stated that he is greatly offended by the casual use of City property by people who have been in the City for a long time and seem to have fallen into the practice. He stated he feels the practice is wrong and it should be made clear that the City is not going to allow use or taking of property without approval. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MAYOR PRITCHARD. Cm Turner stated that he would agree there should be approval by the City but does not agree that it should have to come to the Council. Mr. Lee, Mr. Musso or Parness should be able to give permission, with which Cm Tirsell agreed. MOTION FAILED 2-3 (Cm Turner, Tirse11 and Futch dissenting). Cm Miller stated that he would like to refer to another point concerning grading. Grading took place in a subdivision where a hill was knocked down 20 ft. This did not show in the tenta- tive and was brought out at the time of the final map and the City received the argument that the developer had gone to the expense of preparing the final map and engineering work and the City could not make him change his final map at that point. The Council agreed that it couldn't change it so the point was made that a grading map should be included with the tentative map because this would be the last time the Council would have any control over a map and the argument was made that the City couldn't require the developer to furnish a grading map at the time of the tentative because these are drawn without much consideration of the engineering considerations. The net result of the discussion was that the City has no control over the grading of one of these developments and exactly how a hill was removed. For this reason he feels there is merit in requiring a grading plan associated with a tentative map or the City will have no real control over grading that takes place on more hilly properties. Cm Futch felt this is a good point and wondered if, perhaps, a "rough" grading plan could be required without all of the details. Mr. Musso stated that the Planning Commission has recommended that the subdivision ordinance be amended to require grading plans with the tentative map and this will be coming before the Council. CONTINUANCE OF AGENDA ITEMS --..,/ ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE REMAINING ITEMS (6.4 of the Agenda) CONCERNING POLICY WERE CONTINUED TO NEXT WEEK. CM-29-286 February 24, 1975 REPORT RE MOBILEHOME INSTALLATION FEES ~j Mr. Street reported that recalculation of the proposed mobilehome installation fees indicates that the $15 fee is reasonable and it is recommended that a resolution authorizing application of an inspection fee be adopted. CM FUTCH MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZ- ING APPLICATION OF THE INSPECTION FEE, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT RE JOINT POWERS MODIFICATION The City Manager reported that in order to have a legal vehicle for the transmittal of municipal funds to LARPD for park improve- ment purposes, a modification to the joint powers agreement has been written. It was noted that the Council did not receive a copy of the recom- mended resolution and ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE MATTER WAS CONTINUED FOR ONE WEEK. REPORT RE TRANS. CONSULTANT STUDY The City Manager reported that over the past several months our staff, in conjunction with our citizens Transportation Advisory Committee, has been involved with retention of a consultant firm for an analysis of our local transportation needs. Eight firms have been interviewed, and proposals studied, and it is recommended that the City enter into an agreement with Dave Systems, Inc. A contract has been drawn and reviewed by our City Attorney, BART and MTC and the full cost of the study is estimated at $18,950 which will be paid for through the federal Transportation Develop- ment Act through MTC. CM TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT WITH DAVE SYSTEMS, INC., SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 41-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT (Dave Systems Inc.) Z. 0.. AMEND. RE CONCANNON & CORDOBA ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY A 4-1 VOTE (Cm Turner dissenting) THE ORDINANCE REZONING THE CORNER OF CONCANNON BOULEVARD AND CORDOBA STREET WAS ADOPTED. ORDINANCE NO. 858 ( ~/ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 442, AS AMENDED, OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE BY AMENDING SECTION 3.00 THEREOF RELATING TO ZONING (Sunset Development Company) . CM-29-287 February 24, 1975 Z. O. AMEND RE INDUSTRIAL AREAS ON MOTION OF CM FUTCH, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY A 3-2 VOTE (Cm Turner and Chair dissenting) THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING VARIOUS INDUSTRIAL AREAS WAS ADOPTED. ORDINANCE NO. 859 J AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 442 AS AMENDED, OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE BY AMENDING SECTION 3.00 THEREOF RELATING TO ZONING (Z-174 Industrial Rezoning). CITY MANAGER WEEKLY PROJECT STATUS REPORT Grade Separation Structure Mr. Parness reported that on the grade separation structure program there has been a lot of grading accomplished and the girders are being placed at both locations for the bridge and these are the girders which have been paid for. Oak Street Loop The Oak Street loop design has been completed by the City and construction will soon commence. First & Livermore The First Street-Livermore Avenue intersection has been in negotia- tions with the owners and terms have been reached for the property value which will be on next week's agenda. The negotiated settle- ment is slightly higher than the state appraisal and worth the City's acceptance. Water Reclamation Plant The lagoon has been completed for the Water Reclamation Plant and the emergency holding pond has also been completed. This project is about 45% completed and they are moving right along. Corporation Yard There have been reports of missing gasoline from the yard and there are structural problems at the yard. being siphoned by people climbing over the fence and intends to improve the fencing and to place locks on Corporation Gasoline is the City gas caps. Concannon Traffic Signal Mr. Parness has contacted the state about the Concannon traffic signal. The bid was awarded on February 11th and referred to the contractor but the contractor, as yet, has not signed the construction bid. The state understands our concerns and has promised to take legal action, if necessary, to get the contractor to sign the bid. ~. CM-29-288 February 24, 1975 (Status Reports) ~/ Sewage Capacity The Planning Commission has asked for a report as to sewage capacity and what commitments have been made, to date, and this report is being prepared at this time by our engineers and will be referred to the Planning Commission for their study session and in turn will be coming to the Council. Finance Department The annexation fee study the Council has requested is in its draft stage and being reviewed by Mr. Parness and the staff and should be ready for referral to the Council soon. Bicycle Licensing The forms for the bicycle licensing have been completed for use by the commercial retail outlets and we are meeting with the merchants and getting their consent to use the forms. The actual implementation of the state program, however, is being delayed because of state officer request. A tremendous amount of furror has arisen over this item and there are bound to be modifications to the state licensing program. We do not have to start the program for a couple of years and we are not getting it activitated until it appears that the dust has settled. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Pritchard adjourned the meeting to an executive session at 11:30 p.m. to discuss a legal matter and then to an adjourned regular meeting on Friday at noon at 3070 East Avenue, then to an executive session to discuss a personnel matter. 1ii~ki:r 4lh#rf APPROVE ATTEST ~ Liv m~'~' c:fifornia Adjourned Regular Meeting of February 28, 1975 An adjourned regular meeting was held on February 28, 1975, at 3070 East Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 12:lS p.m. by Mayor Pritchard. Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Tirse1l and Mayor Pritchard Absent: Cm Futch The meeting adjourned immediately to an executive session to dis- cuss personnel matters and the session adjourned at 1:45 p.m. APPROVE ATTEST CM-29-289 Regular Meeting of March 3, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on March 3, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:07 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard presiding. ROLL CALL Present: Cm Miller, Futch, Tirsell, Turner and Mayor Pritchard J Absent: None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Pritchard led the Council members and those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. MINUTES February 18, 1975 Page 269, fourth paragraph from bottom, first line should read: Cm Futch commented that he cannot believe the ....etc. Page 269, last paragraph should read: Cm Tirsell stated that it is not true that only a certain limited amount of land will be zoned 1-3 and that all of the 1-3 has been used for these two parcels. Each parcel, as it is reviewed, is given a zoning according to criteria that has been established for 1-3. This property meets the criteria and she happens to agree with the Planning Commis- sion. Page 272, third paragraph, fourth line should begin: General Plan, there is a half a page of assumptions, and all analytical reports have assumptions so that the whole world will not have to be studied. Page 272, fourth paragraph should read: Cm Miller stated that technical reports are not always tied down to exact mathematical precision. There are often unknowns that affect the results...etc. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF FEBRUARY l8, 1975, WERE APPROVED, AS CORRECTED. PUBLIC HEARING RE P. U. #18 - Springtown A public hearing has been scheduled this evening to hear testi- mony concerning adoption of a Specific Plan for development in the Springtown area - PU #18. Cm Miller stated that he feels the Council cannot make a decision on this item this evening because the Council does not have a copy of the map which indicates areas and the number of dwelling units per acre, and also Mr. Strang has indicated that the Council has promised 30 units and Cm Miller stated he does not recall any such promise but rather that Mr. Strang assumed the Council was going to promise 30 units, and the Council needs to have the portion of the Council minutes concerning this discussion. The Council has not previously discussed PU #18 but the 30 units were mentioned in discussion relative to acquisition of the golf course. ~. CM-29-290 March 3, 1975 (P . H. re PU # 18 ) Mayor Pritchard commented that it should be noted there has been some discussion as to whether or not a Specific Plan should be adopted and if there is to be no adoption, lengthy discussion would mean that the Council is "spinning its wheels". ( / ~/ Cm Miller stated the consultants are concerned about the possibility of Specific Plans and the Council may wish to discussis this also before coming to a final decision. Mr. Musso gave background concerning PU *18, illustrating the area the Specific Plan would cover and some of the factors considered by the Planning Commission such as the "greenbelt" area, the number of schools for the area and traffic concerns connected with the schools. There was one proposal for a cluster project involving a density transfer which the Planning Commission agreed with, in con- cept. It was concluded by the Planning Commission that the shopping center shown in the Greenville plan should not be shown on the plan and to be indicated on one of the other quandrants of the four-way intersection. The consultant has suggested that the shopping center be located central to the area which Mr. Musso indicated on the map and also that the consultant suggested development of a high school. He then mentioned discussion which took place concerning the location of the shopping center and noted that in the Granada area the shopping center was to be located in the middle of the development but the developer convinced the Council that it should be located on a major street rather than in the middle of a development. Cm Miller commented that there is a shopping center/commercial area already approved near the freeway and Mr. Musso agreed that this is one of the alternate considerations. During the Planning Commission hearing there was testimony requesting an increase in density for two areas which Mr. Musso illustrated on the map. There was some concern that there would be complications with density transfer and who pays for the streets which will have to be worked out with the density transfer. Mr. Musso noted that the recently approved church would be deleted, and there was discussion about the freeway noise and the decibel levels noted on the plan. Cm Tirsell asked about the decibel level by the freeway and Mr. Musso indicated that there is a 300-400 ft. of buffer and the maximum tolerance for residential is 70 for interior and 65 for exterior and that area does specify a density transfer if higher density is desired. At present the General Plan shows a 3 d.u./acre for the front part and 3.5 d.u./acre towards the rear. One of the items to be considered is whether or not the buildings should be located closer to the noise of the freeway with the open areas further from the noise because the building can be designed to help eliminate freeway noise, and Cm Miller noted that this would require special criteria for the development of the building. Mayor Pritchard opened the public hearing and invited public testimony on this item. '~. Bill Older, l524 Hollyhock, stated that the Council is going to make a decision on PUD '18 and he would be interested in knowing what happened to PUD *14. In the past Reeder promised to develop Springtown Boulevard to connect with the Proud Country area when 100 homes had been developed, or after one year. There were 99 units developed which is one house short but one year was long ago. CM-29-29l March 3, 1975 (P.H. re PU f18) Mr. Older stated that the street has not been completed, as promised and he would like to know what happened to it. He then illustrated potential traffic flow if some of the streets were completed or extended and wondered how much longer the Springtown residents must continue to risk their lives by using the few streets available for the amount of traffic for that area. He urged that the City do something to get Springtown Boulevard extended all the ~ way to Galloway and to hold Reeder to his promise. Albert Strang, Secretary of Palomar Financial, 5348 University Avenue, San Diego, California; owner of portions of the Spring- town area stated that the reason he is appearing before the Council is to see how the plan is led through the Council and to comment that the loans which brought his company into this area were premised on the density being in excess of 4 d.u./acre and now they are down to 3 d.u./acre, and are still being taxed on the basis of the original use. He stated that he brought up the matter of the 30 dwelling units as a matter of courtesy and would again stress that he attended meetings two years ago at the time Mr. Countryman was Vice President of Intermark when there was considerable discussion concerning the.30 units and during which time the owner and Council went "round and round" over them. They were part of the deal on the golf course and they floated over to the Intermark property and he would like to bring this to the attention of the Council. He has been told that the 30 units do not exist and he would have to argue that they do exist and would like the Council to study the minutes reflecting these discussions. He then read a letter dated March 12, 1973, to the attention of John A. Lewis, City Attorney, referencing the Springtown Golf Course, in which they acquiesce to Council action taken March 12th allowing 30 units being available for density transfer from the Springtown Golf Course to the 112 acres of land held by Intermark, or its suc- cessors in interest. Keith Fraser, representative for Leo Perry and the property known as the 45 acres, pointed out by Mr. Musso as the density transfer property, stated that they have followed this through the P.C. and are prepared to go ahead with a proposal for development with dedication of 30 acres to the east. He stated that he is speaking before the Council so as to go on record that they are ready to proceed at any time. Mr. Musso commented that, for the record, in response to the state- ment by Mr. Older and Reeder's responsibility towards completion, the maps requiring him to extend Springtown Boulevard expired without obligating him. Mr. Older is correct in saying that it was to be extended, and the Council granted extensions in time by saying that he could extend it after the second set of units were developed, and then extended a third time by saying that it could be extended after the third set of units were developed. It was also noted that it was not the present Council that granted contin- uance for getting Springtown Boulevard extended. Cm Miller stated that he is a survivor of the previous Councils that discussed the extensions and would like to mention that he voted against all of the extensions, but to no avail. Mr. Musso stated that the third group, where the obligation rested, were never developed and this relieved Reeder of his obligation. ~ CM TURNER MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM FOR TWO WEEKS AND ALSO THAT THE CITY STAFF BE DIRECTED TO PROVIDE THE COUNCIL WITH THE MINUTES OF THE MARCH 12th, 1973, COUNCIL MEETING AND ANY OTHER MEETING THAT MIGHT RELATE TO THIS ITEM AS WELL AS THE MAP SHOWING DENSITY. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CM-29-292 March 3, 1975 (P'.H. re PU #18) Cm Miller asked if there were any responses to the EIR for this area and Mr. Musso indicated there were responsesebut most of those were included in the EIR, considered by the P.C. and the most significant comment was provided by the Soil Conservation Service and has been incorporated in the present text. L, CONSENT CALENDAR Res. re Weed Abatement The staff has recommended that the Council adopt a resolution to direct the posting of all properties and notices to be mailed to all property owners for the abatement of weeds and is the first action in our yearly Weed Abatement Program. RESOLUTION NO. 42-75 A RESOLUTION DECLARING THAT THERE EXIST WEEDS GROWING ON OR RUBBISH, REFUSE AND DIRT ON PRI- VATE PROPERTY AND/OR STREETS ADJACENT TO PRIVATE PROPERTY PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN THIS RESOLU- TION AND DECLARING THE SAME TO BE A PUBLIC NUIS- ANCE AND ORDERING SAID CONDITIONS ABATED. Payroll & Claims There were 102 claims in the amount of $39,851, dated February 24, 1975, approved by the City Manager. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF & COUNCIL (Departmental Tour) Mr. Parness stated that he has prepared a statement relative to a tour by the Council to all City departments and would like the Council to review the alternatives and indicate to the staff when they will be ready to make the tour and which alternative they would prefer. (Business Licenses) Cm Turner stated it is his understanding that in the City of Livermore a business license is not required for a contractor doing a business of less than $10,000-$20,000. Mr. Parness indicated that anyone doing business in the City is. ( required to have a business license regardless of the amount of ~. business involved. Cm Turner stated that there are people doing business in Livermore from other cities and they are of the understanding that they are not required to have a business license. Cm Turner suggested that somehow people be made aware of the fact that a license is required if they are going to do business in Livermore. It was noted that if someone knows of anyone doing business without a business license they should contact Mr. Nolan, Finance Director, and a form letter will be sent to those who should have a license. CM-29-293 Harch 3, 1975 (Construction at Golf Course) Cm Miller stated that there is construction going on at the golf course in connection with the snack bar and wondered if the plans have been reviewed by the City and the Design Review Committee. Mr. Parness replied that the construction is taking place only in the interior of the snack bar and the plans have not been reviewed by the Design Review Committee as he felt it was not appropriate or necessary to have the Committee review them. The staff has reviewed the modifications and feel that this would be nothing other than an improvement and they were given permission to proceed. , " ! ~ (Housing & Community Development Funds) Cm Tirse11 stated that tonight the Council is being asked to refer the matter of the Housing and Community Development Funds to the Planning Commission for choosing a site and would like to suggest that the Council, at the same time, determine what needs are to be served in the center and which programs could be operated in the center and which groups the City will try to serve. She suggested that there be community input for helping to decide which services could be handled in the center. She felt that, in particular, counceling services, ministers, and schools would have valuable input to offer. Cm Tirsel1 proposed that the Council establish a committee to begin plans for the service center drawing members from these various groups. We need to discuss plans before the building is constructed and before a design is approved. She stated that she would like the staff to look into this matter and to consider the recommendations of the ACAP agency and provide the Council with suggestions as to how the Council should proceed. She felt ACAP can furnish information as to what agencies exist in Liver- morel the things which are needed and the City's service gaps. Mr. Parness commented that he feels Cm Tirse11's suggestion is good but there is one contingency and that is that the federal government may not allow the program and perhaps the City should wait until there is some indication that we will receive money for our first priority submission - that being the multi-service center. Cm Tirsell commented that under the auspices of ACAP we still need to form a Social Concerns Committee because we are the only community in the ACAP South County area that does not have such a committee. Such a committee responds to the execu- tive body over the hill; therefore, with or without approval of the grant we need to form a committee in order to comply with our ACAP membership. (Senior Citizens Program) Mayor Pritchard stated that the Senior Citizens program once fun- ded by SACEOA and then taken over by the state has been working on a quarter to quarter basis and Lillian Snorf telephoned the Mayor today to inform him that she has been told that the first of next month everything will cease as there will be no funding by the state. Mayor Pritchard stated that he feels something should be done and the City should look for a source of funds immediately. He explained that there were some OEO funds left over when SACEOA dissolved and the state has been administrating these funds which the Senior Citizens have been receiving for their program. ~. CM-29-294 March 3, 1975 '~ (Senior Citizens Program) Mayor Pritchard stated that he would like to pursue this matter and if it is true there will be no more funds the ACAP agency should be the body the City appeals to for funding. This program as well as the Head Start program are the two funded through the old SACEOA and it imperative that the City keep them going. The Mayor mentioned that the Meals on Wheels program and a station wagon is being funded to get people to hospitals and doctors offices and he has asked Mrs. Snorf for a breakdown of costs for services that have been funded by the old OEO funds. (Livermore Visitors) Mayor Pritchard stated that on Friday Livermore will receive visitors from Guatemala and with the Council's permission will be hosting a luncheon for them at the Tailwinds Restaurant and would hope that the other members of the Council will attend the luncheon. Mayor Pritchard commented that Dr. DeBruin and Dr. Joe Medeiros will also be attending the luncheon as well as an interpreter for the Spanish speaking guests. COMMUNICATION RE INCREASE FOR INTRASTATE PHONE RATES Notice of filing an application for increases for intrastate telephone rates was submitted to the City Council and Dick Piepenburg, Manager of the Telephone Company, commented that the City has received the standard notification concerning filing for an increase in rates and that the notification will also go to the counties and state. The rate increase is small and required to recoup increased costs, primarily wages. Cm Tirsell asked about the average salary increase and Mr. Piepenburg replied that the proposed increase is to offset wage increases which will go into effect July I, 1975 and as he recalls the wage increase is for 3% plus a cost of living factor which could mean approximately a 10% increase. Cm Miller stated that he has no objection to the Telephone Company asking for a rate increase to cover their expenses as far as wages are concerned; however, in the last eight years the rate of return which the Telephone Company is entitled to earn, and therefore re- felcted in their rates, have gone up substantially. The rate of return is quite high, in his opinion, and quite high compared to what it has been in the recent past and substantially higher than it has been in the past and feels that a reasonable position for the City of Livermore to take would be to ask the PUC to reduce their rate of return first and then consider a wage increase. The wage increase is reasonable but the rate of return is not. He felt the City should oppose a wage increase until after the rate of return has been reduced and would urge that a letter to this effect be sent to the PUC. The present rate of return is 8.85% and at one time it was as low as 5.6% and would suggest that it go back to 6.9%. Cm Futch stated that he would like to see the data concerning this before agreeing to any action. ----._,..,..- Mr. Piepenburg stated that he is not prepared to justify the rate of return, tonight, but would like to say that the PUC goes into this in great detail and detailed discussion on the rate of return. The Telephone Company is only saying that they are .allowed an 8.85% return and with the increased wage costs and inflation the rate of return is going down; their actual return in December 1974 being 7.61%, and the Telephone Company fees the rate of return is not excessive because the rate of return is not guaran~eed. CM-29-295 March 3, 1975 (Phone Rate Increases) Mr. Piepenburg stated that they do try to stay at that rate of return because they are in business.to make money and they are competing for the same money that banks are competing for as is everyone else. Cm Miller pointed out that interest rates have come down a lot recently and Mr. Piepenburg stated that this is true but they have had to borrow at the higher interest rate and will have to pay these higher rates for the next 20-30 years. //-) ---/ It was noted that no action is necessary of the Council on this item but Cm Miller may bring it up again next week. COMMUNICATION FROM CITY OF LYNWOOD RE SB 275 A resolution opposing SB 275 (Public Employer/Employee Relations) was submitted by the City of Lynwood and noted for filing. COMMUNICATION RE P.H. - MAYORS' GAS TAX FORMULA Notice of a public hearing by the Board of Supervisors concerning the Mayors' Formula for Gas Tax Funds was received from the Board of Supervisors. The hearing will be held on March 18, 1975 at 10:30 a.m. Mayor Pritchard commented that from the letter it would appear that no action is anticipated but that public testimony will be received and other meetings will follow and asked if Mr. Parness would be able to attend the meeting and Mr. Parness indicated that he plans to attend the hearing. Mayor Pritchard added that there is some question as to whether funds could be set aside for rapid transit and, if so, whether such funds should come from the City's share, the County's share, or both, and Mr. Parness indicated that it is not positive that the gas tax money can be used for this purpose and it depends upon interpretation of Measure B which appeared on the ballot during the last election. Cm Miller mentioned at this time that the Board of Supervisors is going to hold another hearing about redistricting and would be happy to offer input concerning this matter. Cm Turner stated that he would like to see a full-time Supervisor in the valley and that strong consideration should be given towards establishing a district which would comprise this valley and perhaps Castro Valley because they do not have a BART system. The concerns of Union City and Fremont and other such cities are different than those of the valley and there should be some separation in the districting. Mayor Pritchard stated that the Charter can now be amended because of the recent measure passage, which may allow more Supervisors, and certainly the valley would qualify as an area that should get a Supervisor. Cm Miller stated that the idea of seven districts as proposed by Valerie Raymond, candidate for next Supervisor election, is very good and would suggest that the City ask the Supervisors to create a seven Supervisor Board to provide more representation from areas such as the valley. "J CM-29-296 March 3, 1975 (re Gas Tax Formula and Rapid Transit) Cm Turner stated that he would like the staff to be directed to provide the Council with the necessary testimony such as on the basis of popu- lation and demography. v RECESS Mayor Pritchard called for a brief recess after which the Council meeting resumed with all members present. DISCUSSION RE PU #8 & #9 The discussion concerning Planning Units #8 and #9 was continued from April I, 1974 and Mr. Musso explained that the matter was continued because it was felt that discussion should take place at a time closer to the expiration of the moratorium, which is in a couple of weeks. Circumstances have not changed to any great extent in the plan, although there will be additional information on the airport area in a few months, primarily the area around the clear zones which will probably change and some of the changes for the airport may affect some of the land uses in the area. Cm Futch asked if the park sites for this area have been finalized and Mr. Musso replied that nothing has changed - the plan still shows the Hagemann Park and the existing park. There is still some question on the school which cannot be resolved at present. Discussion followed concerning the school site and plans for it. Cm Tirsell asked about the most recent information regarding the possible Isabel Freeway and Mr. Parness indicated that he is waiting to get the official word but he has talked with the CAL-TRANS staff and the report was that the Highway Commission has said "no" they will not financially participate but would hold the route designa- tion and would not vacate it, allowing the City and County, jointly, to come up with the funding for the purchase of the Elliott property and any other property that may intrude and we will be given something like a month to declare our intention. Cm Tirsell then asked if the width line for the freeway would be wider than the width line the City would need for a major street and Mr. Parness replied that it would be wider but is not sure how much wider. Cm Futch wondered if a decision tonight would have a bearing on what the City might decide to do with respect to participating with the County and Mr. Parness felt it would not but rather would reaffirm the Council's desires to have some kind of a routing along Isabel. / L/ Cm Futch felt if the matter is postponed the Council may have to hold public hearings again and since there is not much change that can take place in the area with respect to the homes that will be built, the density is in conformance with the General Plan and the circulation is already there, he would suggest that the Council go ahead and approve the Planning units as drawn up by the P. C. and MOVED THAT THE SPECIFIC PLANS FOR THIS AREA, AS PROPOSED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION, FOR 4 d.u./ACRE BE ADOPTED, AND A RESOLU- TION PREPARED, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL. - Cm Miller asked Mr. Musso to indicate which areas are yet to be developed and at what density. Musso illustrated the residen- tial property which he stated is at 3 d.u./acre and in the freeway right-of-way 65 units have been approved, and park sites will be required. CM-29-297 March 3, 1975 (PU #8 and #9) Cm Miller stated that part of the reason for holding up the Specific Plan for this area was possible consideration for lowering densities in the General Plan for this area. In his opinion, density at 4 d.u./acre should be a lower denisty and those at 3 d.u./acre could be at lower density if they are going to be cluster developemnt, and he is not ready to approve a Speci- ) fic Plan at higher density at this point. ~ Mayor Pritchard asked if there is a possibility that the densities will be considered in the General Plan amendment and Mr. Musso replied that it is true that many densities established will be considered by the General Plan amendment, but may not get into the detail of determining whether an area should be 3 d.u./acre instead of 4 d.u./acre. Cm Futch asked how this density compares with surrounding density and Mr. Musso indicated that it is similar - the same density has been established for surrounding areas; some at 3 and some at 4 d.u./acre. Cm Futch noted that it would appear that the majority of the density is 3 d.u./acre for the portion remaining, and Mr. Musso commented that it is 4 d.u./acre but has not been developed that way. Cm Tirsell wondered if the Specific Plan would be changed if the density for the General Plan is changed and Mr. Musso felt the Specific Plans would have to be changed separately to reflect the specifications of the General Plan. Cm Miller stated he is not willing to allow any more 4 d.u./acre. The argument that everything in surrounding areas has higher den- sity, so areas should be allowed higher density in perpetuity, should not be used. Cm Tirsell stated that she is not opposed to 4 d.u./acre for this particular site because this development, from the start, provided housing at a cost many other areas in town do not have and one of the last areas in town where young families could qualify for purchasing at the time they were developed, and there was an attempt at innovative planning for the expandables. There is a need for this type of housing and would agree with the 4 d.u./acre but wouldn't want a higher density. Cm Miller pointed out that the "expandables" are built on three to the acre and they were built on three to the acre with the expansion possibility as provided by the RS Ordinance to go, at that time to 30%; our RS Ordinance now says 35%. The argument that higher density is required to provide expandables can't be true because if the lot is too snall one can't expand anything onto it and the argument that higher density will provide lower cost housing has been refuted over and over again in the City of Livermore. It can be noted that the 5 d.u./acre lots in Granada Village have very expensive houses on them; therefore it would seem that the argument 4 d.u./acre makes a difference as far as the housing put on it is not true. He would argue that densities be reduced and if it is found that it is more economical to cluster housing, then we can get the open space associated with it. He emphasized that he can not agree that the majority of this Planning Unit should remain at 4 d.u./acre. Cm Futch stated that he would have to agree with the argument that when density is reduced lots does go up and he feels if there are two or three to for lower income housing and the /...0 cost for housing on the larger ..- l!c."'l,::,.. . .hous1ng cannot be prov1ded acre. . He feels there is a need density for this area is compatible. ~. ,J the the CM-29-298 March 3, 1975 (Planning units 8 and 9) ~/ Cm Miller stated that he is tired of the same argument he has heard for 15 years - that the higher density will provide low income housing. The Council should realize that higher density does not provide low income housing without some other mechanism to make it come to pass. Four and five to the acre does not have low income housing on it and never has. If the City of Livermore wants to provide low income housing there must be some other mechanism for doing it. Higher density never has and never will provide low income housing and in fact the developers have told the City that this does not cause low income housing. . .' ".' '.,' <tm J~~<d &<4 c.It<e'-'t.:..ii<.- -AcuJ-?'OJ~ .o7..Zt./-t./,-C'-'t AlA ~"- ~ ~ ~~ -vr>'''':~'1' Cm Turner stated that he would have to agree with what Cm Mi~ has said about higher density not providing low cost housing. Mayor Pritchard indicated that the consultant has indicated that it is not really necessary or desirable to approve the Specific Plans and Cm Tirsell stated that this has not been said in writing and the Mayor replied that it was not in writing but this is what the consultant has told him. Cm Tirsell stated that she has not seen official notification and she was not informed of this by the consultant and Cm Futch stated that he also was not informed. Mr. Musso commented that the consultant will be presenting the General Plan amendment for discussion by the Council on March 17th which provides the interim growth mechanism and the consultant feels the work being done on the Specific Plans may possibly have to be amended but did not discard the value of the Specific Plans. The consultant suggested that the plans be approved but not formally adopted and to be used as a guide in the next year. Cm Tirsell asked if the consultant would be recommending that the Specific Plans would not be needed and Mr. Musso replied that the Specific Planning process is very important in the consultant's program and will recommend that Specific Plans are adopted. Cm Turner stated that he is not in favor of the motion because he feels there should be some commercial consideration on the frontage area and also there is some merit in having 3 d.u./acre with cluster development and open space. He stated that he is not really opposed to the 4 d.u./acre either, however. Cm Tirsell stated that she would like to make the argument that if all freeway plans along residential are discarded there will be a lot of commercial and a lot of open space will have to be purchased. MOTION FAILED 2-3 (Cm Miller, Turner, and Mayor Pritchard dissenting). CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL TABLE FURTHER DISCUSSION ON ALL SPECIFIC PLANS WHICH ARE PENDING UNTIL COMPLETION OF THE GENERAL PLAN OCCURS, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRITCHARD. MOTION FAILED 2-3 (Cm Turner, Miller and Futch dissenting). Cm Futch stated that he would agree, in principle, with Cm Tirsell's motion but feels that there should be a decision on the specific plans when they come before the Council rather than continued delays. CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL CONTINUE DISCUSSION OF SPECIFIC PLANS UNTIL COMPLETION OF THE GENERAL PLAN, AT WHICH TIME DENSITIES AND OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS, SUCH AS THE AIRPORT LAND USE STUDY, WILL BE COMPLETE FOR INPUT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SO THE PLANS ARE IN FINAL FORM AS FAR AS DENSITY RECOMMENDATIONS AND ALL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS, AND THAT NONE BE DISCUSSED UNTIL THIS TIME MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. CM-29-299 March 3, 1975 (Planning Units 8 and 9) Cm Miller stated that Planning Unit #18 has already been contin- ued until March 17th and would presume the planning consultants will be present at that meeting and would like to continue the discussion of Planning Units #8 and #9, and after the Council finishes discussing #12, next time, it also be continued until March 17th. At that time it can be decided as to whether or not Specific Plan adoption should be postponed. CM MILLER MOVED TO CONTINUE DISCUSSION OF PU #8 AND #9 UNTIL MARCH 17th, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. .-J Cm Tirsell stated that the Council has been "round and round" on #8 and #9; #12 was postponed specifically because there was a question of density and not one park site has been moved since this was first discussed in 1972 and we are waiting to find out what the density for Planning Unit #12 should be. As far as Planning Unit #18, we did not have the map, and there also may be a question on the density and she stated she feels it is ludicrous to discuss this with the anticipation that the Council may very soon pass it. People are coming in for public hearings, land owners are interested, and they feel it is eminent that the City do something and this is the third time the Council has looked at #8 and #9 and feels it is ridiculous. MOTION PASSED 3-2 (Cm Tirse1l and Futch dissenting) . REPORT RE POLICY STATEMENT DRAFTS In accordance with the Council's direction, policy statements for 1) Benefit Districts, 2) Use of Eminent Domain, and 3) Certificate of Occupancy provisions and Property Corner Markers were continued from the meeting of February 24th. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED FOR ANOTHER THREE WEEKS TO MARCH 24. RESOLUTION AUTH. EXEC. OF JOINT POWERS AMENDMENT ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER, AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH LARPD WAS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION NO. 43-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH LIVERMORE AREA RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT. RES. AUTH. APPLICATION OF INSPECTION FEE (Mobi1ehomes) ON MOTION OF CM FUTCH, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A FEE SCHEDULE FOR MOBILEHOME INSTALLA- TION WAS ADOPTED. -..,'/ CM-29-300 March 3, 1975 (Fee Schedule Mobilehome Installation) RESOLUTION NO. 44-75 A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING FEE SCHEDULE FOR MOBILEHOME INSTALLATION. L/ REPORT RE EAST AVE. FUTURE WIDTH LINES Discussion of the future width lines for East Avenue was continued from the meeting of last week and Mr. Lee stated that one item which came up during the discussion last week was the fact that the memorandum he sent to the Council did not include any discussion about future trailways outside of our standard 104 ft. right-of-way and he would suggest that under Bikeways at the end of Page 1, there be insertion of a statement, as follows: It is anticipated that a trailway will be required on each side of East Avenue, in addition to the recommended 104 ft. right-of-way. The additional width of the trailway on each side is expected to vary between 10 and 25 ft. and average approximately 17.5 ft., as shown in the General Plan and will be in excess of the on-street bikeway. em Futch asked if this is referring to the trailway that is not a part of the width of the street, which Mr. Lee replied is correct. Cm Futch felt perhaps this is a separate issue and Mr. Lee commented it is, but the Council seemed to be concerned about this last time there was discussion and this wording would indicate that the Council does intend to provide a trailway outside of the 104 ft. right-of-way sometime in the future; but this would not create a problem as far as planning for East Avenue. Cm Futch expressed concern that the County may feel that if a bike trail is to be provided in the future on each side, it shouldn't be provided for at this time in the street and such a statement may fog the issue. Cm Tirsell pointed out that the bike lane in the street is the emergency lane which will have to be provided anyway. Cm Tirse1l noted that at the time the trail system was adopted she recalls that on major streets where a trail system was provided, the Council was not going to sanction bike riding in the streets. The bike routes are to be the routes for the City and if bike riders choose to use the emergency lanes, this is their prerogative. Mr. Lee stated that this is correct but, again, the bicycle is treated as a vehicle and if someone chooses to ride in the emergency lane they may do so. Also, in the Bikeway Study pre- sented to the Council and Bikeways group it was proposed that at intersections the bike would go out into the street so they would be observed, as would an automobile. Cm Tirse1l pointed out that to purchase land for a bike trail is going to be very expensive and if people are going to use the street anyway, perhaps it would be better to recommend a wider street design and emergency lane for the major street. Cm Turner asked about the plans for the bikes in front of OGO, and Mr. Lee explained that the emergency lane would serve as the on-street bike lane and an off-street bikeway is planned similar to that in front of the apartments at Wagoner Farms. Cm Turner expressed concern for the children going to Almond Ave., East Avenue and Livermore High School, if the bike trail is on-street and Mr. Lee replied that there will still be a sidewalk area that could be used. CM-29-30l March 3, 1975 (Report re East Avenue Future Width Lines) Mayor Pritchard stated that what Mr. Lee is proposing is that the Council approve the 104 ft. right-of-way, and it is the Council's position that they will approve the 104 ft. right- of-way and the very least that should be done is a resolution signifying approval and possibly even an ordinance adopted set- ting width lines. J Mr. Lee stated that ultimately, when the width lines are decided, there will have to be an ordinance but at this time the City is in the process of setting standards and at this time it would not be necessary or appropriate to adopt a resolution or an ordinance. Mayor Pritchard stated that once the Council says they want the 104 ft. then anyone can say this is definitive action taken by the Council but will not have been taken care of by resolution or an ordinance. Mr. Lee stated that if an ordinance is to be adopted setting width lines it will mean that public hearings will have to be held and in his opinion this is not the time for this type of action. Cm Miller stated that what is being proposed is the right-of-way width for a major street and the County is also including a side- walk which includes the bikeway and he would suggest that two more feet be added to the emergency lane which will be used as a bike lane, by taking the extra two feet out of the future bike path. This would mean 104 ft. width plus a small bikeway off-street. His reasoning is that a 15 ft. bikeway cannot be provided in front of OGO and his suggestion would accommodate the use expected. Cm Tirsell stated that there are about three properties where the full proposed bikeway cannot be accommodated. Cm Turner felt if three feet are to be taken from the sidewalk area it would mean that people will have to use the bike area for walking and bike riding and too many uses in an area may render it useless. It was noted that the proposed bike trail will be behind the sidewalk area and that the three feet will not come from the sidewalk. Cm Futch stated that it should be made clear that the Council feels a combined bikeway and sidewalk is not appropriate for East Avenue. Roger Everett, member of the Livermore Bikeways Association, stated that the Association had an opportunity to respond to the County's original 120 ft. recommendation and the Assoc. made recommendations against the off-street plan suggested by the County. In the meantime, it appears that there is not adequate width for the 120 ft. recommended by the County and the position of the Association is that the City is stuck with something in the nature of a 104 ft. right-of-way and would like to point out that if the City is going to lock in a 104 ft. right-of-way, or something similar to this width, that the City install a curbed lane at least 10 ft. wide which could double as an emergency parking lane and would allow a bike rider to go around a stalled automobile. It is felt that a minimum of 10 ft. would be required for this purpose and he offered suggestions for accomplishing this. J CM FUTCH MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL INSTRUCT THE STAFF TO INFORM THE COUNTY THAT THE COUNCIL FEELS A 10 FT. BIKE PATH ALONG EACH SIDE OF EAST AVENUE SHOULD BE PROVIDED FOR AND THAT THE BIKE PATH, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE SIDEWALK, IS NOT APPROPRIATE AND THAT THE CM-29-302 March 3, 1975 (Report re East Avenue Future Width Lines) WIDTH SHOULD BE 108 FT. OR WHATEVER THE COUNTY FEELS IS NECESSARY TO GET THE 10 FT. INTO THE PARKING LANE, SECONDED BY CM MILLER. ~.. Cm Futch explained that his motion relates only to the on-street bicycle path. HE CLARIFIED THE LAST PORTION OF HIS MOTION BY SAYING THAT WITHIN THE 108 FT. RIGHT-OF-WAY THERE SHOULD BE A 10 FT. BIKE PATH ON EACH SIDE OF EAST AVENUE, WITHIN THE STREET, AND IT IS NOT APPROPRIATE TO PROVIDE A BIKE PATH IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE SIDEWALK. Mayor Pritchard stated that he would like to explain that he feels the motion is, in essence, setting width lines for East Avenue and the reason he will vote against the motion. CM FUTCH STATED IT WAS CLEARLY THE INTENT THAT HIS MOTION REFLECTS THE DESIRE OF THE COUNCIL AND NOT APPROVING A PARTICULAR WIDTH LINE. MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Mayor Pritchard dissenting) . REPORT RE PAY IN LIEU VACATION (Blalock) The City Manager reported that a request has been received from and employee requesting 40 hours pay in lieu of vacation for personal reasons and this procedure is specified under Article XI, Section 2 (d). It is recommended that a motion authorizing this request be adopted. ON MOTION OF CM FUTCH, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE REQUEST FOR IN LIEU PAY WAS APPROVED. REPORT RE RECLAMATION PLANT FLOWS A report was submitted by the Director of Public Works relative to the flow status of the Water Reclamation Plant and the planning for capacity expansion, and Mr. Lee gave an oral report concerning this item. He stated that he inadvertently omitted a potential industrial development (Sears) consisting of an estimated .03 MGD or the equivalent of 100 homes. This development would bring the reserve capacity down to .14 MGD. There are assessment districts in the Springtown area and there are about 500 acres of undeveloped property in that area as well as about 84 acres in Wagoner Farms. At an estimated 3 d.u./acre for these undeveloped 584 acres it would mean an additional 1,800 units. He stated that in addition to the plant flow he took note of the discussion the Council had relative to the available capacity that might be authorized by the EPA and the fact that an amount equivalent to a 132,000 population may be assigned to the valley. He consulted with our plant consult- ing engineers, and based on information given to them they prepared an estimate of cost to provide added capacity at the plant in two increments. The first increment would be 2.5 MGD, which is a logical increment because of the units already been built. The costs are included in his written report to the Council and he has recommended that the Council apply for the 2.5 MGD capacity increase. Cm Tirse1l stated that she was not of the impression that the EPA had made a firm commitment and that we are not working with a concrete figure as to what the EPA is willing to fund, as yet. Also, it is apparent that we need other information, such as what will be funded on the high priorities such as the VCSD grant of $8.2 ~il1ioR. If M6-D ~ CM-29-303 ~ March 3, 1975 (Report re Reclamation Plant Flows & Capacity) they are granted that amount and the EPA is firm on this number, that would be all the funding allowed. There are several pieces of information missing and she felt unprepared to make a decision until she is more apprised of what the situation is with EPA AND MOVED TO TABLE THIS ITEM UNTIL THE CITY CAN COMMUNICATE THROUGH LAVWMA AND THE EPA. J Cm Miller stated he prefers that Cm Tirsell not move to table the item because such a motion eliminates any further discussion and CM TIRSELL RESTATED HER MOTION TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM UNTIL THE CITY CAN COMMUNICATE THROUGH LAVWMA AND THE EPA, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cm Miller stated that Cm Tirse1l has made a very good point in that 135,000 has not been made a firm number. As to her suggestion that there are other issues, he would like to mention what he feels should be considered with regard to pursuing something else. The 135,000 bandied about is not consistent with any of the Department of Finance's E-O projections that are supposed to be used by the State Water Resources Board and the EPA. It turns out that for Alameda County the growth rate projections, using E-O, are less than 1%, per year. In the State of California the E-O projections are less than .7 of a percent a year, averaged over the whole state. The 132,000 corresponds to l~% and the implication of this is that Alameda County's population is being concentrated in not only the worst part of the county for air quality but also for the worst part of the whole air basin. There is something "dead wrong" with the way these numbers are being assigned and it seems the City of Livermore should pursue what the State Water Resources Board, the EPA and State Department of Finance uses as a figure (135,000) because the number for 20 years at the Alameda County rate is less than 120,000 based on our present population. CM MILLER MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO ADD THAT THE COUNCIL CONSIDER SENDING REPRESENTA- TIVES AND/OR LETTERS TO THE THREE AGENCIES MENTIONED IN AN EFFORT TO HASH OUT THE PROJECTIONS AND WHERE THEY ARE GETTING THEIR PROJEC- TIONS THAT WOULD ALLOW 135,000 PEOPLE IN THE VALLEY, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cm Futch mentioned that he would like to write the letter to be sent to these agencies. Mr. Lee stated that he will readily admit that there are many answered questions about this item and one concern of his is that if the City waits several months to get a firm commitment, we may never get such a statement and the only way this may become a fact is when they allow additional capacity. If we wait around for some- thing firm it will very likely never materialize and we will find this out after someone else has the capacity. Cm Miller felt the point made by Mr. Lee has merit - not that we should approve an application but in any letter or discussion with these people it should be pointed out that if they are going to distribute the population in the valley they are going to in- sist on viola4ing the air quality guidelines and we should get some portion of the capacity. AMENDMENT PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE; MAIN MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. REPORT RE COMMUNITY DEVELOP. ACT FACILITY -..-/' The City Manager reported that a decision must be made as to the location of the proposed multi-purpose service center funded by CM-29-304 March 3, 1975 (Community Develop. Act Funding) the Community Development Act grant. Two sites have tentatively been suggested: 1) LARPD recreation center at 8th & H Streets, and 2) the community park Civic Center property. ~ ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE MATTER WAS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR RECOMMENDATION. REPORT RE VALLEY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL Cm Tirse1l and Turner have met with the members of the Board of Valley Memorial Hospital and City staff members to discuss plans for the hospital and its intention to construct a new facility in the western sector of the valley. CM Turner stated that the representatives have not had the oppor- tunity to speak with everyone they wish to talk to at this time AND MOVED THAT THE ITEM BE CONTINUED, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. REPORT FROM DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE RE SITE PLAN REVIEW, ETC. The staff has recommended that the report from the Design Review Committee concerning site plan review and design review functions be referred to the staff for preparation of amendatory policy state- ments and/or ordinance drafts for later referral to the various bodies concerned such as the Design Review Committee, the Planning Commission and the Council. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE MATTER WAS REFERRED TO THE STAFF AS RECOMMENDED. COMMUNICATION FROM DESIGN REVIEW COMMa RE SEMINAR The Design Review Committee wrote to the City Council informing them of a seminar to be held on Friday, April 4, 1975, in San Francisco, on liThe Design Review Process". The Committee recom- mended that Mr. Street and a Committee member attend this seminar. Cm Miller wondered if there would be merit in having more than one member of the Committee attend the seminar with Mr. Street. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE ATTENDANCE OF THE SEMINAR BY MR. STREET AND TWO COMMITTEE MEMBERS, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. REPORT RE PROPERTY ACQUISITION - FIRST ST. & LIVERMORE AVENUE. The City Manager reported that a delay in the improvements for the First Street-Livermore Avenue intersection have been delayed because of dispute over a settlement for right-of-way. The owner has agreed to a settlement which is $2,500 higher than the appraisal made by the state for $67,500. The City would pay the additional $1,670 and the state would contribute $830 and it is recommended that the Council approve this property acquisition settlement. CM-29-305 March 3, 1975 (First St./Livermore Avenue Intersection) The City Attorney commented that it is his impression that if the Council intends to expend public funds shuch should be done by resolution; however, if this is only a preliminary approval and an o.k. for the staff to go ahead and make confirmation and later adopt the expenditure later, by resolution, this would also be appropriate. If this is the case a motion would be satisfactory at this time. J Mr. Parness commented that the Council has already enacted a joint contract with the state for this project and the staff is now asking that they indicate their favor for this input. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE PROPERTY ACQUISITION SETTLEMENT WITH FINAL DETAILS TO BE DONE BY RESOLUTION, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Prior to the motion Cm Turner asked if this property would be used for the m1n1 park which is planned in the area and Mr. Parness replied that acquisition has already been made for the site that will be used as a park and that this acquisition will be used, primarily, for the correction of the street alignment. ORD. RE BUILDINGS Cm Miller stated that introduction of the ordinance for the Municipal Code amendment amending Section 6.2.3, regarding Survey of Article I, regarding General Provisions, of Chapter 6, regarding Buildings, corresponds to the formalizing of the property markers and that this portion is included in the policy which has been continued. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THIS ITEM BE CONTINUED UNTIL THE POLICY HAS BEEN DISCUSSED, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Pritchard adjourned the meeting at 10:55 p.m. to an execu- tive session to discuss appointments to committees and the Planning Commission. ~~~ ayor APPROVE ATTEST ~~~L ity Clerk 01 vermore, California .-.../ CM-29-306 Special Meeting of March 10, 1975 A special meeting was called by Mayor Pritchard to convene at 12:00 noon at the Livermore Mortuary, 3070 East Avenue. The purpose of the meeting was to adjourn the special meeting to an executive session to discuss personnel matters. ~/ Due to lack of a quorum, no meeting was held. '\ . \ CJ. ty Clerk Ltvemore, California ATTEST c_lJ:? Regular Meeting of March 10, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on March 10, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called at 8:07 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard presiding. ROLL CALL Present: ern Turner, Miller, Futch, Tirse11 and Mayor Pritchard Absent: None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Pritchard led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of ~llegiance. f..UNUTES February 24, 1975 Page 279, fifth paragraph: Cm Futch commented that this particular paragraph was a question and really should be reworded as follows: Cm Futch questioned the reason for delaying improvements on Wax1ax Lane and this is not the City's normal policy? Mr. Lee stated...etc. Page 284, sixth paragraph from bottom, sixth line should indicate that 20 ft. were taken from the City - not 40 ft. ON ~lOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 24TH WERE APPROVED AS CORRECTED. SPECIAL ITEM - ANNUAL COUNCIL REORGANIZATION According to Council procedures, there is an annual reorganization of the Council with selections for Mayor and Vice Mayor, on the second Monday in March. Mayor Pritchard declared the floor open for nominations for Mayor. '~ CM FUTCH MOVED TO NOMINATE MAYOR PRITCHARD TO SERVE AS MAYOR FOR AN ADDITIONAL YEAR, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. There were no other nominations for Mayor. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CM MILLER MOVED TO NOMINATE CM TURNER FOR VICE MAYOR, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRITCHARD. MOTION PASSED 3-2 (Cm Futch and Tirse1l dissenting). CM-29-307 March 10, 1975 OPEN FORUM (re North 1-580 Citizens & Area) Francis Harper, representative of the North 1-580 Citizens Group, stated that they have drafted letters to be sent to the City Council, LAPRD, the School District, the County Supervisors, LAFCO, ABAG, .~ Assemblyman Mori, the State Department of Education, Governor Brown, Congressman Stark and all the news media, concerning the fact that it has been a mistake to develop North 1-580 and it is the responsibility of the City, and the School District, to recognize this area as an equal part of the City. She then played a recording of children singing "This Land Was Made for You and Me", and asked that the City take a stand for the children of this community. Cm Miller stated that he was uncertain as to what the North 1-580 Citizens Group's stand is and Mrs. Harper stated that their stand is what the City of Livermore has done to them and that they do not want to debate the issue any longer with the City. They have asked for the City for help and no longer "look up" to the Council. Cm Turner stated that perhaps it would be in order to ask the City Attorney to comment on the park acquisition status if this is what the Group is referring to. Mr. Logan stated that Mr. Bevilacqua has recently retained an attorney and this should speed up proceedings and it is Mr. Logan's impression that the attorney would like to talk settlement rather than for the matter to go to court. Cm Miller stated it is not clear whether the Group is unhappy over the state of the park acquisition or this along with other problems but the City has been trying to get a park for these people since dealing with Kissell (Bevilacqua's successor) and Kissell indicated they were willing to dedicate the land to the City but it turned out that they did not own the land and the City was mislead. It has been necessary for the City to condemn this property and this is a slow process. MOTION TO TABLE AGENDA ITEMS Mayor Pritchard stated that Item 4.7 concerning rate increase for PG&E service is now a moot point because a hearing by the PUC has been refused. It should also be noted that the Senior Citizens Committee has requested that Item 6.5 regarding senior citizen funding be tabled. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE ABOVE MENTIONED ITEMS WERE TABLED. PUBLIC HEARING RE GEN. PLAN AMEND. RE PLANNING UNIT #12 \ Mr. Musso explained that the Council and Planning Commission have spent over a year studying Planning Unit il2 (Portola Hills area) with respect to the question of density and the public hearing was advertised to include consideration of density as well as possible change in land use designation along 1-580. The Planning Commission held a public hearing, reports have been written and a Negative Declaration with respect to environmental impact has been filed. ----/ CM-29-308 March 10, 1975 ( ~/ (P.H. re PU #12) Originally the Negative Declaration was written with the intent of approximately 1/2 d.u./acre in the hilly areas with lower density along the freeway in the flat areas. There have been a number of alternatives and one of the major suggestions was for commercial or industrial along 1-580. This was resolved by the Planning Commission on the basis that with the amount of freeway going through the valley it would not be feasible to allocate nonresidential to these areas. In meeting with the Noise Committee and visiting the area it was felt that the noise problem along the freeway is not as significant as it is along some of our major streets where residential areas exist. The highest decoibel level noted in this area was 70 while along Holmes Street it is over 85 decibels. It was felt that residential could be allowed; however, other uses were not ruled out. It was felt, after consider- able discussion, that density for the hilly area could be a function of subdivision design rather than to set a specific density. The ultimate discussion was on the General Plan amendment and a representa- tion of the map on file which is the boundary between the 2 and 3 d.u./acre. The area from the freeway into the Los Altos Hills sub- division and the Ensign-Bickford property was changed from 4 d.u./acre to 3 d.u./acre and primarily the Ensign-Bickford property remained at 3 d.u./acre. The remainder of the area was reduced from 3 to 2 d.u./acre. Cm Futch asked if the primary reason for reduction in density was because of the steep hills and Mr. Musso indicated that this was the reason. A letter was received from Arthur Bellman, representing Judge William H. Gale, Jr.; Mrs. Genevieve S. Fraser; Dr. Paul W. Schriber; Dr. Dalzell J. Potter; Alan J. Andersen; H. A. Martin; and Arthur Bellman, property owners, stated that it will be a long period of time before their property can be developed as a subdivision and the land is presently completely undeveloped. They would protest any change in the General Plan Amendment that would affect their property now and which would hamper efforts to develop. A letter was also received from E. A. Goldberg, Vice President of Ensign Bickford Realty Corporation, in which it is requested that the Ensign Bickford property be considered separately from the northerly hill because it is very different in character from the hills to the north. Attached to the letter was a report from Gruen Associates, Land Planning Consultants, concerning the Plan- ning Department's report concerning this area. Cm Tirsell asked if the density for the General Plan Amendment for PUD #12 were reviewed by Grunwald and Crawford, our consultants, and Mr. Musso replied that it has been referred to them but they have not responded. Mr. Musso illustrated the area changed from 3 d.u./acre to 2 d.u./acre and noted that the number of schools were reduced to two. l There was some discussion regarding decibel levels and Mr. Musso stated that it was generally felt that there is adequate space to develop at higher densities and that higher density would best adapt to a freeway location. The buildings can be designed more economically and structured in such a way that the noise can be minimized. The only unresolved aspect was where the buildings should be located and where the open space should be. Cm Miller wondered if any consideration had been given to the amount of smog that would collect in these hollows and Mr. Musso indicated this was discussed and early in the discussions it was determined that carbon monoxide would not be a problem because it dissipates rapidly with distance. CM-29-309 March 10, 1975 (P.H. re General Plan Amendment re Planning unit No. 12) Mr. Musso stated that one of the alternatives would be to leave this land in open space. He added that the state Division of Highways has been asked to respond and they have adopted a three step program as follows: 1. To take care of properties that were developed before the state adopted this area as a freeway route and to take care of noise problems and other factors. 2. Take care of those properties that have developed since the freeway was developed - which is most of the develop- ment which has taken place. J 3. To take care of everything else. The state indicated they have no intention of purchasing the property in question. Cm Tirse1l wondered if there is any legislation prohibiting develop- ment within certain decibel levels and Mr. Musso indicated that he knows only of HUD restrictions and these are not really restrictions but rather additional requirements. The development in P1easanton is evidently required to provide buffers of some type. Cm Tirsel1 asked if FHA could do anything and Mr. Musso stated that they could also require buffers but that is all he knows of. It has also been suggested that the area remain agricultural until something else comes along. Cm Tirsel1 asked if the Planning Commission is recommending resi- dential after discussions of noise levels and pollution levels and Mr. Musso stated that they feel this would be the best feasible use. There are other uses that would be good but not necessarily feasible - such as a golf course or cemetery. Mayor Pritchard opened the public hearing at this time and the City Clerk reminded the Council that letters were received by property owners, mentioned above. J. N. Smith of Walnut Creek, representative of a property owner of 18 acres between Las positas Road and the freeway, stated that he has been before the City Council and the County Planning Commission as well as the Board of Supervisors and the only posi- tive report came from the County who felt that their plan was satisfactory, and would be along the lines suggested, which would be for a public storage area. Such a proposal would not affect the sewage or water for Livermore and it is felt that the proposal is good. In their opinion (representative and property owner) the last thing that should go in this area would be residential and they feel that there isn't anyone who would want to live adjacent to the freeway. He asked that the Council help them come up with an idea for development other than residential so that the area can be developed by them. Mr. Smith mentioned at this time that he represents Loma Linda University. John DeVenchenzi, stated that he owns 150 acres of land in this area with a partner and is inclined to agree with Mr. Smith in that he knows of no reason to develop residential along the freeway and would really like to see alternative proposals for development. When the property was purchased they did not anticipate the sewage problems Livermore is faced with along with inflation and the taxes they are paying for the property and feel it is very unfair that they are not able to develop, and cannot understand the reduction in density and that 2 d.u./ acre on the hill is an injustice. If density is cut from the top, more should be allowed below. I ~i CM-29-310 March 10, 1975 L) (P.H. re GP Amendment re Planning Unit No. 12) He asked if there is any possibility that annexation of this property might take place sooner than three years and Mr. Parness replied that the last annexation in this general area was in the Los Altos Heights area and that some de-annexation took place also. Cm Miller stated that annexation can take place at any time but feels that annexation, in itself, would be of little help to him unless he would like to put his property into the Williamson Act and the City would cooperate if he wishes to do this. Mr. DeVenchenzi stated that the hill is developable and is a beautiful area for homes and feels it is an injustice to cut the density in this area. There are very few sites in Livermore where residential development can overlook the City and this is one of them. Juanita Vidalin, owner of property adjacent to the Bellman property, stated that this property would probably be developed at the same time the Bellman property develops and as a unit which would alleviate the slope problem and utilize the entire area to its best advantage. Also, if the density is cut too low it would be planned as to what the terrain would permit. She stated that she owns about six acres of land and her parents own about 25 acres. Mrs. Wornow, representing owners of 44 acres, stated that their architects have been trying to work with the Planning Commission and City Council for the past 10 years and the density has been cut recently from 3 d.u./acre to 2 d.u./acre and presented a sketch of plans for development of the area. Mayor Pritchard asked Mrs. Warnow if development is planned if the density is 2 d.u./acre and she indicated that they will develop to whatever maximum is allowed. Lloyd Haines, representing Ensign Bickford, stated that the Council has seen their plans, they have a good project and can live with the City's proposal at present and urged that the recommendation of the Planning Commission be adopted. Mr. Ruggles, representing Amador Associates, stated that they own land near North Livermore Avenue and north and south of Las Positas Road. , and would like to know if the planning con- sultant has made a recommendation as to what should be done with this area or if the Council is holding a public hearing for the purpose of making recommendations to the consultant. He stated that he is not sure what is happening where the consultant is concerned and what procedures are taking place in connection with the General Plan Amendment. Mr. Musso stated he feels this was intended to be an interim amendment, by the Planning Commission, and the final recommenda- tion by the Consultant is still some six months away, and up to a year away for the entire plan. The P. C. felt this could be used as an interim measure and the density could always be changed later. '~. Mr. Ruggles indicated he was of the impression that the consultant had been asked to make a recommendation on these particular areas much sooner than six months and Mr. Musso stated the Council did refer the Planning Units 11 and 12 to the consultant but the P.C. has not received the consultant's letter and the P.C. is recommend- ing that there be a moratorium on the Specific Plans until the con- sultant is finished but they did feel this change should be considered. There was a motion made by the P.C. to withdraw this recommendation but the motion failed. Mr. Ruggles stated they have also hired a consultant to study the area and would submit there are a number of good alternatives to CM-29-311 March 10, 1975 (P.H. re GP Amendment re Planning Unit No. 12) be considered and are feasible; single family residential at low density is not one of them. He stated that they would like to work with the City and try to come to an agreement as to the use because otherwise nothing is going to work. He stated that he feels the Council's judgment in reducing the density is that this works against the Council's desire for open space. Most of the present day land planners make development as dense as possible in areas where development is desirable, therefore using less land to accommodate the same number of people. However, as he understands the implementation of the suggestion of the Planning Commission the Council would be going in the other direction and talking about using more land to accommodate the same number of people and would feel that it would be in the City's best interest as well as the buying public to get the economies of increased density rather than decreased density. He then urged that the Council postpone action on this until the consultant has submitted his input. ) -../ CM MILLER MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Cm Miller stated that he understands Mr. Ruggles' concept of pro- posing that the Council postpone action until the City has heard from our General Plan consultant; however, if the City is seriously considering lowering the density for this area it should be done at this time before the moratorium comes to an end and feels there is merit in following the recommendation of the P.C. for an interim General Plan amendment. In reviewing the P.C. minutes connected with PU #12, it appears that the recommendation by the P.C. is still a relatively high density for this area in the sense that for many years the developers have been saying that high density belongs on flat land and the lowest density belongs in the hilly areas. Somehow it does not seem reasonable to plan 2 d.u./acre on hilly areas when it is 1.5 d.u./acre on the low rolling and relatively flat areas in the southern part of town. Originally the northern part of town was supposed to have been lower density than it presently is and it would seem that a reasonable density for PU #12 should be 2 d.u./acre, overall. There are various ways to accomplish this and one is to put density labels on the map and to cut the density to what the P.C. has recommended or the other possibility would be to set a holding capacity that corresponds to a density of 2 d.u./acre, overall, and wait for the Specific Plans to set final labels as to which parts will be at what density. He stated that he is still in favor of the idea that the P.C. came up with before - transfer of develop- ment rights. He would be willing to consider an overall 2 d.u./acre to be assigned to all properties so that both the hilly and flat areas are equal with respect to value of development rights. He stated that making assignments or having a holding capacity that corresponds would be his two suggestions. At this point he is not ready to make a motion. em Futch stated this item is very difficult because the Council has looked at all the other Specific Plans and the Council has postponed them because the big issue was density. Cm Miller noted that this is not a Specific Plan and Cm Futch stated he realizes this but the concept of not waiting for something from our consultant should really be discussed again. He stated that he would be in favor of adopting the recommendation made by the Planning Commission. ...-" CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL CONTINUE ALL GENERAL PLAN AMEND- MENTS AND SPECIFIC PLANS UNTIL THE COMPLETION OF THE GENERAL PLAN REVIEW, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cm Miller stated he would disagree with the motion because if there are applications for tract maps in this general area, CM-29-3l2 March 10, 1975 L~ (P.H. re GP Amendment re Planning Unit No. 12) whatever zoning is applied must be consistent with the now existing General Plan for which he feels the densities are too high. Cm Miller stated that he feels it would be unwise to postpone, should there be an application for a tract map in which case the City might be caught in the trap of having something it ultimately would not want. We now have the opportunity to lower the densities in this area to something approaching what he feels they should be and what he would suspect to be the recommendation of the consultant. There has been nothing specific suggested by the consultants but there has been mention of lowering the density. Cm Tirse11 countered that the City has been on this item for a year, ahd she has personally discussed this three times. The City has hired some very expensive consultants to make recommendations for the entire planning area for the City of Livermore with respect to densities and does not want to arbitrarily set the density for one planning unit. She stated that she does not want the Council to hack away at densities piece by piece but would suggest waiting to see what the consultants have to say and assign densities in a balanced logical manner. Cm Futch stated he would agree with the recommendation by the P.C. but is also faced with the fact that the City has hired consultants to help the City come to a decision and therefore will vote in favor of the motion. MOTION PASSED 3-2 (Cm Miller and Mayor Pritchard dissenting) . CONSENT CALENDAR Payroll & Claims There were 93 claims in the amount of $115,054.63, dated 2/28/75, and 305 payroll warrants in the amount of $93,472.64, dated 2/21/75, for a total of $207,527.27, ordered paid as approved by the City Manager. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRITCHARD AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL (Civic Awards Dinner) It was noted that a date should be set for the Civic Awards dinner and the Council selected April 3rd. The Council will later discuss whether or not their spouses will be invited to attend the dinner. (Explanation of Change Orders) l Cm Turner asked if Mr. Lee would explain Change Orders for projects and Mr. Lee stated that change orders are necessary any time plans and specifications change or are not complete. Sometimes the change order is used to add something and other times it is used to delete items. (Expansion of Arroyo Rd.) Cm Miller stated that the point was brought up during discussion of Calvary Temple hook-ups, there seems to be no reason for widening CM-29-3l3 March 10, 1975 (Expansion of Arroyo Road) Arroyo Road and it would appear that the reason the County wants the widening is because they have property on Wetmore Road and Arroyo Del Valle they want to sell to developers and conversely widening of the road will encourage development of those parcels. em Miller stated that he feels the widening of Arroyo Road, beyond the City limits does not make sense and that the Council should reflect on this and send notice to the County indicating that the City does not wish to participate in any projects which would extend Arroyo Road beyond the present City limits. Mr. Lee stated the cooperative study the City and County is doing does not anticipate when the widening of Arroyo Road will take place and if there is no development, widening may not take place. Cm Miller stated that one of the things which has prompted his consideration of this matter is that he has received a complaint from someone living on "L" Street who is concerned about funneling four lanes into two lanes on "L" Street which is already too narrow. He stated he feels this deserves consideration by the Council and perhaps this should be an agenda item. , I -..-/ (re Telephone Co. Rate Increases & Rate of Return) em Miller stated that last week he mentioned the proposed increase by the Telephone Company and their rate of return and at that time the Council was not ready to make a decision. Now that the Council has had time to reflect on the matter he would like to suggest that the City of Livermore should take the position of suggesting that that the PUC reduce the rate of return to earlier levels, before consideration of wage increase for Telephone Company employees takes place, AND SO MOVED. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MAYOR PRITCHARD. Cm Turner stated that he feels objection to rate increases, etc. should be made as a private citizen and not as a governing body and that he feels he does not have all the facts involved and there must be reams of facts concerning justification for the rate increase. em Miller stated that almost everyone in the City has a telephone, the Telephone Company is a monopoly, its rate of return is adjusted by the PUC and it is fairly obvious that there are political con- siderations involved in lowering and raising the rate of return. Raising wages is reasonable; however, if the cost of living goes up faster than your wages it means that you have to do without but the Telephone Company has had its income increased quite sharply and not because of any competition but rather because they do have a monopoly position and PUC can do it for them and did. It is time for the Telephone Company to "bite bullets" just as the rest of us are having to do. Cm Tirsell stated that she would have to abstain from voting on the motion. Cm Futch stated that setting the rate structure is a very complex matter and he would need to know much more than what has thus far been presented on the matter before he would be able to vote in favor of such a motion. Cm Miller asked if he would amend the motion to read TO ASK THE PUC TO CONSIDER REDUCTION OF THE RATE OF RETURN, would this satisfy the Council's objection and it was indicated that it would not. -..-"" AT THIS TIME THE MOTION FAILED 2-2 (Cm Futch and Turner dissenting with Cm Tirsell abstaining). CM-29-3l4 March 10, 1975 (OGO Foundations) Cm Futch stated there was mention of some of the OGO foundations being poured too close to the right-of-way and Mr. Lee stated that this matter has been checked and reported to him that the founda- tions are located where they should be and that they conform to the regulations. L/ em Tirse1l stated that she visited the area and can see no possible way a bike path can be accommodated because there just is no room and wondered if what Mr. Lee is saying is that there is room for a bike path plus a 108 ft. easement from the edge of the existing building and Mr. Lee stated that the City anticipated only a 104 ft. easement but the 108 ft. easement will mean that there will be only 8 ft. between the property line and the face of the curb and there is an easement beyond the property line and supposedly there is enough distance for the bike path. Cm Tirsell stated that she plans to measure this area herself as soon as the mud dries and she can get into the area but is sure there is not sufficient room for the bike path. Mr. Lee stated that if there is still some question he will have it measured and a plot map prepared as to exactly what is there and will report back to the Council. Cm Futch felt this item should be checked very carefully and as soon as possible and Mr. Lee indicated that this would be done. (Stolen City Vehicle) Cm Futch stated he understands a City vehicle was stolen because keys were left in the glove compartment and Mr. Parness stated that the keys were left in the car but the driver thought the keys were well hidden. Proper disciplinary action has been taken and methods have been employed to correct this situation and he assured the Council that this would not happen again. (Concannon/Holmes St. Traffic Signals) Cm Futch asked Mr. Lee the date the traffic lights for the intersec- tion of Concannon Boulevard and Holmes Street are to be installed and Mr. Lee stated that notice has been received just today that construction should begin within a week. The contractor has been selected and has been in contact with the City. (Regional Water Quality Control Bd. Meeting) Cm Futch stated that the Regional Water Quality Control Board is going to have a meeting with reference to the Pleasanton plant and wondered if someone should attend the meeting. He stated he would be interested in knowing how many additional units are being added and how expansion of their existing plant might affect LAVWMA's and our projections. Perhaps this is for a small amount but he felt it is of interest because of restrictions in the valley and the possi- bility of polluting the underground. Cm Miller stated that Pleasanton's sewer plant is a disgrace and has been for some 10 years but the problem for Livermore is that additional permits imply more smog in an area upwind from us and it seems unreasonable to allow further connections to a totally inadequate sewer plant, and because of those things mentioned by em Futch and he stated that he feels the Council should take a position opposing any change in the cease and desist order at this time. CM-29-3l5 March 10, 1975 (Regional Water Quality control Board Meeting) em Futch stated that he would prefer the Council ask that a decision not be made until after LAVWMA and Zone 7 have been formed as to the facts and whether or not the discharge will the same requirements being imposed upon other communities. would prefer that the Council take this approach. em Turner noted that it is Council policy that there be no motion or action taken on something that is not an agenda item and it was suggested that this item appear on the next agenda. in- meet He i J (ABAG Hearing re Gelderman's Development) Cm Tirsel1 reported that on the ABAG hearing concerning Mr. Geldermann's Las positas development, he has been granted an hour and a half, starting at 3:00 p.m., Wednesday, March 12th. Cm Tirse11 stated that-she has been told that this has been advertised like a public hearing and it would not be fair to call upon Livermore for testimony prior to the supper hour because many of our citizens would not know that the hour had been changed. Therefore, Livermore's testimony will be after supper. (First St. Cruising) Mayor Pritchard stated that when the item of Friday and Saturday night cruising on First Street was brought up he wanted to be fair and take a cautious approach to the situation. Since that time he has done some investigating on his own and spent some time observing, in great detail, some of the things happening and also where some of the young people are coming from and has come to the conclusion that: 1) approximately 50-75% of the cars are from out of town; 2) though it is alright to cruise if one is obeying the law it is apparent that some of the young people have assumed that they have license to destroy public and private property every Friday and Saturday night. One of the automobile dealers along First Street has threatened to tear out his trees and lights, after spending about $70,000 on landscaping, because of the damage done to his property. Mayor Pritchard stated that he cannot blame him and that the dealer was very irate the last time he spoke with him. The dealer had the impression that the Council had asked the Police Department to be "softll with the cruisers and Mayor Pritchard stated he feels this is not the Council's attitude. The atti- tude is that if they are breaking the law the Police Department is to take care of them as they are supposed to. He wondered if there are any suggestions as to how the Council could make it clear that destruction will not be tolerated nor will flout- ing of the law. Cm Miller felt the Council's general view about cru1s1ng was that it is alright as long as laws are not being violated and that the Police should not select cruisers and stop them for reasons they would not stop other people and that they should not be unnecessarily stopping cruisers. On the other hand, the law should be equitably enforced and people who are not obeying the law should be punished. Mayor pritchard felt things are really getting out of control and asked that Mr. Parness convey this to the Police Department and state the Council's position. ---./" CM-29-3l6 March 10, 1975 RECESS Mayor Pritchard called for a brief recess after which the Council meeting resumed with all members of the Council present. ( \ Vi COMMUNICATION REGARDING CURBSIDE DELIVERY Senator Alan Cranston, in response to the instructions that post- masters may extend door-to-door delivery service to new or extended housing developments if the frontage does not exceed fifty feet and the setback does not exceed thirty feet, wrote to say that he very much regrets that he cannot help with the situation as new legislation to reverse this instruction would probably lead to another hike in postage rates and the Federal budget is already under a severe strain. Mr. Parness stated that this item is hard to follow because he is getting conflicting reports. He is being told that this is regional policy and also being told that this is not correct but it is a national postal pOlicy. He has also been told that it is at the option of the regional postmaster, which in our case happens to be Oakland, and in other regions it is not being enforced. He added that he is very disappointed with the response from Senator Cranston. Cm Tirsell stated that this seems to have been an arbitrary de- cision made by the postmaster in Oakland and creates unequal treatment among our citizens and she wondered if there would be any value in asking Fremont and some of the other neighboring cities to join Livermore in pressuring the Oakland postmaster along with Senators Cranston and Tunney. Cm Tirsell stated that she has been told by someone who obtained the postal regulations that this person's definite impression is that it is discretionary and it is particularly unequal treatment because she has to pick up her mail at the post office and pay extra for a box and is only allowed delivery at the post office box five days a week while people getting service at home receive mail six days a week. Mayor Pritchard stated he is getting more and more calls every day from citizens who are unable to pick up mail at the post office and there are no post office boxes available and sometimes they have to stand in line for an hour to get general delivery mail. He added that Senator Cranston underlined the word ~ay extend door- to-door service and this would indicate that it 1S discretionary and if this is true he would like to see every bit of pressure the City can bring to bear upon the postmaster. The City Clerk mentioned that there is one other problem which may exist and that is that the post office does not make deliveries in a subdivision until a certain percentage of the homes have become occupied. Cm Miller stated that the problem in passing an ordinance of this kind is that the post office wins - next year everybody has to have curbside boxes and they won't deliver mail to your house. .~ Mr. Parness stated that he would like to see the Council adopt a policy and standard which would permit an encroachment permit to allow the installation of curbside boxes and Cm Miller pointed out that once they are installed they will'never be removed.' Cm Futch suggested that the City find out why people are not getting delivery and if it is because of a vacancy factor this is something different. The Council would not want to proceed with action for the wrong reasons. ( CM-29-317 March 10, 1975 (Curbside Mail Delivery) Cm Miller wondered if it would be possible to pursue some kind of injunction against the post office department because of inequities and Mr. Parness stated that one city is doing this. The City Attorney stated that there is no reason for our City to do anything because if Grover City wins then it is almost sure that our City could win too. We will have to put pressure on the post office people because there would be case law in support of whatever we wish to do. Cm Miller wondered if there would be merit in putting pressure on the Post Office Department from two jurisdictions and two different areas - maybe one judge would be better than another judge. Mr. Logan stated that this could be done but if the two jurisdic- tions receive two opinions it would have to be appealed and we would again be in the same hassle. Grover City is in the federal court now and they are pursuing it in the proper court and there are enough interested parties involved to give them a fair representa- tion. If they win we will all probably win. J ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRITCHARD AND BY UNANI- MOUS VOTE THE COUNCIL ASKED THE STAFF TO CONSIDER WHAT CAN BE DONE ABOUT DELIVERY OF SOME KIND AND A POLICY FOR CURBSIDE DELIVERY. COMMUNICATION FOR FUNDS TO PURCHASE LAND FOR ELDERLY HOUSING James Concannon, Chairman of the Committee for Community Concerns has written the Council about the release of $225,000,000 through Housing and Urban Development funds for construction of buildings. Interfaith Housing has requested $400,000 for the building of 26 additional housing units for the elderly and would like to request $75,000 from the Community Development grant, from the City of Livermore. It is felt there is a great demand for this type of housing and there are 100 people on their waiting list. Cm Tirsell stated that this suggestion was voiced at the City's public hearing concerning the grant and that this is the City's second priority if the first priority is refused and would suggest that this be conveyed to Mr. Concannon in writing. AIRPORT MASTER PLANNING STUDY A progress report on the Livermore Municipal Airport Master Planning Study was submitted to the Council for informational purposes, and was noted for filing. COMMUNICATIONS FROM COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Transportation Development Act: SB 2205 provides that up to 2% of the county's apportionment of Transportation Development Act funds (TDA) may be made available for pedestrian and bicycle facilities. The funds will be used for pedestrian and bicycle facilities unless the Board of Supervisors determines, by resolu- tion that they could more advanteageously be used for transit purposes. It is suggested that the City of Livermore submit comments and recommendations concerning this matter. ) '-.-/ CM-29-3l8 March 10, 1975 (Transportation Dev. Act - SB 2205) CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNTY BE SENT A LETTER ENCOURAGING THE SETTING ASIDE THE FUNDS FOR BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRITCHARD. L/ Cm Turner stated that he agrees with this but also feels transit purposes to be equally important and should be pursued. Cm Tirsell stated she is in favor of the motion because l~ of our sales tax goes for public transportation as well as some of our tax rate. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Utilization or Disposal of Arroyo Del Valle and Wetmore Ranch Properties: The County has indicated that six bids have been received for the purchase or lease of the Wetmore Ranch land and the Arroyo Del Valle property for grazing or open space and all bids have been rejected. The County Administrator has been directed to work with LARPD and the Livermore Unified School District to develop further proposals and report on any other proposal received. Cm Tirsell stated that she is very concerned over the communication from the County about the Arroyo Del Valle/Wetmore Ranch properties and if it is not lost already it would appear that development may take place in that area. She felt it would be very advantageous to the City of Livermore to persuade the County to allow the Buenas Vidas Ranch at the Arroyo Del Valle Sanitarium property. She stated she can foresee the County urbanizing that area in another pocket of growth. Cm Tirsell suggested that the City offer technical assistance to Sally Bystroff in her efforts to prepare a bid for this property, as she has boundless enthusiasm for this project and has done everything she could to get the County to allow the project at Arroyo Del Valle. Cm Tirsell asked if the Council would be interested in directing the staff to prepare a professional bid. She stated that, regrettably, it appears that the County is looking at another proposal and is strongly considering it. Mayor Pritchard agreed that it would appear the matter is rather "cut and dried" and that the County is not in favor of the Buenas Vidas Ranch proposal. Cm Miller asked if the Buenas Vidas bid is for the whole property or for just a portion of it and Cm Tirsell commented that the bid is for several buildings on the lower portion of the property. Cm Miller felt that the combination of LARPD and Buenas Vidas has the best chance of Itflying" because LARPD is a public agency and is willing to provide the lower portion for Buenas Vidas. Cm Tirsell stated that Mr. Charles Camenson has submitted a bid on this property and apparently has reasons, other than develop- ment in mind, for wanting to acquire the property and perhaps LARPD and the Buenas Vidas people could meet; with'Mr. Cannon to see what could be worked out. I \ ~~ Mr. Parness stated that the prospective bidders would have to investigate as to what the minimum bid might be and whether or not segregated bids will be allowed. Cm Tirsell asked if the City could take the initial responsibility of getting inquiry or response for Sally as to whether or not the County intends to take segregated bids and the bid closing date and whether or not the date can be extended to allow organizations to acquire professional bids and what the bid should include, and then refer Sally to Mr. Parness? Mr. Parness indicated this would be appropriate. CM-29-3l9 March 10, 1975 (utilization or Disposal of Arroyo Del Valle and Wetmore Ranch Properties) em Tirsell added that she also intends to bring this item before the COVA Board on Thursday night because all three communities involved with COVA have seen the proposal and there may be some staff help available from someone else. Cm Tirsell felt Sally needs a professional overlay for a great deal of commitment and enthusiasm and this thing isn't going to "fly" without it. \ ) ~ Cm Futch felt Cm Tirsell's comments were very worthwhile and he wondered whether or not COVA should become involved. This is something that would be of benefit to the entire valley and feels it might be appropriate for COVA to discuss this. Mayor pritchard felt this is particularly true since Buenas Vidas would be providing a service theCourtty is unwilling Of cart not perform for people in the valley. Cm Miller repeated that he feels LARPD should be involved in this because it would be a qovernmental agency which shOuld have first claim on the 'property. . Unless' something like this is done there is no quasi moral, quasi legal, commitment because Buenas Vidas is not a public agency. Cm Tirsell stated she would be very happy to have LARPD included in any bid but would like to know, from Mr. Parness, if Buenas Vidas and LARPDcould submit a combined bid or ~ould they have to be separate? Mr. Parness stated that he will check into this. Cm Tirsell stated that she may be reading between the lines but detects that LARPD has been "aced out" and Cm Miller stated that this may be and if one reads between the lines it would appear that everyone has been Itaced out" except that developer with the inside track. If this person is to be "derailed" it would be an advantage to have LARPD involved because Buenas Vidas is a step lower than LARPD. COMMUNICATION FROM B.C. RE JOINT MEETING A letter was received from the Beautification Committeethartking the City Council representatives for meeting with them to discuss the Ancestral Tree Ordinance at their study session. As a result of the session it is agreed that the City staff will try to see that the trees are properly maintained and preserved and that owners of ancestral trees will be notified by the committee. Cm Miller stated he would agree with the Beautification Committee in that the Committee should update the surveyor continue the survey of these trees and that they have indicated they would like a response from the City. Cm Miller felt the City should indicate that they should continue the survey and urge the Committee to continue their good work. Cm Futch wondered what amount of money would be involved in updat- ing the 1973 tree survey and it was noted that it would be a nominal amount - in the order of $100-$200 or at least less than $500. Cm Tirsell asked if Mr. Parness has found out whether or not the City can include the ancestral tree notice as part of the deed so that new owners may be informed when they purchase property on which there is an ancestral tree and the City Attorney commented that there are complications involved with this suggestion and that a final conclusion was really never reached. ; ~ CM-29-320 March 10, 1975 (Communication from B.C. re Joint Meeting) Discussion followed regarding the types of problems concerned with getting regulations involving ancestral trees tied into the deed, etc. c) Cm Miller suggested that perhaps there is a way a plaque can be attached to ancestral trees so that anyone could be aware of the fact it is an ancestral tree. Mayor Pritchard stated that maybe there would be some method by which properties with ancestral trees could be indexed so that when the residential building report comes up a letter could be included and sent to the title company and Cm Miller noted that it is his understanding every property in the City has a folder filed and the Building Inspector noted that this is correct. The City Attorney felt this does not answer the issue about the problems of lessees of properties with ancestral trees. A lessee would not be informed and there is a possibility that a tree could be cut down, even though this may not be likely. It may be a good idea just to tack a sign on the tree to indicate that it is an ancestral tree and that harm to the tree would be considered a misdemeanor. The City Manager was directed to look into the prospects of tagging the trees and what permanent methods could be used. COMMUNICATION RE INDUSTlRAL ADV. COMMa A letter of resignation was received from Milo Nordyke, Chairman of the Livermore Industrial Advisory Committee, and noting that during the past five years the committee has been in existence there has been substantial industrial growth in our community, and the assessed valuation in the last two years has more than doubled. The Committee feels that they were not necessarily respon- sible for the growth but did playa major role in some instances, and though he cannot continue to serve on the Committee he feels its role is more important than ever before. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO SEND MR. NORDYKE A LETTER OF THANKS FOR HIS SERVICE ON THE COMMITTEE. Mayor Pritchard noted that for this particular committee each Councilmember selected one person to serve on the committee and with the Councilmembers changing it is possible to lose track of who appointed who and asked how this appointment should be made. The Council majority concluded that the appointment should be made by the Council, as a whole, and the press should be notified that there is an opening. Cm Miller felt there should be some research done as to who made the appointment and allow this person or one member of the Council to make an appointment, as was done in the past. '--- Mayor Pritchard stated that if this is done there is the problem of which Councilmember took whose place and who should make the appointment. ( The matter will be'discussed later. CM-29-32l March 10, 1975 PG&E NOTICE RE RATE INCREASES It was mentioned earlier in the meeting that this matter would be tabled. REPORT RE CUP APP. AMENDMENT - CALVARY TEMPLE SEWER CONNECTION \ \ ) --.-/ The Planning Commission reported that the Alameda County referral concerning the application of Calvary Temple for a CUP amending a previously approved CUP to allow construction of a church building without connecting to the public sewer. The Planning Commission recommendation is that the Council deny the requested amendment to the existing CUP. CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMIS- SION FOR DENIAL OF THE APPLICATION, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL. Mr. Hutka stated that as spokesman for the members of his church, they are confused with the requirements. They have been dealing with width lines that have not been established and improvements which have never been seen or heard of by the County Planning Commission, requested in the agreement. They still wish to hook up to City sewer when and if they can and would wish to cooperate with the City in any way. Cm Tirsell asked about the petition that went to the County Board of Supervisors and Mr. Hutka stated he knows of no petition and that any petition was not a church action and Cm Tirsell replied that she did not mean to imply it was an action by the church but wondered who had signed it. Cm Tirsell commented that the strong sentiment of the petition was that people who signed it do not want the County to widen Arroyo Road and since it is not the City's intention to widen the road there may be input allowed as to how wide the widening should be, in which case, what the Council is recommending might be adopted. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. REPORT RE PROPERTY ACQUISITION FOR FIRST ST. OVERPASS The City Manager reported that one of the major pieces of property necessary for the future First Street overpass is proposed for acquisition. It has been appraised at $112,000 which is acceptable as far as the owner is concerned. It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing execution of a property purchase agreement. Cm Futch asked if this was considered at the time the assessment district was formed and Mr. Parness replied that this is a portion of the overall major project anticipated several years ago and is not a part of the assessment district, nor was it ever intended to be. The project is anticipated to done by state participation to the extent of 80% and it has been submitted to the PUC for considera- tion, this year. It did not receive a very high priority but this did not come as a surprise to the City and it is anticipated that _,/ the project may proceed in three or four years. The $112,000 is for acquisition of one piece of the site and there is yet another piece to be acquired. CM-29-322 March 10, 1975 L! (Report re Property Acquisition for First Street Overpass) Cm Futch asked if the state participation of 80% is for construction costs alone and Mr. Parness replied this is correct but it is conceiv- able that site costs may be reimbursable. The City had to acquire the site, not only for the construction of the overpass at some future date, but also for the deposit of borrowed materials. Cm Futch asked if this is part of our Capital budget and Mr. Parness stated it is - it is part of the gas tax program. It was not budgeted this year; it was budgeted last year and was not inserted this year but funds are available for it. CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRITCHARD. Cm Tirsell stated we are acquiring parcels "A" and "B" on the map and asked about the curved line and Mr. Parness explained that the curved line is the construction easement and is being obtained without cost. It will be rescinded at such time as we acquire the adjacent property, which is under negotiation now. Cm Tirsell stated that parcel "C" is being negotiated and Mr. Parness replied that this is correct. We had to get into the site and obtain the right-of-way to get the material in. We have the right-of-way which is a part of the Henderlong proposition. Mr. Parness stated that this is an important step because this commits the City to this phase of the program and this phase was studied in great depth for many years. This phase, together with the other end of the project (Murrieta Blvd.) is very important and the state is interested in it and we have received approval from CAL TRANS several years ago to participate in this improvement. When it did not proceed it was repealed but they do want it to proceed so it is an important undertaking. We must obtain this property to realize this improvement. Cm Futch stated he realizes this is important and was discussed by other Councils but it is a very large commitment and he is not aware of what details are involved. Mr. Parness stated that this will allow the eventual realignment of First Street onto the vacated S.P. right-of-way and the inter- connection of "A" Street on the south side of the City to this overpass. Fourth Street has been suggested and a great deal of manhours have gone into the planning of it - interconnection of the south-eastern portion of the City to Highway 84. MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Cm Futch dissenting) . Mayor Pritchard asked the City Attorney if he has read the contract and Mr. Logan stated he has read it and the resolution authorizes the Mayor to sign the contract. He stated that it is a short form agreement and there is nothing in it that should pose a problem. RESOLUTION NO. 45-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (Henderlong Property Acquisition) ( .",--. REPORT RE SEWAGE CAPACITY LIMITATION The City Attorney stated he has not had sufficient time to prepare something concerning the sewage capacity limitation and that his assistant is searching out case law pertaining to this matter. CM-29-323 March 10, 1975 (Report re Sewage Capacity Limitation) Mr. Logan added that he feels the matter is not finalized enough to give a report to the Council at this time and would not want to go on record for that reason. ON MOTION OF CM FUTCH, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE MATTER WAS CONTINUED FOR ONE WEEK. J REPORT RE WILLIAMSON ACT - LAND CONSERVATION ACT OF 1965 The City Attorney reported that an application has been received from property owners within the City to designate their land as an agricu1atural preserve. A formal procedure for the establish- ment of such designation needs to be adopted and it is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution establishing procedures to give the Council the ability to contract with persons in the William- son Act area. Cm Tirse1l stated that on Page 2, concerning Size, the minimum size for an agricultural preserve is 100 acres and-sKe felt perhaps this is too large for areas that would fall within this classification otherwise. The City Attorney replied that there is an "escape hatch" built into the provision in that it is noted that if an area less than 100 acres is desirable it may be submitted to the Planning Department and if the Planning Department feels there is a public purpose that would be served by ~he establishment of a preserve smaller than 100 acres, the smaller preserve can be recommended by them to the Council. It is felt that the 100 acres minimum is relatively standard which was followed by discussion. Cm Miller mentioned that there is a 5 acre preserve right in the middle of Fremont and Mayor Pritchard felt it would be very logical for the vineyards to be included in a preserve and they may not consist of 100 acres. Cm Miller felt that one item not covered in the contract or anyplace else is that if somebody cancels there is a penalty but if someone fails to renew there should be a penalty and Mr. Logan felt this is covered somewhere under F. (I) and Cm Miller stated that section deals with someone who renigs. Mr. Logan stated that this is more or less locked in and one agrees to a restriction under the Calif. Revenue and Taxation Code, and the restriction is the mechanism which makes it very unprofitable to enter into and then back out of. That would be very unprofitable to back out of unless someone would waive the taxes. Cm Tirsell stated that she is still concerned about the m1n1mum size because people might not bother to apply because they do not have 100 acres and she would rather allow any parcel to be considered and wondered what disadvantage would arise from allowing any size as an agricultural use. Cm Miller stated he sees nothing wrong with the "escape hatch" that would allow consideration of any size parcel. Cm Tirsel1 stated that her point is that anyone wishing to have their land in this preserve should be allowed consideration and that no arbitrary minimum should be established. She felt that people with less than 100 acres might hesitate in applying if the 100 acre minimum is mentioned. _/ CM-29-324 March 10, 1975 (Report re Williamson Act Land Conservation Act) c/ The City Attorney pointed out that the smaller you get, the quicker you start losing your tax base and perhaps if you get much less than 100 acres you would want to be careful about who is allowed in. If everyone in the City with an acre of land decided they wanted to go under the Williamson Act, the City would loose a lot of tax money. Cm Tirsell mentioned if there is a good reason for the 100 acre minimum she is perfectly willing to leave it and it may be that there is a very good reason. Cm Futch stated that before the Council makes a decision as to what minimum figure should be used, the staff should find out why the 100 acre minimum is being used by the County, and report back to the Council. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THIS ITEM BE CONTINUED FOR ONE WEEK, SECONDED BY eM TURNER WHICH PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. SENIOR CITIZEN FUNDING STATUS As mentioned earlier in the meeting the senior citizens group asked for continuance of the status of the senior citizen funding. PROPOSED AMEND. RE CORPUS REQUESTED FOR ADOPTION BY COUNTY The City Attorney commented that he has submitted the letter from the County to the City Council in response to the City's letter concerning the proposed CORPUS Security Ordinance. The County has indicated that in order to be effective throughout the County of Alameda, the City of Livermore would be required to adopt the misdemeanor ordinance and an ordinance or regulation implementing the proposed disciplinary action and would ask that this City respond as soon as possible. Mr. Logan stated that the County is unwilling to bend. They wish to have consistent law in every jurisdiction. He indicated that the City could still keep CORPUS and just not adopt the County's ordinance but the County would probably not be very happy with this action. Cm Tirsell wondered if all misdemeanors include the words "willfully and maliciously" generally speaking for this type of misdemeanor and Mr. Logan indicated that not necessarily - some misdemeanors are what are known as "general intent" a presumed intent to violate the law. However, many misdemeanors do have "willfullness" in them. This, in effect, is a protection for those people who inadvertently do something wrong or make a mistake. He added that the point Cm Miller made about it being difficult to prove intent is correct; however, generally, if knowledge of the law can be proven you can infer intent and you do not have to have someone testify that someone intended to violate the law. Cm Miller stated in his opinion the D.A. will never prosecute anybody for willful and malicious intent who discloses any information under CORPUS and refuses to adopt an ordinance which is worthless on its face. CM-29-325 March 10, 1975 (Proposed Amendment re CORPUS Requested for Adoption by County) CM TURNER MOVED TO TABLE FURTHER DISCUSSION CONCERNING THE COUNTY CORPUS ORDINANCE, SECONDED BY CM MILLER, AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Cm Miller suggested that a letter be sent to the County inform- ing them of the reason the City does not wish to adopt the ordinance. The Council agrees with the principle but feels there will never be prosecution for violation of it. " i ! "~ The City Attorney mentioned that he has spoken with both Dick Moore and Lowell Jensen, the District Attorney, about the ordinance and they both feel that they will prosecute if the occasion ever arises. The question is, when will the occasion arise and when it does occur will they determine that it is a prosecutable offense or will there always be a determination that there is no intent involved and therefore not prosecute. Cm Miller stated that an alternative to sending the County a letter would be to adopt the ordinance, striking the wording "willfully and maliciously". The City Attorney cautioned that this may be done but it may subject it to some constitutional infirmity by dropping these words because it is possible that they will require some mens rea be involved in this and if it is not there, there is a possibility the County will strike it down. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE ITEM BE TAKEN FROM THE TABLE, SECONDED BY CM TURNER WHICH PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. HCM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL INTRODUCE THE CORPUS ORDINANCE, AMENDED AS FOLLOWS: IN THE FIRST LINE OF ARTICLE 14.25, FIRST AND SECOND PARAGRAPH, THE WORDS "WILLFULLY AND MALICIOUSLY" BE DELETED. MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Title was read by the City Attorney. INTRO. OF ORD. RE TAXICAB REGULATIONS AND RATES The City Attorney commented that there were some procedural changes in the ordinance concerning taxicab regulations to give the Chief of Police some discretion in the granting of additional taxi stands. Also, that the Board of Directors of Security Eye Patrol, Inc., have adopted a resolution giving a 10% reduction in rates to citizens of age 65 or over which will be accomplished through coupon booklets to be distributed. The ordinance does not require the distribution of those coupons but by the language that rates shall be 90% of the rate schedule for citizens age 65 and over, is probably mandatory enough to have an implicit requirement that coupons be available because this is the way the code states such will be accomplished. ON MOTION OF CM FUTCH, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE ORDINANCE REGARDING TAXICAB REGULATIONS WAS INTRODUCED. Cm Turner wondered if the ordinance could be considered an urgency ordinance to go into effect immediately because there was some concern by the owner that~e people might walk off the job during the 30 days it takes the ordinance to go into effect because of wage disputes. ---' CM-29-326 March 10, 1975 (Ordinance re Taxicab Regulations and Rates) The City Attorney felt this type of ordinance could not be justified as an urgency ordinance, especially in view of the fact that the consideration for making it an urgency ordinance is basically pri- vate and not public. He suggested that it cannot be considered as an urgency ordinance. ~ Cm Miller stated that he would reluctantly vote for the ordinance, not because he objects to the majority of the ordinance but because he felt the reduction for senior citizens is not significant. The title was read by the City Attorney. WEEKLY STATUS REPORT BY THE CITY MANAGER Budget Mr. Parness stated that he is really worried about the new budget year and the City's ability to finance our operating program for next year. We have some severe revenue deficiencies and some escalated costs that are absolutely boggling. The major one is our street lighting issue and he has been in contact with PG&E, to ascertain what modifications can be made. As 0 f now it appears that we will begin the year with a $45,000 deficit in this fund. Most of this is associated with added power costs. Flag At the suggestion of one of the City employees the United States flag is flying 24 hours a day at our major City pole. There have been calls from concerned citizens who feel this is improper and this is not true. The Flag Code now does permit the flag to be posted all night and in all weather as long as there is a light on it at night, which there is. One of the reasons for flying the flag at night and lighting it is to help stop vandalism which has occurred on several occasions with the halyards and the pole itself. Also it has been a chore and cost to get the flag posted and removed each day. Medians on Stanley Blvd. The City is proceeding with the planting of the medians on Stanley Boulevard. The medians have remained dormant for a long time and with the new federal employees we are now able to take care of them. This should be completed in about a month. Golf Greens (~ The City met with the Greens Committee and a horticulturist to discuss grounds care, the nature of our soil and what might best be done in the way of reconstruction of our greens. The information obtained was very valuable and the City was provided with specifications for new composition of the greens which the City will use in the reconstruction program. This program may take about six years - about three greens will be reconstructed each year. The estimated cost ois $5,000 per green. If this is not done, however, they will be lost. It is felt we now have the right combination and some very good technological information. The clubhouse interior has been changed and the upstairs has been modified and is being kept clean and managed properly. The snackbar has been finished and he would urge that the Council visit to see what they think of it. CM-29-327 March 10, 1975 WEEKLY STATUS REPORT (Cont'd) Transportation Study The transportation study is now underway and the City is hopeful that good things will come of the study. There is to be a meet- ing this Thursday with the Transportation Advisory Committee and an appointment is needed on this committee. One of the persons representing the lower income members of the community has resigned. ..-" Reports Mr. Parness reported that reports requested by the Council are being done: Zone 7 Rate Revision Study; Annexation Fee, Central Business District Study, Social Concerns Committee and Container Report. These reports will be ready March 24th, with the exception of the Container report and this will come before the Council later. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Pritchard adjourned the meeting at ll:ls p.m. to an session to discuss fringe benefits of a personnel nature. ~~ executive APPROVE ATTEST \\;Z~-A-j \C\__~~[ tJ. Q:l~.. . i / .... '-,-City Clerk J L~vermore, California -.-/. CM-29-328 Regular Meeting of March 17, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on March l7, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard presiding. ROLL CALL LJ Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Tirsell and Mayor Pritchard Absent: Cm Futch (Seated later) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Pritchard led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. PROCLAMATION Mayor Pritchard announced that he has signed a proclamation in honor of the 56th anniversary of the Order of DeMolay. Members of the Amador Valley Chapter will be celebrating the anniversary this current week and International DeMolay Week has been proclaimed in Livermore this week. MINUTES Cm Futch was seated prior to the correction of the minutes. March 3, 1975 Page 298, last paragraph, line three should read: lots does go up and he feels lower cost housing cannot be provided.....etc. Page 299, after the first paragraph, add the following paragraph: Cm Futch pointed out that he has never stated that higher density will provide low income housing. Page 303, last paragraph, last line: Should indicate 8.2 MGD rather than $8.2 million. ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF MARCH 3, 1975, WERE APPROVED AS CORRECTED. PUBLIC HEARING RE GEN. PLAN AMENDMENT Mayor Pritchard commented that before any discussion takes place concerning the public hearing for the General Plan Amendment, there is a communication from the P.C. regarding specific plans and Cm Miller noted that perhaps the Council should listen to discussion with respect to the public hearing and then perhaps the Council can determine the necessity or lack of necessity for considering the specific plans. Cm Tirsell stated that she would not object to this as long as this is consistent with her motion. She had moved to continue all work on specific plans until completion of the General Plan, which was adopted previously. Cm Miller stated that he believes Cm Futch has some questions and Cm Futch replied that it may be possible that his questions will be answered or resolved during the discussion and suggested that the agenda be followed as listed. CM-29-329 March 17, 1975 (Gen. Plan Amend.) Mayor Pritchard stated that the City Attorney contacted him this afternoon about the public hearing matter and would like to ask that he report to the Council with respect to what the Council will be discussing and what action can be taken and what this action would do. He explained that the only reason he suggests that the City Attorney speak first is because the Council needs clarification of a number of items, as the discussion progresses, and the City Attorney's comments will have a bearing on the discus- sion as the public hearing opens. i ~ The City Attorney stated that the General Plan amendment is related directly to the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment. There are two specific items for the Council to consider: 1) the Council can adopt the General Plan amendment by resolution and the affect of the amend- ment is to give rise to or make available, a new theory or a new zon- ing district known as Open Space-Urban Reserve. 2) Under 1.2, the proposed Zoning Ordinance is not going to rezone. The effect of the ordinance is to implement, within the present existing zoning and subdivision ordinances or within the present existing zoning ordi- nance, the OS-UR, as envisioned in the General Plan. The Council can act on this ordinance this evening if the Council approves the way it reads, and introduce it. The effect of the introduction is not to rezone any land anywhere in the City. In order to rezone the land you must give notice, and specifically set forth those areas planned for rezoning. If rezoning is desired this will have to be done at another time after properly noticed public hearings. Cm Futch stated that he feels there was some concern with the P.C. and there doesn't seem to be a clear answer, and that is the fact that although the Council will have adopted the General Plan amend- ment and the Zoning Ordinance amendment, we will not have the land zoned and therefore, there may be land within the City that is not subject to a PUD and he would question what the effect might be. Mr. Musso explained that the consultants report was considered by the P.C. and Council on February 18th and there was a time limit for getting all of this done before the moratorium ended this week. The P.C., in considering this, concluded that what they would do would be to go ahead with these two actions (the General Plan amend- ment and adoption of the new zoning district) and then as soon as possible, initiate the actual rezonings of properties. He stated that he is not sure if the P.C. is going to try to do them all at once or to take the most critical parcels first - this will be dis- cussed tomorrow night at the P.C. meeting. Cm Futch stated there would be quite a lapse of time between the time the moratorium expires and before the City would ever get any land zoned that would require the PUD. Mr. Musso felt this would take about three weeks to a month to get the first property to the Council and this would mean another six weeks. There would be 30 days involved in getting the ordi- nance adopted, so there is at least three months involved in the time. Cm Tirsell stated she has a question about the timing. The ordi- nance the Council can work on tonight, which allows the City to adopt the zone takes 30 days; is this after the first reading or after the second reading? The City Attorney replied that if it is introduced this evening it has to wait at least five days before the second reading and adoption and then it takes 30 days to become effective. '-/ CM-29-330 March 17, 1975 (P.H. re Gen. Plan Amend.) L Cm Tirsel1 asked if the P.C. can initiate the rezoning during the 30 days, since they are an advisory body, and the City Attorney indicated they could. Cm Tirsell stated that, theoretically, at the end of the five days plus the 30 days, if they were to do a large rezoning it would mean that something could be done in about five weeks. The City Attorney felt there was a m1n1mum of 45 days involved before zoning could be touched. He explained that the P.C. can look into rezoning but cannot actually initiate an official zon- ing until the zoning ordinance becomes effective. Cm Miller stated that the P.C. can set a hearing for rezonings for all zoning classes in the zoning ordinance as long as the hearing takes place after the 30 days and the City Attorney felt this would be acceptable. Cm Futch stated it still is not clear as to what liabilities the City has during this interim period - what protection does the City have? The City Attorney stated there is not a lot that can be done. If someone files a subdivision map this does not create a vested right; they file it at their own peril. Mr. Musso stated that the way the ordinance is written it says that the development shall conform to the General Plan under the PUD. This is essentially what we have now. Any zoning now would presum- ably conform with the General Plan. There is some area zoned agricultural and zoned in the PD district. Cm Futch stated this is where he is confused. If it says one shall conform and come under the PUD process and the land is not zoned that way, how can we require it? Mr. Musso stated that presently the zoning conforms to the General Plan; at least most of it does. Under the new procedure it would still conform to the same General Plan. This doesn't change the situation, but gives the City the added tool of a PUD permit but this would take about 60 days. The City Attorney suggested that when the Council adopts the zoning ordinance, the zoning ordinance should be adopted that applies to all those areas the City wants rezoned, rather than to go at them one by one. em Miller stated that all equally placed properties will be treated the same so there are no specific parcels selected. All the un- developed residential should be considered at one time, for instance. l The City Attorney stated it is true it would be difficult to have a pUblic hearing at one time for all of this property but there is no problem with spacing hearings with no changes made until the end of the hearings. Cm Futch stated that with respect to Policy Statement 2. and the General Plan amendment, felt there is no need for such a policy statement unless the City is legally obligated to provide sewer connections to lands within the sewer assessment districts. The policy reads as follows: It is the policy of the City to give priority to those lands already served by interceptor and lateral sewer lines, and to those lands which lie within the boundaries of sewer improvement districts existing as of January 1, 1975, and for which sewer assessments have been paid cur- rently in accordance with requirements of the district and State Law. CM-29-331 March 17, 1975 (General Plan Amendment) The City Attorney wondered if Cm Futch is asking if the City is obligated to service sewer assessment districts first? Cm Futch stated this is the question and then based on this, the Council might determine whether a policy statement such as this is desirable or not. The City Attorney commented it is the City's opinion that it does not have to service assessment districts first. \ ) .--.-/ Cm Futch felt if this is the case, why would the City need this policy statement? This might imply that they are to be serviced first. The City Attorney stated this might be a policy of the City without a legal obi1gation. The Council may feel these are the areas of the City which should be served first. It is always possible that the EPA will lift their requirements and the sewer will be made available and those sewer assessment districts can be fulfilled; however the City is not obligated to serve them now. Cm Futch stated he understands this but consider the possibility of the City getting a large industry and that the City feels this should have priority over Policy Statement No.2, but with the statement included he would feel somewhat hesitant to allow the industry priority because it would appear a policy is being spelled out. It might be felt that it would be to the best interest of the City to allow industry rather than some other use. The City Attorney stated that with concern for whether or not the City can allocate sewer capacity, assuming we are limited and have a definite end period of our capacity, given the proper findings and motives the City can allocate. Mr. Musso stated that prior to opening the public hearing, per- haps the Council would like the consultant to explain what the program is. He stated that he would also like to make one comment. The P. C. did have a public hearing and there was consideration of recommendations by the consultant on the zoning and General Plan amendment. For the most part the P.C. agreed with the recom- mendations - there were some minor changes noted in the draft to the Council. The Mayor explained that a firm from Southern California has been employed by the City of Livermore to do the professional work on our General Plan amendment. That firm is Grunwald, Crawford and Associates and the Council is very fortunate to have these two people present this evening. Mr. Grunwald stated that he would like to preface his remarks by saying that they would like to be considered a Central California firm. He stated that his remarks would be brief but he would like them to be sufficiently encompassing so that the people in the audience understand the motivation behind the General Plan amendment proposal, and behind the proposed amendments to the zoning ordinance which will follow as a public hearing subject later. The moratorium on development ends officially, March 24th, and it was a part of the General Plan program initiated by the Council with their firm to provide the P.C. and Council with the best recommendations possible.as -) CM-29-332 March 17, 1975 (General Plan Amendment) u to how the City could best manage growth through the General Plan and zoning process and subdivision process, after the moratorium expires as of March 24th. Recognizing that the General Plan program may not be finished for several months hence - which is the case, their firm is proposing to the City a series of General Plan amendments first and then a series of amendments to the Zoning Ordinance which would bring the ordinance in line with the General Plan, as amended. If the Council adopts, in whole or in part, the major recommendations for the General Plan amendments this evening, it should be known that the new Subdivision Map Act went into effect the first of March and it clearly states in a number of places that no subdivision shall be approved unless it is in complete accord with General Plan policy. with respect to subdivisions the City would be protected in this regard, the zoning process notwithstanding. What the City will be doing between the time it adopts the ordinance, as proposed, or as the Council might wish to change it, and the time the City takes care of the mapping process, as long as the City is diligent is proceeding to the best of its ability there will be no problem. The Council should have no fears with respect to subdivi- sions coming in, in great numbers. There are five basic amendments and other minor amendments. He then listed the basic amendments: 1. Provides for three population targets and rough dates for achieving those population targets. The existing General Plan provides for a holding capacity for some- thing in the area of 155,000 people. One of the weaknesses of this plan, in terms of meeting interim requirements for policy improvement, is to provide the public and Council with better policy as to when over a period of time this population might be achieved. Three time frames have been described (short range to 1980; medium range to 1990; and long range to 2000) and they are proposing population targets for those frames that reflect a 1-2% growth rate, seeking a population as high as 82,000 people by the year 2000. All of this information is offered with the clear understanding that the General Plan program is only halfway complete and the policies may differ then from what is being recommended on a interim basis. 2. Recognition of the constraints imposed by conditions of air quality and limited sewer plant capacity. There is approximately .4 MGD capacity remaining which is 400,000 gallons, and of that amount, something in the order of 230,000 has already been committed as a matter of official approval of permits by the City either through the subdivision map process or zoning process. This means a capacity of 170,000 gallons remaining. This would allow only 300-400 additional homes. This means that until the capacity of the plant can be expanded for treatment, the short range target population (55,000) could not be met. There is that little capacity remaining, and a problem that cannot be dealt with by a General Plan amendment itself but rather by a series of meetings along with other action. 3. Assign priorities to allocating sewer capacity for those lands which now lie within the City limits. c There is more land in the City limits than the City would ever have capacity for and perhaps there is enough land to handle the medium range target to 1990 (approximately 67,000). CM-29-333 March 17, 1975 (General Plan Amendment) 4. All new development be processed as part of the PUD procedure. The reason for this is not an architectural approach or planning approach for getting good design but if you are to deal with the realities of air quality and how people might be affected by the interstate traffic and how a new development might affect air quality by concentration of oxidants so as to create a health hazard and if the City is going to be concerned with this, there must be the discretionary authority to require proof of mitigation to deal with that problem. Another hazard to health is noise and federal and state standards have been imposed which cannot be ig- nored. ) -.-/ 5. To provide a positive policy statement concerning the City's posture on growth vs. no growth. Those are the five major areas of amendments and there are a few minor changes the Council might wish to mention and he and Mr. Crawford will be happy to discuss these changes and to answer questions. The City Attorney commented that he feels the amendments proposed are defensible and reasonable. A lot of findings have to be made and he also feels that they can be made but must be done properly. If this is challenged and we are successful, it may be a talisman to what is going to happen in the State of California. He would like to state publicly that this is a new area of the law and we are approaching arenas that have hitherto not been approached at all or if approached, only on the periphery. Cm Miller stated that he would like to propose that the Council consider an amendment to the Grunwald and Crawford General Plan which will cover the possibility of lowering the density on Area #12. If that is going to be discussed by the Council then the public should know it in advance so if they wish to speak to it they can. He stated that his suggestion would be an interim amendment which would consider the lowering of density only for Area #12. The City Attorney commented that as he understands what Cm Miller is saying is that as part of the General Plan amendment which Grunwald and Crawford have prepared, there be included some other item other than what is presently before the Council and Cm Miller indicated this is correct. It would be part of one General Plan amendment. Mayor Pritchard wondered if the City could legally do this and the City Attorney indicated it could - all the City would be doing would be adopting one General Plan amendment as suggested by Grunwald and Crawford or with changes desired by the Council. Mr. Musso commented that there was no consideration for change of density in the hearing that the Planning Commission held. Mayor Pritchard opened the public hearing at this time. H. E. Christman, 1462 Vancouver Way, stated that he is a retired building consultant and does not understand why Cm Miller can discuss PU #12 when he lives next to the area because of a con- flict of interest. It has been his understanding that anyone living in that neighborhood or owning property in the vicinity could not set density. --/ Mayor Pritchard asked if the City Attorney would respond. CM-29-334 March 17, 1975 (General Plan Amendment) Cm Miller stated that he has been advised by the City Attorney that as long as he does not speak to specific properties within 300 ft. of his property there is not a conflict of interest. He asked the City Attorney if he has a conflict of interst in discussing anything that has to do with PU #12. c The City Attorney stated that his feeling is that any conflict Cm Miller might have would be a moral conflict because the fact that Cm Miller owns a house does not mean that Cm Miller has a conflict with what affects the area his house is in. If this were the case it would mean that Councilmembers would have to eliminate discussion about anything affecting the City because they own a house in the City. If Cm Miller makes a determination that he has a moral con- flict he should not take part in discussion as well as a vote be- cause discussion can be a means of influencing the Council. Cm Miller stated his position is as follows: Anything that has to do with how properties are distributed within Area #12, how zoning or other things are done, will not be discussed by him. However, Area #12 is a very large area and the general density or quality of what is going to happen does not have to do with the zoning or layout of specific plans for Area #12. He does not have a legal conflict and feels that he also does not have a moral conflict on the general application. Anything specific or specific parts of the area he will not discuss. Mr. Christman stated that he can not understand why this area is being reduced in density from what was originally planned. Mayor Pritchard explained that the public hearing this evening is to discuss the General Plan amendment which will affect the entire City, except that Cm Miller would like to add an amendment to the General Plan amendment regarding Planning Unit #12. At this time the Council has not discussed density nor have they set density for Planning Unit #12 and discussion for specific planning has been tabled, as recommended by the consultant. At this point, until something is adopted, the old General Plan applies to any area that is not changed. The City Attorney commented, to the extent that the City does not change some part of the old General Plan, yes; it still applies. The only difference between this and the old plan is the theory. If this General Plan amendment is adopted and ordinances are adopted to go along with the changes, the City, in effect, throws out the old theory of zoning. Cm Miller stated that he would like to be more specific about what he is going to propose so that Mr. Christman will understand what it is. He is going to propose that the overall holding capacity of Area #12 be that which will correspond to a density of 2 d.u./acre for the whole area, including that part which is already developed. Since the Council is not considering any specific plans, no details of how this will be laid out will be involved. Mr. Christman asked if he is correct in understanding that the City does not plan to take new property into the City and no property will be considered unless it is now in the City under the new General Plan, until 1980. l Mr. Grunwald explained that what the consultants are addressing themselves to is that there is a limitation upon the City for accepting additional sewer applications and until the problem is solved to the point where there is additional capacity, the priority for allocating remaining capacity should be given to those lands in the City already. CM-29-335 March 17, 1975 (General Plan Amendment) Mr. Christman stated that he owns property which is not in the City and is concerned about not being able to build on it before 1980. Mr. Grunwald explained that if the City had the approval of the state and federal agencies for sewer plant expansion in the area and had the assurance of sufficient monies for such expansion and gave Mr. Lee and his staff directions to proceed with the design for enlarged capacity for the treatment plant it would take a minimum of l~ years before anything could be done. What the City is saying is that if anything can be done within the next l~ to 2 years for plant expansion it would change the policy of the Council as to allocating sewer capacity to some extent. J Mayor Pritchard stated he would like the records to indicate that the City did attempt to increase the capacity of the plant to 10 MGD, four years ago, and our funding was withdrawn. We then attempted to increase the capacity by 1 MGD and funding for this amount was also refused. Last week the staff was directed to make inquiries as to the EPA population projections and funding for water treatment facilities. Mr. Christman stated that he is one of many retired people who own property up in the hills and if they are not allowed to build on that property for 10 years it is useless to them. The taxes are high and they really consider this a serious problem. Cm Miller suggested that if development is not anticipated for 10 years it might be advisable for the land to be put into the Williamson Act and the taxes would drop and Mr. Christman stated that they have looked into this possibility. Don pettrich, 1113 Florence Road, stated that he would agree with the Council on some things but not on others. The things he would agree with are time scales but would disagree as to what should be done with properties adjacent to freeways. He stated that there seems to be mixed emotion, as some people want parks and others feel that if something isn't done in 10 years the energy situation will devour us economically and in availability of supplies. He stated that there are people working on the energy situation and the City is involved in trying to plan Livermore and feels these are all good but the efforts should somehow be joined. He stated that the City cannot say we are going to ignore the freeways and the energy and fuel situation and concentrate on parks and beautiful open space. He stated that what he would like to see is the Council get together with people like Dr. Teller and Nelson Rockefeller and start worrying about what Livermore is going to do with various problems and perhaps Livermore can become an example of what can be done. He stated that we are pouring money into freeways and looking at the possibility for providing more parks and open space which do not accommodate rapid and mass transit. He feels the City is getting into a state of apathy - let's make it pretty, comfortable, and don't rock the boat. He stated that perhaps the time for "rocking the boat" is now. Dr. Teller says we have 10 years with which to act and that we do not have an energy crisis but rather an energy disease and people are going to die in 10 years or be feeling the pain of this disease in 10 years. He stated that he would agree with the time scales but rather than saying in 1990 rezoning should take place to accommodate busses, trucks and restaurants he would suggest that something be done to provide mass transit. The General Plan was prepared about ~ lO years ago before there was an energy crisis. We feel the crisis and scientifically know about it and the planning of Livermore should be done with this in mind. He would say forget the parks and go to the freeways and use them. CM-29-336 G March 17, 1975 (General Plan Amendment) Mr. Grunwald explained that what is being discussed this evening is not the major effort of the consultants at all. This is not the General Plan to be considered but rather an interim plan, dealing only with the present General Plan policy. They are spending thousands of dollars looking at the prediction of air quality with certain target populations, looking at circulation, and the impact of certain land uses in certain locations; looking at noise, and all of these things mentioned by Mr. Pettrich. In addition they are looking at recreation and open space and the conservation of agriculture and minerals as well as the hazardous things such as earthquakes and endangered species. The whole sphere of facts affecting physical, economical, and social lifestyle is being reviewed and the Council has yet to see one of the studies. There will be about five coming out within the next month or 45 days and would urge interested people to obtain copies because people will then have some insight as to the level of detail the consultants are going to in analyzing the points mentioned by Mr. Pettrich, and would agree that the statement made by Mr. Pettrich was very good. Mr. pettrich stated that he views everything mentioned as a problem and is very concerned and offered to volunteer to help in any way possible because he feels the problem is not being recognized by enough people. Mr. Grunwald asked that Mr. pettrich give his name and address to Mr. Musso so that he may be informed of study sessions and that they would be very happy to have Mr. Pettrich attend the sessions and help make recommendations. Mr. Lloyd Haines, representative of Ensign Bickford, stated that they are dismayed that Cm Miller is suggesting lowering the density allover the City to 2 d.u./acre. Cm Miller stated that he was thinking about PU #12. Mr. Haines stated that a 2 d.u./acre density will make their project unfeasible and they are also concerned about proposed recommendations. He stated that what the City Attorney has said is true in that the City is entering into a new area of the law and Mr. Haines feels there will be a number of law suits against the City of Livermore because in his opinion the City does not have much legal authority for doing what it is doing. His clients as well as other clients are ready and willing to bring legal action against the City of Livermore. He stated that they do not want to become involved in a law suit but cannot see these properties placed into a situation where they are rendered useless. He stated that they would like to work with the City but they cannot work with the proposed density or a total change of the system whereby they are out on a limb without any economic interest. Ed Goldberg, from Ensign Bickford Realty, explained that they own 176 acres of land at the intersection of First Street, north of Porto1a Avenue. At one time Ensign Bickford and Coast Manufactur- ing was owned by the same group of stockholders and probably the only thing in Livermore at one time was Ensign Bickford, Coast and Wente Brothers Winery. He stated that they are not newcomers to Livermore and frankly is appalled at the development which has been allowed to take place in Livermore and can certainly understand the concern of the Council to bring more orderly and quality develop- ment to Livermore. He stated that the City is spending a significant amount of money for legal defense ($100,000 a year) and cannot really afford to become involved in further legal chaos. Mayor Pritchard stated that before proceeding, the Council should correct what has just been said and the City Attorney stated that this year $13,000 has been spent for outside attorneys but the $100,000 figure may have included the fee for the railroad assessment district, which was a very substantial fee, and is unrelated to legal problems. There are no $100,000 fees for outside counseling. CM-29-337 March 17, 1975 Mayor Pritchard explained that he would just like to have the matter clarified, for the record, because the statement made was quite horrendous and on its face would have looked very devastating in print. Crawford Westbrook, land planner, explained that they have been working with Ensign Bickford since 1967 and in April of 1974 were contacted about property owned in Livermore and asked to work with '" \) Ensign Bickford,them, the Council, Planning Commission, and staff .--1 to prepare a planned development concept for the 176 acres. They have been working with as many people in Livermore as possible on the concept of cluster development for that area using a 3 d.u./ acre density for the property, for the past year. He stated that they have concentrated on quality development from every aspect and this would mean changes in some of the procedures that have marked the development which has previously occurred in this commun- ity. They felt Planned Unit Development is the proper course of action and the best technique which has evolved, to date, for achiev- ing quality development and quality growth. They are concerned for this community as well as Ensign Bickford, their client, in that whatever steps are taken in the process to rectify the wrongs of the past should be soundly based, legally defensible and technically viable. These are the measures that must be applied to any legislation which the Council considers. He would hope that the General Plan amendment being considered tonight, any modifications, revisions or amendments thereto, be based on sound legal principles that will be defensible and not place this community in an embarrassing position. He would hope that the techniques being applied by this innovative legal procedure will be supported and that the Council feels confident it will be upheld in court. He stated that he does not question whether it is or is not defensible but merely suggests that the Council is certain it is, in order to prevent embarrassment to the community. He would hope that any aspect of the zoning policy to be considered in the subsequent public hearings would fill the same criteria. On a point of order he would like to ask the City Attorney the following question: If amendments are to be offered to the General Plan document that is before this public hearing, is it not fitting and proper that all of the specifications of those amendments or that amendment be spelled out to the audience during the open public session of response before the Council makes a decision and votes? In other words, after the public hearing is closed, can other additional aspects, changes or other amendments of a significant nature be considered without the pUblic having the opportunity to respond? The City Attorney felt the answer to this is more appropriately addressed to the Mayor but he is sure the Mayor would give anyone the opportunity to respond. If something is to be amended to a significant degree, it will have to be spelled out how it is to be amended and any questions or remarks would surely be allowed by the Mayor. He stated that he would be most surprised if the Mayor denied anyone this opportunity. Mr. Westbrook stated that in the absence of any further knowledge of any amendments to be offered, he would like to make one closing comment about the extent of the amendment that has been voiced by Cm Miller. He stated that his understanding is that Cm Miller is going to suggest to the Council some action for PU #12, which encompasses not only the Ensign Bickford property, but all of the property to the north, to Las positas and beyond 1-580, plus the area in which Cm Miller lives and all that area under construction by Mr. Mehran. It would seem that if the overall density of that entire area is reduced to an average of 2 d.u./acre, that the net result on any ~ new development will be substantially below 2 d.u./acre. They feel the density they would be allowed would make any form of planned unit development or clustering of units in a new environmental style, prohibitive and financially impossible. Therefore, it CM-29-338 L, L March 17, 1975 (General Plan Amendment) would cause a very severe burden upon Ensign Bickford or any of the other owners who wish to deviate from some of the physical development styles which the Council has indicated to be of concern. Mr. Strang, Secretary of Palomar Financial, and owner of property north of the freeway, stated he did not receive notice of this public hearing or of the General Plan amendment to be reviewed. (NOTE: This was a general notice only and no individual notices were sent nor required.) He has been attending PU t18 meetings and last week was surprised to learn that the Council has been working on an alternative way of solving the problems. He stated that his company has held an interest in this land through three foreclosures, since 1961, and has been told by the City that the moratorium would soon be lifted and things will change. He stated that he wonders if a subtle thing is being done to continue what has been done in the past and noted that certain things can bring ruination economically to people. He stated that the taxes for their property is thousands of dollars a year and that they can do anything they want with the property except use it. They pay assessments for the northern water and sewer district and asked how the City can just shrug and ignore their problems. He stated they have tried to deal in good faith with the City but would like to ask if the City feels it is really being reciprocated, and would hope it "bears on your conscience". Cm Tirsell stated that she is sure Mr. Strang is aware the City is facing limited sewer capacity and there is not sewage capacity left in our treatment plant to serve all the properties that wish to develop. The Council's concern is for the health and welfare of the citizens of Livermore and it is necessary to provide clean water An~ that tag Wftr9r is Rot pelluto~ wjt~~ho ~ff1tt~Rt of e~ sewer tr~gnt plaRt. L-She stated :?" "at this problem would bear on her conscience even harder. 7~~~~ Mayor Pritchard stated that h~~WS of ~o instance in which the Council has ever laughed or shrugged at the problems of anyone who has come before the Council and would like to speak to the point that when a person receives property, whether it is through default as a mortgage holder, or as a gift, or by purchase, it is not the responsibility of any governing body to take procedures that guarantee a profit on that investment. Investment in property is no different than investing in any other type of interest. If one buys stock in any company it is done at a certain risk and you intend to "take your chances". The City does not deliberately do things to properties so that a profit may not be realized but these things do not have to be considered and they cannot be considered by a governing body. It is true that economics enter into the situation but would like to dispell the notion that this City Council or any other Council is going to do the work of an individual to insure that there is a profit made on property. Mr. Older, 1524 Hollyhock, stated that he feels Mr. Strang owes the Council an apology. Mr. Older attended a Council meeting approximately two weeks ago at which time plans for Palomar were presented which called for various things but graciously were omitted, such as en- trance and exit which would not ruin the Springtown area. Mr. Strang stated at that meeting that development by Palomar would rely upon Bluebell for the traffic flow and Mr. Older stated that Bluebell now has excessive traffic because it is used for people gaining access to the Greenvi1le area, Proud Country and the various Reeder projects. He felt if Mr. Strang must come in and make accusations of the Council, the least he can do is also provide a plan for traffic that would not practically assassinate 1,000 adult people who want to live their lives without having to put up with this traffic situation. Mr. Strang indicated it was not his map, they have no development going on and wanted to inform the Council of their economic plight. Cr.1-29-339 March 17, 1975 (General Plan Amendment) Cm Miller commented that there were two points raised by the Ensign Bickford representatives about being above board and assuming 3 d.u. to the acre. In their discussions with some of the Councilmembers, privately, showing proposed plans which generally looked pretty good it was mentioned to them on more than one occassion that density de- J creases were under consideration in this area; therefore, it should - . not be a surprise. Secondly, Cm Miller has done a calculation about approximat1ey what the d.u./acre would probably be in that area, based on the existing development it turns out to be approximately 1.8 d.u./ acre. There are approximately 670 acres in the area with approximately 85 developed at 3.5 d.u./acre on the average. He stated that these are approximate figures and the density is not quite as low as what Ensign Bickford anticipates. Paul Lynch, Killarney street, stated that he has been listening to Livermore City Councils since 1960 about the problems of sewer effluent. It seems that every year we have the same problem in that other items are taken care of - the tracks are being moved - but the same sewer problems continue to exist. He stated that he realizes the City is probably dependant upon money from out- side sources but he also has a small piece of property and if he would like to build 12 units on it, which could legally be done, City fees would cost approximately $30,000. He stated that he has just a small piece of property but can sympathize with those who have large interests because he knows what the fees are for just a small parcel. If things do not improve it would appear that there could be no growth for the City of Livermore and in his opinion this would be ridiculous. He stated that eventually the City will be surrounded by things over which the City has no control and would suggest that the Council determine the best way Livermore can grow with good planning. Mayor Pritchard explained that the City fees are calculated on the needs that must be met by each developer and wondered if Mr. Lynch is saying that these fees are too high? Mr. Lynch indicated that he knows of other communities where development has taken place with less cost to the developer. Mayor Pritchard asked where Mr. Lynch would suggest the City go to get the money needed for various items if the property owners do not pay, and Mr. Lynch stated that there are things being done which he feels are not as essential as our sewer plant. Mayor Pritchard stated that it appears that Mr. Lynch is saying that the City can arbitrarily take monies which are to be used for other projects and use them for the sewer plant, and Mr. Lynch felt this would be possible. nil! ~"I (:E1ij:ejiu.~. M~yor Pritchard stated as mentioned ear1i~rJt~ity Council d1d apply for funds, four years ago, to -~ he capacity of our treatment plant and the grant was denied because of a ruling by the EPA. This was definate1y not a decision made by the City but rather by another agency. He then explained that the funds the City has received for the track relocation project cannot be used for anything else other than track re- location. Some of the funds are coming from the state and the rest is coming from assessment districts and property owners within the ar~a who are supporting it. The remain- ing amount will come from the railroad companies involved. ...-/- Mr. Lynch stated that he did not mean to imply that the track relocation funds could be used for something else but rather that as he recalls there was something like $80,000 spent for a beautification study for a route through Livermore and that such funds could be better spent. After years of money being wasted people become completely fed up with the whole thing. CM=29-340 March 17, 1975 (General Plan Amendment) ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. RECESS c Prior to discussion concerning the public hearing, Mayor Pritchard called for a five minute recess after which the Council meeting resumed with all members of the Council present. CONTINUATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DISCUSSION Cm Miller stated that during the recess he spoke with the consultants and it was suggested that the densities for all of the areas be con- sidered at one time and he would agree with this and therefore would like to remove his suggestion to lower the density for PU #12 and that this be considered at the time the other areas are discussed. Cm Turner stated that it is his understanding the ordinance relative to the General Plan amendment is an interim ordinance and would suggest that the 150,000 gallons remaining in the sewer capacity be reserved for industrial development until such time the General Plan is submitted to the Council, if there is a way this can be done. It seems that if 250,000 gallons have been committed to residential it would be fair to reserve the other 150,000 gallons for industrial development. Mr. Musso stated that on Page 8, under 5., there is reference to allocation and it says that 10% should be reserved for low and moderate income housing and not less than 50% for non residential. It was noted that the Planning Commission had made a change in the wording concerning reservation of sewer capacity and Cm Futch stated that he would agree with the P. C. wording but would suggest adding the wording lias defined in Policy Statement No.1", AND SO MOVED, MOTION SECONDED BY CM MILLER. WORDING WOULD READ: THAT NOT LESS THAN 50 PERCENT OF THE REMAINING EFFECTIVE SEWER CAPACITY AS DEFINED IN POLICY STATEMENT NO. 1 BE ALLOCATED TO NON RESIDENTIAL USES AND OF THAT PERCENTAGE ALLOCATED TO RESIDENTIAL USES 10 PERCENT BE ALLOCATED TO LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING. It was noted that this is a policy statement and therefore not mandatory. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. The City Attorney stated that inherent in the understanding of the motion is that there is no change from what the P.C. recom- mended, in substance, but is a point of clarification. l Mr. Musso stated that apparently the Council received a copy of the P.C. recommendations without the annotations corrected and on Page 7., Policy Statement No.1, in line 6, the gallons per day are eliminated at .4 MGD as of 1/1/75 should be indicated. Cm Futch again mentioned that although the City would not legally be required to provide service to areas with sewer capacity, he feels it would be something that would be pointed to if the City tries to reserve the excess for other uses, and wonders if this is a correction of policy involved. Mr. Gruenwald stated it may help if the Council understands the intent of the consultant in writing the policy this way. It was placed in the General Plan amendments only because at that CM-29-341 Harch 17, 1975 (General Plan Amendment) time there was a question of legality and the consultants wanted it presented so that there would be language available in case it became a legally binding matter. This was their only intent in including this wording. Cm Futch wondered if the consultants would have any objection in the Council's decision to delete the wording and Mr. Grunwald indicated they would have no objections as long as the priorities selected by the Council are reasonable. The amendment, in their judgment, would be just as satisfactory. The City Attorney commented that if Cm Futch is suggesting that Policy Statement 2 be changed it would mean that it would have to go back to he Planning Commission and also would like to point out that this is an interim General Plan. He stated that it makes no difference as to whether or not the Council makes a change but would like them to be aware of the results. , ..~ Mayor Pritchard stated he can understand Cm Futch's point about possibly having a moral obligation to service areas in the assess- ment district before industrial is given service, for example. The City Attorney stated that by adopting this policy in this interim General Plan, the Council is not foreclosing, at some future date, the availability if the City has the capacity to serve the assess- ment districts. In otherwords this is not meant to be the end of everything - it is an interim General Plan amendment and looks at only what we have in the immediate future. Cm Futch stated he would like to withdraw his objection to Policy Statement 2. CM FUTCH MOVED TO INTRODUCE A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT WITH CLARIFICATION THAT FINDINGS ARE CON- SISTENT WITH WHAT THE REPORT SAYS AND THAT THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN CONSIDERED, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 46-75 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE PUBLIC HEARING RE INTRODUCTION OF ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT Th~ proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment is a companion measure to the General Plan amendment the Council has just adopted. The City Attorney indicated that he would like to suggest a change in the wording in Section 4.26, Page 6, at the bottom. The sugges- ted wording has been discussed with the planning consultants and they agree that it would be an appropriate change. It is suggested that Section 4.26 read as follows: Section 4.26 "0S-UR District, Required Conditions: Whenever a new use, as listed under Sections 4.24 or 4.25 of this ordi- nance, is applied for in the Urban Reserve District, the Planning Commission may recommend to the City Council a zon- ing district classification for modification, thereof, for such use. If the City Council approves such classification, the use applied for will be subject to comply with all, or some as specified, of the regulations of the zoning district so designated. '~I ........,,/ Mayor Pritchard asked if this amendment means that the ordinance would have to back to the Planning Commission and the City Attorney CM-29-342 March 17, 1975 (Zoning Ordinance Amendment) stated that the wording change really doesn't change the substance but clarifies the procedure for the approval procedure. l) The City Attorney explained that this is also consistent with what the Council already uses as a procedural mechanism with the P.C. and Council, in view of the fact the Council does not designate or delegate a great deal of authority to the Planning Commission. The City Attorney then mentioned that he would like to suggest a one word change for Page 4, Section 4.14. In discussing this with the planning consultants they agreed that the wording addi- tion would reflect the intention of the Planning Commission. Section 4.14 OS-UR (Urban Reserve) Districts: The Urban Reserve District is intended for application to certain lands within the City which are designated by the General Plan for development .......etc. Mr. Musso mentioned one other 4.25, last line should begin: such uses are consistent with specific plans. change on Page 5, under Section permit in Section 28.00; providing the General Plan and any existing Mr. Musso stated that he was asked to comment, for the record, that if this ordinance is adopted it will not apply to any land in the City and in the Planning Commission discussions there was no discus- sion as to its application to any land in the City in the future except in general terms, and was not discussed in relationship to any particular piece of property. Mayor Pritchard opened the public hearing at this time. Crawford Westbrook read portions of Section 4.l4 and asked if this means that the Urban Reserve District is to be applied to lands that exist within the incorporated boundaries of the City and Mr. Logan explained that it is being applied to no lands today. The district itself is merely being created and the passage of this ordi- nance as it might apply to particular lands, still requires that it go through all the procedural due process as set forth in the Govern- ment Code. Mr. Westbrook asked if this establishes enabling legislation for subsequent action which the City Attorney replied is correct. Mr. Westbrook mentioned that this means that subsequently, this Council, or a subsequent Council, could apply this particular pro- vision to any lands that presently exist in the City, be they zoned one way or the other and the City Attorney stated this is correct as long as there has been a proper public hearing and in this case it can be laid out as a district and the OS-UR can be applied. l Mr. Westbrook stated that he feels it should be the objective of every community to obtain and seek quality development and therefore to apply an Urban Reserve District to properties that are presently incorporated and have been for some period of time, within the City, and established in certain densities or uses at the present time, would affect those properties in terms of their marketability and possible use. Without the knowledge of exactly what densities would later be applied to those properties, by proper due course procedures, it would say that if the owners of property presently having a den- sity of 3 d.u./acre, if placed by subsequent Council action in the Urban Reserve District, the 3 d.u./acres would be lost and the owners would not know what they would be faced with until such time as they make application for a specific plan for that area, at which time the density could be set as the Council judgment at that time resulted. Mr. Grunwald stated it would be impossible, under the California planning laws in adopting this ordinance, after having adopted the General Plan amendment, to change the density proposed by the General Plan which exists. The consultants have been very careful to stay away from changing density and the Council does not have the discre- tionary authority to change the density. CM-29-343 March 17, 1975 (Zoning Ordinance Amendment) Mr. Westbrook asked if the Urban Reserve District, by a subse- quent Council action, be applied to the Ensign Bickford property at the intersection of Porto1a and First Street, would that result in a loss or change of the density presently and legally zoned on that land? Mr. Grunwald replied, "no", there would have to be a change on the General Plan density policy before this could be done. Mr. Logan felt it should be pointed out to those who might be interes- ted, that the theory underlying the establishment of an OS-UR District with PUDs is the requirement that any development be consistent with the General Plan, as it now exists, and would hope that everyone understands this. ~~ ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. CM TIRSELL MOVED TO INTRODUCE THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, ESTABLISHING THE OS-UR DISTRICT, PREPARED BY GRUNWALD AND ASSOCIATES, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. THE TITLE ONLY WAS READ BY THE CITY ATTORNEY. Cm Miller stated that before the Council leaves this subject he would like to mention that this ordinance created no rezoning but creates the district and the Council discussed the possibility of hearings beginning at the Planning Commission. It seems that the Council should request the Planning Commission to prepare the notices for those hearings so this can take place once the ordinance has gone into effect. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION BE SO DIRECTED, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CONSENT CALENDAR Resolution re Appt. to P.C. The following resolution was adopted appointing Brenda Souza to the Planning Commission to fill the vacancy left by the resignation of Robert Lindgren. RESOLUTION NO. 47-75 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING PLANNING COMMISSIONER (Brenda Souza) Payroll & Claims There were 101 claims in the amount of $454,648.67, dated March 10, 1975, and 296 payroll warrants in the amount of $88,565.14, dated March 7, 1975, for a total of $543,213.81, approved by the Director of Finance. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. ----/ MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (State Dept. of Water Res. Control Bd. Hearing) Mr. Lee stated notice of a public hearing by the State Department of Water Resources Control Board has been received concerning declaring CM-29-344 March 17, 1975 (State Dept. of Water Res. Control Bd. Hearing) the entire Bay Area a 208 Planning Area. He stated that LAVWMA had applied to the state for the planning agent of the valley and Mr. Lee wanted the Council to be aware of the upcoming hearing. l (Location of OGO Foundations - East Ave.) Mr. Lee presented a cross-section drawing of the OGO Apartments located on East Avenue and where the foundations for this project are being poured with respect to the distance from the right-of-way. The required setback for the building is 30 ft. and the closest unit is just at 30 ft. from the property line. Within the 30 ft. setback will be a 15 ft. bike path easement, leaving a minimum distance of 15 ft. from the apartments to the bike path. The ease- ment varies from 10 ft. to 15 ft. Mayor Pritchard asked if the City normally measures setbacks from the foundations or from the overhang, and Mr. Lee stated that the wall line is used for the measurement and they are in conformance with the setback requirements. (Park Properties - Crum Ranch & Ravenswood) Cm Futch stated he has received a call from a member of the LARPD Board who is interested in when the Park District might be able to begin development of parks at Ravenswood and the Crum Ranch which have been dedicated to the City and Mr. Parness explained that both LARPD and the staff have been doing nothing about the Ravenswood design and we are awaiting the results of the allocation of Proposition 1 monies. There are five firms who are interested in the restoration of the buildings at Ravenswood and they will soon be invited to take a tour of the Ravenswood grounds. The visit will precede the interview of each interested firm and once this has been done it is assumed that the design work will begin. (Beautification Com- mittee Appointments) Cm Miller stated that we have been asking the Beautification Com- mittee to make suggestions with respect to selecting members for the Committee and asked that a letter be sent to the Committee once again to ask if they know of anyone who might be interested in serv- ing on the Committee. (Population Projection - State Water Resources Control Board) Cm Miller mentioned that Cm Futch was going to write a letter to the State Water Resources Control Board concerning their projections for population in the valley, with copies to various agencies, and Cm Futch commented that he has not had the opportunity to draft the letter. l (Committee Vacancies) Cm Turner wondered about various committee vacancies and Mr. Parness stated these will be coming to the Council with recommendations and that the Council should note that the Industrial Advisory Committee and the Transportation Committee both have vacancies that need to be filled. The City Clerk was asked to notify the press when there are vacancies on committees. CM-29-345 J March 17, 1975 (Food Stamps) Cm Turner stated that he has received a number of calls from citizens who are concerned as to how they will obtain their food stamps because the local bank which has been issuing the food stamps will no longer continue to provide this service. If the people cannot obtain the stamps, locally, they will have to drive to Oakland for them and these people are very concerned about getting to Oakland. '\ ~ Mayor Pritchard commented that Mr. Parness has checked into this matter and has informed him that the County will be coming to Livermore to speak with Mr. Parness and there is another agency in the valley who may take over this service. (Energy Conserva- tion Ordinance) Mayor Pritchard stated that he was hoping to speak with Mr. Street who is absent this evening, about the Energy Conservation Ordinance, and asked that this item be placed on the agenda. It has been brought to his attention that there is some duplication in Ordi- nances 715 and 848 (energy conservation ordinances) concerning inspections, and there should be some amendments made. THE COUNCIL DIRECTED THE STAFF TO CHECK INTO THESE ORDINANCES AND REPORT BACK TO THE COUNCIL WITH RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS. (Adjournment to Executive Sesion) Mayor Pritchard stated that at the close of the meeting the Council will adjourn to an executive session on Tuesday, March 18, at 7:30 P.M., at 3070 East Avenue, to discuss personnel matters and legal matters, as requested by the City Attorney. COMMUNICATION FROM P. C. RE SPECIFIC PLANS The Communication from the Planning Commission concerning specific plans was noted for filing. COMMUNICATION RE GEN. PLAN PROGRESS A communication was received from Grunwald Crawford Associates with respect to Progress Report No.5, for the General Plan Program. No action was required of the Council and the report was filed. COMMUNICATION RE R.R. GRADE SEPARATION The communication from Chief of Police, Ronald Lindgren, was noted and filed. The memo was a report of the traffic problems created by the railroad relocation project and that at this time the problems are practically non-existant with the exception of detours which were necessary to resurface Livermore Avenue. I I ...-"/ CM-29-346 March 17, 1975 COMMUNICATION FROM B.C. RE ACQUISITION OF LOT AT PORTOLA & MURRIETA o The Beautification Committee has written to the Council to ask that consideration be given to the acquisition of the southeast corner of Porto1a and Murrieta Boulevard to provide for greenery at one of Livermore's entrances, and also to provide for parking space for BART commuters. Mayor Pritchard stated that, as usual, acquisition and beautification is a matter of finances and Cm Miller suggested that perhaps a pre- preliminary appraisal could be done so that the City might ascertain the amount of money needed for such a project. Mr. Parness felt this was an item that should appropriat1y be dis- cussed during the budget session and the matter was referred as suggested. COMMUNICATION FROM RANDY SCHLIENTZ RE MULTI-PURPOSE BUILDING A letter was received from architect, Randall H. Sch1ientz, concern- ing his interest in providing design services for the multi-purpose structure to serve the community if funds are approved for this project. The letter will be filed pending further information as to the status of the application for funds. GREENS CO~~. MINUTES Minutes for the Greens Committee meeting of January 16, 1975, were noted for filing. CONSIDERATION OF PU #18, SPECIFIC PLANS 8, 9, & 12 CM TURNER MOVED TO TABLE CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING UNIT #18, AND SPECIFIC PLANS 8, 9, and 12, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL, WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. Cm Miller stated that prior to leaving this item he would like to apologize to Mr. Strang in that the question over the 30 units Mr. Strang says are coming to him, Cm Miller said that he did not remember the Council ever committing the City to 30 units and he, in fact, did not remember correctly. The Council had agreed by a 3-2 vote to allow 30 units with Cm Futch and Cm Miller dissenting. Examination of the minutes showed Mr. Strang to be correct. ~-- L/ . - Mr. Older stated that he would like to ask a question about 5.1 which has just been continued and Mayor Pritchard stated that with the Council's permission he would allow Mr. Older to ask a question but would like to explain that the reason the Council has taken this action is because our General Plan consultant has specifically asked the P.C. and the Council not to do any specific planning in these planning units until they have finished their work on the General Plan. Mr. Older asked if the extension of Springtown Boulevard is provided for in the planning, and Mayor Pritchard stated that this will be in PU #18, and when the Council discusses anything about that par- ticular planning unit there will be a public hearing for all prop- erties that will be rezoned or changed in any way. CM-29-347 March 17, 1975 (PU #18 and Specific Plans 8, 9 and 12) Mr. Older stated that he cannot understand why the specific agree- ment of Reeder for extending Springtown Boulevard, was ignored by the city and why Springtown Boulevard still ends up in the desert. Cm Miller replied that the reason Reeder was not made to follow through was because previous Councils allowed him "off the hook". This present Council has not allowed it but others did. \ I J Mr. Older indicated that he feels there is some moral obligation involved on the part of the City of Livermore in getting Spring- town Boulevard extended because if some older person is hurt or maimed because of the traffic problem the City should feel some responsibility because past Councils let Reeder off the hook. Mr. Logan then explained the reasons he feels the City would not be liable for any accident occurring because of the traffic prob- lem and because Springtown Boulevard has not been extended. Mr. Musso stated that, for the record, he would like to mention that there is nothing in the specific plan for this area as to whose responsibility it might be for getting Springtown Boulevard extended. RES. ESTABLISHING AGRICULTURAL PRESERVES ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, A RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED WITH RESPECT TO REGULATIONS FOR ESTABLISHING AGRICULTURAL PRESERVES (Williamson Act Acreage provisions) . RESOLUTION NO. 48-75 A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR THE FORM~TION OF AGRICULTURAL PRESERVES PURSUANT TO THE LAND CONSERVATION ACT OF 1965. REPORT RE WAXLAX LANE - P.C. REPORT The Planning Commission reported that consideration was given to the referral from the Council concerning the establishment of Waxlax Lane as a public street, presently a private street, and by unanimous vote recommends that Waxlax Lane not be estab- lished as a City street and that a policy statement for develop- ment of this area be adopted prohibiting extension of Wax1ax Lane to the proposed easterly extension of portola Avenue. Mr. Parness commented that he feels the matter should be referred back to the staff for the final preparation of the sewer connection agreement, regardless of what the Council decides with respect to whether or not Wax1ax Lane should be a private or public street. He would also suggest one modifica- tion to the earlier reference to the agreement, and that is the requirement that the finished improvements along the frontage road be installed at this time rather than to be postponed. The major decision, however, is the decision concerning Wax1ax Lane itself. --/ CM TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATION MADE BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH. Mr. Lee stated that his concern is that for the City to state that Waxlax Lane is not a public road is not sufficient and used Trevarno Road as an example of a private street that is used by the public. The public is not aware that it is a private street which is substandard and will probably remain this way. CM-29-348 March 17, 1975 / V (Planning Commission Report re Wax1ax Lane) Mr. Lee stated if Waxlax is to be a private street the Council should decide how it will be treated, and secondly, if it is a private street the parcel adjacent to it will have access to it unless a "no access strip" is provided adjacent which would prohibit later access to the street. The Council should also con- sider what standards will be applied when the lane develops and if trucks are using it. Mayor Pritchard stated if the street is private and will remain private, what difference would it make who uses it and what treat- ment it receives? Mr. Lee stated that it may remain private, according to the City, but it will function as a public street and in time people will complain to the City that they want signs put up on the street, etc., and want the City to do something about the street, just as they have done concerning Trevarno Road. Discussion followed concerning Wax1ax Lane and the points raised by Mr. Lee. Mr. Musso stated that there is an ordinance that specifies if this area is ever converted from the present residential use to industrial use, it would have to improve a parking lot and this lane would become part of a parking lot. Earl Mason of Associated Professions, representing Oakland Scavenger Company, stated that Oakland Scavenger is not interested in access to Waxlax Lane; they want access to the frontage road and Ultimately to Preston when it is extended through to Vasco Road. Mr. Parness has suggested that if and when Waxlax becomes a developed road, the one foot access strip be placed on the west side of the adjacent piece so nobody can cross it; this is the time to do it, when it is annexed to the City. This could be a condition of the sewer connection agreement. CM FUTCH MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE THE NO ACCESS STRIP OF ONE FOOT, AS A CONDITION OF THE SEWER CONNECTION AGREEMENT, SECONDED BY CM MILLER, WHICH PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. THE MAIN MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT RE PROHIBITING GROWTH BECAUSE OF SEWAGE CAPACITY / I ~/ The City Attorney reported on our sewage treatment capacity and the legality of the prohibiting of construction because of the lack of sewaqe treatment capacity. The written report cited cases in which prohibiting residential growth because of inadequate facilities was challenged, and the decisions concerning these cases. No action was required by the Council on this item. Mr. Parness stated that because of the timing on the moratorium situation he feels that, in view of the expired condition of sewage capacity, the Council may wish to make a formal public statement at this time pertaining to this matter. Simply stated, the Council could say that because of the absence of any sewage treatment capacity now, by virtue of technological input, no building permits will be entertained until something is done to relieve the lack of sewage treatment capacity. Cm Miller stated there seems to be discussion about what our available capacity is or is not and this should be clarified with full details given to the Council in a report and possible resolution, for consideration next week. CM-29-349 March 17, 1975 DISCUSSION RE REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD TREATMENT STANDARDS It has been suggested by the Council that there be a discussion as to the transmittal of an official statement to the Regional Water Quality Control Board requesting their consideration of the effects of effluent disposal on underground water supplies and environmental concerns associated with treatment plant expan- sions. J Cm Miller stated that the issue was that the Regional Board is considering adding some connections to P1easanton's plant and there really is a question of contamination of underground water supply, etc., and the Council was going to discuss whether or not Livermore would take a position on this possible expansion. Mayor Pritchard stated he read in the Oakland Tribune where the Regional Board staff is recommending that additional capacity be assigned to the plant but feels he is not totally knowledge- able about their plant operation and is somewhat uncertain about taking a position. At this time the Council is not stating a position. REPORT RE BIKE LICENSING The Chief of Police submitted a report concerning the results of a survey taken among businesses in the City which deal with retail sale of new or used bicycles and their willingness to participate in a bicycle licensing program. The written report was submitted to the Council for discussion. Mr. Parness indicated no action would be required by the Council because it was his understanding the initiation of the new state licensing program would not be undertaken at this time, in view of the fact that many changes will probably be made in the pro- gram. He stated that some cities are even dropping the automobile licensing because of the reluctance of the state to handle uniform computerized record keeping. The legislators have met with all of the police department, bicycle licensing officers to discuss their concerns and apprehensions and this City was represented at that meeting. It was his understanding that the Council concurred that the City should wait to see what happens but that an inquiry was to be circulated among those retailers who might agree to parti- cipate in the licensing program at which time the City does decide to go into the state program and to convert from the present program. Cm Turner wondered if Mr. Parness is suggesting that bike licens- ing not take place and Mr. Parness replied he is not suggesting anything like this and that bike licensing is taking place at present but that we have not converted to the state program. Cm Turner stated that the letter he wrote spoke to the issue of the need for bike licensing in the City of Livermore and that this should be done at the schools, etc., and Mr. Parness indicated that this would be under the new state program. Cm Turner wondered why the City couldn't begin now and Mr. Parness explained that we are licensing now, and the City has gone to the schools to license bikes and that this was done at the begin- ning of the bike licensing program by the City. Cm Turner stated that on December 10th he asked that something be done to get bikes licensed to help insure against theft; this is March and nothing has been done. I --,,/ CM-29-350 March 17, 1975 (Bike Licensing) (j Mr. Parness stated he thought Cm Turner had been referring to the state licensing program implementation and Cm Turner stated that he has never referred to the state program. Mr. Parness indicated that the City has licensed 14,000 bicycles since the City licensing program has gone into effect and the City is currently licensing bicycles, and the Police Department has strongly urged that the state program not be implemented until we know what is going to happen. Cm Turner stated he would like to see those retailers who have indicated they would like to help, begin licensing bikes. Mr. Parness stated if the Council desires, the City can convert to the state plan now, or the dealers can be asked to help admin- ister the City licenses that we are presently using. Cm Turner stated that he would furnish his letter to the staff once again and would define his intentions with respect to bike licensing and there was no further discussion of this item. MUNICIPAL CODE AMEND. RE CORPUS ORDINANCE ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE SECOND READING OF THE CORPUS ORDINANCE WAS POSTPONED AT THE REQUEST OF THE CITY ATTORNEY. The City Attorney explained that he has received word that the District Attorney is sending a letter to him with respect to why the City of Livermore should adopt "willful and malicious", and Mr. Logan asked that adoption of the ordinance be postponed until after the letter has been received. ADOPTION OF MUNI. CODE AMEND. RE TAXIS ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRITCHARD AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THE COUNCIL, THE ORDINANCE CONCERNING TAXICABS WAS ADOPTED. ORDINANCE NO. 860 l AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 22 OF THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 1959, RELATING TO TAXICABS AND OTHER VEHICLES FOR HIRE, BY THE AMENDMENT OF SECTIONS 22.1, RELATING TO DEFINITIONS; 22.6, RELATING TO INSURANCE COVERAGE; AND REPEALING 22.10, RELATING TO SELF-INSURANCE, ALL OF ARTI- CLE I, RELATING TO GENERAL PROVISIONS; AMENDING SECTIONS 22.22, RELATING TO QUALIFICATIONS OF DRIVERS; 22.30, RE- LATING TO REVOCATION AND SUSPENSION, BOTH OF ARTICLE II, RELATING TO DRIVER'S PERMIT; BY THE ADDITION OF SECTION 22.31.1, RELATING TO NONTRANSFERABILITY OF PERMITS; THE AMENDMENT OF 22.40, RELATING TO REVOCATION OR SUSPENSION; 22.41, RELATING TO PERMITS FOR ADDITIONAL OR SUBSTITUTED VEHICLES, ALL OF ARTICLE III, RELATING TO OWNER'S PERMIT; AMENDING THE TITLE OF ARTICLE IV FROM STREET STANDS TO TAXI STANDS, AND AMENDING SECTIONS 22.43, RELATING TO DESIGNATION OF LOCATION: 22.44, RELATING TO LIMITATION OF NUMBER OF TAXI STANDS; 22.45, RELATING TO LIMITATION OF NUMBER OF TAXI STANDS PER OWNER; AND 22.47, TO PRO- VIDE FOR ADDITIONAL TAXI STANDS, ALL OF ARTICLE IV; AND AMENDING SECTION 22.59, RELATING TO RATES, OF ARTICLE V, RELATING TO TAXICABS GENERALLY. CM-29-3sl March 17, 1975 WEEKLY STATUS RE- PORT - CITY MANAGER Sales Tax Mr. Parness reported that the sales tax accrual for the last quarter of 1974 was 54% above that of 1973 and is not sure what this means, exactly, but it is a good increase and it appears that there will be about an 18.6% increase year around. " \ \ 'J McCormick Reservoir Property The case for the McCormick reservoir property has been settled at $29,500 which was about equally divided between the City's appraisal and the McCormick's appraisal. unemployment Claims with respect to some of the problems concerning unemployment claims for Livermore citizens, at present, those who must receive payments of this kind must travel to Hayward sometimes as often as twice a week. This is costly and time consuming and difficult. Reportedly, for some, it may consume as much as four hours for a round trip journey. This is particularly difficult for a mother who must arrange for child care. The Council has asked him to appeal this matter which he has done and after a great deal of discussion with the officials of the State Employment Development Department, they have promised Mr. Parness that those in the valley who wish may ask to have checks mailed to them. This was allowed during the "energy crisis" but was not used by many people and they feel that one of the reasons more people did not request to have checks mailed is because there is about a three day wait. Once the three day wait has been exper- ienced it does not continue and checks will be received regularly and they have asked that Mr. Parness announce publicly that forms will be mailed to each recipient or each qualified person and that such forms will also be available in the unemployment office. Mr. Parness stated that those receiving checks will be required to confirm their employment status once or twice a year and he feels this is a big service to the local citizens. Food Stamp Service Cancellation Mr. Parness stated that the cancellation of the food stamp service by the local bank is a matter of economics. The bank is receiving a limited amount of $600 per month from the Alameda County Human Resources Agency, and it is costing them about $1,300 to administer the program; therefore, they can no longer continue to provide the service. The Human Resources Agency is going to visit Mr. Parness to discuss a substitute location. One of the suggestions has been for the post office to administer the stamps and there are other possibilities. Unemployment Service Bureau Mr. Parness has been told that the unemployment situation has changed in the valley and perhaps Livermore would be justified in asking that an Unemployment Service Bureau be located in Livermore. Presently, the nearest office is located in Hayward. The office, in the beginning, may be manned only part-time but this would be a start and it has been suggested that we make application, which we intend to do. The push would be to get quarters in the valley and to have it outfitted because the State Unemployment Department must be a self-sustaining enterprise. He has been told by the ACAP staff that an application would be favorably entertained by the staff for assistance with funding for this purpose. He has also contacted Congressman Stark. -// CM-29-352 ( ~/ '. L March 17, 1975 Meal Program Mr. Parness has been informed today of a Congregate Meal Program which at present he is not familiar with but it is the program now going on in Pleasanton. They have an allocation for about 25 lunches per day but there are only about 3 or 4 of our citizens who can get to Pleasanton and some of the people over in P1easanton would like to relocate it to Livermore. Don Bradley, with the City of Livermore, is involved with this program and perhaps something can be done to get the program to Livermore. Senior Citizens Funding for senior citizens housing and staffing problems have just about been solved and will be taken care of by LARPD or another source. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Pritchard adjourned the meeting at 11:35 P.M. to an executive session to discuss a1 and personnel matters. APPROVE ~~.j ATTEST ( " c, i -. ~.. y Clerk iv 'ore, California Regular Meeting of March 24, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on March 24, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:05 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard presiding. ROLr~ CALL Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Futch, Tirse11 and Mayor Pritchard Absent: None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Pritchard led the Counci1members and those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. MINUTES ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF MARCH 10, 1975, lVERE APPROVED AS SUBMITTED. AGENDA ITEMS Mayor Pritchard commented that the agenda is very lengthy this evening and wondered if anyone would like to speak on Item 6 (d) (Annexation Fee Calculations); or 6 (e) (Zone 7 Rate Adjustments). CM MILLER MOVED TO POSTPONE DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS FOR 2-4 WEEKS TO ALLOW THE COUNCIL THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THESE ITEMS FURTHER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL, AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CM-29-353 March 24, 1975 OPEN FORUM (Library Needs Consultant) Ray Fa1tings, 1018 Via Granada, stated that several months ago the Council approved the employment of a consultant to determine the needs of the library in serving citizens of the community and wondered if consideration has been given to the possibility of com- bining any public library expansion of services, such as branch li- braries, as a coordinated activity with the School Board. He stated that the School Board is building and expanding at Christiansen, Sunset East II, and Las Positas, and that these sites might be con- sidered for locating branch libraries. He felt that it might be advisable for this information to be passed on to the consultants for consideration. J Mr. Parness indicated he felt it would be a very good idea to allow public input and that it might be appropriate to have at least one public hearing and that something of this nature be specified in the contract which is now being drawn up. He also felt this was a very good suggestion that should be passed on to the Library Board. Cm Tirse1l mentioned that this suggestion had been before the School Board and they were not opposed to the idea~ however they were concerned about being able to keep the branches open in the evening and staffing problems. Cm Miller suggested that a memo be sent to the consultant, the Library Board and the School Board indicating favor of the sugges- tion made by Mr. Fa1tings. CONSENT CALENDAR Minutes Minutes for the Design Review Committee for their meeting of March 11, 1975 were noted for filing. Payroll & Claims There were 107 claims in the amount of $199,349.06, dated March 17, 1975, approved by the City Manager. Departmental Reports Reports were submitted by the following Departments: Airport Activity - February Building Inspection - February Mosquito Abatement District - January Municipal Court - January planning/Zoning Activity - February Police Department - February APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL, AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. -.-/ CM-29~354 March 24, 1975 MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL L, (Inspection Fees) Cm Futch stated that there was a $3.50 charge by the City of Livermore for inspection of a gas line he had installed for a gas dryer at his home and he was told by one of the staff people that there was a $25 inspection fee on attic fans. Cm Futch asked if Mr. Street would explain the $25 attic fan inspection fee. Mr. Street replied that the $25 fee includes a $5 filing fee for a report of residential building records and that the $20 is for inspection to determine whether or not the attic fan conforms to the Energy Consdervation Standards, which includes determination as to whether there is sufficient insulation and proper baffles for vents and involves a lengthy process and necessitates going up into the attic to examine the area under the eaves, etc. The attic fan permit is a simple electrical permit which amounts to about $3.00 or $3.50 and the check would be to see if it is connected properly only. Cm Futch wondered how many attic fans have been installed and Mr. Street commented that the City has been keeping very close records on such installations. It has been six months since the ordinance concerning conservation standards has been adopted and he intends to submit a report to the Council at the end of this month as to what the City's experience has been. (Wall Street/Stanley Blvd. Property - Possible Addition to Park Site) Cm Futch mentioned that a letter has been submitted to the Council from Mr. Guy Willis, owner of property on Wall Street and Stanley Boulevard which indicates that they would settle for $24,500 for their property which is less than the estimated value. The proposal would be as follows: Asking Price $29,500 $5,000 Donation to LARPD -5,000 Cost to City $24,500 Cm Futch stated he realizes $24,500 is a large expense for park property but inasmuch as there is a $5,000 donation towards the cost he would like to know if the Council would like to reconsider purchasing the site. Mayor Pritchard explained that this is not an agenda item but that the Council received a letter from Mr. Willis in the agenda packet suggesting the above mentioned offer and would like to have some indication as to how the Council feels about the offer. / ~ Mayor Pritchard added that when purchase of this site was considered by the Council previously LARPD noted that this area is not one of their first priorities for park acquisition; however, if the City feels the purchase can be made at a bargain price there may be in- terest. He stated that he would like to have the City Manager pursue the matter and report back to the Council. Cm Miller stated that one of the problems was that LARPD was not particularly interested in purchasing this property. While the offer from the property owner is very good, the City should check back with LARPD about the new proposal and if they would be interested. CM-29-3ss March 24, 1975 (Wall Street/Stanley Blvd. Property Acquisition) Mr. Parness commented that according to the LARPD staff, it is felt that this property would be a good addition to Pioneer Park and would round out that corner; however, there are other things they would like to see done also and the financial aspect is the major consideration. He stated that with the permission of the Council he would like to discuss this matter with other appraisers, the LARPD staff, and the owner of the property. .. i J Cm Miller felt it would be useful for the Council to see a report of the other priorities and the amount of money left for acquisi- tion of property. Mayor Pritchard stated that there has been a change in the list of priorities in the past because of one reason or another and if it should happen that this property changes ownership there is the possibility that multiples would be developed and the City would lose the chance to add this to Pioneer Park. The staff was directed to look into this matter once again and talk to the people mentioned by Mr. Parness with a report back to the Council. (Campaign Contribu- tion Ordinance) Cm Miller stated that before the last election, a campaign contri- bution ordinance was adopted and at that time the Council felt there were some considerations which should be postponed until after the election, which has now been more than a year, and he would like possible amendment of the ordinance to be placed on a future agenda and that he would like to speak with the City Attor- ney concerning a draft amendment for the Council's consideration. The Council concurred with this suggestion. (Law Suit Against Pleasanton) Cm Miller stated that the City of P1easanton has some serious legal problems because of the suit by the developers, essentially, "hold- ing the City for ransom" because of their sewer problems. There is some evidence that the additional capacity P1easanton wanted is not going to be allowed; consequently, the legal problem is serious. Since Livermore is about to run out of sewage capacity there is a common nature to the problems of Pleasanton and what Livermore could have. He would like to suggest that the City of Livermore express a willingness to provide an amicus brief on their appeal of the developer's law suit, on behalf of this Council. He stated that he feels this would be very helpful and would be in the spirit of cooperation between the agencies, AND SO MOVED, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. The City Attorney stated that he feels Ken Schidig would be delighted to have the City enter into this law suit on an amicus level and there is a possibility that they might be so inclined, when we get into the battles of Las Positas, to join us. Generally, it would be mutually beneficial to everyone concerned and he would be willing to take the time to file the brief. i J MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CM-29-356 u March 24, 1975 (Election of Mayor) Cm Turner stated that he would like to have the election of Mayor for a discussion on the agenda for possible ballot item in 1976 _ asking the citizens if a Mayor should be elected. The City Clerk was asked to place this item on a future agenda for discussion; within six weeks. COKMUNICATION RE CONTRI- BUTION OF ALL WEATHER FLAG - LIV. WOMAN'S CLUB A letter was received from the Livermore Woman's Club indicating that they would like to donate an all weather flag, lighting, and a plaque as their contribution to the Bicentennial celebration. The estimated cost for the flag and lights would be $450. Betty Johnsen, President of the Livermore Woman's Club, stated that they would like to make the donation, as mentioned, with a plaque placed on the pole indicating that the club made the donation and contributed toward the all weather wiring. The Council accepted the offer with gratitude, and Mayor Pritchard stated that he would like to see a special presentation of the flag made at one of the Council meetings when the flag is ready. LETTER OF RESIGNATION FROM BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE (Hamilton) A letter of resignation from the Beautification Committee was received from June Hamilton and the Council asked that the staff write to June thanking her for her work on this committee. Mayor Pritchard commented that while the Council is on the subject of a vacancy he would like to point out that it appeared in the local newspaper that Harry Silcocks and Ayn Weiskamp were being removed from this committee and this is not true; their term of office had expired, and generally the person is reappointed. TRACK RELOCATION TRAFFIC CONDITIONS The Chief of Police reported that traffic continues to flow smoothly around the railroad relocation construction areas and no adjustments are needed or recommended at this time. Cm Tirsell mentioned that when she visited the construction site she observed boys of the junior high age playing in the excavated area near the pylons and would like the Police Department to keep an eye on this type of activity. ABAG SUMMARY OF AB 625 BAY AREA PLANNING AGENCY l The Council received an ABAG summary of the AB 625 Bay Area Planning Agency, for informational purposes. NOTICE OF INITIATION OF STUDY - CORPS OF ENGINEERS A Notice of Initiation of Study of the Alameda Creek Urban Study was submitted by the Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers. CM-29-357 March 24, 1975 (Notice of Initiation of Study-Corp of Engineers) Cm Miller stated that the representatives from the Corps of Engineers were polite and are trying to do what they perceive as a good job. However, the whole nature of this study has bothered the City Council and the fact that there is no real local invitation to the Corps should be expressed once again to Congressman Stark. Our concerns should be passed on to him and although he is aware of our stand Cm Miller felt the Council should express our concern again with a co~ment about the nature of the initiation of the study without any real interaction with local officials. '\) -.../ Cm Futch felt perhaps the City should wait a little longer before contacting Congressman Stark, as there is a possibility we might learn more of the nature of what the Corps of Engineers intends to do. It appears that they are initiating the preliminary study program which is estimated at $lOO,OOO and later do the major study which may amount to ten times this amount. Cm Miller agreed with Cm Futch that the City should wait and the matter was noted for filing. COMMUNICATION RE LOMITAS AVENUE A letter was received from the Alameda County Board of Supervisors indicating that their Public Works Department was directed to come up with estimates of costs that would be involved in setting up an assessment district to provide water to the Lornitas Avenue area. ORD. 75-41 ESTABLISH- ING LIVERMORE-PLEASANTON JUDICIAL DISTRICT A copy of Ordinance No. 75-41 was received from Alameda County, establishing the Livermore-Pleasanton Judicial District, boundaries, and place for holding sessions. APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE - CHARLES W. DUNN RE SETBACK The Planning Director reported that an application was received from Charles W. Dunn for a variance in side and rear yard setbacks to allow construction of a living room addition. Side and rear yard setbacks are established to provide space separation between residences for various reasons and this was one of the principal reasons for creating the RS Zone. It is felt that the reduction requested would impair the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance and there are alternatives available to the applicant. In this par- ticular instance there is no exceptional or extraordinary circum- stance involved; such a variance would constitute a grant of special privilege; is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial propertv rights possessed by other properties in the same zoning district; and the authorizing of such a variance will be of substantial detriment to the adjacent property. For these reasons the Planning Commission has recommended that the applica- tion be denied. / --/ Charles Dunn, 19 Ranier Avenue, presented drawings of the floor plan for his home illustrating the requested variance and the suggested alternative by the Planning Department. He reviewed the drawings with the Council and discussed problems he feels would exist with the suggested alternatives. CM-29-358 March 24, 1975 (Variance re Setback- Charles W. Dunn) c Mr. Dunn stated that he would emphatically disagree with the state- ment made that there are no extenuating circumstances involved. He reviewed all the lots in the H. C. Elliott, Sommerset West Tract and there is no other cul-de-sac lot with the setbacks he has for his home. He added that there has been a problem with the Planning Department deciding whether he has two back yards or three side yards. Mr. Musso commented that there have been instances in which the back yard was treated as a side yard; however, in this case a variance would still be needed so it is irrelevant. If the Planning Department could have solved the problem by treating the back yard as a side yard they would have considered it; however they couldn't. Cm Miller stated that this is a case in which a lot was developed RS in the time period when it was an average 25' minimum 15'. This is a five sided lot with one front, two sides and two backs. Mr. Dunn stated that at present his house is built 12 ft. into the back yard; even without a variance now, the builder has mislocated the home. He stated that his main contention is that if the home had been situated on the lot as is every other cul-de-sac home in the Elliott Tract, he would be allowed the addition. There is not another home in the tract with this IS' easement. Cm Miller stated that variances apply to property - not to the struc- tures that are built on the property. Setbacks apply to the property and not to the fact that the house is badly placed on the lot. Mayor Pritchard asked Mr. Musso if houses are normally oriented in a more useful way on these cul-de-sac lots and Mr. Musso explained that there really isn't a "normal" way to locate the houses on these lots and that many times they are located poorly. It was noted that the house could have been moved over another 7 ft. and still be within the RS setback. Cm Futch stated that Mr. Dunn mentioned if the addition was placed in the patio area it would block a window and a sliding glass door and Cm Futch commented that he has seen this problem solved by leav- ing a breezeway between the existing house and the addition. Mr. Dunn stated that if he does something like this the Code would require him to knock out the back wall because there are regulations with respect to the amount of light necessary per living quarter. Cm Futch stated he is not suggesting any window be eliminated but rather that the breezeway would allow the window and sliding glass door to remain with a walkway between the sliding glass door and the added room, and Mr. Dunn stated that this would mean that the proposed structure to be built would have to be smaller to leave room for the breezeway. Cm Futch stated that there is plenty of room for adding on in this area as well as providing for a breezeway. Mr. Dunn stated he appreciates the suggestion of the breezeway and the Council's willingness to help him solve his problem; however the suggestion, because of the specific layout of his house, would be a detriment from an aesthetic viewpoint. He again reviewed the desired plans for the addition which would add an entrance from the back. Cm Turner stated that from a personal point of view he can see no reason to allow the variance and would like to suggest that Mr. Dunn go back to the Planning Department to see if something can be worked CM-29-359 March 24, 1975 (Variance re Setback - Charles W. Dunn) out so that the plan will conform to the required setbacks and also satisfy most of Mr. Dunn's concerns. Mr. Dunn stated that he is a family man with three children as well as a person who likes to have friends come to his home and the Council probably realizes that these homes are small and he desires an area where the children can play inside the home. He has already discussed this matter with the Planning Department and has spent $45 to appeal to the Council and the Planning Department is not willing to compromise at all. They have only suggested al- ternatives which he feels do not serve his needs. '\ \ ) --/ Cm Miller explained that, legally, the Planning Department is not allowed to compromise law. Mr. Dunn stated that he appreciates this fact and also appreciates what the Council is trying to do; however, he feels that he does have extenuating circumstances and that any other owner of a parcel in a cul-de-sac lot in this tract would be allowed to build what the City is denying him to build. Mr. Musso explained that after the P.C. denied the variance the Plan- ning Department staff did spend approximately half a day trying to find an alternate suggestion that would be agreeable with Mr. Dunn. Mr. Dunn mentioned that there were only three members of the P.C. present at the time they denied the variance and that one of these three did not vote in favor of denying his application. He stated that there are times in which logic must be used rather than strict adherence to "the book" and asked that the Council take this into consideration. Cm Miller stated that Mr. Dunn has been placed in an extremely un- fortunate position but the Council must face the problem of applying the laws of the City equitably. Mr. Dunn is the victim of a poor house layout; however, the fact that the house was situated this way cannot be taken into consideration unless there is something distinctive about the way the developer laid out the house. If one looks at the setback requirements for the house, there is nothing distinctive about Mr. Dunn's property. Mr. Dunn's property is exactly the same as every other RS-4 cul-de-sac lot in the City of Livermore. There must be a 30 ft. total setback and he explained his reasoning by illustrations on the exhibits. The fact that the developer did a poor layout is not sufficient reason for the Council to grant the variance. Cm Miller explained that all four findings must be justified before the Council is allowed to grant the variance, and the first cannot be met: I. There are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the subject property that through the strict application of the Zon- ing Ordinance deprives the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone class- ifications. A room addition could be constructed and conform to Building and Zoning regulations. Cm Miller stated that this refers to the lot - not the house and the lot; the strict application of the zoning ordinance does not deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classifications. If there were a PG&E easement that were in a different place, such as outside the setback, then this would make Mr. Dunn's property different, but such is not the case. The PG&E easement is in the required setback by the City's ~ Zoning Ordinance so in this sense there is nothing special about this particular property. The Council cannot make the first find- ing, or at least he feels the first finding cannot be made. All four must be made or the variance cannot be granted. CM-29-360 March 24, 1975 (Variance re Setback - Charles W. Dunn) L Mr. Dunn stated he disagrees with this viewpoint because of one specific reason; basically, it has been agreed that the layout is bad so something is wrong someplace. Obviously, if there is something wrong with his specific plans that are not in someone else's plans, this would be extenuating circumstances. Cm Miller stated that the granting of a variance is subject to state statutes and there are certain conditions that must be re- quired, which are listed. What may be extenuating circumstances as to how the developer laid out the house is not an extenuating circumstance with respect to the statutes the City Council must abide by. This is where the conflict arises. There was discussion concerning the setback requirements for the area at the time the house was built, which is a 10 ft. minimum rear yard setback and a 25 ft. average setback, which Cm Miller stated appears to have been satisfied. CM TURNER MOVED TO DENY THE APPEAL FOR A VARIANCE, BASED ON THE FINDINGS BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL. Cm Turner added that he would urge Mr. Dunn to continue working with the Planning Department to see if they could arrive at a suitable plan that would comply with the ordinance. Mr. Dunn stated that if a majority of the Planning Commission had been present he would not have appealed to the Council and Mayor Pritchard explained that with the exception of very few instances, a majority of the quorum is acceptable. Mayor Pritchard stated that he would like to point out that Mr. Dunn has no other place to go and that the Council was his last hope on this item. The Mayor stated that he doubts if granting the variance would really constitute special privilege for that particular piece of property and will vote against the motion. Cm Tirsell stated that these types of applications are the most difficult items Planning Commissioners have to work on because the applicant is standing before them and it becomes a very personal problem and very difficult. One must keep in mind all the misplaced houses in cul-de-sac lots and the obligation the City has for the neighborhood and the setbacks required. She stated that she feels the staff and Council have done their best to offer alternatives and regrets that his particular desires do not fit within our ordinance but it is not possible to design an ordinance that would fit everyone's desire, and for these reasons will support the motion. MAYOR PRITCHARD CALLED FOR THE QUESTION AND THE MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Mayor Pritchard dissenting) . REPORT RE INDUSTRIAL TENTATIVE MAP NO. 1597 - RESEARCH DRIVE (SHAHEEN) l The Planning Commission has considered an Industrial Tentative Parcel Map No. 1597 submitted by Roger Shaheen for property located south of Research Drive and west of Vasco Road. The Planning Commis- sion has recommended adoption of the Environmental Impact Report, and approval of the subject map, subject to the following conditions: I. Approval subject to available sewer capacity. 2. Pending formal adoption by the City of a new Future width Line for Vasco Road to accommodate bike lanes; that the subdivider be required to dedicate additional street width CM-29-36l March 24, 1975 (Tentative Map No. 1597 Research Drive) for a measured right-of-way 55 ft. from the existing centerline with an additional 5 ft. of easement within the required front yards of the abutting properties. 3. Deletion of Engineering requirement of off-site water main extension from northeast corner of subject tract to East Ave. ) .--, 4. No access allowed on Vasco Road, with the exception of a driveway at the northeast corner of the Tract, and that an I District backing lot treatment be required along Vasco Road frontage consisting of a low open fence. 5. provision of a 5 ft. bike path along frontage of the sub- ject tract, physically separated from vehicular traffic. Mr. Musso explained the discussion which took place at the Planning Commission and the reasons for their recommendation and conditions, and the Council discussed access to Vasco Road. Cm Tirsell wondered if the City is making a problem for the Fire Department equipment if a configuration with an easement is re- quired if subdivision takes place since they won't have access to Vasco Road and Mr. Musso stated that the ordinance requires an easement for emergency access. Mr. Musso stated that the primary reason the Planning Commission wanted no access to Vasco Road was to facilitate the flow of traffic, with less obstruction of traffic. Mr. Lee stated that medians are being planned for all major streets and it has been Council policy for many years to limit access to major streets, particularly in a case such as this where there can be an interior street to serve the lots, or the lots can be redesigned with all lots abutting on Research Drive. Cm Futch commented that it seems there is a major problem involved with the center portion not being part of the tentative map, and there should be another street through the center and somehow looping over to Research Drive. The other major item of concern expressed by the P.C. was the water line and the recommendation was that they would not be required to extend the line from the northeast corner of the tract to East Avenue. Mr. Lee stated that normally the waterline issue is not con- sidered a planning matter but in this case there is a problem with a water extension to this area. To begin with, this is a low pressure area. As the line is extended there is an elevation in the line to service the area as well as the fact that they are getting service at the end of a line and the pressure drop is ex- pected to be excessive and it is anticipated that the 2,500 gallons per minute needed for fire protection would not be possible unless there is a loop in the line. The City is asking that the developer bond for the water line and for the loop that will be needed. Earl Mason of Associated Professions, Civil Engineer for Roger Shaheen the property owner, stated that Mr. Lee is correct in saying that they will be at the end of a water line and the 12" main goes all the way through Wagoner Farms before it gets to them and low pressure is presumed. There will be low pressure, however, with or without the loop. It is their understanding this low pressure will exist until a line can be provided from the Greenville Road proposed reservoir, down Vasco Road to their property. He stated that if this is going to be done there will / --' CM-29-362 March 24, 1975 (Ten~ative Map 1597 Research Drive-Shaheen) have to be some type of assessment district provided and he would like to know why the line on East Avenue couldn't be added to that project. The developer would prefer not to have to front the money for a benefit district for the basic line. If the City is going to front the cost of the line for 8" on East Avenue and 10" on Vasco __~.._.--L--_~. __.-L.~--:J. ~_~_. A.lo................~.~. .r~...t:'ii-u he t-hc '-./ 1. A loop of water lines would result in a pressure drop of approximately 6 psi between the intersection of Research Dr. and East Avenue and the south end of the loop when delivering 2,500 gpm for fire fighting. 2. A single water line would result in a pressure drop of approximately 60 psi between the intersection of Researoh Dr. and East Avenue and the south end of the line when delivering 2,500 gpm for fire fighting. !);</.Ju/, / 'l'--~/J, ~:.;_ ~li:L# L,,(! ~ ct:~/ c f::e e ,~> CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE CITY REQUIRE A WATER LOOP LINE, WITH AN APPROPRIATE BOND, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL. Cm Turner asked about the water line from a fire safety standpoint and Mr. Lee commented that the Fire Department would want 4,000 gallons per minute for an industrial fire, and there would be something in the area of 2,500 gallons per minute avaialable. He indicated that by drawing on the fire line the Fire Department could get the 2,500 gallons even if the pressure was as low as 25 psi. It was mentioned that there was not a lot of discussion noted in the P.C. minutes and the Council wondered why the P.C. felt it not necessary to require the loop and Mr. Musso commented that, essentially the P.C. was convinced by Mr. Mason's argument and particularly by the fact that not requiring the loop does not increase the amount of reliability because they will still be at the end of a dead end, which was followed by discussion. Cm Miller mentioned that his motion did not speak to a benefit district. The recommendation of the Public Works Department is that the City pay for the oversizing and how we work the rest of that out has not been spoken to - the developers part, according to the motion, would be bonding. AT THIS TIME THE MOTION PASSED 3-2 (Cm Turner and Futch dissenting) . Mr. Mason felt it would be fair to mention something about a benefit district if it is later determined that this is the Council's pOlicy, rather than coming back and discussing whether or not there will be a benefit district. Mr. Logan stated that there is some mention in an ordinance about water but is not convinced nor prepared to respond about benefit districts or the affect they might have with respect to this par- ticular project. Mr. Mason commented that he understands the City Attorney would want to check into the legalities, but felt it would be possible for the Council to say that if it is legal a benefit district may be established. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE QUESTION OF THE WATER LINE BE SUBJECT TO A BENEFIT DISTRICT, PROVIDED THERE ARE NO LEGAL DIFFICULTIES, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL. \ '-- The City Attorney concurred with this wording and Cm Miller ex- plained that he does not want to be specific with this motion and intends to leave it open with details to be worked out later. Cm Futch expressed concern for voting for a benefit district without knowing all the details of what he is voting for. CM-29-363 Harch 24, 1975 (Tentative Map. 1597 Research Drive-Shaheen) The City Attorney stated that the motion does not state that the Council is voting for a benefit district but rather is saying that if it is legally appropriate a benefit district could be set up. Cm Futch stated that it may be legally appropriate and yet not in the best interest of the City to form a benefit district. His under- standing of the motion is that if it is legal, a benefit district will be set up. \..J MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Cm Futch dissenting) . The Council then discussed Lot 20, and access to this area. The P.C. has recommended that there be access at the north side of Lot 20, so that when the owner needs an access there will be an access at the north and south. Also, there was a suggestion that there be access between the Bieber and Walz property. Mr. Mason would request that an alternate be considered for making Lots II, 12, and 13, into two parcels split in the middle of Lot 12 with access at the north serving Lots 12 and l3 with one driveway. Lots II and 10 will access onto Research Drive and the piece that is half of 12 and 13 should have an access. He stated that they are asking only for a driveway "in" and a right turn coming out of those lots. Ultimately these will all have to be made for right hand turns because there should be no break in the median on the major street. He felt the right turn policy along the major street would not create a problem even with a number of exits from the industrial property. Cm Futch illustrated a suggestion for providing for a street for all the parcels, internally, from Research Drive to the undeveloped areas. Mr. Mason stated that this would mean a loss of 60 ft. for the street as well as IS ft. on each side of the street for the setback and is sure the client would not be interested in this suggestion. Cm Turner stated that, in time, there will be a traffic problem with Vasco Road and this should be taken into consideration at this time. CM TURNER MOVED TO ALLOW ACCESS AT THE NORTH OF LOT 20, AND ACCESS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BIEBER, WALZ PROPERTY, WHICH HE ILLUSTRATED USING "X" ON THE COUNCIL MAP. MOTION WAS SECON- DED BY eM TIRSELL. MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Mayor Pritchard dissent- ing) . Mr. Mason referred to III. Sanitary Sewers, of the Revised Amendment to Engineering Considerations, dated 2/6/75, and Mr. Lee stated that the City is requiring that the sanitary sewer be placed on Vasco Road in front of the developing property. This would be a nonfunctioning system because they will be getting all of their service in~tract. Mr. Mason is making the point that the developer would not be reconstructing the center of the street and this is a re- quirement that could be delayed; this is a valid point. Mr. Mason stated that this is the area in the center of Vasco Road from the south side of Lot 10 to the north side of Lot 20, which is already paved and which the develop- er will have nothing to do with as far as improvements are con- cerned. It would be for the use of somebody south and east of them. This particular subdivision will be taken care of completely in-tract from the sanitary sewer located in Research Drive; therefore, they would definitely like to have this requirement eliminated. (~. I J CM-29-364 March 24, 1975 (Tentative Map 1597- Research Drive-Shaheen) Mayor Pritchard mentioned that for all intents and purposes the Council just moved to deny frontages for three parcels and this will mean that they will have Research Drive addresses. u It was noted that this item was not discussed by the Planning Commission. Cm Miller stated that the City has been requiring sewers along frontages for the 17-l8 years he has been following Council matters, and as for this property he does not know if there are other properties that have been required to put in the sewer line, with the same situation as a result of this policy but would like this researched. He stated that he does not want to get into dis- cussion about this tonight. The staff can come back with a report as to whether there are other properties of this kind or not and if there are other properties that have been required to hook up to the major street line then this property should also be required to pay for the sewage. The Council has to be very careful about establishing a new policy without realizing it which would end up with our taxpayers paying for the cost of the large sewer line. Mr. Mason pointed out that this is a different situation because they are being asked to pay for something they will not be using and that someone else will be using. Generally, one side of the street has sewers and the other side has the water line and the frontage pays for whatever line is on his side of the street. This is a somewhat similar situation - this is for the use of the person on the east side of the street and it just happens that they intend to develop up to that point in the street. If they are required to hook up to this line it would mean that the street will have to be torn up. He felt if they have to pay for the water line, somebody else should pay for the sewer line. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE P.C. WITH THE AMENDMENTS ALREADY MADE ABOUT THE BENEFIT DISTRICT AND ACCESS, FOR APPROVAL OF THIS SUBDIVISION WITH THE FURTHER CONTINGENCY THAT THE QUESTION OF PROVIDING THE SEWER LINE ON VASCO ROAD BE RESOLVED AFTER A REPORT FROM THE CITY STAFF, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH. Mr. Mason stated that he wants approval of the tentative map now. The developer is ready to go and the Council can put whatever con- dition upon it that they might want. There have been three delays with the Planning Commission and a month between each delay. CM MILLER STATED THAT HIS MOTION WILL REMAIN THE SAME BUT WILL AMEND IT TO ADD THAT THE SEWER LINE ON VASCO ROAD WILL BE REQUIRED. No second was made regarding this motion. Cm Miller stated that this can always be amended at the request of the applicant from one week on down the line and if the City policy doesn't require putting in the sewer line, fine. He stated he is not about to vote for approval of the tract map that may re- quire taxpayers to put in the sewer line, ultimately. ( L Mr. Mason stated this should be the obligation of the person who develops to the east, and Cm Miller stated that it is not clear to him what exactly is going to happen and he will not jeopardize the taxpayers. Cm Turner asked Mr. Lee to explain this matter and Mr. Lee stated it is true that the developer will not connect to the Vasco Road sewer line because he will have service from another source, but it has been the City policy to require all improvements as property develops along a major street. Cm Miller has asked the staff to do research indicating whether this would be setting a precedent to not require the sewer connection. CM-29-365 March 24, 1975 (Tentative Map 1597 Research Drive-Shaheen) Mr. Lee stated that Mr. Mason is saying that this is a special situation and the staff will be doing research to determine if it is. This can be amended and there is no problem in amending the condition. /J Cm Turner stated that he would vote for the motion very reluctantly because he is not convinced the sewer line is needed and realizes that the developer wants to begin his project. Cm Miller stated that despite the tone he may have used in speaking about this issue he also would agree to amending the policy if the situation warrants amendment. The City Attorney commented that there has been a lot of dialogue and discussion on this item and there have also been many offers and suggestions and to keep the record clear would advise that a resolution be adopted to spell out what is required and what is not required in the adoption of this tentative map. CM MILLER FURTHER AMENDED THE MOTION TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PRE- PARE A RESOLUTION WHICH CORRESPONDS WITH THE APPROVAL OF PARCEL MAP NO. 1597, WITH THE AMENDMENTS MADE ABOUT BENEFIT DISTRICTS, WATER LOOPS, AND ACCESSES, AS WELL AS THE SE~mR REQUIREMENT, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH. Cm Miller commented that approval of the map is subject to sewer capacity availability and wondered if it would be valuable, in view of Pleasanton's problems, to add another sentence to say that once approved it is subject to any future legal restraints, and the City Attorney commented that he feels this is inherent. If we cannot furnish sewage, this is not a legal constraint but rather a practical constraint and at this point can't really see any potential legal constraints unless there is no sewer and this raises all kinds of issues that may not be related to a legal problem. Mr. Mason asked what the Council's intent is and Cm Miller stated that if there is sufficient sewage the City would like this developer to have it; however, if there is not sufficient sewage capacity they do not want to get into a legal problem. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CM MILLER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE A REPORT FOR THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING WHICH WILL DESCRIBE THE POLICY HAVING TO DO WITH THE SEWER LINE ON VASCO ROAD, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cm Turner stated that he would like the report to have clear findings if the staff decides, yes, the City should require the sewer. He stated that he wants these findings spelled out. Mayor Pritchard mentioned that the Council has set a policy of requiring a resolution on all action items, and very often reports from the P.C. require action. He suggested that the staff be made aware of the fact that resolutions should be prepared to accompany the recommendation and if the recommenda- tion is changed the resolution can also be changed accordingly. As was pointed out by the City Attorney, because of all the verbal contract going back and forth between the representative of the applicant and the Council, it is best to have something in writing. ..-/. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CM-29-366 March 24, 1975 MOTION TO SKIP AGENDA ITEMS ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE COUNCIL MOVED TO ITEM 6.3 BECAUSE THERE WERE PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE t~O WANTED TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM. c/ REPORT RE CURBSIDE MAIL DELIVERY A letter was received from the post office indicating that it is the present policy of the Oakland Sectional Center that: Extensions of delivery will be by motorized carrier to neighborhood cluster boxes or curbline boxes. Curbline boxes should be installed six inches back from the curb and 38" to 42" high. The only exception is that door delivery may be provided to resi- dences constructed between existing houses within the same block where door delivery is presently being provided. The Director of Public Works reported that it appears curbside mail boxes in the most recently completed subdivisions may become manda- tory, which would require imposing certain standards in order to avoid installations that would be hazardous or aesthetically degrad- ing to a neighborhood. Included in the report were recommendations for standards. CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS, AND FOR THE STAFF TO BE DIRECTED TO ISSUE ENCROACHMENT PERMITS, AND TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION TO ALLOW ISSUANCE OF THE ENCROACH- MENT PERMITS, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL. Cm Miller agreed that the people who are not rece1v1ng mail at their homes are not being treated fairly but expressed concern for approving curbside mail boxes because this could mean that within a year every- body else in town could be required to have the curbside mail delivery. He stated that he feels if the citizens give in and allow the post office to deliver at the curb, they will never be removed and the people will never receive service to their door. He pointed out that there is theft and vandalism and many other problems involved with curbside delivery and would like to see relief for these people without jeopardizing the rest of the community. Zane Thomas, 5638 Firestone Road, stated that he does agree there are a lot of problems involved with the curbside delivery, including theft and that they are hazardous; however, if the City would decide to hold out and fight the post office this could take a few years and during this time he would be very unhappy to have to continue to travel seven miles to the post office to pick up mail. l Cm Miller stated that he does sympathize with the people who must go to the post office because when he moved into his home he could not get service for five months and knows the inconvenience involved. He added that in any event these people are being cheated because the curbside delivery boxes are a hazard and there are problems, as mentioned, and they are being cheated if they don't have the curbside boxes because this means a trip to the post office. Carter Schilf, 2691 Pickfair, stated that he has really been hassled for the past eight months with his bills going back to his creditors and getting letters and calls from the stores with which he has accounts. He stated that he has written to Senator Cranston and CM-29-367 March 24, 1975 (Curbside Mail Delivery) Congressman Stark as well as the Post Master General, and none of these people have been able to offer any solution to the problem. He wondered why the homeowners have to pay to install a parking strip and post office box and then be liable if someone runs into it. He stated that even if he is allowed an encroach- ment permit and can put up a box, the post office will not deliver '".,/J...- in a tract unless 50% of the homes are occupied and at present there are only two more homes that would have to be sold on his street before the post office would deliver on that street. With the new interest rates and inflation, people are not buying homes as readily as in the past and they feel that it would be at least l~ years before they could get any kind of delivery. He also expressed concern for tacky boxes that might be installed in front of the homes and noted that he paid a considerable amount of money for his home and would not like to see just anything allowed. The Council presented suggested boxes for installation as pprepared by the Director of Public Works and Mr. Parness commented that the illustrations are suggested designs and that approved equals would be acceptable. Mr. Schilf asked how much the encroachment will cost the homeowner and Mr. Parness replied that it would be suggested there be no charge for this particular permit. Mr. Schilf then mentioned that placing the boxes on the street might necessitate painting a red "no parkingn zone and Mr. Parness replied that the post office has indicated that if a car is parked next to the curbside box they will not make delivery. The City would not recommend that the curbs be painted red but would just suggest that cars not park in front of the boxes. Mr. Schilf indicated that the post office has said that the red "no parking" zone would have to be required if the box is installed. Gary Carlson, 5560 Firestone Road, stated that he has experienced the same problems as those mentioned previously and would appre- ciate any relief, even if it is on a temporary basis, for receiv- ing mail at home as opposed to driving 7 miles to the post office. Kay Dayton, secretary of California Engine Service, 196 Airway Boulevard, stated that they are paying very high business taxes at the airport and they are also not receiving mail. She stated that she realizes the City of Livermore would like more industry in Livermore but would like to point out that they cannot do busi- ness without mail service. At present, employees are being paid high wages to stand in line to get mail for their office and knows of no reason they shouldn't get delivery even if it is curbside service. She stated that if the post office will not deliver to Airway Boulevard they will be forced to move to Oakland because they simply cannot do business without their mail and they have not been able to obtain a post office box either. Crn Miller stated that he cannot understand why rural people can receive mail and yet Airway Boulevard or the industrial areas are not getting delivery. Mr. Lee suggested that the resolution be expanded to include industrial areas; there is no reason why industrial business should not be allowed service. Mr. Parness stated that the City would speak with the postal authorities once again and perhaps a suggestion for a central location for mail in the industrial area would be agreeable to the post office. I I '.--/ CH-29-368 March 24, 1975 L) (Curbside Mail Delivery) Mr. Carlson indicated that in speaking with the post office officials it seems that Firestone Road is not in their postal zone. It is considered a rural area to them and they will have to have curbside delivery. If it is rural zoning it doesn't matter about the number of homes occupied - the post office will deliver to boxes. AT THIS TIME THE MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RECESS Mayor Pritchard called for a brief recess, after which the Council meeting resumed with all members of the Council present. REPORT RE CBD SPECIFIC PLAN The City Manager reported that in response to the City's request for a Central Business District Specific Plan, Grunwald-Crawford and Associates has prepared such a plan, which has been submitted to the Council. It is recommended that the Council adopt a motion instructing the staff to prepare a contract or contract modification with GrunwaldCrawford Associates according to their proposal. Mr. Parness indicated that he feels the specific plan for the Central Business District fits in with our General Plan process and that it should be done by professionals, notwithstanding the fact that it is somewhat expensive. We are benefitted by having some credit allocable to the General Plan process. He would recom- mend that the staff be directed to prepare a contract modification with our existing consultant for this plan. CM FUTCH MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY MANAGER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL. Cm Tirsell asked if Mr. Crawford is aware of the work that has been done by the Planning Commission with respect to the Goals, etc., and Mr. Parness indicated that this was taken into account. Mr. Crawford explained that by including the specific plan for the Central Business District, it would come to about half the cost estimated because it would be included in the General Plan work. At the time they estimated the various tasks it was done with the possibility that Grunwald-Crawford Associates might not be doing the General Plan, but to incorporate it with the General Plan work at this point would be half the cost estimated. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE~ " . iktn-I:- (!dii!!_l!'ujc?-~ Cm Tirsell stated that.she)aoes -not recall formal adoption of those General Plan Goals and~~e was some discussion about moving the Civic Center site back dow~t~; if this is still part of the Goals she would consider the aQ~~till open for discussion. She stated she does not recall adopting[themand peleting the Civic Center part. ~~i. G1fV!-u_k..-- The staff was directed to check the records as to whether or not the Goals were adopted. / ~.. CM TURNER MOVED TO DISCUSS AGENDA ITEM 6.4 (c), SECONDED BY CM MILLER, AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM-29-369 March 24, 1975 REPORT RE BART BUS LINE SERVICE EXTENSION In accordance with the application of the City Council, BART has authorized extension of its express bus service to the laboratory area. Two routes have been discussed with our staff and the Transit Advisory Committee. The two routes considered are via I-580 to Vasco Road and Murrieta Boulevard/East Avenue to Vasco Road. The only question that comes to mind is the route that will be used in transporting commuters to the lab area. Mr. Parness had suggested that the BART route go east and westbound along the proposed route with several pickup stops along the way but Pioneer Bus Service was adamantly opposed to this suggestion because this would interfere with the service they offer. Pioneer Bus Service has no objection to westbound pickup and this is also what the BART bus people would prefer. There would be no pickups on East Avenue going towards the lab area by the BART bus. ~ CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE STAFF PREPARE A RESOLUTION FORMALLY ADOPTING THE ADDITIONAL BUS SERVICE TO THE LABS DURING THE COMMUTE HOURS, UTILIZING THE ROUTE VIA I-580, TO MURRIETA BOULEVARD, DOWN FOURTH STREET, AND EASTBOUND ON EAST AVENUE, tVITH CLOSED DOORS DURING THE MORNING AND WITH SERVICE TO SEVERAL LOCATIONS WESTBOUND, WITH CLOSED DOORS IN THE AFTER- NOON ALONG THIS ROUTE. Cm Turner stated that the people in the Sunset area have re- quested that they be provided the BART service and Cm Turner wondered if there is justification for sending the BART bus out to the lab. He felt the BART bus was designed to get commuters to the BART stations as rapidly as possible and that to use it for other purposes may defeat the whole pur- pose of the system. The BART representative indicated that there are quite a few people riding the bus from the Bayfair Shopping Center station to the labs and the BART people are convinced that this service will be utilized. He also indicated that at this time there is no plan to make a stop in the Sunset area or other areas of the City such as the Springtown area for getting people to BART stations. Cm Tirsell mentioned that this is not just a longer extension of the present route but is an added BART route and in her opinion there are a number of commuters in the Elliott Tract who can now be served at Murrieta Boulevard and she would recommend a stop up near portola Avenue so that more of the Elliott Tract commuters would utilize the service. CM FUTCH SECONDED THE MOTION. Cm Turner stated that he would vote for the motion but would like the Council to ask the BART people to consider specific stops in the Sunset area, such as at the Granada Shopping Center, and also the Springtown area. It was noted that the City has asked the BART people to con- sider this and Cm Turner stated that he has never received any feedback on this suggestion. The BART representative stated that they have looked into the possibility of serving other areas and that the hospital has also asked that there be service to BART from the hospital. He stated that during the six month trial period they have looked into possibilities for adding other stops but nothing appears to be feasible but this does not mean that there will not be future changes, reroutes, or additions. They do have a lack of equipment because at present they are borrowing busses from AC Transit. He added that they will be receiving 36 new --,I CM-29-370 ~-1arch 24, 1975 (Report re BART Bus~ Line Service Extension) G busses and these busses are being purchased specifically for the Livermore valley area service. He stated that there were more people on their busses during December and then it leveled off in January and about the same in February. One of the reasons they do not have more riders is because there are not enough bus stops and this is one of the reasons they are interested in providing more stops. Adding the extension just proposed this evening will help considerably but at present the access to the available stops in Liver- more is not very good. He stated that on a daily basis there are approximately 850 people in the valley using the U-line. Mr. Parness asked when the new route will become effective and the represenntative indicated that there will have to be a bid on the new route and new schedule and this will take approximately 4-5 weeks. REPORT RE P.C. RECOM- MENDATIONS RE AMEND. TO RS, CN ORDINANCE Mr. Musso reported that the Planning Commission considered the Council referral requesting review and comment concerning the proposed changes to amendments to the RS Ordinance, as proposed by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission did accept the changes proposed by the Council but would recommend that the provision for the largest side yard to be on the garage side of the house be deleted. In considering the amendments to the CN Ordinance, they have recommended that there be some changes in Section 10.24 - recommending deletion of Deposit Banking unless adequately defined; Section 10.49 - no additional location criteria be required because this aspect can be regulated through Site Plan Approval; Section 10.54 - recommended rewording concerning toilet facilities. Other than disagreeing with the Council on placing the largest side yard on the side of the garage, they agreed with everything the Council recommended. It was mentioned that the side yards are to be a total of 24 ft. and this could be evenly split with 12 ft. on each side and the Council recommended that if it is not evenly split the largest side yard be on the garage side. Cm Futch commented that the Council discussed allowing room on the garage side to allow vehicle access to the rear yard and there was a question as to whether 12 ft. would be necessary and he wondered if this was discussed by the Planning Commission. Mr. Musso stated that 12 ft. is ample width for a vehicle, depending on the extension of the eaves - the extension allowed is 5 ft. Most vehicles could get into an area of this width. He mentioned that at one time it was felt that 10 ft. would be the very least amount of footage for a side yard and now it is felt that 12 ft. should be the minimum allowed for the wide side. He mentioned that height is really more of a problem than width because of the eaves. CM MILLER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE THE ORDINANCE, AS THE COUNCIL ORIGINALLY PROPOSED FOR THE RS ZONE, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED BY A 4-1 VOTE (Cm Futch dissenting) . L~ It was noted that this action requires that the widest side yard will be on the garage side of the house. Cm Miller stated he would like Cm Turner to say how the Council could define deposit banking, and Cm Turner stated that first of all there CM-29-371 March 24, 1975 (re Amend. to RS & CN Ord.) no correlation between federal reserves and state banking - it could be a state bank or a federal bank and still belong to the Federal Reserve System. A deposit bank is one that accepts funds for deposit on demand accounts and checking accounts - money that can be withdrawn and which does not receive interest. Nondepository banking would be savings and loans, exclusively. All of the U.S. banks are deposit banks. .~ Mr. Musso stated that with respect to Deposit Banking, the P.C. would have agreed with the proposal if it meant a little branch bank where there are only transactions in the nature of deposits and withdrawals and Cm Turner stated that he agrees with this. Cm Tirsell asked if such a bank exists that deals only with de- posits and withdrawals and no other type of business and Cm Turner indicated that they do exist but there is no way the City can specify deposits and withdrawals only, and there is not a significant number of banks that deal only with deposits and withdrawals. He indicated that this is being done on a pilot program at small branch banks. Mayor Pritchard stated he would agree with the recommendation of the Planning Commission to delete Deposit Banking under Section 10.24. Cm Turner stated that if this is to delete banking in shopping centers he would have to abstain from voting. He stated that he feels this would be a mistake because banks in shopping centers attract shoppers and that this is an advantage to the owners in the shopping center. Cm Futch stated that he really hates to see people have to drive all the way downtown to cash a check and is favor of retaining the bank in the shopping center, with which Cm Tirsell concurred. CM FUTCH MOVED THAT DEPOSIT BA_NKING, UNDER SECTION 10.24, BE RETAINED, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL. Cm Miller stated that his argument would be that he does not want a full-scale bank located in every shopping center and unless the Council wants to change the motion to allow only the banks doing deposit and withdrawal business, he would have to vote against the motion. Mayor Pritchard stated that he feels a full-scale bank will not want to locate in a neighborhood shopping center unless they feel they are doing a service for that immediate area. MOTION PASSED 3-1 (Cm Miller dissenting; Cm Turner abstaining). CH rULLER MOVED TO INCLUDE THE RECOMl'lENDATIONS OF THE P. C. UNDER ITEMS 2) AND 3) CONCERNING LOCATION CRITERIA AND TOILET FACILITIES, AND TH:l\T THESE BE !T'TCORPORATED AND WITH THOSE' INCLUDED THE STAFF BE DIRECTED TO PREPARE THE ORDINANCE INCLUDING THESE AMENDMENTS, SECONDED BY C~1 TIRSELL ~'mICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. COMMENTS RE TRAFFIC ACCESS FROM VALLECITOS TO ARROYO ROAD \ I ! -'" The matter of traffic access from Vallecitos/Holmes Street was referred by the Council to the P.C. and the P.C. recommended that Concannon Boulevard be extended easterly and that stop signs be temporarily installed at Lexington Way to discourage the use of that neighborhood street by through traffic. No Council action was required or taken on this item. CM-29-372 ~'1arch 24, 1975 COMMENTS RE HOME OCCUPATION POLICY (; Mr. Musso reported that the Planning Commission did not agree that the sale of firearms, as a home occupation, should be deleted. The Horne Occupation Policy prohibits the retail sales but allows mail order sales. The Policy also prohibits the major storage of stock or other material on a premises in conjunction with any permitted home occupation. CM TURNER MOVED THAT MAIL ORDER SALES OF FIREARMS AND ~t~UNITION NOT BEALL01i\1ED AS A HOHE OCCUPATION, MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. No action was taken on the part of the Council. MINUTES Minutes for the Planning Commission meetings of February II and 25, 1975, were noted for filing. COUNTY REFERRAL RE REZONING ON WENTE ST. The Planning Commission reported that in considering the referral from the County Planning Commission regarding rezoning of Wente Avenue to A District (Joe Caldeira property) it is recommended that the subject rezoning be approved. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL NOTIFY THE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION THAT THEY AGREE WITH THE RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF THE REZONING, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. DISCUSSION RE FORMATION OF SOCIAL CONCERNS COMM. The City Manager submitted recommended functions, membership, selec- tion procedures and the procedure for the proposed Social Concerns Committee and suggested that a motion be adopted authorizing the Mayor to contact each of the local organizations listed, soliciting their nominees for Council consideration. L Cm Tirsell stated that she would like to add three other possible groups: 1) Health Care Concerns Committee; 2) Title I Compensatory Education Committee, at the School District; and 3) the Early Childhood Committee. She added that she realizes how hard it is to choose people for committees and that asking for three nominees from each group would make selection more difficult and would recommend that there be a maximum of two names submitted from each group. She would also suggest that alternates be selected at the time the other members are designated because this is one of the problems with the CETA Board, AND SO MOVED, SECONDED BY CM MILLER. ALSO INCLUDED IN THE MOTION ~vAS TO DELETE (b) and (c) FROM ITEM 7.. ON PAGE..2 ,I\A. GREED TO . . BY THE SECOND. Jw~4 ~"'\.; ~/ .~ --& cU-f ~ % ('~ CM FUTCH MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO ADD INTERFAITH HOUSING AND ~~k THIS WAS ACCEPTED AS PART OF THE MOTION AND SECOND. MOTION PASSEDe~. BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. r- CM TIRSELL MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION REFLECT- ING THE DESIRES OF THE COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM-29-373 JI1arch)4, 1975 REPORT RE CaVA JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT Cm Tirsell explained that it was necessary to enter into a joint powers agreement in order that our resident agency not be liable for the actions of the agencv and it is essentially taken from the bylaws already adopted. eM FUTCH MOVED TO 7\T)OP'T' rr'HE ~FS()T,U'T'I()N ATJrr'HORI ZING EXECUTION OF THE AGREET'1ENT, SECONDED BY C:H TURNER. \ J Cm Hiller staten he was concerned because the agency has the power to make and enter contracts, incur debts, liabilities or obliga- tions, etc., and the term says that you can only withdraw at the end of the fiscal year. This is the same type of problem they were concerned about with the LAm~1A joint powers agreement, that while you are waiting for the end of the year you can be committed by the majority to a large expenditure that you do not agree with. Cm Tirsell reminded him that a budget has already been adopted and voted upon, and Cm ~1iller stated you can also be outvoted in the adoption of a budget and there is nothing in the contract to say that the individual agencies can veto a budget item. Cm ~1iller stated he did not want to be commited by other people to spend large amounts of money on projects the Council of Livermore feels is not desirable. The solution to that is 1) to allow a veto, and 2) to allow withdrawal at the end of the year, but that no expenses incurred after the notice of withdrawal are to be an obligation upon the with- drawing agency. Cm Turner stated he did not agree with em Miller, because he would have to recognize that the other agencies are going to act in a responsible manner when it comes to budget items, and he did not feel there should be veto power by one city as all they would be doing is vetoing items. Cm Tirsell stated that the Council has control over what COVA will be spending by the amount they budget, and in addition money will have to be obtained through grants and other sources. The Council discussed the amount that should be budgeted and if an amount should be specified, also the obliqations which could be incurred and the responsibility for these obligations, and the Council agreed that there should be something written into the con- tract which would not obligate any agency who might care to withdraw after their notice of intention. CM FUTCH HOVED TO REFER THE HATTER TO THE STAFF TO COME UP WITH THE WORDING, however Mayor Pritchard reminded the Council that there was already a motion on the floor. em Tirsell stated it would be necessary to make the change as it would be necessary to contact the other aqencies and advise them there is a change being made, and Mr. Parness stated that the staff would be able to draft the wordinq in a few minutes for the Coun- cil's action. CM MILLER MOVED TO TABLE THE MATTER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND THE HOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. P~PORT RE AMERICAN RED CROSS AGREmmNT J A joint operating agreement with the &~erican National Red Cross was oresented to the council with the recommendation that execution of the agreement be authorized. CM-29-374 March 24, 1975 (Aqreement-American National Red Cross) CH FUTCH MOVED TO ~DOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF THE AGREE~-1ENT, SECONDED BY CH TURNER, AND PASSED 4 -I 't^lITH riAYOR PRITCHARD DISSENTING. /,-- L/' RESOLUTION NO. 50-75 _A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZPJG F:XECUTION OF AN AGREErmNT (American National Red Cross) ORDP,TANCE ABEl-mING ZO RE OS-UR (URBAN RESERVE) DISTRICT ON MOTION OF CM r-ULLER, SECONDED BY C~1 TURNER, AND BY mJANP-lOUS VOTE, THE FOLLOWING ORDINANCE WAS ADOPTED AND READIN~ NAIVED: ORDINANCE NO. 861 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LIVER1\10RE Al'1ENDING ORDINANCE NO. 442, AS ili'1ENDED, RELATING TO ZONING, BY ESTABLISHING CERTAIN ZONING DISTRICTS AND PROVIDING ADDITIONAL REGULA- TIONS NECESSARY TO MAKE THE ZONING ORDINANCE CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY BY AMENDING SECTIONS 1.20, RELATING TO PURPOSE: 2.40, RELATING TO ZONING OF ANNEXED PROPERTY; ADDING 4.14, RELATING TO OS-UR (URBAN RESERVE) DISTRICT; 4.24, RELATING TO PERMITTED USES IN OS-UR DISTRICTS; 4.25, RELATING TO PERMITTED USES WITH A CONDITIONlU-, USP. PERMIT IN OS-UR DISTRICTS; 4.26, RELATING TO REQUIRED CONDITIONS IN OS-UR DISTRICTS; A.MENDING 4.40, RELATING TO LOT DEVELOPHENT REGULATIONS~ 26.10, RELATING TO PURPOSE OF PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS; ADDING 26.25, RELATING TO PEffi1IT REQUIREMENTS FOR OS-UR DISTRICTS; A- MENDING 26.71, RELATING TO EFFECTIVE DATE; 28.32, RELATING TO APPROVAL BY CITY COUNCIL; 28.46, RELATING TO PUBLIC HEARINGS; AND 28.51, RELATING TO FINDINGS FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPROVAL. COVA JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT CONTINUED The COVA Joint Powers Agreement had been tabled earlier for the staff to compose an appropriate wording change. ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY C~l MILI..ER, AND BY UNANIJI.10US APPROVAL, THE ITE~~ tqAS TAKEN FRmJ[ THE TABLE. The following wording change at the end of Sec. 13 was presented by the City Manager;"However, whenever any party files a notice of withdrawal, by means of a Resolution duly adopted by its legislative body, said party shall assume no further financial obligations of the agency adopted thereafter by the Steering Committee." ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER, AND BY UNANIMOUS APPROVAL, THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF THE AGREEMENT WITH THIS CHANGE WAS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION NO. 49-75 / L A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (Congress of Valley Agencies) CM-29-375 March 211, 1975 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council at this time, the meeting was adjourned at 12~10 n.m., to an executive session on Tuesday, March 25, 1975 at 7:30 p.m. at the Livermore Mortuary, 3070 East Avenue, to discuss personnel matters and appoint- ) ments to committees and co ssions.-.-./ APPROVE ity Clerk ivermore, Cnlifornia ATTEST Special Meeting - April l, 1975 A special meeting of the City Council was called by Mayor Pritchard for Tuesday, April 1, 1975, at 7:30 p.m. at the Livermore Mortuary, 3070 East Avenue. The purpose of the meeting was: Executive session to discuss personnel matters. Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Futch, Tirsell and Mayor Pritchard Absent: None The meeting convened at 7:30 p.m. and immediately adjourned to an executive session. adjourned at 10:30 p.m. APPROVE Pro Tempore ATTEST Special Meeting - April 7, 1975 A special meeting of the City Council was called by Mayor Pritqhard for Monday, April 7, 1975, at 6:00 p.m. at the City Hall Conference Room, Livermore, California. The purpose of the meeting was: Executive session to discuss personnel matters. Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Futch, Tirsell and Mayor Pritchard Absent: None J ATTEST / 1/ --'''~". / ( ,-/- '--~.--\,....-L ' adjourned to an p.m. The meeting convened at executive session. The APPROVE CM-29-376 Regular Meeting of April 7, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on April 7, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:07 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard presiding. u ROLL CALL Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Futch, Tirsell and Mayor Pritchard Absent: None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Pritchard led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. MINUTES March 17, 1975 Page 339, third paragraph, 5th line should begin: the citizens of Livermore and it is necessary to provide clean water. (Omit the rest of that sentence.) Page 340, second paragraph from the bottom, second line should read: did apply for funds, four years ago, to increase the capacity....etc. March 24, 1975 Page 369, third paragraph from bottom should read: em Tirsell stated that she does not recall formal adoption of those General Plan Goals and in them there was some discussion about moving the Civic Center site back downtown; if this is still part of the Goals she would consider the matter still open for discussion. She stated she does not recall adopting them and deleting the Civic Center part. Page 373, third paragraph from bottom, motion should read: AND SO MOVED, SECONDED BY CM MILLER. ALSO INCLUDED IN THE MOTION WAS TO DELETE (b) AND (c) FROM ITEM 7 ON PAGE 2; THIS WOULD CONSTITUTE A COMMITTEE SIMILARLY TO ALL OTHER CITY COMMITTEES, AGREED TO BY THE SECOND. c Page 363, second paragraph - comments by Mr. Lee. Cm Futch indicated that the first issue was not clear and that this statement allows some confusion. He suggested that Mr. Lee should indicate what a reasonable pressure is assumed to be at East Avenue and Research Drive, then compute what could be drawn out for fire purposes at the midway point by either route. He felt this would show it a little clearer and asked Mr. Lee to make a correction in the minutes to clarify the first point; which Mr. Lee now indicates as follows: 1. A loop of water lines would result in a pressure drop of approximately 6 psi between the intersection of Research Drive and East Avenue and the south end of the loop when delivering 2,500 gpm for fire fighting. 2. A single water line would result in a pressure drop of approximately 60 psi between the intersection of Research Drive and East Avenue and the south end of the line when deliver~ng 2,500 gpm for fire fighting. CM-29-377 April 7, 1975 (Minutes) ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETINGS OF MARCH 17, 1975 AND MARCH 24, 1975, WERE APPROVED, AS CORRECTED. '\ J OPEN FORUM (re Promoting Spirit of '76 in Local Gov't) Katie Richardson, 510 Junction Avenue, stated that she would like to encourage the "spirit of '76" in our local government. She stated that the local government should be trying to promote the "spirit of '76" for our bicentennial celebration by complying with our United States Constitution to preserve our freedoms. She stated that she agrees with the statement made by Mayor Pritchard that the people of Livermore have become apathetic. She feels that Livermore has been poorly planned and is beginning to look like a jigsaw puzzle. She felt that the Council is listening to what people say in the open forum but do not seem to hear what people are saying. She stated that she feels the reason people have become apathetic is because they are not allowed to help make decisions concerning our local government. She stated that she once felt our problems were at the federal level but now feels they are at the local level and any kind of dictatorship which creates problems on top of problems takes away our freedoms and makes people slaves of our government. She indicated that the people have constitutional rights and the Council should not feel that they have more rights than those who elect them. She stated that the Council should not adopt Agenda Item 2.5 asking for a resolution to create a Social Concerns Committee until the public has had time to study it and determine what it means. She felt if this item is adopted it is another step towards dictatorship and makes a farce of our bicentennial hopes. (BART Riders) John Regan, 672 South"N" Street, stated that people riding the BART bus have been littering the area in front of the National Auto Glass Company. He asked if the City could urge the BART people, or those who might be responsible, to place a trash container at the BART stops to help eliminate garbage. Mayor Pritchard directed the staff to take care of this matter. (Home Building Permit Fees) John Regan, 672 South "Nil Street, commented that people who buy homes are not always aware of the costs involved with respect to the builder, such as the fees required by the City for a building permit. He stated that for a $50,000 home there is a cost of $4,295 to the developer plus $800 to the School District which makes a total of $5,095 to the developer. Cm Futch commented that about 40% of this amount is not required by the City of Livermore, such as the School District fee and Alameda County fees. Cm Miller explained that these fees go towards the support of capital costs that otherwise would have to be subsidized by every other taxpayer in the City of Livermore. These fees mean that development partially pays its own way. The fees are adjus- ted in accordance with the cost of construction and the school fee of $800 is 1/3 of what the actual cost for providing space is. The actual cost is $3,000-$4,000 - only $800 is being collected. This means that everybody else in the City has to subsidize the remainder of this cost for schooling for new people. I J CM-29-378 April 7, 1975 c (Lack of Construction Work in Livermore) Ron Gilbert, Gilbert Backhoe Service, commented that he has been out of work for three weeks and if he continues to be out of work he is going to "go broke". If there is a ban on building it makes thing really "tough" for people like him. He stated that when Mayor Pritchard leaves, he would like to see someone appointed to the Council that would represent people who are in business for themselves, such as he is. Cm Miller pointed out that there is not really a ban on building - there are still 50 building permits available but nobody has taken them out because the economic situation for building houses is very poor. There are several hundred houses standing vacant which have been built and not yet sold. Cm Turner expressed sympathy for Mr. Gilbert's problem and indicated that the Council realizes times are hard and getting a lot tougher and they are aware that jobs are not available. Cm Futch stated that the Council does not like to see hard times. Les Jones, 3961 Santa Clara Way, stated that the widening of I-580 between Dublin and Castro Valley will mean a lot of work for Operat- ing Engineers, local laborers, and a number of other jobs. He stated that at present, 50% of the Operating Engineers are out of work but have homes in Livermore and pay taxes whether or not they have work. He stated that he would like to see the I-580 project go through, and does not know why the Council is blocking the project but feels the situation is ridiculous. Cm Futch commented that bids have been called for coneerning the I-580 project and it is up to the construction people to come in with bids. Mr. Jones further indicated that the 50 permits do not do a developer any good because in order for development to be worthwhile he must have from 200-300 permits. He stated that if development does not take place in the valley, soon, the valley is going to die. He added that he does not blame the Council for the problems but would like to see the Council take initiative in getting the I-580 project going. Barry Yanke, 385 Lee Avenue, stated he would like to back the com- ments made by the previous speakers and would emphasize there is no work in Livermore. Cm Tirsell stated that she would like to meet with the people who are present at this meeting in order to discuss facts and fees and to get some of these things down on paper so that there is a clear picture of the issue and perhaps there is something that can be done to provide work for people in the construction areas. She emphasized that there are 50 permits available but believes development is slow in most communities at this time because of the economic situation. l Mr. Yanke commented that he realizes there are 50 residential per- mits available but would like to see industry come to Livermore and the Council agreed that they would love to have industry come to Livermore. Mr. Yanke commented that it was his understanding Sears was trying to get into Livermore and couldn't. Mayor Pritchard stated that Sears has recently acquired two pieces of property in the middle of the property they are interested in and as far as the City knows they are still interested in coming to Livermore with good clean industry - warehousing. In addition to that he would like to point out that Sears was allowed to be exempt from $300,000 worth of fees in lieu of in-kind services, just to get them to come to Livermore. The Council did everything possible to help Intel locate in Livermore and there are other small sattelite industries interested in Livermore. Also, people are shopping in Livermore more than in the past. CM-29-379 April 7, 1975 (Electing Mayor) Joe Sladky, 1073 Xavier Way, urged the City Council to fill the upcoming Council vacancy by election. He feels the election of a Councilmember would allow a new commitment of backing from the community and that an appointee would not have this trust, and being elected creates responsibility. In his opinion the Council leadership and policy has created Las positas (New Town) which is the current example of our City's loss of leadership and stature. An appointment would be a continuation of the existing situation, and an appointment would require the unity of the Council and commun- ity - which is not evident. Lastly, he commented that as a business- man he would question whether or not he would receive equitable representation by an appointment of this City Council because the Council appears to be dominated by people who are insensitive to the problems of people in competitive business. He felt an elected person would relieve the new member of any commitments other than to those who elected him and who would reflect the position of the involved community. An election will enable the new Councilmember to be the effective leader that the community desires. / ~ \~ Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, stated that he wishes to back the recommendation made to the Council by Mr. Sladky for election of a member to the Council rather than appointment. AGENDA ITEM DELETIONS Mayor Pritchard stated that Agenda Items 5.1 (Oakland Scavenger Sewer Connection); 5.2 (Tract 1597 -Shaheen property); and 6.3 (Airport fbo Lease) will be omitted because some of the paper work was not ready for discussion of these items. CONSENT CALENDAR Resolution re Eminent Domain Attempts have been made to negotiate a settlement for the acqu1s1- tion of the west clear zone area (36.5 acres) needed for protection of the west clear zone of the airport. Our only alternative seems to be condemnation proceedings and it is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution directing condemnation. The FAA favors acquisition of this property and has approved a grant in the amount of $141,033 for the purchase. RESOLUTION NO. 51-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING CONDEMNATION OF FEE SIMPLE ESTATE OF A PARCEL OF LAND 36.5t ACRES FOR AIRPORT PURPOSES, TO WIT: THE WEST CLEAR ZONE FOR THE LIVERMORE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT, LOCATED IN THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. Res. Auth. Agree. - CBD Study The City Council has authorized the conduct of a CBD (Central Busi- ness District) study by our consultants, Grunwald Crawford Assoc. I It is recommended that a resolution be adopted to amend the exist- ~ ing agreement by providing for the study in accordance with the written proposal which will be added as an additional exhibit to the agreement. CM-29-380 l, l April 7, 1975 RESOLUTION NO. 52-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT (Grunwald, Crawford & Associates) . Res. Auth. Eminent Domain Proceedings - Fallon Overpass Property (First Street Extension) Acquisition of the Fallon property is required for the site of the proposed overpass structure. Appraisal has been made and the owner has declined the offer. It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing eminent domain proceedings for this property. RESOLUTION NO. 53-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CONDEMNATION FOR PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY AND RELATED PURPOSES OF A FEE SIMPLE ESTATE IN A PORTION OF A PARCEL OF LAND BOUNDED ON THE SOUTH BY THE WESTERN PACIFIC RAILROAD AND ON THE NORTH BY FIRST STREET AND LYING DIRECTLY SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF FIRST AND SCOTT STREETS IN THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. (Fallon Enterprises, Inc.) Res. Authorizing Vehicle - City Attorney It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing a vehicle for the City Attorney. RESOLUTION NO. 54-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING VEHICLE FOR CITY ATTORNEY Res. Appointing Members to Beautification Comm. The City Council adopted a resolution appointing Harry Silcocks and Ayn Weiskamp to the Beautification Committee. RESOLUTION NO. 57-75 A RESOLUTION REAPPOINTING TWO MEMBERS TO THE BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE (Harry Silcocks and Ayn Weiskamp) . Res. Denying Claim RESOLUTION NO. 58-75 A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF PATRICIA A. REECE Our insurance carrier has recommended that the claim of patricia A. Reece be rejected and the above resolution was adopted. Report re Bike Licensing The City Manager prepared a written report concerning commercial bicycle licensing noting that the Council will be informed of progress. CM-29-38l April 7, 1975 ~ayroll & Claims There were 81 claims in the amount of $182,552.6l, and 81 payroll warrants in the amount of $91,335.49, for a total of $273,888.13, dated March 24, 1975, approved by the City Manager. There were 73 claims in the amount of $50,342.08, dated March 31, 1975, approved by the City Manager. o APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED WITH THE REMOVAL OF ITEMS 2.4 (Check Signing) AND 2.5 (Social Concerns Committee) WHICH WILL BE DISCUSSED LATER. DISCUSSION RE SOCIAL CONCERNS COMMITTEE At the March 24th City Council meeting, approval was given for the establishment of a Social Concerns Committee for the purpose of assisting and advising the Council and to assure that the citizen participation requirements of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 are complied with. It has been recommended by the staff that the Council adopt a resolu- tion to formally establish such a committee. Suren Dutia, Executive Director of ACTEB/ACAP, stated that he feels the City Council should be commended for its responsiveness and foresight as well as its concise documents. He indicated that this Council represents the humanization of local governments, and the reason some communities have failed is because they have been concerned only with the physical planning and did not take into consideration the social planning. He gave statistics concerning the rate of unemployment, poverty and the number of children receiv- ing aid in this valley and noted that the valley has some unique needs. He stated that Cm Turner and Tirsell are participating in the ACAP Agency program in an attempt to respond to the things that have been brought to the attention of the Council by the public during the open forum - unemployment. In this current year there have been 70-75 jobs created through the ACAP Agency and Title I will make available additional resources the valley is not getting at present. Next year's program has already been recommended and the valley will receive its fair share which will be approximately $350,000-$375,000 and will create many additional jobs. At present ACAP is involved in setting up a Child Development program and also a feeding program for senior citizens. He stated that if we are going to improve the quality of life for our citizens we must focus on physical as well as social environment. This involves development to the fullest potential of each individual - nurturing an individual from prenatal care to old age. The leadership of Livermore has accepted the challenge, it appears to be on its way, and ACAP welcomes Livermore and is looking forward to working with Livermore. Mr. Dutia explained that ACAP is a new agency and unlike other agencies that have failed (such as SACEOA) it is committed to being accountable, responsible and responsive to those who belong and to their needs. Cm Turner commented that ia rema1n1ng consistent with terms of office ~ for City Committees he would suggest that no member be allowed to serve for more than eight years. Cm Tirsell suggested that two nominees for membership also be submit- ted by the American Association of Retired Persons. CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION FORMALLY ESTABLISHING THE COMMITTEE WITH WORDING TO REFLECT THE SUGGESTION THAT A MEMBER SERVE NO MORE THAN EIGHT YEARS AND THAT THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION CM-29-382 April 7, 1975 (Social Concerns Comm.) OF RETIRED PERSONS BE ADDED TO THE LIST FOR SUBMITTING NOMINEES, SECONDED BY CM TURNER WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 59-75 c A RESOLUTION CREATING THE SOCIAL CONCERNS COMMITTEE MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL (ABAG Staff Report) Cm Tirsell commented that the Council needs to adopt the ABAG Staff report and that this should be scheduled as an agenda item. Mr. Parness commented that the ABAG staff is revising their report to reflect the input at their hearings which consists of a few techni- cal directions. Also added are statements concerning air quality. Copies of the new report will be sent to us this week and will be available for the Council next week. (Corps of Engineers Planning Study-Alameda Creek) Cm Futch stated that he read in the newspaper this morning that the appropriation for the Alameda Creek survey by the Corps of Engineers will be made and Livermore really doesn't know what this appropriation is for, such as the amount and the procedure to be used as well as which group in Congress approves it. He asked if Mr. Parness could get this information for the Couneil. Cm Miller stated that perhaps the Council could formally send to ABAG, a letter which points out that the Valley Planning Committee was originally founded because of the failure of Alameda County to join the valley jurisdictions, providing a Valley Planning Commission. A representative of the Board of Supervisors attended only the first meeting and never came to another meeting. Alameda County consistently refused to cooperate in any way with the local valley jurisdictions and COVA may also have trouble because of the failure of Alameda County to cooperate. Both of these represent an effort to do something on a subregional basis and we should formalize this information and send it to the ABAG Executive Committee so they can understand what has happened. Cm Futch mentioned that LAVWMA has also written a letter to the County and as yet the County has not responded. (Election of Mayor) Cm Turner stated that he would like to set a date for discussion of an elected Mayor. It was mentioned that this matter has been scheduled as an agenda item for next week and this date was agreed upon. (Curbside Mail Delivery) c Cm Turner stated that it has been suggested to him that perhaps mailboxes could be located in the area where a lawn light could be placed rather than at the curb and the staff indicated that the post office regulations are such that carriers cannot get out of their vehicles to deliver mail and that they will deliver only at the curb. The staff was directed to send letters to Sen. Cranston and Sen. Tunney concerning this regulation. CM-29-383 April 7, 1975 (Kamp Agreement) Cm Turner stated that Hal Kamp has asked about the status of his agree- ment and the staff indicated that the agreement has been taken care of and that Mr. Kamp has probably received the agreement since talking with Cm Turner. RECESS Mayor Pritchard called for a brief recess after which the Council meeting resumed with all members of the Council present. .~ COMMUNICATION FROM KISSELL RE TRACT 2619 A letter was received from Kissell Company indicating that one year ago the Council entered into an agreement allowing Kissell to apply for 104 guaranteed permits by May 16, 1975. Sales in the tract have been hampered by unforeseen Veterans Administration policies and Kissell is now forced to either apply and build 104 speculative houses or obtain an extension of time for building these homes. The letter is a formal request for a position by the Council on this item at the meeting of April 7, 1975. Mr. Parness reported that the Kissell Company has asked for an extension of time for obtaining the building permits for the 104 houses to be developed and also have asked for a delay in the installation of the bridge on Heather Lane. Kissell would like up to two years to obtain the additional 104 building permits and 90 days for installation of the bridge. Mr. Dewey Watson, representative of Kissell Company, explained that within six weeks 60 homes were sold out in that area but then the VA came in with an appraisal $3,000 lower than the sale price and lower than the FHA appraisal. The 60 homes that were sold were almost all VA sales and when VA came in low on the appraisal, very few people were able to make up the difference in the sell- ing price in the way of a down payment. He stated that they had 105 families interested in purchasing the homes up until this time. They are trying to obtain financing through FHA and make the larger down payment. He stated that since they have not yet sold the existing 69 units it would be detrimental to the City to be re- quired to build 104 more units and allow them to sit vacant for another year. They would suggest, instead, that there be some type of phased development of the 104 permits. The City could require Kissell to take out one third of the permits within 30- 60 days and later take out more permits. He stated that he does not mean to imply that they are not able to take out 104 permits because they have been planning all along to take out the 104 permits and they are able to do this if the Council.wishes. He stated that if they are required to build the 104 units at this time they would not be able to develop more expensive houses, which is their intention at this time. They would like to make improvements over what already exists. He stated that it is to Kissell's advantage to build houses and sell them as quickly as possible and this is their intention. With respect to the bridge, Mr. Watson stated that they have a contractor to do the work and there are a couple of minor points that have to be worked out before construction can begin. At this point they are ready to begin construction and there is no major problem delaying construction of the bridge. Cm Futch commented that the construction of the bridge is his major concern and would agree that it would not be to the advantage of the City to force Kissell to take out the 104 permits if they ~ feel it would be better to have a delay. Mr. Watson indicated that it would be physically impossible to ' complete the bridge by June 3rd because of the length of time it takes to construct a bridge and taking into consideration the bad weather we have been experiencing. However, again, if the Council insists that construction begin by a certain date they are prepared to comply. CM-29-384 o c April 7, 1975 (Tract 2619-Kissell Co.) Mr. Lee commented that in the event the Council does agree to the extension of time concerning this contract he would like to point out that there was a bond posted for the construction of the bridge in the amount of $60,300 and would estimate that the cost of the bridge has increased to $40,000. The bond calls specifically for the approaches to the bridge and he would suggest that this work be completed. In addition, there is a provision in the agreement that the City pay interest on the fees the developer has paid for the 104 lots and if there is a delay he would suggest that the interest paYment not be continued beyond this point. Mr. Watson explained that the approaches to the bridge have been discussed and there has been a modification to the agreement which clarifies the responsibility of Kissell Company and the City. It is his understanding that litigation is now proceeding on the bond. The cost of construction for the approaches has been discussed with Kissell's contractor who has estimated that the one approach would be between $25,000-$35,000. Mr. Watson indicated that this is too much money to pay and they will not do so. They would rather take out the 104 permits and chance selling the houses. With respect to the interest, he indicated Kissell Company would be willing to drop the interest from this point on, which amounts to $IO,OOO/year, if they are allowed an extension on the building permits. Cm Miller stated that for Kissell to obtain the 104 building permits this would be a cost of $400,000 just for the permit fees. Kissell would then have to put up the money to build these houses and would estimate that the carrying costs per year would be about $40,000. The Kissell Company is actually asking the City to save them the carrying costs and on the other hand the City could be asking for something in return. Mr. Watson stated he does not share this view because it is their hope that the 104 houses would be sold as soon as possible and also that they would not have this carrying charge for two years, or even one year. Cm Turner stated that Kissell is aSking for a delay because Kissell does not anticipate getting the houses sold quickly and Mr. Watson indicated that they do anticipate it would be difficult to get the homes sold and would prefer not to be forced into this position. Cm Miller stated that, personnaly, he does not object to a delay on the bridge; however, delay of the homes is another matter. TheCity is concerned about the sewer capacity and we would like to get indus- try to Livermore to help our tax base and he would be worried about reserving capacity for possibly as long as two years for these 104 units. We may need this sewer capacity for industrial development. Mr. Watson explained if the Council is unwilling, for any reason, to grant the delay they have requested they simply will take out the permits by May 16th. Mr. Parness asked if this matter could be referred to the staff for one week so that there can be discussion with Mr. Watson concerning some of these matters. CM TURNER MOVED THAT THIS MATTER BE REFERRED TO THE STAFF FOR ONE WEEK; MOTION SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Cm Turner commented that he feels an extension on building the homes is reasonable for a one year period but feels the bridge should be completed no later than September l, 1975. He stated that with respect to the approaches to the bridge he was not aware that the City had ever considered approaches and cannot agree that Kissell should be responsible for the cost of the approaches. Cm Tirsell stated that she would have to agree it would not be fair to reserve sewer capacity for development that might not use the CM-29-385 April 7, 1975 (Tract 26l9-Kissell Co.) capacity for two years when there are other developments that might be able to take place and use the system. Mr. Watson commented that two of the Councilmembers have already indicated they do not want a delay and if this is the feeling of the majority of the Council there is no reason to discuss the matter with the staff. He stated that he does not want to spend time working with the staff and coming to another meeting if the Council is opposed to an extension in the first place. \ J AT THIS TIME CM TURNER WITHDREW THE MOTION TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE STAFF. CM TIRSELL MOVED TO DENY THE EXTENSION ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE 104 UNITS, SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Cm Futch stated that it might be an advantage to the City to allow some kind of extension of time for development of the homes with completion of the bridge in 90 days and perhaps something could be worked out with the staff. Cm Turner stated that the homes proposed for that area are going to mean a lot with respect to getting a shopping center for that area. MOTION FAILED 2-3 (Cm Futch, Turner and Mayor Pritchard dissenting). CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE MATTER BE REFERRED BACK TO THE STAFF WITH A REPORT BACK TO THE COUNCIL AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH. MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Cm Tirsell dissenting). COMMUNICATION FROM RECYCLING CENTER Lois Hill, from the Livermore Community Recycling Center, reported that the shed the Recycling Center was using for storage of their equipment was destroyed during a recent windstorm. It is felt that since they are operating on City property and under City spon- sorship, that the shed should be City property and would hope that the City would appropriate $460 for a new shed and $30 for a con- crete floor. The City Manager reported that this Committee is one of the most successful in the County and has been providing a valuable community service. It is recommended that the Council authorize this expen- diture and a resolution will be prepared for adoption at the next regular meeting. CM FUTCH MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO DRAW UP A RESOLUTION AUTH- ORIZING THE APPROPRIATION FOR A NEW SHED, AS REQUESTED. The City Attorney noted that if the Council has no objection he would suggest that the staff be allowed two weeks to prepare resolutions because it is rather difficult to take care of the necessary paper work in one week. THE MOTION WAS AMENDED TO ALLOW THE ALLOCATION AT THIS TIME AND LATER RATIFIED BY RESOLUTION. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. COMMUNICATION RE ARROYO POLICY I I ~ LARPD has proposed a joint policy statement concerning arroyos, acquisition, operation and maintenance of the arroyo property. It is recommended that this property shall be the same as for other park lands acquired by the City for LARPD development and operation, and the following conditions were listed: CM-29-386 April 7, 1975 (Communication re Arroyo Policy) I. The City shall acquire property and make it available to LARPD. 2. LARPD shall plan for development of the property, coordinating such development with the City and Joint Committee on Arroyos. l: 3. Funds for Arroyo development shall be handled in the same manner as the park development fees utilized for neighborhood park development. 4. LARPD shall be responsible for operation and maintenance of Arroyo property. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION AGREEING WITH THIS POLICY, WITH THE FOLLOWING ADDITION. 5. That plans be submitted to the City for approval, in the same manner that park development is handled. COMMUNICATION FROM CLARENCE HOENIG RE SCHOOL TAX ELECTION A letter of thanks was received from Clarence Hoenig, Co-chairman of the School Building Election Committee, for the Council's support on the recent school tax election which passed. The letter indica- ted that the Council has played a dominant role in protecting our schools from uncontrolled growth and that the Council's untiring efforts to combat "New Town" will always be remembered and admired by the citizens and parents of Livermore. COMMUNICATION - RESOLUTIONS RE NEW TOWN FORMULA Resolutions reflecting the official position of the City of Pleasanton concerning the Las positas New Town proposal were submitted to the Council for their information. The City Council felt the City of Pleasanton .should receive a letter of thanks for the resolutions and also for their testimony at the ABAG hearing concerning New Town. COMMUNICATION RE GAS TAX FORMULA A copy of the Mayors' Gas Tax Formula was received from the City of Newark in addition to the position of the City of Newark concerning this item. It was noted that the City Council has previously taken the position of supporting the Mayors' Gas Tax Formula. l REPORT RE PURCHASE OF WILLIS PROPERTY (Stanley & Murrieta) The City Manager reported that Mr. Willis has offered for sale to the City, a piece of property located at the intersection of Wall Street and Stanley Boulevard which adjoins Pioneer Park and is zoned for multiple dwellings at this time. The issue was taken up at the last joint LARPD/City meeting and it was felt that although it might be appropriate to acquire this property to finish the corner, the value to the City would be marginal. It would provide little, if any, additional utility and it was felt that the money could CM-29-387 April 7, 1975 (Report re Purchase of Willis Property - Stanley and Murrieta) best be placed elsewhere. Since this time Mr. Willis has met with the Mayor and the City Manager indicating that he would be willing to concede on the value if a fair negotiated amount could be set. The Council has asked that the City Manager speak once again with Mr. Willis and the LARPD staff as well as the appraiser. Mr. Parness made an offer to Mr. Willis which was rejected and Mr. Willis submitted a counter offer. Further negotiation has taken place and Mr. Parness has made a third offer for the property which Mr. Willis has indicated would be acceptable. The appraised value was set at $25,000 and Mr. Willis has agreed to a figure of $21,000. The LARPD Board has not met to formally consider this last figure but the General Manager has discussed this with at least three members of the Board, all of whom are recommending acquisition at this price. Mr. Parness stated that he is concerned that this property will be developed as multiples if the City does not pur- chase it and because of potential vandalism problems would recom- mend that the Council approve acquisition of this site. /J CM FUTCH MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF THIS SITE FOR $21,000, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL. ALSO INCLUDED IN THE MOTION WAS THAT THE STAFF BE DIRECTED TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION FOR THE SALE OF THE PROPERTY AT THE RECOMMENDED PRICE, FOR ADDITION TO PIONEER PARK. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. This amount will remain firm until May I, at which time a final decision can be made. APPEAL RE CONDITIONS OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL (Robert J.Dengenzo) An appeal has been filed by Robert J. Devengenzo concerning con- ditions of a Site Plan Approval permit for a nursery site and Mr. Musso explained that the zoning requirements are minimal and there is a requirement that a driveway and parking be provided and the storage area be kept in a dust free, weed free, condition. The main reason for the appeal is that Mr. Devengenzo would like to delay all of the public works improvements and to allow a portable sanitary toilet. The applicant has indicated that the main reason for asking for a delay in the conditions is because the 40,300 sq. ft. will be used to store plants in cans and other miscellaneous materials including trucks. The area will be fenced off and used for agricultural use until such time as a wholesale nursery is feasible. Cm Tirsell wondered if this is in a benefit district area and Mr. Musso indicated that it is in an industrial sanitary sewer benefit district just for the sewer line. Cm Tirsell stated that as she recalls when there was discusson concerning development on Naylor Avenue it was suggested by the Planning Commission that the person be asked to bond and at the end of three years to extend utilities or as improvements are done for that area. Mayor Pritchard wondered if it is even necessary for Mr. Devengenzo to make application for this particular use if there is not going --/ to be wholesale business taking place, and Mr. Musso indicated that application would have to be made for storage of equipment and an office. Mr. Devengenzo, the applicant indicated that he wants to develop the property as he can afford to, and simply cannot afford to put in all the improvements with the idea that there mayor may CM-29-388 April 7, 1975 c (Appeal re Conditions of Site Plan Approval - Robert Devengenzo) not be a potential wholesale/retail operation. He desires to begin with a corporation yard and some agricultural development, he hopes to grow into a wholesale/retail operation. If and when this takes place he would be happy to comply with the requirements of the City concerning all public works improvements. He stated that what may appear to be little money to some people is a lot of money to him and that it is going to cost $10,000 just to fence the property, put in a portable building and portable chemical toilet. At this point there has been no development in that area and he would hope that as the area grows or is developed he would also be able to grow into a business. He indicated that he has asked for a 5 year delay for the improvements but really wants to put in the improvements as soon as it is economically feasible for him to do so and if possible will put in the public works improvements much sooner than the 5 years. Cm Tirsell asked if the City, in the past, has deferred the bond for three years, in an industrial area, or until such time as other properties in the vicinity begin to develop? Mr. Musso replied that frequently this is done. Cm Tirsell wondered what bonding would amount to for this property and Mr. Lee indicated that there is not a cost estimate for what is being proposed for this property but it would probably be in the area of l% or 2% per year. Cm Miller stated that he would like to offer a compromise and would be willing to bond, for a period of 5 years, the full amount of the required improvements and adjusted each year for changes in the Engineer.1.' ng. stpeeifi8a1l.i_. 11. U ~ThiS WOUld. mean that Mr. Devengenzo would not have to put up the money and the City would be protected and it would be insured that the pUblic works improvements would ultimately be put,i~, ~~ SO MOVED./ C~ T~RSELL SECONDED THE MOTION. O,nC.4-p-~~~~ (9K" ~0 L}~~~/CV/ . Mr. Devengenzo asked if this would mean that the basic operation could begin with a use permit and Cm Miller replied that the City would have to have the proper legal document and bonds in hand before Mr. Musso could issue an agreement. INCLUDED IN THE MOTION AND SECOND WAS THAT THE STAFF WOULD BE DIRECTED TO PREPARE THOSE RESOLUTIONS AND AGREEMENTS THAT WOULD FACILITATE THIS MATTER. Mr. Musso commented that the permit would allow the wholesale business but the retail business would require a CUP, because of the zoning on this property. Mr. Devengenzo asked if provision for a driveway could be deferred and Mr. Musso stated that the Zoning Ordinance provides that the conditions of the zoning can be deferred also, which in this case is the driveway and the parking area - these can be deferred with proper surety. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. l/ P.C. RECOMMENDATION FOR CIVIC CENTER SITE The Planning Commission recommendation is that the multi-service center be located at the Civic Center site which may be erected through a HUD Block Fund Grant. CM TURNER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION FOR LOCATiNG THE MULTI-SERVICE CENTER AT THE CIVIC CENTER SITE, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM-29-389 April 7, 1975 REPORT RE Z.O.AMENDMENT RE STORAGE P.H. DATE The Planning Commission is considering possible amendment to the Zoning Ordinance as it relates to the storage of materials, posses- sions, supplies, equipment, machinery equipment, etc. and it is recommended that a public hearing concerning this matter be set for April 28, 1975. Cm Miller commented that under the section concerning storage, it says storage in the front yard (trailers) will be prohibited except in RL-5 or RL-6 Zoning areas and as he recalls the ballot measure submitted to the voters did not make any such prohibition. Mr. Musso indicated that he would obtain further information from the Planning Commission as to why they didn't agree with that par- ticular provision of the referendum. J em Tirsell commented that also there is no reference to multiples which very often have a storage problem. Mr. Musso indicated that the Planning commission did not give an exception to multiples. Mr. Musso stated that the original provision was that if you couldn't get your trailer in the rear yard it could be parked in front which means that a person on a corner lot in the RL-5-0 Zone had to park it in back and all the neighbors could park theirs in the front yard. This created a lot of ill feelings in neighborhoods where the ordi- nance was enforced. The Planninq Commission felt provisions should be established by zones rather than by capability. em Miller stated that regardless of the problems involved, this is still contrary to the ballot measure voted upon by the citizens. Cm Tirsell stated that under A. Storage Defined, storage does not include (1) The storage within a dwelling of objects normally found within a home. Cm Tirsell indicated that what may be considered normal to one person may not be considered normal by another and felt the word "normal" should be eliminated. Mr. Musso indicated that the P.C. discussed this at length but decided they couldn't really differentiate between the various types of storage and decided to shift away from parking to the storage of property in view of the public. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS SET FOR APRIL 28, 1975. PLANNING COM- MISSION MINUTES Minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of March 4, 1975, were noted for filing. COMMUNICATION FROM LARPD RE INTEREST ACCRUAL - PARK DEV. FUND A letter has been received from LARPD indicating that the LARPD Board of Directors feel that if park development funds are inves- ted by the City, any interest income from the investment should be credited to the Park Development Fund. It is felt that it would be logical and reasonable that the interest income would be credited to the account from which it was generated. J The City Manager indicated that our General fund has been the depository of all interest earned from General and Trust accounts. The only exceptions are those specified by law. Interest accruals are an important revenue item for our General Fund and to extract CM-29-390 April 7, 1975 (Interest Accrual - Park Development Fund) the interest earned from one account would be complex and time consuming. It is recommended that the Council adopt a motion denying the request by the LARPD Board of Directors. u Mr. Parness stated that a distinction could be made if the City of Livermore if we were collecting money as a trustee for LARPD but we are not - it is money that belongs to the City. CM TURNER MOVED TO DENY THE REQUEST BY LARPD,SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL. Cm Miller stated that he would disagree with the motion because in his opinion the interest from the Park Fund should go back to the Park Fund, but would agree with what the City Manager has reported concerning the interest for other funds. He stated that he feels that the bedroom tax interest should go back to its fund also. MOTION PASSED 4-1 (em Miller dissenting). RES. RE RESERVATION OF SEWAGE CAPACITY The City Manger reported that a calculation of the current sewage flow and unclaimed commitments for sewer connections has been made by the staff and it would seem appropriate to formally disclose the status and to declare an official policy for the allocation of any remaining sewage capacity. It is recommended that a resolu- tion be adopted declaring such policy. The following plant flow statistics were obtained: MGD Water Reclamation Plant Capacity Present Plant Flow Estimated Flow Commitments Residential Industrial & Commercial Sears Development Present Flow Plus Commitments Estimated Reserve Capacity After Commitments 5 4.6 .305 .026 .03 4.961 .04 em Tirsell commented that the report would indicate industrial development that would use as much sewage as Intel would not be feasible and that only industry such as warehousing would be allowed sewer service. / L/) Mr. Lee indicated that with the amount of capacity left another development such as Intel would be quite a burden to the sewage plant. He added that from a percentage standpoint we would not likely get industry that would be heavy water users. The report indicated that 71 lots have been approved for industrial use and Cm Tirsell wondered if there would be some way one of the lots could accommodate industry that uses a lot of water. Mr. Lee indicated that the 71 lots would be equivalent to l/3 of the water used by Intel because a number of the lots would use even less than one residential unit would use. He also mentioned that many of the lots listed may never be developed but have been subtracted from the amount of capacity available or those lots for which capacity is being reserved. CM-29-39l April 7, 1975 (Reservation of Sewage Capacity) Cm Tirsell asked why a vacancy factor was included in the report and Mr. Musso stated that this is the one number that 'was added over the original report. In the course of checking the dwellings during the time the census was taken the Planning Department became very conscious of the vacancy factor which was about 847 dwellings. He subtracted the major developments from the 847 vacant dwellings which left approximately 600 vacancies. He stated that during the last census there was a 6% vacancy factor and that normally the vacancy factor is from 2%.to 6%. It would be anticipated that the vacancy factor is lower if no additional homes are being built, and the reason they arrived at a 4% vacancy factor figure. It is felt that there will always be as many as 4% vacant just with the normal turnover and this does not include houses under construction or not sold. " J J Cm Miller stated that the report represents certain kinds of commit- ments or what the staff feels are commitments. In his view there is no commitment for tentative tract maps and he is not sure that there is a commitment to anybody that does not have a valid building permit. Legally, nobody is vested until they have building permits and it would seem that the City should not include areas which are nowhere near the point of applying for sewer service. He indicated that he feels the vacancy factor is higher than it should be and if there would be a lower vacancy factor it would mean the City is out of sewage capacity. He would suggest that the tentative tracts be omitted from consideration which would give the City another 11,000 gallons. He would like to delete anybody that does not have a build- ing permit. He asked how long the City can reserve capacity for that which brings difficulty as opposed to commercial/industrial which creates jobs and suggested that the resolution include some kind of a statement to delete the tentative maps and anybody 'that does not have a building permit. Cm Futch suggested that if the Council intends to do this it would probably be appropriate to continue this matter for one week so that such added wording in the resolution could be underlined and so that the Council can think about this suggestion. Cm Turner wondered if the City might have prior agreements with the tentative tract people and Cm Tirsell asked if this can be done if they are in a benefit district. The City Attorney felt the matter of the City's obligation to serve the tentative or final subdivision areas is still hazy and the reason it is not clear is because this is an area of the law that nobody has ever gotten into. He felt the most important consideration that we will have to look at would be the validity and exactness of the figures we are using. The resolution at this time, using the figures based upon obligations Mr. Lee and Mr. Musso feel are appropriate, indicates that there is only .04 MGD capacity remaining. Certainly with this kind of remainder the City is in a position to reasonably say we can allocate. In his opinion, the more obligations we remove and the more gallons 'we include as capacity, the less it is reason- able to allocate capacity based solely upon industrial and commer- cial. He felt if the City intends to allocate more and more gallons to commercial and industrial use then we may have to make findings to show that this is the only way to balance, economically, the community to support the finding the City will have to make - that the City does want to balance, economically, the community. He would also recommend that the matter be continued for one week so that these matters can be studied in detail. He felt that at this time he could not really offer a definitive answer and that his guess is as good as anybody else's guess in these areas and that it is just a calculated guess and what he thinks or does may not be agreed to by a court. First of all we need to be satisfied -.../ CM-29-392 April 7, 1975 l / ~, (Reservation of Sewage Capacity) with the figures and after we are satisfied with the figures then the question of allocation can be reasonably approached. He stated that he has not changed his opinion that the City can allocate remain- ing sewer capacity to economically balance the community and to pro- tect the general health and welfare but he would like to feel sure that the figures are exact or at least as close to being accurate as possible. Cm Miller wondered if there would be an advantage in adopting the resolution tonight and amending it next week, or would the City be leaving itself open to 500 tentative maps that the City can't do anything about because they have been applied for? Mr. Logan explained that the effect of the resolution is simply an intent and is not anything final. He felt that before anything substantial could be done an ordinance would have to be adopted. He felt there would be an advantage to adopt the resolution tonight, as it is written, to put the public on notice that this is a matter of great concern to the City, Mr. Musso has in his hands a disclaimer that anybody who files anything with the City will have to sign indicating that they are fully aware of the fact that there is no sewer. Theoretically, this could go all the way through to an occupancy permit and the only time the City would really take action would be the denial of an occupancy permit based on the lack of sewage capacity. If developers or anybody else wants to take the risk of building a multi-million dollar project with no sewage avail- able at the completion of the project, this is their choice and is nothing the City can be responsible for if they have signed a dis- claimer before the project was started. He indicated that it cer- tainly wouldn't hurt for the resolution to be adopted this evening and since it reflects intent only it can be changed by the adoption of another resolution next week or the week after. Mr Parness indicated that he agrees with Cm Miller in that the Council is going to have to discuss and decide which commitments, if any, will be deleted and once this discussion has been cleared and the final figure has been calculated then it would be appropriate to transmit or transpose this into ordinance form. CM FUTCH MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION, SECONDED BY CM MILLER. l Mr. Logan stated that the effect of adopting the resolution tonight is by no means cast in concrete. Basically the effect is.the City's justification to inform all interested persons who come into the Plan- ning Department to start a project, that they will have to sign a disclaimer~ The disclaimer is such that it recognizes these things may change - there are a lot of things that change and in the first place the Council will proceed to try to get increased capacity. If the capacity does change then the whole effect of the ordinance will change and there are all kinds of contingencies involved but one of the most important things the Council could do now would be to put everybody on notice so that we don't have any arguments six months from now indicating that developers didn't realize this was the case (no capacity). Legally we can't be obligated to do some- thing we are not capable of doing because of no capacity. Cm Turner stated that he could be wrong but a few weeks ago he mentioned that there were only 75,000 gallons available but one of the staff members stated that this was incorrect and that the City had 150,000 gallons. He stated that if his figure of 75,000 was correct, would this affect the resolution? The City Attorney indicated that the resolution is based on estimates and those estimates could be wrong. CM-29-393 April 7, 1975 (Reservation of Sewage Capacity) em Turner asked what the City is doing to diligently pursue the addition to the plant? The resolution indicates that the City will continue to diligently pursue financing to expand the existing Water Reclamation Plant. Mr. Parness replied that the last action on this item was taken up about three weeks ago at which time the Council was considering the allocation of more gallonage capacity to the valley. Cm Turner stated that he is concerned about the wording "diligently pursuing" and Cm Miller stated that the EPA is not allowing us to expand because of the air quality in the valley and we are now asking them, again, through Cm Futch's letter, what they will allow. J The City Attorney felt there is no rush concerning the rest of this item. If the Council is going to put this into ordinance form the most important thing has been covered - the notice. The second part of it will be the decision as to what the legal commitments are and those things which are not legal commitments and then back out those which are not legal commitments and after this is done it can be determined what can be allocated. The Council will have to look at some very serious presentations and documentation of arguments supporting that so much capacity should be used for commercial/industrial and therefore that should be allo- cated. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 55-75 A RESOLUTION STATING THE INTENTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE TO ALLOCATE RE- MAINING CAPACITY OF THE WATER RECLAMATION PLANT OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE TO INDUSTRIAL AND COM- MERCIAL PERMITS ONLY. CM TURNER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO BRING THIS MATTER BACK TO THE COUNCIL IN 30 DAYS AS AN AGENDA ITEM TO REVIEW QUESTIONS CON- CERNING THE TENTATIVE MAPS, ETC. HE ADDED TO THE MOTION THAT THE DATE FOR THIS DISCUSSION BE SET FOR MAY 12, 1975, SECONDED BY CM MILLER. The date of May 12th was selected so that a response could be re- ceived from the EPA concerning what they intend to allow in the way of expansion prior to discussion of this item. Cm Miller commented that there is the question of possible expan- sion and the other issue is the question of what is considered to be legal commitments. He felt that it is possible for the answer concerning legal commitment to come faster than what is possible for plant expansion. He would like to see a resolution to the matter of commitments as soon as possible and if it is not possi- ble to resolve the matter of plant expansion to be included in the resolution this part can be continued. There is also the question of verification of the figures for proof to a court. MOTION PASSED 4-0 (Mayor Pritchard abstaining because he will not be with the Council after the month of April). REPORT RE HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVELOP. FUNDS / ---' The City Manager reported that the County has indicated that HUD will not accept the contract form approved by our City calling for the allocation of federal monies to be passed CM-29-394 April 7, 1975 c (Report re Housing and Community Dev. Funds) through Alameda County. The reason is that the former contract statement clearly specifies that the City will remain the sole authority for the disposition of these funds apportioned to us. HUD insists that the County retain this financial authority. Un- less a contract modification is made, no funding will be distributed to the City of Livermore. The subject agreement, however, is for a one year period, 1975-76, and since the County has already con- ducted hearings on the total program allocation, including that for our City there is no need for real concern. If our project is allowed, it would require the commitment of the entire three year appropriation. It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolu- tion authorizing execution of an agreement with Alameda County for the Community Development Block Grant Funds. The City Attorney reviewed the changes in the greement with the Council. Mr. Parness stated that the changes were rather insignificant except for the change requested by him with respect to the phrase, "which shall be used by the County". It was stressed that there should be use of the word only, "which shall only be used by the County". It was the opinion of the technicians present during discussion of changes, that even this would not be accepted by HUD. He stated that he looks forward to this with a great deal of trepidation and is sure the Council shares this concern, as does every other city that is a member of this consortium. The County staff does not subscribe to the attitude of HUD and would rather not have anything to do with the disbursement of funds within incorporated bounds; however, it is either this or no program. He stated that he is somewhat relieved because it is only a one year contract because our project application is for three years and the first stage has already received the approval of the County. We have been somewhat assured that our project will be approved, at least under the auspices of the County. We will have complete justification for appealing to HUD, who have countermanding authority over the County, if the County says that we will not continue to receive fund- ing the next year. Mr. Parness stated that this is not his main con- cern but that his concern lies with the fact that we may not be allowed to reimburse ourselves per capita expenditure over the suc- ceeding two years. CM TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF THE AGREEMENT WITH ALAMEDA COUNTY, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 56-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (County of Alameda-Community Development Block Grant Funds) REPORT RE ANCESTRAL TREE SURVEY & IDENTIFICATION The City Manager has recommended that the matter of the ancestral tree survey and identification be referred to the staff for con- sideration at the preliminary budget hearing. c/ ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE RECOMMENDATION BY THE CITY MANAGER WAS ADOPTED. REPORT RE LIGHT DESIGN FOR FIRST ST./SO. LIVERMORE A report was submitted to the Council by Mr. Lee concerning the light design for First Street/So. Livermore Avenue lights and CM MILLER MOVED TO APPROVE THE SPHERICAL LIGHT DESIGN, AND ADJUST THE TRAFFIC LIGHT, SO IT IS THE SAME HEIGHT AS THE ONE ON SECOND STREET. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM-29-395 April 7, 1975 RES. RE MECHANICAL CHECK SIGNING & COMMERCIAL BANK DEP. Annually it is necessary to approve a mechanical method for the signing of City checks. Also in accordance with City policy it is time to revolve the depository for our commercial account. The Investment Committee recommends approval of Valley Bank as the commercial bank depository and.that a resolution approving the selection of Valley Bank be adopted. Cm Futch stated that the reason he asked that this item be removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion was because he has a ques- tion having to do with the wording in the resolution indicating that transfer would be made by Valley Bank. In other words, we would be depending upon Valley Bank to make the transfer whenever the amount exceeded the maximum legally allowed. \~ Mr. Parness indicated that this is a matter of clerical transaction and that we will not make a deposit to Valley Bank through their deposit machinery but rather will make it through Central Bank when these limits are reached. Physically we will not go to Central Bank and make deposits but it will be made here with Central Bank's mech- anism. em Futch stated that his point is that we are depending upon someone else to carry out the responsibility of transferring the money so that we never exceed the maximum amount allowed by law. Cm Miller stated that he has the same kind of concerns mentioned by Cm Futch and also Valley Bank has not been very cooperative about time deposits. They don't have the right computer equipment that the other banks have and it would seem that Valley Bank is just not large enough to handle the business that the City engages in. Mr. Nolan, the Finance Director, commented that the report sub- mitted to the Council concerning this item may have been a bit misleading. Valley Bank had originally proposed that they would make the transfer but our auditors, after consultation, recommended that it would be up to the City to deposit the money with either Valley Bank or Central Bank so that the transfer would be selectively deposited at our discretion. This is the point Cm Futch referred to and legally the City cannot exceed the maximum limit for even one day and transfer will not be made by Valley Bank. em Turner commented that with respect to security for public de- posits, there will be a letter forthcoming indicating that Valley Bank will certify that they do have adequate securities on deposits and he would like to suggest that this letter come from the Trustees rather than the bank. Mr. Nolan indicated that this suggestion would be advisable and that, in fact, the united California Bank has proposed to act as the agent for the depository. The reference to be guaranteed from Valley Bank would be in the amount of the securities they are going to pledge. The amount they would be required to pledge would be 110% of all the deposits and this amount will fluctuate. To simplify the accounting problems, because one day there may be nothing and up to a million dollars the next, Valley Bank has proposed to keep a fixed amount of securities pledged all the time. Cm Tirsell asked if the Investment Committee has considered all of these problems and it was indicated that the Committee has met on more than one occassion to see if some of the things could be re- solved. The most important issue discussed was the deposits. \ \ J CM-29-396 April 7, 1975 u (Mechanical Check Signing & Commercial Bank Dep.) Mayor Pritchard stated that he was present at the meetings held by the Investment Committee and it was recommended by the auditors for the City that we adhere to the law specifically on this one point. Consequently, after the first meeting, Valley Bank went to Central Systems and worked out the method for having the deposits made when they are going to exceed the amount of collateral they can make. Mayor Pritchard stated it is his understanding they would be made in Sacramento at that branch for deposits coming from the state. Mr. Nolan mentioned that there are monies turned over directly from the State of California to our bank or their representative from Sacramento for same day deposits, such as motor vehicle in lieu money, the gas tax money, the sales tax money and cigarette tax money deposited the same day it is made available to the City. Because Valley Bank, per se, is not located in Sacramento, Central Bank would be the bank in which the money would be deposited, initially in Sacramento so that, theoretically, we could get our hands on the money the same day. Mr. Parness commented that the reason these considerations were looked at were because Valley Bank has not had the actual accounts of the City. Mr. Nolan indicated that there is one account at Valley Bank now which is a small special account in which deposits are made according to an agreement. Valley Bank loaned the City $177,OOO for some rental facilities at the airport. Cm Miller stated that dealing with Valley Bank seems to be "left handed" and we have never had these kinds of problems in dealing with other banks. He feels that the reason there are problems is because Valley Bank is not large enough and overall it would appear that the City is not getting the best service. Mayor Pritchard commented that he feels a consensus of concern among the majority of the Council and if this is the case would suggest that a recommendation be made either to the Investment Committee or the staff to take some kind of action soon because this is an item that has been dragging on for several months. If the Council does not wish to use Valley Bank another recommendation should be made soon or the Council should come back with a recommendation soon to move to the next bank on the list which would be Wells Fargo Bank. He felt the Investment Committee was trying to keep within the legal limits and still accommodate a local bank but indicated that he too shares some of the concerns mentioned. Cm Turner stated that morally he is concerned about the agreement but feels he should abstain from voting on this item because of a conflict of interest. Mr. Parness stated that if the Council would like, he could arrange to have a bank officer meet and discuss this matter with the Council to help clarify some points and help ease the concerns mentioned. (~ ",----. CM TIRSELL MOVED TO DIRECT THE FINANCE DIRECTOR TO MOVE TO THE NEXT BANK ON THE LIST (WELLS FARGO) AND TO NOTIFY VALLEY BANK OF THIS DECISION AND THE REASONS. MOTION SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND PASSED BY A 4-0 VOTE (Cm Turner abstaining). CM TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MECHANICAL METHOD FOR SIGNING CHECTS, ETC., SECONDED BY CM FUTCH WHICH PASSED 4-0 (Cm Turner abstaining). CM-29-397 April 7, 1975 (Res. Re Mechanical Check Signing Auth. & Commercial Bank Dep.) RESOLUTION NO. 60-75 RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MECHANICAL METHOD FOR SIGNING CHECKS, SELECTING A DEPOSITARY AND PROVIDING FOR THE NAMES OF THE OFFICERS AUTHORIZED TO SIGN CHECKS AND THE METHOD OF SIGNING CHECKS. '\ J EXPANSION OF SEWER PLANTS Cm Tirsell stated that she has just been informed by a member of the VCSD Board that the State Water Quality Control Board is review- ing their priorities for funding sewer treatment plants that are in critical air basins, and they are being lobbied to lower their stan- dards and she would be interested in knowing when and where the hear- ings will be held. She suggested that the staff be directed to write to the State Water Quality Control Board to find out about the hear- ings so that we can testify. Cm Pritchard commented that a formal motion would not be necessary and the staff was so directed. WEEKLY STATUS REPORT - CITY MANAGER Public Works Mr. Parness reported that for the first time the City is having to clean one of the digesters at the sewage plant and the reason for the cleaning is because of a build-up of plastic. Fortunately the staff was alert and the digester is being taken care of and will not need to be replaced. Mr. Lee explained that plastic comes from disposable diapers, tooth brushes and all the plastics used in the home. This material is pumped in with the solids and build up in the digester forming a solid mass which is very difficult to remove. Mr. Parness stated that the resident engineer at the plant has left the City and there needs to be a replacement. A report will be coming to the Council on this matter. Hillside Ordinance The Hillside Ordinance has been under draft preparation and review by a special committee of the Planning Commission and has been referred to the P.C. but during the interim the special committee met with our staff and there was a lot of contrary technical input from the staff as to the committee's work which has caused the com- mittee to have some different views. Therefore, there will be a slight delay of the ordinance because it is being reconsidered. It is anticipated that it will come to the Council soon. No. Calif. Golf Foundation I __,i The City of Livermore was host to the Northern California Golf Founda- tion, who held their third annual seminar at Las positas last week. Mr. Parness stated that he met with them briefly and indicated that this is good publicity for the golf course and is pleased to have had a group such as this at our golf course. He indicated that they spent the entire day at our golf course and were very complimentary as to what they observed. CM-29-398 April 7, 1975 North I-580 Park L The Planning Director has met with Reeder Development Company to discuss the possibility of changing the site for the park because of the realignment of Springtown Boulevard plans. Also the School District has decided not to purchase the school site adjoining the park site. If Reeder is agreeable to the suggested change the staff will bring the matter back to the Council for discussion. Fire Station No. 1 It is anticipated that the City will be ready to go to bid for Fire Station No.1 on May 1, 1975. It might also be noted that with respect to the Fire Department, six men are in training as Emergency Medical Trainees (EMT) which is the beginning level training which requires about 100 hours of in-service training and will qualify them to be administrators of all the equip- ment on ambulances and to serve, during emergency situations, in the hospital emergency room. The next category is EMT-2 for actual paramedical training and the entire training program is through Chabot College. Police Department Mr. Parness stated that the Chief of Police has asked that Mr. Parness reassure the City Council that frequent emphasis is being imposed by them for the First Street patrol job and were quite active this week- end. Rain and bad weather this past weekend meant there was not a great deal of activity on First Street. Continuing efforts will be imposed and particularly as the weather improves. They are making every effort to ease the burden - particularly with respect to the merchants. Curbside Delivery The Post Office has finally agreed to begin curbside delivery at the airport and although this is not exactly what the City would like it is a step in the right direction and the City is appreciative. BIDS FOR VEHICLE The City Attorney mentioned that in the Consent Calendar the bids for the vehicle authorized by the Council (Resolution 54-75) were not listed and suggested that these be mentioned prior to adjournment. Codiroli Ford, $4,077.32; Groth Brothers, $4,952.25; and Moran Oldsmobile, $4,799.14 Mr. Parness stated the City Attorney has indicated his preference for the Oldsmobile Starfire and the Purchasing Department reports that the out-of-town agent (Moran) is $144 lower in price but taking into account the rebate of sales tax it has dropped to about $l02 lower. This is a matter for the Council to decide whether purchase should be made from the local vendor or to take the low bid. L It was noted that the Codiroli Ford proposal did not meet speci- fications and the Maverick was not acceptable to Mr. Logan and that the two Oldsmobile dealers would be the two considered. CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE BID BE AWARDED TO GROTH BROTHERS, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM-29-399 April 7, 1975 ADJOURNMENT APPROVE adjourned the meeting at 11:40 p.m. to an execu- diSC~~:~~ 1\ 'I ;) ~Wl a~ City Clerk Livermore, California Mayor Pritchard tive session to ATTEST \ ..J Regular Meeting of April 14, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on April 14, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m., with Mayor Pritchard presiding. ROLL CALL PRESENT: ABSENT: Cm Miller, Tirsell, Turner and Mayor Pritchard Cm Futch (seated during the Open Forum) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Pritchard led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. SPECIAL ITEM (Beautification Committee Awards) Decals from the R~autification Committee were awarded for beautifi- cation of residences and businesses and were presented by Chairman Ayn Wieskamp and Vice Chairman Ray Brice to the following: Mr. and Mrs. Quentin Johnson, 886 So. K Street, corner lot treatment Anderson Building, 4ll South L Street, attractive restoration Mr. and Mrs. Wallace Clements, 806 So. L Street, landscaping Dr. Sam Takemoto, 314 So. L Street, attractive renovation-office Dr. Jack Owens, 2815 East Avenue, well designed offices Mr. and Mrs. Marshall Kuhn, 2173 Palomino Rd, planters & lawn rock Mr. & Mrs. Conald Brilz, 1469 Aster Lane, attractive low maint yard Mr. & Mrs. Leroy Stewart, 2228 Shetland Rd, nicely maintained Name unknown, lOll Marigold Rd, neat, attractive yard Mr. & Mrs. Duane Martinson, 2246 palomino Rd, neat, well planted yard Mr. & Mrs. Harris, McGehee, 273 Garnet, well coordinated corner lot Mr. & Mrs. Thos. Ziegler, 177 Ruby Court, beautiful landscaping Mr. & Mrs. Robt Sims, 603 Jade Place, nicely landscaped yard Mr. & Mrs. Carl May, 515 Zircon Way, nicely landscaped . Mr. & Mrs. Fred Susakawa, 885 Lagune, beautiful Japanese lands. ~ Mr. & Mrs. Ken Freitas, 382 Pearl Dr, handsome use of stone Mr. & Mrs. Stephen Tedford, 375 Covellite, attr. use of brick Mr. & Mrs. Jasper Pena, 396 Covellite, attr. use of brick, rock Mr. & Mrs. Carter, 2195 Bluebell CM-29-400 April 14, 1975 OPEN FORUM (Ballot Measures) c Paul Tull, 2242 Linden Street, stated it has been reported that the majority of people want to vote on the Council replacement caused by the resignation of Mayor Pritchard, and he felt the So. Pacific Railroad underpass project should be placed on the same ballot, indicating he had the petition to bear him out. (Permit Fees-Residential) John Regan, 672 South N Street, stated he had addressed the Council concerning the fees required for single family residences last week because he felt the Council was not aware of the cumulative total. Also throughout the entire period of time before the aforementioned fees came into being there has remained in his mind the uncomfortable feeling that there is something morally wrong in this method, as those who came before paid nothing, and they now see fit to increase the fees by almost three times the amount they were three years ago. The inflationary rate for this same period is not that high. An editorial asked why these fees could not be paid over a longer period of time. To assess a purchaser of a new home $5,000 weighs heavily on his conscience and he asked the Council if they had ever considered a special committe to study various means of financing these fees and felt it would be morally correct to do so. Cm Futch asked Mr. Regan if he had made this request to other agencies, and he replied that he had not. Cm Miller stated that the Council is aware of the amount of these fees and they have been discussed many times. However, Mr. Regan's view that it is morally wrong to charge fees is not held by many other people who have sub~~9Az~~'Rkgher taxes in the earlier growth of the community. Mistake~ve~een made in the past are not a justi- fication for continuing something that is wrong. People in the past should have recognized they were subsidizing the growth, but it was recognized as early as 1957 by the Council. The whole point of the issue is that people should not have to subsidize, through higher taxes, growth in the community. The City can justify every penny that is imposed on those fees and they are still not a complete accounting of what a fair fee is. Mr. Regan stated he appreciated Cm Miller's comments, but still felt it was wrong for a person to pay these fees every time they moved from one community to another. He again asked if this system had been fully explored and if it is the only way. Cm Miller explained the fee progression by stating that the purpose of the fees is to provide capital improvements and the person moving into a new home is paying his share of these improvements. However when he moves, these fees are included in the selling price of his home, so that in effect he is only paying these fees one time. Mr. Regan stated basically what he is attempting to find out is how these fees came about, and why have they increased from $1800 to $5095 in three years in the same tract and wondered if it would (/ be $IO,OOO in ten years. \ ~/ Cm Tirsell stated that three years ago a friend purchased a tract home for $34,500 and the same model is now selling for $59,500 and she felt that this increase can be justified by the cost of con- struction increase on which the fees are based. CM-29-401 April 14, 1975 (Bldg. Permit Fees) Mr. Regan asked if the Council is satisfied they have explored all means of financing these costs. Cm Turner stated he had asked this same question when he was elected and was assured by the City staff that the fees were imposed to cover the costs but not to make a profit and he has accepted that. There are questions whenever there is a fee imposed, and maybe the fee structure should be reviewed. At one time it was considered to spread the fees over approved industrial applicants, but this was not pur- sued. He would recommend that the Council refer this matter to the Industrial Committee to do a study of industrial fees and perhaps the whole fee schedule if the Council would agree. //---"-"''\\ .-.J Cm Tirsell stated that a meeting in January was called by the City Manager with the Chamber Industrial Committee and City Industrial Committee and they reviewed the entire fee schedule for industrial uses. Cm Miller added that one of the residential fees will be under review by the Council shortly - the annexation fee. Cm Turner asked if there could be a review of the residential fees. The Public Works Director explained that there are different times for different fees, such as the case of the sanitary sewer connection fee for which he had prepared a revenue program study for the state and the EPA in conjunction with the obtaining of the grant on the water reclamation plant expansion. This was based on the actual anticipated need for the future. The park fee was established three or four years ago and a study made at that time and it has been ad- justed annually based on the cost of construction index and land values. The water storage fee was revised about a year ago based on a study at that time. Cm Turner asked Mr. Lee if he could prepare a summary of these fees which he agreed to do. Mayor Pritchard stated when this report is received perhaps the Council could hold a study session with the staff. Mr. Parness stated that the Industrial Committee had spent about six months doing an exhaustive study, circularizing all cities in the state for fees applicable to industrial properties that really pertain to residential because they are relatable. Cm Futch stated he had the impression that Cm Turner was suggesting that the industrial and commercial subsidize the residential, but Cm Turner stated that was not his intent. Cm Miller stated he would like to add that the money is paid off in stages by the mortgage paYments. (Repair of Fences) Ray Faltings, 1018 via Granada, complimented the Public Works Dept. for their quick action in repairing the fences on Holmes Street between Mocho and Elaine. The fences were in excellent repair at 4 p.m., but by dark that same night numerous slats had been destroyed, but the next morning before 9 a.m. the fences were completely repaired. . ) He did not agree with the back yard fencing, but as long as they ~ exist, the Public Works Department is doing an excellent maintenance job. CM-29-402 April 14, 1975 () (Congratulations to Mayor) Mr. Faltings expressed his wishes to the Mayor for success in his activities in his future move, such as his success in this valley. Mr. Faltings suggested that after departure of the Mayor that there should be an election for a new councilmember, however if this is not feasible at this time, it should be considered that whoever is selected for the vacant seat should at the same time as the person is appointed hand a resignation to the Council so that at the next general election instead of electing two council people there should be three elected. In that manner the individual would be before the public in order to see that the choice made by the Council was the right one. Mayor Pritchard asked the City Attorney if this could be done, and Mr. Logan explained this could only be done if there is an ordinance which allows for it, but there is not such ordinance. Mr. Faltings asked the City Attorney if an individual who is appointed could resign in advance, stating he would serve in office until the next election is certified. Mayor Pritchard stated that the person would be appointed to fill an unexpired term, and if they should resign, another appointment would be necessary. Mr. Faltings explained he felt it would be saving the community the cost of the election and adding three names instead of two to the ballot should be no great expense. Cm Miller stated perhaps the Council could do something along the principle proposed by Mr. Faltings even though there is no ordinance, but perhaps an ordinance could be adopted however that might delay the appointment. There are other alternatives that the Council may also wish to consider. (Water Reclamation Plant) Ron Gilbert stated he had done some checking regarding the sewer plant capacity and found it can only handle 5 mgd. Mayor Pritchard stated the capacity is rated in gallons per day average dry weather flow, but there are days when it can handle more. Mr. Gilbert stated that the Council indicated last week that they welcomed industry, yet he learned from a reliable source that there are 50 permits and with those houses and the ones not sold, it would put the City over the alloted sewer capacity. Mayor Pritchard explained that with all the permits that could be taken out on accepted tract maps and all the commercial and industrial property that could be developed, it would bring the capacity to less than the 5mgd, and Mr. Lee concurred there would still be about 40,000 gallons per day left. Cm Miller stressed the 5 mgd was for the dry weather flow and this is the rainy season, and there is a difference in the dry weather flow. c Cm Futch added that a firm was hired last year to check the flow and he confirmed the figures of the Public Works Director, and our present flow is based on the calibration and studies made by that consultant firm. CM-29-403 April 14, 1975 (Reclamation Plant) Mr. Gilbert stated he could not understand why the plant couldn't be expanded to carry a larger capacity, but then that would mean more growth which we do not want. Cm Miller stated expanding the plant certainly means more growth which would mean more smog, and that is the criteria by which the state and federal agencies that pay for 7/8 of the plant use for cutting off funds. Cm Miller referred to the explanation offered at the last meeting concerning this matter. "J Mr. Gilbert asked the Council if they were honestly concerned about the construction people and whether or not they make a living in this valley. He asked Cm Miller if he was interested in seeing the valley grow at all. Cm Miller replied that he is concerned about smog and the residential growth creates smog and there is evidence to prove that. As long as there is going to be smog as a result of residential growth, he personally does not believe there should be any more residential develop- ment in the valley. However, the commercial/industrial development helps reduce the amount of automobile travel which he feels is very desirable for the valley, and the commercial/industrial gives the construction workers jobs so it is not a simple yes or no answer. Cm Tirsell advised Mr. Gilbert that she had invited him to lunch last week to discuss these matters and she had given him her phone number and told him she would do the research and give him any in- formation he wanted. She extended the invitation again. (Fees for Parks) Mr. Carter, 2195 Bluebell Drive, referred to a comment made by Cm Miller regarding fees which are used for capital improvements; one being parks and asked where the park is that he paid his fee on, and Cm Miller replied there is money to buy a community park in that area, explaining that area was annexed to the City before there was any park dedication. That is one of the reasons Mr. Regan feels the fees have increased so tremendously; it was dis- covered that a large part of Livermore is developed without the dedications that provide for such amenities. There is money in the park fund to provide the park land and there are three parks proposed for that area, one being a community park. CONSENT CALENDAR Architects' Tour of Ravenswood A report was submitted concerning the Architects' Tour of Ravens- wood which indicated that Mr. Lowell Bergman of LARPD gave an oral history of the facilities. Ravenswood has been selected as a point of Historical Interest and LARPD intends to apply for re- gistration on the California and National lists of recognized heri- tage establishemtns. Resolution Rejecting Claim (James L. McDonnel) RESOLUTION NO. 61-75 ~ A RESOLUTION REJECTING CLAIMS OF JAMES L. McDONNEL CM-29-404 o c April 14, 1975 Establishment of Mailbox Standards RESOLUTION NO. 62-75 A RESOLUTION SETTING STANDARDS FOR CURBSIDE MAILBOXES Report re Lease Agree- ment Shell Oil Co. The City Manager reported that the Shell Oil Company provides a vehicle for gas dispensing at the airport for $1 per year. This new lease is required because the vehicle is being changed. It is recommended that a resolution authorizing execution of the lease be adopted and a resolution terminating the lease for the old vehicle. RESOLUTION NO. 63-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (Shell Oil Company) RESOLUTION NO. 64-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (Shell Oil Company) Minutes - Various Minutes of the Greens Committee for the meeting of February 27, and minutes of the meeting of the Housing Authority for February 4 and February 18 were presented to the Council. Payroll and Claims There were 86 claims in the amount of $509,018.82 and 294 payroll warrants in the amount of $89,107.19 ordered paid as approved by the City Manager. Approval of Consent Calendar ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR WERE APPROVED. MATTERS INITIATED BY STAFF (Street Light Design) Mr. Dan Lee stated that at the last meeting the Council approved the design of the street light for First St. and Livermore Avenue and the decision was that it be the Second St. type spherical fixtures at that height. As a matter of clarification Mr. Lee asked since the Council considered replacing the First Street lights with the spherical fixture using the existing poles there is a 2~ ft. difference between the existing poles and the ones on Second Street. If it is the intent to use the existing poles then rather than using Second street height poles the Council would want to use the First Street height poles. Cm Miller asked what would be wrong in cutting them off as the reason for the lower height was the architectural scale and that it would be more in keeping with the buildings and the height. CM-29-405 April 14, 1975 (Street Light Design) Mr. Lee explained that the poles on First Street are pre-cast mar- blelight poles and they have a plate on top and reinforcing and he did not feel they would lend themselves to being cut off. Cm Tirsell asked if the Beautification Committee or Design Review Committee had looked at the two kinds of poles, and Mr. Lee re- plied that they had and as he recalled it was the conclusion that they were in the proper proportion. \~ Cm Tirsell stated she would prefer to get the whole batch out and get decent looking lights on First Street. Cm Miller offered the following compromise - examine the poles to see whether they can be cut off and meanwhile send the concept back to the Beautification Committee for a report as he would like shorter poles if reasonably possible. Mr. Lee stated it is reasonably possible if that is what the Council would prefer and is not such a serious matter that it deserves much delay. He only wanted to be sure the Council understood it. Cm Futch stated he would like to know the cost involved and Mr. Lee replied that it would make no difference in cost for the poles being placed at that intersection. (Statements of Economic Interest) The City Clerk reminded the Councilmembers that there are deadlines to be met in filing their Statements of Economic Interest with the County Clerk (Moscone Act). (Hearings-Water Resources Control Board) The City Manager informed the Council of hearings to be held by state Water Resources Control Board having to do with the popula- tion projections, their limits and their effects on funding for treatment plant enlargement projects. There is a notice by that Board dated July ll, having to do with population projections. Another is a special supplement from the League of California Cities on a related topic. There is a report dated April 10, which gives the proposed resolution of the State Board and an attachment of the grant position. Mr. Parness stated that these are very important matters and although not directly affecting our City and the Council may want to propose a position for referral to the State Water Resources Control Board for the May 12 hearing. (Cooperative Planning History Livermore/Amador Valley) Mr. Parness referred to the article he had distributed to the Coun- cil with reference the the cooperative planning history of the Livermore-Amador Valley for their information with respect to the forthcoming presentation to ABAG. Mayor Pritchard asked the Council if there was any discussion on these items. \ J Cm Tirsell reminded the Council that the public hearing is Thursday, April 17, 7:00 p.m. at the Hotel Claremont when the Executive Com- mittee of ABAG will hear the Las positas proposal and she had re- quested that the Council formally adopt the resolution concerning CM-29-406 April 14, 1975 (Valley Planning) the Regional Planning Committee's report to the Executive Committee AND CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE RESOLUTION BE ADOPTED, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH. c Cm Miller suggested that there be one more paragraph added that all the local jurisdictions also oppose the proposal, and the resolution was amended to include this suggestion, ON MOTION OF CM MILLER SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. THE MAIN MOTION TO ADOPT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. RESOLUTION NO. 65-75 A RESOLUTION CONCERNING THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF THE LAS POSITAS AREA Mr. Parness asked Cm Tirsell if she would prefer to have the resolu- tion mailed or deliver it herself, and the Council concurred that they should do both. MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCILMEMBERS (COVA Meeting) Cm Tirsell stated that last Thursday night at the COVA meeting the BART consultant presented BART extension for the Valley plan which will be sent to all Councilmembers. There will be two public hearings in the Valley sponsored by COVA and a separate hearing and presenta- tion by the consultant and our BART director, Bob Allen for all elected officials of the Valley, probably in Pleasanton. She felt that all Councilmembers should hear the presentation. (Committee Appointments Executive Session) Cm Turner asked if the Council could hold an executive session to make some appointments to the committees, and the Council agreed to adjourn to an executive session to discuss the appointments. (7-Supervisor Concept) l Cm Turner referred to a letter which he had sent the other Councilmem- bers concerning his attendance at the League meeting and he had asked that the Council consider supporting the 7-Supervisor concept. It is felt that seven supervisors could better serve the populace and it is worthy of consideration. Since action items are not supposed to be brought up by Councilmembers, he asked if this matter could be placed on the agenda for the next meeting. Cm Tirsell stated that Tom Bates is charged with doing the redistrict- ing plan and they can send communications, she suggested that perhaps they could direct a letter to Tom Bates, however Cm Turner stated that in keeping with Council policy, it should be listed as an agenda item. ~...'::diL ~oAr: tl~~ Cm MillerJst~ that the concept of seven supervisors has been Sl1J?r"n. ,...J::by Valerie RaYmond, and he agreed it was a good idea and should be placed on the agenda. He would also support the idea of sending a letter to Mr. Bates. Mayor Pritchard remarked that the State of Wyoming, which has a popu- lation less than half the population of Alameda County, has a Governor and entire executive staff and a full legislature of senators and assemblYmen to handle the functions of that state. CM-29-407 April 14, 1975 (Council Letters) Cm Futch stated he had the letters he promised to write for the City Council - one to Bill Denny, Executive Officer of the State Water Resources Board; the other to Paul de Falco, Regional Admin- istrator of the Environmental Protection Agency in which he made several points in addition to asking if they could be specific as to the population in the Valley and within the existing communities ~ that would be funded by EPA under the new policy. Cm Futch asked ~ for any comments the other Councilmembers might wish to make before mailing them. Cm Futch referred to the State Regional Water Qual- ity Control Board meeting to be held on May 12, stating that he felt there should be some Council representation when they decide their position which would be solidified by these letters and they would have a basis to make comments at that meeting. Cm Turner stated that he would take exception to the item regarding the full scale widening of I-580 through the Valley as he favored the widening. Cm Futch stated his understanding, but perhaps the combination of factors might be significant and realizing the Council's opinion he felt it was a factor that should be mentioned. (Corps of Engineer Project) Cm Futch asked the City Manager about the report the Council had requested concerning exactly what Congress was going to vote on relative to the Corps of Engineer Project, the procedures, etc. Mr. Parness stated that an appropriation has already been allotted for the preparation of the scope of work in the amount of $100,000 which is to be expended no later than June 27, 1975. This was done by action of the House Committee on Public Works, however an appro- priation for the conduct of the study has not yet been made and is to be a part of the budget process and it will be up to this same committee. Cm Futch stated they are now going back for possibly ten times that amount and the nature of the study is still not known, and Mr. Parness explained that he understands that the scope of work is in draft stage prepared by the district and is now in the hands of the regional offices from which it will be referred to the local agencies for their comments and thence back to Washington. Mr. Par- ness stated that the representative had indicated that the scope of work will go through as presently outlined with the possible exception of the water management aspect of the study which may be deletable in the event there is a 208 planning agent designated, to wit: ABAG. Cm Futch stated he is concerned about the time scale as he under- stands the voting will be held in Washington the last of April, or first of May and he felt we should be represented. Cm Miller stated it is possible for an appropriation to be made before any plans are made, and he felt this is what the Council should be testifying about but they should know the exact format and structure and if necessary they should contact both Don Edwards and Pete Stark to determine what is going on. Cm Futch asked the City Manager if he would contact Congressman Stark and furnish the Council with the information by the end of the week. \ , / -..-/ CM-29-408 c l April 14, 1975 (Sewer Expansion) Cm Turner referred to Cm Futch's letter, stating there are certain needs in the valley and there will be a limited amount of sewer ex- pansion; he felt the Council should be on record that the City would like to be considered for sewer expansion in order to be able to serve our commercial/industrial needs. (Resolution of Appre- ciation Art Work-Chabot) Cm Miller stated that a substantial gift of art work was made to Chabot College by Phillip Chin and he felt this was an excellent gift to education and to the community and SUGGESTED THAT THE COUNCIL PROVIDE PUBLIC APPRECIATION TO MR. CHIN IN THE FORM OF A RESOLUTION THANKING HIM ON BEHALF OF THE COUNCIL FOR THE COMMUNITY, MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. RESOLUTION NO. 66-75 A RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION (Phillip Chin) (Clean Air Act-Sen. Tunney) Cm Miller mentioned that a notice had been received regarding the hearings on the Clean Air Act from Senator Tunney and asked if the Council would like to submit some written testimony, or if someone goes to Washington for the Corps of Engineers matter, they might attend the hearings personally which begin April 21. They have until May 30 to submit comments. Cm Tirsell stated that since Cm Miller has done the research, he might prepare a written position that the Council could look at, and Cm Miller agreed to do this and it might be scheduled as an agenda item for next week. RECESS AFTER A SHORT RECESS THE MEETING RESUMED WITH ALL COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT. COMMUNICATIONS Judge Lewis re Bike Lanes A letter was received from Judge Lewis regarding the prompt response by the Public Works Department to requests for modifications and street signs and painting of the necessary bicycle lane designations. Assemblyman Mori re State Employment Offices An acknowledgement was received from Assemblyman Floyd Mori to the letter from the City Manager regarding the problems incurred by valley residents with the State Employment Development offices. Although arrangements have been made for a mail program, Assemblyman Mori advised that he would desire to look to some more long range, permanent facility in the Valley. CM-29-409 April 14, 1975 Beautification Committee Minute Inaccuracies Elizabeth Mondon had written concerning inaccuracies which have appeared in the minutes of three meetings of the Beautification Committee and asked that the Council note these. \ \J Central Business District Plan A communication was received from the Planning Commission concern- ing the plan for the Central Business District and their views and comments on the preparation of a specific plan for the Central Business District. Cm Tirsell stated that she had asked for the Council to review the goals and that the Council has not formally adopted the goals sent to the Council by the Planning Commission. She stated that this report is the discussion of how the P.C. went about studying the matter but they did adopt goals and in the goals the P.C. asked the consultant to restudy the downtown area. She asked that this item come back to the Council as an agenda item for discussion and adoption of the goals. The communication was noted for filing. REPORT RE KISSELL CO. CONTRACT EXTENSION The City Manager reported that staff negotiations have been con- ducted as to the proposed terms extending the date of applications for building permits and the Heather Lane bridge construction. A response has not yet been received which may necessitate the deliv- ery of a later staff report. Mr. Parness stated that the staff has met with the Kissell people over this past week to discuss proposed conditions for extending the date of application for the building permits. Mr. Parness indicated that the conditions were that in consideration of the extension of the 104 building permits date, for a term not to exceed two years, the Kissell Company would agree to the instal- lation of the full public works improvements associated with the Heather Lane bridge, and secondly they would agree to waive any entitlements for interest accruing for the monies on deposit for the 104 permits from and after the date of their present qualifica- tion (May 16, 1975). Thirdly, they would agree to take out at least half of the 104 permits within one year after May 16, 1975 and the balance no later than two years from this date. In addition it was recommended that the time for the initiation of construction for the Heather Lane bridge be extended for a period not to exceed 90 days. Mr. Watson explained that the date they are asking for the exten- sion concerning the bridge is for the date of completion - not an extension for the initiation of construction. Mr. Parness stated that Mr. Watson has agreed to these terms, as mentioned above, and if the Council desires, these terms will be written up as an amendment to the existing contract. , ) ~; CM-29-410 April 14, 1975 (j (Kissell Negotiations) Mr. Watson stated that they would hope the date of extension for the completion of the bridge could be moved from June 3, 1975, to September 3, 1975. He stated that they have not, as yet, received final approval of the plans for the bridge from the City Public Works Department and they cannot begin construction until they have received final approval. It is his understanding that the plans are back with the Zone 7 people of the County and they aren't taking care of the paper work. There is no guarantee how soon Zone 7 will get the plans back to them and there is also an additional problem because some utility relocations have to be taken care of by PT&T and PG&E who may not do the work for a few weeks. He explained that Kissell does not want to start construction on the bridge, get to within a week of completion and then be delayed with all of these other things. He stated that they are ready and willing to begin but need the final approval. Cm Futch stated that perhaps the agreement should be worded "90 days after approval from the City and Zone 7" and Mr. Watson indicated that this would be aggreable because they plan to begin immediately upon receiving approval and we should be starting to get good weather. Cm Miller stated that he would be interested in knowing how the Director of Public Works feels about the 90 days if construction is tied to approval of Zone 7 and Mr. Lee indicated that he feels the 90 days is a reasonable length of time and doubts that there will be any trouble in meeting the deadline. Cm Miller mentioned that if the City does not approve the extension it will mean that Kissell Company will immediately take out the 104 building permits and those people who have come to the Council about not having jobs will, in fact, have jobs. Mr. Watson stated that this is a possibility; however, there is another possibility - Kissell may say it's not worth it and throw their chances into litigation. CM TURNER MOVED TO APPROVE, IN CONCEPT, THE NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT THAT HAS BEEN WORKED OUT AND THAT IT WILL APPEAR IN WRITTEN FORM WITH THE APPROPRIATE RESOLUTION NEXT WEEK, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. Mr. Watson stated that in closing he would like to remark that he has had differences with the staff and Council over the past year but personally feels the staff should receive a lot of credit for driving an extremely "hard bargain". Cm Miller stated that before leaving this subject he would assume "appurtenances to the bridge" means the approaches and Mr. Parness indicated this is correct and such will be spelled out explicitly. REPORT RE SEWER CONN. AGREE. W!OAKLAND SCAVENGER l The Council reviewed the matter of the sewer connection agreement with Oakland Scavenger Company on March 17th and instructed the staff to modify certain engineering requirements and it is recommended that a resolution be adopted authorizing execution of the agreement. Mr. Parness reported that the terms of the proposed agreement have been written in accordance with the Council's earlier review of the matter and the staff reluctantly agrees with Oakland Scavenger. The major concern has been the legal assurance that the access to Wax lax CM-29-411 April 14, 1975 (Oakland Scavenger Agree.) Lane would not be possible for Oakland Scavenger and would be taken care of by dedication to the City of a one foot no access strip all along the easterly boundary. Cm Miller stated that he had some trouble following through the chain of resolutions where each one referred to the last resolution concern- ing fee structures and dedication requirements in case the properties are not used for industrial purpose. He stated that he did not seem to have copies of everything, including relevant codes. It was not clear that the City is, in fact, covered by the present day fee struc- ture and present day requirements and would be reluctant to vote for adoption of the agreement until this has been checked out. He sstated that he would be willing to vote for it subject to this being checked out. If the property is transferred to any other non-industrial use the fee structure and dedication should correspond to those in effect at the time the property changes classifications. .~ The City Attorney commented that it is his opinion that Cm Miller cannot condition his vote unless the vote is conditioned by all the members of the Council, and Cm Miller stated that he would like to see this as a condition that all the members would vote on. Cm Futch asked Cm Miller to once again clarify the condition which Cm Miller explained as follows: The property is presently indus- trial and most of our annexations and dedication conditions do not apply. If the property does change its use the City should make sure that when it changes use the fees and dedications appropriate at that time do apply. Mayor Pritchard asked if this could be done by stipulation in the contract and the City Attorney felt this would be no problem. Cm Miller stated that he would like to submit a resolution authoriz- ing execution of the agreement, provided that those terms are in the agreement or will be added to the agreement, AND SO MOVED, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Mr. Parness stated there is one minor contingency - the owner of Oakland Scavenger has asked be brought to the attention of the Council and that is that on the southerly quarter of their land that will abut the extension of Preston, will be undeveloped. The Company also owns the property directly to the east of that quarter and they say that if Preston is extended they may wish to join the two pieces together for some type of industrial use which will front Preston. If there is a one foot no access strip requirement they will not be able to do this because the strip would intersect the two pieces. Mr. Parness has indicated to Oakland Scavenger that in the event this does occur there would probably be no problem in a quit claim of the no access strip and with that understanding they were willing to sign the agreement. Cm Miller stated the Council would like to encourage industrial development and there would be no problem in allowing the quit claim. Earl Mason, attorney representing the applicant, stated that the matter of the no access strip was discussed and they would like to know if this would be a fee title to the City or just a no access right that can be relinquished - there is a difference in whether it is deeded or an access strip. .~ The City Attorney commented that the City will ask the title company which method would be satisfactory and indicated that either way there would be no problem. CM-29-4l2 April 14, 1975 (Oakland Scavenger) MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION 67-75 c) A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREE- MENT (Oakland Scavenger Company) RES. APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 1597 - SHAHEEN The Public Works Director reported that the staff was asked to review the requirement that the developer of Parcel Map 1597 install a sanitary sewer line on Vasco Road adjacent to the tract. The developer has asked that this requirement be deleted because they will not need the line, as they will receive service from another line presently in the area. The Council has asked for a recommenda- tion as to waiving this requirement and there has been a similar situation in which the sanitary sewer line on East Avenue was not required at the time Wagoner Farms developed. In this case a prece- dent has been set and there are justifications for not requiring the line and it is recommended that the Engineering Considerations be modified to exclude this requirement. Mr. Lee stated that in addition to the sewer line matter, CmMiller had asked for information on the water line pressure situation that came up last time as to whether a looped water system should be required. The Council asked that the loop be required but did wish to consider it later. He presented a map of the area and the water line extension as well as the existing water line, and there was discussion between the Councilmembers and Mr. Lee concerning the water pressure. Mr. Lee noted that the diameter of the lines is 8" which would mean at least a 20% correction with the proposed loop system. It is calculated that during peak use periods in the summer the pressure at the corner of Research Drive and East Avenue would be about 24 psi. Cm Tirsell wondered if low pressure would affect insurance rates and Mr. Parness replied that insurance rates are applicable City-wide and the insurance company does not take into consideration location. They would enjoy the same rating as any other industrial property in the City unless there would happen to be severe conditions attached to it such as reliance upon a water tank in case of fire, or located five miles away from a fire station. Cm Futch wondered if the Fire Chief has made a recommendation and Mr. Lee stated that he has discussed the matter with him and that Chief Baird would recommend that the City get the highest pressure possible for that area. Mayor Pritchard stated that he would like to summarize the discussion: Basically, the Council is down to two questions - I) the water loop; and, 2) the sewer line. Mr. Mason indicated that they have just seen Exhibit B and there are some other new things brought out that they weren't aware of. / L/ Mr. Lee explained that Exhibit B is the exhibit of the development agreement and it encompasses the decisions of the Council made at the last meeting. CM TURNER MOVED THAT BASED ON THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS, THE SEWER LINE ON VASCO ROAD NOT BE REQUIRED, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CM-29-413 April l4, 1975 (Shaheen Development) CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE LOOP WATER LINE BE REQUIRED, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL. Earl Mason, representing Mr. Shaheen, stated that as he recalls Mr. Lee mentioned that at the end of Research Drive where the red line meets Vasco Road, under full pumping actions there would be 1200 gallons per minute. Mr. Lee did not mention that at East Avenue and Research Drive if someone tries to pump this down to zero pressure there would be approximately 1600 gpm. :~ Mr. Lee explained that it would be approximately 1800 gpm. Mr. Mason stated that at best it is a poor pressure area and the capacity will be increased, at the worst corner, up to 1700 gpm - still 2/3 less than what should be there. He ques- tioned whether the 500 gpm is substantial when it is only 10% of the total really needed, and what value would really be gained by requiring the large line. Cm Futch stated that he does not want to impose unnecessary con- ditions and added expenses to the developer and in view of the fact this will not service residential units feels there would be little chance that there would be loss of life if there were a fire and for this reason would vote against the motion. MOTION FAILED 2-3 (Cm Futch, Turner and Pritchard dissenting). CM FUTCH MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT THE CONCEPT OF THE WATER LINE WITHOUT THE LOOP, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cm Miller stated that Mr. Mason represents the developer of the property who is interested in not spending money. The people who are going to live with the fire risk are the people who buy the properties afterwards and it would seem that the City has some obligation to help avoid fire risk. Also, approval of the motion in this form is contrary to the recommendation of the Fire Chief. For these reasons he cannot support the motion. Cm Tirsell pointed out also that while there may not be loss of life involved, industrial fires are very dangerous because of the materials used in industry that are not found in residential areas. Mayor Pritchard stated that the point is that the additional 500 gallons may not be significant and a lot of added expense would be required to raise the pressure from 1200 psi to 1700 psi. Cm Turner pointed out that if the loop is cut there would still be water funneling around from the other side but the other point is that if it is cut at the neck there will not be any pressure at all and felt the extra cost is not really justified. Cm Miller felt that with the loop it would mean an increase in the options available in case of fire. MOTION PASSED 3-3 (Cm Miller and Tirsell dissenting) . Mr. Mason stated that until he reviewed Exhibit B he was not aware that the one foot strip along the Bieber property was to be dedicated to the City. He stated that if this is to be given I to the City there should be a benefit district created with the ~ value of the half street and utilities proportional to the use of the Bieber parcels. He stated that Mr. Bieber is holding out until all the land around him is developed, the streets and utilities are put in and then he will get a "free ride". CM-29-4l4 April 14, 1975 (Shaheen Development) Mr. Mason suggested that a benefit district be established, arrive at what proportional costs are contributed to the Bieber piece and for the staff to set up that amount of money so that when Mr. Bieber wants to develop he can pay his share back to Mr. Shaheen. L, Mr. Lee explained that no access strips are required to be dedicated to the City and when they are retained by a developer they are called "spite strips". The best way to protect the developer so that he gets a reimbursement at such time as adjacent property does benefit, and Mr. Bieber will, is to form a benefit district. He would suggest that subject to the concurrence of the City Attorney, the City include a provision in the subdivision agreement to set up a benefit district if legally possible. The City Attorney explained that in order to create a benefit district in this area it will have to be the proper subject matter of those things which can be used for benefit districts and does not wish to render an opinion on that at this time. The whole subject of bene- fit districts is being researched at this time and the staff is try- ing to create a mechanism to allow the Council to utilize them. The mechanism, even though it is provided for in the new Subdivision Act, is very vague and those who wrote the Subdivision Act don't seem to know what the mechanism is; therefore it hasn't been decided as to how it can be done. Mayor Pritchard asked if the City Attorney is advising that if this is added to the conditions on the map that it be specified that such will be done if legally possible and the City Attorney stated it would have to be worded this way because at this time he is not sure it is legally possible. Mayor Pritchard asked if, in this case, there should be wording of this kind at all and the City Attorney felt this is a policy de- cision. If the Council wishes to include a benefit district and it is legally possible then he has no objection to it being in- cluded as long as the caveat is there - that it be legally approved and is legal before it is an accomplished fact. Cm Futch stated that he is not sure this should be in the legal agreement if it may not be legal because if it isn't legal the City can't do it. On the other hand we do want some protection and it would appear the no access strip would offer the protection. Mr. Mason stated that if there is no formation of a benefit district there is no way for Mr. Shaheen to recover his money and Cm Futch stated that he understands this but is sure Mr. Shaheen wouldn't want the map to be held up until the legalities of a benefit dis- trict are resolved. CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADD THE PROVISION OF THE BENEFIT DISTRICT TO THE CONDITIONS OF THE MAP, PROVIDING A BENEFIT DISTRICT CAN LEGALLY BE ESTABLISHED, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. Prior to the vote Cm Miller stated that he would assume this motion would not change the fact that the City gets the no access strip, and was assured that this would not change. c Cm Miller stated that there is another notice about a benefit dis- trict having to do with off-site water line installation and if he understands action just taken by the majority of the Council, this off-site water line has been deleted and consequently the item about benefit districts for the water line should be deleted from the agreement. CM-29-415 April 14, 1975 (Shaheen Development) Mr. Mason stated that there is still piece of water line fronting on Vasco Road between Lot 20 and Lot 13 that will be built and will be fronting on the Bieber property. This should either be part of the water benefit district or the benefit district just approved, if legally possible, which would be the portion of his costs for Research Drive and the water line on Vasco Road. Cm Miller stated that since Mr. Shaheen has evaded the cost of the water line loop he feels the cost of this small piece can be absorbed by Mr. Shaheen, and is not willing to vote for the benefit district for the water line. CM MILLER MOVED THAT SUBJECT TO LEGAL LIMITATIONS, THE SENTENCE AT THE BOTTOM OF PAGE 3 OF THE CONTRACT BE DELETED. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. '\ \J Cm Futch stated if he interprets what Cm Miller is saying, the developer will be penalized because of another action which was really separate from this action. Cm Miller stated that he realizes this could be interpreted in this way but what he is saying is that we do not create benefit districts for every single off-site thing that is done and feels it should not be done for the water line. He stated that he can understand a benefit district for the street work and other things but not for the water line. Cm Tirsell wondered if the line for the water could be included in the other benefit district and Mr. Mason indicated that this is what he would suggest. The City Attorney felt if we can get to the benefit district level we can probably include both. CM TIRSELL MOVED TO INCLUDE THIS WATER LINE WITH THE OTHER BENE- FIT DISTRICT, IF LEGALLY POSSIBLE, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED 4-1 (Cm Miller dissenting) . Mr. Mason stated that he would also like to discuss the access at the north east corner of Lot 20. He indicated that this was discussed in the past and it was he and the developer's understand- ing that the driveway would be 25 ft. wide because this is the width needed for entering commercial property. During the discussion it was mentioned that the Ri~hetti piece may have a driveway adjacent to it along the property line but the map (Exhibit B) shows a 25 ft. wide driveway straddling the property line which leaves only a 12.5 ft. access for Lot 20. He stated that this is not suffi- cient for access from a major street for two way ingress and egress. Mr. Musso stated that this was the recommendation of the P.C. and he believes the reason was because they envisioned one access. Cm Turner asked Mr. Lee what his opinion would be concerning the width and Mr. Lee stated that he would suggest that there be an additional notation that, in fact, if development occurrs on the Righetti property that they be allowed a 25 ft. access and at such time as the Righetti access is completed then it could be narrowed. They really couldn't operate with a 12.5 ft. width. In other words Shaheen should be allowed the 25 ft. width until such time as Righetti develops at which time it would be 25 ft. in the middle for servicing both properties, SO MOVED BY CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. , ---/ There was some discussion regarding the requirement for the pull boxes and Mr. Mason indicated they are very expensive and PG&E feels it is hard to estimate where they should be placed and that at this time it is a waste of time and money. It is felt it would be easier to install the boxes at the time PG&E knows where the load will be and the location. CM-29-4l6 April 14, 1975 (Shaheen Development) Cm Turner stated that in talking with people from PG&E he has found that most of the time the initial pull boxes are not used. They are installed and then the service is not needed in that area. G CM TURNER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE AN AGREEMENT NOT REQUIRING THE PULL BOXES AND THAT THE RESOLUTION BE ADOPTED SUBJECT TO THE CHANGES MENTIONED THIS EVENING. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 68-75 A RESOLUTION APPROVING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP 1597 (Shaheen Industrial Park) REPORT RE DIRECT ELECTION OF MAYOR In response to a request from Cm Turner, the City Attorney reported on the question of a direct election of mayor. Mr. Logan indicated that the question must be presented to the voters at either a general election or a special election called for that specific purpose and if the voters approve the measure a vacant council seat shall be designated as that of mayor at the next general election. Cm Turner stated that he favors direct election of a mayor because appointment of a mayor by the Council is a very traumatic time and many times there are hurt feelings because of the selection. He stated that at one time he felt every member of the Council should serve as mayor for a year and that they were owed this honor but he no longer feels that this is owed to them. Also, the mayor is asked to serve on various committees outside of our own City and it often takes about six months to fit into the jOb and know the people in the various organizations and committees and then he may be replaced by a majority vote of the Council six months later; directly elected mayor would allow continuity of service. He also felt that if the mayor is directly elected by the people he would have to be more responsive to his constituents and this would be in the best interest of the voters. Cm Futch stated that often a directly elected mayor is paid a very high salary and this should be a consideration. Cm Turner stated that he had not thought about any particular amount in the way of salary other than what a Councilmember now receives and felt there should not necessarily be an increase over this amount. It was mentioned that if a Councilmember runs for the office of mayor prior to expiration of his term of office and does not win the vote for mayor, he would still retain his seat on the Council. L Cm Miller stated that this matter has been brought up in the past and he too has thought it over many times. The way our present system is supposed to work is that a mayor is selected from the Councilmembers and each of these people have been elected by the people. The job does rotate and there is the advantage of first gaining experience as a Councilmember before being selected as mayor; generally the member with seniority is selected as mayor. Because of the rotation method no one person has excessive power and because he is subject to the other Councilmembers he reflects the majority of the Council and consequently represents the Council and in turn CM-29-417 April 14, 1975 (Electing Mayor) the people and the mayor must be sensitive to the composition of the Council. In our present system political leadership is shared and it is given by different Councilmen on different issues. One of the disadvantages of our present system is that sometimes there are hurt feelings over ~he selection but one of the disadvantages of the elected mayor is that there is prestige and recognition associated with being elected as mayor. He stated that in his opinion a highly qualified person who is unwilling to serve the Councilmembers because he needs more recognition and prestige is unfit to hold public office. Anybody who is so "ego centered" that they are interested in their prestige and recognition and can serve in the role of mayor is no longer thinking of the citizens. It has been mentioned in some of the reports that experience else- where has proven that electing mayors often leads to party politics in what should be non-partisan offices. The reason is because people who are ambitious for personal advancement use the elected mayor as a stepping stone for higher office and with less regard for local issues and the citizenry. The person who is elected may be com- pletely inexperienced in any public office or in public respon- sibility so if they are qualified it is great but if they are not qualified, everyone is stuck for two years or four years. If the office is for a two year term people would have to run for office so often that this would discourage good people. If the mayor's policy is different than Council policy there is the possibility of much more dissention than a 3-2 or 4-1 Council. Any official independent view contrary to the Council majority is both divisive and gives a poor image to the City. He stated he would argue that the popularity contest aspect of election for mayor does not insure a capable leader and does not insure a program of policy; consequently there is a serious problem if that person who is elected as mayor does not lead. The political leadership in a general law city is provided issue by issue by different councilmembers with their own various ideas and in his opinion this is more representative, provides greater variety of ideas than can be provided by a single person who is supposed to be the elected mayor. The elected mayor concept tends to concen- trate power in a single person and a gavel happy mayor can stifle all opposing view because he can't be removed from at the end of a year. He stated he feels the checks and balances of shared power are an important protection for minority and majority views of the Council and to the public. Rotation has the advantage of keeping everybody "honest". He stated that he feels people are becoming concerned about concentrating power in one certain per- son and there are certain aspects and parallels to the office of the President of the united States. The argument has been made that there is greater public participation in government if there is an elected mayor but a mayor can be elected by a tiny plurality. He pointed out that if a mayor is elected he will be expected to work half time or full time at which point he would have to be paid and the cost would be excessive for the results gained, and also feels that Livermore does not need a half time or full time mayor. He stated that many people may not have thought about the fact that if an elected mayor is supposed to spend more time on the job than the present rotating mayor, then there are only cer- tain kinds of people who could take this job and it would be people who could take lots of time off during the day such as lawyers, real estate people, insurance agents and businessmen with lots of help which would mean that anyone working regular hours would be excluded and people working for wages would gen- erally be excluded because of this fact. In response to Cm Turner's argument that it takes about six months to get into an outside job comfortably, this is probably true with respect to the Mayors' Conference but not so with other agencies. CM-29-4l8 \~ J April 14, 1975 (Electing Mayor) L; An alternative suggestion might be to have regular substitute appointments on boards on which the mayor may serve and longevity or continuity could be attained in this manner, serving for perhaps two years as a representative of the Council. He stated that all general law cities have "family squabbles" but this City's squabbles are publicized. Pleasanton has also had problems the last three times running and did not receive publicity. Cm Tirsell stated that she feels many facts need to be pointed out because many people in town are confused and do not have the bene- fit of staff reports and information the Council has available. The Council is facing a vacancy and there is going to be an election or the Council will make an appointment and the Council at this time will reorganize and appoint a mayor. The election of mayor issue will in no way affect the vacancy. The earliest ballot on which people could state whether or not they wish to elect a mayor would be on the 1976 ballot and they would not be able to choose a mayor until 1978 if they wish to choose a mayor. She stated that she is receiving phone calls from people who are asking if a mayor can be elected this year. The City Attorney explained that the measure would not have to wait until 1976 if the Council would decide to call a special election for the purpose of asking the public if they wish to vote for a mayor. Mayor Pritchard stated that if the Council calls for an election to fill his vacancy (new Councilmember) the question of whether a mayor sould be elected by the people could be placed on the ballot at this time and in 1976 a mayor could be electea. Cm Tirsell stated that since the issue of an elected mayor does not face this Council and for this reason if there is a vote on the issue she will abstain from a vote. She would recommend that the Council set the item for discussion on December I, 1975, so that if there is an election for a new Councilmember there will be time for con- sideration of elected mayor, and if there is an appointment that person will have time for consideration, and indicated that this is not the proper Council to discuss the item but rather the newly constituted Council. c Mayor pritchard stated that until he resigns from office at the end of April he has the right to discuss and vote on this item and because of the fact he has been on the Council for five years feels that he is in a good position to help make such a decision. Cm Futch stated that the report from the City Manager on this item was very good and would like to comment that in this report there were quotations from r1r. Howard Gardner, Associate Director of the League of California Cities for many years, and his concerns re- garding elected mayor. Mr. Gardner states that the basic problem would be the possible dissention which might develop between the mayor and the other members of the City Council. At present, the mayor serves at the pleasure of their colleagues, and by a majority vote be appointed mayor but with less votes may return to the position as Councilmember. A mayor elected for a four year term may serve without regard to the support or lack of support from other members of the City Council and it is entirely possible that a mayor could serve a four year term with the entire Council in opposition to his ideas and points of view. Cm Futch stated that the Council might establish a policy that would be potentially disruptive and that this City already has a tendency towards such and it would be a mistake to try to enhance disruptive tendencies. Where there is the council-manager form of government it is possible that an CM-29-419 April 14, 1975 (Electing Mayor) elected mayor might feel that the City Manager should be responsible to provide him with information about the City on a different basis than would be provided for other Councilmembers. Mr. Parness has indicated that whether it is admitted or not, anyone who is interested enough in local government to be elected to the City Council, more than likely would relish the honor of assuming the Mayor's chair for at least one year. Cm Futch stated that as he recalls Mayor Pritchard indicated to the Council a number of times that he would probably not be interested in serving as Mayor for an additional term and left the Council with some doubt as to whether Mayor Pritchard would accept. ,/--- J Mayor Pritchard commented that he has never precluded the possibility of taking this second term, which has been customary on the Council, and it is not true that he indicated to the Council on a number of occasions that he would not be interested in serving a second term. Cm Futch stated that it has been particularly difficult to reorganize the Council because of the strong personalities that exist on this particular Council and it is once again time to reorganize in just one month since the last reorganization. However, election of a mayor will not solve the problems but rather will substitute one set of problems for another set of problems. He stated that he feels the Council has met the enemy and "it is us". He stated that at this particular time the Council is under a strain and with the difficult time and conditions this is not an issue to be decided at this meeting. He stated that in his opinion a strictly rotation system for selection of mayor would be the most fair and best policy. Mayor Pritchard stated that with five council seats for four years the rotation policy really wouldn't be feasible because mathemati- cally it could never be accomplished. He added that in the six years he has been with the Council and during the six years, with the exception of one occasion, there was a fight during the time of Council reorganization. Cm Turner stated that he would like to state a point of order in that he has asked that there be discussion concerning direct election of mayor and not the Councilmembers feelings. Mayor pritchard and the majority of the Council indicated that their feelings play a very important part in making the decision and that hard feelings on the part of the Councilor dissention among the members disrupts the efficiency of the Council for some months after the reorganization and in Mayor pritchard's opinion every time this takes place the rift is really never healed. He felt that his opinion about who might wish to run for mayor is contrary to that of Cm Miller in that the job is so time consuming that he doubts if a businessman would want to devote the time neces- sary and to be away from his own business as much as is necessary. He added that he feels the job is certainly not a full time job but is more than half time. In his case he sometimes spends 80- 90% of his time at his place of business on Council business where a person working at the Lab would have to go through switchboards and would be somewhat insulated from the public and perhaps this would be desirable. Mayor Pritchard stated that in his opinion everything said about a bad mayor elected by the public is no differ- ent than a bad councilmember and what can be done to get rid of someone on the Council who is not responsive to the public or not~/ operating efficiently. He stated that it would be just as difficult to remove a Councilmember as it would to have an elected mayor removed. He felt that the arguments against direct election are all very good but the public is very good at discerning about what is right and not right and if this is the case if the Council puts the question to the ballot there will be ample opportunity for arguments for or against the proposal. CM-29-420 April 14, 1975 (Electing Mayor) Cm Tu:ner stated that in summarizing the arguments against direct elect10n the one point that seems to be emphasized is the feeling that an elected mayor would be a dictator which is something he cannot accept. He stated that he has talked with other officials who had elected mayors and there were no problems. ~/ CM TURNER MOVED THAT THIS ITEM BE PLACED ON THE BALLOT DURING THE NEXT MUNICIPAL ELECTION IN 1976, WITH THE LEGAL WORDING NOTED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY AND THAT IF THERE IS AN ELECTION TO FILL THE VACANCY OF COUNCILMEMBER AFTER APRIL 28, 1975, THE MEASURE BE PLACED ON THE BALLOT AT THAT TIME. MOTION SECONDED BY MAYOR PRITCHARD. Richard Gower, 1450 Helsinki, stated that the matter of direct election of mayor has been broached before, the issue has been well spoken and he commented that he appreciates the lesson he received in politics this evening by Cm Miller. He stated that he did not realize there were so many ramifications in mayorship. He stated that anytime someone is passed over or not chosen for a second term when they wish to be selected, naturally there will be ill feelings throughout the Council regardless of the size of the group. The one thing the people of the City want, in talking with people and conducting surveys, is direct election of a mayor. The reason for this desire is to stop the problem that has existed in the way of "petty bickering" behind the lines and the hurt feel- ings. He stated that these things are concerns of the Council but the main concern should be what the people want. He also felt it would not be difficult to recall an elected mayor or even a Council- member. Pat Goard, 876 Geraldine Street, stated that she had not intended to speak but was a little upset with what Cm Miller had said about needing experience as a Councilmember prior to becoming mayor. She stated that if this were true it could be extended further to mean that one couldn't be President of the united States unless he had served on the Senate, and that the Senate would be the only respon- sible people to select the President. She stated that this idea is destroying the American dream of being able to serve in an elected position. Cm Miller stated that he made the argument that he feels exper- ience is important and there certainly is a difference in a legislative office and an executive office and realizes that one cannot have experience as a President of the united States before he is elected to the office. Ed Wise, 2664 Kelly Street, stated that he feels the Council is too intimate Iv involved in this matter because obviously there is prestige in having the mayor's chair and the vote would reflect self interest. He felt this matter should be put to the vote of the people and take the matter from the hands of those with a self interest. l Cm Miller stated that if there is an elected mayor of Livermore it is not clear that he would still be serving on the Council; therefore, the decision will not affect him directly and he is not arguing for his sake but rather from experience and what he feels is best. He stated that if this is really a major issue that the public is concerned about then there is always the possi- bility of a perfectly legal initiative petition and if the public would like to get the required number of signatures for this to be placed on the ballot he would be fully in favor of the election. CM-29-421 April 14, 1975 (Electing Mayor) Cm Miller continued to say that without such an initiative petition, in his judgment serving 7 years on the Council, we shouldn't do it. He would encourage those in favor of an elected mayor to start an initiative petition for such a measure to be placed on the ballot. He stated that he is speaking about a legal initiative petition and not an attempt at a petition without legal validity. Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, stated that 5~ years ago Cm Miller was quiet on the subject on direct election of mayor and today presents an excellect argument against such an election. At that time Mayor Shirley felt it was an idea that is basically good and has a lot of merit and people would have more of a sense of direc- tion. He stated that he agrees completely with the procedure that is presently being followed and feels it entirely unnecessary to go to the expense of placing this on the ballot. ,,~--"" .~ Cm Tirsell stated once again, for the record, that this has nothing to do with the vacancy to be filled at the end of this month and would abstain from the vote. MOTION FAILED BY A 2-2 VOTE WITH CM TIRSELL ABSTAINING AND CM MILLER AND FUTCH DISSENTING. RECESS Mayor Pritchard called for a brief recess after which the Council meeting resumed with Mayor pro tempore Turner presiding and Mayor Pritchard absent. Prior to the recess Ray Faltings asked that the Council review new business items on the agenda and determine which are most important so that the public may speak on some of the items and that because of the late hour the others he postponed. REPORT RE INSURANCE RENEWAL The City Manager reported that by authorization of the City Council our insurance agent was allowed to negotiate a renewal of our com- prehensive liability insurance coverage and certain miscellaneous policies as well, primarily due to our likely inability to receive competitive bids resulting from market conditions. Regrettably it will be noted that the new premium for comprehensive liability, inclusive of the umbrella coverage, has risen from the current premium of $51,393 to approximately $71,403. Gene Morgan, broker for the City, stated that the Finance Director has requested approximately $3,000 for a consultant firm to do an analysis and then come back with a recommendation and Mr. Morgan would certainly concur with this approach. He stated that the usual procedure would be to hire the consultants to begin around August or September so there is time to analyze the program so that there is ample time to go to bid. CM FUTCH MOVED TO APPROVE HIRING CONSULTANTS, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS 'TOTE. REPORT RE ROUTE 84 PROPERTY ACQUISITION .-.-/ The City Manager reported that the City and County have jointly appealed to the State Highway Commission for financial participa- tion in acquiring 19 acres of property owned by H. C. Elliott in CM-29-422 ~ c April 14, 1975 (Acquisition of Elliott property for Route 84) Tract 3333, for highway route purposes. The State Highway Com- mission has denied financial participation but did agree to retain the route if the property could be acquired by the City and/or County. The Cal-Trans staff believes this implies that a highway would be constructed. In discussing the item with Supervisor Murphy it is possible that the County may participate financially with the City in acquiring the property if a formal request is transmitted. It is requested that a resolution be adopted authoriz- ing appraisal of the property and a resolution requesting financial assistance from the County based on a 55%-45% formula. The staff estimates that the cost to the City under this division would be about $62,000 and $51,000 to the County. CM FUTCH MOVED TO ADOPT THE TWO RESOLUTIONS, AS RECOMMENDED, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 69-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPRAISAL FOR POR- TION OF TRACT 3333: FUTURE ISABEL FREEWAY RESOLUTION NO. 70-75 A RESOLUTION REQUESTING JOINT PURCHASE PROPERTY W/COUNTY OF ALAMEDA (PORTION OF TRACT 3333: FUTURE ISABEL FREEWAY) REPORT RE SALARY NEGOTIATIONS The City Manager reported that of the four municipal employees associations, three have contractual provisions which extend through the 1975-76 fiscal year. Of these only one, the Municipal Employ- ees Association for Negotiation which includes the clerical and technical employees, provides for wage renegotiations in the event the cost-of-living index increase exceeds 7%. The other organi- zations are limited to their contract terms for an additional year. Official reports received by the City indicate that the Consumers Price Index for the San Francisco Bay Area from 12/73 to 12/74 in- creased 12.55% and figures are not available for the increase from 3/74 to 3/75 but from 3/74 to 12/74 the increase was 9.36%. It is assumed that the annual rate will be in excess of 12%. It is recom- mended that the Council authorize staff renegotiations of the labor contracts of all the employee organizations that are subject to fixed wage adjustments for the next fiscal year with the exception of the Fire Department who will be allowed an adjustment by con- tract in July 1975. CM TIRSEI.L MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY MANAGER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Ray Faltings, 1018 Via Granada, stated that inasmuch as the public does not receive the agenda and does not know the full cononotation of what is being proposed and inasmuch as any salary negotiations will ultimately be reflected in the tax rate for the community, he feels that at this particular time a very strenuous detailed look be instituted. He stated that it appears that if the previous salary negotiations were entered into in good faith that those contracts should be maintained until the normal renegotiation time. He added that everyone realizes there has been an increase in the cost of living but this is also true for those people who are on a fixed income and asked that this be considered. CM-29-423 April l4, 1975 (Salary Negotiations) Cm Tirsell stated that some of the contracts were negotiated prior to experiencing the high rate of inflation and if we do not take into account the escalated cost of living increases, year by year, it means that when the contract is due this will have to be made up because these people are made to suffer under vastly increased costs of living if it is not considered yearly, and this would have to be taken into consideration as well as salary increases. This could mean a budget that is sorely out of balance in favor of one parti- cular contract at that time. ,~ Mr. Faltings stated that he would like to point out that the second largest employer in Livermore has never had a cost of living increase in any of its salary negotiations with its employees and at the same organization, salaries have not been raised to keep up with the cost of living. t~en cost of living increases have been 12% the salary increases have been 3% and 4% and these people are taxpayers within this community and are living under these hardships and he is request- ing that the City equate any renegotiations to the increases that have taken place in this community, of the working people in this community. It should be taken into consideration that there are people in this community who are on fixed salaries and if the cost of living rises 12% it does not necessarily mean that an increase should automatically be granted for City employees for this same amount. We are all in the same boat and there comes a time when taxes cannot be increased with- out people losing their homes because of it. There are times when the City should say no, and there are times when we all need to "bite the bullet" and not just a few. Even if there is not an increase in taxes people realize an automatic increase with the increase in the assessed valuation. Ed Wise, 2664 Kelly Street, unemploYment and taxes are at an all time high and to grant such an increase might have some bearing on other negotiations going on such as the demand by the teachers at this time for what might be considered outrageous demands. He stated that if the cost of living went down the various employee organizations cer- tainly would not allow the Council to renegotiate and drop their wages. He would also like to point out that even though the cost of living has risen 12% none of the City employees are living in poverty nor are they unable to support their families. They may have to decrease some of their standards of living but he indicated that he has also had to decrease his standards and that he is on a fixed income because he is retired. He felt that in times such as this everyone should cut down and "bite the bullet". When revenue is lacking and wages are increased when it is not necessary it just increases problems. If the City has money enough to increase salaries when an increase is not justified, the first thing that should be done with this money is to put it to use to decrease property taxes. Cm Miller stated that this is an item of a balance of equity and whether the Council should consider the equity of the taxpayers who may be on fixed incomes, vs. the equity to the City employees. It is very difficult to draw the line on what is equitable and open- ing up for negotiations does not necessarily mean an automatic 12% increase. When a 5% cost of living has been anticipated or con- sidered in negotiations and then the cost of living turns out to be 12% or 14% and employees are locked into the 5%, it seems to be inequitable not to at least consider this difference. Mr. Wise stated that it is true a 12% increase was not anticipated; however, nobody expected the inflation that we have been living with but everybody is, in fact, living with it and the hardships associated with it. He would have to point out that if people are not starving or living in poverty they should also have to endure some of the hard- ship and that taxpayers should not be asked to pay more when money is tight, taxes are high and unemployment is high. ,J THE MOTION TO ALLOW SALARY NEGOTIATIONS PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. (Mayor Pritchard absent) CM-29-424 April l4, 1975 CONTINUATION OF AGENDA ITE~1S ~/ Item 6.4, (Olivina/Murrieta Intersection), 6.8 (Grade Separation Landscap1ng) and 6.10 (Valley Memorial Hospital Expansion) was continued to April 2lst on MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. P.C. MINUTES The Planning Commission minutes for the meetings of March 18th and April lst were noted for filing. RATE INCREASE - CALIF WATER SERVo Notification was received from California Water Service Company concerning a rate increase application to the PUC. The proposed rate increase would result in domestic rates almost exactly equiva- lent to the City's rates. REPORT RE PORTOLA AVE. TRUCK PARKING In response to complaints about trucks parking on portola Avenue the County has responded by indicating that with the concurrence of the City Mr. Crowle, Director of Public Works, will recommend to the Board of Supervisors that a traffic regulation be adopted to prohibit parking of vehicles over 20 ft. in length on both sides of portola Avenue between Murrieta Boulevard and North "L" Street in order to allow for commuter parking for the BART bus people in this area. CM MILLER MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO NOTIFY THE COUNTY OF THE CITY'S CONCURRENCE WITH THE PARKING REGULATIONS MENTIONED, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE (Mayor Pritchard absent) . REPORT RE AB 188 A report concerning AB 188 was submitted to the Council by Mr. Street and ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE (Mayor Pritchard absent) THE COUNCIL OPPOSED AB 188. ORD. RE CORPUS ORDINANCE Cm Miller stated that our own version of the CORPUS (Criminal Oriented ReCODds Production Unified System) Ordinance does not have the wording "willful and malicious" and MOVED THAT THE ORDINANCE BE ADOPTED WITH THE WORDING THE COUNCIL HAS SUGGESTED, AS IT IS PRESENTLY WRITTEN, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. ,/. ORDINANCE NO. 862 \~. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 14, RELATING TO MISCELLANEOUS OFFENSES, OF THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 1959, BY THE ADDITION THERETO OF A NEW SECTION, SECTION 14.25, RELATING TO SECURITY OF CERTAIN POLICE RECORDS (CORPUS). CM-29-425 April 14, 1975 ADJOURNMENT Mayor pro tempore Turner adjourned the meeting at 12:20 a.m. to an executive session. The meeting was reconvened and adjourned at 12:30 a.m. to a 6:00 p.m. meeting on Monday April 21, 1975, in the conference~Room City Hall, 2250 First Street, Livermore. APPROVE ~_~ Mayor " , , ~ '. ~...' /" /"...."" / II / i City Clerk i/ Livermore, California J /' ATTEST ( -'~U<-f, Regular Adjourned Meeting of April 21, 1975 An adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on April 21, 1975, on Monday, at 6:00 p.m. in the Conference Room, City Hall, 2250 First Street, Livermore, called to order by Mayor pro tempore Turne~ and immediately adjourned. .~ ..I^A..t...I.~ May r Pro Tempore , ~ ~Q { . .... .. ~ . / , '- City Clerk --.----.-. - - ...---- ~e~te, California APPROVE ATTEST J CM-29-426 Regular Meeting of April 21, 1975 A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Livermore was held on April 21, 1975, 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. u ROLL CALL Present: Cm Turner, Miller and Futch Absent: Mayor Pritchard and Cm Tirsell PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor pro tempore Turner led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. PROCLAMATION Mayor pro tempore Turner read a proclamation to officially designate the week of April 20th through 26th, 1975, Volunteer Recognition Week. Various volunteers from the community were introduced and pictures were taken by members of the press. MINUTES April 7, 1975 The following correction was made on Page 389, 5th paragraph, line 4: Engineering Construction Index rather than Engineering Specifications. ON MOTION OF CM FUTCH, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF APRIL 7, 1975, WERE APPROVED AS CORRECTED. OPEN FORUM (Council Vacancy) Jim Saddler, President of the Rhonewood Homeowners Association, read a letter prepared by the Association recommending an election to fill the upcoming vacancy on the Council and also to endorse the proposal to hold an election to choose someone for the office of mayor. Mr. Saddler then made comments relative to this issue on the basis of his own opinion and as a voter of the community. He stated that he feels the citizens of Livermore have the right to elect a mayor and that such a selection should not be done by the majority of the Council; however, since this vacancy is not for the purpose of selecting a mayor he does not want to make fur- ther comments concerning electing a mayor at this time. I / Tom Raison, 5244 Kathy Way, stated that he, for one, feels that Mayor Pritchard has done an outstanding job as the Mayor for Livermore and is very sorry to see him leave. He stated that he 1 f 1 't is not. necessary to have an election to fill the, a SO ee S 1 and has confidence in the city counc1~ vacancy left by the Mayor this Council is an excellent counc~l to fill the vacancy ~nd that, b At present we have budgetary and is capable of do~ng the JO . -k' for a raise and one way . h c'tv employees are as ~ng f n problems and t e ~ .... ld be not to spend money or a in which money could be saved wou e are complaining about the election. He added that man~ peo~l ro;ect but will one day thank b' spent for the ra~lroa p, money e~n? letion of the project. this counc~l for comp CM-30-l April 21, 1975 PUBLIC HEARING RE ~VEED ABATEMENT A public hearing has been set for the purpose of hearing public protests to notification, by posting and letter, for ababement of weeds, rubbish, etc. This is an annual City program and it is recommended that a resolution be adopted ordering abatement of weeds which have not been cleared. \ \J Mayor pro tempore Turner opened the public hearing. Dale Holding, 285 Jensen Street, representing the Sea Scouts, stated that Captain McLeod has allowed the Scouts to meet at his home located at 1932 Fourth Street at no charge to the Scouts if they keep the weeds removed. He stated that he felt they were doing a good job but Captain McLeod received a copy of the notice that weeds must be abated on that site and he has asked that the Scouts take care of the matter immediately because Captain McLeod was assessed by the City to clear weeds last year. He stated that he would like to know who to contact to see if the job has been done to the satisfaction of the City and also would like to see Captain McLeod reimbursed for the assessment for last year. Mr. Holding was told to contact the Fire Department concerning his questions because they are in charge of the program. CM MILLER MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH 'NHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM FUTCH MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION ORDERING ABATEMENT OF SUBJECT NUISANCE, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. RESOLUTION NO. 71-75 A RESOLUTION ORDERING THE ABATEMENT OF A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND DIRECTING THE SUPERINTENDENT OF STREETS TO CAUSE SAID PUBLIC NUISANCE TO BE ABATED. CONSENT CALENDAR Resolution re Shed for Recycling Center The City Council has authorized purchase of a metal shelter for storage of equipment used for the Recycling Center and it is recommended that a resolution authorizing the purchase be adopted.. RESOLUTION NO. 72-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF A STORAGE SHED Res. of Appointments The following resolutions were adopted appointing members to committees. RESOLUTION NO. 73-75 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBER TO BEAUTIFICATION CO~~1ITTEE (Patricia Reich) ~ CM-30-2 April 21, 1975 RESOLUTION NO. 74-75 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBER TO CITI- ZENS TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE (Joan Stark) u Res. Rejecting Claim Our insurance carrier has recommended that the following claims be rejected: RESOLUTION NO. 75-75 A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF MARCELLES ROBRAHN RESOLUTION NO. 76-75 A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF MARY E. ROBRAHN RESOLUTION NO. 77-75 A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF MARY E. ROBRAHN Res. Auth. Amend. to Medeiros Parkway App. The state has informed the City that a mathematical error has been made in listing the amount for the Medeiros Parkway project grant. The agreement changes the project surcharge which is supposed to be 2% of project cost. The surcharge was listed at $1,266 and should be $2,533. It is recommended that a resolution be adopted allowing the change in the estimate. RESOLUTION NO. 78-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AMENDMENT TO MEDEIROS PARKWAY ACQUISITION PROJECT UNDER LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND PROGRAM. Res. Auth. Purchase of Lighting Fixtures A report was submitted to the Council from the Purchasing Agent for the City of Livermore indicating that the City does not purchase an excessive amount of lamps during a year but we cannot overlook the overall discount of 72% offered by the state. It is recommended that the Council authorize a resolution authorizing General Services of the State of California to purchase certain items. RESOLUTION NO. 79-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES OF THE STATE OF CALIF- ORNIA TO PURCHASE CERTAIN ITEMS. CM-30-3 ",. April 21, 1975 Res. Requesting Street Closure (Rodeo Parade) It has been recommended that the Council adopt a resolution requesting the Division of Highways for permission to permit street closure for the Rodeo Parade, June 7, 1975. RESOLUTION NO. 80-75 'J A RESOLUTION REQUESTING DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS FOR PERMISSION TO USE A PORTION OF STATE HIGH- WAY 84 AS THE ROUTE FOR THE LIVERMORE RODEO PARADE BETWEEN 9:30 A.M. and 12:30 P.M. ON JUNE 7, 1975. MTC Report re AB 664 A report was received from the Metropolitan Transportation Commis- sion concerning AB 664 and asking for Council endorsement of the Bill. The staff has recommended that the Council adopt a motion supporting AB 664. Payroll & Claims There were 86 claims in the amount of $30,729.25, dated April 14, 1975, approved by the City Manager. Ray Faltings asked what the police bail money that is being paid to other municipalities in Alameda County are for and Mr. Parness explained that these are warrant monies collectable by our City for warrants that are issued and served here. We collect them, put on deposit through our treasury and then in turn we have to pay them back. Mr. Parness explained that other cities do the same for us. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. ~mTTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (-~ Hearing) M~~~ness reported that one of the/~1fi'hearingS to be held in the Valley will take place on April 24th at 8:00 p.m. in the Kaiser Center Auditorium in Oakland, for a presentation of the final report of the BART extension study. This is a very com- prehensive, long, and costly study that was done on our behalf under the auspices of BART and MTC for the possible extension of rail line service to the Valley and its extension throughout the valley community. Some of the considerations given to this item will be the possible continued use of bus service or perhaps a modification. This is an important hearing and he hopes the Council --/ will be able to attend the hearing. C~1-30-4 April 21, 1975 MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCILMEMBERS (State Water Resources Control Board Meeting) /--- u Cm Futch stated that he has prepared the letters to be sent to the EPA and the State Water Resources Control Board and MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE SUBMITTAL OF THESE LETTERS AND THAT SOMEONE ATTEND THE MAY 12TH MEETING, SECONDED BY CM MILLER. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Cm Futch commented that in the last paragraph it mentions the Liver- more City Council would urge the EPA and State Water Quality Control Board to consider the funding of additional capacity in critical air basins for specific purposes which would lead to a balanced communi ty, after comprehensive planning has shown tha't the affect on air quality of larger populations could be mitigated by decreas- ing the amount of travel through provision of additonal commercial and industrial capacity. He stated that he would like to ask if the staff could work out a plan to see if this is possible so that the City could apply for expansion of the sewer plant for specific purposes. Cm Miller suggested that our SMOG Committee also consider this problem because the items are certainly connected. Cm Miller stated he will try to prepare a statement for the State Board hearing on the 12th and try to get the statement to the Council on the meeting prior to the 12th for Council review and comment. (Corps of Engineers Meeting - Washington D.C.) Cm Futch stated that the House Subcommittee intends to have meetings on April 28th and 29th concerning the proposed study by the Corps of Engineers, and the meetings will take place in Washington, D.C. Mr. Parness stated that just today he has received notice that a hearing will be held on the 28th and Congressman Stark, on our behalf, has reserved a presentation time of five minutes at 3:00 p.m. on this date. Mr. Parness stated that the Committee would like to have written statements distributed to them at the time of the hearing but the Senate requires the written statement in advance, and summar- ized in the presentation. CM MILLER STATED THAT THIS ITEM IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT AND WOULD MOVE THAT THE COUNCIL SEND C~1 FUTCH TO THE HEARING AS OUR REPRE- SENTATIVE TO TESTIFY AT THIS HEARING, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEMPORE TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. Cm Miller stated that he understands that the Corps of Engineers is already involved in a flood plain study for this area and Mr. Parness replied that this is true. (Agendas for LARPD) Cm Miller stated that LARPD has indicated that they send our Councilrnembers copies of their agenda and they feel the City should return this favor. The City Clerk indicated that she did not realize the Councilmembers received the agenda from them. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE CITY SEND IJARPD THE AGENDAS, AS A COURTESY, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM-30-5 April 21, 1975 (Geldermann Proposal) Cm Miller stated that he feels the ABAG Executive Committee, Regional Planning Committee and Staff have done a thorough and careful as well as well-reasoned study concerning the implica- tions of the Geldermann project on the region, the environment and interconnection with regional issues. It would seem that the City of Livermore should send a letter to ABAG expressing our appreciation for this careful and thorough study. ~ Mr. Parness replied that he has taken the liberty of doing this, with the exception of a letter to Suzanne Wilson, Chair- man of the Regional Planning Committee, and will be happy to write to her also. (Mayors Conference Representative) Cm Miller stated that the City of Livermore needs to designate an alternate representative, in writing, for the Mayors Con- ference and that this is coming up next month. Also, the nominating committee is going to appoint someone to BASSA and an alternate for LAFCO and it seems that it would be important for Livermore to have some input as to the appoint- ment to BASSA and LAFCO alternate. He stated it is about time someone from the Valley is appointed to LAFCO and someone somewhat more sensitive to the interaction of sewer problems and air quality be appointed to BASSA to replace Jack Maltester. Cm Miller stated that he would suggest that the Mayor and Mayor tempore discuss the best way to go about reaching the nominating committee and the rest of the Council can think about people to suggest as nominees. (Senior Citizen Funding for 1975) Cm Turner stated that Lillian Snorf has contacted him to ask if the Council would contact ACAP concerning Senior Citizen Program funding for 1975 under the Senior Service Center Program. Apparently the ACAP people are meeting on Thursday and she has asked that a letter be sent to them by this time. CM FUTCH MOVED TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO SEND THE LETTER TO ACAP, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. (Resignation of Mayor - Press Release) Mayor pro tempore Turner asked the newspapers to point out, in detail, what is going to take place after April 28th, the effective date of the resignation of Hayor Pritchard. He stated that he has received numerous calls from people who do not know what is happening and that people are con- fused because the Council has been discussing direct election of a mayor. The City Attorney will be able to answer questions reporters might have with respect to the procedure and replace- ment of Mayor Pritchard. (Appointments) \\ J Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that he feels the appointments should be completed next week and asked the City Clerk to make a list of the available people. Cm Futch stated he will not be here on April 28th and it was concluded that discussion of appointments will take place May 5. CM-30-6 April 21, 1975 COMMUNICATION REQUESTING BLDG. PEro~IT FEE WAIVER G Earl Rasmussen has requested that the City allow him to rebuild his business and waive all building permit and building fees. He is one of the people who has had to relocate because of the railroad project and the settlement concerning his property is still in litigation. (See later discussion during this meeting concerning this item.) The City Council asked Mr. Parness to respond, in writing, to Mr. Rasmussen concerning this item. COMMUNICATION RE PURCHASE AWARDS The Livermore Cultural Arts Council is sponsoring the seventh annual Festival of the Arts on October 3rd, 4th, and 5th, and requests that the City again purchase two $150 awards. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE COUNCIL APPROVED PURCHASE OF TWO $150 AWARDS. P. C. RECOMMENDATION RE BUDGET CONSIDERATION The Planning Commission has recommended that the Planning Commissioner monthly salary of $50 be eliminated and that each Commissioner be reimbursed a flat $100 per month for expenses incurred in the per- formance of official duties for the City; that the budget provide for five P.C. to attend the Annual League of California Cities Planning Officials Institute in San Diego in July; and that the P.C. waive their rights to reimbursements for expenses with the excep- tion of the League Conference and major conferences. Cm Miller suggested that this item be set aside until budget time, with which the Council concurred. Cm Futch mentioned that the $50 the Commissioners now receive was really not meant to be a salary for the job but rather reimburse- ment for gasoline expenses, etc. STATUS REPORT RE HCDA APPLICATION A status report concernig the Housing and Community Development Act application was submitted to the Council by the Alameda County Planning Director. The report was informational and required no action on the part of the City Council. COMMUNICATION RE CURBSIDE DELIVERY Letters of response to the curbside mail delivery problem, were received from Windol M. Martin, Director, Delivery Division of the Western Region, United States Postal Service, and from Senator Alan Cranston. Mr. Martin has indicated that the city delivery policy is a nation- wide policy and is not optional with local postal authorities. The policy is one of economics. Senator Cranston stated that in reviewing this problem it would appear that requiring the Post Office to deliver to new residen- tial homes would mean a rise in postal costs and at this time can offer no solution to the problem. CM-30-7 April 21, 1975 (Curbside Delivery) Cm Miller stated that he is really disappointed with the re~ sponse from Senator Cranston and would suggest that the City contact Senator Tunney. He added that the Post Office intends to increase rates for first class mail anyway and it is grossly unfair for people with new homes not to be able to receive service at their door. ~ Mr. Parness stated that Mr. Martin has indicated that curbside boxes may be installed in back of the sidewalk in the utility area; however, they must be in groups of three or more because the mail carrier would have to dismount from the vehicle. Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that people will probably, reluc- tantly, agree to having curbside delivery and Cm Turner would sug- gest that the Post Office make a concession also and deliver to the lawn area since we will be willing to conceed delivery to the boxes. REPORT RE VALLEY MEM. HOSP. EXPANSION PLAN Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that much time was expended in compiling the report on the Valley Memorial Hospital expansion plan which Cm Tirsell worked on and regrets that she is not present this evening to discuss this item with the Council. Interviews were held with Tom Andrews, Administrator, and the Hospital Board who gave reasons for the proposed move to Pleasanton and also with Dr. Berson who is opposed to the proposed move. Dr. Berson has taken a poll of the doctors on the VMH staff and the majority of the doctors are opposed to the proposal, for a number of reasons which were listed in the report. Cm Futch read the following recommendation made by Cm Tirsell and Turner which requires adoption by the Council: "If the VMH Board of Directors wishes to explore the possibili- ties of expanding the current facility to its full potential the City of Livermore will assist them. The present site has land which could be utilized for future expansion. There are vacant parcels adjacent to the present site. There is also an abundance of land zoned for professional office in the nearby vicinity which could be utilized for auxiliary services. The City of Livermore wishes to convey to the Hospital Board our concern for the cost of hospital services to our residents and our desire to maintain the good quality of Valley Memorial Hos- pital." CM FUTCH MOVED TO ADOPT THIS WRITTEN RECOM~1ENDATION, SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Ray Faltings, 1018 Via Granada, stated that he agrees with the report also but would like to know if the committee looked into the possibility of using Livermore Manor located on Holmes Street. The buildinq is ~einq Maintained but no longer has any patients there and it is relatively close to the Hospital and could serve as an annex to it. This could be used for people who are recovering or do not require surgery. (It was noted by a member of the audi- ence that the facility is again in use.) ~. Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that this was not a consideration but a very good point and these comments are appreciated. CM MILLER MOVED TO AMEND THE RECOMMENDATION TO STATE THAT THE CITY OF LIVERMORE WISHES TO CONVEY TO THE HOSPITAI.. BOARD OUR CONCERN FOR THE COST OF HOSPITAL SERVICES TO OUR RESIDENTS AND TO OTHER VALLEY RESIDENTS, ETC. MOTION SECONDED BY CM FUTCH. C!.1-30-8 April 21, 1975 (Hospital Expansion) u Cm Miller stated that there is a group that reviews hospitals with a title something like Comprehensive Health Planning Council and added TO HIS AMENDMENT THAT THE CITY OF LIVERMORE WILL SUPPORT VALLEY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL AT THE COMPREHENSIVE HEALTH PLANNING COUNCIL IN THEIR OPPOSITION TO PRIVATE HOSPITALS WHICH SKIM OFF ONLY PROFITABLE SERVICES AND WOULD LEAVE VALLEY MEMORIAL WITH THE UNPROFITABLE SER- VICES. He stated that he knows this is a concern of the Hospital and feels the City should support them in their concern over private hospitals which are a "rip off" of the profitable services leaving the quasi-public hospitals holding the bag. Mayor pro tempore Turner asked if this would be pertinent to this report and Cm Miller stated it definitely is because one of the argu- ments, as he understands it, is Valley Hemorial's concern about other hospitals coming in on the west side of the valley and concern for private hospitals which take only the profitable things leaving the emergency services and other services which do not make profits, to the quasi-public hospitals such as VMH. MOTION ~vAS SECONDED BY CM FUTCH. Jl8h/Ltr-La~ z::- Cm Miller stated that he would also\!ike to remark on the comments made by the VMH staff.when Cm Ti~sel~and Turner questioned them on this item. A 110 bed hospital, which is what we presently have, typically has an occupancy rate 150,000 population, which is about 10,000 more than the state or EPA would conceivably allow for sewer. Consequently, the need for a hospital larger than 110 beds is very unlikely for a long time. Secondly, their proposal for 150 beds corresponds to a population of 200,000 which is higher than the County's latest projections for the valley, which is only 180,000 population. He stated that he feels these estimates are very strange in view of the present valley circumstances and cannot believe the Board has properly taken all of this into account. He would also like to point out that the response of the Hospital Board and the Hospital Administrator was very evasive about what hospital services will remain in Livermore. He is really very concerned about this issue, and stated that they have been very unspecific about this item. Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that they have indicated the basic services will be provided and Cm Miller stated that this says nothing. AMENDMENTS PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. MAIN MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CO~MUNICATION RE FEE WAIVER - EARL RASMUSSEN c Earl Rasmussen, 19485 West Grantline Road, Tracy, stated that during the communications, there was no discussion of the letter he sent to the City asking that the Council waive building permit fees and other related building fees and asked that his letter be read to the public and that this item be discussed. Mr. Rasmussen stated that the City took possession of his property last July and at an estimated $1,000 loss per month to him, he has realized a loss of $10,000 since this time, and that $7,000 worth of personal property was lost when the City was in possession of his buildings. He stated that at this time he would ask that the City waive $5,000 worth of building fees. Mr. Parness indicated that he feels this is a matter of a technical nature and that either he or the City Attorney should discuss this item with Mr. Rasmussen. If it is deemed legal that the fees may be waived then in this case it would be a Council policy decision. CM-30-9 April 21, 1975 (re Fee Waiver - Earl Rasmussen) Mr. Rasmussen stated that he is ready to begin construction of new buildings on Wednesday and would like some answer as soon as possible and the City Attorney indicated that he is not able to render a legal opinion as to the waiver of fees at this time. The staff will be discussing this matter with Mr. Rasmussen and if further action is needed to be taken by the Council they will be so informed. -.J REPORT RE OLIVINA AVE. MURRIETA BLVD. REALIGNMENT Mr. Lee commented that the report concerning the proposed realign- ment for Olivina Avenue and Murrieta Boulevard has been recommended for referral to the budget session for consideration at that time but if the Council would like to discuss this item he would be happy to report or answer questions. Dave Dent, 373 Ann Court, from the Bethany Baptist Church, stated that the proposed direction in flow of traffic will affect the Bethany Baptist Church plans because they have been in the process of purchasing property in this area for some time. They would like to express favor of a bypass as a benefit to the community, not only from a safety standpoint but from the standpoint of the church with respect to their religious services in that area. He stated that they are in favor of this but would also like to negotiate for another piece of property in the vicinity in the same amount of square footage and use the abandoned school site next to their property so that the church could be constructed with no loss to the church. At present the proposal would not allow them to erect a structure due to the location of the street. He stated that what they would like would be an "even swap" and they feel this would be advantageous both to the City and church people. Cm Miller stated that first of all this item is recommended for referral to the budget session and personally does not agree with the proposal for the intersection and would like to see it remain as it is. He stated that he would be willing to consider traffic lights for the intersection rather than the realignment. Discussion followed concerning the proposed realignment and the proposed street that would intersect Olivina at an angle, with an island in the middle which Mr. Lee explained. CM FUTCH MOVED TO DISCUSS THIS ITEM AT THE BUDGET SESSION, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CBD GOALS COM- MITTEE REPORT Cm Tirsell had requested that the CBD Goals be discussed and adopted and the matter was placed on the agenda for discussion. Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that unless there is objection he would recommend continuing this item until the next Council meeting at which time Cm Tirsell will be present. , I I ~ ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE ITEM WAS CONTINUED TO MAY 5th. REPORT RE KISSELL At the request of the City Manager the report on the Kissell contract amendment was removed from the agenda. CM-30-l0 April 21, 1975 REPORT RE GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT L The Director of Public Works reported that the grade separation project has progressed to the stage where plans and specifications should be prepared for landscaping and irrigation of the underpass slopes and medians and would request authority for De Leuw Cather to proceed with the designs. Mr. Parness commented that no action is required on the part of the City Council and that authority will be given to proceed. REPORT RE LARPD PARK SITE DESIGNS Mr. Parness stated that two proposals for park designs have been submitted to the City by LARPD for the Crum property abutting Holmes Street and the other for Ravenswood park. It is required that the Council review park designs and approve proposed designs. Mr. Musso indicated where the park sites will be located and ex- plained some of the proposed plans for development. There was discussion of the Ravenswood area and Cm Miller stated that it has not been determined what the ultimate use of the Ravenswood villa area will be but it is conceivable that it would be better to have the noisy kids away from the villa area itself, and the kids don't care ~1here the "tot lot II is located. Neil Hilliard, park planner for the Park District, explained that the reason they located the "tot lot" to the rear is because the street is rather busy and kids have a tendency to run into the street and possibly in front of cars. , ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF LARPD FOR THE PARK PROPOSALS ~mRE ADOPTED WITH THE ADDITION OF THE COMMENTS FROM THE PLANNING DIRECTOR. REPORT RE RESIDENT ENGINEER FOR WATER RECLAJ.1ATION PLANT Mr. Lee reported that the Resident Engineer hired for the Water Reclamation Plant Expansion project on a temporary basis has re- signed to accept permanent work. There are approximately eight months left until the project is complete and the City can adver- tise for another engineer, turn the responsibility over to the Design Engineer, or have the Plant Superintendent, Bill Loftin, continue as the Resident Engineer which is the additional work he has assumed since resignation of the Resident Engineer. It is recommended that Mr. Loftin assume the Resident Engineering responsibilities since he is thoroughly familiar with the Plant plans, etc. c Cm Miller asked if Mr. Loftin has the proper engineering background to do the job properly or does this mean that he will have to have supervision, and if so, from whom? Mr. Lee stated that with matters pertaining strictly to engineering aspects Mr. Loftin will have to rely upon advice from the consul- tants and from Mr. Lee's office. CM FUTCH MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATION MADE BY MR. LEE, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM-30-1l April 21, 1975 BART BUS EXTENSION The City Manager reported that the BART service, through AC Transit, plans to extend the bus service to the laboratory area during the morning and evening commute hours. The route selected by them would be to come off of I-580 onto Murrieta Boulevard, continue easterly to Fourth Street, then to East Avenue and on out to the labs. Various stops along the way, with the exception of the stops at Portola and at Stanley Boulevard, will be for allowing passengers to get off the bus. They will pick up passengers on the way back from the labs, west-bound. The reason the BART bus will not pick up people on the way to the labs is because the City does not want BART to interfere with the Pioneer Bus Line doing business for people going to the lab area. The portola Avenue and the Stanley Blvd. stops are presently being serviced and this is the reason people will be allowed to continue to get on in the morning at these stops. "J Cm Turner felt that in the past the bus did not go from portola easterly to the lab and now people will be able to board there and in essence, this is an extension of the system and may inter- fere with Pioneer Lines. He stated that he would have to suggest that BART not stop at Portola to let people on prior to going to the lab, going east in the morning. In the past people could get on at Portola, there was a stop at City Hall, the there was a loop back to Stanley Boulevard and then on to the BART station - not out to the lab. Mr. Ceder, BART representative, stated that at present they have been stopping at Portola Avenue in the morning and many people get onto the bus and ride to the downtown area. This generally is only five or less people; however, if the Council wants BART to discontinue stopping at this location they will comply with the request. Lou Gigliotti, co-partner of Pioneer Lines, stated that last March they came before the Council to initiate the bus line pro- posal. The Council voted unanimously in favor of such a service to the lab and the primary concern at that time was the future BART line to the City. He stated that there question at that tim~ if there would one day be a conflict between Pioneer Lines and the future BART bus and it was indicated that there would be no con- flict but rather that the lines would be complimentary. When BART service to the labs was suggested and two routes were proposed, he stated that he met with the City Manager, representatives from the Transportation Committee and BART people and it was felt that BART would be an interference with Pioneer Lines service unless the route was from I-580 to Vasco, to Mesquite, and to the labs which was the unanimous decision of the committee who met to discuss this matter. Needless to say his company was very surprised to hear that the route voted against, and felt to be in conflict with Pioneer Lines, was selected at the Council meeting when this was last discussed. He has again met with the City Manager, Mr. Ceder, and Mr. Howe, from AC Transit at which time they voiced disapproval of the proposed in-town BART route for the following reasons: 1) BART would be in direct competition with one of the Pioneer routes and since they are subsidized it would be a highly uncompetitive situation; 2) Public pressure would make the "closed door" policy unworkable and in time people would demand to get on at all the stops; 3) At present they have locations at which people can transfer from BART to the Pioneer Lines and continue on to the lab area. The paperwork for this is very involved and has to go through the PUC and any changes take months to become approved. 4) Customers now transferring from BART to Pioneer will automatically stay on the BART bus and Pioneer will lose these customers. 'J CM-30-l2 April 21, 1975 (Bus Service) It is felt that a loss of customers would definitely jeopardize their business and if Pioneer Lines can no longer continue service it means that the present 90-100 people they now serve would lose the service that they would not be able to get anywhere else in town. u Paul Anderson, 4142 Florida Court, representative of Pioneer Lines, stated that Mr. Gigliotti covered most of the concerns of Pioneer Lines but the primary concern at this time is that there will be BART signs posted at various locations and people will assume that they will be able to get service from these locations, and in time public sentiment will force the doors open. He stated that he would just like to point out that a small change in the BART direction means a very large problem in their direction. Ray Faltings, 1018 Via Granada, stated that he has not been in on former discussions concerning this item but would like to know if BART intends to go to the labs during the morning hours for the commuters and then return to the labs in the evening to take commuters back home, or does BART intend to have continuous runs throughout the day to this area? Mr. Parness stated that BART will go to the labs only during the morning and evening commute hours - 4 runs in the morning and 3 at night. Mr. Faltings stated that this means that BART will not serve the public during the other hours of the day and in his opinion there would be little gained for our tax dollars in having BART go out to the lab area during the commute hours. Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that it was his understanding that Pioneer Lines was not opposed to BART going to the lab area during the commute hours as long as they do not pick up passengers along the way. Mr. Parness stated that evidentely there was a lack of communication because the staff was also of the understanding that Pioneer Lines had no objection. Mr. Anderson stated that the reason Pioneer Lines was not repre- sented during the last Council meeting at which this was discussed was because they were of the understanding that the route would be from I-580 to Vasco Road and they were not opposed to this route. When they left the meeting with the Transportation Committee, staff, etc. it was concluded that this would be the choice. Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that he does not want discussion of this item to continue and would suggest that it be postponed to allow the Councilmembers to review previous comments and the testimoney which has been presented this evening. Mr. Parness commented that BART does plan to put something into effect as of April 28th and they would like some direction. Cm Futch felt it wouldn't be reasonable to postpone the matter since BART has plans to do something on April 28th as a result of previous discussion and the Council's permission to institute an additional route. Cm Miller stated that first of all he does not agree that BART needs to stop at portola prior to going out to the labs and also he would suggest that the morning east-bound and evening west-bound one way only route be allowed on a trial basis. If it is determined that this has an adverse affect on the number of customers Pioneer has been servicing, then the Council can take a look at the issue once again. The Council agrees that Pioneer Lines is doing a service CM-30-13 ~now he believes that Pioneer did object to the proposed , BART route and time should be allowed to review pnevious staff reports prior to considering the "pr. .oposed BART route. )j]#~.~/~.; April 21, 1975 "., . .. "~tp.' r ,'t. L / ---.-__ lU ue: C--- --~~>..._-,---_._._---- (Bus Service) --------.. .-----. '-'---, the City does not want to see interfered with or discontinued but he feels it would be worth trying the additional BART route \ service. If this appears to be unsuccessful in the way of inter- } ference with Pioneer Lines then perhaps the I-580 route could be / insti tuted by BART. _/ ~~ )\ Mayor pro temporeAstated that if there is motion to allow the ""- BART route he will vote against it because i .@f his Uhdli!!.L e tAhdiH';1 that there was no objection whatever by the Pioneer people. Cm Futch stated that on the other hand the City has made a commit- ment to the BART people in allowing the additional route and he feels we have some obligation because we have already told them to go ahead with schedules, etc. Richard Gower, 1450 Helsinki, stated that the BART signs have been put into concrete already and it is expensive both to in- stall and remove the signs and BART will only operate the ser- vice if it proves to be profitable to BART. He stated that we have been paying for BART and this is the first service we have received from them and now they are planning to do something which would interfere with Pioneer Lines. He stated that since Pioneer Lines went all out, financially, the City should give first consideration to it because it first tried to service the people of Livermore. Mr. Ceder stated that back in November the City asked BART to extend service to the labs and the BART people studied studied various route configurations to determine which route would best service the City and the lab commuters. The route that best filled these needs was the route which has been selec- ted and discussed by the Council - the route through town. He felt that there was only the one stop which might cause friction and if the City does not want them to stop there they would be willing to eliminate it. They are ready to begin service Monday morning, the schedules are expected from the printers tomorrow and this is one of five major route changes. They could wait until there is some word from the City but this would cause problems. Dave Dent, 373 Ann Court, stated that he would like to make a suggestion that BART have transfer tickets going to pioneer at portola Avenue for people going on out to the lab. He stated that in this way both companies would benefit. ~1r Gigliotti stated that this is essentially what they are doing now and would like nothing more than for people to come in on BART and transfer to their bus at Portola or First Street and they would go on out to the labs. CM FUTCH MOVED THAT THE ROUTE, AS DISCUSSED WITH THE CITY MANAGER, BE ADOPTED vlITH NO PASSENGERS ALLOWED TO BOARD THE BART BUS AT PORTOLA IN THE MORNING OR TO DISEMBARK AT THIS LOCATION IN THE EVENING. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Cm Miller stated that the closed door policy should protect Pioneer Lines but if it is determined that this new route is causing a problem he would be more than willing to discuss the item to resolve any conflicts. MOTION PASSED 2-1 (Mayor pro tempore Turner dissenting) . ~I REPORT RE PROPOSED BOARD OF SUP. COMPOSITION The Council has expressed interest in discussing the possibility of supporting a County Board of Supervisors composed of 7 members. CM-3()-14 April 21, 1975 (Board of Supervisors Composition Proposal) The City Manager reported that if there is a 7 member Board it will mean that each member will represent a population of 180,000 rather than 250,000. ( . U The Council concurred with support of a 7 member Board. Valerie RaYmond, 2250 Buena Vista, stated that she is very happy to see this item on the agenda and that this is an idea she has been pushing for several months and has suggested this at the Board of Supervisors meeting. She stated that this is an item that will have to be voted on by the people and the earliest it could go on the ballot would be June of 1976. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL URGE THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPER- VISORS TO MAKE A CHARTER AMENDMENT TO HAVE SEVEN MEMBERS ON THE BOARD FOR THE 1976 BALLOT, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. ORD. RE. PERMIT EXPIRATIONS The Council reviewed the proposed ordinance concerning expiration of building permits. Cm Futch stated that the ordinance states that if work does not commence in 120 days then half of the fee amount will be required for a new permit and he wondered if this applies to all of the fees and Mr. Parness stated that this ordinance will cover plumbing, heating, electrical and building permit fees. Cm Miller stated that as he recalls there was originally time period for commencing construction and believes this was something in the nature of 60 days. Mr. Street explained that this is correct - prior to adoption of the new 1973 Building code there was a 60 day period and the new section of the code dealing with this aspect now allows 120 days. This is only true of the building permit and not for the permits for electrical, plumbing and mechanical, which are still 60 days. Cm Miller felt it would be reasonable for all permit expirations, including building, to be uniform and Mr. Street stated that he believes the reason for allowing more time for the building permit is to allow the bidding process and for this the 60 days was in- adequate. Cm Miller stated that his concern is for reserving sewer capacity for people who have taken out permits when they are not ready to commence building. He felt 120 days was a little excessive. Mayor pro tempore Turner asked if 90 days would be more reasonable and be an appropriate compromise and Cm Miller felt this would be satisfactory. Mr. Street stated the 90 days would be satisfactory and really it doesn't make that much difference because the City does try to have uniformity; however when the code was adopted it was adopted as it was without a change in the 120 days allowance. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE EXPIRATION TIME BE 90 DAYS, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM MILLER MOVED TO INTRODUCE THE ORDINANCE WITH THE 90 DAYS COMMENCEMENT ON BUILDING PEIDiITS, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM-30-15 April 21, 1975 WEEKLY CITY MANAGER STATUS REPORT Airport Our airport consultants have been meeting regularly with our Airport Advisory Committee and they are about ready to come be- I fore the Council to discuss the concept approval of the preliminary J final.-- Railroad Relocation On the downtown project the staff has met with the contractor to discuss work progress and completion schedules. Mr. Parness stated that he would hate to suggest a completion date because generally the completion date is violated. It is anticipated that with the good weather it may be possible to have the under- passes open for public usage by December I, 1975. One of the things the staff has suggested to help in this regard, is for the temporary closing of the W.P. passing track, which is now in service and if this can be done it will preclude a lot of interfering construction work to have to be done by the con- tractor. There is little likelihood that the W.P. will permit this to be done but it has been referred to them. Water Reclamation Plant The Water Reclamation Plant project is about 60% complete and and the work is progressing quite well. Sewage Treatment A short while ago there was some problem with the discharge from Intel and the City has worked out a monitoring method that Intel has accepted and is now using. They are monitor- ing and we also are monitoring the discharge. Corps of Engineers Study Mr. Parness stated that the Council will note a letter has been received from Congressman Stark relative to the Corps of Engineers Study and he was surprised to see that the appropriation for this package is $75,000. Cm Miller stated that he was very disappointed to see that Congressman Stark intends to support the study. Downtown Project - Accidents Mr. Parness reported that some children have been hurt in the area of the downtown project at lip" Street and Chestnut. A youth was hurt last week and the Police Department has indi- cated that it is very difficult to patrol the construction area but the staff has asked that there be more patrolling of the area. I J Walkathon A Cerebral Palsey Walkethon was scheduled to go down "pI! Street on May 3rd and some announcements were printed con- cerning the "pI! Street Walkathon. The people in charge have changed the route for the Walkathon and they will not be using liP" Street. CM-30_l6 L) L/ ; / April 21, 1975 Radar Survey A radar survey is being done for several streets in the City and this must be done in order to qualify for radar patrolling. CBD Plans The Planning Department has been working on plans for the Central Business District for the past month. Planning is preparing a very comprehensive study on the CBD; some of which was done several years ago. The plan is being updated and is approximately 50% complete. The study will list all properties in the downtown area as to size and assessed valuation. It will list both property and buildings and will list the parking areas and the number of parking places, and a tally will be made of the ownership of each piece of property. City Property Acquisition List Status The City Manager has distributed a list of property acquisition status of the various parcels under various categories. He stated that the Council might observe that the City has a very ambitious property acquisition program and really more than what the staff can devote attention to, but they are trying to keep up with these items. ADJOURNMENT Mayor pro tempore Turner adjourned the meeting an executive session,~uss legal matters. ~..I ___ MaYOr~; ,. CJM_iU at 10:15 p.m. to APPROVE --.... ATTEST Liv CH-30-17 .~ Special Meeting - April 28, 1975 A special meeting of the City Council was called by Mayor Pritchard for Monday, April 28, 1975, at 6:00 p.m. at the City Hall Conference Room, located at 2250 First Street, Livermore. The purpose of the meeting was to have an executive session for the purpose of discussing personnel matters. Present: (Cm Turner, !'1iller, Futch and Hayor Pritchard Absent: ~m Tirsell '1l~ ]\~TTEST The meeting convened at 6:00 p.m. anQ i~~ediately adjourned an executive session. The mee~~djourned at 7:55 p.m. C-~ '~ t...-::d~ ~ ~ ~ May r cJ&wl ~dOi City Clerk ermore, California to ---- APPROVE J CM-30-l8 LJ C~ Regular Meeting of April 28, 197~ A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on April 28, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:12 p.m. with Mayor Pritchard presiding. ROLL CALL Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Futch, Tirsell and Mayor Pritchard Absent: None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Pritchard led the Council members as well as those present in the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. CM-30-l9 April 28, 1975 MINUTES April 14, 1975 Page 401, 4th paragraph, 5th line, should read: of the community. Mistakes that have been made in the past...etc. Page 407, last paragraph, second line should read: suggested by Valerie Raymond, ...etc. J Page 417, motion at the top of the page: Cm Miller stated that as he recalls the pull boxes were to be worked out with the staff but the motion states that they are not to be required and wondered which is correct? It was noted that the motion is correct, as stated in the minutes. Page 418: Cm Miller stated that there are a number of things he would like to change on Page 418 and if there is no Council objection he will make these changes with the City Clerk, as there is no change in the meaning. The Council will receive a copy of the changes after they have been made. ON MOTION OF CH TURNER, SECONDED BY C'vl MILLFP Arm BY UNANHlOUS VOTE (Mayor Pritchard abstaining due to absence at that meeting) THE MINUTES FOR THE MEFTING 0F APRIL 14, 1975, ~~1ERE APPROVED, AS CORRECTED. PROCL&l\1ATION OF SCHOLARSHIP MONTH ~ayor Pritchard proclaimed the month of May 1975, American Business Womens Association Scholarship month in Livermore. Representatives of both Chapters for this area were present during the reading of the proclamation and Mayor Pritchard stated that both Chapters have made scholarships available to women in the valley. SPECIAL ITEM - REPORT BICENTENNIAL COr1MITTEE Gib Harguth, 1156 Farmington Way, Chairman of the Bicentennial Com- mittee reported that the Bicentennial Committee has submitted an application for recognition as a Bicentennial Community. As part of the package sent out to the general membership there was a cover letter included and he read an excerpt from this letter, as follows: "The LBO Pr01ram is the result of many months of discussions and represents the kind of program that we believe would be a fitting celebration. The steering committee first reviewed the draft report on April 9, 1975." The steering committee submitted the report to the general membership for a meeting on April 16, 1975 and at the meeting the general membership endorsed the program with the provision that the Horizons 1976 project reflect the early LBO proposed parkways development project. The report was amended and the steering committee approved the final draft on April 21, 1975 for submittal to the City Council. This program is dynamic in nature and will undergo revision and change as they progress into the Bicentennial celebration. Hopefully, most changes will be to add more projects and to improve upon the pronosed calendar. He stated that the Committee would like the support and endorsement of the City Council for this project and he would be happy to answer any questions the Council might have relative to this proqram. J Cm Miller stated that the Bicentennial Committee is asking for Council support of the LBO Program and the signing of the appli- cation form. He stated that he would be happy to endorse the CM-30-20 April 28, 1975 (Bicentennial) L-/ program and feels the Bicentennial Committee has done an excellent job in preparing everything for the celebration. Cm Miller stated that he would be willing to participate in the celebration as a Councilmember and as an individual, but would not be ready to par- ticipate, on behalf of the City, financially. The Council has already endorsed and recognized LBO but the application is some- thing Cm Miller would not be able to vote in favor of because, I) LBO is a private group and was not chosen by the Council, which happens to be one of the criteria on the application; 2) the available communi- ty resources are words which imply a tax subsidy; and 3) the preliminary financial estimates propose substantial contribution from tax money by the City. In his opinion the Bicentennial should be a purely volunteer affair and not subsidized by tax money. Cm Turner stated that in looking at the budget he reviewed it as not being a monitary donation from the City and wondered if this is correct. Mr. Marguth stated this is correct. The Committee has taken the position that this is a volunteer project and they have asked, for example, the School District to participate by having the educational program for 1975-76 reflect the Bicentennial celebration. The Com- mittee would anticipate that the School District would expend dollars in 1975-76 in support and celebration of the Bicentennial. They would expect the same kind of support from LARPD and the City of Livermore, in the way of in lieu funds. They are not asking for any cash subsidy but rather for support, as has been received in the past and the in lieu support would amount to approximately $30jmonth which is estimated from the support received over the past seven months. He added that he would expect Mr. Bradley to inform the Council at anytime it is determined that the Committee is taking too much City time. Cm Miller stated that if there are any in kind City services used for preparation of Bicentennial material, it means that there are regular City jobs that are not being done that should be done, and he is concerned about the expenditure of money in this area. Postage, alone, can amount to quite a bit which the City would have to pay for. Mr. Bradley stated that the City has taken care of some of the minor typing and has sent meeting notices to the members. He stated that he would anticipate a cost to the City of $350 in clerical time and mailing. Cm Futch stated that the Council appreciates the work the Committee has done and supports the goals they are trying to achieve and MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL EXPRESS SUPPORT. He stated that the motion does not commit the City to any specific funds. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL. l/ Mayor Pritchard asked if the motion means that he is allowed to sign their application? Cm Tirsell stated that the Committee has been working very hard, the Council endorsed the concept of the Committee and she feels that the application should be signed. CMTIRSELL MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE SIGNING THE APPLICATION. Cm Futch expressed concern for establishing a precedent in conflict with Council policy about financial assistance for non-City organiza- tions and Cm Miller stated that he would vote against signing the application. CM-30-2l April 28, 1975 (Bicentennial) CM TIRSELL WITHDREW THE AMENDMENT. CM FUTCH REPEATED THAT THE MOTION IS TO SUPPORT THE PROGRAM THAT HAS BEEN OUTLINED BY THE BICENTENNIAL COMMITTEE, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM TIRSELL MOVED TO APPROVE SIGNING OF THE BICENTENNIAL APPLI- CATION, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH. J Cm Tirsell stated that her motion is made on the basis that a Bicentennial celebration takes place only every 200 years. Cm Miller stated that he is opposed to the motion as a matter of principle. MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Cm Miller dissenting) . Mr. Marguth stated that on behalf of the Committee he would like to present Mayor Pritchard with a Bennington flag which the Mayor indicated he would be pleased to use at his new place of business on appropriate occasions. Mayor Pritchard then signed the application. SPECIAL ITEM RE MEDICAL MALPRACTICE INSURANCE CANCELLATION Mayor Pritchard stated that Dr. Mandeville has a presentation to make on the impending cancellation of medical malpractice insur- ance and is not present at this time and requested that the Council move to Matters Initiated by the Staff and Council, to the Open Forum and other items until Dr. Mandeville arrives. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (Liquor Store Application) Mr. Musso stated that the Planning Department has received an cation for another liquor store in the Louis Shopping Center. would be a second liquor store and is a permitted use - there limit to the number of liquor stores that can be located in a ping center. appli- This is no shop- (Scheduled Meetings) Mr. Parness commented that the Airport consultant would like to meet with the Council to present an advance statement as to the reports that have been under preparation for the past several months. They have suggested meeting for approximately 30 minutes on May 12, 1975, if this would be agreeable with the Council. The Council concurred. The Planning consultant would like to meet jointly with the Coun- cil and Planning Commission to present the major segment of the report (Environmental Resources Management Element) and would like to meet during the week of May 12th also. This will be a public meeting for a study session type of meeting. The Council selected May 14th as the meeting date. I J CM-30-22 April 28, 1975 (Meetings) It is suggested that there be selection of an architect for Ravenswood and Mr. Parness wondered if the Council would object to the liaison committee of the Council meeting with the group and the Council expressed no objection to this suggestion. L/ MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCILMEMBERS (Board of Supervisors Night Meetings) Cm Tirsell stated that she would like the Council to ask the Board of Supervisors to continue night meetings on a permanent basis because we are located so far from Oakland and cannot attend daytime meetings and it does take time for people to become aware of the fact that night meetings are being held. She also suggested that Pleasanton be con- tacted and asked to help support continuance of night meetings, and SO MOVED, SECONDED BY CM MILLER, AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. Mayor Pritchard stated that according to Council policy the appro- priate resolution concerning this matter will be prepared and will appear on the next agenda. (Bus Schedules) em Tirsell wondered if there is any way of getting the bus schedules for all the busses providing service in Livermore, can they be coordi- nated with the BART system, and what is available and how to get on the Franciscan service. She asked if perhaps the Transportation Committee could take the responsibility of writing up a brochure. Mr. Parness stated that the schedules have been printed and the City has requested copies available for distribution to the public but thus far we have not received any copies. The suggestion is a good one and the suggestion will be passed on to the appropriate people. Mayor Pritchard commented that people can get BART information by dialing 462-BART on the telephone. (Council Reorganization) em Tirsell requested that the Council reorganization be placed on the agenda for the pext meeting. ~~~0~hv. ~-L tL-:tdW. . Cm Futchv~~~-T_~ ;~ the reorganization has taken place in public before and Cm Miller stated that he would suggest this take place during an executive session. eM TIRSELL MOVED TO PLACE THE COUNCIL REORGANIZATION ON THE AGENDA FOR NEXT WEEK, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH. l The motion was followed by discussion as to whether or not this should be done prior to the Council meeting or placed on the agenda and open to the public. MOTION PASSED 3-1 (Cm Miller dissenting and Mayor Pritchard abstaining) . (Commending Mayor Pritchard) Cm Miller stated that he would like to say that in his opinion the City of Livermore is losing one of its best representatives with the resignation of Mayor Pritchard. CM-30-23 April 28, 1975 (Commending Mayor Pritchard) Cm Turner also commented that it has been a pleasure to serve on the Council with Mayor Pritchard and would like to wish him suc- cess with his new business. em Futch stated that anyone who has served for five years on the City Council certainly deserves a vote of thanks from the entire community. \ ~ (re Corps of Engineers Study) Cm Futch stated that he had intended to be in WaShington D. C. and not present at this meeting but it was not necessary for him to attend the meeting on the Corps of Engineers study be- cause he recently received a letter from the State Water Re- sources Board indicating that they have reached an agreement with the Corps of Engineers, which is basically that the Corps of Engineers will not become involved in waste water management in the Valley. Basically the complaint to be made by the Council was that there would be too many agencies involved in a study of waste water management and this seems to have been settled. He stated that confirmation of this information was also made by telephoning Sacramento and that he and Mr. Parness both received the information. (Re Resignation) Mayor Pritchard stated that since he has made a decision to resign from the City Council and to make a move to Manteca the condition of his health, for which he is leaving, has already improved. He stated that he is looking forward to the move with some excitement but he will not be moving from his Livermore home for some time. As long as he is a citizen and owns property in this town he intends to let the Council know how he feels as a citizen. He stated that he would like to express appreciation to a number of people who are citizens and members of committees and commissions and organizations, without naming all of these people. He stated that Mr. Tull and he have not always seen "eye to eye" but Mr. Tull does excersise his American democratic prerogative of speak- ing to the Council and to tell them exactly what he thinks. Mayor Pritchard stated that he wishes there were more people who would be interested enough to come to the Council meetings and take part. He stated that if he has any criticism of the citizens at all it would be that there is apathy among them. He stated that while he has had differences with opinions from the press he nonetheless has enjoyed knowing the reporters and has appre- ciated the editorial repartee and expressed appreciation for our democratic way of life and the opportunity to have a free press. He indicated that the professionals in City government are suhjected to much ahuse from the Council, committees, com- missions, public and the press and that a good staff is hard to replace and all of the staff members deserve a word of thanks from the Chair. He stated that the families of people who take public office must give up a lot and that they do suffer and he would like to express appreciation for his family's patience. He stated that the Council has the task of selecting a new Council person and that he will not be making a recommendation and he has no preference as to who sits in the Mayor's chair; the four people who are left will have to make this decision. He stated that he will, however, be thinking of the Councilmembers and is sure they will not enjoy what they will have to do and would like to apologize for placing them in the position of having to make difficult decisions. He stated that the staff, press and Council J CM-30-24 c) (~ April 28, 1975 (Mayor Resignation) deserve the support of the community but at times some criticism is necessary but people should be sure that the criticism is justi- fied. He stated that with some sadness he will hand the gavel to Cm Turner after having met with the Council for five years. He stated that he will leave the business of the City to the fine people remaining in office and asked that the public take part and be concerned with what is happening in local government, be- cause if people do not express interest our system may disappear. As Mayor Pritchard departed he received applause from the audience, Councilmembers and staff. RECESS A brief recess was called after which the Council meeting resumed with Mayor pro tempore Turner, Cm Miller and Futch present. (Cm Tirsell absent.) OPEN FORUM (re Assessment District) Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, stated that he was not allowed to speak to the Council during July of 1973, concerning the railroad assessment district and the reason is because three times a year there is enabling legislation which defines assessment districts, cities, etc., as entities and if a decision they have made has not been taken to court within six months of the decision they cannot be challenged. (Pioneer Lines) Lou Gigliati, 3975 Pestana Way, stated that he would like to report on what has happened on the first day of BART service to the labs, speaking as co-owner of Pioneer Lines. He stated that last week he appeared before the Council to oppose the BART route and was assured that the busses coming into town would have closed doors and that they would merely bring people to the lab or other points in Livermore. He stated that he arrived at a stop with the Pioneer Lines bus and was told by a customer that he had just gotten onto a BART bus on East Avenue. He stated that the customer did not have to flag down the bus but that the driver stopped, opened the door and the customer asked if this is the bus to the labs and the driver indicated it was. The customer asked for a coupon book and the driver stated that they do not have them and since the customer did not have exact change he could not ride on the bus. The customer then waited for the Pioneer bus and rode on out to the lab on the Pioneer bus. Mr. Gigliati stated that this is a breakdown on the second run of the first day of BART service and is exactly what he told the Council, last week, would happen. He stated that the closed doors are never going to make it and the drivers are not respecting this policy. Mr. Parness stated that he feels it is unfair at this point to make a judgment because the service has only been instituted for one day. The BART representative indicated last week that there are 198 different drivers that have to be trained for this new routing and there will be mistakes made in the early stages. It is conceivable that one or more of the drivers did not get the "closed door" instruc- tions and this is the fault of either AC or BART but it is the policy of both companies that there will be no pick-ups along the route. In San Leandro and other stops there is disembarkment only and this has been working quite well and there is no reason to assume that it won't work in Livermore. He will contact BART and AC, however, and re-emphasize the understanding that there is to be no pick-up except at Stanley Boulevard. CM-30-25 April 28, 1975 (Bus Service) Cm Miller stated that Mr. Parness should express the Council's strong concern about this matter because the Council did make a commitment to protect Pioneer Lines because they are serving other areas of Livermore in which there is no BART service. He stated that it really is unfair if this continues and the City should put a stop to it and would suggest that Mr. Parness call the appropriate people the first thing tomorrow. Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that he would like to see something in the way of a follow up to the phone call such as a letter indi- cating that the City expects them to follow the rules. Mr. Gigliati stated that he would appreciate receiving a copy of the letter that will be sent to BART and AC, and gave his address as P. O. Box 965, Livermore. \~ SPECIAL ITEM RE MALPRACTICE INSURANCE Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that Dr. Mandeville is now present in the audience and asked that the meeting return to the special item concerning the serious situation that may arise soon and affect our community, which has to do with impending cancellation of medical malpractice insurance. Dr. Mandeville stated that he, on behalf of the Valley Memorial staff, would like to thank the Council for its concern over this matter and as the public has been led to believe from newspaper accounts, we are faced with a crisis in professional liability. It appears that as of May I, 1975, there will be many physicians in our valley that will not have professional liability. He has just returned from an emergency meeting of the medical staff of VMH and a poll of the physicians present revealed that 27 have not secured any professional liability as of this time; 8 have secured professional liability but feel they are morally in sympathy with not doing business as usual; and 6 have secured liability insurance and will continue business as usual. This will mean that as of May 1, 1975, six physicians will continue doing business as usual and 8 physicians will take care of emergency cases only. He stated that his premiums rose from $848 in 1963 to $3,653 in 1973 and there was another hike in 1974. The quote he has recently received for his personal practice is $15,OOO for professional liability. He stated that there is no place for lack of care for emergency services for this valley and therefore the hospital and hospital staff have developed a May Day plan for this particular crisis. "Under the umbrella of the hospital's mal- practice carrier, physicians not carrying professional liability will be covered on an emergency basis only in the premises of the hospital. He stated that VMH plans to provide coverage for 8 specialists and also 1 full time physician on a rotating basis for a short period of time (perhaps a month). The emergency department and health care clinics will remain open and will have both physician and para-medical staff augmented, as necessary, through rou- tine channels. Elective surgery will be closed until further notice and emergency surgery and services will be accom- plished under the hospital insurance coverage for emergency services. The definition of an emergency is a medical or sur- gical situation threatening to life or limb or where irredeamable damage may take place and where the person cannot be reasonably transferred within the normal referral pattern of the hospital, or where the attending physician or surgeon certifies that it is an eme~gency case, and delivery of a pregnancy by any means. ".-J CM-30-26 April 28, 1975 (Malpractice Insurance) A communications center regarding availability of referral facili- ties will also be set up. This is the policy of the hospital medical staff for this emergency until there is some degree of resolution to the problem. / L) Dr. Mandeville then listed legal measures which the medical staff would like to see instituted, such as 1) increasing the discliplinary action and authority of the Board of Medical Examiners; 2) change the statute of limitations to two years after injury; 3) regulate contingency fees for attorneys to realistic levels - this has been done in New Jersey; 4) develop a system of contracted binding arbi- tration that will remove medical liability claims from the court- jury system so any award will go the injured patient and not for legal and court costs; 5) set legislative limits on the size of the awards; 6) redefine medical liability and negligence; and 7) allow for the admission to the court of all evidence. Argonaut Insurance Company has indicated that they would leave the malpractice insurance field as of May 1, reversed this decision to extend the coverage for an additional 3 months and have again reversed their decision and have indicated that they will give coverage for one year. It is not clear as to what their position is and their ability to render coverage may be in the hands of the Insurance Commis- sion of the State of California. There are several legislative acts in the mill which seem to have some degree of promise and he will be happy to leave a list with the Council as to what the medical staff recommendations would be. The medical staff would be very happy if the City Council could do something to expidite passage of the measures mentioned in writing. He stated that Imperial Insur- ance Company has indicated that there will be an increase in the cost of insurance as of the 15th of May which neans that if a physician has not purchased insurance by this time there will be an increase. He stated that passing the higher cost of insurance on to the patient is a difficult situation because in many instances patient fees are governed specifically by law so that increases to defray the increase in professional liability cannot be equitably distributed to the gen- eral public. It is obvious that some remedial action must be taken Cm Futch stated that he would be interested in obtaining an analysis as to how much cost increase is due to attorney fees and how much is due to higher awards by the courts. Dr. Mandeville stated that such figures are very difficult to obtain simply because they are not generally released to a number of people. Argonaut Insurance Company collected $110 million and they now state that they are financially broke. Argonaut Insurance Company is a multi-state company and much of this money went out of state. The amount of awards for cases won is a small figure and nobody knows how much but he would estimate that this figure would be $750;000. This means that there appears to be a major deficit in the financing. He stated that the medical people have been told that the client receives 27~ out of a dollar in a claims award but this is open for dispute and is disputed by attorneys. Cm Miller stated it is obvious that the Council will not be able to analyze the details tonight but it is a problem that is receiving state-wide attention and the governor and legislature is involved in it. He stated that he does not know why the City couldn't send letters to our Assembly and Senate representatives as well as the governor asking for a rapid resolution to this problem. This may not be very effective but would represent some pressure by the public. He asked that the staff send letters to AssemblYman Mori, Senator Holmdahl and the governor tomorrow. Dr. Mandeville stated that he would like to emphasize for the infor- mation of the public that emergencies will b~ adequately handled. CM-30-27 April 28, 1975 PUBLIC HEARING RE TRAILER PARKING A public hearing has been scheduled for the purpose of a possible zoning ordinance amendment relating to storage of materials, etc., including trailers, boats, aircraft and similar equipment, par- ticularly as it relates to front yard storage. \ \ J Mr. Musso commented that he is sure the Council is familiar with the problems of trailer storage but would like to note that the whole emphasis of trailer storage has shifted from what was originally an off-street parking provision of the ordinance into an accessory use. Cm Miller stated that prior to opening the public hearing he would like to make a few comments about the ordinance which may affect what people may want to say. This does not seem to be consistent with the public vote that was taken on this item a couple of years ago and he would like the Council to consider some amendments. Cm Futch stated that before listing the amendments he would like to ask some questions. There is discussion regarding RL-5, RL-6 and RL 5-0 but wondered about the other residen- tial zones. For example, B. (4) (b) states "Within the RL 5-0, RL-5, and RL-6 Zoning Districts storage in the required street frontage yard shall be subject to the following regula- tions and limitations." The question is, what about the other residential zones? Mr. Musso explained that this deals with front yard storage in the three zones listed only. The other zones are not per- mitted any front yard storage and the vehicles in the street are not covered by this ordinance. Cm Futch stated that he is concerned about B. (I) which states: "The placement of any vehicle, trailer, or similar equipment at the same approximate location at two successive times not less than seventy-two (72) hours apart shall be deemed to be storage." Mr. Musso stated this was discussed at great length and it was a matter of observation and enforcement time. If a shorter time is established, there would not be time for proper observance. A neighbor could report a storage situation but the P.C. felt the staff should be able to observe a situa- tion one day and go back two days later and assume that if something is still there it is being stored. He added that if people are visiting for the weekend the 72 hours would allow storage for that length of time. Cm Miller stated that the vote which was taken a couple of years ago indicated there should not be storage in front yards; consequently, he would like to offer the following amendments to make the ordinance consistent with the vote of the people: B. (4) (a) should read: "Storage within any required street frontage yard shall be prohibited with the exception of ve- hicles less than 19 ft. in length and/or 10 ft. in height." B. (4) (b) should be deleted. B. ( 4) (b) 1. should be retained as B. ( 4) (b). ) , .....-/ CM-30-28 April 28, 1975 (P.H. re Trailers) L) B. (4) (b) 2., 3. and 4. should also be deleted - next page. At the bottom of this section, add (f) "Vehicles less than 19 ft. long and/or 10 ft. high shall not be permitted to be stored in a front yard if they are stored in a hazardous manner or if existing in a derelict condition, or if unsightly in appearance." Mayor pro tempore Turner opened the public hearing. David S. Castro, 2276 Chestnut Street, stated that he would like to point out that he walks a number of blocks daily and has obser- ved a number of vehicles parked in the front of a house, the back yard and the garage and if the gasoline situation gets worse it may mean that there will be even more storage of boats and cars in front and in back of houses. Robert Malone, 1357 Saybrook Road, stated that he would agree with the amendments proposed by Cm Miller but wondered if something could be said about a propelled vehicles being allowed to park in front of a home, which would eliminate parking of a trailer that is not self- propelled. Cm Miller stated that much of the complaining has been about motor homes which are large and block views and there is a safety aspect involved. Mr. Malone stated that he fully agrees that there should be no parking of any kind in front of homes but felt this was too much to ask for and pointed out that besides the safety aspect the aesthetic aspect is detrimental from a selling standpoint. He stated that it may be difficult to sell your home if vehicles are allowed to park out in front in your neighborhood. Mr. Malone added that he feels there are other areas in the City for storage and if someone does not have room on the side or back yard for storage they should assume that storage costs are part of the ownership responsibility for a recreational vehicle. Cm Futch explained that the intent of Cm Miller's motion is that previously the Council has stated that it would like the vehicle stored in the rear, if access is available, and for this reason the Planning Department tried to determine which residential zones in the City have available access. The motion would allow campers and trailers, even in zones where there is access to the rear. Cm Miller replied that vehicles need to be defined more carefully and perhaps in B. (4) (a) it should state, "with the exception of self-propelled vehicles". He stated that vehicles, to him, repre- sents something self-propelled, and the boats, trailers and unmounted camper tops would still be prohibited. If someone has a mounted camper less than 19 ft. long and 10 ft. high, they would be allowed to store it. Cm Futch stated that in this case he misunderstood the wording of the motion. c Cm Miller stated that cars are vehicles also and in this town there are no basements so people use the garages for storage and the cars are parked in front of the houses. CM-30-29 April 28, 1975 (P.H. re Trailers) Cm Futch commented that if there is an RL zone with adequate access to the rear - would they be allowed to store trailers, etc. in the front yards? Cm Miller asked if Cm Futch is referring to a boat trailer, for example, or an unmounted camper top? If this is what Cm Futch is referring to the answer would be no, they would not be allowed in the front yard. In these areas they have room to put the trailer in the back yard and if they can't do this for one reason or another they would have to store the trailer elsewhere, such as in the garage. Cm Miller stated that, for instance, he has a trailer with a boat but can't get to the side yard because of trees in the yard and therefore he stores the trailer and boat in his garage. If he had a larger trailer and boat he would have to store it someplace else because it would not fit in the garage. J Cm MILLER MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM MILLER MOVED TO SEND THIS BACK TO THE P.C. WITH THE AMENDMENTS MADE AND WITH THE REQUEST THAT THE P.C. RE- PORT BACK TO THE COUNCIL. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM FUTCH. The Council reviewed the amendments once again and Cm Miller asked Mr. Musso if "vehicle" is defined as self-propelled in the State Code, or is a trailer considered a vehicle? Mr. Musso stated that as he recalls a trailer is not a vehicle but will review the code and the ordinance concerning this particular aspect and report back to the Council. MAIN MOTION WAS WITHDRAWN AND CM MILLER MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS MATTER UNTIL MAY 12th, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. ("L" Street Trees) Mr. Castro mentioned that there are a couple of beautiful trees on North "L" Street, near Elm Street and the branches are out into the sidewalk area. The trees cause people to have to either walk on the lawn or go out into the street to get around the trees and he felt that the City should be responsible for keeping trees trimmed that are overhanging into the public right-of-way. CONSENT CALENDAR Departmental Reports The following departmental reports were approved for filing: Airport Activity - March - Financial, Quarterly and Yearly to Date Building Department - March Emergency Services - Quarterly Finance Department - Summary Revenues and Expenditures Yearly Ending March 31, 1975 Golf Courses - Las positas and Springtown - Quarterly and Yearly Ending March 31, 1975 Industrial Inquiries - Report Attached Library - Quarterly Mosquito Abatement - February i J CM-30-30 April 28, 1975 (Reports) Municipal Court - February Planning/Zoning Activity - March Police and Pound Departments - March Water Reclamation Plant - February L/ Report re Budget Transfer - STEP The City Manager submitted a report the the Council with respect to the transfer of funds for the STEP program. RESOLUTION NO. 81-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TRANSFER OF FUNDS (STEP program) Report re North Livermore Landscaping The report from the Public Works Director concerning irrigation and landscaping for North Livermore Avenue was continued to May 5th. Res. re Library Facility & Services The Council has concurred with the request by the Library Board to hire a consultant firm to study the needs of the Library facility and services and it is recommended that a resolution authorizing execution of the agreement be adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 82-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (Robert S. Meyer & Assoc.) Res. Rejecting Claim It is recommended that a resolution rejecting the claim of Fred F. Lusignan be adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 83-75 A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF FRED F. LUSIGNAN Report re LARPD Park Priority List A LARPD park priority list, as approved by the Board of Directors, was submitted to the Council with their annual recommendations concerning additional park land acquisition. The staff has recommended that this item be referred to the budget session for consideration, with which the Council concurred. c_ Minutes Minutes from the were received from the following: Housing Authority - March 18 Design Review - April 15 Planning Commission - April 15 CM-30-3l April 28, 1975 (Tailwinds) Mayor pro tempore Turner commented that he would be interested in knowing if the "Crosswinds" was allowed to change name to the "Tailwinds" without permission from the City. Mr. Parness indicated that this is their prerogative, even though they are leasing City property. Also the sign that will be used for the restaurant is being reviewed by the Design Review Committee and the Council will review it with respect to size allowed by ordinance. \ J Payroll & Claims There were 94 claims in the amount of $125,944.69 and 232 payroll warrants in the amount of $90,188.35, for a total of $216,133.04. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. COMMUNICATIONS (re ACTEB Funds) Robert Sandles, owner of Bob's Machine Shop, has requested approval by the Council of a manpower project to be funded by ACTEB, training men and women in the machine shop trade. Mr. Sandles stated that according to the ACTEB people there has been only $372,000 allocated to the valley for projects and none has ever; been allocated for on-the-job training in the machine shop trade. He stated that he is a teacher and has state credentials for training and would like to begin a program for people who would qualify to receive this type of help and he would train them for 1-2 years in this trade. Joyce LeClaire is a member of the governing board, she has helped prepare the proposal and is the person who suggested the Mr. Sandles speak to the Council for approval. Mr. Sandles stated that he has a copy of the proposal which he would like the Council to review and approve, in principle. Cm Futch stated that he would be willing to support the program, in principle, but normally this is not something that would come to the Council for approval. Cm Miller asked if Cm Tirsell is familiar with the proposal and Mr. Sandles indicated that he has spoken with both Cm Tirsell and Joyce LeClaire and they are not opposed to the proposal. CM Futch stated that he would suggest the Council go on record as supporting this type of program within the City of Livermore; however, as far as recommending a certain person for doing the traini~g, he would have to be hesitant. \ J Mr. Sandles stated that he can understand this position but he would not be receiving any of the money, personally: ACTEB will be paying wages to people in training. CM-30-32 April 28, 1975 (re ACTEB Funds) Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that it is his understanding that Mr. Sandles is asking for a written endorsement from the Council and that the problem is the Council is not really sure what is being endorsed. u Cm Miller stated that since the Council has no approval authority it doesn't really come to the Council, in a sense, anyway. If Mr. Sandles sends his proposal to the ACTEB people and the Council has not opposed it it would seem that this proposal is one step further. He would suggest that Mr. Sandles submit a copy of the proposal to the Council for review at the next meeting at which time it can be determined whether or not a letter of endorsement will be sent to ACTEB. Mayor pro tempore Turner indicated that, in any case, the Council will not oppose the proposal. (re Vacant Council Position) Letters supporting Ray Faltings to fill the vacant seat on the Council were received from William R. Hopkins, Genevieve Fraser, and Sally Tull. (re Mailboxes) A letter concerning placement of mailboxes in the resedential areas was received from Windol M. Martin, Director of the Delivery Division, Western Region of the United States Postal Service. (Letter of Resignation) A letter of resignation from the Housing Authority Board was received from David P. Mandeville, M.D. The staff was directed to send a letter of thanks to Dr. Mandeville for serving on the Board. (re Sphere of Influence for Amador Valley) The City of Pleasanton has written to the City Council concerning the Spheres of Influence for the Amador Valley and attached a resolution adopted by the Pleasanton City Council opposing New Town, which was forwarded to ABAG. Mr. Parness asked that the Council postpone this matter for one week because the Sphere of Influence map was not included in the agenda. The Council concurred with the request. Cm Miller suggested that the staff write a letter of thanks to the Pleasanton City Council for sending a resolution to ABAG concerning New Town. l REPORT RE KISSELL COMPANY CONTRACT The City Manager reported that agreement has been prepared in approval and it is recommended ing execution of agreement. the amendment to the Kissell Company accordance with tentative Council that a resolution be adopted authoriz- CM-30-33 April 28, 1975 (Kissell Contract) CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECU- TION OF THE AGREEMENT, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 84-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (The Kissell Company: Third Agreement) ~ REPORT RE SURVEY OF WALL STREET The Public Works Director reported that nighttime surveys of lighting for Wall Street have been conducted by the staff, in- cluding the Police Department and it was concluded that one additional light could be justified. The light installation has been ordered and installation will soon take place. Mrs. Heinz is the person who will be observing the effectiveness of the additional light and will make her observations known to the Public Works Department. Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that the Wall Street lighting issue is a matter that has been going on for some months and the Police Department has indicated that they have had good response as far as curtailing the amount of burglary in that area through the involvement of the STEP team. Sharon Heinz, spokesperson for the Wall Street area, stated that she is disappointed, insulted and really angry about the recommendation for one additional light for Wall Street and it would seem that she will have to resort to discussing things which have taken place concerning her family, and per- sonal situations she would rather not discuss. She stated that four boys broke into her home and they contacted the parents and gave the parents the choice of allowing them to press charges or let the boys work for the Heinz family and receive counseling during this time. She stated that it was decided that the boys would do work as punishment and the Heinz family did not press charges. She stated that even if she had pressed charges the boys would have been back on the streets within 24 hours. She felt it was up to her family to see that the boys did work as an indication that they could not come in and steal from her and then go free. She added that there have been II burglaries in her home during the past three years. She stated that the Police Department has indicated there is just nothing they can do and her little boy is afraid at night because boys have come through his bedroom window, in the past, to steal. She stated she felt it important to demonstrate that there are boundaries within which people must stay and to respect property which belongs to others, and that rules cannot be broken without penalty. She asked Mr. Lee if he really feels one light will make a difference and pointed out that Wall Street is not a typical residential street. She stated that her time:1s as important as the Councilor staff time and that she and her neighbors have been willing to work for free to create the neighborhood they desire but it has been five months since they made a plea to the Council for help and nothing has been done. She stated this is not the way she wants her town run and more importantly not the way she wants to be treated. j ~ CM-30-34 April 28, 1975 (Wall Street Problems) u Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that he feels the emotional impact of this situation and therefore cannot make a recommendation at this time but would ask for suggestions from the other members of the Council. He stated that he does realize this is a problem that has gone unanswered or unsolved for five months and that this is a very long time. He added that he read the recommendation by the Director of Public Works and also feels that one street light addi- tion is not satisfactory and he had come to this conclusion prior to hearing testimony from Mrs. Heinz. Mr. Lee indicated that this happens to be a matter that goes far beyond the street lighting problem and that his recommendation is that the lighting is adequate. There seem to be matters that should be taken care of by the Police Department and there are other personal matters involved which he feels are not necessarily related to lights. Cm Miller stated that as he recalls at the last discussion with the Council the Police Department was going to meet with the people in the Wall Street area in an attempt to work out some type of neighbor- hood strategy to help improve the situation. The Council never re- ceived a report as to what was proposed and he does not know how successful the meeting may have been. Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that at this point the Council is guessing about what was in the letter and what was discussed and would suggest that this item be postponed for another week so that some of this information can be given to the Council. Cm Miller stated that he would like to know how effective this strategy has been and if there has been any improvement in the burglary rate as a result of this neighborhood strategy. He stated that he would like to hear from the neighbors as well as the Police Department and for this discussion to take place next week. Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that for the next discussion he would like to have answers to problems he mentioned in his letter sent to the staff on this item and also a report from the Police Department. It was concluded that the matter will again be on the agenda next week. CUP APP. FOR SIERRA WEST GALLERY Mr. Musso stated that a CUP application has been submitted by Robert J. Mandeville for retail sales of western paintings, unique antiques, sculptures and authentic precious Indian jewelry at 4190 East Avenue (Sierra West Gallery). This would be a use not allowed in the CP Zone. The CP Zone was established in 1972 at which time the basis for the rezoning was the undesirability of living next to a gasoline station. c Mr. Musso stated that the major concern of the P.C. was estab- lishing a precedent for allowing this type of use out on East Avenue because they could envision a number of other applica- tions adjacent to the shopping center and also closer to down- town. It was concluded that it not need be a precedent and it does not conflict with the General Plan. CM-30-35 April 28, 1975 (Sierra West Gallery) The Planning Commission has recommended to the City Council approval of the application making the findings noted in their report to the Council and staff. CM FUTCH MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION APPROVING THE APPLICATION, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. ,~ Cm Miller stated that he cannot vote for the motion because it would essentially destroy everything the Council has just gone through in the CN Zoning Ordinance. This particular use is in conflict with the General Plan and with the CN Ordiance in the sense that it is a retail use - not a day-to-day type of sales located in a professional office zone. Such things would be excluded from our present CN Zone. A retail use such as this belongs in a general commercial area and, in particular, in the downtown area. In his opinion this would be a terrible precedent for East Avenue and this is exactly what happened to portola Avenue. He added that the P.C. was split in their recommendation to approve the application and Cm Miller would urge the Council not to approve the application. THE MOTION AND SECOND WERE WITHDRAWN AT THIS TIME. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL DENY THE CUP BECAUSE 1) A RE- TAIL USE IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH ADJACENT PROPERTIES, 2) THE ADEQUACY OF EAST AVENUE FOR THIS USE IS OPEN TO DEBATE - IT IS NOT CLEAR THAT IT IS ADEQUATE, 3) THIS IS NOT A REAL TRAN- SITION BETWEEN NON-RESIDENTIAL AND RESIDENTIAL, 4) IT IS NOT AN ADJUNCT TO A NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER BECAUSE IT DOES NOT SATISFY ANY OF THE CN CONDITIONS AND PARTICULARLY NOT A DAY-TO-DAY USE, 5) TO APPROVE IT WOULD IMPAIR THE PURPOSE OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, AND 6) CREATION OF RETAIL ON EAST AVENUE WHICH IS NOT OF A NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER NATURE CREATES A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT FOR FURTHER RETAIL APPROVAL ON EAST AVE. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT RE SELECTION OF FIRE STATION NO. 4 The City Manager reported that the Planning Commission has com- pleted its study of alternate sites for Fire Station No. 4 and the results of this study have been forwarded to the Council. The EIR will be transmitted to the Council following May 6, which is the final date for receiving public response. The Council has received a copy of the assessment report which was prepared by the Fire Chief on the various sites and accompany- ing this report is the result of a personal survey conducted among 10 residents, each of which were within close proximity to Fire Stations 2 and 3 to elicit grievances, conflicts, or objections to a municipal fire station facility in their proximity. It is recommended that the staff be instructed to proceed with personal contacts with the property owners of sites having_a priority listing to determine terms and conditions that would be applicable for site acquisition. An early report will be made to the Council on this effort. J CM-30-36 April 28, 1975 (Fire Station Site) L) Mr. Parness stated that this matter has been studied exhaustively and everything that has done concerning location for a station has been presented to the Council. The only thing that can be said, in summarizing, is that anyone of about six of these locations would be acceptable from the standpoint of firefighting capabilities and technology. There are some preferable sites, as listed by the Planning Commission. He would suggest that the matter be referred back to the staff so that preliminary negotiations for the first three sites recommended can begin immediately. Mr. Musso then illustrated the areas of priority and discussion followed concerning these sites. CM MILLER MOVED TO REFER THIS MATTER BACK TO THE STAFF, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH. Wayne Graham, 914 Desconsado, stated that he lives next to Site A and he is concerned about the fact that if a fire station is placed in the area proposed it may limit other development in that area. Mayor pro tempore Turner mentioned that perhaps Mr. Parness could respond to this because Site A is listed sixth on the priority list. Mr. Graham stated that he is also concerned about Site B, which is second on the priority list. What happens to the remainder of a large piece of property if a fire station occupies a portion of it? Mr. Parness stated that his recommendation is for the staff to pursue the first three sites on the priority list, which would be Sites H, C, and D, respectively. Mr. Musso replied that the Planning Department looked into all of the sites with respect to what development problems might be created around the properties and C was one of the better sites for not creating future development problems. He indicated that C would be comparable to the situation of the fire station loca- ted at Rincon and Pine Street. Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that the staff is going to nego- tiate for the various sites and the matter will again come back to the Council - the staff will not make a selection. The City Clerk can see that Mr. Graham receives a copy of the agenda on which this item will appear. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT RE FIRE STATION DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION (~ The City Manager reported that the architectural designs and com- pletion of plans and specifications for Fire Station No. 1 have been completed so that bids can be solicited. The Council has received a new total design and construction budget for Stations No.1 and No.4 in the amount of $628,364.00, inclusive of all costs associated with both stations except the site costs. To be all inclusive the total budgeting allocations for these two structures CM-30-37 April 28, 1975 (Design for Fire Stations) would amount to $640,000. It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing construction bidding for Fire Station No.1. Randy Schlientz, architect for the stations presented renderings to the Council with an explanation as to where the station would be located on the site and that the station was designed to provide a possible future multi-use area comprising approximately 1,250 sq. ft. for a community room in association with the adjacent park area. Station No. 1 has been designed to allow 1,920 sq. ft. of area for administrative and fire prevention area and the remaining portion for normal day-to-day use would comprise fire supression, the apparatus, locker rooms and storage facilities. There will be provisions for a ready room, a company officer and reception area. A reasonable residential character is being maintained for the archectural design of the building and materials that are closely associated with the residential neighborhood will be used. A combination of stucco, shingles, and some wood trim and wood fences as well as a fair amount of landscaping is planned. The dormitory can be used as a dormitory and training room and is designed with exterior access and public rest rooms for community room use. \ J with respect to the budget, Mayor pro tempore Turner commented that the figures have remained consistent with the estimates made by Mr. Schlientz and Mr. Schlientz replied that there was some trimming to allow them to stay within the estimate. Mr. Parness stated that been liberal estimates. of the year and we have get good bid results. it is hoped that the estimates made have We are entering into the best bidding time been given some assurance that the City will Mr. Schlientz added that there are several alternates and some of the features may be omitted. Mr. Parness pointed out that the total estimate for both stations amounts to about $60,000 more than what was originally budgeted and does not include site costs. For this reason, unfortunately, he and the Fire Chief have had to consider postponement of the bidding process for a fire pumper unit. The pumper unit is a comparable expense and it may have to be deleted in favor of the two structures if they are going to be built. This will again be discussed at budget time. CM FUTCH MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONSTRUCTION BIDDING, SECONDED BY CM MILLER. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 85-75 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING AND APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS ASCERTAINING WAGE SCALE AND DIRECTING CLERK TO AD- VERTISE FOR BIDS. (Fire Station No.1) Mr. Schlientz presented an additional elevation which the Council discussed which Mr. Parness mentioned is designed with two parts of the building staggerd and a mansard roof, which Mr. Schlientz explained. This design would cost an additional $1,500. J CM-30-38 April 28, 1975 (Fire Station Design) Randy Schlientz stated that he objects to this particular con- cept because it is not in character with the rest of the building when there are projections. He mentioned that this is one of the "add alternates" and is included in the contract as such. L: REPORT RE QUALIFY- ING FOR BUILDING PERMITS FOR RESIDENCES The City Attorney has reasearched the question of entitlement for residential properties for the issuance of building permits in light of the local sewage treatment capacity reservation. The Assistant City Attorney stated that the legal department is in the process of drafting an ordinance that will delineate the policies set forth in the resolution presented some weeks ago. The staff has arrived at a preliminary opinion that the term "commitment" as expressed in the resolution should be defined as existing lots of record. This was based on two criteria: 1) litiga- tion posture, and 2) practacability both in terms of litigation exposure and economic expectations on the part of property owners. This, however, is a policy decision and will be presented to the Council with the proposed ordinance as a policy decision matter. Cm Miller stated that his concern is that lots of record, as he understands it, refers to lots which have been recorded from a final map. Lots on a tentative map are not lots of record. Mr. Reiners stated that this would be handled in the definition and the ordinance would define "lots of record". Cm Miller stated that 40 lots, for which a final could have been taken out when building permits were not available, and not used, represents 40 stores. He stated that he is concerned about the commercial and industrial balance within the City. He would also like to comment that he feels a case could be made to not allow finals to qualify because nobody has a vested economic interest until they take out a building permit. He expressed concern for this matter of tentatives because we have very little sewage capacity left. Mr. Reiners stated that the problem arises under the Subdivision Map Act which requires the City to disapprove tentative maps when the City does not have adequate sewage treatment facilities. Once we have approved a tentative map, implicit in that approval, is that we have adequate sewage capacity. This is an analogy and an argu- ment that we have used from which to base this analysis. It is not a binding, legal requirement that we actually serve such lots. Cm Miller stated that what the City Attorney is saying is that it is an argument the legal staff will make but it will not necessarily stand up in court. L Mr. Reiners stated that the 40 lots were included in the overall estimates done by the Public Works Department that would use an estimated .36 of the remaining .40 capacity. Cm Miller stated this means that if the 40 lots are omitted it would give the City an additional 12,000 gallons which would be available to commercial and industrial. CM-30-39 April 28, 1975 (Sewer Reservation) The City Attorney stated that no action can be taken by the Council at this time but the staff would like to have this item postponed until such time as the ordinance is drafted and presented to the Council. Mayor pro tempore Turner suggested that the item be continued for a couple of weeks to allow time for preparation of the ordinance. .~ Cm Miller asked how long it will take to prepare the ordinance and Mr. Reiners stated that he is working on it this week and would estimate that could be presented to the Council in about three weeks. The Council concurred that this item should be postponed until May 19th. REPORT RE TENTATIVE TRACT 3607 Cm Miller stated that the item concerning Tentative Tract 3607 is dependant upon what happens to the ordinance relative to tenta- tive maps and permits for residential construction and he would suggest that this item be postponed also. A subdivision, comprising about lO acres and 40 residential lots, covers an area formerly reserved for a school site. The applicants (CARLTON GROUP) are desirous of proceeding with filing a final tract map and thereafter being issued building permits. The Council's decision is dependent upon the Council's acceptance of the City Attorney's opinion con- cerning the previous item. In July of 1974 the Planning Commission and the City Council approved the tentative map for this tract and the map expires on January 29, 1976. Since the approval of this tentative map the availability of financing for housing has been very difficult and it appears that Arbor Development Company was unable to get financing for the construction of the street improvements and houses for the project and have since dropped the option to purchase the land. The CARLTON GROUP is attempt- ing to find another developer to purchase and develop the land in accordance with the approved tentative map. It has been noted by Mr. Musso that it might be possible to trade deeds prior to the recording of the final map so that the Park District would own the new shape of the future park and be able to begin improvements. This would mean that the City would receive 8/l0 of an acre in advance of development and recording the final map. The CARLTON GROUP would be willing to do this in exchange for written commitment that 40 building permits and 40 sewer connections will be reserved for this area. Mario Bertone, spokesman for the CARLTON GROUP, stated that they have been paying taxes on this land for three years and would like to know what the group can do with it. He stated that they are interested in seeing that this land is developed and that the City has already committed sewer service to the 40 lots. Cm Futch stated that in his opinion the benefit to the City is within the policy drafted by the City Attorney and he would probably vote in favor of the proposed pOlicy. ! -/ CM-30-40 April 28, 1975 (Tract 3607) Cm Miller stated that this is a matter of what is best for the community and the ultimate balance. u Cm Miller stated this was a tentative map approved in 1974, which he is sure he voted against on the grounds of air quality, it expires in l8 months and the City is not required to renew the tentative map. In fact, it could not be renewed in view of our sewer problems. Per- haps the thing to do would be to say, "yes you may have until January 29, 1976, but don't expect the tract map to be renewed". If the per- mits have not been taken out and the final not in by this date then that's it. Mr. Bertone stated that they are ready to file a final map if they can receive the assurance that they will get the building permits. Cm Miller stated he is not willing to reserve sewer capacity for these 40 units because they may not be built for lO years. He would suggest that unless the permits are not taken out by January 29, 1976, the City should not be obligated to provide the sewage, adding that this may require some type of special agreement. Mr. Bertone asked if this means that if a map is filed they will get the building permits? Cm Miller stated that this is a border case because the school site has been reserved. He commented that if the ordinance ultimately says that lots of record will have sewer reserved this means that a final map could be filed and this will mean Mr. Bertone has lots of record, and according to the ordinance 40 sewer connections would be reserved. Once having filed the final map Mr. Bertone could wait lO years before obtaining the building permits and in the meantime the City is committed to providing sewage. He stated that this is what he is not willing to do and would not be willing to reserve any sewer capacity beyond January 29, 1976. Cm Miller stated he would like to see the Council agree to some type of agreement with Mr. Bertone to the effect that if the permits are not taken out by the January 1976 date the City will no longer be required to reserve sewer capacity for the 40 units. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO WORK OUT SOME TYPE OF MECHANISM WHICH WILL MEAN THAT SEWER CAPACITY WILL NOT BE RESERVED AFTER JANUARY 29, 1976. ADJOURNMENT Mayor pro Tempore Turner adjourned the meeting at ll:50 p.m. to a 9:30 a.m. executive session, May 3, 1975, at City Hall, in the Conference Room, to discuss personnel matters. APPROVE r \ ~ ATTEST Mayor CM-30_4l Adjourned Regular Meeting of May 3, 1975 An adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore held on Saturday, May 3, 1975, at 9:30 a.m. was called to order by Mayor pro tempore Turner and immediately adjourned to an executive session to discuss personnel matters. Present: Cm Futch, Miller, Tirsell and Turner Absent: None The meeting adjourned at l2:37 p.m. \ J APPROVE ~/~ Mayor '-"\ ~!' 1 I;J ~," ~ ~ City Clerk t/ L1vermore, California ATTEST Regular Meeting of May 5, 1975 A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Livermore was held on May 5, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:l0 p.m. with Mayor pro tempore Turner presiding. ROLL CALL Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Futch and Tirsell Absent: None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor pro tempore Turner led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. MINUTES April 2l, 1975 Page 4, last paragraph, should read (BART hearings). Page 9, third major paragraph, line 4 should read: typically has an occupancy rate corresponding to l50,000 population, etc. Page l4, second paragraph should read: Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that if there is a motion to allow the BART route he will vote against it because now he believes that Pioneer did object to the proposed BART route and time should be allowed to review previous staff reports prior to considering the proposed BART route. CM FUTCH MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF APRIL 21, 1975, AS CORRECTED, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. (Cm Tirsell abstained due to absence at that meeting) i -/ SPECIAL ITEM - COUNCIL REORGANIZATION CM TIRSELL MOVED TO NOMINATE CM FUTCH FOR MAYOR AND MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. CM FUTCH MOVED TO TABLE THIS ITEM FOR ONE WEEK, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CM-30-42 May 5, 1975 OPEN FORUM (Misc. - Paul Tull) u Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, stated that he has written about the Wall Street lighting situation and again spoke to the Council about his letters concerning the assessment district for the railroad relocation. Mr. Parness implied his information was in- correct and he felt he deserved a retraction. CONSENT CALENDAR Res. Auth. Exec. of Agree. - Kamp Mr. Parness requested that the item concerning the resolution author- izing execution of agreement with H. L. and Frances Kamp be postponed for one week because there was a modification to the agreement and the wrong agreement was given to the Council. Res. re Night Meetings The Council adopted a resolution urging the County Board of Super- visors to continue evening meetings. RESOLUTION NO. 86-75 A RESOLUTION URGING COUNTY BOARD OF SUPER- VISORS TO CONTINUE EVENING MEETINGS. Res. Calling for Bids - No. Livermore Medians A resolution calling for bids for irrigation and landscaping of No. Livermore Avenue medians was adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 87-75 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING AND APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS ASCERTAINING WAGE SCALE AND DIRECTING CLERK TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS. (North Livermore Avenue Landscaping) APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM FUTCH, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED WITH POSTPONEMENT OF THE ITEM CONCERNING THE KAMP AGREEMENT. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL (: Cm Futch suggested that there be a rotation policy for selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor. Discussion will be held on May 19th. Cm Miller stated that the Council needs one more member on the Council and according to the statutes there are two alternatives: l) appoint someone for a three year term, or 2) set a special election for which someone can run for the remainder of the term or be appointed to serve out the term until the next municipal election. He stated that he would like the City Attorney to prepare a draft of ordinances for the Council to discuss concerning appoint- ment until the next municipal election. CM-30-43 May 5, 1975 (Selection of Councilmember) Cm Tirsell asked how long it would take to draft an ordinance, adopt it and have it become effective. The City Attorney replied that there is some language to the effect that the effective date of the ordinance concerning elec- tions can become effective immediately. If the language could apply to this particular case an ordinance could be adopted and become effective the day it is adopted. He added that if an ordi- nance is adopted that would call for an appointment until the next general election and then the special election included in the gen- eral election is found to be improper, he would assume the appoint- ment would be effective for the remainder of the incumbent's term. ~ The City Attorney was directed to prepare ordinances for possible adoption at the May 12th meeting concerning a method for appoint- ment of another member to the Council. (Las positas Plan) Cm Miller~ed that we appealed to ABAG's Regional Planning Com- ~ittee~~:~~~~ive Board concerning the Las positas plan and they ~~{.1 id )~~{11t. tlool.t La" P~,itlll VII.. ""11 =--.~ 1ri~k" and agreed generally ~w~th the contentions made by the City and all the other agencies \~~~n the valley about the negative nature of Las Positas. At the :~same time we have been challenged by the Alameda County Board of ,~ Supervisors to submit our General Plan, when it is complete, to o the ABAG Regional Planning Committee and the ABAG Executive Board. He suggested that the City write a letter to the Regional Planning Committee and the Executive Board indicating that it would be our pleasure to send our General Plan to them for review, when the General Plan becomes available. (Mayors Conference) Cm Miller stated that we need to have written notice of the Mayors Conference so that the Mayor will have the authority of the City to vote on the selection committee item. Mr. Parness stated that he is not sure this would be necessary but the City might indicate that in the absence of the Mayor the official delegate would vote. COMMUNICATION RE APPOINTMENT TO ACAP BOARD A letter has been received from Suren G. Dutia, Executive Direc- tor of the ACAP Board, asking that the City Council make an appoint- ment to the ACAP Board. He indicated that representatives to the Board must be reappointed each year and asked that this be done. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, CM TIRSELL WAS REAPPOINTED TO THE ACAP GOVERNING BOARD. COMMUNICATION RE LAVWMA BORROWING i J LAVWMA transmitted a resolution authorizing LAVWMA borrowing and ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE RESOLUTION WAS APPROVED. CM-30-44 May 5, 1975 COMMUNICATION RE LACK OF SHOPPING SERVICES ~ A letter of complaint as to the lack of shopping services avialable in the valley, was received from Mrs. Anne Zarate, 2250 First Street. The Council asked Mr. Parness to respond to the letter. COMMUNICATION RE AB 625 - Regional Planning Assemblyman S. Floyd Mori sent a copy of the Knox Bill tAB 625) con- cerning regional planning, to the Council for review. There was some discussion on this item and Mayor pro tempore Turner commented that the Council has, in the past, approved the concept of the Bill. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED, PENDING FURTHER INFORMATION. CBD GOALS The matter of the CBD goals was continued from the meeting of April 2l, 1975, so that Cm Tirsell could participate in discussion concerning this item, as she is the member who requested that it be on the agenda. The Council discussed the goals making various amendments and Cm TIRSELL MOVED TO DELETE B. l., SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Cm Futch stated that in Item B. 6., he would like to encourage activity and that under B. 6. he would like to add d. with the wording, .community theater - entertainment center". ern Miller stated that he sees a possible conflict because there is supposed to be a theater at the Civic Center. The idea of an entertainment center is something else but the theater is something that is to be included in the Civic Center plan. Cm Miller stated that he would like to add something to B. 6. a., along the lines of the suggestion made by Cm Futch in the past, which is that under residential uses allowed he would like to ask for low income housing, in particular. In B. 5. he would like to see consideration of the use of fountains. CM TIRSELL WITHDREW HER MOTION AND MOVED TO ADOPT THE GOALS, AS AMENDED, SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Paul Tull, 2243 Linden Street, suggested that to improve the central business district the holes at "P" and North Livermore be filled. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. REPORT RE WALL STREET - TRAFFIC LAW ENFORCEMENT ',,-- Staff reports were submitted to the Council concerning the Wall Street lighting problem and traffic problems. CM-30-45 May 5, 1975 (Wall Street Traffic Law Enforcement) Cm Futch stated that he visited the area at night to look at the lighting situation and paced off the distance between lights. There seems to be more distance in this area between lights than in other areas. Cj Mr. Lee indicated that generally lights are placed on the property line where other poles are. em Futch stated that he did observe the Murrieta area and other streets and it would appear that generally there is a street light on every other telephone pole. He asked what the cost for instal- lation would be for additional lighting. Mr. Lee stated that the cost is about $4 - $4.50/month and that the capital cost would be borne by Pacific Gas and Electric Co. He added that he is looking at a possible budget figure of $200,000 for street lights for the entire City next year. He added that he went to the area to see how many lights could be justified and he and the Police Department concluded that one light at Alexander could be justified. Cm Tirsell stated that she would hope the staff can make the find- ings to justify additional lighting for this area because it is an area that has a lot of night time use. Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that with respect to the traffic problem the residents have suggested that there be a stop sign on Wall Street which might force the traffic from Catalina to El cami~to an~,9n~~?e;tanle ~ther than via Wall Street. /t//JAiE~ -~ ) . DisCussion followed ncerning the poC!~ini1it'" of a ston sign. CmiF~' ~a stated that he would like to try the stop sign suggestion and if it proves to be of no value it could always be removed. Mr. Lee felt this would not be a good idea because in his opinion the people living on Wall Street would suffer as much as motorists who.. .would have to stop. There would be stopping and starting noise as well as additional fumes, not to mention th~ incon,\,p"i~:n~~ to motorists. David S. Castro, 2276 Chestnut Street, stated that he realizes lights are expensive but the City should be more concerned about the possibility of lives being lost during burglaries. He added that there should be lights at Murrieta and Olivina because he has seen many near accidents at that intersection where many children cross. Paul Tull stated he feels the discussion tonight a bunch of "flim flam" because burglaries which have taken place have been during the day. He feels he is being discriminated against because 20% more burglaries take place in his neighborhood than those on Wall Street. He stated that Wall Street is a matter of policing - not lighting and asked where the Policemen are to patrol this area. Sharon Heinz, 76l Wall Street, expressed to Mr. Lee her apology if anything she had said last week offended'him as that was not her intent. Cm pro tempore Turner stated that he would suggest the two lights recommended for the area be approved and that the Police Department be asked to keep monitoring the area with respect to the traffic. (j ~'-/ CM-30-46 May 5, 1975 (Wall Street Traffic Law Enforcement) ~/ CM FUTCH MOVED TO ASK THE STAFF TO LOOK INTO THE POSSIBILITY OF INSTALLING TWO ADDITIONAL LIGHTS AT THE APPROPRIATE LOCATIONS AND TO ASK THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO CONTINUE MONITORING THE TRAFFIC PROBLEM AND SURVEILLANCE OF THE AREA. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. REPORT RE GALLOWAY PARK RELOCATION, ETC. Mr. Parness reported that the staff has been in contact with the owners of property abutting our existing Galloway Park land (Bluebell Drive) as to its relocation and enlargement. The Council and LARPD are interested in relocating the park farther to the east because of the change for Springtown Boulevard and the change in the school site. It was suggested by the Council that the park be moved to the east and also enlarged. The staff recommendati~n is to adopt a resolution referring the matter to the Planning Commission for report and to LARPD for comment. It is further requested that the City Manager be instructed to obtain the necessary appraisal of the properties. Mr. Parness commented that the park would increase from approximately 3 acres to l2 acres and an increase of approximately $42,000. CM MILLER MOVED TO REFER THIS MATTER TO LARPD AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO OBTAIN APPRAISALS, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH. Mr. Musso stated that this item has already been discussed by the Planning Commission and a report was forthcoming. CM MILLER WITHDREW THE MOTION AND MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION AND APPRAISAL FOR ACQUI- SITION OF THE GALLOWAY PARK SITE. MOTION SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. RESOLUTION NO. 88-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION AND APPRAISAL FOR ACQUISITION OF GALLOWAY PARK SITE. REPORT RE INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY LEASE AMEND. The City Manager reported that the necessary resolutions concerning the industrial property lease amendment (Agenda Item 6.2) are not complete and requested that this item be postponed for another week. This is also the case for Item 6.5 of the Agenda concerning program continuation - STEP and HORIZONS. ON MOTION OF CM FUTCH, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THESE TWO ITEMS WERE CONTINUED FOR ONE WEEK. ( CM-30-47 May 5, 1975 REPORT RE SB l89 (Fees From Court Fines) The League of California Cities has requested urgent reaction to SB l89 which threatens city fine and forfeiture income and it is recommended that the Council adopt a motion authorizing some state- ment in opposition to this proposal to be transmitted to our legis- lators. ;'J ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE RECOMMENDATION TO OPPOSE SB 189 WAS ADOPTED. REPORT RE PARKING OF LARGE COMMERCIAL VE- HICLES IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS Mr. Parness reported that the City has been discouraging the park- ing of commercial vehicles on residential streets in the City primarily because of their appearance, and because of necessity the operators/owners have had to move them to locations just outside of the City limits. For this reason the Council has requested that this matter be referred to the County so that areas being used for this purpose, such as portola Avenue, will be regulated. He stated that he is sure the County will soon post Portola Avenue not allowing vehicles larger than 20 ft. in length. Mayor pro tempore Turner has asked if there is a possible solu- tion to not allowing parking in the City limits and the staff feels that perhaps up to 9 acres of land under the airport east approach zone might be used for this purpose. Mr. Parness stated that it is possible that this land could be used in a profitable way to the City and would be of value to the owners of these vehicles. Up to 70 vehicles could be accommodated and the parking charge for such vehicles indicates that the normal fee per month is from $lO to $l5. Prior to instituting such a parking facility it would be ad- visable to determine if there would be a demand for such space and if the Council concurs the staff will make in- quiries as to the desire for space for commercial vehicles. Mr. Parness stated there is an area of approximately 77,000 sq. feet with gravel and open for storage. This area is now proposed to be paved this year and site plan approval is pending with the City. On Tesla Road there is about 5 acres of gravel area for storage plus another 3 acres for some storage. There is also about 3 acres of paved area on South front Road which will soon be fenced. There are three privately owned storage areas available at present. CM TIRSELL MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND REPORT BACK TO THE COUNCIL, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. Bill Zagotta, 5155 Lillian Street stated that as a member of the Airport Advisory Committee he would hope that the proposed use would be referred to the Committee prior to any action and was assured this would be the case. ! ...-/ CM-30-48 May 5, 1975 REPORT RE RIGHT OF ENTRY PERMIT - PG&E u The Director of Public Works reported that a dispute has arisen with PG&E over the responsible party concerning relocation of a gas line at North lip" and Chestnut Streets. Negotiations are continuing and during the interim PG&E has agreed to move the lines onto property acquired by the City for customer service. No cost is involved in this transaction. ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH PG&E FOR RIGHT OF ENTRY WAS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION NO. 89-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREE- MENT (Right of Entry to P. G. & E.) REPORT RE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE The City of Pleasanton has requested support for the adoption of a proposed Sphere of Influence for their community and submitted a map delineating the area. Cm Miller stated that in the mail the Council received this evening, there were comments from VCSD on this very item and he would suggest that this item be continued to allow the Council to review comments from VCSD prior to taking a stand. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED FOR ONE WEEK. ORD. RE EXPIRATION DATES RE PERMITS ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THE COUNCIL, THE SECOND READING OF THE ORDINANCE RELATED TO REVISED EXPIRATION DATES FOR VARIOUS PERMITS WAS ADOPTED. ORDINANCE NO. 863 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 6, RELAT- ING TO BUILDINGS, BY THE ADDITION OF TWO NEW SECTIONS RELATING TO EXPIRATION OF PERMITS, TO WIT: SECTION 6.2.3.1 TO ARTI- CLE I, RELATING TO GENERAL PROVISIONS, AND SECTION 6.45.l TO ARTICLE VIII, RELATING TO THE UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE, OF THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 1959. ORD. READOPT. OF NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE L Cm Miller mentioned that in this particular adoption (National Electrical Code by reference) there is also a section having to do with expiration periods. Since we have adopted expiration times of 90 days everywhere else he would suggest that the expira- tion times for this ordinance also be changed to 90 days to corres- pond with other expirations. Mr. Street explained that this matter was discussed and since it is not the prime permit, such as the building permit which usually con- trols the structure that 60 days was appropriate in this case. CM-39-49 May 5, 1975 (Ordinance re Adoption National Electrical Code) CM MILLER MOVED TO INTRODUCE THE ORDINANCE REGARDING ADOPTION OF THE NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE BY REFERENCE, AND TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR MAY 27. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM FUTCH AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. r'~ WEEKLY STATUS REPORT - CITY MANAGER Reclamation Plant Mr. Parness reported that the Water Reclamation Plant Reconstruc- tion program is progressing quite nicely and the digesters are back in service and are having no problem. EPA Program The EPA has a new program which may be beneficial to us. They are going into the training of plant operators and the training will be provided, without cost to the City. Next week the staff would like the Council to furnish certifi- cates to a few of our operators who have accomplished a pro- gression through the training ranks. It is rumored that the EPA may be changing some of its policies with regard to the construction of treatment plants. Theoretically, now, they have clamped down pretty hard and they continue to do so by virtue of areas that are considered to be in critical zones. T~at philosophy is being counteracted, reportedly, by some other thinking just to the need of upgrading construction. They may be thinking about entertaining applications of the kind he feels the Council would be interested in, to allow further considera- tion of added capacity - if it could be reserved. Building Permits Twenty-four building permits were issued last week and seven of these were for swimming pools. Tree Farm The City has engaged in a tree farm project on City property and these trees will be used at the golf course and other areas where trees are needed. Public Works The department supervisors are meeting with Union agents and the Director of Public Works is meeting with the shop stewards and business agents to talk about internal problems. We are now getting down to the business of talking about internal affairs and this procedure has been very productive. Greens Committee 'I J The Greens Committee has been meeting regularly and reviewing the budget. They have also been working with the County Tree Agent and a horticulturist is preparing a tree planting plan for the golf course. CM-30-50 May 5, 1975 c (Greens Committee) Mr. Parness stated that the City has experienced problems with evergreens at the golf course and the reason they will not grow is becuase of the chemicals in the water used for watering out there. He stated that the City has been advised to plant a new type of eucalyptus tree that will tolerate the water used and should flourish. He indicated that the new type is supposed to be less messy than the more common eucalyptus. Airport & Golf Course Wate~ Water for the airport and golf course has been completely trans- ferred to Zone 7. The City well can still be used but will be reserved for the extremely dry periods. Building Inspections During the month of April there were l6.5 building inspections done, per day, per man, and according to experts in the field a normal load is l5 inspections per day. Southern Pacific The City will be meeting with the Southern Pacific railroad people within the next two days concerning the prospects of trans- fering their soon to be vacated, right-of-way. This is for the trackage that extends eastwardly of First Street and will allow the relocation of First Street to that vacated right-of-way, and will accommodate the First Street overpass. Resurfacing Program The staff will soon be coming to the Council with the spring resurfac- ing program budgeted this year to the extent of $38,000. This is a reduced amount because of other expenditures. Holmes/Concannon Signals The Holmes Street/Concannon Boulevard traffic signals are expected to be in operation this week or next week. Planning ( ~/ We are reapplying for a state grant for the supplementary 75 acres along the Mocho channel area. We hope to acquire this area which will comprise part of the total lOO acres. The 25 acres are presently under property acquisition and the owner's attorneys have reviewed our appraisal which Mr. Parness feels is completely acceptable but with which they do not agree. They have had their own appraisal conducted and the values are almost lOO% in disparity. Unfortunately the City will have to go to eminent domain. This is the Woeffel property and the difficulty lies in the fact that this property is outside of the City and there is some question as to whether the City has the legal right to condemn property outside of the City. CM-30-51 May 5, 1975 Property Acquisition Listing Mr. Parness has previously given the Council a list of property to be acquired for park purposes and their priorities. He stated that he now has a map indicating the location of these properties. He stated that he wishes the City could have a full time person to handle the duties concerned with property acquisition. Acqui- sition is very intricate and time consuming. He will bring the map to the Council for review. The staff will be meeting with the Bikeways Association to discuss acquisition of property for bikeways and trailways and to discuss the progress of acquisition. The owner of the parcel of property on Wall Street adjacent to Pioneer Park has come to Mr. Parness indicating that he would be interested in selling to the City at the figure previously negotiated. He has been trying to sell this land to a private party but the private party has declined to buy the property and it would appear that the City will purchase the property. The property is now in escrow and the purchase should be com- plete within a week or two. LARPD feels this will be a good addition to the school park area, and they are very pleased that the City is purchasing the property. \ J Transportation Last week the Transportation Advisory Committee and Mr. Parness toured the the Santa Clara County transportation system. This is probably the largest public transportation system of its kind in the nation and is quite a revelation. It does incor- porate the "fixed route system" with a demand response system - the dial-a-ride type. The Transportation Commission has decided to discontinue the dial-a-ride (on the day they visited). He stated that, in essence, they were overwhelmed by their success and killed by their success. There was very little advertising done concerning the dial-a-ride system, except by newspaper accounts which indicated that all the public had to do was telephone a certain number and a bus would report to their door, pick them up and deliver them anyplace in the City for 25~. This amounted to phone delays of up to two hours, in the beginning, and now the Transportation Commission feels that they should only main- tain the small busses for commuting to and from work - work rela- ted to the transportation, for private charter, or educational use. The visit was very encouraging to the Livermore representatives and afforded a great deal of very valuable information. Weekend In-Service Training Program Mr. Parness reported that over the weekend there was an in-service training program produced by the Intergovernmental Management Institute for City Department heads, concerning communication. He felt this was one of the most valuable programs he has attended. Mental Health The Alameda County Mental Health Committee is having their big kick off program next week for fund raising and will be having a dinner at Castlewood next Monday night and they insist that someone represent the City of Livermore. -...-/ CM-30-52 Ci l/ May 5, 1975 ADJOURNMENT Mayor pro tempore Turner adjourned the meeting at 9:30 p.m. to an executive session to discuss appointments and personnel matters. APPROVE 1M )(~ May6r /\ / /' ~t~~f:-. ATTEST ,..:::;~~) ~ ;'" r . t:1 ...?J . / b0/. __~ Clerk vermore, California Regular Meeting of May l2, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on May l2, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:l0 p.m. with Mayor pro tempore Turner presiding. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor pro tempore Turner led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Futch and Tirsell Absent: None (One Seat Vacant) PROCLAMATION - BUDDY POppy SALES MONTH & NURSING HOME WEEK Mayor pro tempore Turner proclaimed May l3th to June 13th, Buddy Poppy Sales Month and the week of May llth, National Nursing Home Week, in the City of Livermore. MINUTES Special Meeting - April 28th Cm Tirsell noted that she was present at that meeting and the minutes indicate that she was absent. April 28, 1975 Page 23, second paragraph under Council Reorganization should read: Cm Futch stated that the reorganization has always taken place in public before...etc. ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF APRIL 28, 1975, WERE APPROVED, AS CORRECTED. CM-30-53 May 12, 1975 COUNCIL REORGANIZATION Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that the Council has been over the matter of Council reorganization and he feels his position on this item has been made clear from newspaper accounts over the weekend. CM TIRSELL MOVED TO NOMINATE CM FUTCH AS MAYOR, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEMPORE TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. \ .J Mayor Pro Tempore Turner stepped down at this time, and Mayor Futch took the chair. CM TIRSELL MOVED TO NOMINATE CM TURNER AS VICE MAYOR, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. LIVERMORE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN STUDY Bill Bennett, Chairman of the Airport Planning Committee, stated that Bill Zagotta, member of the Committee is also present and they wish to speak to the Council in consideration of the prelimi- nary study of the Airport Master Plan. He stated that the Council is not to take any action at this time but this is a matter of information for the Council and they will proceed and plan to reach completion of the plan in about three months. The objective of the study is to provide guidelines for future development at the airport. Mr. Bennett gave history concerning the airport which at one time was located at the site the PX Shopping Center presently occupies. During World War II the government purchased 360 acres there and designated it as an emergency landing field and at the end of the war GSA offered the 360 acres to Livermore for $1 but to be maintained as an air field. The City exercised this option and maintained it as a municipal airport. An Airport Com- mission was established and they concluded that the airport should be relocated to the Greenville area but professional help suggested a centrally located airport would be more advantageous to the whole area. The airport has grown from a $1 investment into a $3 million enterprise in an area that is convenient with respect to highway access and is aesthetically pleasing to this valley. August Compton, consultant , indicated that a progress report is being presented to the Council and it is hoped that dialogue will take place between the Councilmembers and the consultants as well as the staff. He then introduced members of his staff who have been involved in the planning project. Mayor Futch stated that this is a joint meeting between the Con- sultants, Council and the Planning Commission who are also sitting with the Councilmembers and whom he introduced to the audience. Mr. Castas explained that, basically, an airport master plan is a plan representing the planner's concept of the ultimate develop- ment of the airport and effectively presents research and logic from which this plan evolved including a graphic and written report. The broad objective of the Master Plan is to provide guidelines for future development and to try to be compatible with the environ- ment and the goals of the community and to also satisfy the avia- tion demands forcasted. Generally speaking the plan serves as a roadmap for the potential development and any projects based on ~ this plan will be decided upon in the future and predicated upon having three elements during the City process which Mr. Bennett originally eluded to - the need, desire, and capability. CM-30-54 c l May l2, 1975 ~r~et.k-) . (Livermore Airport '~,~ Master Plan Study) OKC~'-' The concept plan was based on the aviation demand forecast and socio- economic data which has been summarized in their report. The Livermore airport service area is that area contained in the Livermore-Amador valley, which he illustrated on the map. The present population of this area is approximately l28,000 and based upon "Series6X." projections of the Alameda County Planning Department the population projections for 1995 are 245,000. Correspondingly, the number of households will increase from 37,000 to 77,000. The economic base for the Livermore airport service will continue helping anticipated population growth in its expansion. It will remain primarily suburban economy with heavy commute to the urban core for employment. The local economy will continue to be strongly enfluenced by LLL: however, manufacturing and wholesale trade will become increasingly important. Retail and service sectors of the economy will expand to meet the needs of the increasing number of households. From the socio-economic base the aviation demand is determined and projected. In 1974 there were approximately 219 based aircraft at the airport with l65,000 operations - landing or takeoff. Based on an ownership ratio of 6.5 per l,OOO households it is estimated that there should be 500 based aircraft by 1995. This represents a 4% increase growth rate, annually, vs. 4.5% for Alameda County, 4.2% for the Bay Area and 3.9% for California. Aircraft operations are forecasted to increase to 340,000 which represents an approximate doubling. No commercial activity is anticipated but there is a potential for scheduled air taxi or commuter service. With respect to the environmental impact, the two most important concerns were those associated with the airport - the primary con- cern being the noise impact. It was desirous not to have any noise impact and they are describing noise impact as that area identified with the projected 65 CNEL (community noise equivalency level) or the methodology involved in determining aircraft noise impact on the community. Upon existing residential community east of the airport and southeast of the airport it was the goal to decrease or main- tain any pattern overflights over the existing community. While the normal growth of the airport, relating to air pollution, will cause an airport related emission their study utilizing the BAAPCD has determined that the increase in emission related to the airport will not exceed federal state standards, with the excep- tion of emissions presently exceeded. Another parameter of development was the socio-economic impact and relating to Concept V there will be a relocation of six fairways on the Las positas Golf Course because of a proposed runway extension. The approach area is a recommended land acquisition, by the City, for compatible development around the airport, and another improve- ment in Concept V is the parallel runway. Additional land requirements for the total planning include about 84 acres in the south apron and taxiway system and 36 acres for the clear zone - clear zones are mandatory requirements by the FAA for the protection of the airport on the approach and compatible land uses in the area. The major cost of the concept is a total of approximately $4 million and we would be eligible for federal matching funds of up to 80% or more and additional California airport program funds aid of lO% for the project. The program represents the ultimate development within a 20 year period and basically is inherently flexible. CM-30-55 May l2, 1975 (Livermore Airport Master Plan Study) The parallel runway is anticipated to become a reality within lO years or thereafter, if their forecasts are correct, at which time those operations would reach a peak and the parallel runway would be a necessity. ...~ At this point preliminary land use recommendations have been developed and generally speaking the consultant concurs with the General Plan proposals for both Livermore and Pleasanton. It is recommended that land be acquired for the clear zone, approach area, with recommenda- tions for compatible uses in the approach areas. The location of existing residential areas to the east precluded any type of development of the airport to the east. The existing agricultural zoning in that area should be continued based upon the present and potential noise impact. The presently proposed residential use in the General Plan in the areas to the east should be eliminated, which he illustrated on the map. The possible west- ward expansion of runway will require the City to relocate portions of the golf course into the Pleasanton Sphere of Influence and the acquisition of land for the runway and approach area will allow the shift. Cm Tirsell stated that she found the report from the consultants very interesting and did read it in detail but questioned Series "B" population predictions from the County. She stated that she is aware of the Series "E" and "D" which we use and the "EO" but is not sure about Series "B". Mr. Cone explained that "E" and "0" predictions are those which come from the State Population Research Office and late last year the Alameda County Planning Department undertook a set of studies of their own and came up with some revised estimates which are slightly lower (between liE" and "D") and were very conservative figures. The consultants chose to take the most conservative sets of figures for projections. _ WI Jl /::: ~- Cm Miller pointed out that Alameda County's Series '~' isn't relat~d to the Departme~t of Finan:e1so the .figure. ~~~ not fall 1nto the numbered 1 tems. rL./~~ 1ffit.re& Mr. Cone explained that the l57,000 population pr~ection for 1990 is the Alameda County projection for the Livermore-Amador Valley and since our service area is larger than that and since our projection goes to 1995 the consultants took the liberty of taking the County projections and extending them to the 1995 period and utilizing the Contra Costa County median projection for the San Ramon Valley portion within our service area - this is where the 245,000 household counts came from. Cm Turner asked about the forecast for the largest aircraft the airport will handle after its expansion and Mr. CaB~as indicated that the largest aircraft that could be handled would be the same as what can presently be accommodated. There will not be larger aircraft allowed. Mr. Castas explained that the two determining factors in allow- ing a certain size of aircraft would be l) length of the runway and 2) the weight bearing capacity of the runway. -_/ CM-30-56 May 12, 1975 (Livermore Airport Master Plan Study) The length of the runway will be longer but the weight bearing capacity will not be increased. This means that an aircraft larger than the F-27, presently operating there, cannot be accommodated. u Commissioner Simonen asked if there had been consideration that there may be less noise in a larger area when the 65 CNEL was determined. Mr. Cone explained that we are mandated by the state to work under the methodology that has been developed. CNEL does lack some defini- tive answers but is the best they have to work with. The areas studied concerning noise impact fall within the CNEL. The CNEL is a determination based on four factors: 1) type of aircraft flying into the facility, 2) time of day, 3) runway or flight pattern being used; and 4) present wind conditions Obviously there will be single event noises that will exceed the CNEL oontour but basically the 65 CNEL is a representation of these factors. Discussion followed concerning the noise level and decibels, and the area planned for residential development in accordance with the General Plan. Cm Miller stated that he feels the population projections are too high and the state is limiting sewer capacity, substantially. It is not clear that they will ever exceed more than l40,000 and it may be substantially less. Secondly, there was mention of the Bay Area growing at 3.5% but it is, in fact, growing at only l% at present. Mr. Castas explained that he was giving aircraft projections and not population projections. ern Miller pointed out that he feels the number of aircraft will decrease either because of fuel costs or shortage of fuel so that by 1990 there will not be as much airplane usage as there is at present because of operating costs and this does not seem to be something that was taken into account. He stated that it is a relatively new phenomenon. Cm Miller added that it was not clear to him from reading the report what was meant with respect to air pollution and the airport. Mr. Cone stated that they have met with the BAAPCD on developing the air pollution data for the Livermore Municipal Airport and right now they are using the maximum concentrations. The state- ment was that if you took away the background (contaminants that come from the Bay Area) airport emissions from auto access and aircraft (including automobiles going to the airport and golf course) do not exceed the federal standards now or in the future, with the exception of organics. L Cm Miller noted that the pollution from the Bay Area is here and we can't take it away. Mr. Cone explained that this is true but Livermore's emissions combined with the background does not exceed the standards or is comparable in most cases. He stated that each contaminant has to be taken as a separate analysis as to the standards. CM-30-57 May l2, 1975 (Livermore Airport Master Plan Study) The consultant further explained that they overstated the number of emissions because they took the entire take-off and landing cycle condensed into the 1 sq. kilometer. They felt that by overstating the emissions, in the final calculations they should be under the standard amount allowed. The BAAPCD is happy with the data and now they can refine the data and come up with terms that are easier to understand. t~ It was noted that the most conservative figures were used because at the time the study was being prepared observations were made of recommendations for no growth or letting growth continue on its natural curve, and at this point either position could be taken. with respect to shortage of fuel, it has been found that there is actually more flying being done and there is an increase in the growth of the number of aircraft with the rise in gasoline prices. Essentially, with the rise in gasoline prices it becomes more ex- pensive to operate an automobile than the cost of operating an aircraft. One member of the audience indicated that it would seem the runway would have to be enlarged from 5,000 ft. to 7,000 ft. and it was noted that it would not. Cm Miller asked if this presentation has been made to the City of Pleasanton and Mr. Castas replied that it has not, as yet, but it will be. RECESS Mayor Futch called for a brief recess after which the Council meeting resumed with all members of the Council present. OPEN FORUM (Election of Mayor) Gib Marguth, 1152 Farmington Way, stated that he would like to suggest a compromise between direct election of a Mayor and selection of a Mayor among the Councilmembers: At the next gen- eral municipal election advisory questions should be placed before the electorate. l) Shall the electors of the City of Livermore require that the candidate for City Councilmember receiving the highest number of votes be selected by the other four Councilmembers to serve as Mayor until the next municipal election? If adopted the policy shall remain in effect until it is again submitted to the electorate and amended or repealed. 2) Shall the Mayor receive a salary at twice the amount received by the other four Councilmembers? In 1968 the majority of the Council voted in favor of allowing the public to elect a mayor but two of the Councilmembers had just recently been elected and that Council concluded that it would be best to delay a possible referendum until a later date. Since that time no majority Council has favored direct election. Mr. Marguth added that the Council has seen little need for chang- ing to the process of direct election of Mayor but there are people who feel it is time that the people should directly elect the Mayor, even though the present system has worked reasonably well and the quality of our Mayors has been a reflection of the generally high caliber of individuals who have been elected as City Councilmembers. ) --.-/ Mr. Marguth stated that he as well as Bob Pritchard and other voters feel that the electorate should be allowed to participate in the selection of our Mayor and they have reached this conclusion because the Mayor is more than just the Chairperson at Council meetings and the first among equals. CM-30-58 May 12, 1975 (Electing a Mayor) Those who have served as Mayor know that the office carries with it much prestige and influence that is exerted throughout the County and beyond. Many people feel that the Mayor is the spokesperson for the City and the selection should not divide the Council. ."'--.. The Council, over the past few years, has rejected the normal process for direct election of Mayor, as is practiced in other general law cities and has refused to place the issue on the ballot. Most students of Livermore government believe it would be overwhelmingly endorsed by the electorate, as long as a large salary would not be involved. If the legislature will not act there are those who are prepared to circulate petitions and call for a vote on this important issue. He stated that in order to ex~edite matters he would suggest that questions concerning this matter be placed on the March 9, 1976, General Municipal Election. (Trash Containers) John Regan, stated that he would like to thank the City for the trash containers now located in front of National Auto Glass. Papers from the BART bus commuters are being deposited in the receptacles. (Excessive Bldg. Fees) Mr. Regan, 672 South "N" Street, stated that on two previous occasions he has appeared before the Council to discuss what he feels to be excessive building fees to obtain a building permit. a) ~he present fee schedule represents unfair taxation against the young people and the elderly. It would be better to charge everyone rather than to take advantage of the lower income families and the elderly. In his business he sees that it is increasingly difficult for young people to get started and the savings of the elderly are being diminished. b) The City spends a great deal of money for acquisition of parkland which cannot be maintained. He stated that if parks can't be maintained, why should we have them? He would like to urge that the City adopt a strong, stout anti-liter ordinance with teeth in it. c) Mr. Regan suggested that in addition to a provision for parking space for large trucks, perhaps there could be additional provisions that would allow people to take their cars there to work on them, rather than working on them in the street. Cm Miller stated that the point made by Mr. Regan about an anti-liter ordinance is very well taken but one of the problems with this type of ordinance is that they are very hard to enforce. He stated that he will, however, try to pursue this matter because the point is very well taken. CONSENT CALENDAR "- Report re Annual Street Resurfacing Council authorization is requested to call for bids on the 1974-75 Street Resurfacing Project estimated at $28,750 for the resurfacing of a portion of Murrieta Boulevard and El Caminito. Mr. Lee explained that the portion on Murrieta is creek fill area and was originally surfaced by a contractor. Even though the street is only about 10 years old differential in settling has occurred and resurfacing is necessary. CM-30-59 May l2, 1975 (Street Resurfacing) em Miller stated that if this is the case it should have been rejected by the soils engineer originally and Mr. Lee indicated that this is correct - it should not have been accepted and the job was inadequate but nevertheless it was accepted. RESOLUTION NO. 90-75 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING AND APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS ASCERTAINING WAGE SCALE AND DI- RECTING CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS. (1974-75 Street Resurfacing Project) Report re Final Improv. Tract 332l Public works improvements for Tract 3321 have been completed in accordance with the approved plans and City specifications and it is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution accepting future maintenance. RESOLUTION NO. 91-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF TRACT 332l Minutes The minutes from the Design Review Committee for their April 29th meeting and minutes from the Planning Commission for the meeting of April 29th were submitted to the Council. Cm Tirsell commented that there seems to be some confusion con- cerning the height of the lights for the intersection of First Street and North Livermore Avenue and it was noted that the lights are to be the same height as the lights on Second Street because in time all of the First Street lights will be converted to the type used on Second Street. Payroll & Claims There were 95 claims in the amount of $86,42l.76, dated April 30, 1975, approved by the City Manager. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (Council Agenda) The City Clerk commented that it is becoming increasingly difficult to get the expanded agenda folder to the Councilmembers on Wednes- day after the Monday meetings and asked if it would create a hard- ship to get the agenda out on Thursday, occasionally. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE COUNCIL APPROVED THE POLICY OF EXTENDING THE DAY FOR RECEIVING AGENDAS TO THURSDAY. CM-30-60 ~ Q May 12, 1975 (ACAP/ACTEB Funds) Mr. Parness stated that a couple of weeks ago a Mr. Sandles spoke to the Council about a training program funded through ACAP/ACTEB and the Council endorsed the program, in principle, for machinist training. . " L; Mr. Sandles has requested that the item be mentioned to the Council once again and Mr. Parness has spoken with the ACAP people and has reviewed the application by Mr. Sandles. It is the opinion of the ACAP staff that it would be inappropriate to endorse a project like this and very little is being done by the official local agencies. This particular application has very little chance for success because of the amount of money that will be allocated for the valley community, noMe of which is to be used for this type of project, i.e., on the job training, but rather is to be devoted to other types of things such as work experience. Cm Tirsell stated that as a member of the ACAP Board she would suggest that the Council take no position on any application for ACAP/CETA funding projects, prior to re- view by the ACAP Advisory Committee. She added that the individual Councilmembers may know of certain groups that they feel should receive funding for a particular project and if this is the case they should, as an individual, con- tact the Advisory Committee, by letter. (Joint Meeting with Planning Consultants) Mr. Parness commented that there is a joint meeting between the Council and the Planning Commission scheduled for Wednesday, May l4th, at 8:00 p.m. at the Airport Administration building with the planning consultants. (Mailboxes) Cm Turner stated that he attended the Mayors Conference at which time the curbside mail delivery was discussed and it was concluded that they would again adopt a motion opposing the curb- side delivery. At the meeting Cm Turner suggested that alternatives be suggested to our legislators and he was asked to draft a letter to be sent to Washington D.C., and with the Council's permission he will send the letter to the Mayors Conference Secretary for forwarding. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE COUNCIL APPROVED THE LETTER TO BE SENT TO THE LEGISLATORS. (Council Organization) Cm Turner stated that very soon the Council will be discussing Council organization and would suggest that at that time or shortly thereafter the Council discuss the category of Council goals or Mayor's goals during the coming year with the concept of folding it in with the budget. c' (Funds for Transportation) Cm Miller stated that he read in the newspaper that there are trans- portation funds available for transportation for the elderly and won- dered if the Transportation Committee has investigated the possibility of obtaining some of these funds. CM-30-6l May l2, 1975 (Transportation Funds) Mr. Parness replied that the Transportation Committee has not been involved in this particular matter but the staff has been in contact with the Alameda County Commission concerning the subsidized taxi service and Cm Turner has given the staff a great deal of information that is being reviewed. Cm Miller stated that he would hope Livermore could receive some of the funds but if nothing else, we could support Pioneer Lines to provide transportation to the elderly because this really is a major issue concerning the Springtown people. i.,~ (Pleasanton Sphere of Influence) Cm Miller feels it is difficult to come to an informed decision about Pleasanton's Sphere of Influence without a copy of the LAFCO staff report and without a copy of the EIR and asked that the staff try to obtain copies of these. (Council's 5 Min. Rule) em Miller stated that he feels it would be very helpful if the local newspapers would explain the Council policy concerning the five minute speaking rule because there seems to be a great deal of misunderstand- ing. The Council policy allows people an opportunity to speak and the rule states that a presentation lasting longer than five minutes should be in writing and submitted to the Council prior to the meeting so that the Council may reflect upon what the speaker has to say and comments by the speaker can then be summarized before the Council, within the five minutes allowed. He added that the City of Livermore has always allowed the public to speak and they prefer that the public continue to be allowed to do so. There are many cities who do not allow the public any input except for public hearings. (Buenas Vidas Project) Cm Tirsell stated that COVA has voted to support the Buenas Vidas Youth Ranch Project at the Del Valle Sanitorium site and COVA will undertake a mailing to all interested private and public bodies who can see potential use for the site. An event will be held on June 7 at 10:00 a.m. at the site and COVA is inviting anyone who might be interested in offering input as to how the buildings should be preserved and what uses should be allowed at the site. (COVA Discussion - One Valley City) ern Tirsell stated that COVA has set a study concerning a one valley City and she has appointed a task force to review all the implica- tions. The study will begin July lst. (Airport Master Plan) ,~ Cm Tirsell stated that the City of Pleasanton has asked that there be a presentation on the Airport Master Plan and the COVA Directors indicated they would like to see a presentation made to Pleasanton. This meeting will take place next month and in return the COVA Board has asked that Pleasanton present the Stoneridge Shopping Center and implications concerning Valley environment and affects on general business and economy in the Valley. CM-30-62 May l2, 1975 (COVA Budget) L/ Cm Tirsell stated that COVA cannot prepare their budget until they know that there are commitments from other cities to support them and would suggest that the City adopt a resolution setting a sum, not to exceed $4,000, for support of the COVA Agency, as was done last year. She indicated that only $l,500 of this was spent but COVA does need to know what they have to work with. CM TURNER MOVED TO APPROVE $4,000 FOR SUPPORTING COVA FOR NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Isabel Parkway) Cm Tirsell asked if anything has been done with respect to reserv- ing land for the Isabel Parkway and Mr. Parness replied that the appraisal is underway and we need this figure before approaching the County. Cm Tirsell stated that apparently there has been no response from EPA or the State Water Quality Control Board so we don't know if they have a population limit for the Valley or how they intend to disperse the Clean Water Grant funds and would like our Council to discuss subnitting to LA~~, our request to discuss sewer expansion, proposed and pending, for the Valley: how funds will be expended and what cities will receive what funds; and what cities will have excessive population beyond the funding. em Tirsell commented that she would like the press to understand, when writing about this item, that these are not expansion grants but rather clean water grants with $600 million available to the State of California and there must be a very clear purpose in applications for cleaning up water and effluent of current treat- ment plants. (Parking - Gen. Plan) Cm Futch stated that he has talked to the Transportation Committee concerning parking management and wondered if this is being con- sidered in the General Plan by our consultants and Mr. Parness indicated that he would hope so and will bring this to their atten- tion. COMMUNICATION RE STREET LIGHTING Earlier in the meeting it was noted that the lights for the inter- section of First Street and Livermore Avenue should be consistent in height with those on Second Street because in time the First Street lights will be changed to conform to the Second Street lights. COMMUNICATION FROM VCSD RE SEWER MATTERS ( . ~/ The Council received a copy of a summary of VCSD's position con- cerning sewer matters in the Amador Valley. Cm Tirsell felt it would be useful to send VCSD copies of the letters the City have sent to EPA and to the State Water Quality Board, so that VCSD will know what our concerns are concerning sewer matters. CM-30-63 May 12, 1975 COMMUNICATIONS RE COUNCILMEMBER APPOINTMENT Letters requesting that the Council consider Ray Faltings to fill the Councilmember vacancy were submitted by Rose Guido, 1855 Fifth Street, and Barbara Enos, 403 Junction Avenue. RE PROPOSED Z.O. AMEND. RE STORAGE OF TRAILERS .~..~ Mayor Futch stated that it is his understanding that the basic difference between what the Planning Commission is recommending and what Cm Miller has recommended is that the Planning Commission would allow storage of trailers, boats, etc., in those residential zones where there is not access to the rear - RL-5, RL-5-0 and RL-6. Cm Miller stated that there is another fundamental basic difference which is that the recommendation of the P.C. is inconsistent with the public vote taken on this issue and the amendments offered by him are consistent with that public vote. Cm Turner asked if unmounted campers would be allowed in the front yard and Cm Miller stated that they would not - that was the whole point. A car, truck or mounted camper would be allowed if it is less than lO ft. high and less than 19 ft. long. Mayor Futch stated that the Council must make a decision as to whether it will agree with the recommendations of the P.C. or with those made by Cm Miller. Cm Miller stated that it is a question of whether the P.C. draft will be adopted or whether a draft, consistent with the public vote, will be accepted. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT THE DRAFT AMENDED, TO BE CON- SISTENT WITH THE PUBLIC VOTE, MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Cm Turner stated that it is very difficult for him to tell someone that they cannot place their trailer in a front yard, particularly when they cannot get to the back yard. Many of the homes do not have sideyard storage because the side yard is not sufficient. Mayor Futch stated that he would like to suggest different wording for B. (l), as follows: The observed parking of any vehicle, trailer, or similar equipment at the same approximate location at two successive times within a one week period, not less than seventy-two (72) hours apart shall be deemed to be storage. Mr. Musso explained that the time period (within one week) was dis- cussed at length by the P.C. and they concluded that it might be possible that a complaint might be received and a recheck might not be made for possibly 7-8 days after the complaint was made. Mayor Futch stated that he doesn't really feel strongly about specify- ing one week but felt some time limit should be mentioned - the mini- mum is 72 hours but there should be some type of maximum. There may be storage for a year. Mayor Futch suggested that the wording be changed to "within a two week period" rather than one week if this seems to create a problem. i I -/ eM TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE P.C. RECOMMENDATIONS WITH THE NOTED CHANGE MADE BY ~1A YOR FUTCH, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. CM-30-64 May l2, 1975 (Trailer Storage) Mayor Futch pointed out that the intent of the P.C. was that this would apply to zones where access to the rear is not provided. u Cm Turner wondered what the P.C. recommendations would prohibit and Mr. Musso stated that this would prohibit the storage in a front yard for more than 72 hours within a two week period. The exceptions would be in the RL-5, RL-5-0, and RL-6 Zones. The majority of the homes in these zones do not have back yard access. Ruth Schrawyer, 680 Meadowlark, stated that they have a camper that is parked in their driveway because they do not have sideyard access and there is nowhere to store it. She stated that camping is something her whole family enjoys and it is becoming expensive and if they have to pay to store it elsewhere they would have to give it up. She felt people should have the right to store their belongings on their own property. Mayor Futch stated that he believes Meadowlark is one of the zones in which people would be allowed front yard storage. Robert Malone, 1357 Saybrook, stated that in effect, the Planning Commission is suggesting that if you don't want to live in an area where trailer storage in the front is allowed one must move to a newer area where sideyards are provided and would be an expense to the individual. Regardless of how close the vote may have been, ~t did indicate that an ordinance restricting front yard storage was a desire of the people. He stated that he is re- stricted from doing certain things such as placing an 8 ft. fence around his lot so that he won't have to look at trailers stored in front or removing a City tree which he is required to maintain. Cm Turner remarked that he feels the Council is not really going against the wish of the people and that what people wanted was for some of the things to be cleaned up and he feels the ordi- nance proposed will satisfy most of the problems. Cm Miller stated that most of the complaints he has received about trailers and campers have come from the zones which will now be permitted front yard storage. He stated that he would also like to point out that the RL-5, RL-5-0 and RL-6 zones represent a major fraction of the City and also a major fraction of the vote. ' L 1) Every City in the County, with the exception of Hayward, has an ordinance that corresponds roughly with the way the people voted here in Livermore and the amendments he has proposed: 2) storage facilities are available. Also, Mr. Malone has made a point in that properties in these zones will be adversly affected by allowing storage in front yards. Cm Miller added that there was a public vote against front yard storage, as well as very organized support for front yard storage and there were valid arguments presented from both sides. l1hen everything was over with the vote was in favor of eliminating front yard storage and in his opinion in our American system if there is only one vote more than the majority it is nonetheless a win. He would argue that for the Council majority to go contrary to a well advertised public vote is a public disgrace. MOTION PASSED 3-l (Cm Miller dissenting) . CM-30-65 May l2, 1975 Res. Auth. Exec. of Agreement - H. L. Kamp ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT WITH FRANCES AND H. L. KAMP WAS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION NO. 92-75 .~ A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (Harold L. and Frances R. Kamp) PROPOSED SPHERE OF INFLUENCE FOR VCSD AND PLEASANTON Cm Miller noted that earlier in the meeting he mentioned that prior to coming to a decision on the matter of the Sphere of Influence for VCSD and the City of Pleasanton, we should have the EIR and LAFCO report and MOVED TO CONTINUE FOR ONE WEEK, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RE S. RE CRH1E CONTROL PROGRAM Mr. Parness commented that he has furnished the Council with a great deal of information concerning the crime control program which is rather inclusive but essentially what is being recommended by the staff is support from the Council for continuance of the Criminal Justice Planning Program for the state. Apparently the governor has withheld substantial funds from the program because he has decided to take issue with it. Our City has benefited sub- stantially from the program and this would be an endorsement for continuance, with the recommendation that there be more local con- trol in the administration of the grant programs. eM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION URGING RETENTION OF THE PROGRAMS, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL. Glen Strahl, 768 Adams Avenue, asked that the Council not approve the resolution. He stated that there is a struggle for control of money at the state level between the governor and the regional boards and it is affecting us as to whether we will be able to continue our programs. This is not an isolated situation and we are struggling with other agencies over money for other programs. This is money that has come from the taxpayers and if the money was in our local treasury we wouln't be fighting to have our programs continued. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 93-75 A RESOLUTION URGING RETENTION OF THE LAW EN- FORCEMENT ASSISTANCE ADMINISTRATION PROGRAMS REPORT RE AB 625 Mr. Parness indicated that the Council had asked that this item be continued from the last meeting so that there could be review of action taken last year with respect to AB 2040 which was about the same as AB 625 concerning Bay Area Planning. He stated that the primary difference is a strong amendment which happens to be the most controversial issue of all - the "super mayor" concept. J CM TIRSELL MOVED TO WITHHOLD SUPPORT OF AB 625 UNTIL THE CONCEPT OF A SUPER MAYOR IS WITHDRAWN FROM THE BILL. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER. CM-30-66 May l2, 1975 (re AB 625) Cm Miller stated he would have made the motion differently and would suggest wording such as: The Council supports the funda- mental concept of AB 625 but oppose the whole issue unless the "super mayor" is removed. L; Cm Tirsell indicated that this was the intent of her motion. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. (COMARC) REPORT RE GRUNWALD-CRAWFOro PLANNING CONTRACT AMENDMEN~ The City Manager reported that the planning consultants for the General Plan have urged the City's formal participation in some technical computerized land information system produced by COMARC (Computerized Planning Information System). This system discloses a wide variety of information pertaining to planning and land use for our community and translates from computer files to maps sub- divided into a grid system. The matter has been defined and maps have been displayed for review by the Council in the past. In accordance with Council direction the staff has negotiated with the consultant a division of cost for this work and it is proposed that a cost be borne as follows: 2/3 by the consultant, l/3 by the City of Livermore with a maximum expense of $5,000 to the City. Ron Walters of COMARC Design Systems, stated that the use of the computer in the General Plan process would be an extension of what Grunwald-Crawford's contract calls for but would allow them to go into more depth than would otherwise be possible. The cost to Grunwald-Crawford would be $15,000 and if this system is used it will be used to produce the suitability map to be used in the General Plan. He stated that there is cost involved in keeping maps up to date and the cost will be less by using this method because it happens to be very time consuming to take old maps and change them or to have to redraw a map and change data, while punching a couple of new IBM cards is very quick. He commented that updating material by the new system would cost about $1,000. Cm Miller stated that he would like to suggest that prior to giving formal approval to this contract, it should be reviewed by persons with computer experience to make sure the wording of the contract will get something for the City that will be of value and not just boxes of computer cards or computer tapes. He suggested that if there is approval it be subject to review by knowledge- able people CM MILLER MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONTRACT, SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY SOMEONE WITH PROGRAMMING ABILITY AND IF THERE ARE CHANGES IN THE WORDING THIS CAN BE WORKED OUT DURING THE WEEK. Mr. Walters stated that they would be agreeable with this motion. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 94-75 ( A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT (Grunwald, Crawford & Associates) REPORT RE AIRPORT LEASE AMENDMENT Mr. Parness reported that the lessees on the two airport lot sites where buildings are situated are attempting to have financing CM-30-67 May l2, 1975 (Airport Lease Amend.) transferred to a lending institution and this has been with a great deal of difficulty. The lessees have come to the staff with the prospects of this being done but the institution that will be the lender has required of them that the lease be modified so that they will now exercise their option to extend their lease for an additional lO years past the date of the expiration term. That, in essence, is what this request is for. The staff is asking that the Council approve a resolution accepting that option. J ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED AS REQUESTED. RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 CONCONSENT TO ASSIGNMENT OF LEASES (Eschen, et al to Airport One and Airport Two) REPORT RE AGREE. AMEND. - DANAT INVEST. The City Manager reported that the agreement between the City and Danat Investment Company was for improvement of industrial properties off of Vasco Road and there were some requirements and a CUP that Naylor Avenue be improved within five years or at such time as the property across the street improved. A bond was to be posted with the City insuring that this be done and just recently the company has come to the City to report that the plant is finished and they want the building to be occupied. with respect to Naylor Avenue, Danat has concluded that they will do the necessary street improvements this year and therefore they have asked permission to modify the permit changing the five year term to one year and thereby changing the bond requirements from five years to one year. CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE AMENDMENT, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 96-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT (Danat Invest- ment Company) REPORT RE VCSD SOLID WASTE AGREEMENT Mr. Parness reported that VCSD has contacted the City and they are ready to enter into an arrangement with the same rubbish collection firm as our City has and VCSD would like to specify that the same rubbish site used by our City be used by them which is a site along Vasco Read owned by Ralph Properties, Inc. The City's original contract with Ralph Properties, Inc. indicates that in the event their permit is withheld by governmental authori- ties they would guarantee that the property would be transferred to the City for operational rights so the service of the disposal site would not be interrupted. All the agreement with VCSD says, is that ) the City of Livermore would still allow VCSD to use the site in the -/ event the City takes over the operation or legal title of the dump site. CM-30-68 May 12, 1975 (VCSD - Solid Waste) ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT WITH VCSD WAS ADOPTED. G RESOLUTION NO. 97-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (Valley Community Services District) RECESS Mayor Futch called for a brief recess, after which the Council meeting resumed with all members of the Council present. ORD. RE APPT. OF COUNCILMEMBER FOR SPECIFIED TERM Cm Miller stated that he has asked that an ordinance be drafted to appoint a Councilmember for a specific term because the Council has the legal authority to make an appointment to fill out a three year term which he feels has no advantages. Many people feel the Council should hold an election to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Bob Pritchard, and there is merit to that proposal but unfortunately this would cost the City something in the order of $lO,OOO. -:i!l.!iEBIC~/. The proposed ordinance would allow for a short term appoint- ment and allows the Council to proceed but also provides for an election fairly soon, during the 1976 municipal election. It would seem that such an ordinance would be satisfactory from all points of view and, consequently, he would urge the Council to adopt an ordinance of this type. CM MILLER MOVED TO INTRODUCE AND ADOPT THE ORDINANCE APPOINT- ING A COUNCILMEMBER. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cm Turner stated that he concurrs with the comments made by Cm Miller becuase everyone he has talked to feels this would be an appropriate plan at this time. Cm Tirsell stated that she can see advantages to adoption of an ordinance such as this, to her personally, because this would take the "heat" off the issue if it is decided this evening. The Council will have compromised by both making an appointment and going to an election and it might be said that the Council will have tried to accommodate all of the people in the community. It could also be said that the Council saved $10,000 by not having a special election but her concern is not for the heat nor the criticism that comes with the job but this is just one of the many intense issues the Councilmembers face. Cm Tirsell continued to say that Livermore is an opinionated town with many active citizens and if the heat goes out of this town all of us, as citizens, have cause for real concern. She stated that she intends to vote against the ordinance because the Council is a representative form of government and members of this Council are elected representatives and as such are charged with specific duties. The Council must file a budget with the County of Alameda by September 3rd each year, must determine a policy for the management of this city, and are sworn to uphold the laws of the State of California. CM-30-69 May l2, 1975 (re Appt. of Councilmember) Cm Tirsell stated that the Government Code of California states, "The City Council shall fill any vacancy occuring in the offices provided in this Chapter, by appointment. If a vacancy occurs in the elective office and the City Council fails to fill it within 30 days, it shall immediately cause an election to be held to fill the vacancy. A person appointed or elected to fill a vacancy holds office for the unexpired term of the former incumbent." ') ...J Cm Tirsell stated that this is not permissive legislation, it says you "shall". The Councils of Livermore, in the past, have made appointments to fill vacancies without seeing fit to limit the terms nor to call for special elections. In the recent past the Councils of Pleasanton, Hayward and the VCSD Board have made appointments to complete their ranks and she feels there is nothing exceptional about this appointment that delineates it from the appointments made in other communities nor from other appointments made by past Livermore Councils. Cm Tirsell added that there are provisions in the Government Code for the circumstance that this, or any other Council, cannot find a majority to support one person. The Code provides that the vacancy will be filled by an election and again she stated she does not foresee that this Council will find itself in this position. She felt the proposed ordinance would weaken the Code because the ordinance is designed for this particular circumstance and this particular Council. She stated that the ordinance appears to provide the best of "both worlds - an appointment and an election", and in her opinion this is an example of situation ethics. She stated that she feels this would be setting a precedent if there are future vacancies and future Councilmembers may feel obligated to alter the Code to respond to the heat of their particular set of circumstances. Cm Tirsell stated that she feels there are a number of qualified people from which an appointment can be made and that is is the responsibility of the Council to make such a selection. If the Council cannot come to an agreement in 30 days the electorate will decide and she feels this is representative government at work. Cm Miller stated that he appreciates the point of view expressed by Cm Tirsell and it certainly is a well reasoned argument and does have some merit. There are two things he would like to mention and these are: 1) The Council has made appointments in the past to fill Council seats - the one he knows of per- sonally was the appointment of Clyde Taylor for the vacant seat of Manuel Medeiros, for a term of one year, which was the remainder of the term. 2) Cm Tirsell mentioned the "shall" aspect of the Government Code but words which provide for the temporary appointment says something to the effect that previous sections, notwithstanding, the City Council "may" do the type of thing being proposed. The City is authorized by statute to provide an ordinance of this kind, should the Council so desire. Mayor Futch asked if there is the possibility that if a short term appointment is made someone (person appointed) could sue the City because the law says that he shall hold the seat for the remainder of the term? The City Attorney indicated this is a very good possibility; however, there is a big difference between stating a cause of action and winning a law suit. ! J Discussion followed concerning legalities and possible problems. CM-30-70 May l2, 1975 (Ordinance re Appointment Councilmember for Specified Term) , U Mr. Parness wondered if the ordinance is adopted and put into effect, were later challenged and declared to be invalid because of the 30 day referendum term, would this possibly invalidate all actions this Council would have taken during that 30 day period? Mr. Logan indicated this is certainly a possibility. Cm Turner stated that he really had not thought about the heat on the Council over this matter but felt it was a matter of moral obligation to allow the public to vote for a replacement for someone who had originally been elected to office. Bob Pritchard was elected by the citizens of Livermore and Cm Turner feels they should have the right to choose a replacement. Cm Tirsell asked that Councilmernbers not take that particular phrase personally because these were her feelings on the matter. Mayor Futch stated that valid points have been brought up during the discussion but there do seem to be some possible legal prob- lems and would therefore be reluctant to vote in favor of the motion. CM TIRSELL CALLED FOR THE QUESTION AND THE MOTION FAILED 2-2 (Cm Tirsell and Mayor Futch dissenting) . THE ORDINANCE WAS NOT INTRODUCED. ORD. RE MUNI. CODE AMEND. - CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE The City Attorney has asked for the introduction and adoption of an ordinance relating to the administration of the Livermore City Code to add a new Article, Article VII, relating to the City Attorney. A written report was submitted to the Council concerning this matter and the City Attorney stated that he has nothing to add orally because everything has been covered in writing. The essence of the report is the request that the City Attor- ney answer to the Council directly, rather than the City Manager and that a new position (Administrative Assistant) be approved. Cm Turner stated that he would be in favor of the proposed ordi- nance based on the philosophy that the City Council directly hires two people - the City Manager and the City Attorney, and feels it should not be implied that the City Attorney works for the City Manager. He stated that he does feel people have been of this opinion in the past, and in his opinion these two depart- ments should be clearly separated and clearly defined. In his opinion there should be a separate budget to be approved by the Council and also each should have control of the employment of their individual staffs. c CM TURNER MOVED TO INTRODUCE THE ORDINANCE, SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Cm Tirsell stated that she feels it would not be unreasonable to ask that the City Attorney submit his budget to the City Manager for any comment he may have. CM-30-7l May l2, 1975 (Proposed Ordinance re City Attorney's Office) Mr. Logan stated he would appreciate the City Manager's counsel on budget matters, but since this is an ordinance that applies to other than himself, some future attorney may have a different attitude on his attempt to put into effect whatever authority he might have. :'J Cm Tirsell suggested that the wording on page 2 of the ordinance be changed to reflect this and that in the last paragraph of Sec. 2.62 the last sentence read: The City Attorney shall prepare and submit to the Manager and the Council a proposed annual budget etc. Cm Miller offered an alternative that the present wording is okay, but add, "This budget shall also be submitted to the City Manager for his review and comment", to which Cm Tirsell agreed. Mr. Parness asked if it was intended that that wording and process- ing would be the same procedures that are used for all of the depart- ments, and Crn Tirsell replied that it would, and that it was her intention for the City Manager to use his red pencil and say that certain items cannot be justified and send it to the Council and it would be up to the City Manager to rejustify it, otherwise how could the Council make a judgment without this input. Crn Miller stated that was not his intent his intent is that the budget be submitted to the Council by the City Attorney, and that the City Manager review and comment. Mr. Parness stated there was a very important distinction, and Cm Tirsell stated she understood, and it was not her intention that if the City Manager used a red pencil that it would be final. Mr. Parness stated that it was not final with any of the departments as the final decision is made by the City Council. Cm Miller stated that the point is the City Attorney's budget is sub- mitted to the Council, not to the City Manager. Cm Tirsell agreed, but stated they needed to resolve this for the City Manager because if he does review the budget at the same time he does the other departments, what he is looking for is to keep the whole thing in balance. Perhaps it is all a matter of timing. Mr. Parness stated that is the fundamental reason for his fervent view on this matter as they are talking about coordination of a budgetary process. Cm Turner asked the City Attorney if he had any objection to either wording change, and Mr. Logan replied that it would be minimal either direction, as the Council still makes the ultimate decision on the budget. If the City Manager presents to the Council a balanced budget, including the City Attorney's budget, Mr. Logan stated he assumes he has the opportunity to argue back in any sections the City Manager has taken out, and the City Council would make the final decision. Cm Miller stated his reason for the argument he has is that if the City Attorney presents the Council with his budget, they see his budget and what the City Manager has crossed out, rather than seeing what has been crossed out and having the City Attorney come back with additions. J em Turner amended his motion to include the wording offered by Cm Miller as follows: "THIS BUDGET SHALL ALSO BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY MANAGER FOR HIS REVIEW AND COMMENT". MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM MILLER. CM-30-72 May 12, 1975 (Proposed Ordinance re City Attorney's Office) Cm Tirsell referred to Sec. 2.65 re appointment and removal of employees and stated it was the intent of the City Attorney to consult with the Personnel Officer and the City Manager, however for the future she would prefer to add the statement, "after consultation with Personnel Officer and City Manager". '0 Mr. Logan stated he did not intend for the ordinance to do anything other than to allow for hiring in the regular classified way by refer- ring to the list of the three top choices and there would be a range of salary and that he would be able to request a salary within that range. Mr. Parness pointed out that there is again a startling difference between current practices and what is being suggested; it is a contra- vention of the present personnel rules of the City which state that the appointing authority is the City Manager - the selecting authority are the various department heads. Technically, according to the rules the City Manager is the final authority on the employment of the person, each of whom is selected by the department head. Mr. Logan stated he would be happy to change the wording to say "select", assuming that the practice of the City is that he have some selection. His intent is not to do it much differently than the way it is being done now. Cm Tirsell suggested that section 2.65 state: liThe City Attorney shall select such employees, etc." to keep the ordinance in conformance. Cm Tirsell stated she did not understand why the City Attorney would need compensation and expenses and also official traveling expenses and asked why these were listed separately. Mr. Logan replied that he had picked this up from the City Manager's section and this was the reason he had listed them separately. Cm Tirsell stated that in the last section wherein it referred to the City Attorney or his representative attending meetings of the Planning Commission or other Commissions she would suggest that it be without additional compensation. Mr. Logan replied that this is part of the job and both he and his assistant would be the only ones who would attend and they are both salaried and would have no claim to overtime. Mr. Kolster stated one thing that has been overlooked in the entire discussion is the actual creation of positions. If that is taken away from the City Manager's office or prerogative, it would take away the overall review of classification plans in which employees all fit together into the City of Livermore. It is an extremely important issue that should be considered. If the Council does go the direction they are presently steering for it may have great consequences on other employees who work for the City. Mayor Futch stated there is one prime difference between the office of the City Manager and any other department within the City - they are the only two staff members who work directly for the Council - the City Manager and the City Attorney. "" ~..- L, Mr. Parness stated that what the ordinance does is actually establish two additional classifications which is not done by ordinance form. There is a classification system used and there is a salary resolu- tion that extracts classifications and assigns wages. The City does not ordinarily set up subclassifications by ordinance as this does. If there is to be an ordinance which establishes CM-30-73 May l2, 1975 (Proposed Ordinance re City Attorney's Office) the office of City Attorney and defines his duties and responsibilities, that is fine. He has no objection to that, but he does not think it is necessary. But to set up separate classifications and in addition the other two points he feels so strongly about - budgetary review and the selection of other employees for the depart~ mentthese are important matters. I \ \--/ Mr. Logan presented his reasons for Sections 2.63 and 2.64 of the proposed ordinance regarding the appointment of an Assistant City Attorney and Administrative Assistant to the City Attorney and felt that there was more than adequate justification for having those people in positions that he can not only appoint them, but control their salary or at least request their salaries of the Council directly without having to worry about how the City Manager might classify them. He also felt strongly that the administrative assistant to the City Attorney is a position that presently could be filled by a present staff member. Mr. Parness repeated that an ordinance establishing a department of the City is not the place for the assignment of classifications no more than it is for his department or any others as there is a classification plan for that. The ordinance might state that "legal professional assistance as deemed necessary by the City Attorney, subject to the review and concurrence of the City Council, shall be selected by him" or something in that order. Mr. Parness stated that to specifically assign a job title in a specific section in the ordinance is improper and unnecessary. As for the administra- tive assistant, Mr. Parness stated he felt it is obvious that that title and that position is being manufactured for the one employee presently in the department, and he had no quarrel with that person's ability. However the City was very careful in making its survey for relative salary levels for all departments, including the City Attorneys, and all legal assistants are in so-called classified service and are not exempt. The staff was very careful when they queried the other employee groups in ascertaining what an official legal secretary does and it is duplicative of what this person does that the City Attorney is talking about. He felt that the person was qualified and competent, but he did not believe it justi- fies a separate, exempt, unclassified administrative assistant category with the inferred higher salary level. Mr. Logan agreed he had suggested a higher salary leve1,and went on to point out that what she does is improper as a secretary as she is doing professional work. If he conceded the City Manager's point, he would have to concede that he can do nothing for his secretary because she was locked into a position created by the City Manager. Mr. Parness stated that he gets this same reasoning from every department head at budget hearing time; each one believes his princi- pal clerical staff member is exceptional and justifies a little different attention. There has to be a coordination of this kind of thing, if not there is complete devisiveness so that you will have somebody who has the same relative duties, responsibilities and abilities being paid different depending on persuasiveness of her employer to the City Council. Mayor Futch stated it might be appropriate to consider these sections ) in a separate motion, however he was reminded that the motion was --/ made to adopt and amended to include the wording concerning the budget. Mr. Logan read the new paragraph which he had written concerning Sec. 2.65 as follows: The City Attorney may select such employees as in the opinion of the Council are necessary to properly serve the City Attorney. Said employees shall be selected in accordance with personnel rules and regulations of the City of Livermore. CM-30-74 May l2, 1975 (Ord. re City Attorney's Office) I V Cm Tirsell stated that if there are other women employees who do more than secretarial work, and there are some, that are that valuable #. the Council should consider creating administrative assiS~n~~fqr~~.~ ./. these women. This had nothing to do with the motion, but ~e c8uId I,' I see that the other department heads had very valuable women in thei 1 . office who do more than ordinary secretarial work. She suggested that the Council look into this matter. A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION AT THIS TIME AND PASSED 3-l WITH MAYOR FUTCH DISSENTING, AS HE WAS NOT SURE ABOUT SEC. 2.64. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting adjourned at 12:00 midnight to an executive session for discussion of appointments and adjourned to an executive session on May 15th, at 12:00 noon in the City Hall Conference Room. APPROVE litd; t:.~4/ ayor Lf"~ ~ 1 , .,~. , .' " .....,, . --eL ty Clerk L vermore, California ATTEST Regular Adjourned Meeting of May l5, 1975 An adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on Thursday, May l5, 1975, at 12:00 noon, in the Conference Room, City Hall, 2250 First Street, Livermore, California. The meeting immediately adjourned to an executive session to discuss appointments, and adjourned at 1:25 p.m. Present: Absent: Cm Turner, Miller, Tirsell and Mayor Futch None (One Vacant Seat) APPROVE /kck // ~,d-/ Mayor ATTEST (/ ~, CM-30-75 Special Meeting - May 19, 1975 A special meeting of the City Council was called by Mayor Futch for Monday, May 19, 1975, at 7:00 p.m. at the City Hall Confer- ence Room, at 2250 First Street, Livermore. Purpose of the meeting: To discuss appointments. Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Tirsell and Mayor Futch Absent: None (One Seat Vacant) \ J Mayor Futch called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and immediately adjourned the meeting to an executive session to discuss appointments. The meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m. APPROVE M47 / ;K~/J:// Mayor ATTEST ~ r -' .:.1" City Clerk . . Livermore, California Regular Meeting of May 19, 1975 A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Livermore was held on May 19, 1975, 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, Tirsell and Mayor Futch Absent: None (Vacant Council Seat) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Futch led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. MINUTES May 5, 1975 Page 44, under Los positas Plan, the first four lines should read: Cm Miller stated that we appealed to ABAG's Regional Planning Com- mittee and Executive Board concerning the Las positas plan and they agreed generally with the contentions made by the City and all the other agencies....etc. ) -/ Page 46, 7th paragraph, should be a statement made by Cm Turner and not Mayor Futch. CM TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF MAY 5, 1975, AS CORRECTED, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM-30-76 May 19, 1975 CITY EMPLOYEE AWARDS The following City employees received special awards in recognition of achievement in their field. All employees who rec0ived the awards work at the Water Reclamation Plant. ~ Dallas Smith - Operator of the Year - Bay Area (Received certificate from the State as on of the finalists) Richard Vanderbeek - Completion of Sacramento State Course in Waste Water Treatment Robert Anderson - Grade I Certificate from the State Robert Guyer - Grade I Certificate from the State OPEN FORUM (Las Positas Golf Course) Jerry Atwell, 134 Amber Way, representative of the Greens Committee stated that he would like to speak to the Council concerning an operational problem at the Las positas Golf Course with respect to the sprinkling system. He read a report concerning the need for an additional 50 new sprinklers, and urged that the Council allow the immediate purchase of 50 sprinklers which would be a portion of the l50 sprinklers planned for next year's budget. The estimated cost would be $1,850 at $37 each. If immediate pur- chase is not authorized, greens damage will result. Mr. Lee indicated that it certainly would be in the best interest of the golf course if the purchase could be made at this time and the staff would support this request. CM TURNER MOVED TO AUTHORIZE EXPENDITURE OF THE FUNDS FOR THE SPRINKLERS, AS REQUESTED, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Trailer Storage Issue) John Migliori, 6271 Tesla Road, stated that he read in the newspaper that the Council reversed the decision of not allowing front yard storage of vehicles, which the people voted on, to allow such storage and asked if this is correct. \ '-- Mayor Futch explained that the City Council made some recommendations regarding the Trailer Storage Ordinance and this ordinance has been sent back to the Planning Commission for their comments and will again be discussed by the City Council. The Council did recommend exceptions to the ordinance in those areas where side yard access is not possible, to allow front yard storage. Mr. Migliori indicated that he is very upset that people may be allowed storage in the front yards because after the election he invested more than $lO,OOO to provide trailer storage for Livermore people. Mr. Migliori also mentioned that he feels the City should not try to compete with private individuals in providing parking for large commercial trucks and the Mayor indicated that this is not the in- tent of the City and that if there is sufficiant private parking facilities available the City would not provide space. Cm Miller stated he would like to clarify the point made by Mr. Migliori in that the advisory vote was that there should be no trailer storage in front yards in any residential area - the vote said no exceptions. --- CM-30-77 May 19, 1975 (Cask & Mask Float for Rodeo Parade) Virginia Gregory, member of the Cask and Mask stated that the Cask and Mask organization is planning an extravaganza float for the rodeo parade. Cm Miller has consented to participate as a slave for their float and they would like to ask the other Councilmembers to join Cm Miller with Cm Tirsell a maiden on the float. /~ \ j ~ She explained that the theme is a Cecil B. Demille production with slaves pulling the float. (Request for Support of AB 2220) Valerie Raymond, 2368 Buena Vista, stated that she is represent- ing CAGE (Citizens Against Garbage Environment) who would like the Council to go on record as supporting AB 2220, offered by Assemblymen Mori and Mead. Basically the Bill extends current legislation which now requires that no municipality may operate a garbage dump within two miles of any city without their consent, this Bill would expand the requirement to include any kind of private operator. Also there is a provision indicating that the deed on any property which has been or is operating as a dump shall include a statement to the effect that the property is completed garbage fill. Mayor Futch stated that the general policy of the Council is to have the opportunity to review something prior to voting on it and wondered if the Council would have time to review this re- quest and postpone action for another week. Mrs. Raymond stated that she believes the hearing on the bill will not take place until June 3rd and the Council would have time to review the proposed resolution of support and adopt it if they so desire. Mrs. Raymond then read the resolution that CAGE would like the Council to adopt, supporting AB 2220. CM TIRSELL MOVED TO PLACE THIS ITEM ON THE NEXT AGENDA, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. David Castro, 2276, stated that he has lived in cities in which the city operated the dump site and that everything was done correctly and people were allowed as many sacks as they wished to be dumped weekly, at no extra cost. He stated that he feels this would be better than our present system and would be happy to have the City take over the operation of the dump site. CONSENT CALENDAR Report re Hold Harmless Agreement - City of Pleasanton The City Manager reported that the hold harmless agreement with the City of Pleasanton indemnifies the City of Pleasanton against any injuries for property damage involved in the use by our Fire Department, of their draft test pit, for annual testing of our fire pumpers. The matter has been reviewed by the City Attorney and it is recommended that a resolution be adopted. n --/. CM-30-78 May 19, 1975 (Hold Harmless Agreement) RESOLUTION NO. 98-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF PLEASANTON o Report re Acquisition of Murrieta/Portola Corner Property It has been suggested by the Beautification Committee that the City purchase property located at portola Avenue and Murrieta Boulevard for beautification purposes. The property is owned by Exxon Company and a representative has disclosed that it is the general policy of the company not to dispose of excess property because of the uncer- tainty of the fuel situation. The City Manager reported that the original purchase price for this property was $70,000 and reportedly there have been offers made to the company in the the neighborhood of this amount. The property is zoned commercial and undoubtedly the value would be quite high. Under the circumstances it is recommended that the City not proceed with property acquisition for this particular piece of property at this time. Cm Tirsell stated that perhaps the City could look into the possi- bility of leasing the property for $1 a year and that this suggestion might be made to the Beautification Committee for consideration. Mr. Parness will check and report back. Res. of Appointments to Various Committees The following resolutions were adopted appointing members to various committees: RESOLUTION NO. 99-75 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBERS TO THE BEAUTIFICATION COMHITTEE (Janice Bird and Diana Bolander) RESOLUTION NO. lOQ-75 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBER TO HOUSING AUTHORITY (Linda Chapman) RESOLUTION NO. lOl-75 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBER TO INDUSTRIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (Larry Bakken) Departmental Reports ~/ The following departmental reports were submitted for review: Airport - Activity - April Building Department - April Municipal Court - March Police and Pound Departments - April Water Reclamation Plant - March Design Review Minutes Design Review Committee minutes were received from the meeting of May 6, 1975. CM-30-79 May 19, 1975 (Design Review Committee) Cm Miller commented that the Design Review Committee has questioned why various community projects could not be referred to the Committee and Cm Miller felt that the Committee should be informed of the various projects expressing the fact that their input would be welcomed. Payroll & Claims There were 158 claims in the amount of $350,846.81 and 299 payroll warrants in the amount of $88,l6l.87, for a total of $439,008.68, dated May l2, 1975 and approved by the City Manager. v APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (Exec. Session) Attorney Bob Logan requested that the City Council hold an executive session immediately after this meeting for the purpose of discussing litigation. (Ravenswood) Mr. Parness asked when the Council would like to have the Ravenswood Park released to LARPD. He explained that the Council liaison committee is meeting with architects this Wednesday for the purpose of interviewing and selecting an architect for the restoration of the structures. The Park District has been studying landscaping pro- posals and Council policy does permit the release of properties acquired by the City to LARPD. He stated that someone is living in the house at Ravenswood but will soon be moving and there are other people who are interested in renting the house but Mr. Parness would like some direction as to the release of the property to LARPD now, or whether the City will retain the property. Cm Miller asked if the other property has been released to LARPD and Mr. Parness indicated that everything, with the exception of the buildings has been released to LARPD. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE REMAINDER OF THE RAVENSWOOD PROPERTY AND BUILDINGS WERE RELEASED TO LARPD. (Air Resources Board Meeting re Bay Area Task Force - Planning) Mr. Parness stated that the Air Resources Board is planning to have a meeting on June 5th for the purpose of forming a San Francisco Bay Area task force for air quality maintenance plan- ning and he wanted to bring this to the attention of the Council. -../ Cm Miller stated that he would be very interested in attending this meeting as a representative of the City with which the Council concurred. CM-30_80 May 19, 1975 u (Transportation Advisory Committee Appointments) Mr. Parness reported that the vacancies on the Transportation Advisory Committee have been filled. Cm Miller's designee resigned and Cm Miller made another appointment and the appointment to fill the vacancy for the League of Women Voters representative was also made.by Barbara Shaw. (EPA Letters) Mr. Parness stated that the Council has not yet received a response from the letters sent to the offices of the EPA by former Mayor Pritchard concerning sewer capacity allocations. Mr. Parness has spoken personally with Mr. Dendy who has assured him that the letters will be answered soon. (Res. re Shared Recruitment Program) Mr. Parness commented that, regrettably, the staff would ask the Council to adopt a resolution adopting a fee schedule for the Shared Recruitment Program, which is a program started last year with seven cities in the County, including the County of Alameda for sharing in the recruitment process for various types of employee classifications. We do not have to do the advertising or the testing and interviewing which is done in a concerted manner. The program has been very successful for our purposes and two employ- ees have been hired for the City of Livermore through this program. The resolution was not prepared in time for placement on the agenda but it is rather routine in nature and must be adopted at this meeting because the Board of Supervisors will consider it at their meeting of May 27th. Prior to action by the Board it is requested that each city adopt the resolution, and the resolution authorizes our continuance in the program for another year. CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Cm Turner commented that the records should indicate that the reason the resolution was adopted prior to review by the Council was because of the urgency that it be adopted this evening. RESOLUTION NO. 102-75 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING FEE SCHEDULE: SHARED RECRUITMENT AND TESTING PROJECT MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL (Differentiating Between Councilman and Council- woman) ( \ . "-- / Cm Turner stated that for the sake of history he would like the records to indicate "Councilman" and "Councilwoman" rather than "Council- member". It was suggested that Cm be used to designate Councilman and Cw for Councilwoman. CM 30-81 May 19, 1975 (street Patching) Cm Turner stated that he has been observing various cuts made in City streets for the purpose of working on lines, etc. which have to be patched and then within about six months these areas become depressed and the City has to maintain them. He stated that he would like to know if there is some method whereby this can be done better, such as removing large sections of the street and replacing the entire section. :\J Mr. Lee explained the process for the patchwork and indicated that the depression is a temporary situation though sometimes irritating and if an area is brought to the attention of the staff it will be taken care of by whatever utility company has made the cut. (Meeting Next Week) Cm Miller stated that next week there is a holiday and would like to know if the Council intends to meet because there are two items he has proposed for discussion that will be on the agenda. One item is the garbage bill on which the Council should act soon, and the second is the matter of a shortage of funds and the possi- bility that certain things should be eliminated from City funds. It has been three years since business license fees have been examin- ed and there is still some question of equity and this could be re- solved in addition to the fact that some more money could be generated. If there are to be changes this should be accomplished prior to July 1, and consequently the Council would have to discuss this next week to get things going. It was concluded that the Council would meet Tuesday, May 27th, the day after the holiday. (Billboards) Cm Miller stated that in the newsletter from the California Road- side Council there was discussion concerning billboards. Presently we are involved in some type of court case concerning billboards and we have an ordinance which prohibits them. Mean- while, there are options available to sign companies and one of the things which could be done would be to provide for a permit fee, per square foot. Costa Mesa, Glendora and Carpenteria all have such permit schedules whereby they charge on the order of $l/sq. ft. per billboard per year, permit fee. He suggested that the Council ask our City Attorney examine the possibility of adopt- ing this type of schedule for Livermore. Hr. Musso asked what case Cm Miller is speaking of and Cm Miller stated that it is a civil case. (Portola Rezoning) Cw Tirsell stated that last Thursday, she and Mr. Musso attended another meeting of the Board of Supervisors concerning the rezon- ing of portola Avenue (Anderson property). The Andersons are asking for a commercial zoning. --.-/ Supervisor Cooper made the motion to deny the rezoning, Mr. Murphy seconded the motion and Mr. Bort seemed to be favorably disposed towards it. Mr. Anderson dismissed his representative, was very angry and as a result the Board continued the matter until July lOth. CM-30-82 May 19, 1975 (Portola Ave. Rezoning - Anderson Property) Cw Tirsell stated that she did testify that the planning aspects for this property are essentially done and we are awaiting the assigning of densities, and the City does not want to see portola Ave. become strip commercial. L/ Cw Tirsell indicated that if the County allows this property to be commercial zoning it will mean that there would be over lOO acres of commercial land in the County on Portola Avenue. Cw Tirsell added that she and Mr. Musso will be attending the July 10th meeting and that she did cancel vacation plans in order to attend this meeting, and that Mr. Musso will have to return early from his vaca- tion. Cw Tirsell indicated that she is at a loss as to what else can be said to the Board of Supervisors. She has written three arguments and the City's position has been presented. It is very obvious that Mr. Anderson wants the rezoning very badly and it ends up coming to this point. She felt perhaps it would be helpful to have Mr. Musso once again prepare a report on the findings, the Council's position and its past position on portola Avenue. Cm Miller suggested that perhaps a resolution could be adopted just before the July 10th meeting so that Cw Tirsell can present something fresh. Mayor Futch stated that a rezoning would have a tremendous impact on the commercial planning for the rest of Livermore and is a very major consideration. It would seem thatthe Chamber of Commerce would be interested in discussing this matter and would possibly take a position because it will have a significant effect on commercial development for Livermore. (Social Concerns Committee Organization) Cw Tirsell stated that she is very concerned that there have been very few names submitted for appointment to the Social Concerns Committee and that letters requesting names have been out for some time. Cw Tirsell suggested that if, by next week, there are not enough names from which to make selections, the letters once again ,be sent to the various organizations asking for names. Cm Miller suggested that perhaps a telephone call can be made to each organization by the City Clerk asking that names be submitted in order to make appointments. (Committee Appointments) Mayor Futch noted that the appointments to the Beautification Committee would be for two years: Linda Chapman will serve a four year term with the Housing Authority ending l/26/79: and Larry Bakken will serve on the Industrial Advisory Committee. Resolutions of appointments appeared on the Consent Calendar. I I ~/ Mayor Futch stated that the Council has agreed on an appointment to fill the unexpired term of Mayor Pritchard and requested that a motion be made. C\^l..,TIRSELL MOVED TO APPOINT JOHN STALEY TO FILL THE COUNCIL VACANCY, SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Cm Turner stated that he has felt, from the beginning, that this matter should go to a general election if it were to be a three CM-30-83 Hay 19, 1975 (Appointment of Councilmember) year appointment. He has not changed his position on this matter and will vote against the motion, not because he is opposed to the selection of John Staley but rather because he is opposed to the method by which a selection was derived. He strongly feels that the people should have made the selection and should have had the opportunity to hear candidate's qualifications. Cm Miller stated that a couple of weeks ago he offered a compromise which would have permitted an early vote on the replacement of Bob Pritchard without requiring the expenditure of $10,000 for a special election by selecting som~9R~~ust until the next general municipal election. He stated thatlfl",-he- does not object in principle 1:~ appointments but this is a very long term and the compromise~~pro- posal, in his opinion, is the course that should have been followed. He does not object to the appointment of John Staley but is concerned about the length of term. J MOTION APPOINTING JOHN STALEY AS COUNCILMEMBER PASSED 3-l (Cm Turner dissenting) . RESOLUTION NO. 103-75 RESOLUTION APPOINTING JOHN STALLEY TO CITY COUNCIL The City Clerk commented that Mr. Staley will not be able to take a Council seat until his two statements have been filed. Cm Miller stated that it is his understanding that these statements must be filed by Hay 27th or the matter will go to an election anyway. The City Attorney explained that the definition is that he can't take office until the statements have been filed, and there is a la-day lag between the time of the actual appointment and the time he assumes office. C01-ll1UNICATION RE AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF - PLEASANTON SUIT A communication was received from the City of Pleasanton thanking the City Council for authorizing the Livermore City Attorney to prepare an amicus curiae brief in the case of Morrison Homes Cor- poration vs. City of Pleasanton. Letter was noted for filing. COMMUNICATION RE REQUEST FOR FUNDS FOR 4th OF JULY CELEBRATION The Community Affairs Committee is proposing, for Council considera- tion, the second annual City Fourth of July Celebration. The cele- bration will consist of a mid-morning parade which will terminate at May Nissen Park where there will be music and family picnics and in the evening there will be a fireworks display at Robertson Park. The estimated cost for the day is less than $2,000 with $l,500 going to the fireworks event, and it is requested that the City donate $2,000 for the celebration. CM TURNER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZ- ING THE EXPENDITURE OF $2,000 FOR THE CELEBRATION, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL, AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. ) ~ Mayor Futch commented that the event was very successful last year and the fireworks display is in keeping with celebrating the birth of our Nation. CH-30-84 May 19, 1975 (4th of July Celebration) Dick Wright, Chairman of the Community Affairs Committee extended an invitation to the Council to lead the parade, as was done last year, and also to ask the Mayor to say a few words at the event. Mr. Wright added that this is a home town parade that is non- motorized and non-commercial. L COMMUNICATION RE RESIGNATION FROM B. C. COMMITTEE A letter of resignation from the Beautification Committee was submitted by Betty Carrell. The Council directed the staff to send a letter of appreciation to Mrs. Carrell, for serving on the committee. COMMUNICATION RE CAN- CELLATION OF CLEAN WATER GRANTS HEARING Letters from the State Water Resources Control Board and VCSD were submitted to the Council concerning the cancellation of the hearing on the air quality impacts of Clean Water Grants. Cm Miller commented that the City should send a letter expressing our disappointment that there was no public hearing and that conditions should be imposed in the bad smog areas, ours included, and that we support the VCSD letter. CM MILLER MOVED TO SEND SUCH LETTERS, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. CW Tirsell pointed out that this was an advertised public hearing and the City Council certainly is not at liberty to remove a public hearing from the docket simply because the issue might be contro- versial, and no other public agency should be allowed to remove a publicized public hearing either. Mayor Futch stated that rather than adopt a motion tonight he would like to see the letters to be sent. MOTION WAS WITHDRAWN. STATUS REPORT RE HCDA APPLICATION The Planning Department of Alameda County has reported on the status of activities in the HCDA application (Housing Community Development Act) . The Planning Department has been advised that the Alameda County Urban County Entitlement was changed from $725,000 to $742,000 and the application is being revised to include this amount on a pro-rata basis among the seven entities. On April 24, 1975, Mr. Fraley, Alameda County Planning Director, submit~ed to HUD a request for $72,500 advance HCD funds. ~ Cm Miller stated that he would like the Council to consider the following: To ask that this HCDA proposal (insofar as our City's share) be amended to change priority. He is becoming increasinly concerned about not following the real intent of the expenditure of this money which is for housing for low income people. We have no good mechanisms for low income housing, at present and providing one would furnish the low income housing needed in the community and would also help reduce criticism and accusations against us from other agencies: primarily the homebuilders. CM-30-85 May 19, 1975 (Status Report re HCDA Application) Cm Miller stated that he would like each Councilmember to reconsider the concept suggested earlier about using that money for purchasing houses, deeding them to the Housing Authority, and using the excess in rent, over the upkeep, to buy more houses - all of which would be scattered throughout the community. We would not have to depend upon unfunded programs such as rent supplements, for providing the low income housing. He stated that he is really worried and increasingly concerned that we are not really spending that money in a way that brings the most direct benefit to the people for whom the Act was passed. ~~~R~ ~. Cm Miller asked that the Council consider the Q o~ suggestion: The Council made a list of priorities but it could be amended and he is really concerned about not taking care of the low income area. .....-/' Cw Tirsell stated that she can appreciate the concerns of Cm Miller and low income housing was one of the options available at the time the Counil reviewed the grant, but was one that was not at the top of the priority list when the Council finished listing priorities. Cw Tirsell added that she is really excited about the ability of this community to do some coordination of services for the same people Cm Miller is referring to. She stated that there are many services, etc., available that the people who need them do not even know about. The most glaring deficiency in this valley is the coordinated referral of services. We have low income people who need houses and perhaps there are houses available if they knew where to find them. We have people who do not get to emergency crises housing and there may be some available but people do not know where to go to find out. We have many senior citizens who need meals and they are also poor. This City needs to make a commitment to serv- ing the social needs of the community and one of the best things we can do is to fill this glaring gap. We need a central place for identifying and referring people to the already existing private and public agencies. Cw Tirsell stated that she can appreciate the concern of Cm Miller and feels it is really a very worthwhile concern and that we do need to provide more low income housing; however, of the low income people who live in town, many of them have problems which are severe and beyond housing needs. There are medical, social, day care, trans- portation, and food needs. She felt that at the time priorities were listed this City was saying that listing this center as first priority was symbolic in saying that henceforth this City is going to do some- thing about social planning and social services for the City. This is something that can't be done out of a corner desk in an already overcrowded City Hall. Cm Tirsell stated that in sitting on the ACAP Board and communicat- ing with various agencies has revealed that there is a need for a center because "nobody is minding the store". There are grants available, the money is here, there are programs here for every type of need, but no one is minding the store, so nobody is served. Cm Miller stated that he did accept the Council majority view concern- ing priority at the time they were listed but since this time he has become increasingly disenchanted with building essentially a bureaucratic building and not using the money to provide something as direct as hous- /~ ing for people who need it. He would agree that there is a need for ~ referral service but to build a new building for this purpose has ~ lost importance in favor of doing something direct, in his opinion. CM-30-86 May 19, 1975 (Status Report re HCDA Application) l/ Cm Miller continued to say that referrals can always be done from any building and there are other options for taking care of this problem but there are hardly any options for providing housing and this is the reason he is asking the Council to reconsider priorities. 0.1+ ho IA~~ rMbc:k, t!itj@1u.k-/ Mayor Futch stated that^low income hofising. wou~d be of significan~ -...&t benefit to the few people who would llF~f..t~~e.. fJi'8al th~ hOU~:t.~g AIDj ~ _ . :::" -" 1l<r~1 a greater number of people would b ~~ i iR9~ .<< 1 e. r - C! 1 lee ,...1 i t.he establishement of a center. The report was noted for filing. LAFCO SPHERE OF INFLUENCE - CITY OF PLEASANTON The City of Pleasanton has asked the City Council of Livermore to support the proposed Sphere of Influence for the Amador Valley. Cm Miller stated that he would like the Council to consider a resolution supporting Pleasanton in the Sphere of Influence, in particular the Pleasanton Ridge that Mayor Kinney wrote to the Council about, and everything else Pleasanton believes they should have, with the exception of the Dublin area and the area north of I-580. This would correspond with Alternate 2 of their Environmental Impact Report - the City would support Alternate 2. Cm Miller stated that the reasons for such a resolution could be that Pleasanton should control all the undeveloped area destined for future development and that new urbanization should be muni- cipal. Dublin has already turned down an annexation to Pleasan- ton and consequently Dublin ln and VCSD should be allowed to have their own Sphere of Influence. There is also the problem of VCSD crossing County lines. CM MILLER MOVED TO SEND A RESOLUTION TO LAFCO WHICH INCLUDES THESE IDEAS. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES. Cw Tirsell stated that she attended the hearing in Dublin held by the Dublin Chamber of Commerce and that there was no support at all to combine the Dublin area with Pleasanton. The Dublin people feel defensive about it and they asked the LAFCO representative some very perceptive questions that the report does not answer. Cw Tirsell added that while she would like to support the idea of municipality to best serve the population on a general basis, she finds after listening to the discussion at the hearing that it would be very difficult to tell the Dublin people that they f aren't going to be anybody and the rest of us are going to be po..1'+ 0 1 Pleasanton. I f;.J..&z:t<:- Cw Tirsell commented that she really feels the problem belongs o'r:':'c.<i~, with LAFCO and that she read a comment in the newspaper which aptly describes her feelings and that was, "why doesn't J.JAFCO get their spheres straightened out?". (/ ~. Cw Tirsell suggested that the City go to LAFCO and ask what their planning process is, and on what basis are they working? She stated that she does not feel comfortable with the resolution but would like to help Pleasanton because they did support Liver- more when we were having Sphere of Influence problems. CM-30-87 May 19, 1975 (LAFCO Sphere of Influence City of Pleasanton) Cm Turner stated that as he recalls Pleasanton asked for the area north of I-580 to be included in their Sphere of Influence and it was noted that Pleasanton did not request it but that LAFCO suggested it for them. Cm Turner added that the motion supports Mayor Kinney's request but we are also cutting out a portion of their outlying Sphere of Influence, and he wondered if this is really what Pleasanton is looking for and if this is really proper. ) ~ Cm Miller stated that Pleasanton has asked for our views and that Livermore is only presenting its view but not dictating anything. We are trying to support Pleasanton but we also have an obligation to VCSD because they supported Livermore's Sphere of Influence. We are willing to support Pleasanton in the undeveloped area, which they should have control of, and north of I-580 is land that is already developed and there is an existing jurisdiction so VCSD should be given consideration for itself rather than being arbitrarily placed in Pleasanton's Sphere of Influence. We are actually supporting VCSD and Pleasanton. Mayor Futch stated that in his opinion, that whole area really should be one city but the only problem is he does not know of a mechanism to accomplish this. He wondered if the City should indicate that it really feels there should be one commun- ity but in view of jurisdictional problems and crossing County lines, we would have to take this position until that matter has been resolved. em Miller stated that this would have to be done as an amend- ment because he feels there should not necessarily be only one city at the west end of the Valley. Cm Miller noted that the resolution is primarily for LAFCO but a separate letter could be sent to Mayor Kinney. Cm Miller stated that one of the reasons he would argue about having one city at the west end of the Valley is because LAFCO refused Dublin the opportunity to incorporate itself and insisted that they annex to Pleasanton. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Logan commented that if this is the decision of the Council the resolution may as well be adopted tonight and accept it as an urgency measure and during the week Cm Miller or someone from the Council can meet with the City Attorney's office to select proper wording so that the resolution can be sent to LAFCO. RESOLUTION NO. 104-75 A RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE SPHERE OF IN- FLUENCE FOR THE AMADOR VALLEY. It was noted that the Councilmembers will have the opportunity to read the resolution before it is sent to LAFCO. REPORT RE SEWAGE CAPACITY RESERVATION I J At the meeting of April 7th the Council adopted a policy pertain- ing to the reservation of excess sewage capacity and concluded that an ordinance should be adopted formalizing the policy. It may be possible to receive additional capacity allotments if capacity is to be reserved for industrial/commercial use CM-30-88 May 19, 1975 L (Report re Sewage Capacity Reservation) and the City has contacted the EPA and the State Water Resources Board concerning this possibility. Communications from the City of Pleasanton and the F.PA on the general construction of water treatment facilities and grants have also been submitted to the Council. One additional option that might be considered by the Council would be acquisition of sewage capacity for industrial and commercial uses, financed locally. Mr. Parness reported that this was a matter of open discussion and Cm Turner requested that the item be placed on the agenda and this is a follow-up of the calculations made by the staff concerning sewage capacity remaining. The City Attorney stated that since the time the Council discussed reserving sewage capacity he has done research with his assistant and has come to different conclusions about what would be required to accomplish allocation, to some degree, of the remaining sewer capacity. Prior to the meeting a copy of a draft ordinance was submitted to the Council and it was not the intention that this is what was felt to be the final language, but rather to indicate how an ordi- nance could be prepared to accomplish some of the purposes the Council is interested in. Mr. Logan stated that he would like to break the ordinance down into four general areas: l) relating to general application of what kind of evidence we should have at our disposal, or before the Council, to effectuate the kind of ordinance the Council is interested in; 2)how this particular kind of ordinance might be applied: 3) what the poten- tial legal consequences would be if such an ordinance is adopted; and 4) basically a discussion of two alternative methods available to perhaps accomplish the Council's purposes. He stated that he will attempt to point out the advantages or disadvantages of the two methods. 1. Evidence: The Council will have to establish that there is a sewer shortage either threatened or actual. Furthermore, the Council will have to show that the capacity allocation is in accordance with the City's General Plan, and it is perhaps not so coincidental that the General Plan does include allocation policies for sewage, and probably equally applicable to water if that ever becomes a problem again. (/ ~j The Council will have to hear or be made aware of evidence on the relationship of residential vs. industrial vs. commercial. The effect of those three on an unbalanced community, if it is economi- cally unbalanced, there could be findings that there are certain advantages to having industrial sewer usage over residential. He stated that he is not sure the findings are available but if the City can relate the sewer capacity, the allocation of that capacity and some benefit to be derived in the sewer system by that kind of allocation, has justifications that are not so remote as going into air quality problems or other unsettled areas of what is a true economic interest for the general welfare of a community. The Council should be interested in, and have some evidence to support a conclusion that industrial and commercial use will be responsive to the needs the Council sees existing in the community - not only in terms of economic imbalance but in terms of air quality or in terms of any other interest which is the subject matter of this City's police power which goes to health, safety, and general welfare. CM-30-89 May 19, 1975 (Report re Sewage Capacity Reservation) The Council will also have to look at evidence to indicate how industrial/commercial usage will mean cleaner effluent, if in fact that exists, again looking to the benefit of the sewer system itself and relating directly back to why the City is allocating the capacity that is remaining. VThe City Attorney stated that what he is trying to say, basically, and he is not sure there is any evidence at all, is that if the City is going to allocate the remaining sewer capacity and if the City can show that the allocation somehow benefits the total sewer system, - such as saying that industrial effluent is cleaner than residential effluent. In such event a finding can be made or it can be argued that in view of this the plant does not have to work as hard, for example, or that commercial effluent does not use up as much capacity and therefore advantageous to the entire system because more can be put on the line without being concerned with usage. I --,,/ Mayor Futch stated that it may be possible that some industry would have a high grade of effluent: however, there may be others that would be much worse than residential and, in fact, there may be some industry that might not be allowed because of their effluent. Mr. Logan commented that he is sure there are many ramifications and different possible uses and he is not sure that any of the things he has mentioned will necessarily apply but if such bene- fits do exist it is to the advantage of the City to hear the bene- fits so they can be part of the general overall package of evidence for making a determination as to whether the City will allocate or not. Also, this is always something he could look back on and say that these are factors that entered into the Council's final con- clusion, and all factors relating to sewer capacity. 2. Health & Safety Factors: Hr. Logan stated that with respect to health and safety factors of the community, the Council will want to tie together the allocation to local problems that exist, which could include air quality, water quality and any number of local problems we might have. 3. Application of Policy: In looking at the application of a policy such as this, be it by ordi- nance or otherwise, there are different possibilities that arise. There is the obvious possibility of denying more hook-ups but there is also the possibility of rationing to present holders. Rationing has some inherent problems built into it and for health reasons, per- haps it would be advisable not to try to ration. This would also be a difficult thing to monitor and control. Mr. Logan stated that he is giving the Council the options available - that hook-up could be denied or there could be a rationing system. The Council could work out systems with new water use policies, i.e., from the use of the water that actually feeds into the sewer system. If less water is used there would probably be some decrease in the usage of the sewer system and therefore increase the available capacity. Some groups have suggested that, for instance, if gallons in a toilet bowl are reduced from 8 gal. to 4 gal. it would reduce the amount of capacity flowing through the system and in effect increases the remaining capacity that could be allocated. This would be another potential option. '/-----"--''''" \ \ J CM-30-90 May 19, 1975 (Sewer Allocation) 4. Time Limits: ~ Lastly, in ~he application, the City Attorney feels the Council can and should look at time limits to be applied. As long as a party is willing to, or wants to make use of a hook-up, the party should have some time limitation as to how long he has to take advantage of this provision. Mr. Logan added that the particular ordinance which is before the Council is a model ordinance and does not include a timing factor. A timing factor could be included in an ordinance or in Council policy created by resolution following the ordinance, and in a way of effectuating the ordinance. With respect to legal consequences, there are a few cases in this area and there appears to be some general duty to provide services, be they water or sewer. Incidentally, most of the cases that can be looked at are water cases and not sewer cases. There are two basic breakdowns with respect to sewers - there are districts that control them and there are municipal entities that control their own water and sewer. The duty for the district to pro- vide service is probably more persuasive than for a general law city since general law cities are basically exercising police powers which are not found in districts. Districts are created by law and are severely limited by the statutes creating that district. Districts may be obligated to serve on a first come, first served basis but this is probably not necessarily an obligation of a city. The ability to to avoid the firt come, first served basis, would appear to arise out of the general police powers. 5. Legal Aspects: Mr. Logan stated that he is probably not covering the entire field of possibilities but the three mentioned are basic possibilities in terms of legal consequences, i.e., litigation arising out of the City's passing an ordinance - allocating sewer capacity. One suit might be the challenging of the use or misuse of municipal police powers. Generally, ordinances are deemed to be lawful and constitutional and basically, the suit would have to show acts of the Council a~arbitrary, capricious, or an abusive discretion. In other words, if possible, there should be some evidence to fall back onto in order to properly defend a law suit. The City's act of allocating is what act and the legislative act does not evidence to support the conclusion. supported by substantial evidence. clarity and as a backstop, he would substantial evidence in the records the Council reaches. is considered a legislative need anything more than some There need not be findings However, for the purpose of suggest there be possible to support whatever findings This kind of evidence helps avoid arguments, in litigation, that the legislative body acted arbitrarily, capriciously or abused discretion. ( ~/ Mr. Logan stated there is another possible argument that could be raised - a possibility of some implied contract to serve. He stated that in his opinion this kind of argument doesn't hold water and especially in the view that there is not adequate capacity which is not the fault of the City, and the fact that there is always a possi- bility of some future capacity. CM-30-9l M.ay 19, 1975 (Sewer Allocation) In order to overcome such an argument the legislative body should be in a position to make reasonable attempts to increase the sewer capacity, when appropriate and consistent with the General Plan, and its related planning policies, to show a good faith attempt to prove that there is a pointed difficulty in increasing the capacity of the plant. i J One of the more crucial issues' that might arise is the possibility of inverse condemnation action. He stated that he feels this kind of action would be unsuccessful, in view of the fact that Marin and Galido Water Districts have had inverse condemnation actions filed against them and in both cases the court held that a damage action did not lie. The suits were filed because of failure to supply water. He added that these two entities are districts and not municipalities and to some degree were in a worse position that perhaps a municipality would be. In other ways a municipality might be in a worse position - if it exercises its powers rather capriciously and this is the reason he is concerned about background evidence to support findings and conclusions. Mr. Logan cited various court cases which are pending so that the Council would hav~ some idea of what the laws are in this area. 6. Implementation: Mr. Logan explained that the Council can irnolement reservation of capacity by policy, which has basically already been done by resolu- tion. The difficulty with a resolution, from a legal viewpoint, is that it gives the Council much more flexibility, which is a good thing on the one hand, but on the other hand it can tend to lend itself to arguments and claims that the actions o-f' tl-\e Council are arbitrary and capricious. The other way to implement the policy would be to implement it by ordinance. The implementation of an ordinance cements it in absolutes, i.e., it is less challengable for being arbirary and capricious be- cause the Council lays out rather specifically what can and cannot be done and there is no discretion, "left ~:d thin the Council". At this point ~r. Logan is asking the Council for direction as to which way it wants to go - resolution or ordinance. He added that the ordinance spells out a specific cut-off date and what commitments are involved, where the allocations would be, who is allocated what in terms of low income houing and in terms of industrial/commercial. CM MILLER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE, THAT THE COMMENTS MADE BY MR. LOGAN BE PRESENTED TO THE COUNCIL IN WRIT- ING AND THAT THE STAFF BE DIRECTED TO CONSIDER ALL THE VARIOUS AS- PECTS AND FINDINGS PRESENTED BY MR. LOGAN FOR AMPLIFICATION, TO BE PRESENTED TO THE COUNCIL, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL. Cm Tirsell wondered how the ordinance would affect reserving 45% of the capacity for residential and 45% for industrial and Mr. Logan indicated that, in effect, the ordinance would override or pre-empt that resolution. The ordinance which is suggested does not represent the 45%-45%-lO%, because it has transferred the 45% residential into the 45% commer- cial/industrial use, for the remaining capacity up to 5 MGD. At the time the capacity increases over 5 MGD, dry weather use, this ordinance pushes it back to the policy which is consistent with the General Plan Policy of 45%-45%-10% (45% for residential, 45% industrial/commercial and 10% for low and moderate income housing) . i I -..-/ CM-30-92 May 19, 1975 (Sewer Reservation) Mr. Logan stated that, in other words, he is saying that by adopting an ordinance the City can continue to allocat based upon the same findings. The findings will probably not change for a long time, and may never change. L Cm Miller stated that findings are a key aspect to this, in his opinion, and the question of economics and air quality, balancing of the community in view of our overwhelming imbalance, towards residential are all issues that should be provided for in the staff discussion. This staff discussion is very important and all the major department heads and the City Manager should be allowed input. Mr. Logan stated that he is not aware of any precise study of the economic effects of unbalanced communities, or any precise study affecting this community but is aware of the fact the City's General Plan consultants have been looking at those problems and are in a position to address themselves to them. He felt input by the consul- tants would be quite useful. Cm Miller stated that one other finding which might be considered, is energy consumption having to do with residential and the known statistics that nine out of every ten houses are sold to a commuter. Energy is now one of the requirements that has to be considered for the Environmental Impact Statement and certainly that would be applicable in this instance. Mr. Logan indicated that anything the Council might have in the way of suggestions on relevant findings would be most helpful. He did not mean to cover the field by the findings he mentioned but rather chose general areas of findings he feels are important. Certainly energy consumption is a very basic and useful finding in this matter. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Cm Turner stated that he has a concern he would like to mention. It is his understanding that at some point in time, or now, the available sewer capacity is going to be limited by population in the Valley. At present we are nearly at capacity and Mr. Lee is saying that we really should try to do something about expansion now and that we should apply for additional expansion. After read- ing Mr. Lee's letter he felt it was at least food for thought. Cm Turner stated that in reflecting upon the resolution, the ordi- nance, and Mr. Lee's letter he would like to state that if we are going to continue on a forward path in relation to planned growth it is imperative that we receive a fair share of treatment expansion. It is feasible that if we "sit on our hands" the other Valley cities will receive the remaining federal funds available for treatment expansion. Also, it should be mentioned that if we acquire a fair share of treatment capacity the following positive actions will formulate: l) we will better be able to control the future of the Valley; 2) we will eliminate the justification of another New Town; and 3) we will be able to achieve our proposed General Plan which is going to cost us in excess of $100,000 to formulate. ~ Another point is that by having expansion we will be able to justify recapture of our Sphere of Influence which is truly important to the City of Livermore; one area, in particular, would be the portola Avenue Area mentioned by Cw Tirsell earlier. We should have control over what is happening there because this affects our commercial develop- ment. We will be able to provide our residents with needed commercial and industrial development and will be able to establish low cost CM-3D-93 May 19, 1975 (Sewer Reservation) housing and medium cost housing so desperately required to supple- ment and justify the expanded commercial and industrial development. He stated that he is truly concerned about the statement that we are actively pursuing expansion. He stated that he feels very strongly about following Mr. Lee's suggestion to seek federal funding for expansion of our present plant from 5 MGD to 7.5 MGD. \ J CM TURNER MOVED TO ACTIVELY SEEK FEDERAL FUNDING FOR EXPANSION FROM 5 MGD to 7.5 MGD, AS RECOMMENDED BY MR. LEE, SECONDED BY MAYOR FUTCH FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES. Cw Tirsell stated that Cm Turner has made excellent observations and the things Cm Turner would like accomplished the rest of the Council would like to accomplish. She stated that she appreciates Cm Turner's concern and is sure he has given this matter ample thought but the Council has absolutely no information as to what the people who dole out money have in mind. They do not like 10 MGD for Livermore but the City did also send in an application asking for I MGD, a very modest increase in the expansion, which was denied and besides being a request for a very small amount it was a clean water grant. It was clear that there would be an upgrading of our plant with a high lime treatment if they approved the application. Cw Tirsell stated that she feels the City should sit down with people from LAVW~1A and discuss what would be a reasonable alloca- tion. We can submit arbitrary grants from now on and because of the air quality basin they can turn down our applications. We should find out who will make the allocations for this Valley and what a reasonable amount would be for Livermore and for Pleasanton. Cm Turner stated that he feels the City should make an applica- tion to go on record. Pleasanton has already applied and VCSD is going to have to apply and his concern is that there is going to be only so much allocated for the Valley and he does not want Livermore to lose out on the chance for expansion. Mayor Futch stated that he feels the point of going on record for applying is a very good point but it would appear that a I MGD expansion would be all Livermore could hope for. He stated that he would go on record as supporting the motion if the motion were changed to read that the Council would apply for an expansion of 1 MGD. One MGD would handle a lot of commercial and industrial use and it would appear that 1 HGD would handle all of our future needs for this purpose, in addition to some additional capacity for remaining uses. He added that 2.5 MGD appears to be too high with respect to the amount of population growth this would allow, in view of environmental grounds. Cm Turner stated he would like to point out the following: l) an application of expanding 2.5 HGD does not mean that we will have to build to this capacity; 2) we have applied for 1 MGD and this has been rejected: and 3) what will be required if we follow through with the new General Plan? He suggested that the City apply for 2.5 MGD and if they allow us only 1 MGD this would be fine. Cm Miller asked Cm Turner what he would propose to do with the 2.5 MGD if it is allowed and Cm Turner indicated that he does not have a specific plan in mind but for one thing, it would allow following through with the recommendations of the General Plan. J CM-30-94 May 19, 1975 (Sewer Reservation) Cm Miller asked how much would be allocated for residential and how much would be specified for commercial/industrial and Cm Turner stated that he is not sure but probably none of this could be reserved for industrial/commercial. L Cm Miller pointed out that the EPA will not allow sewer expansion for commercial/industrial, so the City cannot expect to use any frac- tion of the expanded amount for this purpose. Therefore, what good does it do to apply for 1 MGD if you can't use it for industrial or commercial use, which is what the City wants to do with additional capacity? Applying for expansion would mean asking for additional capacity in the sewer to provide for residential expansion. Cm Turner stated that first of all there is a remaining capacity of 350,000 GPD and this amount could be shifted to serve industrial and commercial development and the~.~~GqapPlied for could be used to serve the residential uses. ~,~~ .? Of. iF @..-<'..a.~ . Cm Miller stated that the City isn't sure there can be such a shift, but it certainly is worth exploring. The problem with respect to sewer expansion in that any sewer expan- sion for residential is disastrous for our air quality and therefore nobody in this Valley should have any additional sewage. We should be looking to the possibility of limiting expansions of other cities on the grounds of public health, rather than demanding sewer capacity for Livermore. Mayor Futch commented that the grant specifies that the expansion cannot be used exclusively for the use of commercial/industrial - it does not mean that part of it will not be able to go for this purpose. Cm Hiller stated that if you have a sewer plant that has 1 MGD and you can't use it exclusively for industrial, you must put some fraction of it into residential development, which is bad for the air quality. In essence, you would be cutting off your nose to spite your face. Cm Miller stated that he would like to offer a more reasonable suggestion, in his opinion, about how the City should apply this. We should ask that if the EPA and State Water Resources Board are going to approve expansion of sewer plants for residential develop- ment, despite our air quality problems, then Livermore should get a share of that total, according to its population. Mayor Futch stated that if the area where the tracks have been relocated wants to develop, we must have additional sewer capacity and the City does want this area to develop. Cm Miller stated that one possible solution might be to make every effort to get the population projections of the Valley consistent with the Air Quality Standards and the Clean Air Act so that the amount of sewer expansion allowed for residential purposes be more sharply limited than it presently is - including VCSD and Dublin. /' ( ~ Secondly, if the threat of the increase of smog is reduced by the limitation of the residential aspect then we could sell a bond issue to our citizenry for relatively small amount of sewer expan- sion (perhaps .5 MGD) to be devoted entirely to industrial/commercial. An expansion of .5 MGD would not be very costly and would have the added advantage of bringing us a tax base as well. CM-30-95 May 19, 1975 (Sewer Reservation) There was discussion concerning the pros and cons of applying for 2.5 MGD and opinions as to why any application for expan- sion should or should not be made. MOTION FAILED l-3 (Cm Miller, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch dissenting) . Cw Tirsell stated that she really likes the idea of visiting the EPA 'vii '=.1. aR applica~ion rcqucstiREj 2. ~ rtGD cxpan3ien, .:10 'icll as to express concerns for the possible residential growth in the entire Valley. She stated that she would like to find out if they are going to fund for residential growth which would be allowed by sewer expansion grants, and if they are going to con- tinue the funding to allow residential growth Livermore would like to know how much we would be allowed. J Cw Tirsell suggested that the City go to the EPA with the Public Works Director's information and tell them that we realize expan- sion cannot be reserved for industrial/commercial use but we are concerned about balance in the community. If they do intend to proliferate residential growth in the Valley through expansion grants to Pleasanton and VCSD then we would intend to be included in those grants. Cm Miller stated that in his opinion he does not want Livermore representatives to go to the EPA with a figure which may give the impression that we are willing to apply for a sewer grant despite the fact it is bad for our air quality. Cw Tirsell stated that she isn't sure a number has to be taken to them but would like to find out from the EPA what they feel would be a reasonable figure and would prefer to write up something to submit along this line. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO DIRECT THE MAYOR TO VISIT THE EPA TO INQUIRE ABOUT THE EPA POLICY AND IF THEY DO INTEND TO CONTINUE TO GRANT EXPANSION FUNDS FOR RESIDENTIAL GROWTH, IN THE FACE OF A WORSENING AIR BASIN, THEN THE CITY OF LIVERMORE DOES FOR- ~~LLY REQUEST THAT OUR SEWER TREATMENT PLANT BE CONSIDERED AMONG THE OTHER TWO Cm1MUNITIES APPLYING FOR GRANTS FOR SE~II]ER EXPANSION, RECEIVING AN EQUITABLE SHARE IN PROPORTION TO OUR POPULATION. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Cm Turner asked that this item be placed on the agenda again in 30 days so that the results of the EPA meeting can be discussed. CM TUIDIER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO DETEID1INE THE COST OF VARIOUS SIZED PROJECTS, i.e., .5 MGD, 1 HGD AND 5 MGD, TO BE PLACED ON THE AGENDA IN FOUR WEEKS, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. REPORT RE CITY RECOGNITION - POLICE DEPT. UNION AFFILIATION - OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL NO. 3 The City Manager has received notice that the Police Association has elected the Operating Engineers Local Union #3 to act as their representative in all matters of employee-employer rela- tions. CM TIRSELL MOVED TO OFFICAILLY RECOGNIZE OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL UNION NO. 3 TO SERVE AS THE LABOR RELATIONS REPRESENTA- TIVE FOR ENLISTED DEPARTMENTAL PERSONNEL. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. J CM-30-96 ~ -. L May 19, 1975 REPORT RE SUMMER STUDENT PROGRM1 The City Manager reported that the City Council has been alerted to the serious status of our revenue expenditure forecast for the 1975-76 fiscal year. Various revenue generating sources are under close staff examination and unfortunately one of the alternates is to delete the annual summer student program. For the past several years our City has employed 26 local students during the three summer months at a total of slightly in excess of $18,000. Ordinarily the loss of the summer help would be sorely felt but this year our City has hired 24 adult maintenance workers for a one year term and this is being entirely funded by federal funds. It is recommended that the Council adopt a motion authorizing cancellation of the student summer program for the 1975-76 fiscal year. Cm Tirsel1 stated that she read an article in the Oakland Tribune about Oakland's Mayor's alliance for creating jobs for teenagers and wondered if we could call a youth crises conference to be held at City Hall and to invite the Chamber of Commerce and the School District to attend. Perhaps through their volunteer system we can have a week to phone businessmen and ranchers, etc., to see if we can get jobs for teenagers, and to help replace the jobs that the City normally furnishes. CM TURNER MOVED TO AUTHORIZE CANCELLATION OF THE STUDENT SU~1ER PROGRAM FOR THE 1975-76 FISCAL YEAR, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CM TIRSELL MOVED TO CREATE A YOUTH JOB CRISES CONFERENCE, WITH INVITATIONS TO THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, LARPD, SENIOR CITIZENS, SCHOOL DISTRICT AND ALL CHURCH GROUPS, TO SET ASIDE A WEEK, PERHAPS THE FIRST WEEK IN JUNE, TO GET VOLUNTEERS TO PHONE ALL BUSINESSMEN, RANCHERS, AND ANYONE ~mo MIGHT BE ABLE TO FURNISH JOBS FOR TEENAGERS. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT RE MAYOR ROTATION POLICY Mayor Futch read that the present Council policy is one in which the ~1ayor and Mayor pro tempore are selected annually by the Council. The Mayor may be chosen to serve a second year but not longer. The Mayor and Mayor pro tern serve at the pleasure of the Council. Present policy has served the Council well for many years and having a rotation policy would compliment the present policy and facilitate the annual reorganization of the Council. Mayor Futch stated that he would like to propose the following priority: 1) the most senior Councilmember who has not served as mayor shall be elected as Mayor for at least one full year with the exception that the existing Mayor may be chosen for a second term. 2) If two or more members have the same seniority the Councilmember receiving the greatest number of vote in the last municipal election shall have priority. The same priority system would also hold for the !1ayor pro tern. After becoming established this policy will mean that the Mayor pro tern will be next in line for the Mayor's seat. This policy will allow greater citizen participation by placing the newly elected Councilmember having the greatest number of votes first in line for Mayor among the newly elected members. It would also provide the community with a Mayor who is an experienced Councilmember that has served at least one year as Mayor pro tern. Cm Turner wondered if discussion concerning this policy should be continued until Mr. Staley joins the Council but Mayor Futch stated that he would hope the policy would be adopted tonight. CM-30-97 May 19, 1975 (Council Rotation) THE COUNCIL CONCLUDED THAT THIS MATTER WILL APPEAR ON THE AGENDA IN TWO WEEKS. REPORT RE PROPOSED BART EXTENSION PLAN J The draft of the Final Report on the Livermore-Pleasanton BART extension study has been reviewed by the staffs of Livermore, Pleasanton and Alameda County and the various hearings held on the subject have been attended by representatives of the respec- tive jurisdictions. The proposed rail route and station locations as indicated in the report would provide the valley community with satisfactory BART rail service. The report offers an alternative to the Livermore-Amador Valley - a permanent express bus service. This alternative was discussed because of the substantial reduction of cost compared to the cost of implementing the rail system. CM MILLER MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE LETTER liHICH WAS PREPARED JOINTLY WITH PLEASANTON M~D SUPERVISOR MURPHY, AND FOR THE MAYORS OF LIVERMORE AND PLEASANTON TO SIGN THE LETTER. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. P. C. REPORT RE COUNTY REFERRAL RE REZONING OF EL CHARRO ROAD (Rhodes & Jamieson) At the meeting of May 6, 1975, the P.C. considered the referral from Alameda County concerning the request for rezoning of the Rhodes & Jamieson property from Agricultural District to M-l (Light Industrial), for a site located on El Charro Road. In the spirit of cooperation with the City of Pleasanton the Livermore P.C. recommended to the County that the subject rezoning be in accordance with the recommendation of the City of Pleasanton and advising that the proposed zoning will not be in conflict with any plans of the City of Livermore. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE RECOW1ENDATION OF THE PLANNING COW1ISSION WAS ADOPTED. ORD. RE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT RE- GARDING THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE \1AS ADOPTED. ORDINANCE NO. 864 AN ORDINANCE M1ENDING CHAPTER 2, RELATING TO ADMINISTRATION OF THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 1959, BY THE ADDITION THERETO OF A NEW ARTICLE, ARTICLE VII, RELATING TO CITY ATTORNEY. I J LETTER TO SUPERVISOR COOPER RE RESIGNATION Cm Miller commented that Cw Tirsell has suggested that there be an asterisk in the letter to Supervisor Cooper pointing out that CM-30-98 / ~/ / ~.. May 19, 1975 (re Letter to Supervisor Cooper) these are as reported in the ABAG report, and Cm Turner wondered if the letter could indicate that there was a majority vote on the I-58D concept of supporting six lanes, but concluded that the records indicate that he favors the eight lane concept. ON MOTION OF C~V TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIHOUS VOTE THE COUNCIL APPROVED THE LETTER THAT IS TO BE SENT TO SUPER- VISOR COOPER CONCERNING HIS CO~1ENTS TO ABAG UPON HIS RESIGNATION. COMPLAINT RE WEEDS & STORAGE OF EQUIPMENT Mayor Futch stated that he has received a complaint about weeds and about storage of equipment at 1609 and l625 walnut Street and asked that the staff check into the complaint. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Futch adjourned the meeting at ll:30 p.m. to an executive session to discuss pending litigation. APPROVE /k,4 // ~L/ ~~~ L er re, California ATTEST Regular Meeting of May 27, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on May 27, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:07 p.m. with Mayor Futch presiding. ROLL CALL Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch Absent: None (One Vacant Seat) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Futch led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. MINUTES May l2th Page 56, fourth paragraph from the bottom should read: Cm Miller pointed out that Alameda County's Series "B" isn't related to the Department of Finance projection. C.M-30-99 May 27, 1975 (Minutes Corrections) Page 69, 6th paragraph from the bottom, delete Al at the end of that paragraph (typo). Page 75, first paragraph, line three should be administrative assistant position..etc. Page 55, first paragraph, line 6, should state "Series B" rather than "Series E" projections. J ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF MAY l2, 1975, WERE APPROVED, AS CORRECTED. PUBLIC HEARING RE ADOPTION OF NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE Mayor Futch opened the public hearing for the adoption of the Nat- ional Electrical Code, 1975 edition, for the purpose of hearing public testimony. There being no public testimony, ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE, 1975 EDITION WAS ADOPTED. ORDINANCE NO. 865 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 8, RELATING TO ELECTRI- CITY, BY THE AMENDMENT OF SECTION 8.l RELATING TO ADOP- TION OF THE NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE: SECTION 8.9(b), RELATING TO EXPIRATION OF PERMITS: AND SECTION 8.10, RELATING TO FEES; OF THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 1959. CONSENT CALENDAR Res. Accepting Litiga- tion Settlement (Tide- water oil Company) The Tidewater Oil Company provided the golf course sand at a pur- chase price of $400. Upon application of the sand it caused several burned turf areas indicating it was chemically defective. Litigation was commenced in the amount of $5,600, on our behalf and through a series of negotiations the company has agreed to a settlement of $4,000. The City Attorney has recommended accept- ance of this amount. RESOLUTION NO. l05-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT OF LAWSUIT (City of Livermore v. Tidewater Sand and Gravel, et all Res. Auth. Funds for Community Affairs Celebration J The matter of approving an expenditure of up to $2,000 was approved at the last Council meeting and it is recommended that a resolution be adopted. CM-30-l00 May 27, 1975 RESOLUTION NO. 106-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE OF $2,000 (Community Affairs Committee) u Res. re Location of Garbage Dumps At the Council meeting of May 19th, a discussion was held concerning AB 2220 relating to location of garbage dumps. It is recommended that a resolution supporting AB 2220 be adopted. RESOLUTION NO. l07-75 A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING AB 2220 (Relating to Location of Garbage Dumps) Res. Auth. Exec. of Agree. re Escrow It is recommended that a resolution be adopted authorizing execution of agreement with Wells Fargo Bank to allow Wells Fargo to serve as an escrow agent pending settlement of the cost liability between the City and PG&E involving the relocation of a power pole. RESOLUTION NO. l08-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECTUION OF AGREEMENT (Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.). PAYROLL & CLAIMS There were 69 claims in the amount of $213,223.49, and 299 payroll warrants in the amount of $93,50l.43, for a total of $306,724.92, dated May 19, 1975, and ordered paid by the City Manager. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (Summer Jobs - Students) c Mr. Parness reported that as a result of the suggestion made by CW Tirsell relative to jobs for students for the summer, the City has tried to accomplish finding summer jobs. If the Council so desires, a proclamation could be adopted declaring Youth Crises Week, June 8 to June l4th. If such a proclamation is adopted it would hopefully be published in local newspapers. The essence of the program is that with the cooperation of the Livermore Unified School District, LARPD, and the Chamber of Commerce and our City, we will ask for volunteer help to make tele- phone calls to various people who might have work for youths. He added that the telephones used for this purpose would have to be paid for by the City because the Telephone Company is prohibited by PUC order to make contributions. It is anticipated that the cost for the telephones will be about $200 and perhaps there will be dona- tions from the public that will cover this cost. CM-30-l0l May 27, 1975 (re Summer Jobs) A special number will be published in the newspapers and the City hopes that merchants and local citizens will contact the City if they have jobs for students. The job application has been prepared and will be distributed through the School District and LAPRD and will also be available at the Recreation District Center at 8th and "H" Streets as well as at City Hall and the three fire stations. Applications will be processed by the volunteers who will contact students for summer work. .J Mayor Futch read the proclamation which was adopted by the Council. (SB 879 - Nejedly) Mr. Parness stated that SB 879 offered by Senator Nejedly, is a bill which was originally drafted by our City two or three years ago requiring that BART extend rail line service to areas within the confines of the present three county area, which makes up the district, prior to the time that they are extended outside of that three county district, and with the use of district funds. Mr. Parness stated that he was involved in drafting the bill and we were partially successful in getting it through the legisla- ture in that it did pass the Senate but was stopped in the Assembly. Mr. Parness stated that in his opinion it is a bill worthy of our Council's support. ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE COUNCIL SUPPORTS SB 879. (Reclamation Plant Capacity Report) The City Manager stated that he has prepared a brief statement from a number of reports prepared by our consulting engineer, con- cerning the water reclamation plant capacity, and felt it might be helpful for the Council to review these items. He indicated that the report gives a good chronological statement of events that created the City's present position. Cm Miller commented that one thing mentioned in Brown and Caldwell's handwritten report that Cm Turner and Cw Tirsell have not seen is that when the designed capacity of the proposed project was re- viewed there was not sufficient sewer connection fee money to build a lO MGD and it was questionable as to whether there would be enough for a 7.5 MGD plant. This was one reason the smaller plant was favored, in addition to the fact that there would be a better effluent process. It was felt that the City would prefer to have the better process and would allow some sewer capacity. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL (re Fees & Housing) ..........., J em Miller commented that in discussing housing with the General Plan Consultants recently, it was mentioned that the increased square footage of the average house means so many dollars more per square foot. He added that the lot is only 1/4 of the total amount and is relatively insignificant compared to the total cost. He stated that he read an article in the newspaper which told how money can be saved such as cutting down on the amount of glass and not having shake roofs. He suggested that this arti- CM-30-l02 May 27, 1975 (Housing & Fees) cle be sent to the General Plan Consultants, and that the members of the Council also look at it. (Litter Enforcement) ~ Cm Miller stated that a couple of weeks ago Mr. Regan brought up the matter of litter and enforcement of our litter ordinance and in his opinion Mr. Regan had a good point about providing more strategically located litter cans and enforcing the ordinance. Mr. Parness stated that the Council has instructed the staff to look into the feasibility of a recycling law and the City has received a lot of information on this matter. One of the critical aspects of the study has to do with the legal support of such a proposition. There is no court law on it but the staff has found an opinion that was done after a great deal of research, in the City of Berkeley, that contended there was not legal support for such matters. This conclusion was drawn by the former Berkeley City Attorney; how- ever that matter was under review by the existing City Attorney and reportedly they were thinking of reversing this decision. We have been waiting for the new research to be done before coming back to the Council. He stated that this matter would be similar to the Oregon Bottle Bill, and the staff is working on it. (Speed of Cars) Cw Tirsell stated that she has received complaints about the speed of cars in residential areas and suggested that the Police Department initiate a June "crackdown" to get the speeds down because there are so many children on the streets during the summer and this is a very dangerous situation. (Route 84 Bypass) Mayor Futch stated that the deadline concerning the Route 84 Bypass is nearing and wondered if the City Manager will soon be reporting to the Council concerning this item. Mr. Parness stated that he has discussed the deadline with officials of Cal-Trans and he has been reassured that this will not be invoked against the City. The area is now being appraised and when it is finished the package will be transmitted to the Board of Supervisors and if they are in agreement we will be able to go to Cal-Trans and the State Highway Commission. (LAFCO Hearing Res.) Cm Miller stated that with respect to the LAFCO hearing a resolution has been prepared by the City Attorney's office based on the motion made by the Council last week and based on comments made by him. He asked if all of the Council is satisfied with the resolution because this will be the resolution presented t~ LAFCO. The Council concurred that they were satisfied with the resolution. '---~ ' (Letter to COVAl Cm Tirsell stated that the Council received a copy of a letter to the permanent members of COVA, which she drafted, concerning Pleasanton's resolution asking COVA not to discuss their shopping center. She stated that she has asked Mayor Kinney and his Council CM-30-l03 May 27, 1975 (re Letter to COVAl reconsider their action in the light that all of the permanent members of COVA could ask COVA not to discuss their pet projects. Cw Tirsell stated that she feels COVA is not particularly interested in land uses within municipal boundaries, necessarily, but rather is concerned about the regional aspect. Problems grow if people do not ask questions and discuss things that they are concerned about. She stated that she views COVA as a place where things can be discussed and questions asked in a cooperative atmosphere. If COVA is prevented from doing these things she feels this Council should discuss our role with COVA. J COMMUNICATION FROM DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE RE MAJOR CITY IMPROVEMENTS The Design Review Committee submitted Design Review Guidelines for major City improvements which they indicate should be used as a guide for developers, designers, staff and committee to encourage, assist and help ensure that the goals of the Design Review process may be achieved. Cw Tirsell stated that she is concerned with Item 3., Promotion of sound land use development, in that this is really the purview of the Planning Commission. She added that the Planning Commission is the body designated to do this and they have public hearings for allowing public input - a committee mayor may not have the pUblic input. She stated that it should be clear that it is the intention that the Planning Commission should make the land use decisions. em Miller noted that the Design Review Committee is essentially an advisory body and it is true that the P.C. makes the land use decisions with the Council making the ultimate decisions but it would seem that if this is referred to Design Review it would be input for the P.C. Nothing in the report indicates that the Design Review Committee has land use planning auth- ority but rather they are asking for an opportunity to review - not to make decisions. Cw Tirsell indicated that she would nonetheless prefer that Item 3 not be included because it is a function of the P.C. and the Council would always give the Design Review Committee anything they wish to review upon their aSking. Promotion of sound land use development is just not what she considers a duty of the Design Review. Cm Miller explained that they are asking that all major projects be referred to them for review, in this context, but does not mean every item that goes to the Planning Commission. He suggested that perhaps the wording could be changed to state, promotion of sound land use development through advice of the Planning Commis- sion. Cw Tirsell stated that what she really wants is for the P.C. to make the land use development decisions and would like the Design Review Committee to review designs. Cm Turner stated that he would agree with Cw Tirsell but would also like to mention that it isn't clear how long they intend to review major projects and would suggest that the staff talk with their chairman to find out what they want, exactly. ) J CM-30-l04 u ( ! ~/ May 27, 1975 (re Design Review) Mr. Street explained that the four items listed are not things the Design Review Committee created but rather are just quotes from the ordinance which created the Design Review Committee and were simply used to illustrate what the Committee has been charged with. They felt that major City projects were important enough that they should be able to review them and make recommendations, if they had any, to the P.C. or the Council, from a design standpoint rather than a land use planning aspect. Mr. Street added that to judge a building, alone, is difficult be- cause so many things enter into the design review process and it is necessary to review the site as it relates to the building and the landscaping. Mayor Futch suggested that Item 3 be changed to read: Promotion of sound design in land use development and the Council agreed that this wording would be preferable to the present wording. Mr. Street cited examples of projects they would like to have reviewed. Mr. Logan stated that he would note, for the Council's information, that if the Design Review Committee is interested in going beyond looking into buildings or structures within the City they will have to change their ordinance to give them this additional power because they are limited to buildings and structures and not any other par- ticular land use: however, land use is mentioned under Sec. 22.81, but it is only incidental to buildings and structures and not to general application to land use within the City. Mayor Futch stated that this issue is becoming a little complex and suggested that the City Manager draft a letter to the Design Review Committee indicating their charge, according to the ordi- nance. The Council should be careful about what is land use planning, what is design, and what should go to the Beautification Committee. The Council concurred. COMMUNICATION RE STUDY FOR ALAMEDA COUNTY - 9ll PROGRESS REPORT The communication from Alameda County regarding the study concerning the implementation and evaluation of an advanced 9ll system was sub- mitted to the City Council in the way of a progress report and was noted for filing. COMMUNICATION RE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF HIGHWAYS IN COUNTY The Council received notice of a meeting of the Alameda County Transportation Advisory Committee, at ll:OO a.m., Friday, May 30, in the council chambers of the Hayward City Hall, 22300 Foothill Boulevard, Hayward. The meeting will include the request of the Board of Supervisors that BART and AC Transit be included as members of the Alameda County Trans- portation Advisory Committee and recommendations of the Engineers Subcommittee for construction of State highway improvements in Alameda County. Attached was a list of the priorities for improve- ment and development of the State Highway system in Alameda County. CM-30-l05 May 27, 1975 COMMUNICATION FROM P.C. RE MEETING SCHEDULES, ETC. The Planning Commission has indicated that the next meeting with the Planning Consultants concerning the General Plan review has been scheduled for May l4, 1975, and that they have been invited to attend. However, they did not receive notice of this meeting until the May 6th Planning Commission meeting and they would appre- ciate consultation with them prior to scheduling of meetings with the consultant. J Mayor Futch stated that he realizes that a last minute notice is an inconvenience to many of the people who have other items to schedule and would suggest that the staff try to inform them in ample time when there is scheduling of meetings with the consultant. REPORT RE SOCIAL CONCERNS COMMITTEE Mr. Parness reported that 23 organizations have been contacted, asking for the name of a member and an alternate member for the proposed Social Concerns Committee. Thirty days were allowed for responses and during this time only l3 organizations responded. However, the Council has concluded that only 7 names will be selected for the Committee. Cw Tirsell stated that one of the members who worked on the original draft of a human relations ordinance pointed out some of the problems of a Social Concerns Committee, and she stated that we have problems we should solve before getting into form- ing the Committee. She stated that the problem is that people will be serving from other organizations and it should be made clear that the seat is not that of their organization. Another point that the City should make is that they must reappoint on the anniversary date, each year, this person, because what hap- pened in Health Care Concerns was that one of the organizations did not reappoint their member and she continued to sit on the committee and when a controversial matter arose she voted and the organization realized they had not appointed her and she had cast a vote contrary to how the organization would have instructed or asked her to vote. She stated that they really resented that vote and this type of thing can really become a hassle. Mayor Futch stated that if they do not represent an organization, this would solve such a problem, and the Council agreed with this idea. Cw Tirsell commented that when the term is set she feels that some one year terms and some two year terms should be designa- ted in the beginning and the members draw the length of term by lot. She added that she has had one request that there be one section for a member at large and perhaps the Council would like to discuss this. Cm Miller stated that as he recalls in drawing up the resolution or ordinance which created this committee the Council reserved the right to appoint people at large. ') J Mr. Parness mentioned that appointments will be for two and four year terms for this particular committee. It was noted that this will be discussed further in the execu- tive session. CM-30-l06 May 27, 1975 REPORT RE ORD. 848 - ENERGY CONSERVATION The Building Inspector, Mr. Street, reported to the Council concern- ing ordinance No. 848, with respect to energy conservation and attic fans being installed and the effectiveness of the ordinance. ( V It was noted that people are voluntarily coming to the City for per- mits to install attic fans and thus far the enforcement of the ordi- nance has been effective and accepted by most people. The Council expressed the opinion of being very pleased with the results of the ordinance. REPORT RE WAVERLY WAY TURNAROUND Mrs. Betty J. Wanberg, has complained that they were required to have a turnaround at the end of Waverly Way in order to build a home on their property at the end of Waverly Way. The turn- around was to be for emergency vehicles but instead is being used as a view of Livermore by motorists and as a parking place for teen- agers who dump beer cans on weekends. She stated that the street cost them approximately $3,000 and they feel if the City requires it, the City should pay for it. She listed four other dead- end streets in this vicinity which are not required to have the turn- around. Mr. Parness explained that it is his understanding that prior to building the home it was fully explained to the Wanbergs that the turnaround street would be required and was made a condition of the building permit upon its issuance. Mrs. Wanberg feels this was an undue imposition and requests that the $3,3l0.50 be paid by the City and requested that the matter be appealed to the Council. Reports from the Public Works Director and the Fire Department were submitted to the Council concerning the requirement for the turnaround. Mr. Musso commented that the street was planned to be a through street but Ensign Bickford requested that it not be put through: however, the plan has not been approved. Mrs. Wanberg, 2876 Waverly Way, stated that there was a turn around located there but the City required that they provide a 40 ft. radius made of asphalt with an aggregate base and two inches of asphalt. She showed a picture of what was there prior to building their home and she indicated that it would have cost them much less if they had been allowed to install what was pre- viously there. She stated that in her opinion if they are re- quired to have a turnaround other dead-end streets in Livermore should also be required to have the turn around. ( Mr. Lee explained that the other dead-end streets in that particular vicinity are relatively short, less than 200 ft., and the City pOlicy has been that a turnaround is not required. He indicated that the City has been very consistent about requiring a turnaround on an extended dead-end street and noted that in the case of El Rancho Drive, where there is a dead-end, the street is very old and he is not sure why one was not required because it is a long street. Mr. Lee explained the history concerning the Waverly lot at the end of the street and the reason the present turnaround was required. CM-30-l07 May 27, 1975 (re waverly Way Turnaround) Cm Miller noted that he lives in this area and it was very clear to everyone in that tract that the lot at the end of Waverly Way had been reserved for a turn around and was not to be sold. This was shown very clearly on the tract map everyone received at the time they purchased their homes. He added that he was very sur- prised to hear that the lot had been sold and at the time he wondered what would happen concerning the turnaround and he contacted City Hall, at the request of some of his neighbors, and was told that the turnaround would be required at the end of Waverly and that this was a requirement and condition of the build- ing permit. \ ;~ Mr. Lee stated that if this lot was sold to the Wanbergs without their knowledge of the requirement for the turnaround he would feel that the present owner has some recourse against the seller because it was well known that the turnaround would be a require- ment. Mrs. Wanberg stated that they did know there would be a requirement for the turnaround but they did intend to replace it with what was previously there and not a whole cul-de-sac. She stated that this is not used for emergency vehicles but rather has traffic all day long and late at night. Cw Tirsell commented that streets are not closed off to emergency vehicles and this is an encumbrance upon the extension so that the fire protection is greater than if the equipment could not turn. If the fire equipment does not have adequate access the people on Waverly Way could not get fire insurance. She added that she sees no reason to waive the requirementsince it is a policy of the City and since it was an encumbrance upon the lot at the time the Wanbergs purchased it. REPORT RE TAILWINDS RESTAURANT SIGN Mr. Parness reported that the owner of the Tailwinds Restaurant has changed the name from the Crosswinds and would like to change the sign located along I-580. He has changed the name as well as the design and there were meetings with the Design Review Committee concerning the sign. There was a concurrence on the part of the Design Committee as to the design the owner wishes to install. The owner has been informed that this takes a review process and that he would have to obtain a permit from the Planning Department. The owners choice is an opaque sign with the letters internally illuminated. Cm Miller has brought this matter to the attention of the City Manager and requested that it be placed on the agenda. In researching the ordinance concerning signs it specifically states that internally illuminated signs in an Industrial Zone will not be permitted, and this is an Industrial Zone. Cm Miller stated that first of all, Mr. Parness has just pointed out that an internally illuminated sign is in conflict with our Sign Ordinance and, consequently, cannot be approved. Secondly, the sign should have come to the Council anyway. There were two decisions on external lighting and the decision changed after Mr. Gentile made a third request and in Cm Miller's opinion, the third request was unreasonable because decisions have already been made. If there are going to be any changes made, they should be made at formal meetings. J CM-30-l08 May 27, 1975 (Report re Tailwinds Restaurant Sign) The Council had no way of knowing about any phone survey and he feels this to be an unreasonable manipulation of committees when there is a formal agenda and there are formal meeting times and decisions have already been made. u The Council feels very strongly about seeing all the material in advance so that there can be reasonable discussion and they have tried to eliminate the polling business as much as possible. There are approximately 30,000 cars a day on I-580 and even though that number does not pass Livermore there is a significant amount of traffic that does pass Livermore. This particular sign, which is located on City property, is seen by more people than any other signs that would be on the City's interior, and consequently, this sign should be a good one. In particular, a poor sign gives a bad image to the City and the Council has always been very particular about the signs on City property along the freeway. We have always insisted on external lighting and we have insisted on signs on wood, as for the previous sign for this use, and there was a lot of dis- cussion concerning lighting. Every Council has reaffirmed the con- cept of external lighting and besides being illegal by our ordinance, the internal lighting is not consistent with the City sign. Originally there was discussion as to whether a sign should be allowed out by the freeway at all because it is an off-site sign. Cm Miller stated that he would urge the Council to require the external lighting as required by our ordinance. Mr. Gentile, stated that he has gone through all the processes for a new sign and did not realize he was supposed to come to the City Council. He stated that if the Council requires the exterior light- ing he will comply but he does have a letter from the Design Review Committee which indicates that everything is in order and he went ahead and had the sign made which cost $2,200. Cw Tirsell commented that Mr. Gentile was not in Livermore at the time the Council drafted the sign ordinance, so perhaps he can't appreciate how difficult these decisions are. She stated that sh2w~c[! realizes that from a business standpoint a larger sign is bet~9~i~eQ~ bpt,~her~ i~ a lot of property out by the freeway that is ~~ , (;,. wCi'eve:Cop<<'a'nd it is possible that there could be a large string rr:na.J. of signs in that area. The Council has been adamant in the past ~or about external lighting and she would have to support Cm Miller's suggestion that the external lighting be approved. Gloria Taylor, Chairman of the Design Review Committee, commented that the sign before the Council is the sign that the Design Review Committee approved with external lighting. She stated that the Committee was not informed that internal lighting was against the ordinance in that area and apologized for this misunderstanding. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE TO APPROVE THE SIGN THEY SAW WITH EXTERNAL LIGHTING, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. Cm Miller stated that-the staff should make sure that any sign on City property should come to the Council after Design Review and Planning Department approval, and would also like to ask the staff to suggest to the Design Review Committee that they not conduct polling by telephone. Mayor Futch commented that perhaps Mr. Musso could also inform the Design Review Committee about the ordinance regarding signs. CM-30-l09 May 27, 1975 REPORT RE SB 839 The State Compensation Insurance Fund has requested support of SB 839, which amends the Labor Code, and the staff has recom- mended that the Council adopt a motion authorizing support of the bill. .~ ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE COUNCIL AUTHORIZED SUPPORT OF SB 839. REPORT RE PROPOSED LEGISLATION RE STREET LIGHTING POWER COST EXEMP. The City Manager reported that a critical issue facing our bud- get for the new fiscal year is the escalation of street lighting power costs and lack of financial support for it. Traditionally the revenue for this purpose has come from traffic safety fines but over the past three years the source has amounted to only $85,000/year while the estimated cost for lighting is $200,000. It would appear that since local government is committed to pro- vide adequate street lighting and since these costs are rising sharply, we should be permitted to be exempt from the limits of SB 90. It is recommended that the Council support an inquiry as to preparation of legislation and League of California Cities soliciting their support. Mr. Parness stated that just within a couple of days he has re- ceived a copy of AB 1223 which does exactly what he is suggest- ing be done. He added that he is disturbed that this measure was in effect last year but not brought to the City's attention and would like to find out why we wern't informed. It was a one year measure which is being reintroduced again this year for one year, and indications are that it will be accepted by both houses and introduced into law by the governor very soon. CM MILLER MOVED TO SUPPORT AB l223, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. REPORT RE BUSINESS LICENSE FEE ADJUST. Mr. Parness reported that the Council has asked to have some figures calculated to possibly amending our Business License Tax Ordinance. The staff has sought to gather information on this possibility and as to alternatives that might be available, in the event the Council does wish to change the ordinance. If there are to be any amendments the staff would request that this be done as soon as possible so that the changes might be effective as of July l, 1975, the new fiscal year. Mayor Futch felt this item came to the Council rather suddenly and would be reluctant to vote on this issue tonight because he feels the businessmen of the community should have the oppor- tunity to present their views concerning changes. Cm Miller stated that there is pressure to get changes adopted so they can become effective July 1, 1975, and asked the staff the last date this can be scheduled for first reading? --./J Mr. Parness commented that the City Attorney has advised that this is a tax measure and can be adopted as an urgency ordinance. It can be adopted after one reading anytime prior to July I, 1975. CM-30-ll0 May 27, 1975 (Report re Business License Fee Adjustments) Cm Miller stated that if this is the case and it doesn't have to be introduced tonight, there is no reason the Council can't discuss it later, and it would be perfectly reasonable to postpone it so that the Council could hear from the merchants. l) Cm Miller stated that at present there is a distinct inequity which makes the smaller business pay a larger percentage of their gross receipts for business license fees and in his opinion this is unfair. There are not many cities that have a uniform rate because the pressure of the larger businesses tends to keep it down. It seems that changes in the upper rates to make them more equivalent, so there is not the inequity between the large and small gross receipt businesses, requires an increase somewhere along the line. The suggestions are only a small step towards the ultimate inequity but he feels they should be done and as a result the City can pick up another $10,000-$11,000 with a small increase. The City needs the money and the changes would make it more equitable for the small businessman. Cm Turner commented that large business does not always mean large profits. Many times the person who has a $lOO,OOO business makes more profit than the person with the $4 million business. He added that perhaps the whole business license tax program is inequit- able anyway. He feels it is very hard to assess an equitable tax regardless of what method is used. em Miller stated that the point made by Cm Turner is well taken and the City is not allowed to impose taxes on profit: however there are categories, in the ordinance, which tend to separate the higher profit businesses from the lower profit businesses, on the average. Cw Tirsell pointed out that inflation and recession is reflected in gross receipts and this is one reason for using gross receipts because it is a self-adjusting scale. Mel Luna, 723 Via del Sol, asked if there is an ordinance for a service type of business license as opposed to a person selling merchandise? Mr. Parness indicated that people who perform services pay under the same business license ordinance. Mr. Luna commented that the margin for a person performing services varies more than a person selling merchandise, and wondered' why a merchant should be penalized more than the person performing services. Mr. Parness indicated that we have three categories so as to be as equitable as possible: however, the City cannot be as precise as Mr. Luna is suggesting because this would call for a different rate for every conceivable type of business enterprise. Marshall Kamena, 2476 Merritt Place, stated that if the Council is willing to postpone this item and would like the Chamber of Commerce to prepare a report for the Council, they would be happy to do so. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO CONTINUE FOR TWO WEEKS, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. c REPORT RE LAND ACQ. RELATED TO TRACK RELOCAT. A report was submitted by the Planning Commission regarding the pro- posed land acquisition related to the track relocation project and future grade separation at First Street. CM-30-lll May 27, 1975 (Report re Land Acquisition re Track Relocation) Cw Tirsell stated that she and Cm Turner happened to get in on the discussion concerning the bike paths for the underpass, so they have been informed about the underpass: h.Qw~y~r t-. they did .1 not get the overall discussion concerning the ~f'LL"c.A.:'Df1&10.,(.,L She stated that she feels this is what has happened with the~~~~~ Planning Commiss~on in that new members have been selected and U those with exper~ have gone on and perhaps they would like to have a presentation at a future meeting. , 'J Mr. Musso stated that they would appreciate this as well as information concerning other ongoing projects, such as planning at the airport. No action was required of the Council on this item. REPORT RE NOISE MEASURING INSTRUMENT Mr. Musso reported that at a recent Noise Committee meeting it was determined that the present system of borrowing noise measuring instruments is not acceptable and it was requested that a noise measuring instrument be authorized in the 1975-76 budget. The Committee is requesting that the instrument be purchased immediately and on behalf of the Committee Mr. Musso is requesting the emergency purchase of a noise measuring instrument for approximately $500. No funds have been budgeted for this purpose. Mr. Parness indicated that he feels the instrument would be a very reasonable acquisition and will be valuable for the Build- ing Department, the Police Department and the Noise Committee. There is an entry in the 1975-76 budget that was going to be presented to the Council for a more expensive unit but apparently the Noise Committee feels the $500 unit would suffice and he would urge that the Council approve the expenditure. Mr. Musso explained that the $500 instrument would measure down to about 40 decibels which takes care of most of our problems be- cause our problems are up above 60-65 decibels. The more sen- sitive instrument might be required when we get into more sen- sitive problems such as a legal issue or a complaint filed. ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE COUNCIL AUTHORIZED THE PURCHASE OF THE $500 INSTRUMENT. RESOLUTION 109-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF A NOISE MEASURING INSTRUMENT REPORT RE PG&E EASEMENT FOR VISTA MEADOWS PARK Mr. Parness reported that in order to provide for electrical power for a pumping station at California Water's Las Positas reservoir, a lO ft. utility easement is required. This would overlay a 20 ft. wide utility easement now owned by California Water Service Company. The City did assess a fee when the easement was originally allowed to Cal Water for their line and this is an overlying easement for the power line to serve the reservoir system so the staff would recommend that we exact from PG&E, a fee for the easement which would be in the amount of 25% of the value of the land, or $147. J CM-30-1l2 u c May 27, 1975 (Rpt re PG&E Easement For Vista Meadows Park) CM TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF THE EASEMENT, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. RESOLUTION NO. 110-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECU- TION OF EASEMENT (To PG&E) Cm Miller mentioned that we are leasing this property to LARPD for park purposes and it seems that it would be courteous to check with LARPD before the matter comes to the Council. He stated that he knows of no reason why they should object but they should at least be informed. CITY MANAGER WEEKLY REPORT Public Works with respect to public works for the downtown area projects, it is being found that utility line relocations do continue to be a problem. Some of the power lines, when exposed, do have to be relocated, and some of the gas lines have had to be deepened and this is causing delays. Curbside Boxes The City has installed three curbside mail boxes because there is nobody else to install them in this City. The City has contacted some of the local sheet metal firms who may want to fabricate them, but one local business wanted a commitment of 100 before they would go into the fabrication business. The cost has been $35/each to fabricate and install the mail boxes and this is what is being charged. Strike Plan A strike plan has been prepared by the staff for our Water Recla- mation Plant, which is a requirement of the EPA, and has been distributed to the Council. Air Show Our air show was held a couple of weeks ago and was a big success. There were an estimated l4,000 people in attendance and there were about 275 fly-ins. One problem was that people could not get to the golf course because the Jaycees had most of the routes blocked and there were complaints from people who did wish to go to the golf course. Highway 84 Bypass The City is working on the Highway 84 bypass and appraisals are being conducted. Hopefully appraisals will be received in about two weeks, after which time the City will be in a position to go to the County Board of Supervisors. CM-30-ll3 May 27, 1975 CAL-TRANS Meeting The staff has met with the Cal-Trans people and the Southern Pacific Railroad concerning the First Street overpass program. Although we are a long way down the priority list for receiv- ing allocations from the state for that construction, we feel that we will be successful in eventually obtaining a state grant. The S.P. staff is very receptive to the idea of dedicating the vacated right-of-way, once their tracks are moved. It yet remains to be seen whether or not they will demand any compensation for this property but they have indicated that if there is any they would probably request that it be in the form of credit against their mandatory 10% contribution for the project. Cal-Trans is quite enthusiastic about the program and feels that the Highway Commission would readily grant a relocated route of Hwy 84 and they believe that their office will be contributing to the program in the way of providing full engineering and this would be a big assistance to us. ~ Grade Separation The grade separation necessitated the closing off of First Street for about a day and a half last week which created a significant amount of traffic congestion and was due to the new track instal- lation over all of the following streets: "L" Street, Junction, "K", "I" and First Street. The remaining street to have new tracks is Murrieta which is a heavily traveled street. The staff has been meeting with the contractor to determine the hours of the day which would result in the least inconvenience and hopefully something can be done during the evening. Something will have to be done soon and this street will also have to be closed for about one day. Fire Station Cannon Mr. Parness reported that the cannon located at the Fire Station has been stolen. This cannon was reconditioned for the City and it was chained to the building and the City hopes it can be re- claimed. Fire Station Bids Bids will be received on Station 1 on May 29th, and reportedly there are 16 potential bidders. We are looking forward to receiv- ing some very good prices. Fire Station Sites The City Manager has met with two of the three owners for three sites being considered for Fire Station #4, and hopefully he will be able to report back to the Council with all three re- sponses next week. Youth Counseling Services The funding for our youth counseling services, HORIZONS, is in its third year and this will be the last year that monies will be received. If the City wishes to continue this service it will have to be funded locally. J CM-30-ll4 May 27, 1975 (City Manager's Report) STEP Program We have received word from the governor that the STEP Program will also be funded for another year. The program is in its second year and has proven to be a very beneficial police service. / One of the items we were able to purchase through the STEP Program was a video tape machine and we are using it for departmental training ses- sions. Rather than have everyone attend training programs the programs are being video taped and these are reproduced for various groups, as needed. u Water Reclamation Plant The City retained an inspector for the water reclamation plant and he has just resigned. Their program is going quite well and most of the intricate work is now completed and the entire project is 65-70% done. In consideration of this and in view of the problems involved in getting an experienced inspector for a relatively short period of time the staff has decided to assign one of our building inspectors for that job. This will mean a significant load on the other men in the Building Inspection Department but the Chief Building Inspector and the Director of Public Works feel it can be maintained adequately. Cranston Representative A representative from Senator Cranston's office visited the City and spoke with Don Bradley. Reportedly the Revenue Sharing Program will be extended, in Senator Cranston's opinion, but i~ is felt that there will probably be significant modifications. It is also believed that the CETA Program will be extended. Taxi Service Program Cm Turner has given the staff information concerning a program that may be available to our City - a subsidy for taxi service to senior citizens. This is a program that is little known and is under the Older Americans Act of the federal government under Title III of that program and monies are being distributed through Alameda County and the Commission on Aging. There is something in the order of $75,000 available, as far as we know, and relatively few cities appear to be interested in taking part in it. An application must be filed by us by June 1, 1975, so we are taking the liberty of filing one. There is no commitment involved on the part of the City. Police Dept. Scholarship When Chief Michelis retired there was a residual amount of money left over and given to the Police Association to be used for awards to young students who were going on to college and interested in law enforcement work. l Just today Mr. Parness was told that the Police Association has announced its third annual award in the amount of a $300 scholarship. Mr. Parness stated that he is very gratified to hear that this pro- gram is being maintained by the Police Association. CM-30-ll5 ;'~i.l May 27, 1975 (City Manager's Report) Parking - Trucks The Police Department has informed the City Manager that 45 trucks have been posted concerning parking in and about the City and notices have been sent out concerning this matter. Property Ownership List Mr. Parness distributed a property ownership list of all the downtown property ownerships which is a tabulation of every piece of property and mentions name and location, parking allotment, the sq. footage of the building and the assessed valuation assigned to the property as well as land and improvements. Mr. Parness stated that as far as he knows this is a very accurate updating of all property in the Central Business District and will be very valuable as a plan- ning tool as well as consideration of assessed valuations. 'J A map was displayed disclosing project numbers and showing the property ownerships as well as which properties are being acquired by the City and the status of the acquisition. DISCUSSION RE DESIGN REVIEW COMr1ITTEE RE MAJOR PROJECTS REVIEW Cm Miller stated that during the meeting he has been reflecting upon the discussion which took place concerning the Design Review Committee's request to be allowed to review all major projects in the City and in his opinion if he was a member of the Committee he might feel, after listening to the discussion, that he had been slapped in the face. The Design Review Committee is offering their services to try to make Livermore a better looking City and the Council, in essence, has said for them to keep their noses out of it. The majority of the Council felt this was a misinterpretation of the discussion: however, the matter has been referred to the staff and it will again be discussed. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Futch adjourned the meeting at lO:lO p.m. to an executive session to discuss legal matters and appointments. APPROVE ~d f %$/ Mayor ~rk - - . -Liverm~re, --C~lifornia ATTEST J CM-30-ll6 Regular Meeting of June 2, 1975 A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Livermore was held on June 2, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:l0 p.m., with Mayor Futch presiding. u ROLL CALL PRESENT: Cm Turner, Miller, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch ABSENT: None (Vacant Seat - Cm. Staley seated during this meeting) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Futch led the Councilmernbers as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. MINUTES May 19, 1975 Page 84, second paragraph, line 5 should have the a) deleted and line 6 should read compromise proposal rather than compromised proposal. Page 86, second paragraph should indicate that Cm Miller asked that the Council consider the above suggestion rather than the following suggestion. Page 95, third paragraph, third line should state 2.5 MGD rather than 1 MGD. Page 96, third paragraph, second line, after EPA, strike the re- mainder of that line. Page 87, 3rd paragraph from bottom, line 5 should read: are going to be part of Pleasanton. Page 87, 2nd paragraph from top, rephrased as follows: Mayor Futch stated that although low income housing would be of significant benefit to the few people who would receive the housing aid, a greater number of people would benefit by the establishment of a center. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF MAY 19, 1975, WERE APPROVED, AS CORRECTED. PROCLAMATION - LIVERMORE RODEO WEEK Mayor Futch read a proclamation proclaiming the week of June 1 through June 8, as Livermore Rodeo Week. SPECIAL ITEM - OATH OF OFFICE - JOHN STALEY c At this time John Staley was sworn into office by the City Clerk and was seated with the other members of the Council. CONSENT CALENDAR Payroll & Claims There were 56 claims in the amount of $89,606.90, dated May 27, 1975, approved by the City Manager. CM-30-ll7 June 2, 1975 Res. Auth. Award of Bid - No. Livermore Median Landscaping The following. bids were received for the North Livermore Avenue median landscaping and irrigation and it is recommended that a resolution awarding the bid to the low bidder be adopted: Collishaw Corporation Davey Tree Survery Co. M. H. Hansen Construction Co. Robert Quatman, Inc. Landco Corporation B & M Landscape R.E.G., Inc. Christner Co. Bibens Nursery $20,407.88 22,56l.82 25,999.02 26,269.59 28,350.34 28,528.l4 3l.03l.82 31,839.86 35,806.40 ,J RESOLUTION NO. lll-75 A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID (North Livermore Avenue Median Irrigation and Landscaping - Collishaw Corporation) Res. Auth. Settlement of Lawsuit - Calif. Rock It is recommended that a resolution be adopted authorizing the settlement of a lawsuit with California Rock and Gravel, et al, regarding property acquisition for Stanley Boulevard widening. RESOLUTION NO. ll2-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT OF LAWSUIT (City v. California Rock and Gravel, et al) Res. Auth. Park Purchase - Willis A resolution authorizing park purchase is a formalization of approval given earlier by the CounciL for the purchase of a small parcel of property (1.5 acres) adjacent to Pioneer Park. RESOLUTION NO. l13-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF PROPERTY (Pioneer Park Addition: Guy C. Willis and Dorothy Willis) Res. Rejecting Amended Claim It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution rejecting the amended claim of Caltaco, Inc. for property acquisition damage under litigation in our grade separation project. RESOLUTION NO. 114-75 A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE AMENDED CLAIM OF CALTACO, INC. ) --/ CM-30-ll8 June 2, 1975 Appointments to Social Concerns Committee A resolution was adopted appointing the following members to the Social Concerns Committee: u Members: Rin Hartwig, Marion Mendelsohn, Dick Flores, Lillian Snorf, Myra Latkin, Judith Turner and Tom Haratani Alternates: Quenten Ramil, Barbara Carothers, Lucille Bruskin, Diane Hall, Mel Lagasco, Jack King, and Alfredo Despy RESOLUTION NO. ll5-75 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBERS TO SOCIAL CONCERNS CO~1ITTEE APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (Request for Exec. Sess.) The City Attorney asked that the Council adjourn the meeting to an executive session to discuss legal matters. (Check Signing Plate) The City Clerk commented that the check signing plate transfering the name from Mayor Pritchard to Mayor Futch has been received but did not come until after the agenda had been prepared. The staff would like the Council to adopt the two resolutions authorizing the transfer. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE APPROPORIATE RESOLUTIONS WERE ADOPTED. RESOLUTION NO. 116-75 RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MECHANICAL METHOD FOR SIGNING CHECKS, SELECTING A DEPOSITARY AND PROVIDING FOR THE NEAMES OF THE OFFICERS AUTHORIZED TO SIGN CHECKS AND THE METHOD OF SIGNING THEREOF. (BANK OF AMERICA) RESOLUTION NO. ll7-75 l" RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MECHANICAL METHOD FOR SIGNING CHECKS, SELECTING A DEPOSITARY AND PROVIDING FOR THE NAMES OF THE OFFICERS AUTH- ORIZED TO SIGN CHECKS AND THE METHOD OF SIGN- ING THEREOF. (Aircraft Hangar Facilities Fund Loan Account) CM-30-119 June 2, 1975 (Rodeo Parade) Mr. Parness stated that he has distributed statements about where the Livermore Rodeo Parade will be located and at what time. The parade will begin at 9:30 a.m. on Saturday, June 7, and Second and "J" Streets is the entry point. (Departmental Tour) .~ Mr. Parness commented that the Council has expressed interest in visiting the various departments in the City of Livermore and he would like to suggest that the tour take place prior to the budget hearings. Mrs. Parness suggested that Friday, June 20th, be set aside for the tour and commented that this may take all day. The Councilmembers asked that the tour take place on Thursday, June 19. (Council Meeting Schedule for Summer) Mr. Parness asked if the Council would like to consider meeting twice a month during the summer months, on a trial basis, with special meetings called during the interim, as necessary. Cw Tirsell commented that she feels perhaps some of the meetings could be eliminated but does not want meetings scheduled for every other week, on a set basis. Mayor Futch stated that he would be willing to meet every other week, on a trial basis, but it would appear that his is a minority opinion. (Scheduling of All Day Budget Session) Mr. Parness asked the Council to select a day for the all day budget session. It was concluded that due to various conflicts this date would have to be selected at a later time. (Revenue Sharing Grants) Mr. Parness commented that there are local entities applying for revenue sharing grants and response must be received by the County by next Tuesday. Good Samaritan Home, Buenas Vidas Ranch and the Citizens Committee for Twin Valley Counseling Service, have applied for revenue shar- ing allocations. All of these agencies are reputable and highly recognized institutions. Good Samaritan has applied for $32,406; Buenas Vidas $90,000, and the Twin Valley Learning Center $48,274. The County has asked for a response concerning the applications. ~ Cw Tirsell commented that she would prefer to have something written in front of her before commenting. She is familiar with all three organizations and could certainly support their applications. CM-30-l20 June 2, 1975 (Revenue Sharing Grants) CM TIRSELL MOVED TO SUPPORT THE APPLICATIONS FOR REVENUE SHARING FUNDS FOR ALL THREE ORGANIZATIONS, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. G MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL (Summer Vacations) Cm Turner suggested that the City Clerk contact each Councilmember to determine vacation schedules for the summer. (Sign Ordinance Enforcement) Cm Miller stated that it has been eight years since the Sign Ordinance was adopted and that every non-conforming sign should now be taken down and would hope that people who own the signs which are illegal are being contacted. Mr. Musso commented that there were two freestanding signs rema1n1ng and there are still some oversized signs remaining. One of the free- Cm Miller stated that Mr. Mehran has several tract signs that are illegal and have been up for almost a year. The staff has notified him that they are illegal and he has been asked to remove them but they have not been removed. ultimately the staff took the matter to the D.A. and the D.A gave Mr. Mehran another two months in which to apply for a variance. Zoning Ordinance violations are crimes just like any other type of crimes, in Cm Miller's opinion, and it would seem that no matter how many times we speak to the D.A. they fail to prosecute any kind of the deliberate violations of our Sign Ordinance and it would be advisable to send a strongly worded letter to the D.A. suggesting that it is time he take care of his public responsibilities. Mr. Logan stated that if he would have the Council's permission he would prefer to speak with the District Attorney on a less formal basis to see if he can get a response and explain the problem we have out here. If, after speaking with him, he appears to be unwilling to react, perhaps we can formally complain or object. Cm Miller stated that he does not care what method is used to obtain response. The City Attorney was directed to contact the D.A. concerning this problem and Mr. Musso also suggested that perhaps they can discuss the entire issue of better enforcing our ordinances in this area. (Local Transportation) (- Cm Miller indicated that the City of Livermore has been in the process of working on local transportation, since 1968, and it appears that we are slowly working towards accomplishment. The last time we came close to getting local transportation was in 1972 when the subject was discussed among the three valley jurisdictions and the Pleasanton representatives refused to go along with a valley- wide bus system. He added that during recent discussion concerning a bus system the Herald editorial mentioned that perhaps we shouldn't have a bus system and yet this is the one good way to eliminate smog. CM-30-l2l June 2, 1975 (Council Tour) Cw Tirsell commented that if the FAA Tower is not to be included in the tour the Council will be taking she would suggest that the members of the Council try to visit the tower whenever they can. (Centennial Flag) Mayor Futch stated that the City has been given a small centen- nial flag to fly on special holidays and wondered if it would be appropriate for it to fly beginning on Independence Day, beneath the American flag. \ J It was concluded that this would be appropriate. (First Meeting - Social Concerns Comm.) Mayor Futch invited the Council to attend the first meeting of the Social Concerns Committee which will take place on June l2th at 7:30 p.m. The staff is looking for a place in which the meeting may be held. COMMUNICATION RE LAVWMA 1975-76 BUDGET The Project Director of LAVWMA presented the 1975-76 budget to the Council for review and Cm Staley wondered why Pleasanton pays less than VCSD towards projects and it was explained that part of Pleasanton's sewage goes through VCSD's plant which makes up for the difference. REQUEST FOR FUNDS FOR ANNUAL DELEGATION TO QUEZALTENANGO The Chairman of the Sister City Committee has requested that the City pay the airfare for the Sister City representative and a Council delegate to help defray the cost of the annual visit to Quezaltenango. It was also noted that the term of office for Dr. DeBruin, Chairman of the Committee has expired. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO APPROVE FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT ALLOCATED FOR AIR- FARE LAST YEAR AND THAT A LETTER BE SENT TO DR. DEBRUIN THANKING HIM FOR HIS SERVICE ON THIS COW1ITTEE. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM STALEY. Cm Turner stated that he feels it would be appropriate for the Council to pay the airfare for the delegates' spouses as well as for the two delegates. Cw Tirsell stated that she would like to support this suggestion but everyone should realize that there are many committees on which people work very hard and receive no money from the City. CM TURNER MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION THAT THE MAYOR AND THE MAYOR'S SPOUSE RECEIVE AIRFARE FROM THE COUNCIL. J Cm Staley asked how much money is involved and it was explained that the airfare is approximately $350-$370 per person and the City generally sends a $100 gift making a total of about $800. CM-30-l22 June 2, 1975 (Request for Funds for Annual Delegation to Quezaltenango) CM STALEY STATED THAT HE WOULD SECOND THE MOTION BECAUSE HE ALSO FEELS IT IS IMPORTANT FOR THE CITY TO SUPPORT A HUSBAND AND WIFE VISITING QUEZALTENANGO, AND THE GESTURE IS CERTAINLY WORTH $350. u Mayor Futch explained that the Council delegate almost always takes his/her spouse and for the 10 day visit there are no expenses to the delegates. All accommodations are taken care of and there is no expense whatsoever. For this reason it does not seem unreasonable that the spouse continue to pay the airfare. Cm Turner stated that he does feel it is unreasonable to request that the spouse pay airfare because the Council has accepted the responsibility of sending a delegate every year to take part in the festivities and it is in good keeping to have both husband and wife attend and it is unjustified that the spouse be asked to pay $ 350 for a City Council approvec;1 funct1.... .on~ . I ,;4 ('y /1 L. fl~~~ ~-ir -" ~lJ1eee~/!/. em Miller stated that he will\oppose the amendmentlbecause in his opinion the City should not be)paying to send anyone to Quezaltenango. He feels that the Sister City~should be responsible for raising the money to send delegates through various fund raising events. He stated that he feels this is not the correct way to spend tax dollars and will vote against the main motion as well. AMENDMENT FAILED 2-3 (Cm Miller, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch dissenting) . MAIN MOTION PASSED 4-l (Cm Miller dissenting) . CO~~UNICATION FROM VCSD TO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RE COUNTY FACILITIES The City received a copy of a communication sent to the Board of Supervisors from VCSD asking that the Board of Supervisors reconsider locating County facilities at the Santa Rita site. The letter indi- cated that the County already owns this land, it is centrally located for the valley and it would cut costs to have court facilities near the prison. Cw Tirsell stated that she would like the Council to join with VCSD in asking reconsideration of the Santa Rita site for County facilities because the site selected by the Supervisors is virtually inaccessable to the citizens of Livermore who need to use it. The other sites considered by the Supervisors were difficult enough, but the site selected was not even a site recommended by the consultants and they also have to purchase the land. Cm Miller also pointed out that it would be much more expensive to developp the site they have selected because it is on a hill that will have to be graded considerably. Also the access is bad because elderly people will have to walk up a hill to get to the facilities. Cm Staley pointed out that the site selected by the Supervisors is also within about l2 miles of the Hayward Superior Court and it would make more sense to separate the court facilities by more miles and he also would favor the Santa Rita site. CW TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE STAFF BE DIRECTED TO SEND A LETTER TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS EXPRESSING THE CONCEro~S OF THE COUNCIL AND THEIR COMMENTS, SECONDED BY CM STALEY, AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. Cm Turner commented that Judge Lewis might also be interested in receiving a copy of the letter to be sent to the Supervisors. CM-30-l23 June 2, 1975 (re County Facilities) Cm Staley felt the Livermore-Amador Valley Bar Association would also be interested in having a copy of the letter. COMMUNICATION RE ABAG RES. RE NEW TOWN A copy of a resolution adopted by the Alameda County Board of Super- visors concerning consideration of the Las positas area was dis- ) tributed to the Council. The resolution indicates favor of rescind- ~ ing the resolution adopted by the ABAG Executive Committee and asking delay of further consideration until a master plan and other procedures are approved. CM MILLER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE AN APPROPRIATE RESOLUTION TO BE PRESENTED AT THE NEXT ABAG EXECUTIVE MEETING, INDICATING THE CITY'S CONTINUED SUPPORT OF THE ACTION TAKEN, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. REPORT RE ARROYO PARKWAY ADDITION The Director of Public Works reported that the developer of the Livermore Garden Apartments on East Avenue would like to have the Arroyo Seco Parkway incorporated into the Zone 7 drainage channel system in order that he may be reimbursed by Zone 7 for that work. It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution requesting Zone 7 to add that section of the Arroyo Seco into the Arroyo Parkway system. Cm Miller asked if this work was done with concrete and Mr. Lee explained that it was not. Cw Tirsell commented that she would also be interested in review- ing the design of the channel prior to formal adoption because because the trees are a big consideration. CM MILLER MOVED TO HAVE THE FINAL DESIGN REVIEWED BY THE COUNCIL AS AN AGENDA ITEM IN THE FUTURE AND THAT THE STAFF BE AUTHORIZED TO SUBMIT THE CHANNEL PLAN TO ZONE 7 FOR APPROVAL SO THE DEVELOPER MAY BE REIMBURSED HIS PORTION OF THE COST OF THE CHANNEL WORK, MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSL~"/f'~ . RESOLUTION NO. 118-75 9I<~~ A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (Modification No. 1 of Aqreement) (Alameda County Flood Control and Water - Conservation District) REPORT RE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS Mr. MUSSO reported tnat ~n tne past homes in Tract 1993 were allowed to have a garage detached :;:from the house and when a breezeway is added it means the. house is not in conformance and a greater setback is then required. As a result an accessory structure is required to have the same setback as the house. This report clarifies the matter for this area, the regulations have since been changed regarding accessory structures. REPORT RE HEARING DATE FOR ENSIGN BICKFORD PROPERTY - PORTOLA AVE. Mr. Musso noted that Mr. Hutka telephoned him this morning to ask that the hearing for the Ensign Bickford rezoning from RS-4 to CN District request be set for June 30th. J The Council indicated that the 30th is the fifth Monday in the month at which time the Council will not meet and ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE HEARING WAS SET FOR JULY 7, 1975. CM-30-l24 ~) /- / I ~/ June 2, 1975 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES The minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of May 6, 1975, were noted for filing. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Futch adjourned the meeting at 9:10 p.m. to an executive session to discuss legal matters. APPROVE tk4 /1 ~ . Mayor ATTEST Regular Meeting of June 9, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on MaJune 10, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chamber, 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 May 27, 1975 Page 109, 5th paragraph from bottom, line 5 should begin: but there is a lot of property out by the freeway that is owned by the City and will eventually develop. It is possible that there could be a large string of signs in that area....etc. Page 112, first paragraph, line 4 should read: not get the 9verall discussion concerning the track relocation. Page ll2, first paragraph, next to last line should indicate experience rather than expertise. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE (Cm Staley Abstaining) THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF MAY 27, 1975 WERE APPROVED, AS CORRECTED. CM-30-l25 June 9, 1975 OPEN FORUM (Chain Link Fence - in Commercial Develop- ment Area) Tot Green, 673 South "M" Street, stated that she is concerned about the chain link fence along the new Safeway and Longs stores because it appears to be a permanent fence and it was her understanding that there would not be a permanent fence in this area because this would ruin the plans for the downtown commercial area. J Mr. Lee explained that as soon as the tracks are relocated onto the new right-of-way, Railroad Avenue will be extended on to Stanley Boulevard and the fence will be removed at that time. Mrs. Green stated that it appears that there is very little access from Railroad Avenue into the new shopping area and is very dis- appointed about this also. Mr. Lee explained that when Railroad Avenue is extended to Stanley Boulevard, there will be two accesses along Railroad Avenue with left turn lanes. Cm Miller stated that people have been asking him if some of the excavation work for the railroad relocation has ceased and Mr. Lee commented that everything that can be done at this time is being done and at present work is being concentrated on the placement of the rails. Mr. Lee continued to explain the various items that are being done with respect to the railroad project and Mayor Futch stated that the the shopping center and Railroad Avenue have probably been given more consideration than any other project in the City. The Planning Commission and the Design Review Committee have re- viewed the details very carefully and everyone should be very happy with the final results. CONSENT CALENDAR Report re Participa- tion in Amici Brief A report from the City Attorney concerning the City of Los Angeles v. County of Los Angeles - Amici Brief, recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Attorney to join, on behalf of the City of Livermore, with the City of Santa Barbara in an amici brief on behalf of the Cities outside of Los Angeles area in a differential tax rate - property tax subsidy case. RESOLUTION NO. ll9-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION IN AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF (City of Los Angeles v. County of Los Angeles) Res. Supporting ABAG re Los positas 'I -.-J A resolution supporting ABAG Executive Committee concerning develop- ment of the Las positas area was adopted. Cm Miller had suggested that an additional statement be added but it was concluded after some discussion that this would only be confusing with respect to the intent. RESOLUTION NO. 120-75 A RESOLUTION REGARDING THE ABAG LAS POSITAS RESOLUTION CM-30-l26 June 9, 1975 Housing Author- ity Minutes Minutes from the Housing Authority meeting of April l5, were submitted to the Council for review. u Payroll & Claims There were 65 claims in the amount of $l02,977.82, and 407 payroll warrants in the amount of $141,138.67, for a total of $244,ll6.49, dated May 30, 1975 and approved by the City Manager. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (Executive Session) The City Attorney requested an executive session after the meeting to discuss legal matters and an appointment. (HUD Application) Mr. Parness stated that the County has been instructed that some of the wording for the agreement that has been authorized with respect to the HUD application, must be changed. The City Attorney has looked at this and it appears that there is no problem. It is a matter that is dictated by the federal government and must be inserted in order for the City to qualify for funds. He then read the two paragraphs that are required to be inserted which would modify our agreement. The City Attorney commented that this is an urgency matter for which there is no choice concerning the wording or the timing. ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, A RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED AUTHORIZING THE CHANGES, AS READ. RESOLUTION NO. 121-75 A RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION 56-75 AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (County of Alameda) (Community Develop- ment Block Grant Funds) . Mr. Parness stated that there still is some concern on the part of the City as to whether or not HUD will allow use of the funds to build a capital structure and before proceeding the City would want to have., certain certifications from HUD. (North I-580 Recreation Area) c Cm Turner stated that he toured Athletics International, north of I-580 on Heather Lane and was rather disturbed to see that the building and area appears to be abandoned, The vacant lot which is part of the area is covered with weeds and debris, the parking lot is covered with broken bottles, the tennis nets are torn and the swimming pool is filled with algae and dis- carded objects. In general, everything is a mess. His concern is that one can enter the area as there is no lock on the gate and that a child might fall into the pool and drown. The people who are members of the club have tried to contact the owner concerning all of these problems but have not been able to find him. He stated that he feels the City can require the owner to have the pool drained, the weeds cleared and the gate locked, because all of these items constitute a hazard. CM-30-127 June 9, 1975 (Athletics Inter- national Club) It is his understanding that LARPD has looked into the possibility of purchasing this property and this might be a prime time to look into the possibility of acquiring the land. Mr. Musso stated that the owner must have a permit for this use and there are conditions with respect to the exterior and he has drawn up a list of items to be corrected. He explained that the pool was not one of the items because this is not on the exterior. There is an ordinance which requires a locked gate and it would seem that the City has ample evidence upon which to act. 'J Mr. Logan commented that he believes the Department of Public Health could visit the site and request that the pool be drained because it obviously is a danger to people if it is accessable to the public because of not having a lock on the gate. Within a week something could probably be done to get the pool drained but it isn't likely that something could be done tomorrow. It was mentioned that the City can lock the gate and also post a violation against the owner. The staff was asked to report back to the Council concerning any action taken by the staff. (Source of Revenue - Legislative Bills) Cm Miller stated that on the Legislative Bulletins sent to the City by the League of Caifornia Cities, two bills were listed which he feels are very important. One was the alcohol-beverage tax increase for cities and counties, which we could have used during the rodeo weekend, and the League recommends supporting the bill. The bill is AB 1807 and he sug- gested that the City contact the Committee members urging strong support. The second is entitled, Major Restrictions on the Community Act, called a major disaster for communities trying to obtain park dedication - AB 19l1. The League recommends opposition to this bill and Cm Miller would also recommend the strongest opposition possible to this bill. He added that this bill is designed to emasculate the park dedication legislation. (EPA Hearing re Amend. - Clean Water Act) Cm Miller stated that the EPA will be holding a public hearing on June 19, 1975, in San Francisco concerning amendment of the Clean Water Act, and we should have a representative present at this hearing. This hearing is in conflict with the City tour scheduled for the Councilmembers and Cm Miller feels the hearing is sufficiently important that he would suggest postponement of the City tour in favor of attending the hearing. " \ J Cm Miller stated that he will be attending the hearing anyway, and would attend as a representative of the Council, if this is the wish of the Council, and such was agreed upon. CM-30-l28 June 9, 1975 (Report re Rodeo Dance Disorder) u Cm Staley stated that he would like to hear from the staff con- cerning the problems which occurred during the rodeo dance, and Mr. Parness distributed a copy of the report from the Chief of Police. Cw Tirsell asked about the condition of the police Officer who was injured during the disorder and if he had been treated and released from the hospital. Are all of our officers alright? Mr. Parness reported that the officer was released from the hospital and everyone is alright. The essence of the police report was that it was apparent there were going to be a very large number of people attending the dance and about 11:30 p.m. some problems did occur in the vicinity which necessitated police action and caused other confrontations elsewhere in the vicinity. Around midnight the Chief of Police called upon assistance from other police agencies from which we received excellent response - the Highway Patrol, the Sheriff's Office and the City of Pleasanton. Generally speaking there was an unruly crowd in an explosive atmosphere causing confrontations among the public and the police officers. Mr. Parness added that windows were broken, rocks and bottles were thrown at officers and police cars and policemen were injured. It was a very bitter scene and our Police Chief will not issue another permit for such an event, which is supported by the City Manager and hopefully by the City Council. Mayor Futch stated that he feels a letter of appreciation should be sent to the Police Department for the manner in which this event was controlled. Mr. Parness stated that he feels such a letter would be in order and is happy to say that as of 7:00 p.m. this evening there were absolutely no grievances reported to the Police Department as to their actions in this disorder with the exception of one father of a boy who was ar~ested. Cw Tirsell stated that in driving through Livermore on Sunday she observed that the streets were a mess and that the City's bill for the cleanup must be quite high. She requested that the staff report on the estimated cost for the cleanup. Mr. Parness stated that this is true and that there was a lot of vegetation destroyed - trees and planted areas. Lee Estes, stated that he was in the middle of First Street when everything started happening and would like to commend our Police Department for the excellent job they did. There was a tremendous number of people who were drunk and the situation was really terrible. He stated that he also hopes the City Council would go along with the idea of stopping this event, once and for all. c David S. Castro, 2276 Chestnut Street, stated that he heard Junior High School students saying that there was going to be a rumble at the dance, prior to Saturday night, and wondered why Livermore doesn't have a helicopter to help disperse crowds when there is trouble. CM-30-l29 June 9, 1975 (Meeting to Discuss Gen. Plan Goals) Cw Tirsell stated that the Planning Commission and Council should meet to discuss the goals of the General Plan prior to meeting with the consultants. Mr. Parness replied that notices will be sent out tomorrow for a June 18th meeting at 6:00 p.m. in the Library, and the consultant will join the Council and Planning Commission at 8:00 p.m. J (Carnegie Build- ing Leaking) Cw Tirsell stated that someone has indicated that the Carnegie Building is leaking and asked that Mr. Parness ask someone from the Building Department to check on this complaint. (Juveniles - Liquor) Cm Miller stated that he has heard a number of complaints concerning juveniles with liquor at the street dance. If there are juveniles drinking, they are obtaining liquor somewhere and somebody is selling it to them. If someone is selling it to them they are selling it illegally and in his opinion someone from ABC should take a look at why there is so much illegal liquor being sold. Mr. Parness indicated that every effort is being made to keep checking into this type of thing and it is something that is constantly investigated. He added that often liquor is pur- chased outside of the City and transported in and it really is difficult to uncover and control this type of activity. CO~1UNICATION RE HELPFUL LIVERMORE CITIZENS A letter of appreciation was received from Bill Anderson of Jackson, California, in which he mentioned that he had car trouble while in Livermore and was also not feeling well and that people passing by willingly assisted him. The Council felt it was a very nice letter and a tribute to the citizens who were willing to help someone in distress. It was suggested that the Mayor send Mr. Anderson a letter of acknowledgement indicating that the City was very pleased to receive the letter. COMMUNICATION RE DIS- CONTINUATION OF PIONEER LINES SERVICE Owners of the Pioneer Lines have informed the Council that due to increased costs and a decrease in patronage in recent months, Pioneer Lines will discontinue operations as of Friday, June 13, 1975. J Cm Miller asked if there would be any way Pioneer Lines could be incorporated into our public transportation system which will be formulated after the Transportation Committee has made recommendations. CM-30-l30 June 9, 1975 (Discontinuation of Pioneer Lines Service) u Mr. Parness replied that if there is ever to be a publicly financed transit system it can certainly be operated and main- tained by a private entity and Pioneer Lines people could do this. He added that the Pioneer people are looking at the City's progress with a lot of interest. Cm Miller stated that he wished progress was faster and asked if there is anything the City can do to find federal/state sup- port for the service Pioneer Lines is presently providing and perhaps some expansion until such time as our program is underway. Mr. Parness stated that upon Council direction he can look into this possibility. It is his understanding that federal monies (UMPTA) can be made available to privately operated local transit service. A letter has been directed to LLL, Sandia, and the City, request- ing that the three entities consider a possible subsidization of the Pioneer Lines system. The City Attorney has been asked to research the statutes to consider what legal aspects are involved with this possibility and Mr. Parness plans to talk to people at the labs to see what course they propose to follow and a report will be forthcoming concerning this item. David S. Castro, suggested that the City purchase this system and assume the responsibility of operation and maintenance. RESOLUTION FROM SCHOOL DISTRICT ENDORSING JOB CRISIS WEEK A resolution endorsing Job Crisis Week was submitted by the Board of Directors of the Livermore School District and was noted for filing. REPORT RE BUSINESS LICENSE FEE INCREASE Cm Miller stated that he would like to hear testimony from anyone who would like to comment on the business license tax increase but would like to postpone Council discussion and a decision until next week because he would like to have the opportunity to discuss this matter with the Chamber of Commerce before next week. Cw Tirsell stated that she would rather not have testimony one week and discussion the following week and would prefer that everything be taken care of tonight unless there is a vast amount of written material to be reviewed. CM MILLER MOVED TO CONTINUE THE ITEM FOR ONE WEEK, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED 4-1 (Mayor Futch dissenting) . REPORT RE ARROYO PARKWAY DESIGN C~ A report of the Arroyo Parkway design for the Arroyo Seco adjacent to the Livermore Gardens apartments was submitted to the Council for informational purposes and was noted for filing. CM-30-l3l June 9, 1975 POLICY RE ROTATION OF MAYOR Mayor Futch commented that when the policy for rotation of mayor was scheduled for the agenda it was done with the understanding that the Council may wish to table the item because the new Council- member may wish to have more time to review the policy. Cm Staley indicated that he has reviewed this matter and is prepared to discuss it if the Council wishes but has no objection to continu- ance. \J CM TURNER MOVED TO TABLE THE ITEM, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. REPORT RE SELECTION OF FIRE STATION SITE The Council has directed the staff to contact owners of three sites preferred for construction of Fire Station No. 4 to obtain responses concerning sale of their property for this purpose and has also soli- cited the Planning Commission's recommendation on several sites. Fire Station No. 4 is to be located in the south-western sector of the City and there is a need for a station in the vicinity of Holmes Street and Concannon Boulevard. The Planning staff reviewed a possible 7-8 sites and prepared a priority listing suggesting the sites to be considered, along with and EIR for the project. The Council selected the following three sites for consideration and the property owners were contacted: H - Evans and Concannon Boulevard C - Cordoba and Concannon D - South Side of Concannon, West of Holmes Street Mr. Parness reported that site "H" is a choice location but com- prises five acres and that only 1/2 acre is needed for the neighborhood station. Also the owner is adamantly opposed to selling the property to the City and is asking a price that is greatly in excess of what the City has been told the value would be. The owner is basing the land value on what they are being assessed; they are asking $8,500/acre. Also the owner is opposed to selling only a portion of the property and wishes to sell the entire 5 acres when he does sell. The City has no authority to obtain a portion of the property by litigation because it is out- side of our City limits. Site "C" is unoccupied, at present, by a permanent structure but does comprise a portion of the corporation yard of Sunset Homes Develop- ment. Mr. Mehran, the owner, feels that occupation of this property by a fire station would greatly diminish the value of the property and would devalue the balance of the property as well. Mr. Mehran has indicated that if the City wishes to acquire this site it will have to be done through litigation because he will not consent to the sale. Site "D" is owned by the Granada Baptist Church who also object to the sale of their property because they do have plans for the ultimate use of this land and for further development. Cm Staley asked what happened to Site "I" which was also recommended by the P.C. and Mr. Parness indicated that the Council took the first four recommendations of the P.C. and that Site "I" is also included in the five acre parcel located outside of the City limits. J CH-30-l32 June 9' , 1975 (re Site for Fire Station No.4) Cm Staley commented that the P.C. looked at the sites very carefully and would suggest that if "I" cannot be obtained, the City try to acquire "C" through litigation. I U Cw Tirsell wondered how long it would take to acquire the property if it goes through litigation and the City Attorney replied that this would take from 8 months to a year. There was discussion considering the possibility of Site "G" (North of Concannon and East of Holmes Street) - and Mr. Parness explained that the property owner would also contest purchase of this property for a fire station and it would also have to go to litigation. The City Attorney felt there is some ongoing agreement with the owner of property "G" (Mehran) and that this might have some affect on the lights at the corner of Holmes Street and Concannon Boulevard. Mr. Parness explained that the agreement with Mr. Mehran is a tenta- tive agreement that has not been formalized but if another site is selected Mr. Mehran would agree to the settlement concerning the traffic signals. CM STALEY MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION FOR ACQUISITION OF SITE "C", SECONDED BY CM TURNER. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. Wayne Graham, 914 Desconsado, stated that he and his neighbors came to the Council a few months ago in protest of a possible fire station in their neighborhood and now the Council is saying that a fire station is more compatible than housing and he does not like this. There are other areas in the vicinity that would be more compatible than Site "c" and he strongly feels that these should have been given more attention. REPORT RE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT - WESTERN PACIFIC RAILROAD Mr. Parness explained that when the original agreement for the grade separation project was drafted some minor variances occurred on property descriptions which were typographical errors. The staff has prepared an agreement which clarifies the descriptions and has been reviewed by the staff, the City Attorney and the consulting engineer who find it to be in order. It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing execution of agreement. Mr. Parness added that this is a descrepancy with W.P.and does not affect S.P. nor would it affect S.P. direction. Cm Miller stated that it appears we are g~v~ng up a portion of Oak Street and it is not clear to him why we are doing this and it is not clear what we are getting in exchange for it. l Mr. Parness explained that Oak Street transfer was a part of the entire consideration for the financial exchange and this was all calculated originally. Mr. Parness added that ~v.P. has occupied Oak Street since 1906 and the franchise expired. This was one of the negotiating parts of the agreement that was finally con- cluded whereby a value was established on Oak Street and used as a credit for the City's costs for the project and used in negotiating final settlement as to what parts each of the parties to the agreement would pay. CM-30-l33 June 9 , 1975 (Supplemental Agree- ment with W. P.) Cm Miller stated that he would like a summary of the costs and credits prior to approving the requested resolution. CM MILLER MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM FOR ONE WEEK, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. \ 'J DISCUSSION RE VARIOUS INTERSECTIONS The Public Works Director submitted a report concerning various intersections with respect to various traffic problems and the Council discussed some of these problems. The intersections reported on were as follows: Second and South "L" Holmes Street and Alden Lane Norma Way and Mitra Street First Street and South Livermore Avenue South Livermore Avenue and Fourth Street Cm Turner suggested that the staff conduct a study of the area composed of the area from First Street and Fourth Street and Holmes Street and South Livermore, as to the setup for stop signs so that stop signs are not scattered allover town in various directions, in a piecemeal fashion. He also suggested considering Second and Third Streets for one-way streets. Mr. Lee explained that the City does have a plan for the area and since Third Street does not go through to Holmes Street, Second Street functions as a through street, for the most part. One can go all the way from Holmes Street to "L" Street without stopping. Cm Miller stated that he has received complaints about the traffic lights at the corner of Portola Avenue and North Livermore, in that some people feel the "steady go" should be along Portola rather than for North Livermore traffic because the majority of traffic travels along portola rather than down North Livermore. Mr. Lee recommended in his report an alternative to increase the capacity and reduce delay on "L" Street by eliminating parking on "L" Street from Third Street to 300 ft. north of First Street, which was discussed by the Council. It was concluded that the majority of the Council is concerned about removing the additional parking provided on "L" Street and would prefer that it remain. Cm Turner asked if the signal for First Street and Livermore Avenue is to be included with the bids for the mini parks in that area and ~1r. Parness replied that this ,.,rill not be a package bid but the bids will be going out at about the same time because the City would like to have the project done con- currently. Cm Turner stated that he would really be interested in discussing the mini parks again and Mr. Parness commented that the matter will be coming to the Council for approval of the plans and specifications and the receipt of the bids before anything is done, and the Council will have a chance to speak at that time. , i J REPORT RE FEDERAL AID URBAN SYSTEM The Federal Aid Highway Act of 1973 provides substantial sums of money for continuing highway improvement and construction programs. A major provision of the Act places emphasis on the Ci>1-30-l34 June 9, 1975 (Fed. Aid Urban System) modernization of non-interstate highway systems and increases the size and funding of the Urban Highway System. Projects approved under this funding are the following: Widening and improvement of E. Stanley Boulevard from Murdell Lane to Isabel Avenue. Total reconstruction of ilL" Street from Fifth Street to College Avenue. Widening and improvement of the Arroyo Road bridge. Widening and improvement of East Avenue from Nielsen Lane to Greenville Road. Extension of Concannon Boulevard from Arroyo Road to Tesla Road. Parking facility for BART - Stanley Boulevard. The total amount available to Livermore for Fiscal Years 1974-75, 1975-76, is $567,960. It is recommended that a resolution approv- ing the Federal Aid Uran System be adopted. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION NO. 122-75 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FEDERAL AID URBAN SYSTEM IN THE CITY OF LIVERMORE AND THE URBAN BOUNDARY IN THE CITY OF LIVE&~ORE. REPORT RE JOINT POtVERS AGREEMEND AMEND. - COVA The City Attorney reported that some minor amendments to the agreement with COVA are proposed to take into account responsibility for minister- ial duties of one of the signatories for the agency and it is recommendec that the resolution be adopted. Cm Miller mentioned that the last time the agreement was discussed, the Council asked to have some wording changes about withdrawal and it has come back to the Council in a way that Cm Miller feels really does not accomplish what the Council intended to do. He stated that he would like to suggest a simple wording change which he feels would accomplish what everyone has agreed to. On the last page, Page 9, Cm Miller would suggest striking "effective at the end of each fiscal year", and to read as follows: Last sentence, Page 8: "Further any party may unilaterally withdraw from the agency and Steering Committee, effective upon written notice containing a resolution of its governing body so to do provided that such withdrawing party has fully paid any and all assessments...etc. c Mr. Parness commented that one of the intentions of this wording is to maintain the obligations of each signatory to the costs incurred through the fiscal year (maintenance and operation costs), and the point Cm Miller is speaking about is the concern we had with regard to LAVVrnA, which is the assumption of unforeseen capital costs signi- ficant in nature, and Cm Miller is correct. Perhaps we should include modified language which would cover the concerns of Cm Miller but also feels it is fair that each signatory should be obliged to maintain its fiscal responsibilities for the maintenance and operation costs. CM-30-l35 June 9, 1975 (re Amend. to COVA Joint Powers Agreement) Discussion followed concerning the proposed wording changes suggested by Cm r1iller and whether or not wording concerning fiscal year should be eliminated. Cm Miller suggested that the last line read, lias a voting member of the Steering Committee before receipt of the written note." J The majority of the Council felt the wording, "before receipt of the written note" is redundant and asked that this not be included. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE AGREEMENT, WITH THE RECO~1MENDED CHANGES. The City Attorney commented that at present we have one resolution rescinding one resolution and if the Council adopts this resolution and then decides another change is in order we may end up with a resolution rescinding another resolution and he would suggest that all the other agencies review the resolution prior to adoption by the Council. CM MILLER ADDED TO THE MOTION THAT BETTY MEYER CIRCULATE THIS DRAFT, AS AMENDED, TO THE OTHER AGENCIES PRIOR TO ADOPTION BY THE COUNCIL. Cw Tirsell pointed out that it took three months to get paperwork back from the County Counsel and wondered if there is some way this can be taken care of so that it can become effective July 1. CM MILLER ADDED THAT THE RESOLUTION SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO THE OTHER JURISDICTIONS FOR APPROVAL, AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. Cm Turner asked if the wording, with respect to withdrawal, protects the City, and Mr. Logan replied that it does pro- tect the City to the extent that whoever withdraws is obliga- ted to pay into the funding anything he agrees to do while he is sitting on the Committee. Mr. Logan explained that the wording suggested by Cm Miller is implementation of the theory that the City will not be in a position to be obligated to anything it does not agree with, after the time it has decided to withdraw. In effect, the way it was worded before the City would still be obligated to pay everything up to July of the next fiscal year, even if it withdrew in January. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT RE OPPOSITION TO AB 2041 AND AB 1059 The City Attorney reported that he would request approval to oppose AB 2041 and AB 1059. AB 2041 is a bill requiring the awarding of attorney's fees against a public entity or officer of a public entity when a writ of mandate is awarded against same. AB 1059 is a bill purporting to require cities to issue contracts or provide for the liability for police officers including puni- tive damages. 'J ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE CITY ATTORNEY WAS DIRECTED TO OPPOSE THE TWO BILLS MENTIONED ABOVE. CM-30-l36 June 9, 1975 WEEKLY STATUS REPORT - CITY MANAGER u Airport Consultant The Airport Consultant has made several local presentations about his report. The consultant has been asked to repeat his presentation for COVA at their meeting of June 12th and also to the County Airport Land Use Commission and unfortunately these two presentations will result in some cost to the City; however, 2/3 of the cost will be sustained by the FAA. Building Department The Building Department reports very little activity as far as actual building permit issuance is concerned. Out of 26 permits issued last week there was only one permit for a house and there have been only 10 permits for houses this year. There are 30-40 permits available for this purpose. Planning Department The Planning Department has been concentrating on Zoning Ordinance enforcement for the past two weeks which includes illegal businesses, trailer storage and sign violations and notices have been sent to violators. 911 System Program The 911 System Program is about to begin its implementation stage in our County and just today and Mr. Parness was informed that there has been a partial grant awarded to our County in the amount of $800,000 for this program which is about 2/3 of the amount requested for the first year's program. Hopefully the balance of the money will be allowed through appropriations in subsequent years. The Council may recall that this is a pilot program for the entire nation and will be installed here in Alameda County. We are fortunate to be a part of it here in Livermore because originally we were not to be included. Ravenswood Restoration Architects c Cm Turner, Miller, LARPD staff and City staff interviewed architects for the restoration of Ravenswood project. Ten firms were solicited to submit brochures and letters of interest concerning this project and the firms were recommended by the Bay Area Chapter of the American Institute of Architects as being experienced or having an interest in historical building restoration work. Four firms were invited for personal interviews and three did appear to give presentations. All of the firms gave good presentations and the joint Committee selected an architect who has been contacted. The Committee was not aware of the fact that this architect represented an association of two firms and the other part of the firm is not necessary because it deals with landscape architecture, which is not the primary interest in this project. The architect has contacted his associated firm to explain the situation and they have given consent to allow him to negotiate singularly with the City. A scope of work has been drafted by our staff and will be sent to him and then he will again meet with the staff to negotiate contract terms. Cm Turner stated it was his understanding that the Committee had not made a selection and that he specifically asked if any of the three architects were being eliminated and was told that they were not. CM-30-l37 June 9, 1975 (Ravenswood Architect) Cm Miller commented that as he recalls there was a priority list established and if the City got what it wanted (the architect to negotiate without the associate firm) this would be the selection. Mr. Parness explained that the first choice architect will meet with the staff to work out negotiations, will be given a scope of work and will again meet with the Committee for their approval. If, at that time, the Committee does not wish to retain this person then the staff will contact the next person on the list. ..~ Cm Miller commented that the other architects have not been eliminated because nobody has been selected. There has been a priority list drawn up and if the first choice does not work out the staff will simply go to the next person on the list. Nobody is really eliminated at this time. Cm Turner stated that he does not want to proceed with anything until the Committee has another meeting because it was his under- standing that all three firms who were interviewed would have an opportunity to review the scope of work. Cm Miller stated that he does not believe the staff has done anything contrary to the direction of the Committee but would suggest contact- ing the other members of the Committee to find out if their understand- ing is the same as that of Cm Turner. If this is the case another meeting can be called. David Eller, of Livermore, stated that Mr. Bergman from LARPD gave a talk at the Heritage Guild and this was the first time the Heritage Guild knew anything about the architect. Dorothy Nielson who heads the May School Restoration Committee asked ~1r. Bergman if it would be possible for someone from the Heritage Guild to attend the meeting. Apparently Mrs. Nielson was misinformed as to the meeting date and there was not a representative present from the Heritage Guild. He stated that the Heritage Guild was the first to protest possible demolishing of buildings at Ravenswood and they feel entitled to sit in on discussions concerning the destiny of Ravenswood and its restoration. He also indicated that he knows of architects in this area who do restoration work and was surprised to learn that they were not contacted. Mr. Eller stated that as a citizen he would like to know that the best architect available will be chosen for Ravenswood and certainly believes that it is not too late to con- tact the architect from San Francisco who has expressed interest in restoring Ravenswood. Letter from Exec. Director of the State Water Resources Bd. A letter of response has finally been received from the Executive Officer of the State Water Resources Board concerning the letter sent to them from former Mayor Pritchard, sent in March. The letter includes a lot of information about the State Water Resources Board program and their part in the matter. Attached was a copy of a statement delivered before a State Association meeting in Los Angeles, given by the Deputy EPA Director which should be of interest to the Council. J Sewage Treatment Capacity - LA~1A Mr. Parness indicated that the matter of the sewage treatment capacity planning intentions of LAVliMA will be discussed at the meeting with LAVl~1A tomorrow night. This matter was brought up CM-30-l38 QUITCLAIM DEED (Ferrario) Pursuant to stipulated jUdgment in City v Beukers~ et al~ Alame County Superior Court a Quitclaim from the City to Raymond A. a Anna J. Ferrario is recommended. ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL~ SECO. BY CM TURNER THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY. RESOLUTION NO. 123-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A G,UITCLAIM DEED (Ferraric ~ I June 9, 1975 (Sewage Treatment Capacity) ~ the the Livermore representatives at the last meeting and there was very little discussion on it. The staff of each of the agencies and BASSA have met to talk about this and it is felt to be an important consideration. If the Council is thinking about expansion for our plant, even if it is only for industrial purposes, plans should be discussed with LAVliMA. Discussion followed concerning expansion of sewage plants for Pleasanton, VCSD and Livermore. REPORT RE REPORT RE AIR QUALITY MAINTENANCE MEETING Cm Miller stated that he attended a meeting concerning air quality maintenance as a representative of the Council. The meeting was sponsored by the Air Resources Board with repre- sentatives from EPA the Water Resources Control Board, Regional Boards, ABAG, Cities and Counties, MTC and numerous other people. The object of the meeting was to get going on the state implementa- tion plan and air quality maintenance plan. The meeting was a pre- task force discussion to gain a consensus as to what a task force should consist of in a Phase I program. The task force for Phase I would also determine the kind of things that need to be done and the composition of the task force for Phase II. Also they would need to start working out an implementation plan. Phase I would start the beginning of July and would be over by December and Phase II would begin January 1, 1976, and would con- tinue for 1 to l~ years. The consensus was to set up a group com- prised of a representative of each of the nine counties, a representa- tive of the city from each one of the nine counties with San Jose, Oakland and possibly San Francisco being assured a seat. An approxi- mately equal number of representatives from the citizens groups will also be included, such as the Home Builders, the Sierra Club, PTA groups, etc., together with representation of one Bay Area legislator from the Assembly and one from the Senate, as members of this group. Ultimately the appointments will come from the various jurisdictions. The proposal was to have appointments come from the Mayors Conference for the cities which, in his opinion, has a lot of disadvantages. There seemed to be a very good consensus and it was a very good meeting that was well done by the Air Quality people. Budget Hearing It was mentioned that the budget hearing will take place on June 28th probably commencing at 9:00 a.m. and will be held at Fire Station No.2. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Futch adjourned the meeting at 10:30 p.m. to an executive session to discuss legal matters and appointments. ATTEST Ikd/ /I'~ Mayor ~~ '- APPROVE 1: -jClerk L' ermore, California CM-30-l39 I Regular Meeting of June 16, 1975 A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Livermore was held on June 16, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Liver- more Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m. with Mayor Futch presiding. ROLL CALL Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Tirsell and Mayor Futch Absent: Cm Staley (Seated Later) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE June 2, 1975 Page 123, 4th paragraph, 3rd line should read: He feels that the Sister City "Committee" should be responsible....etc. ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF June 2, 1975, were approved, as corrected. CM STALEY SEATED AT THIS TIME. OPEN FORUM (Pioneer Lines) Barbara Shaw, representative of the Transportation Advisory Com- mittee, stated that they very much regret the loss of Pioneer Lines bus service to the City which provided commuter service to the labs. The Committee feels the City should make every effort to assist Pioneer Lines so that they can continue operations in the City. Public transportation is a habit that needs to be fostered and continuity is very important. The value of public transportation has been acknowledged by the voters - Alameda County voted 64% in favor of Measure B to allow expenditure of gas tax money for transportation and Livermore matched this percentage. Thus far none of the gas tax money has been spent and there are 11 measures in the legislature related to transit financing, some of which include operating subsidies. The Committee urges the Council to investigate revenue sources now available and to support increased funding for public transportation in the future. Mr. Parness commented that the staff is looking into the possi- bility of applying for grants to help subsidize Pioneer Lines but there are apprehensions as to the legal supportability of granting public funding for subsidy of a private bus line opera- tion. In the meantime Pioneer Lines is not operating and the AC Transit is going along the designated route but still refuse to allow passengers to board enroute to the labs. They have indicated that this will be their policy until they are given official information asking that this order be revoked. Mr. Parness stated that he would urge the Council to revoke this order even though it be during the interim term and that he has had numerous requests for service to the labs through AC Transit. Mayor Futch asked if there would be legal problems involved if the Council would ask AC Transit to allow passengers to board and disembark at the various BART stops, if Pioneer Lines resumes operation, and Mr. Parness indicated he feels there would be no legal problem. This would be a matter of operational instructions. CM::.30_l40 June 16, 1975 (Pioneer Lines) Cm Miller wondered if perhaps the Transportation Advisory Committee could do some research on some of the federal grants that might be available for the purpose of subsidizing local transportation and provide this information to the City staff? u Mr. Logan commented that his concerns lie with the basic question of what is a gift and what is a not a gift in terms of expenditure of public funds. It was suggested that the item be placed on the agenda for discussion and em Staley added that he has been contacted by a representative of Pioneer Lines a couple of weeks ago and they are very disturbed about the policy concerning funding and he feels they should have the oppor- tunity to speak to the Council. The item will appear on next week's agenda. (Vendors During Rodeo Parade) Mr. Ken Nather, 654 Caliente Avenue, stated that currently the City charges a $10 fee to an individual for the right to vend their wares on the street and that non-profit organizations can vend without a charge. There were many street vendors during the rodeo parade and only a few of the vendors had permits that were paid for. He feels that this rule should somehow be more equitable. He stated that as a businessman he does not feel opposed to fair competition but feels that the vendors who do not pay taxes, as do the businessmen, should be restricted from the business district area. Mr. Nather also urged that the City ask the Alameda County Health Department to investigate the dispensing methods used by the vendors because some of the methods appeared to be unsanitary. em Miller stated that Mr. Nather has made some very good points. He has always felt that the fees for the profit making vendors were too low and unfair to the permanent businessman of the community and that this should be considered during the restructuring of the business license fee ordinance. em Staley commented that he believes there are problems in that the vendor capitalizes on the crowd at the expense of the permanent busi- nessman and also as far as he knows there is no requirement that the one day vendors do any type of cleanup and merchants sometime have to go out and clean up what somebody else made a profit on. (Rodeo Dance Disorder) L/ Charles Rogge, 3902 Princeton, stated that he was at the rodeo dance when the problems occurred and that he feels things could have been handled differently. People were trying to get to their cars which were parked by the Court building and the police were not letting them pass and this is when some problems occurred. He also observed young children, 10, 11 and 12, at the dance and felt the police should not have allowed children to be there after curfew hours. He saw one boy about 12 years old smoking and carrying a bottle of beer and a policeman just looked at him and did nothing. A lot of the young kids were yelling names at the policemen and throwing bottles. The street dance is part of the rodeo celebration and he would like to see the dance continue. CM-30-l4l June 16, 1975 CONSENT CALENDAR Greens Committee Minutes - Three Meetings The minutes for the Greens Committee meetings of March 20, May 1, and May 8 were submitted to the Council and were noted for filing. Res. Auth. Appraisal of Property - Station 4 A resolution authorizing appraisal of property for Fire Station No. 4 was adopted. .. ) --.-/ RESOLUTION NO. 124-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPRAISAL OF PROPERTY (Fire Station #4) Res. Rejecting Claim - Azevedo The Council adopted a resolution rejecting the claim of Mary Azevedo, concerning the railroad relocation project. RESOLUTION NO. 125-75 A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF MARY AZEVEDO Res. Awarding Bid - Street Resurfacing The following bids are the summary for the Street Resurfacing Project 75-1: Contractor Unit Cost Total Cost Stanfield & Moody Oliver de Silva Teichert Const. McDonald Conts. McGuire & Hester Alves Const. Co. $14/85/ton l4.99/ton l5.20/ton l7.58/ton l8.00/ton l8.49/ton $16,5l3.20 l6,668.88 16,902.40 19,548.96 20,016.00 20,560.88 It is recommended that the bid be awarded to Stanfield & Moody, low bidder. Mr. Lee explained that the estimated cost for this project was $29,000 but due to the availability of asphalt for the job and the time of year bids were favorable and requested permission to include ilK" Street, between Chestnut and Elm Streets for resurfac- ing, because the bids were per unit price and "K" Street is next on the priority list. The total would then come to $27,800. The Council concurred with this request, and CM TIRSELL MOVED TO ADD THE RESURFACING OF ilK" STREET FROM CHESTNUT STREET TO ELM STREET. SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. RESOLUTION NO. 126-75 ) '--/ A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID (Stanfield & Moody) CM-30-l42 June 16, 1975 Payroll & Claims There were 108 claims in the amount of $46l,552.95, dated June 9, 1975 and approved by the City Manager. c' Claims Against the City Cm Staley commented that it is the City's policy to reject claims made against the City by private citizens, etc. and since it is so difficult for the City to get insurance he wonders if it would be worthwhile for the City to try to make a settlement prior to being denied by the City Council. Mr. Logan commented that he personally feels that in most instances claims are inflated and it is probably better to reject a claim and if the person is serious enough they can file a law suit. If they are serious and file a lawsuit the City is covered by insurance and the insurance company can determine whether or not the claim should be paid. The City is really not in a position to pay the claims and this is the reason we have the insurance. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED WITH THE ADDITION OF RESURFACING FOR ilK" STREET. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (Request for Executive Session) The City Attorney requested an executive session to discuss legal matters. (Ensign-Bickford Hearing) Ensign-Bickford has requested a change of date for the public hearing for the request for rezoning of their property. The hearing has been set for the 7th of July and Ensiqn-Bickford has requested postponement until July 28th. ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE HEARING WAS RESET FOR JULY 28th. c (Property Acquisition Adjacent to Pioneer Park) Mr. Parness reported that the City is having some difficulty in clos- ing escrow for property adjoining Pioneer Park. In reading the report from the Title Company it appears that there are a number of covenant restrictions having to do with "Declaration of Restrictions", which he explained. There is an architectural control committee that is made up of former owners of the property who have the legal right to review any use of the land as to structures, walls, etc. To the best of our knowledge the architectural review committee is nonactive but the staff has been informed that it would apply to this property. CM-30-l43 June 16, 1975 (Property Acquisition Adjacent to Pioneer Park) The owner is anxious to have escrow close but it is being held up because of the problem mentioned. Mr. Parness stated that he would like to know whether or not this problem is a burden on the land and if the City should accept the property under these conditions. " .-.J The City Attorney explained that the restrictions Mr. Parness is speaking of are known technically as equitable servitudes and they are enforceable against any party that attempts to violate those servitudes. When he noticed that all of these reservations were on the property he sent a request to the Di- rector of Public Works indicating that he has no objection to the City entering into this agreement by negotiation, recognizing that if we purchase it by such means we purchase it subject to those equitable servitudes. The Public Works Director has assured the City Attorney that this does not affect the City in our use of the property as a public park and Mr. Logan is satisfied that this is true. The recommendation would be that if this is the situation everything is fine; however, if it is not the case the City may be faced with a law suit if those people wish to sue and the restrictions are violated. Mr. Logan added that he is inclined to think that the people would not likely sue but it is something the City should be aware of. Mr. Lee stated that he read the restrictions and it did not appear that they would be a serious hindrance to the use of the land for park purposes. The restrictions cover very spe- cific things such as the architectural design and he feels that the restrictions would not adversly affect any structure that LARPD might wish to place on the property. Cw Tirsell asked how 200 people might be contacted or the pro- cedure to be followed if LARPD decides to build a structure on this property. Mr. Logan indicated that he feels this is a problem the City will face; however he would suggest that if there is to be a structure built the City try to contact the former owners and if this cannot be done a notice be published within that area. The notification does not really seem to be a problem but the problem that might exist is the ability of the group to rule over the planned design for the park or what LARPD does. Cw Tirsell wondered if there would..pe any advantage in having the people sign a release and the City Attorney explained that if the City wants a signed release it would have to pay for it and he isn't sure how much this would cost, unless they want to do it without compensation. Cw Tirsell commented that she feels the reason the restric- tions were on the property was because the land was zoned for multiple dwellings, and the people probably did not want a six story multiple developed in that area. For this reason they may be willing to sign a release when they realize that it will be used for park purposes. Mr. Logan stated that he would have to agree with Cw Tirsell, personally, and if the area will be a park it will change the complexion of the area as the owners originally envisioned it. J CM-30-l44 June 16, 1975 (Property Acquisition Adjacent to Pioneer Park) G Mr. Parness stated that the only people the City might be able to contact would be the members of the architectural review committee which consist of three brothers that subdivided the land and Mr. Parness knows only where one is located and possibly the staff can talk to him. He stated that he does not know what the complications might be in getting some type of waiver executed. Mayor Futch felt it would be worthwhile to at least attempt contact with the three brothers and would prefer to wait until next week to make a decision. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO CONTACT THE OWNER AND TO ATTEMPT TO GET THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE TO SIGN A RELEASE PRIOR TO CLOSE OF ESCROW, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANI- MOUS VOTE. (Labor Negotiations) Mr. Parness reported that he would like the Council to review a labor agreement negotiated by the staff with one of the employee organiza- tions, during an executive session, and added that the staff has been negotiating with two other organizations for the past couple of months. He would like to have the Council's permission to present a resolution denying retroactive pay for next week's agenda, concerning the organi- zations that have not completed negotiations. (Athletics International) Cw Tirsell stated that she has been contacted by the former manager of Athletics International, Mr. Graham, and she suggested that Mr. Graham or anyone else interested in that area, (Greenville North) contact Mayor Futch or Cm Turner. She added that Mr. Graham is also concerned about the condition of the property and its future. (Mailbox Installation) Cw Tirsell stated that a lady contacted her about getting a mailbox installed and the lady understands that the City will install one for $30.00. Mr. Lee explained that the City prepared a design approved by the Council and the City made up and installed some boxes, at cost, to demonstrate their suitability. This has been discontinued because there were misunderstandings in that people associated the require- ment for curbside boxes with the City of Livermore rather than the Post Office. He added that the City has proven that this system can work and that larger boxes which lock are available if people want this type of box. A local firm has been contacted and is willing to fabricate the boxes desired by the Council and the City and people are being referred to this individual. c (P.C. Interviews) It was noted that interviews for a Planning Commissioner will take place beginning at 6:30 p.m. next Monday. CM-30-l45 June 16, 1975 (Request to Show Film re Planning> Mayor Futch stated that he has received a request from a citizen to show a five minute film at their Wednesday night meeting, con- cerning planning and wondered if this would meet with the approval of the Council. The Council approved showing of the film. ,~ COMMUNICATION FROM RECYCL- ING CENTER RE ALLOWANCE OF SIGN ON SHED The Livermore Community Recycling Center has requested that they be allowed to paint the words RECYCLING CENTER on their shed as an identification to motorists. CM TURNER MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST. em Miller stated that he would like to see a sign, provided it satisfies the Sign Ordinance. Mr. Musso commented that the proposed sign does satisfy the ordi- nance. CM MILLER MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST, AS LONG AS THE SIGN SATISFIES THE SIGN ORDINANCE, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL, AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. LETTER OF APPRECIATION FROM FIRE CHIEF BAIRD A letter of appreciation was received from Fire Chief Baird for the City's authorizing his involvement as President of the Calif- ornia Fire Chiefs Association during the past year. NOTIFICATION OF CONSTRUCTION PROJECT The Veterans Administration Assistant Administrator for Construc- tion has notified the City that a two-story building is being planned at the V.A. Hospital in Livermore, to house administra- tive offices. No action was required of the Council on this item. COMMUNICATION FROM OFFICE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE PLANNING A letter of response concerning the administration and expenditure of criminal justice funds was received from the Interim Executive Director of the Office of Criminal Justice Planning. It was noted that the governor does plan to eliminate the Office of Criminal Justice Planning in Sacramento, and that there will be a direct passing of all grants to the regional agencies. In our case it will be the Alameda County Criminal Justice Planning Board. ,J LETTER OF APPRECIATION FROM ASSEMBLYMAN MORI A letter of appreciation for the City's support of AB 2220 was received from Assemblyman Mori. CM-30-l46 June l6, 1975 REPORT RE BUSINESS LICENSE FEE INCREASE Cm Miller commented that he requested that the matter of the business license fee be postponed from last week's meeting so that he would have the opportunity to speak with a representative of the Chamber of Commerce about the proposed fee increase. u Cm Staley and Cm Miller met with Marshall Kamena, of the Chamber of Commerce, and that there was a very productive exchange of ideas with the following outcome: Although Cm Miller would have preferred to raise the money this year he was convinced by the argu- ment that it would be better to restructure our business license fee in a way that would provide equity and still raise an appropriate amount of money. It was suggested that there be a committee of representatives from the Council, the Chamber and consumers, to discuss various mechanisms for equity and to try to resolve this issue in a reasonably short length of time. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL AGREE TO SUCH A COMMITTEE AND APPOINT TWO REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE COUNCIL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY. Mayor Futch asked if the Council will be appointing only representa- tives from the Council, and Cm Miller commented that this is correct. The Chamber will select their representatives and the Council will possibly select members of the community to represent the consumer, after names have been submitted by the other committee members. Cm Staley stated that he would also like to have this committee study other problems of the community such as the semi-municipal parking facilities for which the businessman is assessed a"surcharge. Cm Miller stated that he would like the committee to review the enforcement of business license fees on all businesses in the commun- ity - there are home occupations which do not pay their fair share. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CM STALEY MOVED TO APPOINT CM MILLER TO THIS COMMITTEE, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CM MILLER MOVED TO APPOINT CM STALEY AS THE SECOND MEMBER TO THE COMMITTEE BECAUSE HE IS A MEMBER OF THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY WITH SOME GOOD IDEAS CONCERNING THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY, AS WELL AS A MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL, SECONDED BY MAYOR FUTCH FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES. CW TIRSELL CALLED FOR THE QUESTION AND THE MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. c Ken Nather, 654 Caliente, stated that he would like to go on record as opposing any increase to the present City business license fee. The present fees are already excessive and he has arrived at this conclusion after doing a survey of other business license fees in other cities for his type of business. He listed various Bay Area communities and the fees they impose, compared to Livermore's. Cm Miller stated that the purpose of the committee is to try to bring equity to these fees and hopefully the shift will create declines in fees for some of the businessmen. We all agree that banks and insurance companies should pay a fee because they do CM-30-l47 June 16, 1975 (Business License Fee Increase) business with the pUblic and are located in the business district; however, they are protected by statutes because banks and insurance companies have better lobbies than the cities and perhaps after the committee has made a report there can be a recommendation that the City go to our representatives in the legislature saying that the time has come for banks and insurance companies to pay their share. \ \J Cm Staley commented that banks and insurance companies are not protected by statutes but rather by the Constitution of the State of California. REPORT RE WATER RECLA- MATION PLANT CAPACITY Mr. Parness reported that a variety of data has been distributed to the Council concerning the sewage treatment plant capacity which includes a letter received from federal and state officers (EPA and State Water Resource Control Board), as well as a report from our Director of Public Works. Reports include the amounts of capacity and their respective costs. A small resume has been included with respect to the results of a meeting between the staff and Mr. DeFalco of EPA. Mayor Futch stated that the last time this was discussed it was suggested that we go to LAVWMA to try to get them to discuss some of the issues. It was learned that the majority of the LAVWMA members desired that the staff from the various jurisdictions present information to LAVWMA as to what their individual communi- ty anticipated needs are, in the way of sewer capacity. This is where we are with respect to LAVWMA. Cm Miller stated that he would like to present a personal view that he has expressed many times. We live in the worst smog area in northern California and smog is bad for your health. The standards are attacked by people who do not want to see environmental issues resolved for the benefit of the public even though the standards have been reaffirmed twice by the National Academy of Sciences. The state Environmental Quality Act requires as one of its provisions in the preamble that "the guiding criterion for public decisions shall be the long term enhancement of the environment". Cm Miller added that in this particular valley in view of the nature of development, essentially the provision says that there should be no further residential development in the valley until the auto emission controls are in effect and any mitigating measure we can devise within our present population, such as bu~service, to bring our smog level down to federal standard~~ans that there should be no further sewer expansion for residential purposes anywhere within the Livermore Valley, which includes Pleasanton. If there is going to be sewer expan- sion, then the only ones that would make sense would be those of a nature that would generate industrial and commercial use and create jobs locally. Any other type of expansion, at this time, would be irrational and in conflict with the Clean Air Act and the California Government Environmental Quality Act. The fact that some jurisdictions do not accept this is a reflec- tion upon them and it would seem that a reasonable course for the City of Livermore to take would be to discuss the question of plant expansion, only for the purpose of commercial and industrial use, because this would be the only mitigating measure that a seuer 8npaRSiQR would help reduce air pollution. Larger expansion which would have further residential develop- ment only workS against the improvement of air quality in the valley .~~}V CM-30-l48 J~~,\ ) ~' c c June 16, 1975 (Report re Water Reclama- tion Plant Capacity) Cm Miller stated that there is only one area in which there is any justification for residential development and that is to provide a reasonable fair share of low income housing which has to be managed by a housing authority, so that people who work in the community and people who need this type of housing can get it. Cm Miller stated that when we finish our discussion we should be looking for our sewer plant expansion a relatively modest amount to allow a reasonable industrial/commercial tax base and that it be reserved wholly for this purpose. These types of expansions make sense in terms of the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act and that no other expansions in this valley should be allowed. Cw Tirsell stated that she agrees with many of the things Cm Miller has said but feels discouraged by the letters received from the EPA and the State Water Quality Control Board because the State Water Quality Control Board cancelled their hearing. She stated that she is very discouraged about the federal bureaucracy really taking any account in order to tie everything together and make reasonable growth possible. Also, she feels reasonably sure we would have trouble using a Clean Water grant entirely for commercial/industrial development because they are excluded from it. It appears that any expansion would not be through a grant but rather from local funds and if this is the case we need to talk about how large it will be and how much it would cost and whether or not the taxpayers would support it by voting in favor. Cm Miller stated that this is exactly what he has in mind and that the City should pursue, the idea of using the Clean Water grants to provide expansion for commercial and industrial use because this would reduce the number of vehicle miles traveled in the valley. At the same time he would suggest that the City offer to the voters a bond issue for a relatively small sewer plant expansion and the terms of the bond issue would say that it cannot be used for residential expansion but must be used for industrial/commercial expansion only so that the residential developers will not come in and use up all of our capacity before the commercial/industrial developers are ready. He added that he really believes the citizens would accept such a bond issue and there is a reasonable chance of its passage by 2/3 vote. Cm Miller noted that the figures the state is using for the valley come from taking ABAG's population projections for the valley without any regard to air quality, using them to provide Clean Water grants in the worst part of a critical air basin. Obviously this does not make sense. He commented that he feels this is also an issue the City needs to pursue with the State Water Resources Control Board staff. It is ABAG and the State Water Resources Control Board that have provided the really distorted population projections for sewer plant expansion. They have estimated that there will be 149,000 people in this valley in 20 years and we currently have a population of 110,000. This might be fine for cities that are pushing for growth, such as the City of Pleasanton, but we are, in fact, down wind from them and we will suffer from their expansion. Cw Tirsell stated that she would really like to hear what Cm Turner has to say about this matter because he is the person who has been particularly interested in expansion of our sewer plant. Cm Turner stated that he attended the meeting in San Francisco with Mr. DeFalco from EPA. He added that he was the person who suggested that the City of Livermore request an additional 2 MGD but would have to concede that this would be unrealistic. He stated that his primary reason for wanting the 2 MGD expansion was because it was his under- standing that anything less than 2.5 MGD would not be considered for federal funding. He stated that the thing he is concerned about is CM-30-l49 June 16, 1975 (Report re Water Recla- mation Plant Capacity) that if industrial/commercial is going to be encouraged one must that there has to be some resulting residential growth. People will move into the area and there will be a need to provide some residential units. realize Cm Turner asked if Cm Miller had a figure related to the number of dwelling units that would be needed if there is additional capacity to provide for commercial/industrial development and Cm Miller commented that he would anticipate a need for perhaps an additional 500 units. " \ J em Miller explained that the rule for funding low income housing is that there must be four times the demand which would amount to about 500 additional units. Cw Tirsell stated that when we do finalize our ordinance about reserving sewer capacity, is it the City Attorney's intention that this would apply to future capacity as well? The City Attorney responded by saying that this is true but he does have a request for direction. Originally when the staff planned this ordinance they viewed any additional amounts of allocation for the plant as being broken down into 45% for indus- trial/commercial, 45% for residential, and 10% for low to moderate income housing. If the direction the Council wants to take is to reserve 90% for industrial/commercial and 10% for low to moderate income housing then it would probably be useful for some direction to the staff at this time so that the legal affect of pursuing it to that extent can be researched. He stated that the staff was more secure with splitting the reservation of capacity in half after additional allocation. We were convinced that with the limited allocation (up to 5 MGD) we could limit whatever was left to commere cial/industrial on a 90%-10% basis. There is some concern as to whether or not it would be justifiable to limit it on the same basis if we receive another 1-2 MGD added to the capacity. He would suggest that if this is the direction the Council would like to take the staff should be so directed in order that there is time to research the matter. Cw Tirsell pointed out that some commercial/industrial development may mean a need for housing and the housing in Livermore is appre- ciating in value continually which means that there is a need for houses in the $20,000-$30,000 range. The builders do not come in and build houses for $20,000; therefore, having the capacity for additional housing doesn't guarantee that we will get the type of housing we need. The other side of that argument is that 10% of the houses are always vacant and therefore industry coming into Livermore would not require additional housing. Cw Tirsell stated that the problem might be the kind of housing Livermore has to offer and we need to look into providing the kind of housing needed on the lower end of the scale. Cm Miller stated that the purpose-of the industrial expansion is not to bring industry to Livermore for any other reason than to divert our commuters - the people already in our housing, into local jobs. This is the best mitigating course that we can take to reduce the number of vehicle miles traveled. Cm Miller added that economists concede that the Bay Area is one massive labor pool for all the industry throughout the whole Bay Area and we know this is partly true in the valley because approxi- mately 40% of LLL's employees commute into Livermore from someplace else. About 40% of Livermore's residents commute out to someplace else so there really is this labor pool aspect and it doesn't make sense to say that we should provide housing for every aspect because J CM-30-l50 June 16, 1975 (Report re Water Reclama- tion Plant Capacity) people commute from everywhere if there is enough gasoline and no restrictions on air quality. L Cm Miller stated that he believes the real goal is to provide industry that would make use of local people so they do not have to drive out of the valley for jobs. For this reason he really does not want to provide more housing because we don't want more people to move here and not all of these residents would work here but many would commute out of Livermore. Cm Staley commented that it would appear there is move to separate the issues of water quality from air quality and Mayor Futch stated that the Council has taken the position that it does not agree with the move for the separation. Mayor Futch stated that we want to create a balanced community but not at the expense of air quality; therefore, we are looking at mitigating measures to offset additional residential development. In his opinion an expansion of 1 MGD would give us all of the capacity we would be able to use, in the foreseeable future, for additional commercial/industrial development and some residential development. In his opinon 1 MGD would also be consistent with the environmental goals and it would probably also be consistent with funding and with LAVWMA facility to dispose of the effluent which is based on a 20 year projection of the E-O population. Cm Staley commented that if we are going to be able to get assistance for this project then we should try to do as much of the planning for future expansion we might have to plan for ultimately. Cm Turner stated that after reading the minutes and the report from Mr. Lee as well as talking with Mr. DeFalco, it would appear that we would have to build forever to use up more than a 1 MGD increase and for this reason he would feel very comfortable with the 1 MGD increase he was opposed to a couple of weeks ago. It seems that this would be a reasonable figure that would achieve the goals we are seeking in long range terms for Livermore. Mr. Logan stated that he would like to comment so that the Council will be aware of all their options. within the Government Code there is an option to fund sewer expansion facilities by a vote of the Council but the only caveat is that the electorate has the ability to do something by referendum. This gives the Council three options; outside funding, a vote of the people, or a vote of the Council. Mayor Futch stated that he hasn't decided as to what specific amount should be asked for and that what the Council wants is a balanced community and what the Council must do to achieve this. He stated that this could mean a very long discussion and feels that it is not necessary to get into such a discussion tonight. l Mayor Futch added that the suggested 1 MGD is kind of a ball park figure and if our share of the LAVWMA project came in a 1.3 MGD we should accept this amount. Cm Miller stated that any increase in population over the llO,OOO will make it impossible to meet the air quality goals; consequently, a 20 year projection of l49,000 means we will never meet the federal standards. The 149,000 projection is an arbitrary figure chosen by the state, based on ABAG's projection for the county appropriately scaled without any regard whatsoever for air quality. If we go to LAVWMA asking for another 1 MGD there will be more residential develop- ment and we will get sicker. He would like to suggest that the Council direct the staff to go to LAVWMA with the following suggestion: 1. Accept E-O for Alameda countifilli.z9~0~ :t~ul~~~~ 2. Sewer capacity be divided equitably among the jurisdictions; CM-30-lSl June l6, 1975 (Report re Water Recla- mation Plant Capacity) 3. All the fees provided for industrial/commercial which would give Livermore, Pleasanton and Dublin about .5 MGD. em Miller continued to say that Pleasanton and Dublin are unbalanced communities, just as Livermore is, and they should be looking for the same goal. Pleasanton wants to build a large shopping center and they are looking for a million people in the valley so that they can have a lot of sales tax revenue but this is not relevant because the guiding criterion for public decisions is supposed to be the envTronment. "'~ We should tell LAVWMA that we should not have a population of 149,000; we should not have a 14 MGD equivalent pipeline; and we should be talking about no increases. Whatever the sewer capacity is for l20,000 people we should use it for industrial and commercial and not residential growth. '''--tS Cw Tirsell stated that she would support Cm Miller's suggestion ~except for the fact that Pleasanton would really laugh at this ~. suggestion because they are asking for a 12.2 MGD capacit~ aft4 " an ul1:imatc l8 liCD. SRe aQQQQ 'tba..t liRil billiil"J'illi if I.iv~na'Sre .~ '~'a&ly 1:a]tc the aadi tioRal cal'aai ty ~Rd this is wkat PleasaR'toa. -~ is 001aR:tiR9' OR. AlreaQ}. i't Ras the support of thc EPA aftd ~ &tate Wa1:er Qaality Coft1!.l':'el BeaJ':'Q, ,d1!aea't 'tRail':' s\1~~ert. we- ~ dOB't aa~o a anaRge wit.R our p08itioR. Cm Miller stated that Pleasanton cannot make us sick without some responsibility, and Livermore has some rights to protect our citizens against this. Cw Tirsell stated that while she agrees with the recommendation of Cm Miller she feels there will be no support from LAVWMA and MOVED THAT THE CITY~C~ APPROXIMATELY 1 MGD EXPANSION FOR LIVERMORE WITH mi 0 RESERVATION OF THIS CAPACITY TO BE DISCUSSED WITH OUR CITY ATTORNEY AND THAT THIS BE THE FIGURE TO BE USED IN WORKING WITH THE STAFF, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cm Turner stated that he feels the comments made by Cm Miller are very valid points and if possible would like them included in the motion, with which Cw Tirsell agreed. Cw Tirsell commented that while we disagree with using Clean Water grants for the expansion of residences in an air basin as endangered as ours we realize that these expansion grants are used in this manner and therefore, reluctantly, we request the 1 MGD increase. Cw Tirsell added that we would be in favor of E-O population growth for the valley, scaled to Alameda County, if the cities of Pleasanton and Dublin would support this suggestion. Cm Staley stated that he will support the motion because he has studied this problem both at the Planning Commission meetings and with the City Council during the past month. He finds that this is such a complex problem that he is not satisfied he has arrived at a final solution of what he would like to see done. For the interim he is supporting this measure but is very clearly reserving the right to change his opinion as more information is available. I .-J Cm Miller stated he appreciates the way in which the motion was made in an effort to reflect the ideas he has presented. His view of the way this should be presented by our staff to LAVWMA is that the City of Livermore should take the position of doing the right thing environmentally - that is our position. We CM-30-li52 June 16, 1975 u (Report re Water Recla- mation Plant Capacity) should say that the other communities should recognize their responsibility and this is our position. If they laugh then we can offer a different suggestion. He commented that he would prefer this be done in two stages even though, in a sense, it is time consuming. We shouldn't say, "well, everyone else is doing it", therefore, this is the way it has to be if we will go along. We really should take the position of doing the proper thing environ- mentally. The way the motion is stated makes it very difficult for him to support it, even though he appreciates the way in which it has been done. Cm Miller added that irrationality reigns at the west end of the valley and he feels we should make an effort to protect our popu- lation and the only way we can do this is by hanging in for what is proper environmentally. He added that he really can't vote for the motion even though he appreciates the intent of the motion. David Eller, Livermore resident, stated that he would prefer to have Pleasanton laugh at us first and then continue on with what we have to do at a later time. He would like to see Livermore stand up for what it feels is the right thing to do and not to give in to Pleasan- ton. Let Pleasanton make fools of themselves first. Mayor Futch commented that he would like to mention that we are entitled to one expansion with federal funding and this would be it. In his opinion, with adequate planning and sufficient mitigating measures 1 MGD need not necessarily mean an increase in air pollution. MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Cm Miller dissenting) . RECESS After a brief recess the Council meeting resumed with all members of the Council present. REPORT RE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH W.P. RR Last week there was discussion concerning a supplemental agreement with Western Pacific Railroad with respect to construction of the underpasses and grade crossings. This matter was continued in order to allow the Council to review the agreement. ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE COUNCIL APPROVED THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT. RESOLUTION NO. 127-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECU- TION OF SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT (Western Pacific Railroad Company) REPORT RE CONSTRUCTION BIDS FOR FIRE STATION 1 L Construction bids were received for Fire Station No. 1 on May 29th and immediately thereafter a notice was received from the apparent low bidder (Lohsen Company) that there had been an error and a request to withdraw. The City Attorney and architect reviewed the work sheet for the bid and it was concluded that the appeal for withdrawl was valid and should be granted. Review of the next bidder (M & H Construction) revealed that the subcontractor for the electrical work was not acceptable and M & H was asked to prepare a modified bid figure with a substitute electri- cal subcontractor, and they have complied. CM-30-l53 June 16, 1975 (Report re Construction Bids for Fire Station #1) It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution awarding the construction bid to M & H Construction Company in the amount of $424,252.00, including two alternates, i.e., lockers and shelving ($5,320.00); landscaping and irrigation, $9,886.00. This amount also includes a $201. figure re the new electrical subcontractor. ,/ "\ \J ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE COUNCIL ADOPTED A RESOLUTION AWARDING THE BID TO M & H CONSTRUCTION COMPANY. RESOLUTION NO. 128-75 A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID (M & H Construction Company) REPORT RE REQUEST TO OCCUPY LIV. GARDENS Mr. Street reported that a request has been received from the developer of the Livermore Gardens Apartments, which is a partially completed housing project, for occupancy permits primarily for security reasons. The staff recommends that the Council adopt a motion author- izing occupancy not to exceed 2/3 of the planned housing units until all of the requisite improvements and conditions have been satisfied. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE REQUEST FOR OCCUPANCY PERMITS BE DENIED. Cm Miller stated that he believes the Council has not come to a policy on this matter but the Council was adamant once before about not allowing occupancy until everything is complete. We have had trouble in the past and in his opinion there should be a uniform and systematic rule that there will be no occupancy until everything has been done to the satisfaction of the City. As everyone knows, bonds are two year issues and they are extrem- ely inefficient. Bonds require law suits and use of the City's time and it is simply better all the way around to have everything done right the first time and then allow occupancy. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cm Tirsell agreed that the City was adamant about occupancy in the past and that she would suggest developers avail themselves of Security Eye Patrol, the Police Department, or other means of protection for their property if this is the concern. The developer of Livermore Gardens explained that he would like to have occupancy allowed for the manager of the 96 unit apart- ment complex because this person needs a place in which to live, which the developer provides. The manager is hired by the developer and works for him and if he can live there Livermore Gardens will have 24-hour representation on the job site with respect to infor- mation and security. He stated that FHA will not allow inspection of the units until the utilities have been turned on and they would like this to be done prior to people moving into their units. Also they feel that no matter what type of fencing is provided, vacant houses invite problems such as theft and vandalism. They wish to j move people into portions as they are completed. If the contractor --/ is not meeting his obligations then utilities and occupancy permits can be denied. He added that if they can progress, keep busy and have full occupancy by the end of the project, it will result in a better project with less problems. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THE COUNCIL~ r:;/ -7 J L,L-"" c--C'c.t' (i 'l./ ~[-(_ l.~tcc'.( c',c .) ~I \lJ' f'v ~," \ ,,~ ~,Vi v. \)J (\ ,J ~\Xyt' W \ A~, ';0 {l,;pZ- , , (7 eM-30-l54 June 16, 1975 (Request to Occupy Livermore Gardens Aptst CM FUTCH STATED THAT HE HAS NO OBJECTION TO ALLOWING ONLY THE MANAGER TO OCCUpy A UNIT AND SO MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. v REPORT RE PROPERTY ACQUISITION - GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT Mr. Parness reported that the City had occupancy rights for the Standard oil Property but Standard Oil required that appraisals be obtained and that the City work out a compensatory figure with the occupant of the property prior to acquisition. There was also a problem with improvements that had to be moved. Negotiations have finally been completed and the figures have been presented to the Council for acceptance. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT WITH STANDARD OIL COMPANY, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 129-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (Standard Oil Company of California, Western Operations, Inc.) REPORT RE LEAGUE OF CALIF. CITIES POSITION RE STATE REVENUE SHARING A report was distributed to the Council concerning the proposal for State Revenue Sharing with comments from the League of California Cities and the staff has suggested that the Council adopt a motion instructing the staff to prepare a response to this matter for the meeting of June 23rd. Cm Miller stated that the suggestions of the League are very good, with one exception, it takes 51% of the cities to participate before becoming effective. Cm Miller stated that he wants Livermore to participate regardless of what the other cities do, AND SO MOVED. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. REPORT RE EAST AVE. FUTURE WIDTH LINES The Director of Public Works reported that during discussions with the County concerning the cooperative project for widening East Avenue there was a difference of opinion as to the future width lines. The Council has tentatively approved a width of 108 ft. to accommodate four lanes of traffic while the County contends that an ultimate 120 ft. width is necessary with two lanes for eastbound traffic and three lanes for westbound traffic. c The County has agreed to modify their standards in order that the street will fit within the 108 ft. right-of-way, as proposed by the City and it is recommended by the City staff that the County standards be accepted in order that the design work can proceed. It is recommended that the Council refer this matter back to the Planning Commission for their comments. Cm Miller stated that unless there is a mistake in the exhibit submitted to the Council, this would be completely unacceptable, be- because in adding up the width the County's standards still come to 120 ft. CM-30-l55 June 16, 1975 (Report re East Avenue Future Width Lines) Mr. Lee stated that if the standards indicate 120 ft. then there is a mistake because they have agreed to the lOa ft. width. It was concluded that the exhibit from the County was not in error and that they illustrate a 108 ft. width which is acceptable to the Council. Cm Staley commented that during the Planning Commission discussion concerning future width lines for East Avenue there was concern for bike lanes and emergency parking and asked about these items. Mr. Lee explained that this will provide for the bike lane. Cm Miller stated that he can't understand the reasoning behind five lanes with two in one direction and three in the other. Traffic goes one way in the morning and the other in the evening - it does not make sense to have an extra lane for the evening traffic. \J Mr. Lee stated that the County used state standards and took into consideration the turns into the residential developments on the north side of East Avenue. In order for traffic to move smoothly through the traffic signals and to allow for motorists turning into the areas north of East Avenue it was deemed necessary to provide for the additional lane. CM STALEY MOVED TO REFER THIS MATTER TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cm Miller asked that the justifications concerning traffic and diagrams be sent to the Planning Commission and not receive only the two exhibits. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. HEARING SET RE REZONING - PLANNING COMMISSION'S REPORT ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE HEARING FOR THE PROPOSED REZONING OF PROPERTIES TO OS-UR DISTRICTS WAS SET FOR JULY 14, 1975. P. C. MINUTES The Planning Commission minutes for the meetings of May 13, 20, and June 3, 1975, were received and noted for filing. REPORT RE AB 1807 The City Attorney commented that the Council has discussed their position concerning AB l807 and that no Council action is necessary at this time. WEEKLY CITY MANAGER STATUS REPORT Property Acquisition The City has recently purchased the site at the corner of Chestnut and "P" Street which was a service station site. The storage tanks on this site (four in number) were found to be in good order and are presently being relocated to the airport for use. ~ CM-30-l56 June 16, 1975 (City Manager's Weekly Rpt) ~/ Airport Hangar Plans The airport hangar plans are nearly complete for the l6 new T-hangars authorized for our airport at an estimated cost of approximately $125,000. The staff will soon be coming to the Council for authorization and will go to bid on them thereafter. The City has been trying to generate interest among the lending institutions, locally, for financing of this construction and if we can't get it all locally we have the rights of obtaining a $50,000 loan from the state at low interest return. Building Permits It has been reported that about 20 building permits were issued last week and that none of these included a permit for building a home. Most of the permits were for remodeling and swimming pools. T.V. Sewer Inspections The Public Works Department has been performing T.V. sewer inspections over the past couple of weeks and there will be a display and presentation concerning this item. Presentation to COVA By Airport Consultant Firm The Airport Consultant firm gave a presentation to COVA and apparently the presentation was well received. This completes presentations to organizations that are concerned about this topic and the next presen- tation will be a presentation of the City Council after receipt of the draft report to be available in July. Transportation Study The Transportation Committee met with our consulting firm and the consultant study is approximately 80% finished. A great deal of information has been amassed by them as to the transportation needs of the community and what the recommended system might be. A draft will be ready for the Council in about another month and should be very interesting. Noise Element - Gen. Plan The Noise Element of the General Plan is under preparation and hope- fully will be finished in draft form sometime this week or next week at the latest. Subsidized Taxi Service for Senior Citizens ( ',---, Our City will be the recipient of a $22,000 grant from the federal government to subsidize taxi service for the elderly and the City Manager feels this will be a good program. Only $76,000 has been allocated to the County and we were able to obtain almost 1/3 of it. One thing that must be carefully studied is the possibility of whether the City might be admitting any kind of irrevocable obligation to the cab company by this action, in view of our intention to go into public transit later. CM-30-l57 June l6, 1975 City Manager's Weekly Report Rent Subsidy Program The City has recently been informed of a program available through the Housing and Community Development Act for rent subsidy for low income housing. This would be under Section 8 and would be different from monies we have qualified for in the past under Section 23. There will be 1,800 units allocated to the County and perhaps some 54 may be assigned to Livermore. The rent subsidies would range between$175-$276/month for each one of the rental units and the City is looking into the possibility of receiving some of this money. J Mr. Parness reported that these projects are getting numerous and more complex by the day and it is very difficult for a small staff to keep up with these things. Social Concerns Meeting The Social Concerns Committee has met and the Mayor and Cw Tirsell were present. Staff liaison is being provided and Don Bradley will serve in this capacity. The Committee will meet once a month and the staff will meet with them to make sure that they get a good start. Athletics International Club Swimming Pool The City staff has looked at the Athletics International Club swim- ming pool and the County Health Department was also asked to observe the condition which exists. The City has been told by the owner that the pool will be cleaned up and the water has been "super chlorinated" so that mosquitoes, etc. will be eliminated. The owner was going to drain the pool but they now intend to lease the pool again so that it will be open for public use. People have been cutting the weeds and trying to get the landscaping in proper order and they are maintaining locked entrances. Budget A performance budget format was distributed to the Councilmembers and Mr. Parness explained that this is an introduction and only applies to three departments in the City and hopefully will gradu- ate slowly into this subject. It is anticipated that the conver- sion to this system will take about three years for the entire City. Council Tour of City Mr. Parness reminded the Council that the tour of the City will take place on Thursday, June 19th, at 8:45 a.m. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Futch adjourned the meeting at 11:00 p.m. to an executive session to discuss the labor agreement, appointments and legal matters. ~~~~ , "'\ Mayor, , /'"\ I I \ I . _~':Gf::.. P-c8-L/L- ;'~\/: /1..1("_ /q~ty Clerk iv~rmore, California j J APPROVE ATTEST CM-30-l58 Regular Meeting of June 23, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on June 23, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:25 p.m. with Mayor Futch presiding. I V 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 June 9, 1975 Page 128, last paragraph under (Source of Revenue), should read as follows: The second, AB 1911, is a major disaster for communities trying to obtain park dedication. The League recommends opposition to this bill...etc. OPEN FORUM (Taxes) Katie Richardson, 510 Junction Avenue, expressed her feeling of concern regarding the City budget and tax increases, police and fire depart- ment allocations. (Taxes and Cruising) David Castro, 2276 Chestnut Street, commented that taxation is beyond belief. He also remarked that the cruising by teenagers on First Street has created a lot of congestions and there is a seeming inability to cope with it. CONSENT CALENDAR Departmental Reports The following Departmental Reports were distributed to the Council- members: ~ Airport Activity - May Building Inspection - May Fire Department - Quarterly, January/March Industrial Inquiries Mosquito Abatement District - March Municipal Court - April Police and Pound Departments - May Water Reclamation Plant - April CM-30-l59 June 23, 1975 Committee Minutes Minutes for the Design Review Committee meeting of June 3, 1975, were noted for filing., Resolution Authorizing Transfer of Funds I .J An annual resolution is required for the formal transfer of monies among funds, all of which are approved in the current year's budget. RESOLUTION NO. 130-75 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING TRANSFER OF FUNDS. Res. Auth. Execution of Agreement (Highway Patrol) (Abandoned Vehicles) A resolution is required authorizing the City to participate in the state program which allows a reimbursement of up to $20 for the cost of abatement of abandoned vehicles on public streets. An ordi- nance has been adopted by the Council allowing our participation in this program. RESOLUTION NO. 131-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL FOR PARTICIPATION IN ABANDONED VEHICLE ABATEMENT PROGRAM. Res. Auth. Execution of Agreement - State Coop. Personel Services Our current contract with the State Cooperative Personnel Services for the preparation of pre-emploYment examinations is about to ex- pire. The proposed agreement will extend this service for an addi- tional three year term. The costs are based upon ordering examina- tion materials and wholly dependent upon job classifications and numbers. RESOLUTION NO. 132-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (State Personnel Board) Res. re Settlement of Action (Heath) The Robert B. Heath property acquisition proposed for eminent domain litigation has been negotiated and a settlement has been reached. It is recommended that a resolution authorizing the settlement be adopted. J RESOLUTION NO. 133-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT OF CON- DEMNATION ACTION (City v. Robert Heath, et al) CM-30-l60 June 23, 1975 L Res. re Retroactive Pay Denial Mr. Parness reported that the staff is making every effort to seek a negotiated settlement with the two remaining employee organiza- tions prior to July 1, 1975. These efforts have been under way over the past two months and it is recommended that a resolution be adopted that would be consistent with the policy adopted last year declaring that if a settlement is reached after July 1, pay will not be retro- active. RESOLUTION NO. l34-75 A RESOLUTION DENYING RETRO- ACTIVE PAY AFTER JULY 1, 1975 Payroll & Claims There were 97 claims in the amount of $428,825.02, and 318 payroll warrants in the amount of $95,864.74, for a total of $524,689.76, dated June 23, 1975, and approved by the Director of Finance. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR On motion of Cm Miller, seconded by Cm Turner the items on the Consent Calendar were approved by unanimous vote. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (Liquor Store in Louis Shopping Center) A question was posed regarding the request for an additional liquor store in the Louis Shopping Center. Mr. Musso, Planning Director, explained that there is no limitation set, either on liquor stores or any other type of establishment. It may come to the Council as an appeal from grant of the permit. MATTERS INITIATED BY CITY COUNCIL (Railroad Relocation Proj.) Cm Miller questioned the seeming lack of work on the railroad project, and Mr. Lee explained, briefly, the method of laying track and indi- cated that while the work is approximately 14 days off schedule it is hoped that this time can be made up prior to the proposed comple- tion date of December 1. ( ~ (AB 437 re Residential Developments) Cm Miller spoke regarding Leauge sponsored AB 437 which is a measure permitting by ordinance that in the construction of residential developments a specified proportion of low or moderate income units could be required. There is also a Senate Bill to the same effect and it is requested that we support these measures. CM-30-l6l June 23, 1975 (Letter re Mailboxes) It was suggested that communications be sent to the post office once again regarding curbside mailboxes and the regulations re- garding them. (Executive Session re Litigation & Labor Relations) The Mayor announced an executive session immediately following the regular meeting to discuss appointments, litigation and labor relations. \ I J (Budget Session) CW Tirsell commented that the budget session is scheduled for June 28, 1975 at 9:00 a.m., and hopes that people will attend this meeting to hear the presentations and express their views. Ray Faltings, 1018 Via Granada, also requested that the agenda be publicized so that citizens would know when particular depart- ment budgets are to be discussed. (Livermore Day at the Fair) July 7th is Livermore Day at the Pleasanton County Fair and CW Tirsell commented that she hopes people will attend that day. It was also suggested that since the 7th is on a Monday, the City Council would hold their regular meeting on Tuesday, July 8, and the Council concurred with this suggestion. REQUEST FROM LARPD RE PROPERTY ACQUISITION LARPD has requested that the City purchase a small piece of property along Murdell Lane adjacent to Max Baer Park which is for sale by Reid Oliver and Company, a real estate firm located in Hayward. ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE COUNCIL APPROVED THE RECOMMENDATION THAT THIS PROPOSAL BE REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND STAFF FOR REPORT. COMMUNICATION RE QUESTIONS TO AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMITTEE (City of Pleasanton) A copy of the questions posed by the City of Pleasanton to the Airport Advisory Committee was distributed to the Council for informational purposes. The Council asked that the answers, eventually forwarded to the City of Pleasanton, also be sent to the Council for their information. P.H.NOTICE ALAMEDA CREEK CALIFORNIA URBAN STUDY (Corps of Engineers) ,J The Council received a notice of a public meeting to be held at the Rincon Avenue School Multipurpose Room concerning the Upper Alameda Creek Urban Study to be conducted by the Corps of Engineers. CM-30-l62 c June 23, 1975 COMMUNICATION FROM ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN RESOURCES AGENCY (Re Transportation Program) A communication was received from the Alameda County Human Resources Agency concerning recommendations of the Advisory Commission on Aging with respect to transportation programs for the elderly in South County. Among the recommendations was that the City of Livermore should be allocated $22,050 to implement a subsidized taxi service for the elderly for the community of Livermore. REPORT RE PIONEER BUS SUBSIDY A proposal has been transmitted to LLL, Sandia, and the City of Livermore by the owners of Pioneer Lines requesting a joint subsidy in the amount of $3,300 per month to allow continuance of service. It would appear that according to an opinion voiced by an LLL authority, the prospects of LLL and Sandia participating are virtually nil. The City Attorney was asked to prepare an op~n~on on the legal aspects of the City's subsidy for this purpose and he reported that an inquiry has beem made to MTC as to whether or not federal or state monies would be available for this purpose. .MTC has indicated that although UMTA does provide for grants for privately operated local transit systems, their award more than likely would have to be made as a pass through from a major pUblic transit system such as BART or AC. The requirements of the federal law, in addition, are so complex and imposing that MTC's staff believes them impossible for qualification for a small local private service. The City Manager recommends that although a great deal remains to be done prior to any implementation of a local public transit service, it is conceivable that one may be operational within a year. Such a service, supplemented by the existing BART commuter service, may be enough to substitute for the very fine operations that have been conducted by Pioneer Bus Lines. Regrettably, it is recommended that the application for subsidy be declined. Discussion followed on the report submitted, with the Council ex- pressing concern regarding encouraging use of this type of local transit which is a matter of educating people to use busses. It is regrettable that the private line could not remain in business; it was hoped that the entire City would benefit from its existence. Some subsidy should come from BART. The need for subsidization is clear, and probably will exist for some time even though it is not clear that such a subsidy can legally be given by the City. At the close of discussion, ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY, THE COUNCIL VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO REGRETFULLY DENY THE SUBSIDY REQUEST, AND TO HAVE, WITHIN 30 TO 45 DAYS, A STUDY SESSION WITH PIONEER BUS LINES, LLL, SANDIA AND KAISER SAND AND GRAVEL AND OTHER LOCAL EMPLOYERS TO DISCUSS THE SUBJECT OF LOCAL TRANSPORTATION. "-/ Cw Tirsell indicated her feeling that local transportation must be subsidized; we are being unrealistic if we think otherwise~The Council also asked the City Manager to write to the bus owners expressing the Council's appreciation of their effort in this regard. Also, at the City Manager's request, the Council did authorize, ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, PERMISSION FOR AC TRANSIT TO PIC~ UP PASSENGERS ALONG THEIR ROUTES TO THE LABS WITHOUT PREJU~ DICE TO A LATER CHANGE IN DIRECTION. .. ~~" k<-d4/'~';A'ff./-~~2.~L/ //'~~~~ ,A;~t>, t2/c;~~L-A"v -:#/'-J4.'L<:';~ "<"'-,/ ;;-';(c, ' _uZTi.v p"-<:^~Y) /.' L. L. .~A~? Cl/~_. _7~y-~.-t7~ ,-z:,_.L~ ('<:~ -Cc cL /~^L:'A<^i '_i',"I~~,7v" /, , /J;;Z,t, 7--</"---<,,-_,,-_ ?<'^,,-'<c;< ,.-^c,T7''Li!'-'i:. <-,':7_, ..?/'~: ?V~_~.,~/7<~/;Ejj~..,A,^.e4? ;;;,,7..i.<'/~^-t'/t(/--c/ ~U,/I../ /("[L'l,tL_/~(,/-, ~<,--?c..e{:?:y/> .k:L-i:.LrF'J/" ",. /~ , , CM-30-l63 r'<!~~ June 23, 1975 REPORT RE GOLF PRO CONTRACT ~mNDMENT Since the Springtown Golf Course was acquired over two years ago the starter shack has been manned by hourly employees. This was due mainly to our original intentions to seek a golf pro for this responsibility or to assign it to the existing pro. Until re- cently these efforts have been unsuccessful and the temporary employees have been retained. , J Finally the golf pro at Las positas has agreed to assume the pro responsibilities at Springtown, which include operating the starter shack and offering golfing merchandise. The negotiated terms would be a monthly retainer to be paid by the City in the amount of $700. The City would receive 5% of the gross receipts earned by the pro and, of course, would retain all green fees. Our current expense for this service is $8,500/year. It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing execution of an agreement between the City and the golf pro at Las Positas. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO ENTER INTO AN AGREE- MENT WAS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION NO. 135-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (First Amendment to Agreement: Daniel Lippstreu) REPORT RE UTILITY EASEMENT ISSUANCE TO CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE LARPD has requested issuance of an easement to California Water Company along the alignment of a proposed bike trailway intersecting Vista Meadows Park. The staff has recommended that the Council adopt a resolution granting the easement. CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION GRANTING THE EASEMENT, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. AFTER SOME DISCUSSION CM TIRSELL MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO WAIVE THE FEE IN RETURN FOR WORK ON THE PARK, SECONDED BY CM TURNER WHICH PASSED 4-1 (Cm Miller dissenting). MAIN MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 136-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF EASEMENT (California Water Ser- vice Company) REPORT RE DESIGN REVIEW ORD. MODIFICATIONS Recently the Council was informed of some procedural conflicts between the zoning and land use administration and the design review process. The Council instructed the staff to seek to recon- .~ cile these differences. The Council has received a draft of proposed ordinance changes which hopefully will accommodate this need. If the draft is acceptable it is recommended that the staff be directed to prepare an ordinance for adoption. The Council then discussed the draft agreed upon various changes CM-30-l64 June 23, 1975 (Ordinance Modification re Design Review Process) they felt were necessary and ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE DRAFT WAS ADOPTED AND REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR REVIEW. ~' Cm Miller expressed concern with Section 22.86, at best some punctuation is needed, and Chief Building Inspector Herb Street was requested to revise this section for future review. REPORT RE PIONEER PARK PROPERTY PURCHASE The City Manager reported that at the last meeting the Council was informed of the fact that the title report for the proposed purchase of property adjacent to Pioneer Park reveals that an "equitable servitude" covenant remains with this land. This means that the rights of architectural review and other structural restrictions pertaining to fences and walls is vested with sub- sequent property owners, now numbering some 200. The only way to get this covenant lifted, short of litigation against all parties, would be to obtain the consent of each subsequent property owner which would be impractical. The former landowner-subdivider has stated that to the best of his knowledge the subject deed covenants have never been invoked nor is there an active homeowners association or architectural review committee at present. The Director of Public Works foresees no problem in assuming the title with this listing and it is recommended that the Council adopt a motion authorizing the staff to proceed with the purchase of this property. After brief discussion CM STALEY MOVED TO CEASE NEGOTIATIONS UNTIL THE SELLER CAN GIVE A CLEAR TITLE TO THE CITY, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT RE REVENUE NEEDS (League of Calif. Cities) The City Manager submitted a letter to be sent to the League of California Cities Board of Directors concerning their recent inquiry on proposed state revenue sharing with cities. The letter indicated that this subject is of critical importance and current to our budgetary season and hopefully the League will be able to initiate a measure and make it one of high priority on the legislative programs. The City Council unanimously urges that the League Board of Directors endorse such a proposal. P. C. REPORT RE PRO- POSED GALLOWAY PARK PURCHASE A staff report from the Planning Commission concerning the acqui- sition of Galloway Park (park relocation and golf course expansion) located southwest of Bluebell Drive near Buckskin Road, was submitted "--/ to the Council for review. The Council has authorized conduct of an appraisal for this property, the results of which have not been received. Following receipt of the appraisal, the owners will be contacted seeking their acceptance of the value thus established. No Council action was required at this time and the report was noted for filing. CM-30-l65 June 23, 1975 REPORT RE COVA 1975-76 BUDGET A report was received from COVA with their proposed 1975-76 budget. The proposed expenditures would require our financial partici- pation to the extent of $2,000. Mr. Logan requested that this item not be discussed at this time because he would prefer that the Council act on the Joint Powers Agreement first. It was concluded that this item would be postponed. J REPORT RE ZONE 7 WATER SERVICE - LAS POSITAS The Director of Public Works reported that an inquiry was made to the Zone 7 Board by the consultants for Mr. Geldermann about the possibility of water service to the proposed Geldermann development north of I-580. The Zone 7 Board discussed this matter at their meeting of June 4, 1975, and directed their staff to send a report to water retailing agencies. Prior to their meeting Mayor Futch requested a delay in considera- tion of this matter and the item was continued to July 2nd after some discussion as to what their policy should be with respect to such requests. The staff has recommended that a resolution be adopted opposing the extension of domestic water supply for this project and on MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE RECOMMENDATION WAS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION NO. 137-75 A RESOLUTION OPPOSING EXTENSION OF DOMESTIC WATER BY ZONE 7 Mayor Futch also indicated that he would be present to ask that discussion not be continued regarding this matter and to reinforce the resolution adopted. Also, it was decided to present a letter to the Mayors' Conference requesting a hands off policy in instructing the Conference dele- gates to ABAG and how to vote on the Las positas development matter. RECESS After a brief Recess the Council meeting resumed with all members of the Council present. PROPOSED COMMUNICATION TO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS (Re Anderson Rezoning) Consideration of the letter proposed to be sent to the Board of superv~sors c~ntaining a resume prepared by the Planning Director was br~efly d~scussed and the matter postponed for action at a meeting proposed to be held just prior to the budget discussions on Saturday, June 28th. -.-/ CM-30-l66 June 23, 1975 ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned to an executive session at 10:35 p.m. to discuss labor negotiations, appointments and litigation; thereafter to 9:00 a.m., Saturday, June 28, 1975, at Fire Station No.2, 951 Rincon Avenue. ATTEST ~~~ ~ /?;;# Mayor I (' (~1t-{~ I~ I'",C~ ty Clerk Li~ermnre, California '~./ APPROVE Adjourned Regular Meeting of June 28, 1975 An adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on June 28, 1975, at Fire Station No.2, 951 Rincon Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 9:10 a.m. with Mayor Futch presiding. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Cm Miller, Cw Tirsell, Cm Turner and Mayor Futch ABSENT: Cm Staley (seated shortly after the discussion commenced) LTR RE ANDERSON PROPERTY REZONING (portola Avenue and I-580 Off-Ramp Area) The Council discussed the proposed communication and decided to include an appendix which would state some of the historical data, leaving the letter and attachments strictly addressing the rezoning itself, and CM TURNER SO MOVED, SECONDED BY CM MILLER, AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.," ~t~ The stafVwtt~lsctdi~cf~d?'tt~~C'~;;~~s t~ Council's appreciation for the~ettersent to the Board supporting the City's stand on this proposed rezoning. RESOLUTION RE MEDEIROS PARKWAY GRANT APPLICATION The Planning Director requested that a resolution be passed approving the application for Land and Water Conservation Funds for the Medeiros Parkway Project. Some monies have already been received, however not enough to complete the project. This application provides monies to acquire lands for public outdoor recreation purposes. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, AND BY UNANIMOUS '~ APPROVAL, THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED. CM-30-l67 June 28, 1975 (Resolution re Medeiros Parkway Grant Application) RESOLUTION NO. 138-75 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUNDS (MEDEIROS PARKWAY PROJECT) J ADJOURNMENT There being no further business the meeting adjourned to the budget session. APPROVE ~ ~'%H n Ma~or I (~:~~( ~ ~;i<.-'- ~,.~ \ :{/VLec.(~k5'- ;> City Clerk l.vermore, California ATTEST Regular Meeting of July 8, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on July 8, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m. with Mayor Futch presiding. ROLL CALL: Present: Cm Miller, Cw Tirsell, Cm Staley and Mayor Futch Absent: Cm Turner PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Futch led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. MINUTES June 16, 1975 Page 152, third major paragraph, third line should read: suggestion because they are asking for a 12.2 MGD capacity. The remainder of this paragraph should be deleted. Page 152, 5th paragraph, 4th line should read: PERCENTAGE, ...etc. FOR LIVERMORE WITH June 23, 1975 -.-/ Page 163, last paragraph should read: Cw Tirsell indicated her feeling that local transportation must be subsidized; we are being unrealistic if we think otherwise. She was disappointed at the attitude expressed in the letter from LLL - they are trying to locate a new energy source and ignoring an opportunity to help preserve our current energy supply.---etc. C1-1-30-l68 July 8, 1975 (Minute Corrections) P. 148 (June 16), second paragraph from bottom, 7th line down, should read as follows: standards. This means...etc. ,--. P. 148, last paragraph, 6th line down should read: measure that would help reduce air pollution. Larger expansion which would have further residential development only works against the improvement of air quality in the valley. Page 149, 3rd paragraph from bottom, 9th line should indicate 149,000 rather than 119,000. Page 151, bottom of the page, Item 1. should read: 1. Accept E-O for Alameda County, scaled to the valley (119,000 population). Page 167, second paragraph under Anderson Property Rezoning should read: The staff was also directed to express the Council's appre- ciation for the Chamber of Commerce letter sent to the Board..etc. Page 154, last line should read: MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THE COUNCIL, AMENDED AS LISTED ON THE NEXT PAGE. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETINGS OF JUNE 16, k~D 23, 1975, villRE APPROVED AS CORRECTED. CONSENT CALENDAR Res. of Condemnation re Fire Station #4 An appraisal is currently underway for the Fire Station #4 site and hopefully a negotiated settlement can be reached. It is recom- mended that a resolution authorizing condemnation be adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 139-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING CONDEM- NATION OF FEE SIMPLE ESTATE FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES, TO WIT: A FIRE STATION AND APPURTENANCES, OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED ADJACENT TO THE WEST LINE OF TRACT 2266 AND AT THE NORTHWESTERN CORNER OF CORDOBA STREET AND CONCANNON BOULEVARD, CITY OF LIVERMORE, COUNTY OF AL~..EDA. Res. re Fed. Aid Safer Roads Program The Federal-Aid Safer Roads Demonstration Program is a program administered by the state and involves 90% federal reimbursement. The state has determined an apportionment for each county and has requested the counties to establish their own means of how available funds are to be used. It is recommended that this program be adopted and a resolution passed. Cm Miller commented that the resolution mentions the Maple Street/East Avenue island at three times the amount approved by the Council. '~ Mr. Parness replied that by the Council's acceptance of the report does not necessarily mean approval of the expenditure for this project but rather staff approximations were noted in the report. If the City receives the funding for the various projects the Council will have to later review and approve installation. CM-30-l69 July 8, 1975 (Safer Roads Program) RESOLUTION NO. 140-75 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE FEDERAL SAFER ROADS DEMONSTRATION PROJECT Res. Approving EIR for Housing & Community Development Act The City Council adopted a resolution approving the application for federal grant pursuant to the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974. J RESOLUTION NO. 141-75 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR FEDERAL GRANT PURSUANT TO THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974 AND DETER- MINING THAT SUCH WILL HAVE NO SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Res. Accepting Grants for Park Sites & Streets re Tract 3407 It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution accepting grants for park sites and streets concerning Tract 3407 which is a procedure recommended by the Assessor's Office for technical clarification purposes. RESOLUTION NO. 142-75 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING GRANT OF LOTS A, B, C, AND D AND OPEN SPACE PARCELS A, B, C, AND D, AS INDICATED ON THE FINAL MAP OF TRACT 3407, LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA. Airport Advisory Committee Minutes Minutes for the Airport Advisory Committee meeting of June 2, 1975, were noted for filing. Planning Director's Report re Pending Major Projects The Director of Planning submitted a listing and status report of pending major projects for informational purposes. Progress Report - Water Rec. Plant A monthly progress report for the month of May was submitted by the Director of Public Works for the Water Reclamation Plant, Stage 3 Improvements. Report re Growth Rate & Fundable Flow .--.J The Director of Public Works prepared a report with the calcula- tion of fundable capacities in the Water Reclamation Plant and the Valley growth rate projections through 1986. em Miller commented that the entire calculation assumes that the City accepts the 1.6% per year population growth for the Valley. CM-30-l70 July 8, 1975 (Report re Growth Rate & Fundable Flow) It was explained that the report is informational and Mr. Lee explained the method by which the growth rate was calculated. Payroll & Claims ~ There were 64 claims in the amount of $39,371.58, dated June 26, 1975, and approved by the City Manager. 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 (City Attorney's Secretary) The City Attorney stated that his secretary will be taking the first two weeks of August for vacation and he would like the Council to give approval to hire a part-time secretary as early this month as possible so that this person will be somewhat familiar with the office work before his secretary leaves. The Council expressed approval for allowing someone to begin on a part-time basis beginning July 14th, and to work full-time the first two weeks of August. (Salary Resolution) Mr. Parness apologized to the Council for not having the salary resolution in their agenda packet prior to the meeting and the Council indicated that they would prefer to review the resolution and adopt it at a later date. '" faMj&.J e1< f;PQif>- -t/}~ Cm Miller commented that QQr1~ the past the Council has received a list of Planning Commission action that would be final unless there was an appeal by the Council. The Council has not received this list regularly during the last month and there was one action taken by the Planning Commission 3-4 weeks ago that the Council did not know about until too late to appeal it. He commented that this list is very helpful and would appreciate it if the Planning Director would continue to distribute such a list regularly. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL (P. C. Action Summary) (RS/CN Ordinance) Cm Miller noted that the Council should again discuss the RS/CN Ordinance and it was concluded that everyone would be present during the meeting of July 21, 1975, and the ordinance will be discussed at this time. (Community Affairs Committee Parade) Cw Tirsell felt the Community Affairs Committee should be thankedj?j~tt;L' for the 4th of July parade and celebration and would also like to ( commend the Bicentennial Committee and Jaycees for their participation. CM-30-l7l July 8, 1975 (Early Meeting - July 21) Cw Tirsell stated that she will not be able to attend the meeting scheduled for July 19th and asked that the meeting of July 21st begin early rather than to meet on July 19th. The Council agreed to meet at 5:00 p.m. on Monday, July 21st. (Legislative Bills) ,~ Cw Tirsell stated that there are land use bills in the House and Senate and the City should receive copies of these bills (SB 984 Jackson and HR 3510 Udahl) . Cw Tirsell added that land use and growth is a nationwide concern and that the state and federal government will be looking at these controversial items and feels the City should be informed as to the content. The staff will obtain copies. (Lobby re Sewer Grant) Mayor Futch stated that he intends to make a trip to Sacramento and that the major topic will be the grants for sewer expansion. He stated that he intends to present the City's point of view with respect to mitigating measures and asked if anyone from the Council would like to join him. Cm Miller and Staley expressed interest in attending the lobby session but there was a conflict of days and schedules. The majority of the Council concluded that they could do so on Tuesday, July 15th, and make the trip to Sacramento. (Corps of Engineers) Mayor Futch noted that the Corps of Engineers will be having a meeting at Rincon Avenue School on July 9th at 7:00 p.m. and wondered if someone from the Council will be in attencdance. Cw Tirsell commented that she intends to be at the meeting and the Mayor will try to attend. (Bill re Mailboxes) Mayor Futch stated that it is his understanding there is a bill in the House of Representatives that would make the curbside mailboxes illegal. He stated that he does not remember the number of the bill but would like to ask the City Manager to find out the number and prepare a resolution endorsing such legislation and the staff was so directed. COMMUNICATION FROM CARROLL E. B. PEEKE RE LIQUOR LICENSE APP. A letter protesting the grant of a liquor license applica- tion to open a liquor store at 4068 East Avenue (Louis Shopping Center) was received from Carroll E. B. Peeke. -~ -.,/ Mr. peeke was in attendance at the Council meeting and stated that he strongly objects to the selling of liquor in the neighbor- hood shopping center and at present there are five merchants selling liquor at this location. This number should be sufficient. CM-30-l72 July 8, 1975 (Communication re Liquor License Application) Colonel peeke stated that if gasoline stations can be prohibited or the number controlled, he knows of no reason why liquor stores can't also be controlled. "--- Mr. Musso explained that the number of uses in a neighborhood shopping center cannot be controlled with the exception of a gas station. The only requirement for allowing a bar is that it be in conjunction with a restaurant and this definition was discussed a year ago. Mr. Musso mentioned that he has received complaints about the restaur- ant being in violation of regulations. During the discussion it was noted that the restaurant/bar apparently is in violation of either the federal law or the City ordinances and Cm Miller felt this should be pursued. CM MILLER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PURSUE WHATEVER IS NECESSARY TO MAKE SURE THEIR AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY IS BEING UPHELD OR THEIR LIQUOR PERMIT WILL BE REVOKED. MOTION WAS NOT SECONDED. Mayor Futch explained that there is no ordinance to prevent the City from allowing an additional liquor store in the shopping center. Harry West, 1126 Tulane Court, stated that one of the reasons he objects to an additional liquor store in the shopping center is because this takes up space in which a different type of business could locate. Cw Tirsell stated that she would agree a lot of liquor can be sold from five stores in a neighborhood shopping center but is sure those who spoke would agree that they would not want the City to be in the position of regulating free enterprise. She added that if a ,~ busine~~f~~~s it is because people do not shop at that particular ~~ store.~~cause of the problem of the Louis Shopping Center being ,~~ so close to the Lucky Shopping Center on Pacific Avenue, there will ~~1 probably continue to suffer bad uses in these shopping centers,BeBa~Be\ dthere is not the market to keep both shopping centers viable. She stated that the City is in the middle, just as the nearby residents are, and that they should rightfully approach the owner of the property with their objections to an additional liquor store. Cm Miller stated that he sees no reason, in principle, with limiting liquor stores to the number of one per shopping center and would be willing to consider the possibility of revising the ordinance to limit liquor stores to one per shopping center. Cw Tirsell commented that Granada Village is probably the largest residential neighborhood in Livermore and four businesses work compatibly in selling liquor without the problem such as apparently exists with the Louis Shopping Center. Cm Staley stated that as an attorney he can't imagine allowing his client to sign a lease in a neighborhood shopping center that did not have a protective clause to keep a competing business out of the immediate area and secondly before a particular use can be regulated there must be a compelling community interest in that regulation. -'''-, Cm Miller stated that in his op~n~on there really is a qualitative difference between a liquor store and a bakery or shoe shine store and would be willing to try to regulate this type of use. CM-30-l73 July 8, 1975 (Communication re Liquor License Application) Cm Staley stated that he feels this is exactly the type of thing that should be discussed when the CN Ordinance is on the agenda. Mayor Futch stated that perhaps further discussion concerning this item should be postponed and discussed at the time the CN Zoning Ordinance is reviewed. .,~ Cm Miller stated that such a discussion might not help the people near the Louis Shopping Center if the space has already been leased and another liquor license issued. Cm Staley stated that since the City does not presently have an ordinance prohibiting another liquor store in that shopping center, it might be very difficult to defend an ordinance adopted for the purpose of prohibiting this particular application. Mr. Musso stated that if the Council is considering limiting a liquor store to one per shopping center it might be a good idea to direct the Planning Commission to reconsider this particular aspect and make a recommendation, and the staff was so directed. COMMUNICATION RE RESIG- NATION FROM BEAUTIFICATION COMM. A communication was received from Brenda J. Souza informing the Council of her resignation from the Beautification Committee which was noted for filing. Cm Miller asked that the City send a letter to Brenda thanking her for serving on this committee. COMMUNICATION RE APPT. TO LIBRARY BOARD A letter was received from Christine A. Sherman asking that she be considered for the appointment to the Library Board and her name was added to the list. COM~UNICATION RE OFFICIAL BICENTENNIAL COM~UNITY The American Revolution Bicentennial Administration has advised the City of its designation as an official Bicentennial community. The letter was noted for filing. COMMUNICATION RE CURBSIDE MAIL DELIVERY The Council received copies of letters sent to Howard Gardner, Executive Secretary of the Alameda Mayors' Confrerence, from Congressman Stark and Windol Martin of the United States Postal Service, in response to letters sent to them in support of Liver- more's position on curbside delivery of mail. ~ 1 The staff was asked to send letters of thanks to the mayors who supported Livermore's position and sent letters in our behalf. .--/ CM-30-l74 July 8, 1975 REPORT RE SEWER CONNECTION AGREEMENT u The City Manager reported that there have been inquiries as to the availability of sewer connection agreements for unincorporated properties. In view of the recently adopted resolution specifying the application of the remaining balance of sewage capacity it would seem in order for the Council to make some type of pOlicy statement. Martha Haapanen, 2620 Collier Canyon Road, stated that in the spring she got a permit to extend the sewer line to her property line but not all the way to the house and now she would like the line to be extended to the house if the Council would agree to this. She is not located within the City limits. She stated that if she is allowed the extension she would also like the requirements for public works improvements waived because of the location of the house (rural location). Mr. Parness explained that apparently Mrs. Haapanen is asking to have a line extended to her house from the line that services the Junior College. Cm Miller asked where Ms. Haapanen obtained the permit and she stated that she received the permit from the City Public Works Department. Mr. Lee explained that a permit has not been issued to connect to the sewer line but Ms. Haapanen does have a copy of the standard agreement for connections outside of the City limits. At the time the line was being installed for the Junior College she requested that the City extend a lateral to her property line for ultimate connection to the line and the City did give permission for this but it is Mr. Lee's understanding that this was not completed. Cm Staley commented that at this time the Council does not have a very clear explanation of the situation and it might be more help- ful to the Council if some type of formal application is made. Mr. Musso stated that the reason the staff has asked the Council to state a policy is because the staff wonders if they should prepare an agreement to bring before the Council if the Council is not going to grant a sewer connection. Mayor Futch explained that Cm Staley was not on the Council two years ago at which time there was an agreement reached for providing water and sewage lines for the Junior College site. The City had intended to form a benefit district rather than an assessment district so that funds would not be collected from the property owners at that time. The City did not want to be in the position of having to allow development prior to the time development would be appropriate in that unincorporated area. In order to prevent premature development the City paid approximately half of the cost to provide the extensions to the Junior College. Cm Miller commented that the City and all of it has been committed. should be done with the remaining outside of the City would be very has a shortage of sewage capacity We have a resolution about what capacity and obviously connections low on our priority list. Cw Tirsell explained that the City has approximately 40,000 gallons of capacity remaining and the City is trying to reserve this for \~ commerce and industry. We are committed to a large number of resi- dential connections and the City does not wish to allow further con- nections for residential units that are not annexed to the City. Mr. Parness stated that upon applications such as this, henceforth, the staff will repeat the Council policy - sewer connections are CM-30-l75 July 8, 1975 (Report re Sewer Connection Agreement) not being favorably entertained unless it is for a commercial or industrial or low income housing use, subject to review by the Council. The City Attorney explained that the resolution does not specify whether a connection is requested within the City or outside of the City, and therefore the resolution is all encompassing. The present resolution is appropriate and adequate. J REPORT RE TRACT 2619 - KISSELL COMPANY Mr. Parness reported that Kissell Company has written to the City asking that a definite statement be made to the effect that permits will be issued for the 32 lots remaining in the Kissell Tract No. 2619. They indicate that it is apparent from the language of the memorandum of Understanding, there may be restrictions which might stand in the way of issuance of the permits. Cm Miller stated that he feels the Memorandum of Understanding is very clear, it is a legal agreement, and that further expla- nation is unnecessary. Bill Schwarer, President of the Great American Land and Development Company, explained that Great American Land is the purchaser of the Kissell property and in reading the Memorandum of Agreement it indicates that if the permits were available for the 32 lots at the time of application they would be seriously considered. He stated that they would like to make a positive program, get the lots developed and get people living in these houses. He added that they have also entered into an escrow agreement to purchase the Arbor Development lots out on Murdell Lane and they would like to get these developed. They are specifically interested in the time limits for development of these two areas. Mr. Parness explained that the City has agreed to issue 104 per- mits to Kissell to be taken out in two equal installments at the least, annually. The remaining 32 lots are held in a state of abeyance - the Council did not say that they would not be issued and did say that the Council would be favorably inclined towards issuing permits for the lots. The improvements have been installed but permits were never issued for the 32 lots. Prior to purchase of the property, Great American would like to have some indication as to a time limit, if this is the case. He added that his interpretation of the agreement is that the developer would have to ask the permission of the Council for the additional 32 permits. Cm Miller explained that the reason the 32 lots were not included was because they were part of the General Plan moratorium for that area. Mr. Parness noted that these 32 lots were counted in the number of commitments for sewer connections. Cm Miller stated that there is still a limitation on the permits for the 32 units based on the water situation, before Project II goes into effect. This limitation still exists. Cm Miller added that there is a Memorandum of Agreement with the Kissell Company and describes our policy exactly. We cannot unilater- ally change this agreement and in his opinion we shouldn't - the situation is very clearly laid out. If there are no other legal impediments the City will issue the permits for the 32 lots. -J CM-30-176 July 8, 1975 (Report re Tract No. 2619 - Kissell Company) Cm Staley stated that his understanding of the developer's question is as follows: When the 104 permits expire in approximately two years, does the right for the 32 permits expire at this time also, is the expiration time prior to the deadline for the 104 permits, or is there an expiration time? '",-- Mr. Schwarer noted that this is what his company would like to know. He added that his company does not want to begin construction and then find out that the 32 permits cannot be obtained because the City had a chance to issue them for industrial purposes. Cm Staley suggested that the staff meet with the developer and determine if it would be necessary to modify the agreement and then report back to the Council prior to the Council's making a decision. The City Attorney stated that he would like to mention something so that the record would remain clear on this issue since the Council is relating this to sewer connections and sewer connection commitments. The City is still considering the possibility of imposing some type of time limitation on existing lots of record and the time period in which those lots can apply for and acquire or obtain whatever is remaining in the existing sewer capacity. The developer should be aware of the fact that this is still a consideration although tthere isn't a clear indication, as yet. In the very near future there may be a time limitation on which lots of record will be allowed to apply; however, he feels that the time limitiation would probably not be less than two years. Everyone will be notified if the City decides to do this and there will be public hearings also. The City Attorney added that with respect to the lots of record, the City clearly is committed to allowing permits but we also have the right to place a limitation upon the time allowed for taking out permits. This item was postponed pending a report from the staff. REPORT RE TENTATIVE MAPS 3641 & 3642 Don Bissell of Bissell & Karn, asked that the Council postpone discussion of Tentative Maps 3641 and 3642 for two weeks. The City Attorney stated that for the record he would like to point out that by the request for a continuance, Bissell & Karn is waiving any time limitations otherwise committed to the Council in terms of acting on a Planning Commission recommendation and Mr. Bissell replied that they are aware of this fact. CM TIRSELL MOVED FOR A CONTINUANCE OF TWO WEEKS, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND 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 Turner "-- on vacation.) CH-30-l77 July 8, 1975 CUP APPLICATION - GOOD SAMARITAN HOME AND 7-11 STORE ON PORTOLA AVENUE Mr. Musso reported that the Good Samaritan Home has applied for a CUP to allow a health facility similar to a rest home, which is a change from the present quasi-public use, located on portola Avenue. The Planning Commission recommends approval of the use in conformance with all the ordinance requirements. ~' Good Samaritan is asking for a variance from seven occupants to an average of ten and this will be before the Planning Commission. Originally the Planning Commission approved the quasi-public use with all of the City staff recommended conditions relative to public works improvements but asked that the City Engineer allow an extension for installing the improvements such as two years or at such time as 50% of the block were improved. The request was never made to Mr. Lee and the improvements were not installed. The Planning Commission recommends that the Council now allow an extension in the installation of the public works improvements, without requiring a bond. There are two issues at hand: 1) allowing the use, and 2) allow- ing an extension of time for the installation of the public works. Cm Miller stated that he would like to know what the public works improvements were to be, specifically, and it isn't clear to him what it was the City was to have required. Mr. Lee explained that the public works improvements required by the City are the curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and widening of the street surface, as well as any other facilities that might not be present, such a sanitary sewer connections and water line ex- tensions and street trees. There was discussion concerning the public works improvements and whether or not to allow a delay and Mr. Lee felt it would be reasonable to allow a delay of two years with a bond, with which Cm Miller concurred. Mr. Lee mentioned that portola Avenue is one of the entrances to the City and one of the problem areas and that he would like to see public works improvements in this area. CM MILLER MOVED TO a) APPROVE THE CUP, SUBJECT TO ALL RECO~IENDA- TIONS AS LISTED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND b) THAT THE CUP BE SUBJECT TO PROVISION FOR INSTALLATION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS WITH- IN TWO YEARS, WITH A BOND TO INSURE THAT THEY ARE INSTALLED WITHIN TWO YEARS. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM STALEY. Cw Tirsell felt the two years extension is not reasonable because this is in the vicinity of county property and it is very likely that no development will occur in the near future. (7-11 Store) It was mentioned that a 7-11 Store has been approved on county property in this area, and the Council expressed extreme dismay upon learning of this approval. ..~ J Mayor Futch stated that he is very upset about the fact that the City has tried very diligently to discourage and not allow com- mercial devlopment in this area because it is one of the entrances to the City. CM-30-l78 July 8, 1975 (7-11 Store - Portola Ave.) Cw Tirsell stated that she cannot understand how the county can allow use of a septic tank without notifying the City and par- ticularly since this is within the City's Sphere of Influence. "- The Council asked the City Attorney what can be done about the situation, at this point and the City Attorney replied that he hasn't seen anything concerning approval of the 7-11 Store and would suggest that if the Council is considering litigation it should be discussed in an executive session. Mayor Futch stated that the Council will meet in an executive session immediately after the meeting to discuss this item. HOTION PASSED BY UNAND10US VOTE. The City Attorney stated that he would like the resolution to indicate what the Council has approved the Conditional Use Permit for the Good Samaritan Home and Cm Miller advised him of the wording he would like inserted. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION NO. 144-75 A RESOLUTION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (Good Samaritan Home, Inc.) P.H. SET FOR PROPOSED ZONING ORD. AMENDMENTS ON MOTION OF CM TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, A PUBLIC HEARING WAS SCHEDULED FOR PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS RE TEMPORARY SIGNS, PUD PE&~ITS, ETC., FOR AUGUST 4, 1975. P.C. MINUTES - June 17 The Planning Commission minutes for the meeting of June 17th were noted for filing. REPORT RE ILLEGAL SIGN - CITY SUBLESSEE The Planning Director reported that the City staff has informed Rojan Electronics, a sublessee on City owned airport property, that their sign does not conform to the Sign Ordinance. As of this date no action has been taken to conform or modify the sign to make it conform to the ordinance. CM STALEY MOVED TO REFER THIS MATTER TO THE CITY ATTORNEY FOR APPROPRIATE ACTION, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. REPORT RE FIRST STREET OVERPASS PROJECT The City Manager reported that in order for negotiations to begin with CALTRANS and the two railroad firms concerning the proposed First Street overpass project, it is necessary to prepare certain preliminary engineering materials and property descriptions. At the City's request, DeLeuw Cather and Company has submitted a Ct1-30-l79 July 8, 1975 (Report re First Street Overpass Project) proposal for this work at an estimated maximum fee of $5,500. Eighty percent of this amount can be recovered when the project proceeds. It is anticipated that the final and detailed engi~- neering, including construction plans and specifications, will be done by CALTRANS as their contribution to the project and it is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing execu- tion of an agreement. \ J ~ CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT WITH DE LEUW CATHER AND COMPANY, INCLUDING THE RECOM- MENDATION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICES UNDER NO.6 OF THE "TASKS". MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM STALEY. The additional services suggested by Mr. Lee are as follows: ". . . and between Maple Street and North Livermore Avenue. Prepare descriptions and deeds for all neces- sary right-of-way acquisitions for the First Street relocation." Mr. Parness explained that the staff will come before the Council at a later time with a request for approval of appraisals on the property mentioned above. Cm Miller stated that he intends to vote "no" on this motion because he is extremely dissatisfied with DeLeuw Cather and the problems the City has had with them over descriptions of property for other parts of this project. Cw Tirsell commented that at first she had the same feelings about DeLeuw Cather but many of the things are substantially done by virtue of the fact that they have done the work for another project. If the City goes to another consultant, at this point, they would have to redo the work and the cost would be prohibitive. For this reason, alone, she will vote for the motion and would hope that their work would be entirely accurate, because she also shares the concern about their accuracy. Cm Staley asked if this is the type of work that could possibly be done by the City staff and Mr. Lee replied that it is possible but the work is rather specialized and DeLeuw Cather is located in San Francisco near the Southern Pacific offices and they are familiar with the land grants and records of S.P. For this rea- son he feels DeLeuw Cather would be better equipped to handle this service. Mr. Parness noted that despite some of the problems we have had with DeLeuw Cather over property description errors, there is a reasonable argument to be said in their behalf. This firm has an outstanding reputation in utility engineering and if it were not for DeLeuw Cather and Company, Livermore would not be undergoing this project. He stated that in his view they have done an outstanding job and have been with Livermore all the way. MOTION PASSED 3-1 (Cm Miller dissenting) . RESOLUTION NO. 143-75 f) A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (De Leuw, Cather & Company) CH-30-l80 July 8, 1975 REPORT RE Ar-1ENDMENT TO ZONE 7 TREATED WATER CONTRACT "- The Director of Public Works requested that the Council consider the possibility of amending the Zone 7 Treated Water Supply Contract to allow annual water rate adjustments rather than five year water rate adjustments. Cm Miller stated that he would like to suggest that the Council reject this request for an amendment because, in his opinion, this is a "gimmick" by which Zone 7 will raise our water rates to pay for Project II, contrary to their promise not to raise rates for the project prior to passage of the bond issue for the project. If Zone 7 needs money for this project, they need to raise their water connection fee to pay for the project. Cm Staley stated that he was not a Councilmember during the time Project II was discussed with Zone 7 but he feels such an amendment could not possibly be of any advantage to Livermore. CM STALEY MOVED TO DENY THE REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT RE FRANCHISE FEE - CITY WATER DEPT. At the recent budget session the Council discussed whether or not the franchise fee for the City water system should be increased from 1% to 5%. An estimated $8,000 would be accumulated from this source. After brief discussion the Council concluded that this item should be acted upon at the time a full Council is present. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM UNTIL JULY 21, 1975, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. URGENCY ORD. RE SEWER SERVICE CHARGE The matter of establishing a new sewer service charge for the new fiscal year was discussed by the Council at the preliminary budget session and it was concluded that an urgency ordinance would be adopted revising the fee from $2.30 per single family unit per month to $4.80 per single family unit. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE ORDINANCE WAS READ AND ADOPTED. ORDINANCE NO. 866 AN ORDINANCE N1ENDING SECTION 18.80, RELATING TO RATE, OF ARTICLE III, RE- LATING TO SEWER SERVICE AND USE CHARGE, OF CHAPTER 18, RELATING TO SEWERS, OF THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 1959. CM-30-l8l July 8, 1975 DISCUSSION RE FEDERAL REPAYMENT - SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT Mr. Parness explained that the EPA a new regulation requir- ing that grants for sewage treatment plants require industrial users to be assessed a service charge for sewage discharge and that \ 50% of this amount is to be returned to the US Treasury. The .~ remaining 40% is to be used for expansion of the treatment plant and 10% at the discretion of the local agency. Cm Staley asked how this could be imposed upon the City if it wasn't a condition of the grant and indicated that he would assume EPA is subject to rules and regulations. Even though they do have some power he feels this power would be conditioned on some grant we receive in the future or something of this nature. The EPA can't come up with any regulation and then say that the City must comply. Mr. Parness commented that he really isn't sure about the timing involved but it is entirely possible that the regulation occurred after the grant was received by the City. Cm Miller summarized the issue as he recalls it - EPA required the City to impose sewer service charges rather than collecting this on the tax rate. At the same time he believes there was some discussion of requiring an industrial portion to be repaid to the federal government and this was done prior to the City's receiving the final grant. He stated that he could be wrong but the City perhaps should check into the matter. Cw Tirsell stated that she was not on the Council during the time the grant was received but was on the Council at the time repayment was discussed, so the regulation must have been effective after receipt of the grant. Mayor Futch pointed out that the point is really academic because this is a requirement of the grant and making inquiries will only make it more difficult to obtain future grants. Cm Staley stated that he feels very strongly about this matter in that if the City accepted repayment as the condition of the grant then by all means it should be done; however, if the City accepted a grant and later somebody came along and changed the rules he will not go along with this. ~1r. Lee explained that the grant agreement requirements are quite broad, as he recalls. The agreement indicates that the City will have to meet the regulations, as adopted by EPA or the state. The latest regulations were adopted in February of 1974 and part of those regulations was the industrial cost recovery. We are obliga- ted to repay a portion of the industrial charges. Mayor Futch asked if the City agreed to future EPA regulations in the agreement and Mr. Lee replied that this is correct. The City Attorney commented that he would like to advise that the Council does have the option, as a public body, to refuse to comply with the regulation; however the Council must likewise take the consequence if they decide to exercise this option. The EPA cannot order the City to do this but to refuse means that we will not get the grant. \. ) -.-/ ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED FOR TWO WEEKS. CM-30-l82 July 8, 1975 MUNI. CODE AMEND. RE HOTEL TRANSIENT TAX INCREASE Cm Miller stated that Cm Turner asked that the item concerning the Municipal Code amendment relative to hotel transient tax increase be postponed until he can be present. ~ ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED UNTIL JULY 21st. Marcel Chaparteguy, manager of the El Dorado Motel, stated his opposition to the proposed raise to double the present fee and indicated his concern that business will be greatly affected. SELECTION OF SISTER CITY REPRESENTATIVE Mayor Futch announced that Cm Staley has been selected as the Sister City representative and will be among the delegates to visit Quezal- tenango this year. WEEKLY STATUS REPORT - CITY MANAGER Railroad Project Continuous inquiries are being made of the City Manager as to the progress of the railroad relocation project because he agrees that it does not always appear that progress is being made. The shoeflys are complete and this is a very important part because it means that trains can be relocated and the excavation can be reactivated so that the northerly side of the bridge structures can be completed. Some time has been lost but there is hope that this lost time can be recovered so that the December 1st deadline will be met. The Council indicated it isn't apparent that work is being done and Mr. Parness invited them to tour the project which they willingly agreed to do. Sewer Line Inspections Approximately 30,000 ft. of sewer line has been inspected by T.V. and the staff indicates that this method of inspection has proven to be extremely valuable. It was felt that one line which was installed 70 years ago should be replaced but inspection by T.V. camera disclosed that the line was in remarkably good condition and needing only some repair at a cost of several hundred dollars rather than several thousands of dollars for reconstruction of the line. Medians The irrigation system has been installed for the North Livermore Avenue medians, the materials for planting are felt to be satis- factory and everything seems to be in order. CM-30-l83 July 8, 1975 Golf Course The staff has been working with horticulturist technicians from U.C. Davis who have been giving us good technical advice about the golf course ground conditions and irrigation waters, without charge. Reconstruction of one of the greens will begin soon and one of the professors from Davis will be on-site and will assist in the reconstruction specifications. We have found the proper kind of sand for this type of work and unfortunately it will be a long slow process in getting the remainder of the greens recon- structed. ' \ \ \'J Airport Property The City has recently harvested 4,000 bales of hay from the air- port property which is being sold at $2 to $3 a bale. General Plan The Noise Element of the General Plan been referred to the Noise Committee. process at this time and the Planning will be receiving a recommended draft the near future. has been completed and has The second draft is in Commission and Council of the Noise Element in The Scenic Highway Element is being prepared and will also be referred to the Planning Commission soon. Fire There was a 20- acre grass fire over the weekend near Waverly Way and although it was outside the City our Fire Chief took due precautions and initiated the Mutual Aid Program with 15 fire units responding to the fire. Apparently the fire was handled very well. Cm Miller stated that he would like to express the gratitude of his family and those of his neighbors on Waverley Way for the efforts not only of the Livermore Fire Department but all of the fire departments who responded to that fire and the competent way in which it was handled. The fire could have been very serious. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Futch adjourned the meeting at 10:30 p.m. to an executive session to discuss possible litigation. ATTEST :l ~Y-;i Ik4 /~ Hayor . ~ . /)k-eL j City Clerk , Livermore, California APPROVE J CM-30-l84 Regular Meeting of July 14, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on July 14, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:07 p . m. wi th !1ayor pro tempore Mi ller pres iding . ROLL CALL ~) Present: Cm Miller, Staley and Cw Tirsell Absent: Cm Turner and Mayor Futch (vacation). PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor pro tempore Miller led the Councilmembers and those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. P.H. RE REZONING TO OS-UR DISTRICT - Z.O. AMENDMENT Mr. Musso explained that the creation of the OS-UR District and the zoning of the property presently undeveloped was proposed by the City's consultants, Grunwald-Crawford Associates. Their concept was to place all land presently undeveloped into the OS-UR Zone (Open Space-Urban Reserve). The OS-UR Zone is written in such a way that it is basically agricultural but where any use can be requested and allowed by a Planned Unit Development permit. In addition to being a method of land use control the OS-UR District would provide instant zoning conformance to the General Plan. At this point the General Plan is approximately 98% in conformance and this would add a few other areas presently not in conformance with the General Plan. The P.C. considered the entire City and the properties on the map are those concluded to be zoned OS-UR. Some of the downtown properties were eliminated from consideration as OS-UR areas. Mr. Musso also explained the reasons for the staff recommendations for the four categories and the locations the categories apply to. With respect to the new proposed zoning (OS-UR), Mr. Musso explained that if all the agricultural properties were zoned to OS-UR this would not result in a loss of zoning rights. For example, many properties are limited only to agricultural use but with the new zoning the owners can come in for a PUD permit for any type of use they wish. From the property owner's viewpoint this should be advantageous because he does not have to go through the rezoning process for a different use to be allowed. Mr. Musso commented that the City did get some reaction from property on East Avenue (National Housing) where the General Plan indicates 8 d.u./acre and they have zoning for 10 d.u./acre. The effect of action in this area would be a slight reduction in density but not a change in land use, as it would still remain high density residential, and rather than having to go through a PUD permit procedure they will need only to get a building permit. '~ Cw Tirse1l commented that at the time of the PUD permit procedure she was not on the Councilor the P.C. and would like some informa- tion as to the types of standards for development and what types of guidelines were used for those PUD permits? Mr. Musso explained that the PUD permits were used as a commitment by the City for a development beyond the normal one or two years for a tentative subdivision map. In nearly every instance the City used the basic zoning as the standard for the guidelines. CM-30-l85 July 14, 1975 (P.H. re OS-UR Dist.) Mr. Musso noted that the City did gain some open space from time to time in granting the PUD permits and achieved some variety in housing, but not much - the housing is rather conventional. Originally a PUD permit was for about 10 years but then the City tried to tie them to approval of the subdivision map to eliminate the problem of having a permit expire with a valid map, or when the map expired having a valid permit. This approach did not seem to be successful either. i'J Cm Tirsell wondered if there are parcels where there is density in conflict with the General Plan and where the General Plan would be jeopardized by using the PUD procedure. Mr. Musso stated that there are a few small parcels and one large parcel where the OS-UR District would be in conflict because of the PUD permit, which he illustrated on the map. Prior to opening the public hearing, Mayor pro tempore Miller stated that a letter supporting the recommendations of the Planning Commis- sion was received from Johnny Reikert as well as a letter from Cm. Dahlbacka expanding upon his objections to the rezonings to OS-UR. Mayor pro tempore Miller stated that Cm Dahlbacka expresses concern that there are no real standards for the CUP and about pressure for changes and that the rezoning might not be appropriate. MAYOR PRO TEMPORE MILLER OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME. Albert W. Strang, 5348 University Avenue, San Diego, California, Secretary of Palomar Financial, owner of 400-500 acres of land in the Springtown area, commented that his company has historically been involved, involuntarily, through foreclosures of loans made in 1962 and 1963. They have used valuations in density rights that existed in 1963 and 1964 and the density has since been reduced from 4.5 d.u./acre to 3 d.u./acre, and they have been caught in the moratorium because of sewer and water problems and a moratorium because of the specific plan for the General Plan. It would appear that the City intends to impose a further restrictive device and economic use of this land would not be possible. He noted that they recently sold property for $20,000 that had been assessed at a value of $l20,000 two years prior to the sale. This is just one illustration of what is happening to the economic and zoning climate of this area. He stated that there is one density transfer in this area but there appears to be no protection for it and there is no assurance that development could be made at 3 d.u./acre where it does exist and he would oppose any effort that would make it more difficult to utilize and develop the property. Mr. Strang stated that at some point the question should be asked, "what would have happened if our forebearers had placed similar restrictions on land use?". If they had we wouldn't be here. Carol Jess, 2021 Buckskin Road, representative of the I-580 Group, indicated that they would like to know what the rezoning would do to their bike paths and parks as well as the shopping center on Portola Avenue. Mr. Musso explained that the parks and bike paths have been budgeted for this year and would not be affected but there is some conflict where the shopping center is concerned because there is a request ~ for rezoning from residential to neighborhood commercial to allow the portola Shopping Center. At this point in time the shopping center would not be allowed because it is still zoned residential. CM-30-l86 July 14, 1975 (P.H. re OS-UR Dist.) Henry Bettencourt, Danville realtor, stated that it is his understand- ing that under the OS-UR zoning a property owner can apply for any type of use but asked if this means that it would still have to comply with the master plan. The Council indicated that this is correct. L) Chester Anderson, 1570 Portola, stated that he would like to review the maps indicating the location of the OS-UR properties and the report from the Planning Commission. He stated that he understands this would be property within the City limits and has nothing to do with property located in the County and he was advised that this is true. Prior to closing the public hearing the Council discussed whether or not the item should be continued until Cm Turner and Mayor Futch could be present. It was concluded that this matter would be post- poned and the date would be determined after some discussion and further public testimony. Francis Harper, 5691 Oakmont Circle, representative of the No. I-580 Citizens Group, stated that she feels people can't decide what should happen in this area unless they have seen the General Plan because plans must conform with the General Plan. She added that her group has requested a copy of the General Plan and they were told that there was not one available. Mr. Musso explained that he believes Mrs. Harper is speaking about the task reports and that this is not the General Plan. Mayor pro tempore explained that the City does have a General Plan; however, it is under revision. OS-UR would allow development, subject to approval of the City Council, but it must be in conformance with the General Plan which exists at the time someone applies for a permit. It was noted that there are copies of the General Plan available at the Library but this would be the current General Plan. The revised General Plan is being written and probably will not be available until about September. Mr. Musso stated that for the record he would like to comment that on this rezoning the Ordinance procedure was followed with notification made to every property owner who might be affected by the rezoning and every property owner within 300 ft. of an area that might be affected. Every property owner within the area being considered was also sent a copy of the staff report with a map and staff recommendations. ~ Mayor pro tempore Miller noted the parcels that were OS-A and indicated that in his opinion they should remain OS-A. He added that he is still concerned about questions raised by Cm Dahlbacka. He has been involved in PUD permits since the first one was approved and that he feels none of them have brought anything to the City and that almost all of them have caused the City to lose standards. When there are not standards there are arguments and negotiations and things which should be kept by the City are given away. He stated that he would argue that the City needs to amend the OS-UR to require that any resi- dential development permitted must meet at least the minimum standards of the existing R Zoning, and particularly RS Zoning. Cm Tirsell stated that she feels it is not realistic to zone something OS':'"A if i t ~.' s fe). t:7 A,t~~, ij: ;~i ~,}," ~o~e d~r ~pg.Jl. fl:}anizeii ..,...,,~:rI\~) .'~<ilue of t.~te/OS-UR ~~~filoO'liJ'h$tio~..&<firban/~ ~n ~~1..'c'\:irt1lrar area. This is an indication of where growth may take place and for this reason she does favor the OS-UR Zoning, even though she feels uncer- tain about the standards. CM-30-l87 July 14, 1975 'i V} I~J~~c, {)! ~ Q)/- ~ Mayor ~ro te~pore Miller sta1!~p~t wit~ re~pect to the ?S-A~ there ~s a d~fference betw~n 7 ~rban~zat~on and urban~zat~on within the next 10-20 years. The lack of sewer, air quality and other conditions are going to be sufficiently sever so as to minimize development north of the freeway for at least 10 years, if at all. If property is zoned OS-A, people can be assessed for land that is agricultural but if it goes to OS-UR with the implica- tion that it will ultimately be developed, there will be trouble in dealing with the assessor. He felt this reasoning should be considered prior to coming to a conclusion. (P.H. Re OS-UR Dist.) !:~ Cw Tirsell pointed out that we are trying to do a plan that will take care of possible development up until 1995, so this must be taken into consideration as well. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND DISCUSSION OF THIS ITEM UNTIL JULY 21, 1975, AT WHICH TIME A FULL COUNCIL IS ANTICIPATED, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CONSENT CALENDAR Res. Establishing Salary Classifications It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution establishing salary classifications for the classified and unclassified employees which has been prepared with the City Council's preliminary budget decisions and approved labor agreements. RESOLUTION NO. 145-75 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE ESTABLISHING A SALARY SCHEDULE FOR THE CLASSIFIED AND UNCLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, ESTABLISHING RULES FOR ITS USE, AND RESCINDING RESOLU- TION NO. 8-75. Minutes Minutes for the Beautification Committee meetings of May 7 and June 2, 1975, were noted for filing. Design Review Committee minutes for the meeting of June 24, 1975, were noted for filing. Report re Arroyo Mocho Bike Path Bids The Director of Public Works reported that Council authorization is requested to call for bids for bikeway improvements along portions of the Arroyo Mocho Park/Trailway. The project is to be partially funded by stat e grants and the monies must be used soon or forfeited. Payroll & Claims There were 74 claims in the amount of $85,943.88 and 321 payroll warrants in the amount of $103,143.l2, for a total of $189,087.00, dated July 1, 1975, and approved by the City Manager. --.../ CM-30-l88 July 14, 1975 APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. L) MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL Cw Tirsell stated that she has heard that the Anderson property rezoning has been delayed at the County level because Mr. Anderson is appearing before LAFCO to withdraw the area from Livermore's Sphere of Influence. It is her understanding that LAFCO has agreed to a hearing scheduled for the 24th of July. Cw Tirsell stated that the letter sent to the Board of Supervisors was excellent and would suggest that the staff direct this letter to the LAFCO members, properly annotated by the mayor, with individual copies to all LAFCO members, and again ask the Chamber of Commerce to submit their letter to the individual members of the LAFCO Board. She also asked that this date be checked to make sure the 24th is the correct date. (COVA) Cw Tirsell stated that she realizes everyone has been reading about the difficulties occurring at COVA with the bylaws and joint powers formerly agreed to and which are presently under revision. She stated that she would like to ask the Councilmembers if any of them would have any objection to having any project in Livermore discussed by the Valley, at any time. Cm Staley and Miller felt there is no reason there should not be discussion of any Livermore project and Cm Miller added that if COVA wishes to discuss a Livermore project they may do so and Livermore still has the power to do as they wish regardless of what is said. Cw Tirsell stated that she felt confident in saying that Livermore willingly submitted the Airport Master Plan for discussion and that she and Mayor Futch really learned a lot from the discussion. (Livermore Gardens) Cm Staley commented that it is his understanding the Livermore Gardens Apartments are to be low income housing units and if this is the case he would question the advertised rents. Mr. Parness replied that the units were approved under a federal program that does qualify for low and moderate income housing, and the amount of rent is beyond the City's purvue. It was mentioned that the advertised rent is $195 for a two bedroom unit. i ~ CM-30-l89 July 14, 1975 (Excessive Speed) Cw Tirsell stated that she has received complaints about excessive speed on Olivina from Hagemann to Murrieta. Apparently cars are traveling at about 50 mph through this area. Cm Miller stated that he has also received repeated complaints about speed on "L" Street. Even with the stop sign at College Avenue, quite a bit of speed can be attained by the time people get to Fourth Street. Cm Miller suggested that the Council ask the staff to contact the Police Department to ask that they concentrate enforcement in these two areas. (~ (Gasoline Prices To Be Made Visible) Cm Miller stated that he has been asked to see what can be done about getting gasoline prices posted so that they are visible from the street. If it is legal to require that prices be posted, this could be an agenda item scheduled for discussion by the Council. (Library Tax) Cm Miller stated that one of the librarians has indicated that books are being taken from the Library by people living outside of the City limits who are not returning the books. He would like to suggest that people outside of the City pay some type of fee for the use of the Library. Cm Miller noted that the City residents pay $15-$20/year in taxes for library services and it would appear reasonable to require people from outside the City to pay the equivalent of the property tax for the use of a library card. Cw Tirsell stated that she agrees with this suggestion, on one hand, but philosophically she does not agree because in her opinion anyone who takes the time to go to the library and check out a book is of benefit to all of us. She would prefer to see that everyone has the opportunity to use the Library and would agree to a fee of per- haps $1 for a library card. Cm Staley felt it is a municipal responsibility to provide educa- tional material for its citizens as well as those outside of the City. If the cost is exorbitant then perhaps something will have to be done in the way of a fine for not returning the book. He added that he feels it is more beneficial for the public to pay for lost books rather than not having them used. The Council agreed that they would be interested in receiving a report showing the statistics concerning the number of lost books during a year. em Staley commented that he feels a decision concerning this issue should take place at the Library Board level with recom- mendations from them to the Council. -..J (Murrieta Closed) Cm Staley stated that since Murrieta will be closed for three days the City should prepare for handling a maximum amount of traffic on the remaining through street - ilL" Street. CM-30-l90 July 14, 1975 (Closing of Murrieta) Mr. Parness stated that everything is being done to accommodate the large amount of traffic that will be using "L" Street. u Cm Staley added that it has been noted that the speed limit for "L" Street is being violated and in view of the fact this is one of the few through streets for Livermore, perhaps the speed limit is too low, temporarily. COMMUNICATION RE BART EXTENSION REPORT A letter containing comments from Robert Allen on the Final Report of the Livermore-BART Extension was submitted to the Council for review. Cw Tirsell stated that she really disagrees with the suggestion that the BART line stop at Pleasanton, if it comes to the valley at all, because the east side of the valley pays more taxes than the west side and has done so for many years because of our popula- tion and tax base. The City Manager was directed to send a letter to the BART Board expressing the views and objections of the Council. REPORT RE FIRE STATION No. 1 SUBCONTRACTOR The City Manager reported that in the bidding process for selection of a contractor for Fire Station No.1, it was discovered that one of the subcontractors was unacceptable - electrical subcontractor Foxx-Lynn Corporation. Our City Attorney's Office undertook an investigation of this company and found that the company was on an unacceptable bidders list by the federal government. The City Attorney felt the City had grounds to recommend that this firm be denied participation in the bid and in the contract work. The Council accepted a staff recommendation to reject the electrical subcontractor and the prime contractor was notified, as was the Foxx-Lynn Corpora- tion, and an alternate subcontractor was selected by the prime con- tractor for this work and the contract has been awarded. One of the principals of Foxx-Lynn Corporation has appealed to the staff regarding this decision and has requested the opportunity to make his appeal before the City Council this evening. Prior to comments made by Mr. Lynn, Mayor pro tempore Miller reviewed the five minute speaking rule policy. Al Lynn, of the Foxx-Lynn corporation, stated that if possible he would like the Council to review his six page report in an execu- tive session and still be allowed the opportunity to speak to the City Council to publicly state his views. Mayor pro tempore Miller commented that the Council would review the report if the City Attorney would advise that this is an executive session matter. L The City Attorney explained that this is an executive session matter only if litigation is threatened in the report and since he hasn't read the report cannot determine if litigation might be involved. He indicated that at this point in time he feels it is not a matter of litigation. CM-30-l9l July 14, 1975 (re Fire Station 1 Contract) Mayor pro tempore Miller explained that legally the Council can hold an executive session only for the purpose of discussing per- sonnel matters or litigation; however, the report can be submitted to the Council on a confidential basis for review and contents of the report will remain confidential. Mr. Lynn can ask for a con- tinuance for one week to allow review of the report and then can address the Council concerning this item. ,\~ Mr. Lynn stated that he would be willing to postpone this item for one week provided the electrical contract remain as is until he has the opportunity to address the City Council. Mayor pro tempore Miller stated that it depends upon how pressing this matter might be. Mr. Parness stated that he would have to talk to the prime contrac- tor, but he has been informed that the electrical subcontract has been transmitted to the new subcontractor. The contract has not been executed by the new subcontractor or returned but it has been issued. If the Council is so inclined, he could be instructed to notify the prime contractor that the Council wishes to hold the electrical subcontract in abeyance for a week. Cm Staley stated that prior to requesting that the new electrical subcontract be held in abeyance for a week, he would like to know more about Foxx-Lynn's position. Mayor pro tempore Miller stated that if Mr. Lynn wishes, the Council can call a 5 minute recess during which time they can review the contents of the report and Mr. Lynn indicated that he would appreciate this because he felt there were a lot of nice people in the Court Chambers and the report applies to only a few people. Mr. Lynn stated that if this is to be his last chance to speak he would request the opportunity to speak before a full Council because if he is going to be denied the contract he would like for each member of the Council to have denied him the opportunity. RECESS Mayor pro tempore Miller called for a five minute recess, after which the Council meeting resumed with all members present, as during roll call. Mayor pro temore Miller stated that the City Attorney has reviewed the report and has advised that it is not a matter to be discussed during an executive session. Mr. Lynn stated that he would like to postpone this matter until a full Council is present. Cw Tirsell commented that at the time this matter was discussed and the bid was awarded, reasons were given to the Council as to why another selection should be made for the electrical con- tract and that at that time a full Council was present. Mr. Lynn stated that the reason he wishes to address the full Council is because Mr. Parness indicated it was the Council option as to whether or not Foxx-Lynn should be notified. He was not notified and his firm was not told that they were being .-/ CM-30-l92 July 14, 1975 u (re Subcontractor - Fire Station No.1) investigated. He added that he can produce people who will testify that they didn't realize questions being asked were serious business. He stated that one of the sad things about this whole situation is that so many people do not have jobs, particularly in his neighborhood, and apparently the person selected for this jOb is moonlighting elec- trical jobs, and is the person who started the rumor that Foxx-Lynn was unacceptable. Cm Staley stated that he would be perfectly willing to postpone this matter for one week at which time a full Council is anticipated but with the understanding that the City will do nothing to hasten the letting of the contract to. another subcontractor, but neither will the City do anything to prevent it. If Mr. Lynn wants to take the chance of waiting another week this should be his option. Mr. Lynn stated that his livlihood is on the line here. Mr. Lynn added, "if I prove that this has been a conspiracy between some people and the Attorney, to get my name removed, being I'm the only black involved", Mayor pro tempore Miller interruped at this point to say that dis- cussions of conspiracy and attacks of members of the City staff are not really very fair. Mr. Lynn stated that he would like to withdraw his accusation. Mr. Lynn continued to say that his company bid for this job because they have people working for them right in the Livermore area and now the job is being taken from them because of things that have been said which are not true. He added that Jim Price of HUD has agreed to send a letter to the Mayor and City Manager explaining that Foxx-Lynn is working very hard to reconcile any alleged differences with HUD. Mayor pro tempore Miller stated that from his viewpoint it is his understanding that Foxx-Lynn is on a list of unacceptable bidders as posted by HUD and in his opinion if somebody is unacceptable to a major public agency they are also unacceptable to a smaller public agency which also spends the public's money. If, by next week Foxx-Lynn has been removed from the unacceptable bidder list, and receive word from HUD in writing, he would be willing to consider the matter again. If Foxx-Lynn is still on the list by the next meeting he would have to believe that the original reasoning of the Council is correct and the City would have to deny them the contract. The Council concluded that if Mr. Lynn can get the prime contractor to wait in letting the contract for one week this would be fine; however, the City will not become involved in asking that the con- tract be held for a week. Mayor pro temore Miller suggested that the contractor be informed of the conversation which has taken place at this meeting so that the City is not asking him to wait a week but that the Council is willing to wait a week without formally requesting such. Mr. Lynn stated that the thing that will get him off the list is a letter to HUD saying that he is being denied the job because he is on such a list. ~., The City Attorney commented that as long as Mr. Lynn has appealed to the Council, the Council must make the decision as to whether or not the City Attorney should be directed to issue a letter to HUD indicating that the job will be rejected because Mr. Lynn's firm appears on the list. CM-30-l93 July 14, 1975 (re Subcontractor - Fire Station No.1) Mr. Logan stated that the decision of what should be done rests with the Council and he does not want to have to be in the posi- tion of saying that Mr. Lynn has been rejected until the Council has stated that he has been rejected. He would like to say that if the Council so directs, he would indicate that the Council is inclined towards rejection based upon the list because the City and HUD are both public agencies and there are public funds in- volved. There is a very strong possibility that Foxx-Lynn will be rejected unless they are off that list in one week. Mr. Lynn stated that in other words, if he is not off the list in one week there is no point in coming before the Council again. u Mayor pro tempore Miller commented that first of all Mr. Lynn has already been rejected and that the Council is willing to listen to his appeal; however, if he is not off the list Cm Miller would not vote in favor of Foxx-Lynn receiving the contract. Mayor pro tempore Miller reminded Mr. Lynn that there is some risk involved in a weeks delay because the Council is willing to wait but Mr. Lynn will have to work out delay of the contract with the prime contractor. It was also explained that if it happens that Mr. Lynn is rein- stated and during the interim the contract is let to the new contractor there would be nothing the City could do - if he is reinstated it does not mean automatically that he will get the contract but that the Council will reconsider. Mr. Logan stated that he feels he should explain something for clarification. He has spoken with all of the attorneys for HUD at the same time and when Mr. Lynn talks about being cleared it is his right to a hearing and consideration of his appeal to HUD that he should not be on the list - not that HUD has evidence that will exonerate him from being suspended on the list - there is a big difference. What HUD people are talking about is allowing Mr. Lynn the hearing. It is true that they should have given him the hearing a long time ago because he asked for it in a timely manner and unfortunately he was not given the hearing at a sooner date. Mr. Logan then read Code of Federal Regulations, 24 CFR, Part 24ll, which deals with the suspension list, for informa- tional purposes. He added that the hearing is to determine whether or not the suspension should be a permanent debarment from HUD. Mr. Lynn stated that he has been contacting HUD to find out why he has been suspended and apparently they don't have the evidence because they keep reinvestigating the matter. Mayor pro tempore Miller stated that regardless of the problems Mr. Lynn is having with HUD, the City must follow prudent business practices for the City of Livermore and he would agree that the problems Mr. Lynn has are unfortunate. Unfortunately, Mr. Lynn's suspension makes it impossible for him, personally, to vote in favor of Mr. Lynn's appeal. He added that it is his responsibility as a Councilmember to see that the public's money is expended wisely. Cm Staley commented that before Mr. Lynn could expect a vote in favor of his appeal he would have to be removed from the suspension list and echoed the same comments expressed by Cm Miller with respect ~ to expenditure of public funds. CM STALEY MOVED TO CONTINUE FURTHER DISCUSSION UNTIL JULY 21ST, DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO COMMUNICATE WITH THE CONTRACTOR AS TO TONIGHT'S DISCUSSION WITH A FINAL DECISION TO BE MADE ON THE 21ST WITH NO RECOMMENDATION TO THE CONTRACTOR AS TO THE PROJECT. CM-30-l94 July 14, 1975 (re Subcontractor - Fire Station No. l) ALSO INCLUDED IN THE MOTION WAS THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY BE DIRECTED TO WRITE A LETTER INDICATING THAT IT WOULD BE A CONDITION PRECEDENT FOR THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER THE APPEAL, THAT MR. LYNN BE REMOVED FROM THE UNACCEPTABLE LIST AT HUD, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. ~ Mr. Lynn stated that he is asking the City Attorney to write a letter saying that he was denied the contract because his firm is on the list - a letter just that short. Mr. Logan explained that the Council was informed of this and was aware of the facts at the time they voted to deny the contract with Foxx-Lynn. As to the motives or intent at the time the vote was taken should not be answered. Secondly, this is factual evidence that is supportable legally for the denial and this is what he will inform HUD about at the same time he writes the letter to them. Mr. Lynn stated that he wants the Council to tell him why he was denied the contract and he feels the Council should say why as well as to present the reason in writing. Mayor pro tempore Miller stated that the letter will indicate that the City received information that Foxx-Lynn was on the unacceptable list and this was among the considerations of the City Council. Mr. Lynn stated that the word "among" means there could be other reasons and asked for an explanation of the other reasons. The City Attorney replied that it was the recommendation of the City Manager and City staff that Foxx-Lynn be rejected and probably the only consideration was the list. The Council accepted the recom- mendation; the minutes will reflect what action was taken. Mayor pro tempore Miller stated that the minutes are the official records for the City and they will say what action transpired and that Mr. Lynn may review them if he so desires. Also, the City will be happy to send a copy of the minutes of the meeting in which the rejection was made for HUD's review. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT RE EXXON PROPERTY BEAUTIFICATION The City Manager reported that there is a small piece of property located at the corner of Murrieta Boulevard and portola Avenue which the Beautification Committee suggested for beautification purposes because it is at an en trace to the City. This property does not belong to the City and it was suggested that the property be purchased for this purpose (adjacent to Exxon) . Mr. Parness has contacted Exxon concerning their attitude as to its purchase and the Exxon people indicated that they were not interested in selling it but they would be willing to listen to the City's offer concerning lease of the property. It is recommended that a motion be adopted authorizing the staff to prepare a lease for transmittal to the firm. '-- ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY, AND UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE CITY MANAGER WAS DIRECTED TO REFER THIS MATTER BACK TO THE BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE INCLUDING THE COST OF A LEASE. CM-30-l95 July 14, 1975 RES. AUTH. EXEC. OF AGREE. - HORIZONS The staff has recommended that a resolution be adopted authoriz- ing execution of agreement for the HORIZONS YO~th Ser~ices Center. The Criminal Justice grant is for $40,000 and ~s fund~ng for the third year of the program. ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION NO. 147-75 J A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING GRANT AGREEMENT REPORT RE SUPER- VISORIAL REDISTRICTING Mr. Parness reported that the matter of supervisorial redistricting was presented at the Mayors Conference a couple of weeks ago by Supervisor Bates and his report has been copied for information to the Council. This report will be discussed at a public meeting tomorrow before the Board of Supervisors. The notice received from the County is that no action will be taken by them and that it is informational in nature; however it is his understanding that a formal vote will be taken by the Board at the August 5th meeting. If the Council has any feelings on anyone of the alternatives perhaps this should be discussed at either the meeting of July 21st or 28th. Cw Tirsell commented that in her opinion Oakland is still carved in a very strange manner. Mr. Parness stated that it is the assumption on the part of the staff that the Board will not consider adding to the number of members on the Board and one of the reasons is that it would require a charter amendment. Mayor pro tempore Miller stated that in his op~n~on the plan which includes Livermore and Castro Valley is reasonable be- cause there is more of a common interest between the two. One of the other plans is to link Livermore with Fremont which does not seem reasonable because Fremont has all of its undeveloped land within the City limits and they have a lot of undeveloped land in their area. He would suggest that we ask the Supervisors to propose a first district like Plan VI and do as they please with the other four. Secondly he would recommend that there be seven supervisors on the ballot for the 1976 ballot. Cw Tirsell commented that the problem with Plan VI is that it covers the entire east side of the hilly area. Mayor pro tempore Miller stated that perhaps we should say we would like something like Plan VI which would contain Castro Valley AND SO MOVED. ALSO INCLUDED IN THE MOTION WAS THAT THERE SHOULD BE SEVEN SUPERVISORS LISTED ON THE 1976 BALLOT, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. G P.C. MINUTES Minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of July 1, 1975, were noted for filing. CM-30-l96 July l4, 1975 WEEKLY STATUS REPORT - CITY MANAGER New Subdivision o The City has received notice that K&B Homebuilders will file a small subdivision at the corner of Charlotte Way and East Avenue - approximately 7 acres and 32 lots. Housing & Comm. Develop. Application The Housing and Community Development application we participated in with the County has been approved. There will be a meeting held this week with the staff so as to be informed about what the next order of proceeding will be. There are a few critical issues to be cleared with respect to our portion of the grant but it is good to know that it has finally been approved. First Street For the first time in many years, last Friday and Saturday night, foot patrolling of First Street was used. The Police Chief has indicated that this method worked very well. Two uniformed officers walked the streets using proper psychology on the juveniles. Appar- ently this method was very effective and we will continue to employ this method on Friday and Saturday nights for most of the summer. ADJOURNMENT Mayor pro tempore Miller adjourned the meeting at 10:25 p.m. to an executive session to discuss litigation and then to 5:00 p.m. on Monday, July 21, 1975, for further discussion concerning the budget. APPROVE ATTEST CM-30-l97 Special Meeting - July 21, 1975 A special meeting of the City Council was called by Mayor Futch for Monday, July 21, 1975, at 12:00 noon, at 379 So. Livermore Avenue (Library - Cm Staley's Office). The purpose of the meeting was to discuss litigation and other pending litigation. \J Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Staley, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch Absent: None The meeting convened at 12:10 p.m. and immediately adjourned to an executive session. The meeting adjourned at 1:00 p.m. ATTEST cJ',d. I/tdt//~ . Mayor - ~{(~ J'- C~ ty Clerk vt.ivermore, California /!' APPROVE Regular Adjourned Meeting of July 21, 1975 An adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on Monday, July 21, 1975, at 5:00 p.m., in the Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The Councilmembers met with the City Manager and the Director of Finance to discuss those budget matters which were not finally settled at the Budget Session of June 28, 1975. The meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. APPROVE &~f~/ ATTEST Mayor /' ' ~" j" , i, /,' ,-" /(/, / '--'Gllf j U7'-A.-'" -t' {i "J_______ ", t'" . City Clerk (; Ii . Livermore, California -..-/ CM-30-l98 Regular Meeting of July 2l, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on July 21, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:20 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 Councilmemhers as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. MINUTES July 8, 1975 Page 171, third paragraph from bottom should read: Cm Miller commented that in the past...etc. Page 171, last paragraph, First line should read: Cw Tirsell felt the Community Affairs Committee should be thanked by letter...etc. Page 173, fifth paragraph from the bottom, 6th line should begin: store. Because of the problem of the Louis Shopping Center being so close to the Lucky Shopping Center on Pacific Avenue, there will probably continue to suffer bad uses in these shopping centers. There is not the market to keep both shopping centers...etc. ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, (Cm Turner abstaining due to absence) THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF JULY 8, 1975, WERE APPROVED, AS CORRECTED, WITH THE DISCUSSION OF THE LOUIS SHOPPING CENTER TO BE SENT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. P.H. RE 1975-76 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET A public hearing has been set for the purpose of allowing public comments concerning the proposed budget for the 1975-76 fiscal year. The total amounts by major expenditure category, tentatively set by the City Council are as follows: General Government Municipal Enterprises Capital Outlay $4,911,974 1,840,947 5,072,255 Total $11,825,176 Cm Turner inquired about the hotel tax and Mr. Parness explained that the budget assumes there will be a 10% tax increase for hotel- motel occupancy. However, in the event the Council decides not to raise the rate to that extent, the budget would have to be modified and replacement revenues found later. Mayor Futch opened the public hearing at this time. /~) THERE BEING NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY, ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. ,---,' It was noted that there was public at the budget session held earlier people attended the session. testimony made by two ci~zens by the Council, and thatA~[ny ,\ .~)\{) . \\}\.Vr\~0J\J ' \~ yvv \0>",\ CM-30-200 July 21, 1975 (re Budget) CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 1975-76 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 148-75 u A RESOLUTION APPROVING 1975-76 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET P.H. RE CHARGES FOR WEED ABATEMENT The weed abatement work has been completed, the billings have been mailed and the amounts must now be confirmed. Payments can be made until August 8, 1975. Mayor Futch opened the public hearing for public testimony con- cerning weed abatement charges. THERE BEING NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENTS FOR tmED ABATEMENT, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL, AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 149-75 A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENTS - WEED ABATEMENT CONTINUED P.H. RE REZONING TO OS-UR Mayor Futch opened the public hearing regarding possible amendment to the Zoning Ordinance with respect to OS-UR District, which was continued from the meeting of July 14th. Mr. Musso explained that last week the Council discussed the various reasons for recommendations made by the Planning Commission concern- ing the OS-UR District, including the recommendation to rezone most of the area now zoned PD to the OS-UR District as well as some agri- cultural area and other areas. There were some properties involved in density transfers and some isolated properties that the P.C. felt should not be rezoned. The primary discussion centered around whether or not some of the properties involved in possible long range develop- ment should be maintained in their present OS-A Zoning rather than to go to the OS-UR. Mr. Musso commented that the OS-UR District is primarily for agri- cultural use but commercial, industrial and residential uses can be requested, with a PUD permit, and can be allowed as long as the use conforms with the General Plan. The present OS-A allows only agricultural use with no exception. SINCE THERE WERE NO COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC AT THIS TIME, ON MOTION - OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Cm Miller noted that he has a conflict of interest concerning Parcel ilO, which is the Ensign-Bickford property within 300 ft. of his residence. He would therefore request that this parcel be deleted from the discussion and if there is a vote relative to that parcel he will abstain. CM-30-20l July 21, 1975 (re OS-UR District) Cw Tirsell pointed out that at last week's meeting the Council was in substantial agreement with the recommendations of the P.C. with the exception that the Council deleted some additional areas from the proposed OS-UR Zoning and would suggest that any areas in which the Council differed in opinion, should be voted on separately. iJ CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT ASSIGNMENTS OF OS-UR TO PROPERTIES, AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND THAT FURTHER DELETIONS BY THE COUNCIL WILL BE HANDLED BY AMENDMENT, SECONDED BY CM STALEY. Cm Miller suggested that the Planning Commission be directed to amend OS-UR by saying that the minimum standards for development will be RS, RG, etc. The City Attorney recommended that he feels the motion made by Cw Tirsell is premature if the Council intends to talk about amendments and suggested that the Council talk about the amendments. If the P.C. recommendation is amended the Council should refer the matter back to them for a report. em Staley stated that rather than to consider the entire P.C. action, could only the parcels amended by the Councilor ques- tioned be referred back to the P.C.? Mr. Logan stated that the recommendation of the P.C. is based on the whole so this is what the Council must be responsive to. The Council concluded that they would begin discussion of Par- cels #1 through #9, with Mr. Musso illustrating the areas on the map. CW TIRSELL WITHDREW THE MOTION MADE EARLIER AND CM STALEY WITH- DREW HIS SECOND ON THAT MOTION. Cm Staley explained that the P.C. recommendation was for change to OS-UR for Parcel #1 and for no change for Parcels #2 through #5. Parcel #1 is owned by the National Association and #2 through #5 is in the Wagoner Farms area, #6 is Wells Fargo in the Trevarno area and #7 is property located behind Madera Way. Parcel #8 is the Standard gasoline station site, and #9 is the proposed shopping center site (Portola Avenue . Mayor Futch stated that #1 is recommended for OS-UR, no change on parcels #2 through #5 and OS-UR again for #6 through #9. CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATION BY THE PLANNING COM- MISSION FOR PARCELS #1 THROUGH #9, SECONDED BY CM STALEY. Mr. Logan indicated that the Council may vote on groups of par- cels or review them individually because the P.C. may have taken 10-15 lots and made a recommendation but this does not mean that they didn't consider each one separately. Likewise, the Council can take as many as they wish as long as it is felt that each parcel within a category is the proper rezoning. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM STALEY MOVED TO ACCEPT THE P.C. RECOMMENDATION FOR REZONING OF PARCEL #10 TO OS-UR, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL, WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE (Cm Miller abstaining due to conflict of interest). ..-/ Mr. Logan pointed out that for the record the Council is not re- zoning this evening but rather making indications as to how the ordinance should be prepared. CM-30-202 July 21, 1975 (re OS-UR District) The Council then discussed the two parcels located north of Las positas Road just west of First Street near the interchange. CM MILLER MOVED THAT PARCELS #11 and #12 REMAIN OS-A ZONING - MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. u CM TURNER MOVED TO REZONE PARCELS #11 AND #12 TO OS-UR DISTRICT, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL, AND PASSED 4-1 (Cm Miller dissenting) . Mr. Musso then illustrated the location of Parcels #13, #14, #15, and #16, north of I-580 off of Bluebell Drive. CW TIRESLL MOVED TO ADOPT THE P.C. RECOMMENDATION TO REZONE PARCELS #13, #l4, #15, and #16, TO OS-UR DISTRICT, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CM MILLER MOVED THAT PARCELS #17 and #18 (east of Vasco) REMAIN IN THE OS-A DISTRICT BECAUSE IT IS NOT ANTICIPATED THAT URBANIZATION WILL TAKE PLACE IN THIS AREA FOR SOME TIME, SECONDED BY CM STALEY. Discussion followed the motion because the Planning Commission had recommended that this also be rezoned to OS-UR. Cm Staley commented that as he recalls, the majority of the P.C. accepted the consultant's report which strongly recommended that these parcels be rezoned OS-UR because it was felt that this zon- ing would be compatible with what was anticipated with the General Plan report. Cm Miller explained that Parcels #17 and #18 are on the East side of Vasco Road as are #20 and #21 and that he intends to move that #20 and #21 remain OS-A as well. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND. BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, PARCEL #19 WAS REZONED TO OS-UR, AS RECOMMENDED BY THE P.C. Parcel #l9 is located near Broadmoor Street. CM MILLER MOVED THAT PARCELS #20 AND #21, EAST OF VASCO ROAD, REMAIN OS-A, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM STALEY MOVED THAT PARCELS #22, #23, #24, and #25 REMAIN OS-A (located west of Vasco Road near Christensen School) SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Cm Staley stated that he feels the outlying properties are currently involved in agricultural use and contiguous to a plot that has already been zoned OS-A in its entirety and that it would be natural to con- tinue the OS-A zoning in these outlying areas. Mayor Futch stated that his view is somewhat different because the clear dividing line is Vasco Road and Parcels #22 through #25 are partially surrounded by existing development. OS-UR is a type of reserve and he felt they should be rezoned OS-UR. Cw Tirsell stated that she can sympathize with either argument but will probably vote against the motion because of the fact that there is not a natural dividing line such as Vasco Road and there may be application for development. Cm Turner agreed that the property should remain OS-A and does not feel that Vaso Road is a natural dividing line. MOTION PASSED 3-2 WITH CW TIRSELL AND MAYOR FUTCH DISSENTING. CM-30-203 July 21, 1975 (re OS-UR District) Cm Miller stated that in his op~n~on Parcels #26, #27, and #28 are also outlying parcels and should also remain OS-A with anticipated development taking place around the central core of the City. Cw Tirsell felt there would be a real advantage in having these parcels rezoned to OS-UR because they are located between two existing developments, for a sense of community, with which Cm Staley concurred, adding that he would like to see this area fill in. :\J CM MILLER MOVED THAT PARCELS #26, #27, and #28 REMAIN OS-A SBCON- DED BY CM TURNER AND FAILED 2-3 (Cm staley, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch dissenting). CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE P.C. RECOMMENDATION FOR REZONING OF PARCELS #26, #27, and #28, TO OS-UR DISTRICT, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED 3-2 (Cm Miller and Turner dissenting). CW TIRSELL MOVED THAT PARCELS #29, #30, and #31 REMAIN OS-A, SECONDED BY CM STALEY. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, PARCELS #32 through #39 WILL BE REZONED TO OS-UR, AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. This is property owned by Reeder Development and Palomar. The Council next discussed zoning of land in the vicinity of the Junior College, Parcels #40, #41, and #42 (south of the college). CM MILLER MOVED THAT PARCELS #40, #41, and #42 REMAIN OS-A, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE P.C. TO REZONE PARCELS #43, #44, #45, and #46, TO OS-UR (east of Kittyhawk Road), SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Musso commented that Parcels #47 and #48 involve a density transfer. Parcel #47 is in conformance with the General Plan and rezoning to OS-UR would not affect this. Parcel #48, however, has mixed zoning but rezoning to OS-UR would affect the General Plan and the Planning Commission has recommended that there be no rezoning of this parcel. CW MOVED TO REZONE PARCEL #47 to OS-UR AND THAT #48 REMAIN AS IT IS WITH RESPECT TO ITS ZONING, AS RECOMMENDED BY THE P.C., SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE PLANNING COM}1ISSION RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PARCELS #49 THROUGH #78 WERE ADOPTED. Mayor Futch stated that he continues to be concerned about the comments expressed by Cm. Dahlbacka with respect to development standards and would like to suggest that the P.C. prepare a proposed development ordinance as soon as possible, to spell out standards. It was noted that the action by the Council must go back to the Planning Commission for comment. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL SEND ITS DECISIONS, WITH RESPECT TO REZONING TO OS-UR, BACK TO THE P.C. FOR THEIR REPORT, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. -.-./ CM-30-204 I July 21, 1975 (re OS-UR District) CM MILLER MOVED TIlAT THE COUNCIL REQUEST THE P.C. TO AMEND THE OS-UR ORDINANCE TO REQUIRE CERTAIN MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR OS-UR WITH RESPECT TO DEVELOPMENT. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. ~) Cm Turner stated that he would suggest the minimum standards be RS; multiple RG, and that the City make sure that all the standards remain. standards do n ,d"_' s.e~n1rm:mJ ' cttandards:- Cm Miller noted that our existing RS and PUD standards provide fo r a maximum of flexibility and there should be no interference with the intent of OS-UR. from a philosophical ,'"1.::-: . Cm Miller stated that he would like to mention that he is very grate- ful that Cm Dahlbacka recognized this problem and brought it to the attention of the Council. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CONSENT CALENDAR Res. Rejecting Claim A resolution rejecting the claim of Castle & Cooke, Inc., et aI, was adopted by the Council. RESOLUTION NO. 150-75 A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF CASTLE & COOKE, INC., ET AL Res. Rescinding Res. 9-75 The following resolution was adopted rescinding Resolution 9-75: RESOLUTION NO. 151-75 A RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 9-75 (Re: Condemna- tion of Real Property at Concannon Boulevard and Evans Avenue) Res. Approving Tentative Map. #3615 The resolution approving Tentative Map No. 3615 was removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion at the end of the meeting. Minutes Minutes of the Airport Advisory Committee meeting of July 7, 1975, were noted for filing. CM-30-205 Cw Tirsell wished the P.C. would discuss the philosophy of whether~ in fact~ established standards do or do not violate the purpose of the PD Zoning; if not~ then d~s-t cuss standards. ~</~ I July 21, 1975 Departmental Reports Departmental Reports were received, as follows: Airport Activity - June Building Inspection - June *Emergency Services - Quarter Ending June, 1975 Library - Fiscal Year - 1974-75 **Mosquito Abatement - May Municipal Court - May Police and Pound Departments - June Water Reclamation Plant - May and June I \,-~ *It was suggested that a master list of the items located at the disaster hospital be posted at that location. **It was also noted that the Council would like some explanation as to why Livermore is a Mosquito Abatement District and it was suggested that Mr. Jenkins speak to the Council about this item. Cm Staley noted that less than 20% of the operation:; (~10squito Abatement) is going towards control effort while about 75% is going for inspections and support. Payroll & Claims There were 76 claims in the amount of $40,504.01, dated July 21, 1975, and approved by the City Manager. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED, WITH REMOVAL OF ITEM 2.3 RE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 1175. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL (City Hall) Cm Turner stated that while he was traveling on vacation he noticed that regardless of the size of the town he was in they had a nice City Hall. (R. R. project) Cm Turner stated that upon return from his vacation he noticed in the paper that the railroad project is behind schedule and asked about the delay. Mr. Parness indicated that the contractor feels some of the days can be made up and is still working towards December 1, 1975. Cm Miller noted that the contract allows the contractor until next spring to complete the project without penalty. (Livermore Garden Apts.) Cm Turner stated that he doesn't know if anything can be done about the amount of rent for the Livermore Gardens Apartments but they are supposed to be low cost housing and the rent seems too high. CM-30-206 I July 21, 1975 (Livermore Garden Apts.) GmMillcr 61:1EjEjCCltcd tnat tnc staff BRlSn:lla projcct tho aHU31:1st ef gallon.o going t-fifetlfjh- the lines, per day, that. tl.c project sllould pay for thc pipeline in. tnat proportioR. (ACAP/CETA Meeting) u Cw Tirsell reported that at the last ACAP/CETA meeting the final funding for CETA grants were approved. She stated that she pushed very hard, as a Livermore representative, for an employment develop- ment office in the valley and last week a letter was received con- firming the fact that under the EDD contract with CETA for this year, funding will be available for an EDD office in Livermore. (re 7-11 Market on portola Avenue) Mayor Futch asked if the City is required to allow water for the 7-11 Market being constructed on portola Avenue. There was no clear answer as to what is happening concerning water for the use and Mr. Musso noted that he just discovered that Mr. Lounsbury is required to have a new private sewage treatment system as a condition of the permit. This means that if Mr. Lounsbury has connected to the residential septic tank then they are in violation of the permit. It is possible that the permit may have been violated. This matter was referred to the City Attorney. COMPLAINT RE TIE-DOWN FEE A letter was received from Wayne Lawson indicating that he left his airplane at the airport on consignment for sale and because of a domestic dispute the sheriff took possession of the plane and re- quested a particular tie-down are~ that was expensive. The costs for the tie-down must be paid by Mr. Lawson and he feels that the plane should have been stored in an inexpensive and protected area. He has requested adjustment and restitution of the fee be- cause the plane incurred damage. Mr. Lee explained that all arrangements were made by the sheriff who specifically requested the area to be used and who was aware of the fees to be charged. The City does not feel responsible for any damage which may have occurred by such arrangements or the fees involved The letter was noted for filing. REQUEST FOR MECHANICAL PARK SITE - LARPD LARPD has requested that during the time the Airport Advisory Commission studies the Airport Master Plan, requirements for a mechanical park site be considered as part of any land acqui- sition study. ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE MATTER WAS REFERRED TO THE AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMITTEE. CM-30-207 Cm Miller suggested that the Council direct the staff to ask for Livermore's proportion of the total LAVWMA pipeline established. If Pleasanton wants 12 MGD extra~ they pay f9~J.A the pipeline proportionally. ~ I July 21, 1975 COMMUNICATION RE PARAMUTUAL WAGERING A letter was received from California City concerning efforts to amend a constitutional amendment proposing extended para- mutual wagering. , The letter was noted for filing. '\',J PUCNOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC HEARING (California Water Service) The PUC has notified Livermore of a public hearing scheduled for August 11, 1975, at 10:00 a.m. in San Francisco, concern- ing the matter of the application of California Water Service Company for an order authorizing an increase in rates charged for water service in all districts. The notice was noted for filing. RECESS Mayor Futch called for a 5 minute recess, after which the Council meeting resumed with all members of the Council present, (except those excused at the time of convening) . REPORT RE FOX-LYNN SUB- CONTRACT APPEAL RE CON- STRUCTION OF FIRE STATION #1 At the City council meeting of July 14 an appeal was made by Foxx-Lynn Corporation concerning the electrical subcontract work for Fire Station #1. The Council agreed to continue the matter until this evening to allow the appellant the opportunity to provide documents clearing him from the unacceptable list of the federal government. Mr. Parness reported that last week Foxx-Lynn appealed the re- jection of their firm as a subcontractor on the fire station construction work. The rejection was based upon information received from a large federal agency, that Foxx-Lynn has been placed on an unacceptable bidders list. Mayor Futch asked if the Foxx-Lynn Corporation has been removed from the list of disbared, suspended, and unacceptable contractors. Mayor Futch added that at this point the Council is interested in knowing only whether or not Foxx-Lynn has been removed from the list and no other type of information. Al Lynn, of the Foxx-Lynn Corporation stated that at this time he does not know if they have been removed from the list and is supposed to be contacted tomorrow by the HUD people. Mr. Parness reported that according to information the City has received, orally, by the Area Director of HUD, Foxx-Lynn Corpora- tion has not been removed from the list and it may be several weeks before a hearing can be held to determine if they should be removed from the list. Mayor Futch wondered if the replacement subcontractor has signed the contract, and Mr. Parness replied that he has. CM-30-208 July 21, 1975 (re Subcontractor - Fire Station #1) Cm Miller stated that at the meeting of last week the Council indi- cated that they would not consider the appeal unless Foxx-Lynn had been removed from the Hun list. L) FOXX-LYNN HAS NOT BEEN REMOVED FROM THE HUD LIST; THEREFORE CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE APPEAL BE DENIED, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT RE TRACTS 3641 AND 3642 Mr. Musso illustrated the area where the new subdivision is pro- posed (K&B Tract 3641 and 3642) explaining that as far as the design of the subdivision is concerned it was satisfactory and all the con- ditions are standard with no problems associated with the subdivision. The basic question has to be answered as to whether or not the sub- division is to be approved, conditionally approved, or referred back for design. The main issue before the P.C. was whether or not the map should be recommended for approval in light of the City policy concerning sewer allocation. P. C. denial was based on nonconformance with the General Plan since the Subdivision Map Act allows a denial on the basis that it does not conform with the General Plan. The City of Livermore General Plan has provisions relative to adequate schools, adequate water and adequate sewage treatment capacity. Based on City policy the P.C. felt they could not guarantee sewer capacity. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COM- MISSION FOR DENIAL OF THE TRACTS, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Mr. Varni, attorney for the developer requested a continuance of this item so that they may have the opportunity to get a definition of "low cost housing". Cm Miller felt the request for a definition is reasonable but the suggestion to continue is not reasonable because this is a standard subdivision and definitions of low cost housing will not correspond to standard subdivisions. eM TIRSELL WITHDREW HER ORIGINAL MOTION AND MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS MATTER UNTIL AUGUST 18, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cm Staley stated that he has no objections to a delay but wondered about the time limitations. The City Attorney explained that the particular group involved in this matter have already waived any rights to time limitation when they asked for a continuance a couple of weeks ago. By asking for another continuance they reiterate that waiver. Cm Miller stated that he feels Livermore Garden Apartments is not low income housing - this came to Livermore as a low income housing !~~ unit and he does not accept it as such. He stated that he feels that anything which qualifies as low income housing must have some measure of control, directly or indirectly, by our Housing Authority so the City can guarantee that applicants for low income housing are primarily local with local jobs and with income restrictions. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM-30-209 July 21, 1975 REPORT RE PARCEL MAP 1597 - SHAHEEN Mr. Parness reported that with respect to Parcel Map 1597 (Shaheen property located south of Research Drive) there are some factors in dispute concerning the contract for final consideration by the Council. All of the public works improvements have been listed and these have been done in accordance with previous Council approval. The developer asks consideration of the following three items: , ('0 1. The land value is assumed to be $lO,OOO/acre and the develop- er feels $20,000/acre would be more equitable. 2. The term of the benefit district is to be 10 years and the developer requests 15 years. 3. The interest rate for the benefit district is to be 7% per annum and the developer requests that it be 10% or if it is to be 7% he would request that the increase in costs be based on 7% interest or the change in the Construction Cost Index, whichever is more. (The proposed agreement says which- ever is less.) Cm Turner felt that it might be best for Mr. Shaheen to get an appraisal for his property if the $lO,OOO/acre seems unfair. Cw Tirsell wondered if the City is entering into the benefit dis- trict and Mr. Parness explained that the City is involved with respect to the oversized line the City has required. Discussion followed between the Council and Mr. Earl Mason, representing Mr. Shaheen, concerning the term for the benefit district and the interest rate. The City Attorney commented that before the Council can form any local benefit district for this area a revised Subdivision Map Ordinance must be effective. He stated that such an ordinance is basically drafted and is in the process of being typed for review by the Council. Mr. Logan added that he has one basic concern about the Council maki~g decisions at this time, determining the rate and number of years, etc., which is that first of all the Council will have to know what the ordinance requires that the City must do. As he recalls there is a requirement for some type of public hearing in ord~r for property owners to give testimony and where they can protest if they do not want to be part of a benefit district. Failure to comply could create problems of due process in collec- tion from future developers or owners of property in that area. If the agreement is found to be inconsistent with what the ordi- nance requires, the Council woulQ be subject to the ordinance. Mayor Futch wondered if the Council could vote on separate items such as approval of the subdivision map and requiring separate actions for the benefit district. Mr. Logan suggested that to alleviate some of the concerns on both sides, the Council could approve the agreement the way it is written but indicate that the formulation in Exhibit A is an intent of the Council at this time, rather than to make any final decision because the decision may have to change as a result of the Subdivision Ordinance. CM-30-2l0 July 21, 1975 f'\ '\~ (re Shaheen Property) Cm Miller stated that he would want to include the condition that formation of a benefit district costs be borne entirely by the developers and the cost of maintaining the district be estimated and charged to the developers. Mr. Logan explained that the City is still agreeing to set up a benefit district which doesn't affect the developer's ability to recover but rather affects only the ability to recover under a specific formula. Mr. Logan asked that he be allowed to form a final sentence for adoption by the Council and the Mayor indicated that this would be agreeable. Mayor Futch commented that the City Attorney is advising the Council not to discuss the terms of the benefit district until the Council has seen the ordinance. Mr. Logan suggested dropping the whole formulation and to delete the last sentence which would mean that the only thing the City is doing is agreeing that upon the passage of a subdivision map ordinance the benefit district will be created and at that time the terms can be negotiated. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION, STRIKING THE LAST SEN- TENCE OF THE AGREEMENT, AND TO INCLUDE A SENTENCE TO SEC. 14, TO SAY THAT A REASONABLE FEE BE DETERMINED BY THE CITY MANAGER AND SHALL BE PAID TO THE CITY BY CONTRACT FOR THE COSTS INVOLVED IN THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A LOCAL BENEFIT DISTRICT, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cm Staley asked for clarification as to what the Council is voting on and Cm Miller explained that the resolution is to enter into an agreement which has the last sentence deleted and another sentence added. The City Attorney explained that striking the last sentence of the agreement automatically eliminates the Local Benefit District Section in Exhibit A. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 152-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREE- MENT (R. L. Shaheen Company) REPORT RE PROPOZED ZONE 7 CONTRACT AMEND. Zone 7 has proposed that the water supply agreement be modified to permit annual rate adjustments. The current agreement restricts changes to five year terms and the Council directed the City Attorney to report back to them on this proposal. The City Attorney reported that no police power has been exercised by Zone 7 to obligate the City to enter into an agreement that would allow for annual rate adjustments and that basically this is a policy consideration. It was noted that the current agreement will be effective for an additional five years and that there cannot be a rate change for this length of time. CM-30-2ll July 21, 1975 (Zone 7 Contract Amend.) The Council concluded that there would be no advantage to the City in allowing the annual rate adjustment; however, when the current contract expires they may give consideration to yearly adjustments. CM TURNER MOVED TO TABLE THIS ITEM, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. Mr. Parness suggested that an appropriate motion might be for the Council to direct him to so notify Zone 7. CW TIRSELL WITHDREW HER SECOND FROM THE MOTION TO ALLOW FURTHER DISCUSSION, ALLOWING MOTION TO DIE FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Cm Staley commented that the Council voted unanimously last week to inform Zone 7 that the Council would talk to them about this matter in four years - action was taken last week and further action is not required. REPORT RE CUP APP. TO ALLOW AUTOMOTIVE RE- PAIR & PARTS SALES IN CO DISTRICT - ACORD Invest. The Planning Commission has reviewed an application for a CUP to allow ACORD Investors to conduct the business of automotive repairs and sales of parts in the CO District, at a site located on the south side of Olivina Avenue near "P" Street. The report from the Planning Commission recommended denial of the application on the basis that the required findings could not be made, particularly effects on abutting property and con- ditioning the use. Mr. Musso gave history concerning the zoning for this area, noting that the property already has a variance to allow retail sales to encroach so the issue is not really the retail sales but rather primarily the auto service. The P.C. looked at this particular use and felt that the activity would be detrimental to adjacent property, particularly with respect to noise that would be generated by auto service. A communication was received from G. Werner, Olivina Avenue, who favors the development of the automotive store. Cw Tirsell stated that she would disagree with the recommenda- tion of the P.C. for denial of the application and would agree with the staff recomm~~~~...j:l19J; conditional approval be d"-' ' t,;~>. given. She stated that^'t.he~ois~ Abatement Committee took readings for noise levels in that area and it was felt that additional noise would not be noticeable and that the noise would not be detrimental. She added that she was also inter- ested in the staff recommendation for reorientation of the building. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO CON- DITIONALLY APPROVE THE APPLICATION, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. James Hillman, attorney representing ACORD Investors, ex- plained that each nearby resident was contacted and asked if they would object to the proposed use of the property by Montgomery Wards and that people did not object to this use. They obtained signatures of 28 nearby residents who favored the use. The petition with the signatures was then handed to the Council. CM-30-2l2 July 21, 1975 (CUP App. - ACORD Invest.) ~\ ~/) Jack Acord, partner with ACORD Investors, stated that this property has already been approved to be developed for uses in a small neigh- borhood shopping center. Their plot plan and elevations indicate where their buildings will be located and the zone line but the P.C. felt there might be too much noise generated from the use. He added that all of the building lines have been approved, and normally they would just apply for a building permit; however because Wards has a tire, battery and accessory testing area (TBA) they need to obtain a CUP. Mr. Acord commented that they did consider turning the building around, as suggested by the staff, but they find that this would not be feasible. He stated that the P.C. seemed to be confused about what services would be taking place at the automotive center and asked that Mr. Ashenfelder be allowed to explain the services. Mr. Ashenfelder explained that Wards will be dealing with battery testing, tires and shock absorbers and they will be doing nothing heavy such as installation of mufflers, tailpipes or overhauls and that they will not be engaged in heavy automobile repair. The store will be primarily a catalog store open until 5:00 or 6:00 p.m. and closed on Sundays. Mr. Ashenfelder then explained the full operations to take place and illustrated where the various services will be located. CW TIRSELL ADDED TO THE MOTION THAT THE REQUIREMENT FOR REORIENTATION OF THE BUILDING BE DELETED BUT TO ENCOMPASS THE REMAINING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, APPROVING EXHIBIT B, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cm Staley stated that he was in favor of the motion until the staff recommendation for orientation of the building was deleted and that he favors the recommendation for orientation because he feels it would be beneficial to the neighbors from a noise standpoint. Discussion followed concerning Exhibit "B" and Exhibit "C" and opin- ions expressed as to why one or the other would be more favorable. John Kohat, 1566 Chestnut, stated that he has lived in this neigh- borhood for 19 years and that the noise level is very high but he would be highly in favor of the Council allowing the Wards store to be developed, as proposed. Cm Miller stated that he appreciates the op~n~on of the neighbors and the fact that all of them feel the proposal is perfectly reason- able; however he does not agree with the staff recommendation to approve the use. He explained that he does not want commercial development to expand and does feel that the CO Zoning is the proper buffer for adjacent residential units. He stated that he feels expansion of commercial will untimately be detrimental and agrees with the recommendation of the P.C. to deny the application. However, if the Council intends to vote against the P.C. recommenda- tion he feels that the placement of the building, as recommended by the staff, is more reasonable. Cm Turner stated that he is in favor of the motion and with respect to Council concern about being pressured for development if it is allowed, he feels there is pressure everyday for development in areas where development is not allowed. MOTION PASSED 3-2 (Cm Miller and Staley dissenting) . CM-30-2l3 July 21, 1975 (CUP App. - ACORD Invest.) Mr. Musso commented that during the discussion it was implied a number of times that the Planning Commission did not know what it was doing and did not understand and this is not true. The P.C. was fully informed and aware of everything proposed but the ordinance does not provide for "auto repair" in this type of zoning. RESOLUTION NO. 153-75 A RESOLUTION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: ACORD INVESTORS P.C. MINUTES The Planning Commission minutes for the meetings of July land July 15, 1975, were noted for filing. REPORT RE MAYORS FORMULA DISTRIBUTION The City Manager reported that the County requires transmittal of approved forms and a map indicating local street projects proposed for application of Mayors Formula gas tax distribution. These projects proposed will be in accordance with capital outlay sections of our current budget. It is recommended that a resolu- tion approving the project list and map be adopted. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION NO. 154-75 A RESOLUTION APPROVING PROJECT LIST AND MAP FOR MAYOR'S FORMULA DISTRIBUTION FISCAL 1975-76 RES. RE WATER FUND FRANCHISE INCREASE It is recommended that the Council approve an increase in the fran- chise payment from the City Water Fund from the current l% to 5% which would result in an $8,000 increase, in accordance with the approved fiscal year budget. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE lNCREASE WAS APPROVED. RESOLUTION NO. 155-75 A RESOLUTION SETTING FRANCHISE FEE (City Water Department) Cw Tirsell commented that the reason she voted for the motion is because the Water Fund is a utility provided with no choice for those users in the area it is provided - it is not an amenity. ORD. RE MUNI. CODE AMEND. - HOTEL TAX INCREASE The matter of the proposed hotel transient occupancy tax increase was postponed from the meeting of July 8th. The proposal is for an increase from the existing 5% to 10%, resulting in an increase of $40,000. CM-30-2l4 June 21, 1975 (re Hotel/Motel Tax) A letter protesting the proposed increase was submitted by the six motel operators of the City of Livermore in which it was noted that Dublin charges no tax at all and Pleasanton charges only 5%. \ ''----~ Mr. Parness explained that the matter has been continued to this meeting because at the time it was first on the agenda a full Council was not present. CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE RESOLUTION BE DENIED. MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE HOTEL TRANSIENT TAX BE INCREASED FROM 5% TO 6%, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cw Tirsell stated that she would be in favor of an increase from 5% to 7% and em Staley felt an increase to 6.5% would be reasonable. AT THIS TIME THE MOTION AND SECOND WERE WITHDRAWN. CM MILLER MOVED TO INCREASE THE HOTEL TRANSIENT TAX FROM 5% TO 6.5%, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. Duane Beck, Sales Manager for the Holiday Inn, stated that an increase that will be passed on to the customers will definitely hurt their business because people will go to Pleasanton or Dublin if rates are lower. He stated that if there is to be an increase he feels 6% should be adequate because this is the tax for motels in the Bay Area. Marcel Chaparteguy, of the El Dorado Motel, urged that the tax not be any higher than 6%. Mayor Futch explained that the City does not want to have to levy a tax for the motel operators but the City is digging deep into its reserve funds to operate the City and the hotel tax is one of the few ways in which the City can obtain additional funds. Cm Turner stated that he feels it is very important that Livermore remain competitive with Dublin and Pleasanton and also feels that the 5% tax is probably sufficient. He stated that people do check the prices of motels and in his opinion it is wrong to raise the tax. CW TIRSELL WITHDREW HER SECOND TO THE MOTION AND CM MILLER WITHDREW THE MOTION. CM MILLER MOVED TO INCREASE THE HOTEL TRANSIENT TAX FROM 5% to 6%, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. David Castro, 2276 Chestnut Street, stated that he is happy to see the tax increase for motels because the Livermore residents will be taxed for sewage. Cm Miller explained that all of us have to pay the increased sewer service charge, as do all businesses. The motels are not being exempted from the increased sewer service charge. The City does not like increasing the sewer service charge but we are being forced by the EPA, the state and Regional Water Quality Control Board to have the expensive sewer plants which require the increased fee. Cm Staley stated that he can sympathize with the motel operators but the increase to 6% will result in additional $8,000 to the City and the City really has little choice but to ask for the additional 1%. CM-30-2l5 July 21, 1975 (re Hotel/Motel Tax) Cm Turner stated that he feels it is wrong to place an additional tax on the motels when the City will gain only $8,000. The $8,000 will do little for the City of Livermore and it may really hurt the business of the motels. INCLUDED IN THE MOTION WAS THAT THE ORDINANCE BE INTRODUCED AND READ BY TITLE ONLY. MOTION PASSED BY A 4-1 VOTE (Cm Turner dissenting) . ORD. RE SEWER SERVICE CHARGE FORMULA - INDUS- TRIAL SURCHARGE The introduction of the ordinance concerning sewer service charge formula was postponed from the meeting of July 8th so that the staff could gather additional information as to the EPA regula- tions and whether they postdate the award of the construction grant for our treatment plant. Mr. Lee submitted written information for the Council and it was noted that the attachment of the agreement requires compliance with federal regulations. It is felt that the ordinance amendment will bring the City into compliance with federal regulations and it is recommended that such an ordinance be adopted. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE ORDINANCE RELATING TO RATES WAS INTRODUCED AND READ BY TITLE ONLY. ITEM REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR - RES. RE PARCEL MAPS A resolution approving Tentative Subdivision Map 3615, (Castilleja III) has been drawn in accordance with a Superior Court writ of Mandate. The City Attorney explained that the reason he asked that this item be removed from the Consent Calendar was to inform the Council that they are ordered by the court to approve the map. Failure to approve the map could result in some action by the Superior Court of Alameda County. He stated that he would like the records to clearly indicate that approval is based upon a court order and not upon anything else. Cw Tirsell wondered if Castilleja III is officially a condominium complex and Mr. Muss9~ePlie that it is. , o&.!'~- Cm Miller stSii~that t e park dedication is complete only insofar as the City a judgment but the judgment is being appealed. He added that the City does not have full dedication of the park and the portion missing is the Sally property that Gillice is trying to take from the City. Mr. Logan commented that Madis, the attorney for Gillice has not perfected the appeal, explaining that he had a certain number of days in which to file a notice of an intent to appeal, which he filed properly. He then has so many days in which to file the first brief which he has not done and that time has expired. CM-30-2l6 July 21, 1975 (re Tentative #3615 - Castilleja III) The City Attorney added that the 44 acres has nothing to do with the property that the Council must approve under the Court order. \, "'-- ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE COUNCIL ADOPTED A RESOLUTION APPROVING TENTATIVE SUB- DIVISION 3615. RESOLUTION NO. 156-75 A RESOLUTION APPROVING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP NO. 3615 SELECTION OF PLAN- NING COMMISSIONER Mayor Futch stated that the Council should be thinking about what they want to do in the way of selecting a new Planning Commissioner and suggested that the list not be limited to those who previously applied because other people have indicated that they are interested in being interviewed. Cw Tirsell stated that she also would like to leave the list open. Cm Miller stated that he is opposed to adding more names because this would be unfair to those who applied within the time limit. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO CONTINUE TO TURN IN APPLICA- TIONS FOR AN APPOINTMENT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, SECONDED BY MAYOR FUTCH FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES. Cm Staley commented that first of all, people have already been interviewed and if more applications are received and interviews conducted, it will have been 90 days since the first people were interviewed and a selection made. Cm Miller stated that he has been through this before and when the Council allowed more names to be submitted and interviews conducted after the first group, it turned out to be a bad exper- ience. He would agree that everyone who submitted an application before this time should be allowed an interview but not to begin receiving additional applications. Cm Turner suggested that of the seven applicants, if there cannot be a unanimous decision among the Council for the selection of one of the seven he would then suggest that the City ask for additional applications. CM STALEY MOVED TO POSTPONE THIS ITEM UNTIL AUGUST 18th, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Futch adjourned the meeting at 11:45 p.m. APPROVE ~)lU/ Mayor /- ATTEST ..iAc )k~-, / .'.......Ci ty Clerk Livermo~~, California CM-30-2l7 Regular Meeting of July 28, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on July 28, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:07 p.m. with Mayor pro tempore Turner presiding. ROLL CALL Present: Cm Miller, Staley, Turner and Cw Tirsell Absent: Mayor Futch (Excused for Business Reasons) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor pro tempore Turner led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. POSTPONEMENT OF ITEM RE KISSELL CONTRACT Mayor pro tempore Turner commented that he would like to mention that the attorney for the Kissell Company has requested that Item 5.1 of the agenda be postponed until August 4th, in case someone from the audience is interested in this item. ~1INUTES July 8, 1975 Page 187, last paragraph, line three should read: the OS-UR is a declaration of intended urbanization in an agricultural area. Page 188, first paragraph, second line should read: there is a difference between ultimate urbanization and urbanization...etc. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF JULY 8, 1975, NERE APPROVED, AS CORRECTED. (Cm Turner abstaining due to absence at that meeting) OPEN FORUM (Barking Dogs) Donald Rawls, 232 Scott Street, stated that he would like to know what he can do about barking dogs in the vicinity of his home be- cause according to the ordinance it would appear that he might not have grounds to file a civil suit - the ordinance indicates that two other neighbors must also sign the complaint and most of his neighbors have barking dogs. The City Attorney suggested that Mr. Rawls visit him at his office for discussion of this matter, as it has been some time since he has read the ordinance and would like to review it again prior to making any recommendation. (Proposed K&B Low Income Housing Development) Jim Ward, 968 Hazel Street, stated that it is his understanding the Council has not approved development of the proposed K&B low income housing units but this was also the case with Livermore Garden Apartments - the Council did not want to approve it but it was approved. CM-30-2l8 July 28, 1975 (Proposed K & BLow Income Housing Dev.) Mr. Ward stated that there are a couple of items he would like to inform the Council about, relative to low income housing units: /- 1) HUD has discontinued all types of funding for group, low income or low cost housing units: 2) HUD has decided fund in- dividual families so they can live in a better environment rather than in one grouped area. u He added that he believes low income housing is needed but it should be handled in a more up-to-date manner, and speaking as a representative of the Rhonewood Association, would like to inform the Council that they would be willing to help in any way they can to see that additional low income housing is approved for their side of town. It was noted that this item is scheduled for discussion on August 18 and the Council would appreciate written comments from Mr. Ward or the Rhonewood Association. (Complaint Regarding Council Attitude) Mr. Morris, 2354 Bluebell Drive, stated that in his opinion the City Council either ignores or rejects the wishes of the people of the community and should this Council continue to do as it pleases, necessary recall elections can and will be instituted and used. He indicated that this is not a threat but a promise. em Miller stated that he feels it would be very helpful to know specifically what it is that Mr. Morris might be referring to. Mr. Morris stated that he does not have specific information but is referring to newspaper articles written about the Council every week and information from the Council minutes. (Complaint re Motorcycles) Bill Older, 1524 Hollyhock, complained about the noise from motor- cycles out in the Springtown area. Cw Tirsell commented that the City is in the process of obtaining property for the park to serve the Greenville/Springtown residents and that the property will soon be posted, patrolled, and hopefully this problem will be abated. (re Budget) Elizabeth Mondon, 5873 Singing Hills, stated that the newspapers indicated that the public had shown no interest in how the City budget is to be spent and that nobody from the public attended the public hearing concerning the budget. She stated that the public did speak in letters, telephone calls, at study sessions, in petitions, in Council meetings, to staff members and at study sessions. She then read a letter she stated appeared in the ~' newspaper about the fact that people do speak out but nobody ( listens, and with recommendations about how expenditures should be made for necessary projects. Mrs. Mondon commented that she and other people have no objections to projects in which the City is engaged; however, they feel that CM-30-2l9 July 28, 1975 (re Budget) the pressing needs of the people are for police and fire protec- tion, developed general use parks, clean streets, good sewer service, decently paved roads, enlarged job market and good shopping near home to cut down on driving. She felt that the money for these items should come out of the original revenue resources and then, if there is money left in the budget, other projects could be undertaken or taxes lowered. u P.H. RE REZONING OF ENSIGN BICKFORD PROPERTY - PORTOLA AVE. SHOPPING CENTER A public hearing has been scheduled for testimony concerning the application submitted by Ensign Bickford Realty Corporation for rezoning of property located on portola Avenue from RS-4 to CN District. The property is located at the intersection of First Street and portola Avenue. Mr. Musso reported that most of the Councilmembers have gone through the exercise of allocating a shopping center and this is probably the last allocation we have, which is recognition of all the exist- ing centers and the service area. The area to be discussed is a service area bounded by, roughly, First Street, Las positas, the freeway and North Livermore Avenue - that's the neighborhood shop- ping center service area. Another service area talked about was the remaining area to the north and east (Springtown/Greenville area). The City zoned two sites for neighborhood shopping centers and neither of these have developed. During the P.C. discussion the issue was not whether or not the General Plan would support a shopping center at the portola loca- tion, because it does; the issue seemed to be whether or not it would be timely to rezone it now because of the minimal population and whether or not development would take place in the Springtown araea. The P.C. concluded that it would be best to encourage develop- ment of a shopping center in the Springtown area and rezoning of the portola site for a shopping center was deleted. It is anticipated that that approximately 11,000 people will live in the Springtown/Greenville area at the time it is fully developed and at this time it is difficult to speculate as to when that num- ber might be reached. The portola site would serve a population of about 9,000 which is enough to serve a shopping center but it was felt that priority should be given to the Springtown/Greenville area. Cw Tirsell wondered if Mr. Musso could give a figure for the cur- rent population in the Springtown/Greenville area as well as the portola area and Mr. Musso reported that the figures are 3,596 for the Springtown/Greenville area and approximately that number for the portola area. It was noted that an EIR was prepared for the portola site, and that the consultant reviewed the proposal and made little comment other than he would favor smaller neighborhood shopping centers with smaller stores and not the large supermarkets. Cw Tirsell commented that if the City followed the consultant's recommendation it would mean changing the whole CN concept for the town. CM-30-220 July 28, 1975 u (P.H. re Rezoning of Property - portola Ave. For Shopping Center) Cm Miller noted that the City has been moving in that direction anyway because of the limited uses on a day-to-day basis. Mayor pro tempore Turner asked if there was written testimony and it was noted that a letter was received from Lloyd Haines, attorney representing Ensign Bickford. At this time Mayor pro tempore Turner opened the public hearing. Lloyd Haines, attorney representing Ensign Bickford stated that the portola property was annexed to the City in 1970, there was an RS-4 Zone designated to the property and it was the owner's understanding that they could obtain a CN Zoning at the time they wished to develop. Mr. Musso has indicated that eN Zoning is consistent with the General Plan and the owner feels the CN Zone would allow the highest and best use. He explained that the proposal is for a community shopping center to be developed by Mr. Hutka and that the major tenant shall be the Tradewell Stores. The intent is to serve the surrounding area - Sunset Development, portola Hills, Trevarno Road, Springtown, Greenville and the area east of Livermore Avenue. He stated that Mr. Fletcher will explain the details of the store which will carry a complete line of groceries, with the exception of fresh red meat, at prices comparable to any other grocery store in Livermore. Mr. Haines stated that in looking at the development of the shopping center they are looking at construction jobs that will be available for people and also for jobs that will be created by the new busi- nesses in the shopping center. He stated that this is not something to be viewed for the future because the escrow account is open and with the approval of this Council they intend to proceed with construction. Development of the shopping center fits within the policy estab- lished by this Council (re additional commercial development) and would also be advantageous to the City in terms of tax revenue. Mr. Haines then gave a slide presentation concerning the proposed development, outlining the various elevations of the property. During the slide presentation Mr. Haines also commented that there will be a seven acre buffer between the proposed development and the homes located on Scott Street. Mr. Haines further stated that they are proposing a project that is the highest and best use of the property and are talking about developing a neighborhood center to service the people in the surrounding area who are in sore need of service of that kind. It is felt that the project fits within the development that exists, at this point, in the area and they feel that residential develop- ment in that area would not be proper. He stated that they are in the vicinity of a motel, a service station and Codiroli Ford. Their proposal would be consistent with the development in the area and they have filed a negative EIR. There is no reason why this project should not proceed. /~, Mayor pro tempore Turner asked if Mr. Haines would explain the other uses planned for this area besides the Tradewell market. Mr. Haines explained that there will be uses in this project that will service neighborhoods such as a meat market, drug store and a shoe repair store. Perhaps Mr. Hutka would be able to give more information as to which tenants will be located in the center. CM-30-22l July 28, 1975 (P.H. re Rezoning of Property - portola Ave. For Shopping Center) Robert Fletcher, Vice President of Tradewell Stores, based in Kent, Washington, stated that they are the operators of l05 grocery stores and that 35 of the stores are conventional supermarkets. He stated that 70 of the markets are Prairie Markets which are food stores designed to sell groceries to the public identical to foods sold through the Tradewell stores. The Tradewell stores are much like Luckys and Safeway, etc. The prairie Market differs in that it is a low overhead operation. ~ Mr. Fletcher stated that during the Planning Commission hearing there was a great deal of time spent on discussion of the difference in a conventional food market and a prairie Market and he never did get the opportunity to explain the similarities. The major similarity is that they are selling the same products as in the Tradewell stores - national brands and from the same warehouse. As far as locations are concerned, they have converted some of the Tradewell stores into prairie Markets and some of these are in neighborhood shopping centers. They have just purchased a supermarket from one of the largest chain operators in the country and opened the store a couple of weeks ago as a prairie Market. He has ujust consumated the purchase of three conventional supermarkets in California, specifically in a neighbor- hood shopping center, in Woodland, Madera, and Hanford, all with populations much less than that of Livermore. The point is that they couldn't serve the entire community of Livermore with one 20,000 sq. ft. store. The Planning Commission asked if the store would draw people from the entire community and he answered the question affirmatively. It only stands to reason, however, that the people closest to the store will use it the most. He stated that once again he would like to emphasize that the products to be sold in the prairie Market would be the same as those sold in their conventional supermarket, with the exception of fresh red meat, and that they sell for less by reducing the overhead in every area they can. Mr. Fletcher added that of the present 70 Prairie Markets in opera- tion, he has personally selected each site and he has never been denied a building permit where property has been zoned to allow a supermarket. Mayor pro tempore Turner commented that the Council has a copy of the transcript from the Planning Commission meeting and that most of the details concerning operation of the store are included in the transcript. Ed Hutka, l019 Angelica, stated that he would like to say he is perhaps concerned more about the east part of Livermore than anyone present because he has his life efforts sitting on First Street. Since requesting the rezoning they have had inquiries from drug stores, concerning occupancy in the center, and that inquiries will not be received from the little shops until the City has given approval. About every three months they tell someone with a small repair business, that there is no place for them to locate, such as shoe repair and barber shops. They feel there is a demand for these services and at present there is no place for them to locate. Mr. Hutka added that in viewing the site, the hills in the vicinity are rather beautiful; however proper landscaping which would be required would be a greater asset to one of the entrances to the City. CM-30-222 (\ ( ( July 28, 1975 (P.H. re Rezoning of Property - Portola Ave. For Shopping Center) Mr. Hutka stated that he wanted to know if the prairie Market opera- tions were similar to "Big John" markets so he visited Kent, Washington, to find out what they were like. He saw very large warehouses and something like 15 rail cars inside the warehouses besides large trucks for transporting foods to California. He stated that in visiting the operations and after doing a credit check he felt confident that he would be dealing with one of the strongest companies, on the basis of ability to operate the most sound markets he could possibly find. He then presented photographs of prairie Markets he has visited in Stockton and Santa Rosa and assured the Council that the market would be pleasing in appearance and that they would be happy to work with the Design Review Committee. Mr. Hutka stated that in visiting the stores he found that they had fresh vegetables (many of which other stores purchase), ice cream, eggs, and everything other stores have to offer. People mark the prices of items with a grease pencil and the carts are such that a case of merchandise can be carried in the customer's basket. He added that he does not generally purchase groceries but has been told by his wife and other people that the prices at prairie Markets are substantially less. Mr. Hutka stated that if the prairie Market were to be located in this area the City would find that the people north of I-580 would save perhaps as much as two miles of driving in each direction, there are 1,300 homes and they would save four miles once a week, for example, a savings of 270,000 miles a year @.15/mile to equal a $40,000 savings, plus less air pollution. The $40,000 saved could be used somewhere else in improvements and recreation north of I-S80 and this might be an asset the City might be passing up. He would strongly recommend that the Council consider these points. David Tritsch, 2l6l Bluebell Drive, Chairman of the North I-S80 Citizens Committee, stated that at their last general meeting by a large majority passed the following proposal: "Whereas the nearest shopping area is located on Railroad Avenue and "P" Street, which is on the other side of the Southern Pacific making it a distance for our citizens to travel, a 4 to 6 mile distance for their day-to-day shop- ping needs. Whereas the City of Livermore has shopping centers in the southeast, southwest, and western part of the City but it does not have any in the northeast portion of the City, thus making an unbalanced convenience to its citizens. It is obvious that the North I-580 area will not have sufficient population to justify a shopping cen- ter for a number of years; therefore, we do recommend to the City Council to make plans for CN Zoning of Portola and First Street which will save several miles of travel for our citizens and will reduce air pollution and conserve energy and will aid in a better balance in our community between the residential, commercial, and industry." Mr. Tritsch stated that a copy of the proposal was delivered to each Councilmember last Monday night. A vote in favor of this zoning will increase the City's income, through taxes, it will help the local economy both in construction and operation and it may reduce the smog level due to less driving as well as to conserve energy. Cm Staley asked if the I-580 Homeowners Group is made up of home- owners north of I-580 and Mr. Tritsch replied that the Group is comprised of residents north of I-580. CM-30-223 July 28, 1975 (P.H. re Rezoning of Property - portola Ave. For Shopping Center) Cm Staley asked how large the I-580 group is and Mr. Tri~8ch indi- cated that it is difficult to say but the average attendance is from 35-75 people. He stated that at their last meeting there were three dissenting votes on the proposal stated above. /\ Cm Staley stated that the group should understand that if the Council votes in favor of the CN Zoning it is not a guarantee that any of the particular uses discussed, would be allowed. In fact, if CN Zoning goes in this particular area it would be more unlikely that there would be a shopping center north of I-580 for an appre- ciable period of time. Mr. Tritsch stated that this had been a consideration of the I-SSD Group but they felt that the portola Avenue Shopping Center would be a compromise because they feel they will never get a shopping center over in their area anyway.. .stii~v t9K'. ~(!'.e... Cw Tirsell asked if people do not want a shopping center in the Springtown area and Mr. Tritsch stated that he can't speak for the whole Group but there are some of the people who really do not want additional shopping north of the highway but a shopping center at the portola Avenue location would meet some of the needs imme- diately. Studies indicate that it will be between 10-30 years before the population north of I-580 would warrant a shopping center. They would rather have one at this time south of the highway. Cw Tirsell stated that for the sake of interest she would like to know why anyone would not want shopping facilities in their area. Mr. Tritsch stated that, frankly, he likes it out there the way it is with the rural atmosphere. They have all the City conveniences but are in the country, for all practical purposes. He, personally, prefers it this way. Elizabeth Mondon, 5873 Singing Hills Avenue, stated that as one of the dissenting three, she would like to clarify her reasoning for not voting in favor of the proposal read by Mr. Tritsch. She would like to see the City Council and staff allow a little bit more growth in that area so they could have a shopping center north of I-580; however, the estimates as to when there might be facilities in that area are probably conservative and even the three dissenting votes agree that shopping at the portola site would be better than no shopping facilities at all for 30-40 years. Mayor pro tempore Turner asked for some clarification as to the North I-58D Group membership and asked if the membership includes residents of Springtown. Mr. Tritsch stated that they advertise their meetings in every area north of I-S80; however, there have been very few Springtown resi- dents attending their meetings - there have been a few from time to time. Harold Ames, 366 Scott Street, speaking on behalf of all the people on Scott Street, stated that the valuation of the homes on that street is over a million dollars. As far as he knows neither he nor anybody else on Scott Street asked the people north of the freeway to go out and live where they are. They live there of their own free will and they did it to save money, he would guess. If they want a Shopping center, put in out there - why back it onto Scott Street. He stated that in talking about development for this small parcel it reminds him of the story of the Arab and the camel, which he narrated. CM-30-224 July 28, 1975 (P.H. re Rezoning of Property - Portola Ave. for Shopping Center) If commercial is allowed to begin, that whole area will become commercial. He added that the developer doesn't know when to stop building as long as he can continue to make a dime and he really can't blame him, but these are the facts. l_ Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that he would like to clarify some- thing and asked if Mr. Ames personally spoke with all of the resi- dents on Scott Street and that they are opposed to the development. Mr. Ames stated that he did speak with every resident that was home over the weekend and that he did not speak with each one because some of them were not home. Mayor pro tempore Turner asked if Mr. Ames could give a percentage of the number of people who were opposed to rezoning and Mr. Ames felt that approximately 80% of the Scott Street residents were opposed to the rezoning. Cm Staley asked if Mr. Ames is opposed to any commercial zoning for this particular area and Mr. Ames commented that he sees no reason for commercial zoning - they should put in condominiums in this area because this is what it is for. Melvin Kirby, 5376 Scenic Avenue, stated that he has worked in Livermore for three years, stated that it is his understanding that the EPA says it will be nearly 40 years before they can have any more homes in the Greenville area but additional homes are what they need to qualify for enough citizens to get a shopping center built. He asked how long the people in that area have to continue to pay taxes without facilities. He stated that a lot of people are opposed to a shopping center north of I-58D but he needs a place for his children to go to school and he is caused a lot of inconvenience. Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that he is getting lost with Mr. Kirby's statement and would appreciate it if his remarks would be made with respect to the proposed shopping center and not the schools, etc. Mr. Kirby stated that he feels they really need the shopping center. If there are more supermarkets in an area, especially for the north side of Livermore, the revenue from that area would go to build that area. He added that their primary need is for a grocery store, and not like Luckys or Safeway - they need a store such as the one proposed with lower prices. Nicholas Chakakis, 320 Michell Court, stated that he lives fairly close to where the proposed shopping center is to be built. He does not object to the desire of the I-580 people for a store but he would have to agree with Mr. Ames in that if they want a store they should get one north of I-580. He strongly objected to develop- ment of commercial behind his house and emphasized that he does not want it. Mr. Hutka has indicated that his life's work is on First Street but would like to point out that there are about 300-400 property owners west of First Street who have their life savings in their homes also and this is many more than one. ~ Bill Crickett, Scott Street, stated that he is in favor of another shopping center, particularly the one proposed, because the other three shopping centers are some two miles away from this area. Mr. Ward, 3536 Murphy Street, asked about the buffer zone and just what portion comprises the buffer, and Mayor pro tempore Turner asked the Planning Director to illustrate the buffer zone on the map, (which is the westerly portion) . CM-30-225 July 28, 1975 (P.H. re Rezoning of Property - portola Ave. for Shopping Center) Don Rawles, 232 Scott Street, stated that he would like to support the opposition expressed by both Mr. Ames and Mr. Chakakis. He feels the CN Zoning would be a very inappropriate use for the area. At the time he purchased his home there was no development on the south side of First Street and in his opinion the develop- ment which has thus far occurred has created a deterioration of property values, including his property, because of the way it has been developed. Now there is an application for development north of First Street. David Eller, stated that he does not live in any of that planning area so he is more neutral but would like to comment that there are many small cities with a population the same as the Greenville North/Springtown area, and they have a smaller supermarket. Rather than a large supermarket they have a small one and would suggest that this type of planning be considered to accommodate the north I-580 residents. Cw Tirsell commented that this is the fervent hope of the Council for the people north of the freeway. Last year the Council even annexed an additional piece into commercial zoning so that there would be two sites available for marketing. The City doesn't market the land, however; the man who owns the land markets the land. She stated that she does know that some food lines are looking at diversification and going into things such as the one suggested, rather than going into huge markets. The City hopes that markets and other uses would be interested in the two available commercial sites north of the freeway. Mr. Eller stated that he certainly can sympathize with these people and the things they need in their area. He stated that he heard people say that some people do not want commercial development out there but people want to have their cake and eat it too. When people moved out there, did they realize there was no shopping area there, or did they believe something was just around the corner? Cw Tirsell replied that the developer did lead the people to believe that there would be commercial development but the City did not promise these things. Mr. Eller stated that in his opinion Mr. Hutka's development on First Street is one of the biggest eyesores in Livermore and would like to see this area improved before anymore com- mercial development is allowed. Mr. Haines s~ated that he can sympathize with the concerns of the residents on Scott and Michell Streets that development will occur adjacent to their property but people wshould realize that this property is surrounded by main thoroughfares and one must take into consideration the surrounding area. The applicant feels this would be the best place to put a shopping center. This area is on a heavily traveled street and the decision is that this is a good location for the proposed development. with respect to the size of the proposed market, the City has the right to review and approve the plans and to make sugges- tions. It is not the developer's intention to corne in with something that would be considered an eyesore. As far as commercial development north of I-580, using a growth factor of 2% growth per year and using the figures that the population requires to support a shopping center, it could be as long as 50 years away. They have a project right now that will service the area north of I-580 and it is felt that the benefits derived will far outweigh the burden on the homeowners around the proposed site. CM-30-226 July 28, 1975 c (P.H. re Rezoning of Property-Ist & Portola Ave. for Shopping Center) David Eller stated that he feels the idea for this type of supermarket is a wonderful idea, but not for this area - it should go in someplace else. Bill Older, 1524 Hollyhock, stated that he has heard remarks such as rumors that there will be a market place near the motel but this will never happen. He has spoken with a number of homeowners in Spring- town and 80% of these people are not particularly interested in whether they are going to Luckys or another store to pick up their pound of bacon. What they are interested in is getting the railroad moved back and getting good stores into the new downtown development area. They would certainly be against any local development that might draw away and limit or deter the real progress of getting big stores into the downtown area. 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. Cm Miller stated that it was his understanding that there was testi- mony at the P.C. that, in fact, Tradewell intended to draw not only from the rest of the community but from the rest of the valley and possibly from Tracy because of the nature of this store being essen- tially a food discount store. Mr. Fletcher stated that this question carne up during the time there was discussion concerning the difference between a Prairie Market and a Tradewell store. It is true that the prairie Market will draw some people from other parts of Livermore. He stated that he happens to have a wife that will spend $5 on gas to save $4 on groceries and a lot of people will do this. He stated that they do not try to get business from people outside of the area they are serving but he noted that if a supermarket runs an ad in the weekly supermarket specials section people will go to a store outside their area for a bargain. If they have lower prices, the word will travel and they will get people who will travel long distances to take advantage of lower prices. Their primary concern is to serve the people in the immediate area, however. Cm Staley stated that he would be interested in knowing the plans for the remaining seven acres. Mr. Musso commented that one proposal was to provide a small park at the end of Murphy Street and the other was to extend Murphy Street and bring it out to either First Street or Portola Avenue, or even possibly to create a cul-de-sac and possible clustering of houses. At one time there was talk about providing a combined residential and Shopping center type of development where the residential would be mixed in with the commercial development. ( \ Mr. Haines stated that at this time due to the sewer situation his client has no plans for any development in the other area but certainly if future plans were anticipated they would comply with any City regulations or any City recommendations. At present there is no effort to develop any of the seven acres - it would act as a buffer between the commercial development proposed and the homes. Cw Tirsell stated that this is surely recorded as a lot of record which would be included in the sewage allocation and Cm Miller noted that this is true but would be counted as only one sewer connection. CM-30-227 July 28, 1975 (P.H. re Rezoning of Property lst St. & portola Ave. for Shopping Center) Russ Morris, Bluebell Drive, commented that there has been a con- siderable amount of discussion but would like to add that for his family it is necessary that they travel approximately 12 miles a week, round trip, making two trips a week into town, and arnounts to 45 gallons of gasoline a year for a car that gets 25 miles to the gallon. If this is multiplied times the number of homes in the north I-SaD area, it arnounts to a substantial amount of gaso- line used just to drive to the downtown area, not to mention the inconvenience. Nick Chakakis stated that the people north of I-SaD could save a lot more gas if they put a supermarket over there. One member of the audience stated that he still doesn't understand what is proposed for the buffer strip and asked if this is also to be rezoned or if it will remain RS-4. Cm Miller stated that presently the seven acres proposed as a buffer will remain RS-4 even if the portion near the gasoline station is rezoned to commercial. ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Cw Tirsell asked if the Council discussion will lend itself to rezoning to CN and the concept of commercial neighborhood develop- ment, or is the Council going to discuss this particular applica- tion and what it entails. Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that the application is for rezon- ing to CN and it is understood that a Tradewell store will probably go in there. He would suggest that the Council discuss the re- zoning and whether or not it would be appropriate for the area. Cw Tirsell stated that she believes past history is a very good planner, in a negative way, for a City, and also in a positive way. The past history of this City with planning shopping centers has not been an altogether happy one for two reasons: I) they have been planned too close together, and 2) planned without sufficient people to carry the uses. This is an example of the shopping cen- ters the Council worries about such as the Vineyard Center and the East Avenue Center. The City worries about these shopping cen- ters because the uses change in them and they are not continuing neighborhood uses. The City has to allow lots of commercial uses that serve a broader area than just a neighborhood and they are not viable uses. They don't stay for 20 years to develop a clientele of loyal neighborhood shoppers - they are in and they're out. Cw Tirsell continued to say that during her term on the Planning Commission they reviewed all of the neighborhood planning in town and determined that we have too much commercial neighborhood in town because our shopping centers were in trouble. At that time three shopping centers were in trouble. The way you know they are in trouble is because the merchants come to the P.C. and ask for a variance in uses - they want uses that are not traditional neighborhood uses and the reason for this is because there are not enough people in the area to support the traditional, hard core, neighborhood uses that a commercial neighborhood area is designed for. One booming shopping center in this town and perhaps an example of all good neighborhood commercial would be the Granada Shopping Center, which serves about 15,000 people. She stated that she can remember the time uses could not stay there because the population for it was too small. It took a long time to establish good viable uses in that shopping center. CM-30-228 \, ! / ( July 28, 1975 (P.H. re Rezoning of Property-1st St. & Portola) Cw Tirsell added that to go back to shopping centers: I) where they are placed is crucial, 2) when you place them on the lower edge of the area they are to service they will not be able to draw from the entire area. If you look at the placement of this one you can see that it will not draw from the south at all. If you look at the placement of the Vineyard Shopping Center, which is a shopping center in trouble, and where the uses do not stay, you will notice that the lower edge does not draw from the south at all. It doesn't draw more than about half of its population area. The pro- posed shopping center on portola also would not draw from the south. Cw Tirsell pointed out that another thing that is a worry about commercial neighborhood, besides the fact significant population is necessary, is that one neighborhood commercial affects another because the uses change back and forth and they are competitive back and forth - it is not a viable, steady, business so that you could depend upon a drug store in each center. However, the drug stores and food markets tend to be the most long lasting uses, and sometimes a hardware store stays. One center can very much jeopardize another center, as in the case at East Avenue and the Vineyard Shopping Center. Those two shopping centers do not have the population base to serve them, the uses do not stay constant, and therefore both of them affect each other and neither are viable shopping centers. Cw Tirsell stated that this is the first time she has heard the opinion that people north of I-580 don't want any commercial out there, although in walking in that area she was aware of the fact that a lot of people want it to remain rural, because she met people who indicated this when she walked the entire area. The opinion is split, to some degree, but she did not know there was a desire to have it noncommercial. The City does want commercial development for that area and because there is a lack of population it does look like it might be some time before commercial development will be realized. She stated that she is of the opinion that the portola Center would forestall development out there, perhaps forever, and in her opinion getting a little bit now would not serve their needs because with just a little market available they would still have to get back into their cars and drive downtown for the other uses they would like in their neighborhood shopping center. This would not represent a savings - no time would be saved in driving to the Portola Center and then driving to another area for the other required items. Cw Tirsell felt that at this time the population of the area does not warrant a shopping center and she is not sure the placement of the shopping center would not make viable shopping at some time. The people on Scott Street and in that area should look at good planning lines because two major streets intersecting does tend to be a good shopping area. The City would be very careful as to how Scott Street would be buffered and as to how any area between the shopping and Michell were handled. She stated that she does feel this is a good area for a shopping center but at this time such planning is premature and for this reason would vote against the rezoning AND MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL SUPPORT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR DENIAL OF THE REZONING REQUEST, SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Cm Miller stated that people who represent North I-58D, as well as the developers have made what he considers to be meritorious argu- ments, and he has considered those arguments presented to him at some length. Material has been very graciously given to him by the developer, in detail, which he appreciates and he has discussed this issue with the people from the Greenville North area, has heard their reasons and can understand their arguments. CM-30-229 July 28, 1975 (P.H. re Rezoning of Property - lst St. & portola Ave.) Cm Miller commented that some of the arguments made by the Green- ville North people, which make sense to him, are the questions of reducing traveling and shortening the distance to a store and the conservation of energy as well as their need for some kind of con- venience, as constrasted with what is available elsewhere in the community. However, there are arguments on the other side having to do with the City, as a whole. He would have to agree with Cw Tirsell in that there is now too much CN Zoning in th~ City. He agrees that anything developed in this portola area will pre-empt any conceivable neighborhood shopping in Springtwoown. Assuming that something gets built, he would like to call to the attention of the people living in Greenville North, that they have been listening to developers' promises for a very long time and the developers' promises, starting with Bevilacqua through Kissell who promised them a park but didn't own the property, have shown that promises do not necessarily result in delivery. He believes that the most meritorious thing, having to do with zoning up there, is an atte~p~ to encourage the devel9pment of a smaller store along the lines Mr. Eller has suggested, which corresponds more closely to the population there. It would be large enough and bigger than the "Speedy Mart" presently located on Las Flores. It would be nice if they could get a store more competitive with respect to prices, larger than the little store which is out there but smaller than the downtown Luckys size because the point has been made quite clearly that it would be a long time before their population could support a full scale supermarket. It appears that there is a trend towards smaller stores and it certainly is true that a store in the Springtown area would save a lot more gas than a store down at the portola area. He would suggest that everyone's efforts should be devoted towards encouraging development in a Springtown location which is convenient for everybody up there and for those who do not really want a commercial area near them, at least the Springtown locations are about as far away from Green~ ville North as you can get and still be north of I-SaD. Cm Miller felt the use, itself, is an excellent use, it would be good for all of us in the City. He would like to encourage it but it is not exactly a neighborhood commercial use and he would be willing to bend on that one if it were to locate in Springtown. He feels that such a trade-off would be reasonable, but not for the portola location. He added that there are reasons on both sides of the argument and it certainly is not an easy decision to make, but most of the weight stands on the better planning and says that the City should not turn this area into CN Zoning. Cm Staley stated that he understands that our current ordinance provides for 4-6 acres of CN and the application is for 6.6 and wondered what this means if the application is approved. Does this mean that if the application is approved the City has granted a variance to the normal size of the neighborhood commercial? Mr. Musso replied that the new CN Zoning District regulations which allow a larger center are pending in the City Attorney's office and presumably these have passed the P.C. and the Council and may be adopted. If the Council would change their mind about the larger centers it would require either reducing the arnount of commercial requested, or a variance, as was granted in the past. At one time they had a variance for a little larger shopping center at this location. Actually, in this case, the CN site would be larger than the 6.6 they are requesting because the existing gas station site would be included within this zoning action. Cm Staley stated that if this property is rezoned to CN, it does not mean approval of the shopping center plans - this would be subject to a separate hearing and action and asked if this is correct. CM-30-23D ~ ~ ( \ July 2a, 1975 (P.H. re Rezoning of Property - 1st St. & portola Avenue) Mr. Musso commented that if it is in accordance with the CN Zoning Ordinance, it could be approved at the staff level. Cm Staley stated that first of all he would like to say he agrees with the comments made by Cw Tirsell in that the CN Zoning in the City is excessive. This zoning is creating real problems in compet- ing uses and at the P.C. level he voted to deny this application based on what he felt were three important arguments: l) that this type of store would not be a neighborhood use because at that time it was his understanding that nothing perishable would be sold, such as vegetables, milk, etc.; 2) the population in this particular area is not adequate to support a neighborhood shopping center, although he believes that the calculations used did not include the Springtown people. Mr. Musso replied that this is correct. Cm Stalyey continued: 3) the North I-580 citizens have been requesting a shopping center and shopping facilities for several years and it certainly has been the intent of the City to do everything possible to provide them with one. In fact they have zoned two areas out there commercial and the City would like to see it developed commercial but it just hasn't. 4) The P.C. felt if portola were to develop it would effectively forestall, possibly forever, any real neighborhood commer- cial development in Springtown. Cm Staley pointed out that he wants it clearly understood by the people north of I-580, that there will never be any commercial development in their area for the next dozen years. Also, if only the Tradewell Store were to go into this area, and no other stores, this may effectively keep any other commercial development from going in, north of I-58D. He stated that these are his concerns and would like to ask if the people really understand what this could mean and if the people would rather have shopping at Portola and First. David Tritsch, Chairman of the North I-SaD Group, stated that the Group has a variety of opinions and one of the opinions is that the Council feels if land is zoned commercial, north of I-580, it is like planting sunflower seeds in concrete hoping they will grow. He feels it is ludicrous to ftry to force industry or commerce to that area. Secondly, the land values, as reported to the people by the developers, have been such that stores are not able or willing to take the large venture to go in. Right now there is an applicant who wants to go into an area and wants that piece of property - they don't want the other side (Springtown), and who are you or who are we to say to a person or group that they can't go in where they wish but must go in someplace else. This can't be done. We have free enterprises and they must be allowed to establish where they can survive. He would also like to point out that it was mentioned that a shopping center should be located on a major through street and reminded the Council that Springtown does not have these through streets, such as First Street and portola Avenue. Cm Staley stated that his question really wasn't answered and repeated the question. Mr. Tritsch stated that the people understand that development on portola might pre-empt development in Springtown for many, many years. However, it is obvious that regardless of what happens there will not be development in Springtown for years anyway and their vote for Por- tola is a reasonable compromise. CM-3D-23l July 28, 1975 (Re Rezoning of 1st St. and Portola Avenue for Shopping Center) Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that, originally, he was in favor of this project but has somewhat changed his mind for the follow- ing reasons: l) there was a comment made that it will probably be 50 years before there is a population base north of I-S80 that would justify a shopping center which is based on our present pro- jected growth rate of 2% per year up until 1980 and at this time the growth rate will be reviewed again. 2) We are in the process of applying for increased sewer capacity which would allow for more residential building permits. 3) I-S8D is an area the City .~~ wants to fill in with residential uses. 4) To rezone the portola B~, ~::~~=pr~~ln~~~sr~;~,~~i~~~+f:~{~5)l~~~-i~i::i:~1~:~; ~::o/~e)JI~. oomf9r~ab18. 5) It will take a long time for the center to establish itself, as Granada did. Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that the overriding factor is that it is projected for residential use, people residing near the pro- posed rezoning site are overwhelmingly opposed to the rezoning and thereAis no guarantee that the buffer zone will not go commercial .~ be~~ tnere would.be E;~~~~r~~9~ the City to allow more commer- ~'Y cial in ~~tr~~6Pl~the immediate area certainly do ~. . have some rights also. This store is something he would really like to see locate in Livermore but not at that site and he would also go along with the recommendation of the P.C. to deny the rezoning. Cw Tirsell stated that she feels the prairie Market sounds like an innovative type of shopping for the homeowners which would attract the whole community and be an excellent competitive use in Livermore. We have an abundance of land available for such use and she feels that this is something our community would support and the Council would like to see them locate here. Cm Staley stated that he now believes this type of store would be appropriate in a neighborhood shopping center, if the only thing they don't sell is fresh red meat. The testimony of Mr. Fletcher from Tradewell is that they are primarily a neighborhood store and would, in fact, draw from the whole town. This is true of most stores because occasionally one will drive to a supermarket if they have a particularly good buy. He stated that he is very concerned, however, about the population in the area to support the center and at best it would seem to be very marginal. He does feel that a convincing argument is that the people north of I-580 have to drive a very long way tn oraee to get groceries. One of the things this Council has wanted to do is to somehow cut down vehicle miles and he does not believe that development will take place in Springtown for many many years, whether or not this application is approved, and that this factor overrides what he might otherwise decide. He would have to vote to override the recommendation of the P.C. and approve the request for the rezoning. Mr. Haines stated that he does not believe the calculations made by the staff for the neighboring population took into account the Springtown people, the people on Trevarno, Portola, etc. because they believe the store would be serving about ID,ODO. Secondly, it is not intended that people will have to drive to another area to obtain other necessary items because this is a planned develop- ment in which they intend to have a meat market, a barber shop, a drug store and other neighborhood uses. They are ready to begin upon approval of the Council and they already have a major tenant which they must have to attract other types of uses. He stated that shopping centers which are having problems are in close proximity to one another and this would not be the case with this proposed center - there is nothing close. Cw Tirsell then asked Mr. Musso to read the definition of a neigh- borhood shopping center to Mr. Haines, from the Ordinance. CM-30-232 July 2a, 1975 (P.H. re Rezoning lst St & Portola Ave.-Shopping Center) Mr. Musso stated that relative to the population calculations, the staff spoke only to the Springtown/Greenville population because this is a rather defined service area in which population is a significant factor. On the south side there is an overlap which is recognized but feels that the population was not that significant. This is the reason the staff didn't get into the other population because the store certainly can and would draw from beyond Livermore Avenue. Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that the overriding factor in his decision to vote against the rezoning is because of the testimony from residents in the jmmediate area and ueala liJ(~ te JtR8u B8u the appl.ican.t COUld^9ua. ran tee that there w$>uld be a buffer strip.:......., f {j, -;ou-<'UJ-.-"'~ A..u~~;dN~ /.A-c-rn (!" )-y>.?-YJ-<!..~Ld..-~ -e--~-<!-k6-~~~. ~0('~a~.,i> Mr. Goldberg from Ensign Bickford stated that there has been talk about the rights of the residents of the area but they feel there is the issue of rights of the owners of the property as well. He stated that they have owned this land for many years and the map they have shows CN Zoning and this site is CN on the General Plan. People who have bought in that area know it is CN Zoning. As far as the buffer is concerned, they are reasonably happy with the RS-4 zone as long as within the reasonable future they can get sewer con- nections which will allow them to proceed with development. He stated that he does not have a detailed plan for development of that area but it is not their intention to expand the neighborhood Shopping center into the residential buffer - they would be happy with the residential. They have considered some type of cluster development with a neighborhood park. He stated that the real issue is the concern of neighbors as to how this shopping center will look and they can assure everyone that it will look good because they intend to do it themselves. It is not a question of the need for this type of store in Livermore because everyone has indicated that they would be in favor of a Tradewell store and a discount market would be highly beneficial to the community. Cw Tirsell stated that she has been through three hearings on this issue and it is very clear that the neighboring residents do not want commercial development. It happens that this is a very small public hearing but she has been to public hearings where there have been 20 people speak against the commercial development time after time, and this is the reason for having the public hearings. The Council wants to know what the people want for their town. The people in this area have been active for years on this particular piece of property, they lobby effectively, and have good positions on it. Melvin Kirby, stated that he has known many people who have moved out of the Greenville/Springtown area because of the lack of facilities and if the EPA won't allow further development, how will they ever get their needed facilities? Also, the residents in the Portola Avenue area must have known that there was CN Zoning when they purchased their homes but they moved in there anyway. Cw Tirsell commented that the homes were there many years before this piece of property was annexed to the City. Mr. Kirby stated that in order for Springtown to get any facilities /~ there must be the population to support it and yet people are moving out of there because there are no facilities. If a developer does develop in Springtown he will not draw people from the rest of the community because it is too far away; however if someone develops on Portola he will get the people from Springtown/Greenville as well as a large portion of Livermore. He stated that he goes to Dublin to shop because of the "damn" inconvenience to get downtown. CM-30-233 July 28, 1975 (P.H. re Rezoning of lst St. & portola Ave for Shopping Center) AT THIS TIME MAYOR PRO TEMPORE TURNER CALLED FOR THE QUESTION AND THE MOTION TO DENY THE REQUEST FOR REZONING PASSED 3-1 (Cm Staley dissenting> . Cm Miller stated that there is one point that should be mentioned and that is that EPA has never said that it would be 40 years be- fore there can be further development - no prognosis has been made. A lot of statements have been made about who says what and what is going to happen, that are not true. It is true that it will be awhile; however 40 years is a number nobody uses and is one that somebody has fabricated. RECESS Mayor pro tempore Turner called for a brief recess after which the Council meeting resumed with all members present, as during roll call. P.H. RE SEWER SERVICE CHARGE BILLING AND COLLECTION METHOD Annually a public hearing must be held to receive 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 billings as distributed by the County tax collector. At this time Mayor pro tempore Turner opened 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 MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION ADOPTING METHODS TO BE USED FOR BILLING AND COLLECTION OF SEWER SERVICE CHARGES, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. IS7-7S A RESOLUTION ADOPTING REPORT OF CITY FINANCE DIRECTOR RE SEWER SERVICE AND USE CHARGES. CONSENT CALENDAR Method for Signing Checks, Selecting Depositary Our local banking institutions have a policy calling for the revolution arnong the various local offices which calls for a change at this time. This effects our active deposits only - payroll and warrants. RESOLUTION NO. IS8-7S RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MECHANICAL METHOD FOR SIGNING CHECKS, SELECTING A DEPOSITARY AND PROVIDING FOR THE NAMES OF THE OFFICERS AUTHORIZED TO SIGN CHECKS AND THE METHOD OF SIGNING THEREOF. (Wells Fargo Bank) CM-3D-234 July 28, 1975 Minutes-Various Committees Minutes were received from the following committees: Greens Committee meeting of May 29 Design Review Committee of July 9 Social Concerns Committee of June 12 Planning Commission meeting of July IS CW Tirsell asked that the minutes of the Social Concerns Committee be removed from the Consent Calendar and it was decided to discuss this item later. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR On motion of Cm. Miller, seconded by Cw Tirsell and by unanimous approval the items on the consent calendar were approved. MATTERS INITIATED BY STAFF (Litigation re Area Vicinity portola Avenue The City Attorney advised the Council he was prepared to discuss the matter of litigation re the area near portola Avenue. AB-II re Eminent Domain Mr. Logan explained that there is presently before the Legislature a bill called AB-lI which is a bill to bring up-tO-date Eminent Domain as far as the Law Revision Committee has made recommendations and as far as the State Bar has made recommendations, some of which present some very difficult problems in terms of what a public body should or should not do, especially in terms of compensation. He would like to send a letter objecting to several of these sections and he might circulate a letter amongst the Council and if any member'; thinks this is a matter for discussion, he would place the matter on docket. If there are no comments on the letter, he would just send it. Cm Miller indicated he had intended to bring up the matter himself as he was interested in opposing the bill and felt that the City Attorney would be able to answer the technical questions satisfactorily, Carnpaign Statements The City Clerk reminded the Councilmembers that they should file their Campaign Statements. MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCIL (Valley Memorial Hospital Rate Increase) Cm Miller referred to a newspaper article concerning the rate increase anticipated by Valley Memorial Hospital, stating that at the expense of the people in the valley, a purchase of land in Pleasanton for expansion was the cause for this increase. He felt that the residents of Livermore should be made aware of this reason which he did not feel made sense since the future population of the valley does not warrant an expansion. He suggested that perhaps the Council should send a representative to the Comprehensive Health Council, who have to do with locating hospitals, and discuss with them the future of the valley and estimated growth, use of the hospital. CM-30-23S ".__._~~~__._.u._.____.____.,~"~________...~______.._"" ""~""'"__""___'-~~_~""'_"'__""'_"~_""'''_'"''~'_ ..,,______~,_"''',_,~__~__,___ "_"_~__^'__M'''_''_'._____.__~,_.__.__ July 2a, 1975 (Valley Memorial Hospital Rate Increase) Cw Tirsell added she was particularly disturbed concerning this matter because the Council was assured that the expansion of the hospital would not effect rates. Cm Miller stated that the Council would support Valley Memorial Hospital in making sure that there isn't any private hospital rip-off. He again urged that one of the Councilmembers discuss the matter with the Comprehensive Health Council, and Cw Tirsell agreed to do so. EIR - Pleasanton Redevelopment Cm Miller inquired if the City had been furnished with a copy of the EIR for the Pleasanton redevelopment, and the City Manager advised that we do not have a copy although he had asked for one. Cm Miller felt that the Council should examine the implications of redevelopment and the loss of tax revenue for valleywide agencies, just as Zone 7 should. If Pleasanton wants to redevelop a shopping center, they should do it in a way that does not affect everyone else in the valley. The Council may wish to consider testifying at their hearings. North of 580 Group Cm Miller referred to letters in the newspapers by members of the North of S80 Group which he found irritating as the letters imply that the City Council has ignored and refused to consider the issue regarding curbside mailboxes. He asked if the City Manager would prepare a list of the times and dates of the City Council's early opposition to curbside mailboxes and send a letter to the North I-S80 Group so they can understand that the Council has consistently con- sidered the issue and intends to continue to pursue the matter. A member of the North I-SaD Group spoke from the audience stating that the letters in no way were meant to indicate that the Council had not done their part, but were meant to ask for the Council's assistance in getting rid of the curbside mailboxes. Legislative Bills Cm Miller stated he would like to oppose AB-II which was mentioned by the City Attorney; also oppose AB-IOS9, indemnification of Peace Officers for Punitive Damages; oppose SB 662, Business License Tax exemption; support AB 1223, tax rate exemption for street lighting costs; oppose AB la8, limitation on cities' authority to impose fees and taxes; support SB 90 (AB 1375). Cw Tirsell asked that these be placed on the Consent Calendar for the next meeting and she would study them. The City Attorney stated that the Council had already opposed AB 1059, and to oppose it again would be to double up the same thing as it has not gone any further than at the last date it was opposed. The Council could concentrate on the others. ~' ( Cw Tirsell stated that there are two bills in the Legislature for property tax relief for people on fixed income and she has been contacted by senior citizens who are under great duress, and asked that Assemblyman Mori be contacted regarding these bills. CM-3D-236 July 2a, 1975 BART Extension Cw Tirsell stated she had learned that the new BART manager was intending to cut corners, i.e. cut the valley. She felt that in an entirely subsidized system he should be alerted to the fact that the BART service to the valley would be a sUbsidy and we have paid dearly and are due the subsidy and asked that a Council letter be directed with the past history of our support for BART and a summary of the amount of money our citizens have paid, and stating that we certainly oppose any service cut to the Livermore Valley. Cm Staley asked if they can determine when that issue will be before the Board as he would personally testify on the Council's behalf on that particular issue. Mr. Parness stated that if the issue is to be discussed by the BART Board or any of its committees, he felt the entire valley community should prepare as strong a case as can be composed so there can be a unified force presented before the committee or board. With the Council's instructions, he would find out what their process will be so they can begin planning. CW Tirsell stated it was an excellent item for COVA and she would bring it up at their meeting. Public Transportation Mayor Pro Tempore Turner asked what the status is regarding public transportation. Mr. Parness replied that the draft copy of the consultant's report was received the latter part of last week, and the Transportation Committee will be meeting on Thursday to go over the report, and the final draft will be distributed within the next week or ten days. With that technical information the Council should be able to call a meeting with the various other official agencies to determine where the city wants to go on public transportation. Planning Commissioner Appointment Mayor Pro Tem Turner stated the Council should set a firm meeting date to discuss the appointment to the Planning Commission. Cw Tirsell stated she would like to point out that the Council has had only one meeting concerning this appointment and the delay was simply due to the fact that there has not been a full Council since. The Council concurred that this matter would be discussed August 18. Raft Race Challenge The Planning Commission has challenged the Council members to a raft race. Cm Miller said he had a better idea - a challenger from each group to race in EI Toros, and he would be happy to represent the Council. The Council directed the Planning Director to convey their counter proposal to the Planning Commission. COMMUNICATIONS Grunwald, Crawford & Assoc. re Upper Alameda Creek Urban Study A copy of a letter sent by Grunwald, Crawford & Associates to the u.s. Army Engineer District regarding the Upper Alameda Creek Urban Study was noted for filing. CM-3D-237 July 28, 1975 COMMUNICATION RE REPLACE- MENT OF DUMBARTEN AND ANTIOCH BRIDGES A letter requesting assistance in support of replacement of the Durnbarten and Antioch bridges was received from the Mayor of Newark. Included was a resolution supporting immediate replace- ment of the bridges. Cm Miller commented that he would prefer taking no position on this item and would suggest that it be noted for filing. Cw Tirsell stated that she has heard vehement arguments on both sides of this issue and would not be able to take a position without hearing all of the arguments. Mayor pro tempore Turner and Cm Staley both indicated that they do not have enough information to support the request. COMMUNICATION FROM HUD RE COMMUNITY PROBLEMS Information has been received from HUD as to projects representing solutions to community problems and that thousands of these pro- jects will be included in Horizons on Display. One of these projects is the Fire Management Allocation Project in Livermore. The goal of the Horizons program is to encourage information ex- change arnong communities and to inspire innovative solutions to contemporary community problems. During the Bicentennial period domestic and foreign travellers will be encouraged to visit and to study these examples of achievement. This item was noted for filing. COPY OF COMMUNICATION SENT TO WILSEY & HAM FROM ZONE 7 The Council received a copy of the letter sent to Wilsey & Ham, from Zone 7, in response to an inquiry about water service. This item was noted for filing. RESIGNATION FROM COM- MUNITY AFFAIRS COMMITTEE A letter of resignation from the Community Affairs Committee was received from Walt Griffith. The Council requested that the staff write to Mr. Griffith thank- ing him for his service on this committee. NOTIFICATION OF FORMAL HEARING RE SUPERVISORIAL REDISTRICTING Notification of a formal hearing to discuss supervisorial redistrict- ing was received from the Board of Supervisors. /"'" CM-30-238 July 28, 1975 (Hearing re Supervisorial Redistricting) Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that he would like to attend this hearing. Cm Miller suggested that it might be of value would be to send our proposal to Supervisor Santana to get his reaction to it and to see if he has any alternatives to suggest that might be similar to what we have in mind. If someone could talk to him sometime this week it could be an agenda item for next week. REPORT RE KISSELL CONTRACT AMENDMENT The representative of the Kissell Company has asked that there be a continuance, concerning the contract arnendment, until August 4, and request was granted. REPORT RE EAST AVE. COCKTAIL LOUNGE FOOD SERVICE A report was submitted to the Council by the Director of Planning concerning the East Avenue Shopping Center Cocktail Lounge, The Matador, and the circumstances relative to food service. The staff has recommended that the City Attorney be instructed to notify the owners and occupants of the cocktail lounge, pizza parlor, and of the complex, that strict observance of the food service require- ments must be maintained or litigation will ensue. Mr. Parness stated that he has spoken with the owner of the cocktail lounge who indicated that food service is available; however, they do have a limitation in two regards: l) they have a state license which means that they do not have to have food on the premises, un- like a restaurant liquor license and with this kind of license they also cannot have minors on the premises; 2) he wants to expand the cocktail lounge to the extent of having a restaurant but his lease has a covenant against it, for protection of the pizza parlor and the delicatessen. There is food service available from the pizza parlor and they do have food menus available upon request. Mr. Parness would suggest that signs be posted on the interior inform- ing people that food service is available. Cm Miller stated that, originally, the application was for a restaur- ant with liquor service and the whole thing has turned into something else which has caused criticism from the neighbors, and justifiably so. He stated that he feels the City should stick with its require- ments. Mr. Lamberton stated that he has recently purchased the business and does serve food from the pizza parlor, also from the delicatessan, however they naturally serve their own customers first. He will make every effort to see that menus are available, and table tents placed on each table regarding food service. He does now understand the requirements as set forth in a prior agreement and will comply. Cw Tirsell stated that it was her understanding that the reason this is before the Council is because the operations of the cocktail lounge did not comply with the state liquor requirements. Mr. Musso explained that the City received a complaint that there was a violation of the original conditions of approval and doesn't recall a complaint concerning any violations of any state require- ment. CM-30-239 July 28, 1975 (Report re East Avenue Cocktail Lounge Food Service) Mr. Parness stated that when there was a complaint, previously, the Council instructed the staff to monitor the operations and to see that they were complying with the regulations. This is really the basis of this investigation also. In his opinion, posted signs con- cerning food service, would bring about qualification. Cm Miller stated that he believes there should be a sign over the entrance to the bar and the tables and then if there are any more complaints the matter can be re-exarnined. One thing that is impor- tant is that the agreements made earlier should apply to successors. These requirements should have been made known to the successor. REPORT RE ADVANCED OCCUPANCY BY LONGS - LIVERMORE ARCADE SHOPPING CENTER The Chief Building Inspector reported that Longs Drug Store has requested occupancy in order to open for business during the first week in August. Construction of the store is essentially complete and it will be safe for occupancy upon final inspection and issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. However, since certain required improvements both on-site and off-site have not been completed, the Building Department will withhold occupancy until authorized by the City Council. Cw Tirsell stated that perhaps this matter could be continued for one week, for discussion at the August 4th meeting, and by that time they may have completed all of the required improvements. Mr. Street commented that Mr. Arrigone, from Longs, is present this evening and is sure he would like to know what the intent of the Council might be. Cm Miller stated that if he must make a decision this evening his decision would be the following: It has been a Council policy in the past that projects be complete before an occupancy permit is issued. If it is complete there is no problem and if it is not complete, occupancy should not be permitted. Anything else is very unclean and difficult. The only clean way to resolve these prob- lems is to make sure that everything is right prior to issuance of an occupancy permit. The City has had trouble in the past as the result of allowing occupancy early, and he does not want to see this continue. He stated that he is sorry that in this particular situation the matter is difficult but in his opinion occupancy should not be allowed until everything is complete. Mr. Arrigone, representing Longs, stated that at present they are 99% complete and there are a few minor items to be completed. Everything should be complete by the end of this week but the problem is that they can't wait for the Council to give approval next week and then try to open the next day. If the Council would make the conditions known tonight they would be willing to accept approval, subject to certain conditions. Cm Miller stated that the conditions are already listed by the building inspector, as to what is necessary for completion. As soon as everything has been completed the City will issue an occupancy permit. He would suggest that the Building Department expedite all the inspections so the people from Longs will not have to wait for inspections. Mr. Arrigone commented that the Safeway portion of the development will not be completed until sometime in September and would assume that these conditions would not be included. CM-30-240 / .~ July 2a, 1975 (Report re Advanced Occupancy by Longs) Mr. Parness stated that this is what has to be clearly established. There are parts included in this list that pertain to the general shopping center and the question is whether or not they should be qualified, or just matters pertaining to the structure and appurten- ances for the Longs store. Cm Miller stated that if the items remaining actually pertain to the Longs store, they should be complete. Cm Staley stated that he feels this information puts the issue in a different light because what we have is a complete shopping center with Longs, Safeway, and shops in between. Basically it appears that they are saying 1/3 of the development is ready but the remaining portion will not be ready until sometime in September. This is not much different than a developer corning in saying that 1/3 of his tract is ready. It was noted that prior to any development, the City requires all the public works improvements to be installed. Mr. Arrigone stated that he really feels it is not the responsi- bility of Longs to see that Safeway gets their air conditioning in, etc.,that everything the public would see has been done. Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that he is not opposed to Longs Drug opening, as long as their striping, etc., has been done, and he asked Mr. Street what remains to be done prior to opening of the doors and issuance of an occupancy permit. Mr. Street stated that Longs is essentially complete with the excep- tion of a few minor details such as the installation of a stair rail. There are possibly 8-ID items of this nature that will have to be done and can be done in a few days. However, there are some items, not pertaining to Longs, that remain uncompleted and this is what he would ask Council direction on. For exarnple, there are three light poles that PG&E will not have available until after Longs opens. Mr. Arrigone stated that all of the lighting is in and functional but the three remaining poles are for First Street and they have been ordered. Cm Miller stated that he believes anything having to do with the operation of Longs should be completed, if it is on the list or not. If there are items that should be debated, such as the three light poles, these should be called to the attention of the Council. Cm Staley stated that the only thing he views as an overwhelming concern on the list is the first item - dedication of parcels and a quitclaim for right-of-way along First Street. eM MILLER MOVED TO DIRECT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR TO PROVIDE A LIST OF THOSE ITEMS PERTAINING TO LONGS, TO REQUIRE THAT ALL ITEMS WHICH PERTAIN TO LONGS BE COMPLETE BEFORE AN OCCUPANCY PERMIT IS ISSUED AND THAT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR PREPARE THAT LIST OF THINGS WHICH PERTAIN TO LONGS TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE REPRESENTATIVES OF LONGS FOR THEIR INFORMATION. MOTION SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. Cm Staley asked if the list before the Council is a complete list or if there are other items that must be included. Lee Kerin, Engineering Department, stated that the list before the Council is only the public works requirements and there are still remaining on-site requirements. CM-3D-241 July 28, 1975 (Report re Advanced Occupancy by Longs) Mr. Street stated that the only other items he knows of are require- ments by the Planning Department such as landscaping. He stated that there is a median required for First Street and the City does not know at this time if an encroachment permit will be issued. He stated that there are some items such as this but the store itself will be complete with the exception of the very minor items he men- tioned. Cm Miller noted that his motion includes those items that remain to be done, including those not listed before the Council and the requirements by other departments, etc. Cm Staley stated that he is concerned about the first item on the list and is not sure whether or not this pertains to Longs or if it rests with SP; however, he will not vote in favor of occupancy until this item has been completed. Mr. Parness stated that the dedication and quitclaim is the respon- sibility and requirement of SP Development, and most assuredly these will be qualified prior to occupancy and acceptance of the development, by the City. Cm Miller stated that a partial occupancy is already being allowed. The point Cm Staley is making is that Longs will be allowed occupancy before we get the quitclaim and he wants to see that this is done first which Cm Miller agrees is a very reasonable request. Cm Staley stated that he is very sorry that it is not within Longs ability to comply with the dedication of the parcels and the quit- claim but the fact is that the owner of the property has not met the agreement and until that is done he cannot support the request for occupancy. He stated that he is not concerned about the minor items because they can be taken care of but the City has not prac- tical ability to enforce dedication of certain parcels. Mr. Logan stated that there is always the ability for enforcement. The bonds can be enforced, the contracts can be enforced, etc. The Council has been concerned in the past about enforcement of bonds and possible lengthy litigation. It just depends on what the Council wants to do to pursue enforcement - if they want to informally say to Longs to put pressure on SP to dedicate the parcels this would be less pressure than the City trying to enforce bonds. He added that he certainly wouldn't discount the fact that those bonds are there and they are enforceable unless the City does something that affects their enforcement. Cm Staley stated that he really feels it is the obligation of the Council to try to protect the public's money and while there is little possibility this would ever occur, this is the Council's opportunity to make sure the possibility for litigation becomes even more remote. CM STALEY MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION THAT THE CITY MUST HAVE THE QUITCLAIMS PRIOR TO ALLOWING OCCUPANCY,SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Cm Staley stated that as far as he is concerned Mr. Street can be responsible for seeing that an occupancy permit is not allowed until the items have been done, which pertain to Longs, with the exception of Item #l - this responsiblity is not to be delegated and something the Council wants done. (\ \ AMENDMENT PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CM-30-242 July 2a, 1975 REQUEST FOR ADVANCE OCCUPANCY - LIVERMORE GARDENS APARTMENTS The contractor for the Livermore Gardens Apartments (Goldrick-Kest) is again requesting that occupancy of these multiple dwellings be allowed in advance of completion, for security reasons. About 95% of the irrigation is complete and the planting is 35% complete. The Building Inspector recommends that the Council authorize issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for Buildings 1 through 20 upon notifica- tion of approval from Planning, Public Works and the Fire Department. Mr. Robert Hirsch, l523 Ventura Blvd., Sherman Oaks, Calif., one of the partners in the Livermore Gardens Apartments, referred to a newspaper article in the Valley Times of July 27, regarding in- flation requested in low cost housing rent, which he felt to be one of the most accurate reporting of the issue. He stated that he had never made any statements as to what the rent would be, but perhaps someone throught they could rent for $40, $50, $lDD or even $l50, but unfortunately it will be closer to $200 a month for a two-bedr90m apartment. That is why there will not be any convention- al apartments built in Livermore, or anywhere else for that matter. Mr. Hirsch,stated that at: this time they have IS people who want to rent units and explained the facilities and what they have to offer. He stated that he can understand the City's position and the desire to see that everything is done prior to allowing occu- pancy but would like to point out that this causes the developer hardships. If they can get some of the development released the air conditioning, etc. can be checked out, as well as the electrical portion and other such items, while the superintendent is still here and it is important for them to get as much work done as possible to utilize his time. He is a professional in this line of work and will be going on to another project. Cw Trirsell stated that she has no objection to allowing the develop- ment to test the air conditioning, etc. and if the complex will be completed in two weeks they will be getting their occupancy permits at this time anyway. Mr. Hirsch stated that a delay for the occupancy permits will not hurt him but there are many people waiting for the units who are living with other people until they can move in. He stated that they are getting daily inquiries as to the date they will be able to move in and another two weeks means that they won't have time to enroll their children in the schools. Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that the City has many projects going in at this time and it is important that the Council be consistent with their policy. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE CITY SATISFY THE POLICY OF REQUIRING FULL COMPLETION PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS AND IF IT IS SATISFACTORY WITH PG&E, ELECTRICAL TESTING IS PERMISSIBLE, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. /~ Cm Miller stated that this matter is essentially the same as with Longs in that Longs has also been required to complete everything which pertains to them before they are allowed occupancy. The Building Inspector will be asked to expedite inspections as they are completing items so that they will not be delayed because of inspection delays. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM-30-243 July 28, 1975 REPORT RE LEASE DEFAULT FIXED BASE OPERATOR - AIRPORT Despite repeated written appeals the current airport lessee has not satisfied full lease terms for the fixed base operation. Mainly these have to do with the provision of tax statements for gross re- ceipts so that the lease payment can be calculated. Such statements were due April 30, 1975. A letter of citation was sent to the lessee, David Madis. The City Manager added that much of the diffi- culty rests with the tax accounting defect authorized by the City Council several months ago. He read a letter from the new account- ing firm addressed to Mr. Madis which he had just received in which they asked for a two week extension due to a recent change in their firm. It had been recommended that if full satisfaction of the lease terms had not been reported by tonight that the City Council authorize foreclosure proceedings. The fixed base operator has asked for the two week extension on the prosecution so that the accounting details can be satisfied. The Mayor pro tem asked the City Manager what they should do and Mr. Parness stated that legal prosecution would not satisfy anything and suggested that the Council allow the two weeks, but nothing further than that. CW TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL FORECLOSE IN TWO WEEKS, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM TURNER. Cm Miller argued against the motion as he felt the foreclosure pro- ceedings should commence immediately. Cm Staley commented that it it his understanding of rights under a lease is that once you have given 30 days notice that the default has to be cleared, you are no longer required to allow performance, and asked the City Attorney if that was his understanding. Mr. Logan replied it was basically correct, but he could look into it; he would just indicate that at the very outset the "foreclosure" isn't legal in terms of going into court and forcing them out, but they will be given the proper notice and upon failure to leave after that notice, then we will go into court for unlawful detainer. The point of law concerning this matter was discussed further. CW TIRSELL WITHDREW HER MOTION, AND THE SECOND WAS ALSO WITHDRAWN. CM STALEY MOVED TO INSTRUCT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO IMMEDIATELY SEND ANY NOTICES REQUIRED BY LAW TO EFFECTIVELY TERMINATE THIS TENANCY, AND IN THE EVENT THOSE NOTICES ARE NOT COMPLIED WITH BY THE MINI- MUM PROVIDED FOR IN THE LAW, THAT HE IMMEDIATELY AFFECT FORECLOSURE. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. ISABEL AVENUE HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION The City Council has authorized an appraisal on 19 acres of pro- perty contained within Tr. 3333. It is intended to be used for a future state highway route. Thereafter, a request was to be made to Alarneda County to share in this acquisition to the extent of 4S% County, SS% City. A preliminary appraisal has been conducted with two values set, one in the amount of $210,ODO if the property can be developed, and $9S,00D if not. Since the tentative tract map has expired it is the staff assumption that no sewer commitments have been made and, therefore, the property cannot be served. The total monetary responsibility for its purchase would be $42,7S0 - County, $52,2S0 - City. (\ CM-30-244 July 28, 1975 (Isabel Avenue Highway R/W Acquisition) Our contact with County officials indicates that this sum is the absolute maximum that can be justified for County participation. The draft agreement with CALTRANS states that the City and County assume financial responsibility for all further hardship and protec- tion acquisitions until such time street construction is possible. County officials state that this provision might be eased by a sub- sequent City/County contract which divides the responsibility with the City assuming liability for the property within the City limits and the County for unincorporated properties. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO AUTHORIZE FORMAL APPLICATION TO BE MADE TO THE COUNTY, SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Mr. Parness stated the Council should be alerted to a couple of matters he is very concerned about: 1) that Supr. Murphy in his discussions with him is willing to approach the Board of Supervisors requesting financial participation, but in a limited amount - to 45% of the low appraisal received on the property. If the actual value of the property is higher, the City would be required to pick up the difference. 2) that part of the draft transmitted by CAL TRANS re the City and County responsibility for acquisition of all future rights of way along this route that may be endangered by property development. He would prefer a phrase which would say that that obligation would be met within our financial abilities, and he had discussed this with CALTRANS and they think that perhaps the Highway Commission would be willing to accept such a modification. Mr. Parness continued that he would hope that the Council would allow him to proceed with this approach but with the understanding that $42,7S0 is all they will likely get from the County, and further that we ask for a modification of the CALTRANS contract draft. Mr. Parness stated he has also discussed this with the property owner who has made a counter offer and has offered to sell the property to the City for what he paid for it four years ago, but that is higher than the appraisal. If the Council would allow him to proceed with negotiations with the property owner, but with those understandings which are encumbrances, in his view, he would like to do so. Cm Miller stated he would like to hear from the City Attorney as to what our obligations or liabilities might be. Mr. Logan stated that the figures he had were the same as those given the Council and he was not too familiar with the matter. In view of the fact this land was reserved, whether directly or indirectly, there is a serious complication as this could very well be considered subdivided land and as such could come up to a level of some $200,000, assuming the figure given is accurate. Secondly, there are some problems with the State agreement and there is the notation that perhaps all can be satisfied by zoning controls. One must be very careful with announcing in advance, or at any time, that you control any property by zoning controls other than zone it for the use which you think it should be zoned, not to control land use, but it mayor may not be a problem. He could not respond to any more than that since he is not familiar with the situation. Cm Miller stated he was uneasy and disturbed by the County's unwill- ingness to assume their share of whatever the cost may be. ,~. Mr. Parness remarked that Supr. Murphy contends that the 45% share obligation was what the county had agreed to long ago, which is correct. He further argues that the county feels they should only go 45% of the appraised value. CM-3D-245 July 2a, 1975 Isabel Avenue Highway Right of Way Acquisition Cw Tirsell asked what the total cost to the City would be with no county or state participation to develop the property with major streets. Mr. Parness stated that if the developer were required to build the streets it would be an economic impossibility. What the developer wants aside from price, which he feels can be negotiated to an equi- table level, is a building permit on two lots one of which has a house on it which he wants a permit to hookup and market, and one other permit and a third condition is that he would like to eventually annex the Shell station and the trailer park area, and he asked the Council for their reaction to those conditions. He asked the Council for permission to meet with the owner and get the terms and conditions clearly defined and get some idea about the monetary value involved. After some discussion CW TIRSELL WITHDREW HER MOTION, and the Council concurred that the matter should be continued for two weeks and the City Manager was directed to negotiate with the property owner. Cw Tirsell stated that in the interim she would like to learn what the state is talking about in terms of expressway so it will not be necessary to acquire property at the last minute. Cm Miller remarked that it has been the Council's position in the past that it has not been particularly anxious to have a freeway from Sunol, but merely a bypass through the City, and Mr. Parness agreed this was the position the Council had taken. REPORT RE CONSENT CALENDAR CONCEPT - DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE The City Council had asked the Design Review Committee to indicate their feelings on having all design review applications, not requir- ing their formal attention, to be processed under a consent calendar concept, the the Design Review Committee complied with a report and draft of some proposed ordinance changes concerning the matter. Mayor pro tern Turner asked the Council if they would consider con- tinuing this matter. Mr. Parness advised the Council that the Planning Commission is now considering other modifications associated with the design review process and suggested that it might be appropriate to refer this matter to them and in company with the other matter that they report back to the Council. Cm Miller stated that he felt what had been suggested by the Design Review Committee had a lot of style and class, and he was happy with their proposed changes and would like to have the staff prepare an ordinance. The Planning Director remarked that a public hearing has already been set regarding some amendments to the zoning ordinance. CM STALEY MOVED THAT THE MATTER BE REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL, AND THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. ('\ REPORT RE PROPOSED CHANGES TO TRAILER STORAGE ORDINANCE A report was received from the Planning Commission regarding some proposed changes to the Trailer Storage Ordinance. CW TIRSELL MOVED THAT THIS ITEM BE CONTINUED TO August 18, SECONDED BY CM MILLER. CM-3D-246 July 28, 1975 (Proposed Changes to Trailer Storage Ordinance) Cm Miller stated that when this matter is brought up again he would hope that everyone would refer to the memo which he had prepared on this issue before they have the final discussion. THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. ORDINANCE RE HOTEL TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX ORDINANCE NO. 867 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 21. as, RELATING TO IMPOSITION OF TAX, OF ARTICLE V, RELATING TO HOTEL TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX, OF CHAPTER 21, RELATING TO TAXATION, OF THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 19S9. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL, AND BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE THE ABOVE ORDINANCE WAS ADOPTED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS Miller, Staley and Tirsell COUNCILMEMBER Turner Mayor Futch ORDINANCE AMENDING SEC. la.aO RE RATES, SEWER SERVICE & USE CHARGE CM STALEY MOVED THAT THE FOLLOWING ORDINANCE BE ADOPTED, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL, AND THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY (Mayor Futch absent.) ORDINANCE NO. 868 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS la.aO, RELATING TO RATES GENERALLY, AND 18.83, RELATING TO INDUSTRIAL AND MISCEL- LANEOUS CUSTOMERS GENERALLY, OF ARTICLE III, RELATING TO SEWER SERVICE AND USE CHARGE, OF CHAPTER 18, RELATING TO SEWERS, OF THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 19S9. SOCIAL CONCERNS COMMITTEE The minutes of the Social Concerns Committee meeting of June 12 were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion at this time. Cw Tirsell referred to page 2 of the proposed by-laws and stated that was the intention of the Council regarding membership to draw upon the list of socially oriented community groups for the initial group, and wondered if they should show as Section 2 that Members and alternates shall be appointed by the Council, and delete the remainder of that section. She felt that Section 3 covers their concern regarding selecting members. Cm Miller felt that when there are vacancies the Council should have the right to add anybody to the list. Cw Tirsell stated she wanted to get away from the organizational ....,vand she~elt Section 3 would cover their concern. Q f'f<' · (\1' ".,~. r, ;- tI2~i:. The Council concurred with the suggested revision. CM-30-247 July 2a, 1975 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to corne before the Council, the meeting adjourned at l2:33 a.m. to an executive session to discuss a legal matter. ATTEST ~ dvh/~ Mayor 0JL- APPROVE .;:, Cl.ty Clerk Livermore, California Regular Meeting of August 4, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on August 4, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:ID p.m. with Mayor pro tempore Turner presiding. ROLL CALL Present: Cm Turner, Miller, and Cw Tirsell Absent: em Staley (Excused Vacation) and Mayor Futch (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. MINUTES July 21, 1975 Page 200, last paragraph, next to last line should read: at the budget session held earlier by the Council, and that not many...etc. Page 2DS, third paragraph, should be restated as follows: Cw Tirsell wished the P.C. would discuss the philosophy of whether, in fact, established standards do or do not violate the purpose of the PD Zoning; if not, then discuss standards. Page 212, third paragraph from the bottom, 4th line should read: given. She stated that a member of the Noise Abatement Cornmittee...etc. Page 207, first paragraph, should be restated as follows: Cm Miller suggested that the Council direct the staff to ask for Livermore's proportion of the total LAVWMA pipeline established. If Pleasanton wants 12 MGD extra, they pay for the pipeline proportionally. Page 216, next to last paragraph, second line: as the City has a judgment...etc. ~- ! MAYOR FUTCH WAS SEATED DURING DISCUSSION OF THE MINUTES. CM TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF JULY 21, 1975, AS CORRECTED, AND THE SPECIAL MEETINGS OF JULY 21, 1975, AS SUBMITTED, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE (Mayor Futch dissenting - Absent at that Meeting) . CM-30-248 August 4, 1975 (Letter re Budget Priorities) Elizabeth Mondon, Singing Hills Avenue, stated that last week she read a letter to the Council indicating that people had expressed concern about the budget and that priorities should be reconsidered and wondered if anything has been done about her suggestions. Mayor Futch explained that this has been referred to the staff for recommendation and when the Council receives a report from the staff this matter will be discussed further. Mrs. Mondon asked if anything had been decided about allowing the citizens to vote on the public safety matter brought up in the past by Cm Turner and it was noted that this has not been decided either. P.H. RE PROPOSED Z.O. RE TEMPORARY SIGNS Mr. Musso explained that the amendment to the zoning ordinance con- sists of two sections. One has to do with the PUD permit feature and that amendments are brought about as a result of the adoption of the OS-UR regulations. It was recommended by the consultant that changes be made and the most important is the recommendation to delete the minimum site requirement for a PUD permit. In addition there were some cleanup recommendations that the P.C. agreed to, and these are noted. The consultant also deleted other requirements, such as the constructive notice of permit where the fact that the permit existed had to be recorded. One amendment was initiated, per the directions of the City Attorney, relative to signs for the purpose of conforming our ordinance to the Contra Costa case ruling out the opportunity of the City to regulate size and placement of portable signs. The City may regulate signs in the public right-of-way, not covered by this ordinance. The de- cision also allows the City to post a bond or collect a surety fee to guarantee that signs will be removed after a particular campaign. The P.C. felt this would not be feasible because individuals are involved and not always just the candidate. There was discussion concerning 26.80 Rezoning and the reason for the deletion and Mr. Musso explained that there will be no zoning districts, everything will be OS-UR and he felt the wording was superfluous. Cm Miller stated that if the PUD prevails over the zoning districts, the conditions of the PUD permit are weaker. Tom Bailey, 554 Escondido Circle, stated that the agenda indicates a report is attached and there doesn't seem to be an attachment. He stated that because of this it is difficult to follow the conver- sation of the Council. It was explained that the Councilmembers receive a complete agenda with all reports attached and that there are copies available for public review at the library, City Hall and outside the Court Chambers during the meeting. Cm Miller explained that the expanded agenda is available to the /-', public if they are interested in a particular item and pointed out that in years past such information was not published for the convenience of the public. David Eller, Livermore, stated that perhaps a separate agenda should be pUblished for the public without the wording "see attached" and that this might eliminate the problem. CM-30-249 August 4, 1975 Mr. Musso continued to explain that the proposed changes in the PUD procedure primarily consist of wording changes for the pro- cedures and elimination of some superfluous wording, also to delete the minimum size requirements for what can be a PUD require- ment. previously, in order to obtain a PUD, the property had to be a certain size. Now the procedure is that everything has to be a PUD. The other change was to delete any restrictions on political signs with respect to size and number. Mrs. Mondon asked if, in doing this, there is any provision made for making sure that development is done according to the plan. Cm Miller stated that PUDs are only as sure as the next request for amendment. There are no guarantees and he added that he has been a victim of PUD permit areas, as have most residents who have lived in them. PUDs are mechanisims for getting around zoning standards and, in fact, every single PUD permit ever approved by the City, with the exception of the Ravenswood property, could have been done by standard zoning. However, if these had been done by standard zon- ing there would have not been the easy amendments that resulted. CM TURNER MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. Cm Miller stated that he would like to discuss the question of a political sign as follows: I) The Concord Court decision is a lower court decision and does not yet have the force of law. 2) Some of the issues raised by the court seem to be very reasonable; narnely, the first arnendment consideration should prevail. 3) The City of Concord did not defend some of the areas we have in our present ordinance and the court pointed out that since they didn't bother to defend it or justify what they had done, the court struck down those provisions. Cm Miller stated that the point being made in this decision is that the first amendment overrides other things unless there is a good argument. Some of the things Concord did, for example, were to allow a single sign of 4 sq. ft. for all election issues. Our n) ~ ordinance allows any number of signs on all the issue and all~\~~~t'- the seats open, if people choose, but t~;~A_~~ a maxA~~_~ize~~~ allowed. He stated that he would sugges~'~as fa~-'jUggested by Mr. Reiners, but rather _8 a.)ie some changes in our ordinance consistent with the "free speech argument" and still retaining some of the flavor we have. Cm Miller added that the purpose of signs for free speech is to allow somebody to express an opinion. The key to expressing that opinion is that the sign be visible and of adequate size so that a reasonable message can be observed. The size it takes to observe a message can be small in a residential area, where people don't travel rapidly, and would have to be larger on the freeway. Since the discussion concerns, primarily, signs in residential areas, the argument that a small sign would work carries some weight because the message is visible. He stated that if we take out all the restrictions which would allow a 300 sq. ft. billboard on somebody's front yard, it is not reason- able and that some limitation of sign should be acceptable. Cm Miller suggested that in Sec. 21.72 8. E. 3. (d) the City continue with provision, as it was, except to eliminate the 30 day time period. (' \'" CM-30-25D August 4, 1975 (P.H. re Proposed z.o. re Temporary Signs) Secondly, in "C" where 4 sq. ft. are allowed in residential and 8 sq. ft. are allowed in commercial/industrial, he would suggest 4 sq. ft. for each issue but no upper limit on the number of sign sizes, and that it be 12 sq. ft. in the commercial areas. He stated that he feels if there is no limitation to the issues people can speak to, these should satisfy the requirements of free speach. Lastly, Cm Miller stated the P.C. talked about, but rejected, the idea of a deposit. The deposit was upheld in the Concord case and he feels there is merit in asking for a fee, despite the argument against it. He stated that candidate usually puts up the sign and then removes it, or his sign crew takes care of the signs, and he should be charged $IDD. If all the signs are removed the candidate can be reimbursed the $IOD or be charged $5 for each sign not removed. Mr. Logan explained that this decision was made by a u.s. District Court and a u.S. District Court, as far as this judicial district is concerned, does have the force of law with any decision that is made and published by it, unless this decision is inconsistent with the higher court's ruling. Mr. Logan then advised that if the Council intends to limit the size of signs and wants to overcome the argument that this is a limitation on free speach, the Council will have to be able to put together sufficient facts to prove that those signs are readily readable by anyone traveling in the area. He stated that he realizes the concern expressed by Cm Miller for no limitation allowing a bill- board in a residential area but the main problems Concord had was that the factual situation did not support their legal arguments that size limitation did not infringe upon one's first amendment rights. Cm Miller stated that if it is determined that a 4 sq. ft. sign is not visible we can go to 6 sq. ft. or even 8 sq. ft.; however, he would suggest there be some kind of limitation. Cw Tirsell asked if the City Attorney feels he can find court decisions that would support the sign limitation and Mr. Logan stated that this is not necessarily what he meant but if the Council wants to immunize themselves against possible legal complications he would suggest that he be allowed to do some research. Cw Tirsell stated that she has no objection to allowing the City LJ Attorney to do some research on cases to use as a backup; however, ~.~\ if he finds nothing she would support the P.C. recommendation Re- ~ cause there is no reason to have an ordinance that cannot be cg'Up:.:::-'~c.~< PQr~ee. She suggested that this portion be continued until it can be determined whether or not there is legal support for the proposal to limit sign size. CW Tirsell added that she is opposed to charging $100 for the candidates signs because she has experienced a bare bones campaign during a recession era. She stated that at the time of her campaign she did not have $100 to put down for signs and this would discourage candidates of the low income category. She stated that she would be against any additional costs for campaigning. ~, Cm Turner stated that he would support Cw Tirsell because he feels the biggest offenders are the people campaigning for supervisor or the Assembly over which the City has no control. People running for office in town are generally very good about removing their signs after the election. However, he woulb be upset if someone put a billboard across the street from him and would suggest that something be done in the way of size limitation. CM-3D-251 August 4, 1975 (P.H. re Proposed Z.O. re Temporary Signs) Mayor Futch pointed out that if there is a sign for a political candidate there likely would be no problem concerning size of sign. However, if someone wishes to give an expression of an opinion there may be some problem with sign limitation, depending on the length or wording content and the sign may have to be very large. Mr. Logan stated he believes this would be a very legitimate prob- lem but his concern is that he would not be able to lend to the Council the expertise on those kinds of factual determinations. He stated that he can tell them what the law says but certainly cannot research that kind of issue nor can he look into how long a sign can be. He stated that it would appear that the length of the sign would be unlimited. He added that he would like to tell the Council with some certainty that first amendment rights are not unlimited. There are only certain kinds of newspapers that can be placed on the street and this is the same type of issue - there are some limitations that can be applied but they must be very reasonable. Cm Miller stated that he would like to mention, for the records, that traditionally this Council has encouraged, and should encour- age, people to express their opinions, political or otherwise, within reasonable bounds. CM MILLER MOVED TO CONTINUE THE SIGN ORDINANCE ISSUE PENDING A REPORT FROM THE STAFF, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE P.C. WITH THE EXCEPTION THAT THE ENTIRE WORDING FOR 26.aO BE RETAINED, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND THE MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. Cm Turner wondered about Section 26.50, .51 and .S2, concerning the time, noting that it takes 90 days for an application to get to the Council. Mr. Musso explained that 90 days is the minimum length of time necessary for processing an application because of the Environ- mental Impact Report. This was followed by discussion concerning time, however no change was made. CONSENT CALENDAR RES. REMAIL DELIVERY The resolution supporting HR 422S concerning curbside mail delivery was postponed until next week. REPORT RE EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARD PROGRAM The report concerning the Employee Service Award Program was con- tinued to the end of this meeting. REPORT RE STATUS CERTIFICA- TION FOR RAVENSWOOD PARK r' The state requires a certificate that the Ravenswood property will be used for park and recreation purposes and it is recommended that a resolution be adopted authorizing execution of certificate. CM-3D-252 August 4, 1975 (Status Certification for Ravenswood Park) RESOLUTION NO. 159-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF CERTI- FICATE RE USE OF RAVENSWOOD PARK RES. APPROVING EMERGENCY OPERATING PLAN It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution approving the Emergency Operating Plan, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk. RESOLUTION NO. 160-75 RESOLUTION APPROVING EMERGENCY OPERATING PLAN HOUSING AUTHORITY rUNUTES FOR JUNE 24 Minutes of the Housing Authority meeting of June 24, 1975, were noted for filing. RES. RE STREET RESURFACING It is recommended that a resolution be adopted recording the Notice of Completion for the Street Resurfacing Project 75-l. RESOLUTION NO. 161-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER TO RECORD NOTICE OF COMPLETION RE PROJECT 75-l - STREET RESURFACING. PAYROLL & CLAIMS There were 63 claims in the amount of $2a,232.l8, dated July 28, 1975, and approved by the City Manager. There were 64 claims in the amount of $107,92D.II and 280 payroll warrants in the amount of $94,D66.12 for a total of $2DI,986.23, dated July 31, 1975 which were ordered paid as approved by the City Manager APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED WITH THE DELETION OF ITEM 2.1 WHICH WAS POSTPONED UNTIL NEXT WEEK, AND 2.2 ~mICH WAS CONTINUED TO THE END OF THE MEETING FOR DISCUSSION. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (Executive Session) (' The City Attorney requested that the Council meet in an executive session immediately after the meeting to discuss litigation con- cerning condemnation. (Tax Exempt Credit for Senior Citizens) Mr. Parness reported that the City is attempting to gain more informa- tion concerning tax exempt credits for Senior Citizens and will notify the Council when information is received. CM-30-253 August 4, 1975 (First Street Cruising) Mr. Parness stated that the City continues to have problems con- cerning First Street cruising and it was a bad weekend. The foot patrol has been fairly successful but the City is limited as to personnel, as the staff has been instructed that overtime must be stringently reduced. The Chief of Police, as well as the City Manager, is very concerned about the property damage that ~_ has occurred on First Street and recently about $300 worth of dam- ( age was done to cars parked in the Oldsmobile parking lot on First . Street. The hotel across the street was broken into and furniture was damaged, removed and burned. There doesn't seem to be an answer other than to add manpower or funding to allow the necessary manpower during the weekend. Cw Tirsell stated that she is getting calls from some of the senior citizens who are afraid to go out at night because of all the things that have been happening. Cm Miller wondered if it would be possible to temporarily ask assis- tance of the Highway Patrol and the Sheriff's Office. Mr. Parness stated that he does not believe the Sheriff's Office would become involved but the Highway Patrol might agree to help inasmuch as it is a state route; however, they are also limited to personnel numbers. He added that the cruising is not the primary problem but rather the loitering and littering on sidewalks and private property. The foot patrol has been very effective by using the proper psy- chology the patrolmen are able to talk to the kids and get them to move along, but the officers often have to be taken from this area to answer other calls and that is the problem. There is a regular officer and a reserve officer on foot patrol but if there are any problems elsewhere in the City they have to leave First Street. Bobby Silva, stated that she moved to Livermore from San Leandro where there are the same kind of problems Mr. Parness is referring to. Her family moved here because Livermore has a lot to offer but expressed concern for the lack of facilities to busy teenage children during the weekends. She stated there are no skating rinks or anything else other than a movie to occupy their time during the whole weekend and possibly this is something that should be considered. (Consultant Report re Transportation) Mr. Parness reported that last week our Transportation Advisory Com- mittee met and received the draft report from the consultants on this item. There were comments made as to minor modifications but the Committee is quite anxious to have final copies of the report trans- mitted. Tentatively, subject to Council concurrence, they would like to arrange a joint meeting on the 13th with invitations to interested citizens and the Planning Commission. Unfortunately the Council will not be able to review the report until the lIth because it can't be printed sooner. Cm Turner felt there wouldn't be time to review the report and then to meet on the 13th to discuss it with the consultant, etc. It was noted that the meeting would be for the purpose of informa- tion and not decision making. Mr. Parness explained that there are only a couple of sections that have statistics and believes the Council would have no trouble in reviewing these sections within an hour. :~ ~. CM-3D-254 August 4, 1975 (Supervisor Cooper's Resolution re ABAG) Mr. Parness reported that he has received a copy of Supervisor Cooper's resolution in the form of a request that ABAG review our General Plan on the same basis the Las positas Plan was reviewed, which he is asking the Board of Supervisors to endorse at their next meeting. Mr. Parness stated that he doesn't know what the intention of the resolution might be other than the possibility that Supervisor Cooper is trying to follow the tactics used by the City by saying that the Livermore General Plan is virtually committing the same things proposed by Las positas because our General Plan anticipates urbanization of that area. Cw Tirsell stated that she would like to have a resolution prepared again for the Council to send to ABAG because the point was made many times during the hearings that the disposition of the Livermore General Plan had no relationship to Las positas - they reviewed Las positas and found it to be nonconforming, regardless of what Liver- more's General Plan said about the area. There were many areas that did not conform to a regional housing plan that the Planning Com- mittee heard and noted. It was concluded that a letter to ABAG might be very effective and that they might be more likely to read information contained in a letter. (RE Board of Supervisors Night Meetings) Cm Turner stated that he and Cm Miller had the opportunity to speak with Supervisor Santana and during their conversation it was men- tioned that the Board of Supervisors are considering eliminating their night meetings. Supervisor Santana would like the meetings to continue for at least a year, as it takes some time for people to become accustomed to changes. It was suggested that the Livermore City Council contact the mayors in Alameda County to ask that they endorse Supervisor Santana's proposal to let the night meetings continue for at least another six months. There are many people who just cannot get to meetings during the day. (Trailer Ordinance) Cm Turner stated that a Mr. Chandler Smith has presented some ideas in writing, concerning the Trailer Ordinance, that should be con- sidered at the time the ordinance is again discussed. (Greenville Area Shopping Center) Cm Turner stated that he has received a telephone call from someone interested in getting support for establishment of a shopping center in the Greenville North area. ,~\ Cm Miller suggested that the City write to Tradewell encouraging them to make use of property already zoned CN - such as an area in the North I-580 area. CM-3D-255 August 4, 1975 (Use of sewer~n ~ Plant Gas) f.\/lflfY Q!.~Jra Cm 1111ler stated that he has received a telephone call from someone asking if the methane gas at the sewer plant could be used for power purposes and would like information on this suggestion. Mr. Lee explained that the methane gas is used to heat the digesters but at this time it is doubtful that there enough for power. He added that this was a suggestion made to the consultant but the consultant wasn't interested in the suggestion. (Barking Dogs) Cm Turner stated that he has received two complaints about barking dogs. Apparently people do not like to complain to their neighbors because a complaint may cause bad relationships. It is his under- standing that San Francisco recently passed an ordinance relative to barking dogs and perhaps the City Attorney could obtain the ordinance and provide the Council with a copy. (Greenville Misrepresentation) Cm Miller stated that during the recess last week he was talking with two people from the Greenville North area who indicated that they had been "lied to" about the availability of schools and shopping facilities as well as other things, at the time they pur- chased their property. The City has a Truth in Real Estate Ordi- nance which requires some kind of statement from real estate people who sell property, having to do with the property sold. It seems that this might be an instance which the City should pursue, on behalf of this person, because it looks like our ordinance was also violated because the present property owener received erroneous infor- mation. Cm Miller submitted the property owner's name to Mr. Parness for fOllow-up. (Corps of Engineers Report re Land Disposal) Cm Miller stated that he has received notice of an Interim Report, by the Corps of Engineers, concerning the San Francisco Bay, Sacra- mento, San Joaquin Delta Regions of Water Quality and Waste Control Through Investigation. He stated that the report goes on about land disposal and he feels this is very interesting because opportunities for Livermore to land dispose are very limited and attacked by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. He would suggest that the City respond, pointing out the fact situation and ask why they are pushing land disposal when other agencies are not allowed to do this. Cw Tirsell commented that the report is very voluminous but perhaps a copy can be obtained by the City Manager for review by the Council. She stated that at present it is available only in certain libraries. (Courtesy Aviation Default) 0, ~ Cm Miller stated that there has been a default on the part of Courtesy Aviation with respect to their lease with the City. Mr. Madis was given notice and Cm Miller would suggest that the staff be directed to proceed. CM-30-256 August 4, 1975 (Max Baer Parking Lot) Cw Tirsell stated that there was a large truck parked in the Max Baer parking lot and if this continues the parking lot won't last long. L (Shopping Centers) Mayor Futch stated that when there was discussion concerning neighbor- hood shopping centers he suggested that consideration be given to providing housing for senior citizens near shopping centers, as part of the ordinance. This suggestion was referred to the Planning Commission and since it has been some time since the referral was sent he would like a letter sent to the P.C. from the Council asking for their response to this request. Mr. Musso stated that the P.C. did discuss this proposal in the course of developing the CN Zone but concluded that this should be treated as a separate item. Apparently they just haven't gotten back to it. (Civic Center Site) Joe Concannon has had a suggestion concerning beautification efforts to improve the Civic Center site, and perhaps some response from the Council would be in order. Cw Tirsell felt that this possibly should be referred to the Beauti- fication Committee. Mayor Futch stated that it was felt there is really more involved than just the beautification. In particular, the City has set aside money for the basics of an irrigation system. (Complaint re Bike Path) Mayor Futch stated 'that he has received complaints about the bike path in the sunken gardens area. The path goes around a sharp corner in one area with quite a slope downhill and a few people have fallen. He suggested that the turn be banked to help solve the 'problem. (Arroyo Bridge) Cm Turner stated that he has received complaints about the condition of the pedestrian/bike path on the east side of Arroyo Bridge. The path is in very poor condition and many people prefer to use the path rather than cross the bridges in the lanes for cars. Mr. Lee reported that the path is presently being worked on by crews and since it is wooden it does have to be repaired frequently. (Bike Trails) ~ Mayor Futch stated that in planning the Civic Center site it was felt that it might be a good idea to plan a bike path to connect with the sunken gardens path to a path that would lead to the arroyo through the Robertson Park area. Mr. Lee explained that there are property acquisitions that have to be made to realize this route in addition to the necessity for bike paths in the Robertson park area that LARPD will have to provide. CM-3D-257 August 4, 1975 (Motorcycles in the Arroyo) Mayor Futch stated that he has received complaints about motorcycles in the arroyo and wondered if it would be possible to get a policeman to go there on weekends. Mr. Parness stated that it is a matter of divising a method whereby the offenders can be caught, but he will try to have someone check. (Visitors Gift) Mayor Futch stated that he feels it would be appropriate if the City of Livermore could offer some type of gift to visitors. Mr. Parness will be reporting back to the Council concerning sug- gestions as to what types of gifts might be appropriate. (State Energy Research & Development) Mayor Futch stated that he has received a letter from the State Energy Research Development Commission asking for an appointment of someone from the City with whom they can communicate and asked whether or not the City has adopted any energy conserving related ordinances. Cm Miller stated that he would suggest appointing Cm Dahlbacka and Mayor Futch felt perhaps a staff contact would be more appro- priate and Mr. Parness was designated. (Stanley Blvd. Bike Path) Mayor Futch stated that there are to be some bikeway plans for the bike path on Stanley Boulevard and asked when this will be presented. It was noted that this is one of the items the City wants to get done and Mr. Lee reporetd that a schedule of tasks has been out- lined and the schedule is quite lengthy. Numerous property owners have to be contacted and rights-of-way have to be determined - this is the stage the staff is working on presently. A preliminary de- sign has been prepared. RECESS Mayor Futch called for a brief recess after which the Council meeting resumed with all members present, as during roll call. (Letter to Corps of Engineers) The Councilmembers reviewed the letter written by Mayor Futch to the Corps of Engineers. Cm Turner stated that his understanding of the letter is that Mayor Futch is saying to the Corps again that we would urge the Corps to limit its studies to the traditional role of flood control within the Livermore/Amador Valley. 1" \_--../ CM-3D-2S8 August 4, 1975 (Letter-Corps of Engineers) Mayor Futch stated that the point is, there are a number of other agencies that are doing the other studies proposed to be done by the Corps of Engineers. He feels there would be unnecessary duplica- tion of effort and particularly when this is not a local agency doing the study. Cm Turner stated that he not opposed to urging them to limit their studies; however, he is also not opposed to other studies being done by them as long as Pleasanton, Livermore, and VCSD can still control the implementation of any study. In view of this, the way the letter is written, he would be opposed to sending it to them. Cm Tirsell stated that she agrees with the letter in that it reiterates the position previously taken by the Council and is the exact position reiterated back to the Council by the Corps - that they would not undertake other studies. She stated that she feels it does not hurt to keep reminding them of their promises to us. She pointed out that studies done happen to come from the taxpayers and we certainly do not need large numbers of groups looking at the same problem. Cm Miller added that the Corps has already been authorized to spend more money, and to not accomplish anything, than LAVWMA will spend by the time its contract is finished. Mayor Futch stated that basically, what the City is trying to say is that, sewage treatment for cities has always been someth~~he cities should take care of. We ~ cities as well as ~~v! agencies involved are probablYffi It ~ taking care of these ~J.;< problems and he does not really understand the Army's part in this~Y~ matter. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE LETTER WRITTEN BY THE MAYOR BE SENT TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND PASSED 3-1 (Cm Turner dissenting) . COMMUNICATION RE REQUEST FOR SUPPORT OF SB IDD re GAS TAX A letter has been received from the Alameda County Transportation Advisory Committee requesting support of SB IDO proposing a one cent increase in gas and diesel fuel taxes. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THIS ITEM BE NOTED FOR FILING, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. APPEAL FOR VARIANCE - GREAT AMERICAN LAND & DEVELOPMENT (Murdell Lane) 1'" Mr. Musso reported that the Great American Land and Development Co. has submitted an appeal for a variance to allow reduction of side yards in the 40 unit Murdell Lane Tract. The P.C. denied the reqfest for a variance noting that the entire pun area developed to RS regu- lations. There have been no similar variances granted except at a time when the City was going into a transition. The P.C. also did not make the prescribed findings to allow the variance. Cw Tirsell stated that she really doesn't understand the intent of the application because the park is located behind these houses and if the side yards are reduced it will mean that there will be more open space. CM-3D-259 August 4, 1975 (Appeal for Variance - Great American Land & Development (Murdell Lane) Bill Schworer with Great American Land and Development, stated that the comments made by Mr. Musso have been very clear and would rather not go into the discussion which took place with the P.C. because he did not agree with them and they did not agree with him. He stated that they have tried to comply with the letter of the ordi- nance as well as the spirit of the ordinance but that property is difficult to develop on. They wanted to have a side yard reduction because they wish to develop a wide house and two story with 12 ft. on the garage side and from 8-12 ft. on the other side, which did not comply with the ordinance. They therefore decided that they could accomplish what they wanted by adjusting lot lines but in reading the ordinance they found there were problems and he would like to request withdrawal of the appeal. They have corne up with a plan that will provide the minimum side yards required by the ordinance, and they comply with setback for front and back but he noted that they are having difficulty with the percentage of coverage and wondered if this can be discussed with the Council rather than having to go back through the P.C. Mayor Futch felt it probably would not be appropriate for the Coun- cil to discuss this issue and that it should go back to the P.C. Cm Miller stated that if Mr. Schworer has withdrawn his appeal then coverage is not a part of the original discussion with the P.C. and if he wishes a variance on coverage he would have to begin at the P.C. level again. Cm Miller added that one case will have to be required by a court decision to increase coverage because no variance is granted for coverage. Mayor Futch stated that it would be very doubtful that the P.C. would change the amount of coverage permitted. CM TIRSELL MOVED TO REFER THE MATTER BACK TO THE P.C., SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Mayor Futch then asked if this motion would be appropriate and Mr. Musso explained that the application was for approval of a plot plan, as submitted, and more specifically having to do with the side yards which were less than required. The applicant has amended the site plan. Mr. Logan replied that what the Council has before them is a vari- ance that has already gone through the P.C., they have made their findings. The applicant has appealed the P.C. decision and also has withdrawn the appeal which means the end of the matter. If he intends to do something else, beginning with the P.C., this is his choice. At this point there is nothing to refer back to the P.C. THE MOTION WAS WITHDRAWN. APPEAL RE SIGN VARI- ANCE - JERSEY CROWN DAIRY The appeal from Roy Viscomi concerning the decision of the P.C. for the Jersey Crown Dairy sign at 112 Maple Street was continued to August lIth at the request of the applicant. n CM-3D-26D August 4, 1975 REPORT RE CBD PARKING & BUS. LICENSE SURCHARGE ( U Several years ago a surcharge was added to the business license fee for downtown merchants to pay the lease costs of the parking facili- ties located behind the First Street retail area. The charge amounts to 146% for merchants on the north side of First Street and 79% for those on the south side and those merchants on South "J" and South "K". A petition has been signed by 17 merchants on South "J" and South "K", objecting to the surcharge, l3 of which presently pay the surcharge. Mr. Parness reported that the particular merchants affected by the surcharge have been paying the fee for about 8 years of the IO year lease term and the lease amount has been paid annually by this method. There was a very careful analysis done of the equity involved in estab- lishing the rate and admittedly a line has to be drawn someplace. It had to be determined which merchants would benefit from the parking lot and which would not, and there could be a number of arguments cast in this regard. There are properties contained within the bounds of the district that may argue that no benefit is received from the parking lot but this is a highly debatable subject. Mr. Parness stated that he tried to explain to some of the complaining merchants that the parking lot is full, daily, and that most of the parking is taken up by employers and employees of the stores. If the parking lot were not available these cars would be parking on the street and could be consuming many of the on-street stalls that the merchants are now trying to keep clear for their customers. Therefore, even if some of the customers do not park there the additional parking facilities allow customers to park on-street. Although he can sympa- thize with the grievances expressed, money must be afforded and the fee must be paid by someone. At the time the lease was arranged it was agreed by the merchants, overwhelmingly, that this kind of arrangement was their preference. The County is being assessed a supplemental amount because a substantial number of people are using the parking facilities while at the court offices. The County is paying $l,2DD/year which is credited towards the lease rate charged to the businesses. Mr. Parness has inquired as to the availability of additional S.P. property that might be available for additional parking facilities and S.P. is proposing some type of charge and area the City might be offered. This means that there will have to be a source found for the payment of the improvement and leasing of property for parking purposes and he has written to the County to alert them that much of the reason for the need for additional property is because of what is happening with respect to the court building. There is now a second court located there, a District Attorney's office, and reportedly a probation office with about nine probation officers located in the building. The complaint has been made that BART commuters are using the parking facilities but during investigation it has been found that very few commuters are using the parking lot. (- -,"--- Mr. Parness stated that some of the merchants may have a right to complain but the revenue must corne from somewhere. The City has tried very hard on three occasions to form off-street parking assess- ment districts that would primarily benefit the areas of "J" and "K" Street, and all of the merchants at that time were in favor of it but the property owners were the blocking force. Cm Miller stated that he recalls watching the efforts for the forma- tion of an assessment district and that two of the people who were opposed to the district have signed the petition. The lease and fee was worked out with the merchants on an annual basis and it would seem best to leave things as they are. CM-3D-261 August 4, 1975 (Report re CBD Parking & Business License Surcharge) It was noted that the City gains no revenue from this source but that the surcharge is only for the amount of the lease payment and repair of the parking lot. Cm Tirsell wondered if the County will be contributing more money since the second court will be there. v Mr. Parness stated that he has written to the County informing them that the City cannot accommodate anymore off-street parking on the present lot and the City is asking the adjoining property owners to make available more property. This means that the County will have to pay more and hopefully the City will receive a favorable response from them. Cm Turner felt it should be determined just what percentage of park- ing is being used by people coming to the court - if it's 90% the County should pay 90% of the cost of the lease. If, on the other hand, merchants and employees are using 90% of the parking, the merchants should pay 90% of the cost. Mr. Parness stated that about two years calculations were made, with rather exacting proof of how many stalls were being used by people going to the court, and it equated to about $IOD/month. The County did not contest this amount and agreed to pay it; how- ever calculations can be done again. It was suggested that after the additional development takes place concerning the court building and after the second court and pro- bation offices have settled, a calculation should again be done. Ruth Bailey, S54 Escondido, wondered why there are no parking meters in the lot as well as on the street as a source of revenue for the City and then perhaps some of the all day parking would move elsewhere. Mr. Parness replied that the Council discussed this matter, in great depth, and the matter was reviewed by two different off-street parking committees. It was concluded that parking meters would result in the opposite of what the City needs downtown, just in the interest of the economic liability. Where parking meters are used and are of some benefit, are in highly congested mercan- tile districts that require turn-over parking. Meters are a regulatory device to move cars. What the City needs to do is to make parking an amenity to shopping and more convenient, and parking meters will not satisfy this requirement. If enough money is not generated from the meters then they become a finan- cial burden. It was felt that the revenue generated, in Livermore, would be a fraction of what would be needed. Bobby Silva, part owner of The Cover-Up on South "J" Street, stated that her concern is for more parking on the south side of First Street, not additional parking adjacent to the already existing parking lot. She stated that her customers will not park across the street behind the stores on First Street and walk to her shop. She stated that during the evening hours when it is dark she will not walk to the car that far from the store in the dark and she wouldn't expect her clients to do it either. Mayor Futch asked if there are lots on the south side of First Street that could be used for additional parking and Mr. Parness replied that there are lots located there but they are privately owned. Mr. Parness added that it was the intention of the City that if a parking assessment district could be formed, some of this CM-3D-262 August 4, 1975 (Report re CBD Parking & Bus. License Surcharge) property would be purchased for this purpose; however, the City has been unsuccessful in arranging for a financial method by which the needed property could be acquired. It was mentioned that "J" Street was torn up during Christmas time because of the mall construction and this was very distressing to the merchants. If construction of the "K" Street mall is delayed the project will wait until after the holidays. Gail Sidhu, owner of the Knit Craft on South "K" Street, stated that she believes in the subsidized parking facilities and that she either rides a bicycle to work or parks behind Baughmans on private property. There are offices located on "K" Street and many of the employees park in the one hour spaces and keep running out and moving their cars during the day and this is part of the reason there is no parking available for customers in this area. She stated that the more parking lots, the better, and believes people should not expect the City, County or state to pay for everything. She does not object to paying her share of the parking surcharge but she indicated that she really would like one spot of her own in which to park - not necessarily on "K" Street. Torn Bailey stated that he feels the share the County pays is not fair because the City has estimated that the court uses lS spaces a day, and he is sure there are many employees using the lot, in addition to visitors. Cm Miller noted that the City is again going to review what portion the court is using and the County may be asked to pay much more than they are currently contributing if it is determined they are using more spaces. Bonnie Steele, of the Cover Up, stated that she feels the merchants should be taxed more fairly and that it certainly isn't fair that those in the mall are not charged for the parking behind First Street, when those on "K" and "J" are. She stated that they don't mind paying for parking but they want parking on their side of the street. She stated that she pays an $80 license fee and that $53 of this goes towards the parking and feels this is inequitable. Douglas Bond, owner of a barber shop, also spoke concerning the matter. Mayor Futch at this time asked for a show of hands as to whether or not the merchants would favor more strict parking regulations and two people indicated that they would. Mayor Futch suggested that the City Attorney be allowed to report back to the Council as to whether the City could legally restrict parking or reserve parking spaces for merchants. The staff will do more research concerning this item and report back to the Council later. ~\ ( \ Cm Turner stated that he would request that the staff do the following: l) A new survey, since one has not been conducted in two years; 2) The possibility of increasing the fee for someone parking past the expira- tion time; 3) Reasons why the merchants in the mall do not help pay for the parking; and 4) The possibility of additional parking facil- ities for people south of First Street. REPORT RE COMMERCIAL VEHICLE PARKING The City Manager reported that the Council requested that portola Avenue be posted by the County prohibiting on-street parking of commercial vehicles and notices were left with each vehicle ask- CM-30-263 August 4, 1975 (Report re Commercial Vehicle Parking) ing for an expression concerning the need for parking facilities, and citing various private areas available for rent, upon demand. There was no response from the owners of the vehicles with respect to need for a parking space. Apparently there is no need for the City to provide parking. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THIS ITEM WAS NOTED FOR FILING. REPORT RE DISPOSABLE BEVERAGE CONTAINERS The City Manager reported that in response to a Council request for information concerning disposable beverage containers, various governmental agencies having such legislation have been contacted to obtain information as to their experience with enforcement. In summary, it was found that it was difficult to enforce such an ordinance and some City Councils have requested that the legisla- tion be repealed. Also included in the report was a copy of AB 2353, Litter Abatement and Resource Recover Act of 1975, which establishes a comprehensive state program to reduce litter and develop solid waste resource recovery and recycling facilities. Cm Miller stated that he is the one who brought this matter before the Council and would like to make comments. I) It has been re- commended that the Council support AB 23S3, if they wish to pursue this matter, and that this should be the end of the Council efforts. He stated that he is rather discouraged about this recommendation because there is no guarantee that the state will do anything. AB 23S3 is a minimal attempt to do anything at all. 2) Solid waste problems generally, and the cost of disposing of solid waste be could be sharply reduced if disposable beverage containers were eliminated, and if there were standard sizes for all containers. Somebody pays for all of this and we are paying for it in our gar- bage bills. Cm Miller added that the thing that is discouraging to him is the failure of the state to act; and the failure of anybody to act, and he feels we will never get through all this litter unless we try to do something. There has never been much support at the Council level for doing anything specific. It's certainly true that these other cities are having problems, except in Bowie, Mary- land, where the ordinance was upheld by the Circuit Court. The idea of giving special attention to recycling is only a "band-aid" and will solve nothing. Cm Miller stated that he still thinks the City should adopt, as a minimum, an ordinance to prohibit disposable beverage containers, but is not sure how much support there would be from the Council. Cm Turner wondered if it would be fair to the merchants to prohibit disposable beverage containers (flip top cans) if there isn't a statewide ordinance, and in his own mind feels it would not be fair. Secondly, how could we enforce such an ordinance, just in the City of Livermore. Lastly, AB 2353 is very weak and if the City feels ~ strongly about such legislation contact should be made to our (\ legislators in Sacramento to get something going that has teeth in it. Cm Miller stated that he is in favor of doing this but to have an ordinance for Livermore would be a step in the right direction. Cm Turner felt it would not be possible to enforce such an ordi- nance just in Livermore. CM-3D-264 August 4, 1975 (Report re Disposable Beverage Containers) Cm Miller stated that there can be a law to enforce the prohibition of selling the flip top cans or disposable beverages. It is true that some people will go out of town to buy disposable cans but the City could discourage the sale, or a tax could be imposed; CW TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL SUPPORT AB 2353 AND AB 1073, SECONDED BY MAYOR FUTCH AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE CITY PROHIBIT FLIP TOP CANS AND DISPOSABLE BEVERAGE CONTAINERS IN THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, AND TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE THE APPROPRIATE ORDINANCE, SECONDED BY CM TURNER FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES. Cm Turner stated that he feels it is unfair to penalize our merchants when the surrounding cities and the State of California are not sub- ject to this regulation. He stated that he feels this is one regulation that must begin at the state level and will vote against the motion. Cm Miller stated that he does not view this as something at the expense of our merchants because they can sell what they are al- ready selling - returnable bottles. Mayor Futch felt the matter is something that would have to be statewide to be effective. Cm Miller stated that this is exactly why ordinances are never passed anywhere. Everybody argues that it can't be done locally and then it never passes on the state level and this is exactly the reason no such law is prohibiting this kind of garbage and extra expense on solid waste disposal. It never gets done because every- body continues to argue that it has to be done one step up. He added that Oregon and Vermont are doing something have legislation that is fairly good but attempts to apply this type of legislation in California have failed aduring at least two sessions of the legis- lature. If it can't be done statewide it should be done locally, in his opinion. He stated that there are arguments on the other side, and Cm Turner has expressed these; however he still believes it is more overriding to try to do something about this problem rather than pushing it off to the state and hoping that AB 2353 and AB 1073 will pass is not enough. Mayor Futch stated that he feels the majority of the Council feels a statewide ordinance would be desirable and certainly agrees with the philosophy expressed by Cm Miller about banning the disposable bottles. It's a matter of whether one believes a local ordinance could really be effective. MOTION FAILED 1-3 (Cm Turner, Cw Tirsell and 11ayor Futch dissenting) . REPORT RE SENIOR CITIZEN TAXI SERVICE f\ i The City Manager reported that the Alarneda County Human Resources Agency has offered the City a grant of $22,050 to subsidize senior citizen transportation services, for the new fiscal year. Those who would qualify for the subsidized service would be citizens over 60 years of age within the City of Livermore and must meet at least one of the following requirements: I. Persons eligible under Chapter 3, Welfare and Institutions Code. 2. Persons eligible under Title 16, Social Security Act. 3. Persons receiving welfare or public assistance. 4. Persons with a minimal income based upon family size. CM-3D-265 August 4, 1975 (Report re Senior Citizen Taxi Service) Those eligible will be allowed local taxi service for 5D~ and the agreement will reimburse the taxi company $1.DS. It is estimated that 21,00D rides will be afforded during the agreement term. /~ ( ) It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing execution of agreements with both Alameda County and Tri-Valley Cab Company. Mr. Parness added that, regrettably, the one qualification that each person must observe is the income level, which is set quite low. It is not nearly as good a program as the City was originally led to believe, unfortunately; however, perhaps it will serve a small portion of the community. Cm Miller asked if the City or the cab company will be doing the bookkeeping for this program and Mr. Parness replied that the City will do it, insofar as receiving applications and certifying them. Cm Miller stated that apparently this program would be of benefit to very few people in the community and wondered if there would be an advantage in not entering into the agreement at all and to possibly use the money for something else. Mr. Parness replied that the City could not use the money for any other purpose and the money would just go back to the County. Cm Miller added that this is revenue sharing money for Alameda County and perhaps it would be better to allow the money to be used for social welfare purposes, for which a portion of revenue sharing is used. If it happens that very few people are able to take advantage of this service perhaps the City should consider allowing this por- tion to be used elsewhere. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTIONS, AS RECOM- MENDED BY THE STAFF, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 162-7S A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (County of Alameda) RESOLUTION NO. l63-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREMEENT (Tri-Valley Cab Company) REPORT RE COORDINA- TION OF BUS SERVICES The Council has suggested, in the past, that an attempt be made to coordinate local public transit systems functioning in the City (Franciscan Lines, Pioneer, Senior Citizens Bus, and A.C. Transit) and the staff has made inquiries concerning this possibility. (\ \ The staff report indicates that the Franciscan Lines operates only during peak commute hours to and from San Francisco, Pioneer Lines has ceased operation, the Senior Citizens bus is not available for public transit and A.C. Transit overlaps with The Franciscan Lines during the commute hours. CM-30-266 August 4, 1975 (Report re Consolidation of Bus Services) It is recommended that the matter of a combined schedule be dropped until such time as the city implements its own bus transportation system or until Pioneer Lines is reactivated. Cm Turner stated that the last time the Council discussed this issue was when Pioneer Lines carne to the Council announcing that they would be discontinuing service. At that time, as he recalls, the City was to look into the possibility of leasing the Pioneer busses for public transportation. This consideration was not mentioned in the staff report. He added that he feels the City should do something right away and can see that this could drag on forever before anything is done. Mr. Parness commented that the staff is about to receive the final report of the consultant study, which is a five month study effort at a cost of $20,000 to the federal government. The cost is very detailed and he believes it gives much in the way of statistics and needed information about patronage figures, cost, availability of federal and state monies and other items. It is important that the Council takes the resource material, study it and then with the help of the Transportation Advisory Comnlittee and the City staff, decide upon the next appropriate course of action which might be one of implementation. The City has been suffering delays already, and he knows of no reason why there should be further delay. He would like to point out that if the Council decides the system suggested is not feasible for one reason or another or that we simply can't afford it then perhaps we should look in another direction; however if we do it will be on our own with no source of federal assistance. Cm Turner stated that he would be willing until the report comes out to present his proposal but feels very strongly about the fact that something should be done very soon. FURTHER DISCUSSION OF THIS ~~TTER WAS POSTPONED. REPORT RE ZONING ORDINANCE FEE REVISIONS The Council has received a copy of the proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance regarding fees. The new approach concerning the fee is based on the number of steps to the process rather than the type of permit (CUP, PUD, ZUP). Also to be included is an additional fee for site plan approval, public hearings, ordinance publication costs and the EIR fee structure. Mr. Musso reported that he has talked to various people about having the public hearing publication fee billed directly to the applicant rather than having the City collect the money and pay the newspaper. The fee structure is approximately the same as it was using a different base of collection. (\ Cm Miller stated that he reviewed the report and there were some things that were not clear. He would suggest that this item be continued and that the staff be asked to prepare a systematic example, AND MOVED TO CONTINUE THE MATTER UNTIL MORE INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT RE PARK SITE ACQUISITION PROPOSAL The Planning Director reported that Steve Riggle, of the People's Church has offered to sell four acres of property located on Blue- bell Drive in Springtown to the City for $20,000 to be used for CM-3D-267 August 4, 1975 (Report re Park Site Acquisition Proposal) park purposes. The estimated value of the land is $40,000. The City referred the matter to LARPD who has indicated no interest in the proposed acquisition and it is recommended that the pro- perty owner be notified that the City declines the sale offer. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION WAS ADOPTED. REPORT RE PENDING LEGISLATION The League of California Cities recommends support and opposition of the following bills: Oppose: AB II; AB 1059; AB 18a; SB 662 Support: AB 1223 and AB 1375 ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE LEAGUE RECOMMENDATIONS ~iERE ADOPTED. REPORT RE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT - COVA There was some discussion among the Councilmembers concerning the committment to a budget without knowing everything that is included in the COVA budget and the ability to withdraw without being obli- gated to costs after withdrawal. FURTHER DISCUSSION OF THIS ITEM WAS POSTPONED AND THE CITY ATTORNEY WAS DIRECTED TO MEET WITH THE OTHER ATTORNEYS INVOLVED WITH THE COVA AGREEMENT AND TO REPORT BACK TO THE COUNCIL. REPORT RE STATE AGREEMENT - NO. "L" STREET GRADE CROSSING PROTECTION The City Manager reported that the City has recently received infor- mation that federal aid for grade crossing protection devices is about to be terminated. Our project at "L" Street might yet qualify. The total estimated cost is $43,500, of which 90% will be paid by the federal government. It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing execution of agreement with the State of California for federal funding for the railroad crossing at "L" Street. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION NO. 164-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (State of California) (\ REPORT RE EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARD PROGARM The report concerning the Employee Service Award Program was post- poned to the end of the meeting and removed from the Consent Calendar for comments from Cm Turner. CM-3D-26a August 4, 1975 (Report re Employee Service Award Program) Cm Turner suggested that rather than a gift certificate for five years of service, that a pin could be given with the number of years designated, or in the case of a woman that it be in the form of a charm. Mr. Parness replied that this is what has been effect for the past fifteen years. On motion of Cm Turner, seconded by Cm Miller, and by unanimous approval the resolution adopted the service award program was passed. RESOLUTION NO. 165-75 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARD PROGRAM ADJOURNMENT APPROVE The meeting was adjourned at 11:45 p.m. to an executive session to discuss litigation. (ltd, )I" ~/ ~!aYor,.n~. ..' .. / . / "/ ,v'-., <' '''. ~~. C Y ~er'k" . Liverm re, California ATTEST Regular Meeting of August II, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on August II, 1975, 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 Turner, Miller, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch Cm Staley (Excused Vacation) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Futch led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. MINUTES July 28, 1975 (' Page 224, 4th paragraph, first line should read: Cw Tirsell asked if ~ people...etc Page ~47, second line from bottom, first word should be appointment (delete the word bit) . CM-3D-269 August ll, 1975 (Minutes Corrections) Page 232, first paragraph, Item 4) should read: To rezone the portola site will not really solve the shopping needs of the people north of I-S8D. Delete the rest of the wording in this item. Page 232, second paragraph, beginning line 4 should read: there is no guarantee that the buffer zone will not go commercial and there would be pressure for the City to allow more commercial in the re- maining seven acres. Page 233, second paragraph, third line should read: from residents in the immediate area and the applicant could not guarantee that there would be a buffer strip to protect existing residential from commercial encroachment. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE (Cm Futch abstaining due to absence) THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF JULY 28, 1975, liERE APPROVED AS CORRECTED. OPEN FORUM (Introduction of French Student) Mr. Reuben Pena, 123 EI Caminito, stated that a student from France is visiting in Livermore and living with his family and he wanted her to observe municipal government in action. (Agenda Items) ) David Castro, 2276 Chestnut Street, stated that the Council agenda often has items concerning the spending of money and felt this should be placed on the ballot for a vote of the people and not to be decided by the Council. He then complained about the people working for the government continuing to make more money and cost- ing the public more money indicating that this problem is all the way from the federal government down to the municipal government. (East Avenue Bike Lane Hazard) Mike Stevenson, 350 Burgess, stated that he was involved in an acci- dent last Thursday while riding his bicycle in the bike lane on East Avenue and that the situation, as it has existed since the installa- tion of the bike path, is one that absolutely demands something be done. He stated that he does not have all the answers but would like to briefly point out some of the problems. Eleven years ago there was nothing but a blacktop strip on each side of East Avenue with a painted line separating the path from the street. During this time he doesn't recall that there were any near accidents as far as he is concerned, while riding from town to work. A survey was done by the County and as a result the present bike path has been provided with two-way traffic on the south side of East Avenue, and a berm was installed to separate the bike path from the traffic. \ He stated that when he had his accident he was, in essence, riding on the wrong side of the street and this has been a source of legal difficulty in the past. In order to help solve this problem he felt the implementation of a path on the north side would be advisable. He indicated that a large number of encounters that happen between bicycles and cars tend to happen at intersections in which the driver CM-30-27D August ll, 1975 (East Avenue Bikeway) of the car looking to his left and the bicycle is coming from his right. This proble m could be alleviated, to a large extent, by the placement of a bike path on the north side of East Avenue. \ ) ~j Mr. Stevenson added that he realizes the City doesn't have control over the installation of another bike path because this is County property but would hope to solicit the help of the Council in getting something done. Bike paths that go against the flow of traffic are inherently bad because they subject the rider on the path to a higher degree of risk and also train people to ride on the wrong side of the street. Mr. Stevenson also spoke in opposition to the berm used to divide the bike path from the traffic indicating that in doing research on this matter, a state study recommended that berms be used only under very specific situations which included a bike path of at least nine feet in width. Mr. Stevenson indicated that he believes the possibility of a fatality type accident is very real for East Avenue and the types of accidents that have already occurred will certainly continue unless something is done and urged that the Council place some priority on correction of the situation on East Avenue. Mayor Futch commented that the Council has recognized that a bike path on the north side of East Avenue is necessary and has made this recom- mendation to the County. The County has agreed to place a path on the north side and a rather detailed plan has been drawn up to provide for paths on both sides. The matter of the berm has been a subject of dispute between bicyclists with a fairly high percentage favoring some ttype of separation. The present design of the berm is not satisfactory and engineers are looking into the possibility of providing a type of berm that would be safer. Mr. Stevenson commented that if the berm had not been there he would have escaped injury last week because there was no oncoming traffic and he could have gotten out of the way. He would favor a separation that would allow the bicyclist to cross over if necessary. Cm Turner wondered when East Avenue is scheduled for widening that will include a path on both sides of East Avenue. Mr. Lee replied that a schedule has not been established for the actual construction. The setting of standards and the preliminary design is underway at present but it has not been budgeted by the County and the City's share has not been budgeted. The City has made it very clear to the County that the City is very anxious to proceed at the fastest pace possible. After the standards for the street are established, hopefully construction will commence at a reasonably early time. Cw Tirsell stated that possibly before the three phase widening takes place the City is going to lose a cyclist. This makes three times within a year the City has had injured people before the Council who have narrowly missed having a fatal accident. She wondered if the County could be petitioned to go back to the old bike path on the north side for westerly bike traffic, using the south side path for bike traffic going towards the lab, since this was successful for many years. All the accidents brought to the attention of the Council have been bikes traveling westbound where a car pulls right out into the bikes. CM-30-271 August 11, 1975 (East Avenue Bikeway) Cm ~1iller felt one of the reasons for pressure to get a wider bike path on the south side was because there were so many accidents and near accidents when people were traveling on the very narrow right-of-way on the north. No matter how you do it, it's a "loser". Cw Tirsell stated that she would like to see a report of the number of accidents that occurred with the old narrow two way system and the number which have occurred since the path has been wider but only on the south side. She also suggested that this be referred to the Bikeways Association for their comments concerning the berm, etc. She felt there must be something that could be done to help alleviate the problems, immediately. She stated that she would also be interes- ted in the standards used for VCSD. :Perhaps the City could get the County to reduce the height of the berm. Cm Miller pointed out that there was an increased number of riders when the right-of-ways were separated and this should be taken into consideration when reviewing statistics on accidents. Cm Turner stated that he is concerned about the bike path on East Avenue because his children will be using it when school starts and also because he knows of instances where people have been hit by cars at intersections, just as Mr. Stevenson was. Just last Friday a boy was struck by a car at one of the intersection. The City has been very lucky that nobody has been killed. The staff was directed to report back to the Council with statistics concerning number of accidents, comments from the Bicycle Association and a copy of the standards, particularly with respect to the berms. SPECIAL ITEM - COUNTY BLOOD BANK PROGRAM Richard J. Farana, Director of Public Relations for the Blood Bank of Alameda-Contra Costa Medical Association, Oakland, stated that he would like to briefly explain the function of the Medical Associa- tion Blood Bank and hopefully a resolution will be passed supporting a blood bank and also establishment of a committee in the City of Livermore to increase volunteer blood donations in Livermore. Mr. Farana explained the history of the present all volunteer blood bank program and the number of units necessary daily to serve a community. He indicated that they would like a better response from volunteers in Livermore and Pleasanton and perhaps City employ- ees could be encouraged to participate. Mayor Futch suggested that the staff come back to the Council with recommendations as to how City employees might be encouraged to participate. It was noted that there has been a very good response from those working at the Lab and Sandia. Mr. Farana commented that their primary concern is getting more people to donate at the mobile unit in Livermore. Cm Turner noted that perhaps something can be done through Rotary or other such groups. Mayor Futch felt the target is for City wide participation in addition to the special organizations. CM MILLER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE BLOOD BANK" SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CM-30-272 August II, 1975 CONSENT CALENDAR Design Review Committee Minutes Minutes for the Design Review Committee meeting of July 23, 1975, were noted for filing. Housing & Community Develop. Act Program The City t1anager reported that the federal Housing and Community Development Act Program is to be administered by the Alameda County Housing authority and will allow rent subsidy for low income families. Of the 944 units allotted to Alameda County, it has not been deter- mined what amount will be assignable to Livermore. It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution to authorize the Alameda County Housing Authority, in cooperation with the Livermore Housing Authority, to operate within our municipal bounds. RESOLUTION NO. 166-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF ALAMEDA COUNTY TO OPER- ATE WITHIN THE CITY OF LIVERMORE. Acceptance of No. Livermore Ave. Median Irrigation & Landscaping The Public Works Department recommends acceptance of Project 74-36, North Livermore Avenue Median Landscaping and Irrigation, for main- tenance. RESOLUTION NO. 167-7S A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO RECORD NOTICE OF COMPLETION RE MEDIAN LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION OF NO. LIVERMORE AVENUE - PROJECT 74-36 Payroll & Claims There were 28 claims in the amount of $2,036,775.97, and 287 payroll warrants in the amount of $95,050.80, for a total of $2,13l,826.77, dated July 31, 1975, and approved by the City Manager. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. (\ . \ MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (Request for Executive Session) Mr. Logan requested that the Council hold an executive session after the meeting to discuss legal matters. CH-30-273 August 11, 1975 (National League of Cities Program) Mr. Parness reported that the National League of Cities has scheduled a program to take place on August 22nd and 23rd and in looking at the agenda there appears to be a number of very important items rela- tive to local government and would urge attendance by any Council- member who might be interested. (Transportation Committee Meeting) Mr. Parness reminded the Council that a meeting has been scheduled for \vednesday, August 13th, to discuss local transportation plans. The meeting will take place at 7:30 p.m. at the Airport Administra- tion Building. (LAFCO Meeting re Sphere of Influence) The City Manager reported that the City has been told LAFCO will be holding a meeting on August 28th to reconsider the application of Mr. Anderson and others for secession from our Sphere of Influence. Reportedly there are over 90 property owners joining in this request. Cw Tirsell stated that she would be happy to go as a Council repre- sentative but would like permission to work with the City Attorney on a presentation for the day with another Councilmember present, if possible. Cm Miller suggested that the City take a court reporter and be ade- quately prepared. (Downtown Parking) Cm Turner stated that he read newspaper articles about the downtown parking situation and someone has suggested to him that while the City is reviewing the public parking situation, there be considera- tion of the following: I) paving of the land between the buildings on First Street, which is muddy during rainy seasons, and 2) possi- ble parking provided between these buildings. Mr. Parness replied that the City would have to get rights of access from other properties in order to do this and the City hasn't been successful in doing so in the past. Cm Turner stated that the third point suggested by a gentleman was that there be directional signs located downtown for public parking. Mr. Lee commented that there are signs at the entrances on First Street, but would check to see that there are adequate signs. (Ancestral Trees) Cm Turner stated that he has spoken with Harry Silcocks of the Beautification Committee who has asked that the Mayor again respond concerning their letter to the Council about ancestral trees. Appar- ently they did not understand the Council's first response to their letter. o The staff was asked to obtain copies of the minutes in which decisions were made concerning ancestral trees, and forward to the Council. CM-3D-274 August II, 1975 (S.P. Property Quitclaim) Cm Miller wondered when the City obtained the quitclaim for the S.P. property which was part of the requirements for the opening of Longs. ~- Mr. Lee could not give the exact date but indicated that they had been submitted. (Solid Waste - Disposable Containers) Cm Miller stated that he is a representative of the Mayors Conference to the Solid Waste Advisory committee and one of the things that will ultimately be recommended in the Solid Waste Management Plan, are the bottle bills. Last week this was discussed and he pointed out problems of cities adopting ordinances concerning bottles. There is a general feeling that this can't be done by a city alone and the counter argument has been raised from a representative of Berkeley. The upshot of the discussion was that everybody agreed if something can't be done at the statewide level one should certainly try to work through the Mayors Conference to try to get the cities in Alameda County to adopt a bill or request the County to adopt a bill. It was suggested that at the same time ABAG and other counties be contacted in an effort to get a regional bottle bill, which could be successful. Cm Miller suggested that Mayor Futch raise this question at the next Mayors Conference and ask that the item be placed on one of their agendas soon. Cw Tirsell stated that she had a similar suggestion which was that other cities which have adopted ordinances but have rescinded them, be contacted to determine if there could be a consensus on an ordi- nance. If there could be a standard ordinance everyone could look at and approve, the intent wouldn't be picked to pieces. Mayor Futch felt if there could be support from those cities who have previously tried to ban disposable bottles, it may be more influential when the Mayors Conference is approached on this matter. Cw Tirsell stated that it may take time for the Mayors Conference or Alameda County to come up with something concrete and would suggest that during the interim Livermore contact the other cities who tried an ordinance and ask them to help form a lobby. Cm Turner stated that he would like to hear comments from the Mayors Conference prior to going to the trouble of contacting the other cities and drafting an ordinance. Cw Tirsell felt it might be more effective to have something for them to look at, in summary, rather than saying, "let's all talk about litter". uMayor Futch suggested that perhaps there might be more of an impact if the Solid Waste Committee would first make their recommendations and then get all of the other cities to support it. ~' ( Cm Miller stated that there is supposed to be a meeting between the Solid Waste Advisory Committee and the Mayors Conference but doesn't know what the date is at this point. Our report has to be into the County Planning Commission in less than two weeks and then there has to be a series of public hearings. Hopefully, after the Mayors Con- ference has heard from this there will be an invitation to the Council- members of various Alameda County cities to hear this report. The advantage of the bottle bill being singled out is because this is something everybody can support. The plan is going to be a very thick plan with a lot of backup material and he would guess there CH-30-275 August II, 1975 (Solid Waste - Disposable Bottles) will be a lot of Councilmen who will never read it. The contro- versy will probably lie less with the bottle bill than it will with who will do the garbage collection, own the transfer station, and land fill. There will be a lot of controversy on these matters which will divert attention from something such as a bottle bill. He would prefer to have the issue raised at the Hayors Conference and be discussed be- cause all the other issues having to do with solid waste management will corne before them anyway. Mayor Futch wondered how something could be done on a regional basis because there is no single jurisdiction that could enact a law for all. Cm Miller explained that all the jurisdictions in the Bay Area must be encouraged to adopt a uniform ordinance. Mr. Parness stated that he is concerned about the legality involved and someone will have to answer this point. It is a legal debate as to whether this can be a local option. Cw Tirsell stated that before the Mayors Conference is approached the homework had better be done concerning the legalities. The City Attorney commented there is not a great plethora of law in this area, particularly with respect to what the effect would be. It would be a local ordinance vs. the statewide ordinance. There are concerns other than just mere pre-emption and those con- cerns could be very substantial concerns, such as interference with interstate commerce. Apparently there is a law in Maryland that has been challenged and upheld but he hasn't really looked at the case - this is only in federal court and hasn't gone above the d~strict co~rt level. He stated that he is not indicating, one way or the other, whether or not this would be struck down as.,being an unlawful interference with interstate commerce but the Council should be prepared to expect to go into some rather protrac- tive litigation, should the Council decide to pass this law. Then there is the question of whether or not the other cities would be willing to participate in the financial cost of accepting a challenge. Mayor Futch stated that he feels the preferable course of action would be to get the support of all the cities and the County to obtain a statewide ordinance. We would be more likely to receive support from the County if we went to them with a proposal for statewide legislation. The City Attorney stated that he does not mean to imply that this would fall through because it is an unlawful interference with interstate commerce - this is just a very possible argument that could be raised by distributors, and should it be raised it is likely to have to be settled in the highest court because California would be setting a precedent with this type of legislation. It was concluded that the Council will discuss tthis item next week and the City Attorney will look into the legal aspects and report back to the Council. (Criticism of EPA) Cm Miller stated that public officials from Alameda County have been criticizing the EPA for doing their job and he finds this particularly irritating. EPA is trying to do what the Clean Air Act and other en- vironmental laws require them to do. Consequently, he would suggest sending to our Congretional representative and other Congressmen of the Bay Area and our State Legislators, a letter supporting the attempts CM-30-276 August II, 1975 (Criticism of EPA) of the EPA to meet the goals of federal law. Not everybody agrees with some of the criticism that has been leveled at EPA and in his opinion is unwarranted. The staff was directed to prepare an appropriate letter expressing these views. (Senior Citizen Tax Postponement) Cw Tirsell stated that she has found the bills relative to Senior Citizen Tax Postponement and perhaps Assemblyman Mori could be contacted concerning the bills and which bill would be best. Those bills are: SCA 16, AB 508, SB 657 and SB 462. (LAVWMA Meeting'- Sewer Capacity) Mayor Futch stated that the LAm~ meeting is for a discussion on the capacity of the sewage pipeline for the valley and who gets what sharep He will not be able to attend the meeting, and felt someone from the Council really should attend. Cm Miller stated that the Council has already expressed a position on this, which is that we want a share of the pipeline, according to the population and we prefer lower than the population which presently exists and presently proposed. However, whatever that population is, Livermore wants its fair share. Mayor Futch stated the E-O popluation, as calculated by the State Water Resources Board, assumes a growth rate of 1.6% for Livermore. If .Livermore would cut this amount significantly, we may not be able to get the I HGD expansion. He stated that his position would be that something in the neighborhood of the 14 MGD for the total valley, which is E-D projection would be agreeable. He stated that he is not sure the City should push for something that would possibly not allow the 1 HGD. Cm Miller stated that the valley presently has IID,DDD people and using the County scale growth rate (E-D) there would be about 12D,DOD people. This would mean an additional 2 MGD capacity for the valley and since Livermore has half the valley's population we should have the I MGD. After further discussion it was concluded that the figures indicate Livermore should receive .5 MGD but what we are asking for is I HGD. Mayor Futch stated that the valley will receive an additional population of 10,000 people and that 1 MGD will take care of 11,DOD - this is the reason Livermore might be allowed .5 MGD and if we are asking for I MGD it would appear this would be a substantial problem. Cm Miller stated that the consensus of the Council does not in- clude him but he will present the majority opinion at the meet- ing with LAm~1A tomorrow. COMMUNICATION FROM CAGE RE GARBAGE DUMPS The Committee Against a Garbage Environment (CAGE) has written that Kaiser is in the process of changing its request from a Class II to a Class III dump which is a threat to over 700 acres. CM-3D-277 August ll, 1975 (re Kaiser Dump) CAGE urges that AB 2220 which prohibits the establishment of a garbage dump within two miles of any city without the consent of the governing body, be endorsed. ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE COUNCIL VOICED SUPPORT OF AB 2220, WITH THE AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE THE KAISER PROPERTY, AND TO SO NOTIFY THE LEGISLATORS. CO~~UNICATION FROM CITY OF MONTEREY RE TAX REFORM LEGISLATION A copy of a letter sent to Governor Brown, from the City of Monterey, concerning tax reform legislation was forwarded to the City Council with the comment that the City of Monterey would welcome any sug- gestions the Council might have on a concerted effort to ultimately effect relief for the tax payer. Cm Turner commented that there were portions of the letter to the Governor he would support and other areas he would question and would like the matter put over for one week for discussion. BART HEARING RE RATES & CHARGES The City Council received notification of a BART hearing to consider proposed rates and charges for transportation and parking. Cm Turner stated he is disappointed in the charge for parking because in some areas it is 25~/day and in other areas it is 5D~/day, depend- ing upon the usage of the lot. He stated that the reason he is dis- couraged is because mass transit is designed to encourage people to stop using their automobiles and to ride public transportation and the parking fee could influence people to drive. He added that he feels a parking fee is the incorrect vehicle for obtaining additional funds. Mayor Futch stated that he was also disappointed with the proposed parking fee and realizes BART has financial difficulties but feels there are other means for getting money. CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL OPPOSE THE PARKING LOT FEr: BASED ON THE ABOVE MENTIONED CO~ll1ENTS, SECONDED BY CN TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. INVITATION TO OPENING DAY CEREMONIES - SOCCER An invitation was extended to the City Council from the Livermore Soccer Club to attend the Opening Day Ceremonies for the youth soccer season of 1975-76 on September 5, at 7:00 p.m. at the Robertson Park Stadium. The majority of the Councilmernbers indicated that they would like to attend the ceremonies if possible. APPEAL RE SIGN VARI- ANCE REQUEST - JERSEY CROWN DAIRY - (Viscomi) Mr. Musso reported that the Planning Commission at its meeting of July l5, 1975, did consider the application of Jersey Crown Dairy, by Roy viscomi, for a variance to permit an increase in the amount of permitted sign and signs having more than 2S% devoted to a pro- CM-30-278 August II, 1975 (Variance Request - Jersey Crown Dairy) duct not the principal product sold on the premises. The P.C. did deny the application for a variance based on various findings as outlined in their report to the Council. \ Mr. Musso stated the P.C. was very sympathetic to the particular situation but did not find the use to be unusual, or visibility such as to warrant additional signs and denied the variance. Mr. Viscomi stated that the business at the dairy is actually the sale of wholesale groceries where people drive in and stay in their cars - the groceries are brought to them. The problem is that he can't have a glass window which would entitle him to advertise products being sold, as does Safeway, etc. He felt the only way this could be accomplished would be to provide a "reader board" for his customers which cost him a great deal of money and was in violation of the ordinance, but which he did not realize. Mr. Viscomi added that he feels he must be competitive with the other stores and the only way people can know what he has to sell is to advertise by "reader board" and would request that the Council allow him a conditional variance whereby if there were complaints from other merchants the variance could be revoked. He indicated that the sign he is requesting really makes a difference in whether or not his business can make it and he has been working about 70 hours a week already in order to make a go of the business. The business is very small and he can't afford to advertise in the newspaper. Cm Miller stated that his family has been a customer of the dairy for as long as he can remember and he can certainly sympathize with Mr. Vascomi; however, other people have reader boards and people had signs they felt were essential but discovered that once they were removed they weren't so essential. The Council has never granted a variance of this type of sign in the past and he knows of no way the Council can justify allowing a variance under the present circumstances. He indicated there are really no legal grounds for supporting a variance AND MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL SUPPORT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE P.C. AND DENY THE APPEAL. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL. Cw Tirsell apologized that there is not much the Council can do for Mr. Viscomi but indicated that the Sign Ordinance fell equitably upon all the businesses in town and other reader boards came down, as did other signs in violation of the ordinance. In order to be equitable to all merchants the Council must deal equitably with everyone. She stated that in her opinion the dairy is in a marvelous location and it is a very nice store that has been improved and is very attrac- tive. She stated that she is sure the Jersey Crown Dairy attracts people from that side of town and the Springtown area and while she does shop at Safeway and other such stores she does patronize Holdener's Dairy which is essentially the same type of business but closer to the Sunset area, and they have only one sign. Cw Tirsell added that she feels very strongly about enforcing the ordinance equitably because it was an ordinance that caused grief and yet was something that did a lot of good for the visual aspect of our community. She stated that with reluctance she would have .~ to support the motion but would like to add that she feels that in the long run this will not affect the business because of the excel- lent location and visual aspect of the business. Mr. Musso indicated that signs can be placed on the building as long as they don't try to attract business from people passing by and noted that Jack-in-the-Box was allowed to post a menu as long as it wasn't designed to attract people from the street. He stated that he is sure something can be worked out. CM-3D-279 August II, 1975 (Appeal re Sign Variance - Jersey Crown Dairy (Viscomi) Cm Turner stated that he intends to support the motion also but would like to mention that Luckys has to remove their signs within 30 days - they cannot be permanent. He wondered if there could be some type of movable reader board and Mr. Musso indicated that these are also illegal. Mayor Futch stated that he would have to agree with the motion be- cause it has been very difficult to get merchants to adhere to the Sign Ordinance, and as much as the Council can sympathize with the problem of Mr. Viscomi, it would be a backward step to allow the variance with respect to being consistent to what has been required in the past. r1r. Musso commented that the Holdener sign is allowed, although it is a freestanding sign, because the business is located 300 ft. from the street. IT WAS NOTED THAT THE MOTION WAS BASED ON THE REASONS AND FINDINGS EXPRESSED BY THE P.C. FOR DENIAL OF THE APPLICATION, AND MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. The City Attorney stated that he will prepare a resolution briefly reflecting that the rejection for the variance was based on the basis found in P.C. Resolution 79-75. RESOLUTION NO. 168-75 A RESOLUTION DENYING SIGN VARIANCE TO MR. ROY VISCOMI RESOLUTION RE POSTAL REORGANIZATION The Council received a report concerning the status of postal legislation, including a bill approved by the House Committee which would allow for a temporary rate increase bringing the cost of stamps to l2~. The bill also addresses the question of a cutback in postal delivery services and requires the Post Office to provide continued door-to-door delivery in all communities having adopted zoning ordinances prohibiting the construction or maintenance of any struc- tures on the property adjacent to the curb. Cm Turner stated that it appears unless the City has an ordinance prohibiting curbside delivery, the City would not qualify under the amendment change however the legislation should be supported. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS APPROVAL THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION NO. 169-75 A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT TO POSTAL REORGANIZATION ACT AMEND~1ENTS OF 1975 AS PROPOSED BY CONCRESSMAN MINETA REPORT RE FINAL ACCEPTANCE - TR. 2619 KISSELL COMPANY The Director of Public Works reported that all of the public works improvements for Tract 2619 (Kissell) have been completed in accor- dance with the agreement, the Heather Lane bridge is under construc- tion and a bond has been provided assuring the maintenance of the CM-3D-28D August II, 1975 (Final Acceptance - Tr. 2619 - Kissell Co.) public works improvements for one year after acceptance of the tract by the City. L The Memorandum of Understanding provides that the City shall accept all improvements immediately upon satisfaction of certain conditions and those conditions have been satisfied. It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution of acceptance. Cm Miller stated that he would like to know if completion of the bridge was one of the conditions that have to be satisfied prior to acceptance. Mr. Lee explained that this was not one of the conditions but rather they would have to bond for the bridge and it was to be underway at the time of acceptance. The bridge is underway and they do have a separate bond for it. ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE RESOLUTION ACCEPTING TRACT 2619. RESOLUTION NO. 17D-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF TRACT 2619 Prior to the motion Dewey Watson from the Kissell Company stated that they have been before the Council concerning the additional 32 lots and they will drop this from any Council consideration. There is still bargaining going on with respect to the permits for these lots. Cw Tirsell commented that the person bargaining with Kissell to purchase the 32 lots has been before the Council asking assurance that the permits will be available and ~1r. Watson stated that the lots have not been purchased and they still belong to Kissell. Also, Kissell has dedicated a bike easement to the City. REPORT RE AGREEMENT WITH CAL WATER RE EMERGENCY INTERCONNECTION Mr. Lee explained that the agreement with California Water Service Company for an emergency interconnection on East Avenue is in further- ance of the project anticipated under the Capital Projects Budget, and the interconnection would provide water from one jurisdiction to the other in case of a line failure. ON MOTION OF CM HILLER, SECONDED BY CI'1 TUmJER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE INTERCONNECTION WAS APPROVED. RESOLUTION NO. l71-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (California Water Service Company) REPORT RE FORMATION OF BENEFIT DISTRICT - PORTOLA AVENUE The Director of Public Works reported that a determination is needed as to whether or not a benefit district should be considered for the off-tract properties at the northeast corner of portola Avenue and No. Livermore Avenue. CH-30-28l August ll, 1975 (Report re Formation of Benefit District - portola Avenue) Originally an attempt was made to establish a benefit district in this area which would assess some of the costs to adjacent properties and considerable objection was raised by the property owners. Both a benefit district and an assessment district were proposed and neither were accepted. There was some mention at the time the agreement was entered into with the developer for a benefit district, but no official action was taken and the record needs to be clarified as to what action the Council wishes to take with respect to formation of a benefit district. Mr. Lee added that he feels there are some problems and the City Attorney questions the legality of establishing a benefit district at the present time. Later on the City will have the new Subdivision Ordinance with provisions for benefit districts and it is possible that this could be reinitiated at that time with public hearings held. There is a problem because the houses are located in-tract and not on the street and undoubtedly there would be objections to the forma- tion of the district. It was noted that formation of a benefit district would not affect the amount of money the developer contributed. The City Attorney commented that all the legal arguments can be avoided by merely dropping the suggestion to form a benefit dis- trict; however, if the Council doesn't want to drop it they are faced with not being able to do anything until a new Subdivision Ordinance has been adopted and becomes effective. The new ordi- nance should be before the Council in about a month. Cm Miller stated that as he recalls during the final approval of the public works improvements for Portola/Livermore Avenue, there was, in fact, going to be an assessment district with the major developer paying most of the cost and the City was to prepare an assessment district with those property owners. Somehow all of this seems to have disappeared and the tax payers may have to pick up a $17,000 tab for this project. Cm Turner stated that at the time this was discussed, originally, he was a member of the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission held public hearings and the major developer was to pay the largest portion of the cost and there were firm decisions made at that time. He stated that prior to discussing this item further he would request that the Council be allowed to review the minutes reflecting former discussions and public hearings on this item. CM TURNER MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. MUNI. CODE AMEND RE PLANNING COMMISSION SALARIES During the budget session it was decided that the salary of the Planning Commissioners should be increased and since the present rate was established as a part of the Municipal Code an amendment is required. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE ORDINANCE RELATIVE TO PLANNING CO~~ISSION SALARIES WAS INTRODUCED AND READ BY TITLE ONLY. CM-3D-282 August 11, 1975 CITY MANA.GER vffiEKLY PROGRESS REPORT Springtown Pond The pond in the Springtown area continues to be a source of grievance to the City and the blight of the neighborhood. The problem is that there is just not enough pressure in the golf course watering system to effect the area. The City has been waiting to do something about the problem until some pumps could be relocated from Las Positas. As an interim measure the City is interconnecting the Springtown Lake area with the domestic water system in order to reconstruct the land- scaping area. Hopefully everything will be upgraded shortly. Arroyo Bridge The crews have finished working on the Arroyo Bridge and if someone from the Council could ride across the pedestrian portion of the bridge he believes they would find that the City did a very good job in repairing the pedestrian area. The Councilmembers indicated that people have been saying the job was done well and Cw Tirsell stated that she has seen it and is pleased with the work. Bike Path There is now a bike path going from College Avenue through the Civic Center site to Hillcrest Avenue and the dangerous area has been banked so bicyclists do not have to slow down. Water Reclamation Plant The Water Reclamation Plant construction is still on schedule and operation is anticipated for TJovember. Aircraft Commuter Service The City has been told that the California Air Commuter will begin service on September ath. The City doesn't have the schedule or. the fees but as soon as they are received the Council will get a copy. General Plan The Scenic Element of the General Plan has been completed and has been referred to the Beautification Committee. The Noise Element is being drafted for the fourth time and is with the Noise Committee. ( Public Safety Last Saturday the City was involved in a mutual aid alert. There was a sizeable grass fire which occurred in Fremont. Eight units were sent to the fire, including one from Livermore, and reportedly about IS units did respond to the fire. CM-30-283 August II, 1975 ADJOURNHENT Mayor Futch adjourned the meeting at ID:DO p.m. to an executive session to discuss legal matters. ATTEST ?kA /I u:7 I'-1ayor __ /r /~I . ~ ' " \. .~'. r. '...../ ',' ,,,,,, , \....... ,- ~ ." , / ~Y---Clerk L. ermore, California APPROVE Regular Meeting of August 18, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council was held on August 18, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:ID 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 Councilrnembers as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. HINUTES August 4, 1975 Page 251, third paragraph from the bottom, last word in the fourth line should be enforced with the word supported deleted. Page 250, third paragraph from the bottom, line 7 should read: allowed. He stated that he would suggest changes not as far reaching as suggested by Mr. Reiners, but rather some changes (to make deleted) in our ordinance...etc. Page 256, first paragraph, should be Cm Turner rather than Cm Hiller. Page 259, fifth paragraph, line three should read: cities should take care of. We feel the cities as well as the other agencies involved are probably capable of taking care of these problems..etc. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM HILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF AUGUST 4, 1975, vffiRE APPROVED, AS AMENDED. CH-30-284 August l8, 1975 SPECIAL ITEr! RE HOSQUITO ABATEMENT () Mayor Futch stated that Cm Staley had requested that the Mosquito Abatement give a presentation and since he is not present the Mayor would request that this item be postponed until his arrival. REPORT RE'BUDGET M1END. RE CROSSING GUARD - ITEt,1 6. 3 Mayor Futch stated that it would appear Item 6.3 is to be discussed very late in the evening and it has been requested that this item be postponed for two weeks (portola Crossing Guard Item). ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, ITEM 6.3 i\TAS CONTINUED TO SEPTETl1BER 8, 1975. CONSENT CALENDAR Resolutions (7) Auth. Placement of Assessment Levies on Tax Roll RESOLUTION NO. 172-75 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SPECIAL ASSESSHENT DISTRICT LEVY TO BE PLACED ON THE TAX ROLL TO BE COLLECTED BY THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA. (No. Sanitary Sewer Assessment District No. 1962-1) RESOLUTION NO. 173-75 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SPECIAL ASSESSEMENT DISTRICT LEVY TO BE PLACED ON THE TAX ROLL TO BE COLLECTED BY THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA. (Northern Water Assessment District No. 1962-2) RESOLUTION NO. 174-75 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT LEVY TO BE PLACED ON THE TAX ROLL TO BE COLLECTED BY THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA. (Wagoner Farms Assessment District No. 1962-3) RESOLUTION NO. 175-75 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SPECIAL ASSESS.MENT DISTRICT LEVY TO BE PLACED ON THE TAX ROLL TO BE COLLECTED BY THE COUNTY OF ALA11EDA. (Lincoln Shopping Center Assessment District No. 1963-1) RESOLUTION NO. 176-75 ~' I RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT LEVY TO BE PLACED ON THE TAX ROLL TO BE COLLRCTED BY THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA. (Portola Avenue Assessment District No. 1966-2) CH-30-285 August la, 1975 (Resolutions) RESOLUTION NO. 177-75 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT LEVY TO BE PLACED ON THE TAX ROLL TO BE COLLECTED BY THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA. (Murrieta Boulevard Assessment District No. 167-l) I ! RESOLUTION NO. 178-75 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT LEVY TO BE PLACED ON THE TAX ROLL TO BE COLLECTED BY THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA. (Railroad Assessment District) Res. Supporting Blood Donor Program It has been requested from a representative of the A1ameda- Contra Costa Medical Association Blood Bank, that the Council adopt a resolution supporting the blood donor program. RESOLUTION NO. 179-75 A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF VOLUNTARY BLOOD DONATION PROGRM1 OF THE ALA.r1EDA-CONTRA COSTA HEDICAL ASSOCIATION. Report re AB 700 The City Manager has distributed copies of the Legislative Bulletin to the Councilmernbers. Included in the bulletin was information on AB 700 which would require local agencies employing peace officers to establish separate rules and regulations for peace officers. The City Manager has recommended that this measure be opposed. Report re Progress on Murrieta Bikeway The Director of Public vvorks submitted a progress report concerning the Murrieta Bikeway for informational purposes only. Departmental Reports The Council received the following departmental reports: Airport Activity - July Building Inspection Department - July Fire Department - quarterly - April/June Mosquito Abatement - June Municipal Court - June Industrial Inquiry Police and Pound Departments - July Water Reclamation Plant - July PAYROLL & CLAD-iS There were 87 claims in the amount of $130,505.26 and 270 payroll warrants in the amount of $93,006.30, for a total of $223,5ll.56, dated August l4, 1975 and approved by the Director of Finance. CM-3D-286 August 18, 1975 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 that the Council meet in an executive session immediately after the meeting to discuss two legal matters, both with respect to condemnation. ~~TTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL (Railroad Project) Mayor Futch stated he would like to report on a meeting which was held this morning on the Railroad Relocation Project. After a number of visits last week, and previously, to the relocation pro- ject (on Livermore and "P" Street) and observing what appeared to be a lack of activity, he requested a meeting this morning. He stated that one of the reasons for calling the meeting was to express the Council's serious concern with the progress being made and, secondly, to emphasize the importance of completing the grade separation of these streets at least to the extent that motorists can resume travel by December I, 1975. Lastly, he wanted to deter- mine the status of the project and any potential future problems which might occur and if there is anything the City can do to expe- dite the completion of the project. Attending the meeting were Brian Robertson, Project Manager from Hensel Phelps, Jim Daer, Vice President of Hensel Phelps, Dan Lee, Director of Public Works and Bob Diaz, City Coordinator for the project, and the Mayor. Hensel Phelps people have assured the Mayor that it would be in their best interest to finish the project as soon as possible and that they are working hard to meet the target date. Some of the lost time has already been made up and the precast girders for both bridges are to arrive August 19th. Hayor Futch asked if Hensel Phelps could foresee any potential future prohlems vlhich could result in dalays and indications are that the weather could be a problem if there is bad weather at the time they plan to pave the streets. Hensel Phelps did feel they would get to this point prior to the rainy season. The second problem could be a delay on the part of v7estern Pacific for reconnection of the rails after the bridges are completed. ~1estern Pacific, in the past, has been responsible for various delays on the project. The City has conctacted II.P. and they have indicated that they will be there when they are supposed to and they will not cause a delay with respect to reconnection, scheduled to take place in about 30 days. It was mentioned that a labor strike could conceivably result in a delay but they have no knowledge of any labor negotiations that might affect the project and feel this would be unlikely. C~,1-30-287 August 18, 1975 (Railroad Project) It was asked if the City was responsible for any delay at the present time and Hensel Phelps indicated that problems at "P" and Chestnut, due to incomplete specifications by the City on the location of medians and traffic light poles, were a problem. Mr. Lee noted that this would be resolved and a report will be forwarded to the Council on this item. Mayor Futch stated that, overall, he is hopeful the project will continue and the underpasses completed by December 1, 1975. (Library Board Term) Cm Miller requested that the matter of the term for Library Board be placed on the agenda because he would like the term changed to four years to correspond with the other City boards. (Matters Initiated) Cm Miller stated that in a Letter to the Editor he read where someone suggested placing Matters Initiated by the Staff and Council at the end of the meeting, as it was in the past. Cm Miller stated that he would be willing to reconsider placement of this agenda item but Cm Turner is the one who suggested that it be early in the meeting and wondered if the Council might reconsider. Cm Turner commented that the article noted there are many impor- tant items discussed by the Council and if this is done at the end of the meeting there isn't anyone remaining in the audience. It was requested that this item be placed on the agenda for dis- cussion. CM STALEY WAS SEATED DURING MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF AND COUNCIL. SPECIAL ITEM - MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT PROGRM1 At the request of the Council, a representative of the Alameda County Mosquito Abatement District Board will attend the meeting to briefly explain the District program. Fred Roberts, Manager of the Alameda County Mosquito Abatement District presented written material to the Council as a means of basic background concerning the function of the District and stated that he would like to briefly explain the program and give some basic facts concerning this item. The purpose of the District, which was established in 193D, is to take all necessary or proper steps to control mosquitoes within the District boundaries which includes all of Alameda County with the exception of Albany. In 1966 Livermore was annexed into the Alameda County Mosquito Abatement District and the district tax rate during 1966-67 was .Oll to every $100 assessed valuation and during the last fiscal year the tax rate was .009. In 1966-67 the District received $9,976 in property taxes from the City of Livermore or about 209 per citizen per year, or $1.12 for an owner of a home valued at $50,000. CM-3D-288 August 18, 1975 (Mosquito Abatement) l He stated that he is sure the City would like to know what it gets for its money and explained that in 1965 the City was plagued with 12 species of mosquitoes produced in a variety of sources including temporary rain pools, agricultural areas, storm drains, catch basins, fish ponds ann tree holes, in the residential areas. The District has assigned one ~1osquito Control Technician (state certified) to the area of Livermore and maintains the program of routine surveillance and inspection of known sources in this area and promptly responds to citizen requests. In addition, technical personnel can be assigned if there are specific problems with specialized mosquito control equipment. He added that the District has a reputation, in the State of California, for being a very effective District in the area of control, emphasizing the area of physical control, using methods reducing costly chemical treatment. Mr. Roberts briefly explained the man hours needed, the personnel employed by the District and the facilities, and thanked the Council for allowing him the opportunity to explain some of these things. Discussion took place between Mr. Roberts and the Council concerning the Livermore area and the number of service requests for Livermore and for the District. Cm Staley stated that his concern is the percentage of time devoted to control efforts as opposed to general overhead for operation of the District - control efforts being less than 1/3 of the budget. Mr. Roberts noted that there is a breakdown of the man hours on one of the sheets distributed to the Council and noted that it is doubtful the Council has ever seen a breakdown such as this for any organization, and this may be the reason there is concern for their percentage of effort expended. He stated that the reason he has prepared a monthly man hour sheet is to determine efficiency in the District from month to month, as a comparative index. Cm Staley stated that he has questions he would like to ask l1r. Roberts but does not want to take further Council time and hopefully they could discuss this matter again. Cm Miller stated that 60% of the man hours are being used for control and only 30% of the expenditures of the District are being used for control, according to the report. The discrepancy is that there should be 60% of the money expended for 60% of the man hours. If one is 60% and the other is 30% then what is the rest of the money being used for? Mayor Futch stated that the agenda is very long and perhaps it would be best to ask Hr. Roberts to communicate further with the Council concerning this particular aspect of the report in an effort to resolve some of the apparent discrepancies. COMMUNICATION FROH ABAG RE CONFERENCES CONCERN- HOUSING & THE ELDERLY Notification was received from ABAG of conferences to be held on October 10th and 24th dealing with housing the elderly. The item was noted for filing. The City Clerk was aske:l to notify the Housing Authority and Inter- faith Housing about the conference also. CM-30-2a9 August 18, 1975 CO~ll1UNICATION RE GENERAL PLAN william E. Loewe has suggested including a policy for the business community in the General Plan. Cm Miller felt the idea was good, in principle, and that this should be referred to the General Plan consultants for comment, and if the Planning Commission is interested they should also be allowed to comment. REPORT RE DEFINITION OF LOW & ~mDIUM INCOME HOUSING (Tracts 364l and 3642) At the meeting of July 21 there was a request to develop Tracts 364l and 3642. There was discussion as to whether or not these tracts would qualify as low income housing and presumably if they could qualify the tract may be allowed as a result of the Council policy to provide sewer connections for low income housing units as well as commercial and industrial development. The City Attorney reported that under HUD regulations, several definitions relevant to low cost housing are made and at present the defiuitions cover only income and proportion of income allo- able to housing costs rather than unit price of housing. Generally, for a family of four an income of 80% of the median income of the surrounding area is low or moderate. HUD has indicated that $15,500 is the median income for this area. The City Attorney stated that there is another definition for low- low income housing based on the same formula presentation and for a typical family of four it amounts to 50% of the median income of the surrounding area. He explained that the information he has presented the Council is based upon information obtained from the Code of Federal Regulations which are regulations passed pursuant to federal statutes passed. As a general rule 25% of one's income should be allociated to housing costs. Cm Staley asked if the 25% is relative to gross or net income and the City Attorney replied that this is gross income. The Council discussed methods by which it is determined the amount a person can pay for a house and Cm Turner indicated that because of the high interest rates a person who has a gross income of $1,000 can generally afford an $18,OOD-$19,ODD house. Mayor Futch stated the reason this item was placed on the agenda was for the Council to arrive at a criteria for qualification as low income housing. In his opinion 80% of the median would not be classified as low income but rather moderate income. The 50% would be more reasonable for consideration of low income. Cw Tirsell stated that the key to the formula is based on the in- come for the immediate area; therefore, if you are talking about an area of town where the salaries are lower the median will be a ~ lot lower. If this formula is followed the City will continue tP.L~;\0Y' 1)build approximately the same kinds of houses at the same price,~ ~~ ~~~ will not rQally be building low incoMQ h011sing but shortly the City ~ ~' may be required to low income housing. Shortly, the City may be ~' required to provide for low income housing by allocations or other means. Cw Tirsell asked if the City uses the low income of 50% of the median income, is this so documented as low income housing? CM-30-29D August l8, 1975 (Low Income Housing) The City Attorney replied that the 50% is located in the Code of Federal Regulations which was not cited in his report. ( "--_/ \. Cw Tirsell felt the $7,750 (50% of the $15,500 for that area) is really not a realistic figure for an income - the average Bay Area family is making $l2,OOO/year as a bare minimum. Cm Staley co~~ented that he would disagree and believes there are families in Livermore who make $8,000/year for a family of four. If the median for Livermore is $15,000 then the low to moderate income would be $7,500-$12,000. Based on the 25% allowed for housing, of this income, it means someone could afford monthly payments between $150 and $250, and a net housing cost of between $15,000-$25,000. Cm Turner stated that with the higher interest rates someone making from $7,500 to $12,000 could afford a house of $11,000 on the low side and $18,000 on the high side. The Council mentioned previously that someone making $l,ODD/month could afford an $18,000 house and the monthly income corresponds with $12,ODOjyear. Mayor Futch felt there are a lot of people in the community who make far less than the Bay Area average, such as older people on fixed incomes and Cm Miller mentioned that there are also many women in the community who are trying to support their children and make less than $8,000/year. These are really the people the City wants to provide housing for. Cw Tirsell asked if the Council is supposed to adopt this formula as a policy, accepting the report as a statement of low income, or what? Cm Miller stated that the Council has been given the federal defini- tion which is as good as anything else the Council might follow and less arbitrary than other statements. He stated that the report covers a portion of his concerns but among his concerns about low income housing is the claim on our sewer capacity. He stated that he feels low income housing should have some connection or be sche- duled through our local Housing Authority in order to make sure that the properties are, in fact, used for low income housing and that the housing would be provided, primarily, for local job holders. There is a need for people who are presently working in Livermore for housing. What we don't want is to attract commuters but to try to take care of our local people. Mayor Futch felt this item should receive considerable consideration and that a decision should not be made tonight. He felt it would be worthwhile to find out how many citizens in Livermore are in need of this type of housing prior to making a decision and would suggest postponement, with direction to the staff to obtain more needed infor- mation. Cm Turner felt more information would not alter his decision and suggested that the Council adopt the report as a guideline to apply against the 10% sewer reservation for low and moderate income housing. CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT THE REPORT PROVIDED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. ~ Mayor Futch stated that one formula was presented to the Council and the other was verbal information from the City Attorney. CM TURNER AMENDED THE MOTION TO INCLUDE THE DEFINITION OF LOW INCOHE HOUSING WITH A PERSON MAKING 50% LESS THAN THE HEDIAN FOR THAT AREA INcmm, AND PROVIDED IN RESOLUTION FORM, SECONDED BY OV TIRSELL. Cf1- 3 0- 2 91 August 18, 1975 (Low Income Housing) The City Attorney asked if the Council would like a resolution that would make more direct reference to HUD's criteria for estimating what low or moderate income is? He stated that the reason he would suggest this is because if the Council becomes consistent with the HUD criteria, then every time the City becomes involved in federal funding old definitions can be reclassified and the City can remain consistent with HUD by referencing what- ever they have as their particular definition. Each time HUD makes a change in their definition it would allow the City to automatically change its definition. CM TURNER AMENDED THE MOTION TO INCLUDE HUD's DEFINITION OF LOW OR MODERATE INCOME HOUSING, SECONDED BY CN TIRSELL. Cm Miller stated that he would like the Council to discuss the passage through our Housing Authority as a portion of the defini- tion, with respect to our sewer capacity. Cm Staley stated that the need to specify, and set into resolution form, low and moderate income housing for the implementation of our ordinance, is very necessary and would be in favor of the motion but is concerned about a lack of reflection going into this. He stated that this is a good starting place and he is in favor of this interim statement but believes the concept of low income hous- ing needs more work than is being afforded by the Council at this time. He would suggest that the Council use this as an interim measure with study in greater depth. He stated that he, too, is concerned about all the ramifications of this item. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE STAFF BE DIRECTED TO EXAMINE MECHANISMS BY HHICH PROVISION OF LOW INCOME HOUSING WOULD PASS THROUGH OUR HOUSING AUTHORITY. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT RE CONSIDERATION OF TRACTS 3641 & 3642 A request to act upon the tentative tract maps of Tracts 3641 and 3642 was postponed from the meeting of July 21, at the request of the applicant, for Council consideration of the definition of low to moderate income housing. Don Bissell, Civil Engineer representing Kay Building Company, applicant for Tracts 3641 and 3642, stated that Kay Building would like to obtain additional information from FHA and HUD with respect to meeting the criteria for low income housing development and would request an additional three week delay. Cm Miller stated that even though this item is to be continued there may be people present who wish to speak about the item. Cm Turner stated that he would suggest there be a Council vote on the original application which was for single family residences out in that area and if the application is denied then application could be made under the low income and moderate housing request. Kent Estabrook, 707 Geraldine, requested that the Council, not approve development of additional housing in that area because of the present problems of schools, traffic and sewage. There would be sufficient traffic generated by the development to over- load the streets, the schools are overloaded and we do have a lack of sewer capacity. CM-3D-292 August 18, 1975 (Tracts 3641 & 3642) Robert Sester, 730 Geraldine, objected to the development of more houses that would crowd more children into their already overcrowded schools. He stated that, originally, this developer promised the people in the area that they would have a school for their children but the area isn't scheduled for a school for another IS years or more. He stated that what the people need is another school and if they want to build a tract they should provide another school first. Mayor Futch pointed out that the Council is sympathetic with the problems the people are experiencing with respect to lack of ade- quate schools but there is a limit to what the Council can legally do and the School District is a separate jurisdiction over which the Council has no control. The Council does have a policy of not allowing residential development unless schools can be provided, but as to where schools will be located, remains the responsibility of the School District. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE ITEM WAS CONTINUED FOR THREE WEEKS. Cm Miller stated that this matter has already been continued twice and residents of the area have come regularly to the Council meetings only to learn that it is again to be continued. He would suggest that in three weeks a final decision be made by the Council. It was noted that a final decision will be made in three weeks. REPORT RE PROPOSED CHANGES TO ZONING ORD. RE TRAILERS The matter of proposed changes to the Zoning Ordinance with respect to trailer storage was the subject of a public hearing on April 28th, was returned to the P.C. for recommended changes and again discussed on May l2th. The Council now has a copy of the ninth draft for consideration. Leon Horst of the Planning Department stated that the draft before the Council is essentially the same as the one presented before the City Council on May 12th. The major changes made by the P.C. was the deletion of permitted storage within the RL-S, RL-5-D and RL-6 Zoning Districts for front yards. The P.C. also provided a removal period for those trailers presently illegally stored to be included in the ordinance. The P.C. has suggested that the trailers which have been allowed be phased out over a period of five years and elimination of the per- mitted storage within the RL-S, RL-S-O and RL-6 Districts. Cw Tirsell wondered if Mr. Horst knows of any other city that has used this type of system for abatement of trailers and Mr. Horst indicated that he knows of none. Cw Tirsell wondered if the P.C. has suggested a manner in which enforcement might be implemented and Mr. Horst indicated that he has just returned from vacation and hasn't had an opportunity to discuss the matter with the Planning Director. Cw Tirsell stated that the ordinance appears to fulfill the spirit of the intent of the election on trailer storage and the desire of the majority of the citizens with respect to trailer storage but is concerned about enforcement. She stated that she would hesitate to adopt an ordinance that could not effectively be enforced. CM-30-293 August 18, 1975 (Trailer Ordinance) Mr. Horst indicated that there would have to be a lot of staff effort involved in enforcement of the ordinance and just as the sign ordinance took a very long time to be totally effective, this would also take time. Mayor Futch stated that the Council has received a letter from an individual claiming that prohibiting storage of trailers in front yards would be illegal and he would like a response from the City Attorney. It was noted that all of the cases cited have not been in Califor- nia, and the City Attorney indicated that he knows of no ordinances in the state of California that prohibit front yard storage. If the Council feels there are sufficient facts to support the find- ing they can regulate storage in the front yard. Cw Tirsell asked if the fact that people voted to have such an ordinance would be a persuasive argument. The City Attorney commented that this would not necessarily be an argument to support the findings - the fact that a majority of the citizens would like to do something which would affect a minority, may not cancel out certain rights of the minority. However, he can't think of any substantial rights the minority might have, off hand. The Council could probably do this and more and more cases are allowing the use of police power to accom- plish something no more than an aesthetic purpose and this is pri- marily what the purpose of this ordinance is - to accomplish an aesthetic result. There certainly are other reasons that probably could be brought forth to support the exercise of the City's pOlice power. ern Miller stated that apparently Livermore's authority is the same as all other cities in Alameda County, except Hayward, which they are using to enforce similar ordinances. Cm Miller commented that with respect to the comments by the P.C. he feels the time period is incredibly long and would argue that three months should be sufficient time for owners to find storage space for recreational vehicles or to get them into their back yards or whatever is necessary to comply with the ordinance. He would suggest deletion of Item (6) which would be costly in staff time and that an effective date for the ordinance be a year or less after it is adopted. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE WORDING, AS STATED ABOVE, FOR ITEM (S) (a) BE THE FIRST PART OF HIS MOTION AND THE SECOND PART OF THE MOTION IS TO DELETE ITEM (6) IN ITS ENTIRETY. PART THREE OF THE MOTION IS TO ADD A REPLACEMENT FOR (6) STATING: THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE ORDINANCE IS ONE YEAR FROM THE TIME OF PASSAGE OF THE ORDINANCE. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER. CM-3D-294 I August la, 1975 (Trailer Ordinance) Cm Staley commented that one of the things the City has done is to cut the student help during the summer and suggested that this would be a job that would be ideal for summer students - checking trailers in front yards. He would therefore suggest that the effective date of the ordinance be nine months from the time of passage, making the effective date June. Cm Miller felt this suggestion was reasonable and would be willing to change the motion to reflect the suggestion. Cw Tirsell stated that she realizes the draft had been amended nine times but still feels B. (I) is not clear. This was followed by discussion concerning the definition of "storage". Mayor Futch stated that he assumes the majority of the Council is in favor of the motion but he does not agree because the reason for the\period of time recommended by the P.C. was to give people additional time to amortize the use of their recreational vehicle which they may have recently purchased. He stated that he understands the need and the reasons for the ordinance but does believe a longer transition period is necessary. Cm Turner, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch expressed regrets at having to adopt such an ordinance for various personal reasons but they indicated that the public did vote for such an ordinance and it is their obligation to provide one that would eliminate storage in front yards. Cw Tirsell stated that the public voted this ordinance in and the Council will soon know if they want it "voted out". Cm Staley stated that he would not want to vote for an ordinance that will not be enforced because this type of action breeds disrespect for any law making body who would pass an ordinance that will not be enforced or cannot be enforced. If the Council objects to the ordinance, this is one thing, but if the objections are to the enforce- ment, that is something else. Cm Turner stated that he can just see a bunch of kids running around town during the summer telling people that they can't store their trailers in the front yard just before people are going on vacation and felt this information might not be well received. Cm Miller stated that Cm Staley's suggestion for letting the summer students inform people was good but Cm Turner also has a point. The motion at present is for one year and perhaps there could be a notice in the newspaper prior to summer so that people might be aware of the ordinance before the summer students go around to check. Richard Dickinson, 211 Donner, stated that he is fully opposed to anything that will dictate what he can park on his property. He stated that if this ordinance passes he will be one who will help fight it into court. He stated that he believes Santa Barbara has a case coming into court over an ordinance that was passed in that City. There is a magazine available that gives information with respect to various ordinances which have been ruled unconstitutional and those which have been ruled legal. He suggested that the Council review some of these other ordinances. > Regrets were again expressed by the Council with explanations that the Council is obligated to adopt such an ordinance AND MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Mayor Futch dissenting) . Since changes were made in the P.C. recommendation the ordinance will be sent back to the Planning Commission for comment. CM-30-29S Cw Tirsell stated that she is not personally in favor of this ordinance _ it works an undue hardship on citizens; however, she will vote in favor of the ordinance because of the results of the advisory election held in the city. M! ~<!.L/t1dy~ I August 18, 1975 RECESS Mayor Futch called for a five minute recess after which the meeting resumed with all members of the Council present. APPEAL RE VARIANCE APP. GREAT AMERICAN LAND Mr. Horst explained that Great American Land and Development Company has submitted an appeal for a variance to allow an increase in the allowable floor area from 25% to 29% on 23 lots ,in the tentative tract. These lots are all included in the 40 unit tract located on Murdell Lane. The P.C. denied the request for the variance because they felt the prescribed findings for allowance of the variance could not be made. Earl Mason, Civil Engineer, representing Great American Land, stated that originally the property was a school site found to be surplus which reverted back to the original zoning. He illustrated the area on a map noting that it was to be a school site with a park and since houses are to be built it means a strip about 1,000 ft. deep without access to the rear. There was considerable discussion and numerous meetings held concerning access to this property. He stated that the problem lies with the fact that the original owner dedicated .8 of the property in lieu of paying a fee for park development which has reduced the average lot size from what it would otherwise be. The developer requests the coverage vari- ance so the proposed models can be built on the available lots. It was noted that the park would be dedicated at the time the map is recorded - the previous tentative map was subject to trading land and park dedications. Bill Schworer, President of Great American Land, stated that he was told by the P.C. that they would not allow a variance under any condition but would like to illustrate what his problem is and gave a brief presentation concerning lot coverage for his lots with the aid of a map. He commented that people are concerned with what they get for their money and he wishes to build reasonable four bedroom houses with a family room. He stated that he could eliminate the family room but there would be no value in the house if he has to do this. He indicated that with the setbacks allowed it would be impossible to ever add onto the house. They would request permission to build a house of value and added that he designed the house without realizing there would be a lot cover- age problem. Dennis Bowen, 485 Murdell Lane, stated that the homeowners in the area worked with the original developer to get their park and the developer originally intended to place condominiums in the area but changed the plans to single family dwelling units when the neighbors complained about a condominium. He stated that Great American Land intends to do the same as the original developer and the homeowners support the request for larger cover- age. He then read a petition urging the Council to allow the request for larger coverage which would result in a park for their area. The petition submitted was signed by 20S homeowners. Cm Miller stated that it would appear the concern of the residents is for the park and not necessarily the homes to be built. He wondered if the homeowners would be interested in coverage allowed if they were to get the park. Mr. Bowen indicated that this is not necessarily so, because they do not want the value of the homes compromised by development of small houses in that area. CM-30-296 August 18, 1975 (Great American Land Variance Request) Cm Miller stated that it was his understanding the petition addressed itself to the park. ~ Mr. Bowen stated that this is true but if Great American Land does not obtain the requested variance they believe he will take the land that is open space to increase lot sizes. Les Knott, Chairman of the LARPD Board, stated that they have been working with the residents in this area for many years in efforts to provide a park. He stated that they are ready to develop the park - the mains are in and the water pipes would be installed if they knew where their land would be, and they also have the seed for the grass on hand. For the interest of all concerned he would suggest that the Council grant permission of the variance request. Cm Turner stated that the Director of Planning submitted a list of findings that could be made to support the request AND MOVED TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE REQUEST BASED ON THE FINDINGS MADE BY THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING. (a. That the delay in development of the property resulting from the school reservation constitutes exceptional or extraordinary circumstances; b. the granting of such a variance will not oonstitute a grant of special privilege; c. that such a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights; and d. that the authorizing of such a variance will not be detrimental to adjacent property.) MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Cm Turner commented that an additional 10% increase of coverage would be an additional 7SD sq. ft. and it would be unreasonable to expect anyone to add this amount to their house. He stated that he would like to restate the motion because the variance request is reasonable and the coverage is reasonable. CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE VARIANCE REQUEST BE ALLOWED WITH THE ADDITIONAL FINDINGS MADE BY THE STAFF (a, b, c, and d). MOTION SECONDED BY MAYOR FUTCH FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES. Cw Tirsell stated that she feels two issues are at hand: I) the park the people desire and the Park District is working hard to provide and the Council needs to make sure this park configuration remains; 2) the residents do not want devaluation of their properties to take place but this is not within the purvue of the counc42 - they cannot decide what type 0; housiF9~11 b~ deve~oped. ~' ~ c~~~;~la~~~mf~g~~~:ng t ~~d~S t:t the 2S% coverage has been consistent for the other RS "and RL areas .11 and she feels that basically Great American Land is saying that they ~~ disagree with the ordinance. If a variance is granted it ma~~~~~ " unfair for all the other developers who have conformed and i~esn e ~, .eRaR~e the ordinance. She added that the City has problems too in ~:~~ey are dealing with new owners of the property every three J and could say that the City is faced with unusual circumstances also. Cm Staley wondered what the zoning is for other houses in the area and the coverage allowed. ~ / Mr. Horst explained that there is RL Zoning for that area with 40% coverage for the other homes. Cm Staley then asked what zoning was in effect at the time the school site was reserved and Mr. Horst indicated that both the RS and RL Ordinances were in effect. CM-3D-297 August la, 1975 (Great American Land Variance Application) It was noted that the situation is more complex than changing lots around and if the variance is required it would, in fact, require a new tract map, and there are trades with LARPD. Discussion followed concerning the models and the square footage of each. It was mentioned that about 68% of the homes will be the two largest models. i I ~~ Cm Staley noted that the largest model could be eliminated and this would probably solve the coverage problem but Mr. Schworer stated that it is a matter of economics and that people with children still prefer to purchase a four bedroom home. Cm Miller stated that there have been no variances ever granted against the RS Zoning Ordinance since its adoption. The purpose of allowing only 2S% coverage with expansion allowed later, was not a question of time but who did the expanding and this was the major issue. The initial builder could not crowd the lot and leave no room for expansion for home buyers or to limit possible expansion by the home buyer. In order to give a house and lot and setback consistent with reasonable backyard space, etc. and oppor- tunity for expansion later, if the buyer chose, was provided and was not to be done by the developer. This was deliberate, and consequently, the fact that one could do something in two years was not the issue of the RS Ordinance. There was an effort to eliminate large houses being built on small lots. Cm Miller stated that the discussion of this item has been as if the developer and subdivider were the same person - they are, in fact, not the same person. The subdivider, neighbors, and LARPD all agreed upon this configuration for the tentative map for the park. The developer, when he purchased the property, should have known what the lot sizes were and what the ordinance allows. Fur- thermore his civil engineering consultants should have told him what the percentage of coverages are because they are familiar with what the ordinances allow. Cm Miller stated that the issue is that the developer wishes to build houses on lots that are too small for the houses he desires to build. If he wishes to build larger houses he has other alter- natives: I) reduce the number of lots; or 2) build a smaller house. The fact he wants to build a large house on a lot that is too small is not a reason to grant a variance. In his opinion, there is no justification for granting a variance. One of the major concerns of the neighbors is preserving the park and the developer has a tentative map that is binding on the City - the City has to approve a final, consistent with that tentative map and the tentative map is equally binding on the developer. In accordance with this map if the developer choses to develop he must also dedicate the .a acres which is a condition of the tentative. The developer bought the tentative knowing what the conditions were and should have known what the lot sizes were, and should have known what coverage is allowed. He can ask for a variance or amendment to the tentative but the law does not require the City to amend a tentative or grant a variance. The subdivider has the opportunity to withdraw the tentative and sub- mit a new one without the park in it, but this tentative map was included in the City's sewer commitments because it was a tentative map in the mill - this would not pertain to any other tentative sub- mitted later. CM-30-29a August 18, 1975 (Great American Land Variance Application) c If the tentative map is withdrawn, at the option of the builder, then he has said, effectively, he does not want to build according to the map which was in the mill and in Cm Miller's opinion the City should no longer have a sewer commitment to that tract. He would have to wait a long time to get sewage. If the developer loses the sewer connections and does not develop the question would be, what would happen to the land that should be park. The answer is that the City has the right to condemn and it is within the power of the City to condemn the .81 acres, whether or not there is a tentative map. If the City is required to purchase the property it is no longer available for counting in the overall density which would leave 3.2 houses per acre and the developer would lose about three lots if the City has to resort to condemnation. Pressure on the part of the developer to say they will take away the park unless the variance is granted is not a reasonable discription of the situation. Cm Miller stated that he can't make any findings to grant a variance but can see a couple of ways to preserve the park. Therefore, if the concerns of LARPD and the major concerns of the residents would be satisfied with retention of the park, with- out granting the variance, he feels this would be preferable to granting a variance for which the findings cannot be made. Cm Turner commented that he hasn't heard anyone mention that the park land would be taken away if the variance isn't granted, and condemnation does take a long time and this should be kept in mind. Skip Clausen, 370 Pearl Drive, stated that Cm Miller has indicated the 29% coverage would mean a IS% increase in the size of the house and he felt this was incorrect. Cm Miller explained that the increased coverage is 4% out of the total lot size so if one divides 29% by 2S% it gives the ratio for the increased size of the house which equals l.l5 or 15%. Mr. Clausen felt power plays are satisfactory, in their place, but with respect to the fact variances have never been granted for the RS Ordinance, laws are subject to exceptions and should be granted if it is to the benefit of the parties involved. He stated that power plays, in this instance, are not necessary. It appears that the developer has the interest of the community in mind as well as his own interests and that there is a balance. He stated that he believes power plays should be involved when there is not a balance. Earl Mason, stated that out of all the 300-400 lots located out in that general area there are only about 50 RS lots and all the others are RL lots. To add another 40 lots to the already existing lots which have been allowed 40% coverage would not seem to be an unreasonable request if it accomplishes what would be best for the community and the area. The developer wishes to build the size of house a family would need because due to the ordinance there is no way anyone can ever add to the house with the required side yards, etc. This means that the ultimate size would be 29% now rather than 35% by the home owner later. Mr. Clausen stated that Great American Land is ready to build and /~ he wants to see something go into that vacant area. He stated that for 2~ years the dust from that vacant area has blown through his house and that when he purchased the house it was with the under- standing that a school would go in there. He is tired of not having a place for his kids to play and presently there are motorcycles in there and other hazards which prevent him from allowing his children to play in the vacant area. Development is ready to begin and he stated that he is "all for it". CM-30-299 August l8, 1975 (Great American Land Variance Request) AT THIS TIME MAYOR FUTCH CALLED FOR THE QUESTION AND THE MOTION FAILED 1-4 (Cm Miller, Staley, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch dissent- ing) . CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE PLANNING RECOMMENDATION TO DENY THE REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE, BASED ON THEIR FINDINGS, SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Cm Turner stated that he strongly disagrees with the opinion of the majority of the Council and that it is very clear there are overriding circumstances for this variance. Mayor Futch stated that he also sympathizes with some of the arguments in favor of granting the variance but he really feels the Council should try to uphold an ordinance that has been up- held for many years, particularly when there is nothing unusual about the topography of the land. The developer does have the option of using the other models that would fit on the lots and in his opinion there is no reason to change the ordinance because of his problem. MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Cm Turner dissenting) . RESOLUTION 18D-7S A RESOLUTION DENYING APPEAL BY THE GREAT AMERICAN LAND AND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY FOR VARIANCE APPLICATION. COMMUNICATION FROM MAYOR OF MONTEREY RE TAX RELIEF Cm Turner requested that the letter from the Mayor of Monterey concerning tax relief for the tax payer in the form of compre- hensive tax reform legislation be continued to this week for discussion purposes. Cm Turner stated that he feels some of the points made by the mayor were reasonable but others probably not feasible but would like the Council to somehow support the theory that the tax payer is paying more than his share of the tax burden, particularly in a county area. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO SEND A LETTER TO THE GOVERNOR URGING TAX REFORM LEGISLATION. REPORT RE DESIGN OF FIRST ST./SO. LIVERMORE AVENUE The Public Works Director reported that the properties for the alignment of First Street/So. Livermore Avenue have been ob- tained, the engineering designs are complete and bids are in order for proceeding with the project. The estimated cost is $lS5,000 with CALTRANS financing $95,000 and the City $60,000. The other facet of the project will be the beautification on the northwest and southwest corners of the intersection. Plans have been prepared but further Council discussion has been requested on the proposal for off-street parking facilities on the southeast site. It is recommended that a motion be adopted authorizing con- struction bids. Mr. Lee then illustrated the various designs indicating parking lot exits and entrances which was followed by a discussion of some of the problems. CM-3D-30D August 18, 1975 (First St./So. Liv. Ave.) CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THE DESIGN AND BEAUTIFICATION IMPROVEMENTS FOR FIRST STREET/SO. LIVERMORE AVENUE, AS INCLUDED IN THE AGENDA PACKET. MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. lj\ Mayor Futch stated that he was opposed to the purchase of the two corners through use of park funds and after it has been purchased he would also be opposed to use of park funds for provision of a parking lot. Cm Staley stated that he is personally familiar with the need for additional parking in the downtown area but at the same time he feels a strong commitment for having more park space downtown. In his opinion, this site does not seem to be the best place for the location of a parking lot and on the other hand is not con- vinced that it is the best location for a park either. At present the CBD is undergoing a study and rather than make a decision this evening he would suggest including these parcels in the study. One of the options he would like to see considered would be the market value of these properties for commercial development, after the realignment takes place, and if the value is sufficient, perhaps offering them for commercial development and using the proceeds for acquisition of a larger park along First Street. He would also like to say that this corner is not where parking is needed but rather down around Second Street and the Post Office. Cw Tirsell stated that she would be opposed to continuing this item because it has been on the agenda for several years. The report from Ribera and Sue indicates a need for visual relief in the down- town area but believes beauty and utility can be combined. For example, the owners of the bakery could be asked to cover the wall of that long building with ivy. She concurrs that there would be a problem with traffic turning on First Street and has an alternate design she would like the Council to consider. She stated that if the corner lot is mounded correctly it can have the appearance of open space with parking spaces hidden behind it, and no one need know there is parking behind the beautified area. She stated that she really dislikes losing the opportunity to make something beauti- ful and yet useful at the same time. Cm Turner stated that he would certainly support the recommendations and comments made by Cw Tirsell. He added that while he and Cw Tirsell were members of the Planning Commission they did see this concept in use in industrial parks - the combining of beauty and utilization of the area for parking, and the aesthetic affects were very pleasing. Discussion followed, concerning the various plans for the corner, and problems which would be confronted with respect to traffic, etc. Mr. Lee roughly estimated that the fee for park developement vs. development including a parking lot is $IS,OOO or $21,000 with the parking lot providing 16 parking spaces, and noted that a parking lot for this area would be difficult. Cm Staley stated that there is a vacant lot at Second Street and "J" Street and perhaps the City could purchase something like this for a parking lot in that area. ~ Cw Tirsell pointed out that there is parallel parking on one side of "J" Street and diagonel on the other side and the City would have to do away with parking spaces in order to create an access for the parking lot. It wouldn't be a very good idea to eliminate six parking spaces on the street to provide 12 spaces on a lot. Mayor Futch stated that the Council is discussing development of an area at the corner of First Street and South Livermore Avenue with possible parking provisions but he would be very reluctant to vote for something without knowing where the funds would corne from. CM-30-301 August la, 1975 (First St./So. Liv. Ave.) Cm Turner suggested that a motion be tempered to include the formulation for reimbursing the Park Fund, that would be satis- factory to the Council and perhaps this would alleviate the con- cern expressed by Mayor Futch. John Regan, 270 South "N" Street, wondered if the public or the merchants have been asked for input with respect to what should be done at the intersection and, if not, perhaps there should be postponement of a decision until they have been contacted. I \ / ,--j Celia Baker, Sl4 Bell Avenue, stated that she believes it should be determined what the parking problem is and who is creating it. She knows that many employees are using parking spaces on the street and that some of the banks will not allow parking for employees in their lot so they are also using the street. Gloria Taylor, S8S South "L"-Street, stated that the little amount of parking that could be provided at this corner wouldn't make a dent in the number of spaces needed and urged that the corner simply be beautified. If parking is provided it will be taken by merchants or employees and the public will still have a lack of parking for go- ing to the downtown stores. Ayn Weiskamp, 1413 Lillian Street, Chairman of the Beautification Committee, stated that she really believes Livermore needs some- thing downtown to make it appear attractive. She stated that she has enough interest in that corner to personally help dig and plant trees and knows of other members of the Beautification Committee who share this sentiment. Gail Sidhu, IS33 Vancouver Way, speaking as a business person from downtown Livermore, would like to support the suggestion for the mini park at the corner of First Street and So. Livermore Avenue. She stated that downtown Livermore is sick and anyone driving through is either appalled or glad to be moving through at a fast pace. In order to promote pride in Livermore the citizens must sacrafice a few parking places in favor of face lifting, demolition, and mini parks. She added that she would welcome traffic tie-ups and a horrible parking problem because this would be an indication of a vital dynamic business community and a "well" Livermore. David Eller, 3797 Oregon Way, stated that he agrees with the pro- posal for mini parks. He stated that he considers the area between "L" Street and South Livermore, as the downtown area of Livermore and that the main street of Pleasanton is considered the downtown area of that town. What people enjoy while driving through Pleasan- ton are the aesthetic qualities - not that there are thousands of parking lots. He stated that a lot can be done with paint to improve Livermore. The flagpole and the central area around it should be the central spot and the most aesthetic portion of the downtown area. He would urge postponement of this item until the Beautifica- tion Committee has the opportunity to present coordinated plans for the beautification of First Street. Cm Miller stated these parcels were purchased and designed for park purposes and beautification and to use them for parking would be contrary to the recommendations of the Beautification Committee, contrary to he recommendations of Ribera and Sue which were approved by the Council and P.C., and it would seem to him to be a tragedy to destroy, for the use of automobiles, a park that was designed to make the downtown and City attractive. There is so little greenery in the City that to use this particular piece for parking would be like turning Golden Gate Park and Central Park into parking lots. CM-3D-3D2 August 18, 1975 (First St./So. Liv. Ave.) ~ \ (, / ~_// Cm Miller continued to comment that to provide IS parking spaces out of this small area would eliminate a large portion of greenery. There is no question that there is a need for additional parking but he would agree with Cm Staley in that it should be dealt with in a different way, separately. Other Councils have tried to resolve the Second Street parking problem and in 197D there was an effort to provide a major parking area but at that time the merchants opposed it. In his opinion the City should proceed with what the purchase was made fo. He added that, essentially, a parking lot at this particular corner would be a parking lot for a bar and the use of park money for this purpose cannot be justified. The purchase has been made, the plans have been approved, and the purpose was to try to improve the appearance of our downtown. He stated that it has been found everywhere that attractive downtowns encourage shopping therein - the merchants need the business and the City needs the sales tax. CM MILLER MOVED TO ACCEPT THE DESIGN AND PROCEED WITH THE DEVELOP- MENT OF THIS PARK. Cw Tirsell stated that she doesn't understand why the Mayor doesn't second the motion and he explained that he is opposed to using park funds for the project and unless someone can explain where the money is to come from he is opposed to any action. Cm Staley stated that he believes there would be some benefit in having parks on these corners and little merit in adding parking because the lots are too small but still believes that once the street is realigned these lots will be very valuable and the City may be able to get enough money from the sale of the two parcels to purchase a better area for a park, as well as a more useful area for parking. Cw Tirsell stated that this suggestion would be absolutely contrary to the recommendations of Ribera and Sue, the consultants, who have indicated that what is needed in the downtown area is visual relief and openness. Mayor Futch again emphasized that he really believes the Council should sit down and determine where the funds will come from to do anything with the corners, whether it be parking or beautification. CM TURNER MOVED TO TABLE THIS ITEM, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED BY A 3-2 VOTE (Cm Miller and Cw Tirsell dissenting) . RETURN TO DISCUSSION RE GREAT AMERICAN LAND DEVELOPMENT - MURDELL Earl Mason stated that the developer of Great American Land would like to know if they could work with the staff and LARPD to keep the park as it is and make amendments to their tentative map. In essence they wish to create larger lots so the larger houses can be built and this might mean the loss of one or two lots to the developer. They intend to conform to the RS Ordinance, leaving the .a for the park, and leaving the access, but revising the lot sizes. Cm Miller stated that if the developer conforms to the ordinance and the park and access remain, he would be agreeable to this request. He suggested that Mr. Mason speak with the City Attorney to see if amendments can be made without refiling a tentative. CM-3D-303 August la, 1975 (Great American Land) Cm Miller stated that he can't speak for anyone else, but if it is a matter of timing and the developer is going to satisfy the ordinance and everything else is otherwise alright he would be willing to consider a short extension for allowing the issuance of the permits. Mayor Futch stated that in the absence of a report or comment from the City Attorney it would be agreeable with the Council for the developer and Mr. Mason to discuss this matter with the City Attorney and staff if there are no legal problems. Mr. Mason stated that the problem is timing and they need to get a consensus from the Council to go ahead and work with the staff. The City Attorney commented that there is no provision in the Government Code to allow for an amendment of an approved tenta- tive map but there probably is a way to get around this by, in effect, repealing approval of the tentative and adopting the revised tentative. However, the Council should make findings to take exception to the normal resolution about sewer capacity and indicating that this was considered as part of the capacity and the Council would be reducing the arnount of capacity that would be used with the revised tentative, and the Council would allow for this. Mr. Mason explained that often a tentative is approved with IDS lots, for example, and when it is time for approval of the final there is only room for 103 lots - this is substantially the same thing and nobody ever questions a change. All they intend to do is to adjust the lot sizes on the final map. The City Attorney stated that in this case the developer wants to amend the approved tentative and then adopt it again and this is what there is no provision for in the law. Mayor Futch stated that the Council has indicated that it would be receptive to changes if they can be worked out, legally, and there is nothing more the Council can do this evening. MOTION RE REGULA- TION OF DISPOSABLE BEVERAGE CONTAINERS At the last Council meeting discussion took place concerning effective regulation of disposable beverage containers and the following proposals were made: I) Request that the Alameda County Mayors Conference formally support a uniform local ordinance; 2) Request that ABAG support and sponsor similar legislation among its member jurisdictions; and 3) Request support of the Mayors Conference and ABAG for the adoption of stringent state legislation for statewide appli- cation. CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THE THREE RECOMMENDATIONS LISTED ABOVE, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL, AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM-30-304 August la, 1975 ADOPTION OF MUNI. CODE AMEND. RE SALARIES OF PLANNING COMMISSIONERS I ~j ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT RELATING TO SALARIES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS WAS ADOPTED. ORDINANCE NO. 869 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE AMENDING ARTICLE IV, SECTION 2.46, OF THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE, RELATING TO SAL- ARIES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. SISTER CITY VISIT Cm Staley stated that when he visited the Sister City of Quezaltenango he was given a proclamation to be framed and placed in City Hall and it has brought to mind that our City does not have a proclamation or a key to the City or any type of protocalol. Cm Turner stated that this is true but the City is working on some- thing now. The City Manager has been asked to look into this and make a recommendation. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Futch adjourned the meeting at l2:IS a.m. to an executive session to consider pending litigation and appointments. APPROVE ~11:~ // .~? Mayor ~ I \~.'.. .:-.. J.ty Clerk . ivtJ;.ore, California ATTEST Regular Meeting of August 25, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on August 2S, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:10 with Mayor Futch presiding. ROLL CALL Present: Cw Tirsell, Cm Staley and Mayor Futch Absent: Cm Turner and Miller (Excused) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Futch led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. CM-30-3D5 August 25, 1975 MINUTES ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY MAYOR FUTCH AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE (Cm Staley abstaining due to absence) THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF AUGUST II, 1975, WERE APPROVED AS SUBMITTED. OPEN FORUM (P.C. Appointment) David Castro, 2276 Chestnut Street stated that he read in the newspaper that the recent appointment to the Planning Commission by the Council was for someone in the business of real estate and wondered if there would be a conflict of interest concerning City business. It was noted that if the paper indicated Mr. Sadler is in real estate it was a mistake. (Tract 3607 - Great American Land) Earl Mason, Civil Engineer, representing Great American Land and Development stated that as the Council will recall he spoke to the Council last week about Tract 3607. It was suggested that if Great American Land could find a solution to the lot problem they should let the Council know. The staff has seen the amended map and Great American Land would like the Council to be aware of the changes and to review them. Mr. Lee, Mr. Musso, Mr. Logan and the Park District have reviewed it and have indicated that it is satisfactory. Mayor Futch stated that the Council will be happy to receive and review copies of the map but would like to ask the City Attorney what Council process is necessary. The City Attorney explained that the map is not an amended map or not an amended tentative map because the law does not provide for amendments to approved tentative subdivision maps. Nevertheless, what Great American Land is showing the Council is what they pro- pose to do for the final map and if they file a final map, such as what is before the Council, it will probably be in substantial conformity with the tentative map. If the Council approves the final map then it doesn't matter that it doesn't exactly conform to the tentative and this is the way one eliminates amending the tentative map. The final is amended and the Council approves the final. If the Council does not like the arnendment of the final then it can be rejected on the basis it does not conform to the tentative. The City Attorney stated that he suggested that Mr. Mason inform the Council, at this meeting, what they are planning to do. Mr. Lee indicated that he and Mr. Musso reviewed the map and it is in substantial conformance with the tentative map. Mr. Musso stated that the one significant change is that with the proposed configuration the developer gives the City some money rather than additional land for park dedication but this does not affect the access to the park, or its configuration. Mr. Mason stated that they were able to work everything out using the allowable 2S% coverage without decreasing the number of lots. He added that he has a letter of approval from LARPD also. CM-30-306 August 25, 1975 (Tract 3607 - Great American Land) i ~/ Cm Staley stated that he is very happy the changes could be made, within the ordinance, but was very unhappy that the homeowners were apparently mislead into believing that their park was dependent upon the developer receiving the variance. He stated that he believes this was not the case and apparently this change proves it was not the case. Mr. Mason stated that the ordinance allows, when there are 50 lots or less, the developer the choice of whether he dedicates land or money for a park. That choice, in effect, was taken away from the developer at last week's meeting and they were told that they had to leave the park - period. They weren't trying to mislead anybody - that's the way the ordinance reads. The developer, supposedly, had the choice. He is trying to cooperate and this appears to be a good solution. Cm Staley stated that he believes this doesn't quite state the facts as they existed last week. He believes the facts were that the tenta- tive map had been approved by the earlier developer who, in fact, as a condition of the approval agreed to donate that park land. While it is true that, initially, it was his choice to decide whether to donate park land to the City or to pay the fees, the choice was made prior to Great American Land taking over the project and this is not a choice that was taken away by the City Council last week. He con- tinued to comment that the thing that disturbed him last week was that after he carefully reviewed the plans he found that three of the proposed plans would have fit on almost any lot and only two would not. There were 23 variances asked for out of 40 lots. He stated that he does not object to the request for a variance on 23 lots but what he did not like was the concept he believes was mistakenly given to the homeowners - that if the City Council didn't grant the variance, the park would not be forthcoming. He stated that 208 homeowners left the meeting last week convinved that the Council had voted against them when, in fact, it did not at all and that it voted in favor of the homeowners. Tonight the Council sees the application where the developer is getting the 40 lots and the people are getting their park and everyone is happy. Last week this was not the case - people left very upset. He stated that he believes people signed the petition because they were allowed to maintain a false notion concerning the park and he added that he really wanted this to be voiced publicly. Mayor Futch stated that in reviewing the final as presented, by a quick glance, it would appear that it is in agreement with the ordinance and when it comes before the Counil as a final map, unless the Council finds some reason for denying it, it would appear that the Council would approve it. (East Avenue Bikeway) / Franklin Halasz, Attorney at Law, 229 Garnet Drive, stated that he is addressing the Council in the nature of a continuing news item on the East Avenue bikeway. On Tuesday afternoon at about 4:lD p.m. he was proceeding westward on East Avenue, approaching Almond Avenue, on his bicycle. There was a car stopped clear of the bikeway waiting to make a right turn onto east Avenue. There was a bicyclist ahead of Mr. Halasz going slowly who elected to wait for the automobile but by the time Mr. Halasz realized what the bicyclist was doing it was too late for him to stop without overturning his bicycle. As a result, he suffered a broken elbow. The reason he is before the Council is to remind them that the situa- tion continues to be dangerous and people will continue to be hurt. The problem is counter traffic and no room for two-way bike paths the length of East Avenue. He stated that he would suggest the Council CM-30-3D7 August 25, 1975 (East Ave. Bikeway) seriously address the possibility of devoting whatever money and effort is necessary to getting this situation corrected, immediately, including acquiring land and paying PG&E to place utilities under- ground, etc., before someone is killed. Mr. Halasz commented that the reason he was hurt was because he applied his brakes but skidded on dirt that was remaining on the pavement from construction work for the new fire station. Mr. Lee stated that the staff is in the process of gathering data the Council requested concerning accident records for the county area and will make every effort to provide this information at the next Council meeting. Mayor Futch stated that it is the Council's intention to do every- thing possible at the earliest possible date and urged that this information be available at the next meeting - September 8th. Cw Tirsell stated that, frankly, the Council feels frustrated because Mr. Halasz asks the Council to help but most of the land is in the County with a three stage improvement planned for the road. We have children that we worry about, going up the other side.- very dan~crous, aRd the li~ht poles arc daR~crouo. The Council feels the same sort of frustration because Mr. Halasz comes to the Council, is hurt, and all the Council can promise is that "we will expedite". As a cyclist the word is passed that East Avenue is an extremely dangerous bike path and that one rides at their risk. until the City can do something, if everybody is alert and rides with full awareness and alertness, maybe the situation can be kept under control. This is just one of those things that can't be taken care of "tomorrow", and she stated that she regrets this because more and more people have been hurt. This makes three people hurt this summer that the Council knows about. (Shaheen Industrial Park Map) Earl Mason stated that on July 2lst the Council approved the Roger Shaheen Industrial Park map and agreement. In the agreement there was an amount stated for a credit, from the City, for the storm drain oversized pipe, in accordance with the Storm Drain Ordinance. Since that time, due to changes in the plans, etc., the apparent low bidder at that time was not the low bidder and they had to go to the second bidder - now the low bidder. This affected the numbers in the storm drain credit amount. He has discussed this matter with Mr. Lee and Mr. Logan and they felt since the amount was a fair amount of increase in the number, that Mr. Mason should ask the Council if it would be alright to reaffirm the agreement with the one change. All the bonds are ready to be given to the City as soon as the agreement figure is changed. The agreement has been signed and the man wants to start development tomorrow. Mr. Lee stated that the number which had been used previously was based on bids that had been given to the City. They had given the City a set of three bids and the low bidder, at that time, had bid higher on the storm drainage and the method of calculating the fee was in strict conformance with the ordinance. Cw Tirsell stated that she doesn't really understand what has happened and Mr. Lee indicated that he would go into the matter in further detail. When the City approvs a development agreeement and plans, it knows precisely how many feet of storm drain are going in. A developer CM-30-3D8 August 25, 1975 (Shaheen Industrial Park Agreement) "'- is given credit toward his storm drainage fees for oversized storm lines - lines over 18 inches. There are 24 inch lines in his tract and he gets credit towards the storm drainage fees in the amount of $7,337. This means that the first $7,337 owed to the City is credited to him and he doesn't have to pay the cash. This amount is listed in the agreement so there is no question about the amount. Mr. Lee indicated that the first figure was $4,627.46, and now it is $7,337" - the City had a better deal the way it was calculated before than it will now. Cm Staley commented that he finds it difficult to make a decision on the spur of the moment without further information and if the Shaheen developers should receive credit he is in favor of it but finds it surprising that the cost should have gone up 60% or more. Mr. Lee indicated that part of the reason for the increase is the way it was calculated in the beginning and that strict interpretation of the ordinance would favor the developer. The Council did not see the justification for the first figure and he will be happy to furnish the Council with a breakdown of both figures. Mayor Futch pointed out that it is against Council policy to make a decision on anything not on the agenda and felt it would be best to get a report from Mr. Lee and make a decision later. Cm Staley stated he sees no reason the City and developer can't proceed with the original agreement to get things started and the adjustment, if proven justified, can be made at a later date. CONSENT CALENDAR Greens committee Meeting The minutes for the Greens Committee meeting of July 17, 1975, were submitted to the Council for informational purposes. Monthly Progress Reports A monthly progress report for the month of June was received for infor- mation concerning the Water Reclamation Plant construction project. Res. re Low Income Housing The Council adopted the following resolution establishing a policy related to low-moderate income housing: RESOLUTION NO. 181-75 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING HUD REGULATIONS PER- TAINING TO LOW-COST HOUSING Res. re Appointments -~'\ The following resolutions approving appointments were adopted: RESOLUTION NO. 182-7S A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBER TO AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMITTEE (Steve Patenaude) CM-30-3D9 August 25, 1975 RESOLUTION NO. 183-7S A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBERS TO BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE (Ann Bradley, Norman Hong, Marjorie Leider) RESOLUTION NO. la4-75 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBER TO COMMUNITY AFFAIRS COMMITTEE (Marilyn Lane) RESOLUTION NO. 18S-7S A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBERS TO LIBRARY BOARD (Kay Honodel Reappointed, and Christine Sherman) RESOLUTION NO. l86-7S A RESOLUTION APPOINTING PLANNING COMMISSIONER (James Sadler) RESOLUTION NO. 187-75 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBER TO SOCIAL CONCERNS COMMITTEE (Barbara Carothers) Res. Authorizing Settlement of Condemnation A resolution authorizing settlement of condemnation action was adopted by the Council. RESOLUTION NO. 18a-7S A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT OF CONDEMNATION ACTION (Parcel IS: GEORGE RONALD DONNELLY - City v. Zepol, et al action) Res. Auth. Exec. of Agree. re STEP RESOLUTION NO. 189-7S A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (City of Pleasanton: STEP - 1975) Payroll & Claims There were a4 claims in the amount of $271,040.73, dated August 18, 1975, and approved by the Director of Finance. APPROVAL OF CON- SENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (Greenville North Trial) The City Attorney noted that the trial for Greenville North is over and the City has a park but the cost is not known, as yet. The order for condemnation will be received within 30 days. CM-3D-31D August 25, 1975 (Parking Lots) Cm Staley stated that last week the matter of the lots at First Street and South Livermore Avenue, with respect to possible additional parking, was postponed and he would like to request that this be scheduled for discussion on the first agenda in October. Cm Staley stated that he would like the Council to consider the whole problem of parking in the downtown area and not just whether or not the lots at the intersection at First Street and South Livermore Avenue should or should not include parking. He felt the intersection should be considered by the P.C. and the Beautifica- tion Committee with recommendations made to the Council for some type of comprehensive plan. There should also be recommendations from the Chamber of Commerce and some discussion concerning the financing. Cm Staley stated that one method of financing which comes to mind is some type of tax override such as we have for the present munici- pal lot, or some type of assessment district. The Business License Tax Study Committee was going to review the surcharge, as it relates to municipal parking, and perhaps the Council could ask that this part of the report be ready by the first meeting in October. Perhaps they could give some indication of the amount of revenue that could be raised through the surcharge method. Cw Tirsell asked that the staff report on the historical problems the City has encountered with formation of an assessment district for anyplace in the downtown area so the Council will not find a happy solution only to discover that something is historically impossible. Mr. Lee indicated that bids for the intersection should be going out as soon as possible and the staff will hopefully be ready in three weeks. The parks at the intersection should really go out at the same time as part of the package of the project. He explained that it is more efficient to have the same contractor do everything since all the activity will be taking place in the one area. If all three projects are in one package the contractor will be able to give the City a better bid. Mr. Lee commented that the traffic will be disrupted to some extent but the flow of traffic will continue because it is a state highway and this will be written into the contract. This project is separate from the relocation project and he believes it will not increase the amount of disruption to begin the project now rather than later. Cw Tirsell asked if the demolition of the buildings will be part of the contract and Mr. Lee indicated that it would. Cw Tirsell felt a discussion in six weeks would be a little late and would suggest that a decision be made as soon as possible, perhaps September ISth. Cm Staley stated he has no objection to earlier discussion but his only reason for suggesting October was to allow maximum input; how- ever if time is pressing and people are already somewhat organized then it should be discussed as soon as possible. CM STALEY MOVED TO REMOVE THE ITEM OF PARKING AND THE FIRST STREET AND NORTH LIVERMORE AVENUE INTERSECTION FROM THE TABLE AND PLACE IT ON THE SEPTEMBER lSth AGENDA UNDER UNFINISHED BUSINESS, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. Cm Staley stated the Council needs to know what kind of parking is needed and what is proposed, how much this will cost, and a means for financing it. CM-3D-3Il August 25, 1975 (First St./So. Livermore Avenue Intersection) Mayor Futch stated that he would agree the Council must look at the overall problem with respect to parking for the downtown area and try to obtain a funding method. Cw Tirsell stated that she is not sure bringing this item from the table will help because it is a very focused problem that has been discussed for three years. None of the Council believes that the few spaces of parking that might be provided in these two sites will really have any impact. She feels the Council would be able to discuss the item of what should be done at the intersection but if the Coun- cil trys to attack the whole problem they will be meeting all night. Cm Staley stated that he would like the Council to discuss the whole issue of parking prior to making a decision for the corner and he is not prepared to vote, either way, on the corner until some type of comprehensive plan has been accomplished. Cw Tirsell stated that she feels the motion is wrong because if the item is brought from the table it is a very specific item involved with maps and matters to be resolved and if the majority of the Council wishes to set the matter of parking, in general, on the agenda for discussion, fine. She stated that the Council will end up tabling the item in lieu of the discussion on parking, in general, and it is not an orderly way in which to do business. CM STALEY WITHDREW THE ORIGINAL MOTION AND MOVED THAT RATHER THAN TO REMOVE THE ITEM FROM THE TABLE AND PLACING IT UNDER UNFINISHED BUSINESS, THE COUNCIL PLACE A COMPREHENSIVE DOWN- TOWN PARKING PLAN INCLUDING METHODS OF FINANCING UNDER NEW BUSINESS. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. It was noted that there should be a report from the Business License Tax Study Committee with recommendations concerning a surcharge. COMMUNICATION RE SUNSET DEVELOP. SIGN CITATION HEARING A letter was received from Henry D. Murphy, Deputy District Attor- ney, notifying the City of a request for a citation hearing involv- ing non-conforming signs of Sunset Development, which was held on June 2, 1975. Mr. Mehran was advised that he would be granted 60 days in which to either obtain a variance or remove the non- conforming signs. The letter was noted for filing ON MOTION OF CWTTIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. COMMUNICATION FROM BART RE EXPRESS BUS PROGRAM A letter of response concerning the BART express bus program was received from Richard o. Clark, President of BART. He indicated that no decision has been made to eliminate the program and that the General Manager has requested that the program continue to operate until October at which time the issue will be reviewed by the Board. The General Manager of BART also informed the Council of fare adjustments and parking charges which will be implemented on July lst of next year. These items were noted for filing on MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM-30-312 August 25, 1975 COMMUNICATION RE REPLACE- MENT OF DUMBARTON AND ANTIOCH BRIDGES Letters from the City of San Leandro and the City of Union City were submitted to the Council concerning the replacement of the Durnbarton and Antioch bridges. ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE MATTER WAS NOTED FOR FILING. RES. ADOPTING TAX RATE FOR 1975-76 FISCAL YEAR Don Bradley, Assistant to the City Manager, explained that the report submitted to the Council summarizes the action recommended by the staff which is slightly different than what was discussed at the Budget Hearing. The recommendation asks that the Council adopt a tax rate l~ higher than what the Council discussed. The recommendation is made on the basis of the financial condition of the City and also on the final assessed valuation figures outlined in the report. It was noted that there is an 8.2% decrease in the Public Utility Roll and a 3.1% decrease in the Locally Assessed Unsecured Roll and Cw Tirsell asked for a verbal explanation. Mr. Nolan, the Finance Director, reported that the decreases are a surprise to the City. He indicated that he spoke with the assessor who reported that it was discovered the recession is in the Public Utility Roll but they had not received the detailed numbers at that time. He stated that this affects all utility properties, including the railroad properties, PG&E, and Western Union. It was felt there would be a 25% increase in the valuation of these properties and instead there was a drop. It is recommended that the tax rate be set at a maximum of 8~ which will be offset by a proposed decrease in the bond rate of 2~ which will result in a net of 6~. ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE COUNCIL ADOPTED A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 1975-76 FISCAL YEAR TAX RATE of $1.Sl. RESOLUTION NO. 190-75 RESOLUTION FIXING TAX RATE FOR FISCAL YEAR 1975-76 RES. AUTH. EXEC. OF AGREE. WITH PG&E RE METERING STATION The relocation of PG&E's Isabel Avenue metering station is part of the East Stanley Boulevard widening project. As soon as PG&E receives notice from the City, arrangements will be made to remove the facility on Stanley Boulevard. Upon completion of the work, reimbursement will be made for the net cost of the move, estimated to be $115,ODD. It is also recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authoriz- ing right-of-entry by the City onto PG&E property. ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, RESOLUTIONS AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT WITH PG&E WERE ADOPTED. CM-3D-313 _._------_._........__......._._._-_._~~-------~-----..._~-.._-.~-.._-~"_._,, ....,_._""""_.~.__..._..__......._--,~~---"-----"'-_.."., August 25, 1975 (East Stanley Widening) Mr. Lee explained that the project is the result of an agreement made with the County about lO years ago. The County was to do the major portion with the City doing other portions and this particular area is the responsibility of the City. RESOLUTION NO. 191-7S A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (Pacific Gas and Electric Company) RESOLUTION NO. 192-7S A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (Pacific Gas and Electric Company) ADJOURNMENT There being no further Council business, Mayor Futch adjourned the meeting at 9:10 p.m. ATTEST ~ /I~ ~~~ onn 0 nn Livermore, California APPROVE Regular Meeting of September a, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on September 8, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:10 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. PROCLAMATION Mayor Futch proclaimed Monday, September 8, 1975, World Literacy Day in the Livermore area, and read a copy of the proclamation to the Council and audience. CM-3D-314 September 8, 1975 MINUTES August 18th P. 290, second paragraph from the bottom, line 5 and 6 should read: build approximately the same kinds of houses at the same price but shortly the City ...etc. (and will not really be building low income housing - omitted) . p. 295, insert a new paragraph which will be the third paragraph from the bottom: Cw Tirsell stated that she is not personally in favor of this ordinance - it works an undue hardship on citizens; however, she will vote in favor of the ordinance because of the results of the advisory election held in the City. p. 297, 5th paragraph from the bottom. At the end of the paragraph add the following sentence: We do not try to manipulate the values of housing built within the City. p. 297, 6th paragraph should read: Cw Tirsell added that the impor- tant thing to keep in mind is that the 25% coverage has been consistent for the other RS areas and she feels that basically Great American Land is saying that they disagree with the ordinance. If a variance is granted it makes it unfair for all the other developers who have conformed and will weaken the ordinance. She added that the City has problems too in that they are dealing with new owners Of the property every three years and could say that the City is faced with unusual circumstances also. August 2Sth P. 308, 5th paragraph line 4 should read: the road. We have children that we worry about, going up the other side. (Omit the remainder of line 5.) ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE MINUTES FOR AUGUST 18th villRE APPROVED, AS CORRECTED. ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE (Cm Turner and Miller abstaining due to absence) THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF AUGUST 25, 1975, l~RE APPROVED AS CORRECTED. CONSENT CALENDAR Minutes The following minutes were submitted to the Council for informational purposes: Social Concerns Committee - July 17 Design Review Committee - August 19 Housing Authority - July 22 Report re Signal Timing - Portola & No. Livermore With respect to changing the signals at portola and No. Livermore Avenue to allow a green light for Portola, the staff recommendation at this time is that the lights remain green for the No. Livermore Avenue traffic, the major volume street. Res. Rejecting Claim The Council adopted a resolution rejecting the claim of Michael Burns III. CM-3D-3l5 September 8, 1975 RESOLUTION NO. 193-95 A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF MICHAEL BURNS III. Payroll & Claims There were 133 claims in the amount of $114,546.21, and 273 payroll warrants in the amount of $93,725.67, dated August 28, 1975, and approved by the Director of Finance. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. COMMUNICATIONS - CON- TINUED UNTIL LATER REPORT RE CROSSING GUARD ELIMINATION The Chief of Police has submitted a report to the City Council recommending that the crossing guards at portola and Royal and at Holmes Street and Concannon be eliminated. Both of these streets are served by traffic lights close to where the crossings are located. Cm Miller stated that if the Council is going to adopt a resolution he would like the reference to portola and Royal deleted. CH MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE BUDGET BY THE ELIMINATION OF THE CROSSING GUARD AT HOLMES STREET AND CONCANNON BOULEVARD, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. Dana Hartley, 513 Briarwood, asked that the Council allow them to continue traveling safely to school and that the Portola/Royal crossing be continued. She stated that children using this crossing have signed a petition and that letters of support have been submitted by the ECE teacher and the principal. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 195-75 A RESOLUTION AMENDING 1975-76 BUDGET BY THE ELIMINATION OF A CROSSING GUARD ASSIGNMENT. DISCUSSION & P.C. REPORT RE TRACTS 3641 & 3642 (K&B - No. of Joyce & Katrina) Discussions concerning Tentative Tracts 3641 and 3642 have been continued from the meetings of July 8, 21, and August lath. At which time there were questions as to whether or not development of these tracts could qualify as low income housing in order to obtain sewer connections. VERBATIM TRANSCRIPTION Mayor Futch: I would like to make a brief comment because I've had a lot of comments regarding low income housing. The item CM-30-316 September 8, 1975 (Tracts 3641 & 3642) that we have in front of us is a standard subdivision map and we have no application pending for low income housing. George, do you want to comment on the staff report? Mr. Musso: Just briefly, I didn't have time to put the maps up, I didn't realize this would be so soon. The issue before the Council is whether or not the two subdivision maps, located on the north side of the rear portion of Wagoner Farms subdivision, should be approved. The Planning Commission somewhat dismissed, or did not consider the details of the subdivision map, but instead recom- mended denial based on the issue of sewer availability. The State Code provides that they can deny a subdivision map that does not conform to the General Plan. The General Plan includes criteria for availability of sewers and neither subdivision met the criteria of availability of sewers. On the basis of that, they recommended denial of the subdivision. For the most part the design of the subdivision, as far as the lotting and street alignment, was satis- factory. There were issues that were not particularly discussed and they felt those were details that had nothing to do with the principal issue of the sewer. I would suggest that in the event they proceed, irregardless of the school, then you might look at the question of the details. One of them has to do with the school letter and the access problems. Mayor Futch: Just for the record we do have a letter from the School District saying that they cannot handle an extra load of children in that area. Mr. Musso: One subdivision is the extension of Joyce Street, a relatively minor extension in conformance with all of our planning. The other is the extension of the street from Geraldine and again, pretty much in conformance with our planning and provides the begin- nings of a second park area, but none of these things are issues as far as the details of these subdivisions. Mayor Futch: Are there any questions of the staff? If not, would the applicant like to address the Council? .- , Don Bissell: Thank you gentlemen, my name is Don Bissell of Bissell and Karn, Civil Engineers representing Kay Building Company. We're representing them in regard to these two subdivisions and as George has indicated to you, there is little in the way of specific planning criteria that is of issue with regard to the two subdivisions. There was, initially, but we worked very closely with the staff and I think virtually met all of the particular issues that the staff had raised. The P.C. did not choose to talk about planning issues, though we requested that they address themselves to those issues, and came to you with the recommendation for denial, on the basis of the sewage treatment plant capacity, that being the primary issue from that standpoint. I was speaking with Scott Phillips of Kay Building Company today. He had indicated to me, today, and verified, today, that there was an agreement back in June with the School District that they would agree to a contribution of $850 per unit, which I think is what has been contributed in connection with other develop- ments and that the School District would then write a favorable letter with regard to it being sufficient to address the question of the capacity of schools and allow for an expansion. I was told that Bruce Jamieson was the one with whom this discussion had taken place and that as late as December the 3rd he had promised that a letter would be forthcoming. I came here tonight under the impres- sion that was somewhat different than commented on here by the Council so we assumed that that issue had been resolved. CM-3D-3l7 September 8, 1975 (Tracts 3641 & 3642) Don Bissell: With regard to the sewage treatment plant capacity, we have studied the two reports that have corne to the City Council but differ somewhat in the capacity that is available. We are somewhat concerned with the second report because one of the major factors is that it sets aside certain committed capacity for develop- ments that are projected. There's nothing with regard to a time ele- ment as to when those projected developments should, in effect, pick up their permits, so to speak, so that if they aren't, in fact, going ahead then there should be an allowance for other developments to be able to take its place and fulfill some of the housing needs for Liver- more. We are concerned also with the second report in that committed capacity is established for certain developments and, in effect, a contingency factor, so to speak, is set up which amounts to about twice that that is set aside for specific committed developments, and it is in the category of miscellaneous which, frankly, didn't seem appropriate and, frankly, I have been unable to determine the full justification for those miscellaneous categories. Another factor that is taken into account is the matter of treatment capa- city set aside for commercial and industrial. This is a common practice with regard to, particularly, industrial uses where it is a type of use which is an unusual type of use insofar as sewage treatment capacity requirements are concerned but it is not neces- sarily required to set aside specific capacity for all types of industrial uses. If you aren't contributing at home you are con- tributing at work, so to speak; therefore it is not necessary to establish a capacity for all and sundry industrial and commercial uses, so that there are, in our opinion, and I'm in the Civil Engineering practice and have delt with sanitary districts from the initiation of my career, we feel this is an area where there can be capacity that can be established. Maybe the major item is that the area we're talking about here is a so-called clean up area. There are two parcels, in fact there is a third one that is falling behind it, three clean up parcels, so to speak, for the developer who has put in quite a number of units. I really can't state a specific number - it's several hundred. It seems to me that there are close to a thousand units. I'm not sure about specific numbers but something in that category and these are cleanup parcels to finalize and get those parcels of ground off the book and into the tax roll as opposed to lying fallow out there. It's in the City, it has been for many years, and specifically it is within an assessment district that was created some dozen years ago. That assessment district formed, among other things, the improvements that included sanitary sewer. I am sure that the contention and assumption at that time was that there was capacity. They have been paying under this, the capacity in sewage treatment plant facilities, to handle the area. They have been paying into that assessment district, as I say, for more than a dozen years, and in our opinion, constitutes a moral and legal obligation on the part of the City to allow the capacity in the sewage treatment plant for these final parcels of development. I think those are the major points I wanted to bring to your attention. I might just add there has been some concern with regard to parks. I have heard that expressed here at the Council meeting with regard to these two developments, one of them does include a portion and would be the initiation of a park adjoining a proposed school site that is in Tract 3641 and several acres are set aside in that development for park purposes. Cm Staley: Did I understand you to say that, I'm not sure I under- stood the point of your testimony, was that the sewage ordinance was improperly passed because there was sewage capacity? Was that your point? Mr. Bissell: Mr. Staley, I believe there are any number of ways to calculate sewage treatment plant capacity. The first item is that there is no such thing as an absolute fixed capacity for CM-30-318 September 8, 1975 (Tracts 3641 & 3642) a sewage treatment plant. It is not a specific number - you could handle lD% more than that - it's not just a S million gallon plant, you could handle lD% more or 10% less. It's not just a fixed number but it's being calculated on the basis of a fixed number and I am taking issue with the manner in which the numbers were arrived at. em Staley: Do you have any evidence or any point to make in terms of the calculation? Mr. Bissell: Yes, I'm ra1s1ng the contention that about 2/3 of the number of units that were set aside as so called "committed units" for capacity, is in the category of miscellaneous, 1/3 of which were actually, in fact, justified on the basis of specific developments. The remainder 2/3 are in the category of miscellaneous. I have a copy of the report. Cm Staley: I'm not sure what that has to do with capacity. It seems like the original argument was that capacity was flexible, that's one, and I'm asking you if you had any evidence to support that position, and it seems to me like the second argument is that we made too large an allowance in a particular category. Am I correctly stating your arguments? Mr. Bissell: That would be reasonably accurate - I'm not sure that I agree in every word you've used there, to be honest. em Staley: But I still didn't know if you had any evidence on that point about the calculations or about the flexibility of the plant. Mr. Bissell: I've discussed the point with Dan Lee, if that is sufficient evidence. I'm aware of the sewage treatment plant capacities, I've dealt with sewage treatment plants in my experience; not every day, but certainly over an extended period of time - some 25 years in practice. I know, for a fact, that sewage treatment plants do not have a specific capacity. They may have a specific hydraulic capacity which can be much more substantial than the so called treatment capacity, but a treatment capacity can be flexible; it depends upon how the operation is. You could run it at ID% less than the S MGD if it's a poor operation and still not have as good a treatment as if you were running it at ID% greater capacity than the so called 5 MGD. em Staley: You stated my question distinctly. Have you inspected the plant or have any engineering data to indicate that the calcula- tions are incorrect? Mr. Bissell: Well, sir, I was your City Engineer here in Livermore at the time the plant was built so I have some knowledge with regard to it - I don't have knowledge with regard to specific expansions that have taken place since that time. Ma~or Futch: The plant has changed, considerably, since that time an I would also like to state that the Council was quite aware that this might become a point of controversy. We therefore hired an expert firm in the field to go out and do a study and Brown and Caldwell is very notable firm in this field. The capacity of the plant they gave us is based on their findings. Dan, I wonder if you might comment on the reserve capacity and the allocation that we made to the different categories? Dan Lee: Yes, the question I think Mr. Bissell is referring to or the number that he is questioning, has to do with the miscellaneous lots; the number of which were established by the Planning Director. Perhaps I should refer it to him because the numbers of lots that have the potential for development were established by him. CM-3D-319 September 8, 1975 (Tracts 3641 & 3642) Mayor Futch: I think the question that was raised was that the con- tingency factor was probably much larger than it should be and I really don't understand this. It's really the uncertainty in the size of the plant, which he readily admits, that makes the necessity for a contingency factor. Mr. Lee: Let's then talk about this and try to clear up the confu- sion, first of all talk about the capacity of the plant. When we talke4;abaut the capacity of the plant the Council was well aware that it's the average dry weather flow. There are a number of units in the plant, all of which have to be designed for this certain aver- age dry weather flow. Some units of the plant may have a little more capacity than the other; however, for the entire plant you have to assign a capacity to it. This plant has been designed as a S MGD plant, average dry weather flow. Instantaneous flows, as you know, can be much higher than that - 30% higher and more. Nevertheless, the plant is designed for a S MGD plant and this is one of the points that was raised when the Council considered this earlier. You had the independent study made, that you speak about, Mr. Mayor. The consulting firm of Brown and Caldwell confirmed that it was a S MGD plant and I believe that could be well substantiated. The other issue, now, is how the reserve capacity is committed. As you recall, there were a number of commitments that the Council acknowledged. Some of the reserve capacity was used by tracts that were already in the mill; others were tracts that were already filed but the houses weren't built yet and then there was industrial develop- ments anticipated or committed and then there were lots throughout the town; some of them were existing lots that are not built upon, and these were fairly large lots and referred to in the study as miscellaneous lots. I believe that is the committed capacity that Mr. Bissell is referring to. Those lots were counted by the Planning Department and are lots of record. If that is what Mr. Bissell is questioning, George would be in a position to tell you how that num- ber was arrived at. Mafor Futch: I really don't think it's necessary to go into a de- ta1led description of how lots of record were accounted for. Mr. Musso: Could I just add that we also figured in the vacancy factor which would be in favor of a new developer. We used the November 1964 Census as to the house count and we used the vacancy factor, which was fairly high at that time and we've reduced it significantly to come up with the maximum number of new units that was decided upon. Mayor Futch: I think the technical facts can be well substantiated and I really don't see any need to have additional discussion on that. We have been very careful in computing the capacity of the plant to the best engineering ability that's available. Are there any other comments you would like to make, sir? Mr. Bissell: No, I thought that there might be more questions. Anthony Varni: My narne is Anthony Varni, I'm an attorney represent- ing the applicant. I just want to talk for a second on the question of low cost housing. Mayor Futch: I don't believe we had an application for low income housing in front of us tonight. As far as I can tell it's a stan- dard subdivision map and I really would be very reluctant to get involved in that discussion. I see nothing in the documents that I have in front of me that would say that this is a low income housing development. CM-3D-32D September a, 1975 (Tracts 3641 & 3642) Mr. Varni: Let me ask a question. Are you saying that you don't want us to talk about that? Mayor Futch: Yes. If the Council had something in writing, they would be happy to discuss it but I think you're bringing this up at a rather late time, without any facts in front of the Council as far as low income housing; as far as the application goes. There is nothing is writing. Mr. Varni: Just so I understand, what you are saying is that you don't want us to talk about it. Ma~or Futch: I'm saying there is nothing in your application and we re considering your application at the present time. Mr. Varni: O.K., but just so we don't have any confusion, is that the position of the Council - that we should not talk about it? Because if it is, we won't, that's fine. Mafor Futch: Well, I cannot speak for the rest of the Council. I th1nk maybe the best thing would be to get a motion on the floor and then the Council can open that discussion. ern Miller: Mr. Mayor, may I ask a question? What's the relevance? Mr. Varni: The relevance is that it is my understanding you're going to allocate capacity to low cost housing and you've adopted a standard as to what low cost housing is. Cm Miller: Let's see - we've already had a standard about what low cost housing is; you've seen that. The application before us has nothing about low cost housing and was not relevant to this applica- tion. Mr. Varni: I don't think your standard on low cost housing says that it has to be in our application. Mayor Futch: What's the pleasure of the Council? Cm Turner: That's not the application. The application is for the two tracts, 364l and 3642, and I guess that at this time I would MOVE THAT WE DENY THAT APPLICATION. Cw Tirsell: I'LL SECOND. Mayor Futch: We have a motion and a second. I think we should have some findings to go along with that. ern Miller: I have some. Cw Tirsell: I have some, too. Cm Turner: The main finding is the sewer capacity allocations. There is no allocation for that type of residential. Cw Tirsell: Dale, I was wondering if we might use the P.C. findings and then add to those. ern Staley: It seems to me that if what Mr. Varni is going to say about low cost housing relates to our motion for denial, which is that we allow an exemption in our sewer capacity for low cost and moderate cost housing, that perhaps we ought to hear what he's got to say. That's my opinion. The motion is to deny. CM-3D-321 September 8, 1975 (Tracts 3641 & 3642) Mayor Futch: There is a motion and a second and findings, and we'll open it up for discussion. We have a motion to deny, based on the findings of the P.C., plus some additional ones which you would like to add. Cw Tirsell: I have some. Mayor Futch: Would you go first? Cw Tirsell: I would include the five findings from the P.C. with a sixth (6) finding that these tracts are an extension of a leap frog development and further increase the environmental and social problems inherent in such development. A number (7) finding is that the circulation pattern of this area is inadequate at this time to handle additional traffic. Problems of access for residents, police, and fire emergency vehicles would be further aggrivated by acceptance of this tract. P.C. Findings: I. That Resolution No. SS-7S adopted by the City Council on April 7, 1975, states that the policy of the City Council of the City of Livermore shall be to allocate estimated remaining average dry weather flow capacity of the City of Livermore water reclamation plant to industrial and commercial uses only, except that ten percent (10%) shall be located to low cost housing. 2. That the proposed map is not consistent with the arnended City of Livermore General Plan. 3. That the design and improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with the amended City of Livermore General Plan be- cause of conflice with City Council Resolution No. SS-7S. 4. That although the site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development, the proposed design and improve- ments are likely to cause substantial environmental damage and sub- stantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitate because of conflict with City Council Resolution No. 5S-7S. S. That the design and type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems because of conflict with City Council Resolution No. SS-7S. Mayor Futch: Do you have anything to add? (To Cm Miller) Cm Miller: Yes - I think we have already added the findings made by the P.C., there are Helen's findings, there is no school letter before us that says there is classroom space. I know that they say there is one coming but this was the night of decision and if it isn't here, it isn't here. Mr. Musso: We have a school letter. Cw Tirsell: It says there isn't any. em Miller: But the letter that says there is space available - Mr. Musso: It says the opposite. Cm Miller: Yes, it says there is not. It has been alleged that there is such a letter or that there-should be such a letter but unfortunately it is not here. This is the night of the decision. Mr. M~so: Would you like that letter read into the records? The one we do have - the findings. CM-30-322 September 8, 1975 (TEacts 364l & 3642) Cm Miller: When we finish, I think maybe. Finally, the development will lead to more vehicle miles traveled that will lead to more smog, a decrease in valley air quality, and this will mean an increase to the already existing hazard to health from substantially worse air quality than existing federal standards. I would like the record to say something a little more specifically: (l) That this tract conflicts with use of our sewer capacity to balance the community - this is Resolution No. 55-75. (2) It conflicts with the timing and availability of public facilities portion of the General Plan as concerns schools, in particular, as well as clean air. (3) It will worsen air quality as indicated on Page 9. of the Environmental Impact Statement; and (4) the cumulative effects of subdivisions have a serious adverse affect and we must therefore deny this by the provisions of 66474 (e) and (f) of the Subdivision Map Act. Cw Tirsell: I have no objection to hearing Mr. Varni if he has something he wants to add as far as low income, but I don't intend to discuss the subject unless there is a point raised for information. Mayor Futch: Don, (Cm Miller) I agree that any additional housing would probably contribute to the air quality by worsening it. I'm a little concerned about that finding, though, because the next logical step is that we're not going to approve any additional homes in the valley and I know that's your position but I'm not really sure I'm ready to take that position yet and I don't think that we need that air quality finding in here in order to take the action. Cm Miller: As you know, I agreed and have agreed to the low income housing portion of the reservation for sewer, which implies that given the appropriate overriding social impact that this would be a reasonable expansion of housing. But this particular case doesn't show any of that in any way, form, shape, or size, and consequently I think the argument is not unreasonable. Mayor Futch: Well, the conflict that I see, brewing probably, is that the Citizens Committee have recommended a growth rate of between one and two percent. I'm afraid we would be setting a precedent with- out really a formal discussion as to whether that's the intent of the Council - not to have any more housing or not. I just don't think it's necessary to have that finding. ern Miller: Well, why don't we put my suggestions as the form of an amendment and if you want to amend that out it's okay with me. I wouldn't want it out but I can understand. Mayor Futch: Would you like to make a separate amendment then? Cm Miller: Well, if all the rest is acceptable, with the exception of that one thing then I'll formalize that one thing as a separate amendment and the Council can second or not second, or vote for it or not vote for it. Is that what you'd like? Mayor Futch: Yes. I would like that as a separate amendment because I think we really ought to discuss that issue in greater depth. Cm Miller: I presume nobody objects to any of the other items? Mayor Futch: No. ern Miller: I BELIEVE THAT ONE OF THE REASONS FOR DENIAL OF THE DEVELOPMENT IS IT WILL LEAD TO MORE VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED, MORE SMOG, A DECREASE IN VALLEY AIR QUALITY WHICH INCREASES THE ALREADY EXISTING HAZARD TO HEALTH FROM SUBSTANTIALLY WORSE AIR QUALITY THAN THE FEDERAL STANDARDS AND WILL WORSEN ~RB AIR QUALITY AS INDICATED CM-3D-323 September 8, 1975 (Tracts 3641 & 3642) ON PAGE 9 OF THE EIR. THAT I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE AS ONE OF THE FINDINGS AND I'M MAKING THAT AS A MOTION. Mayor Futch: You're not making that as a - Cm Miller: I'm making that part of it in a motion so if there's no second, then it's out. Mayor Futch: That's an amendment then to the main motion. Is there a second to the amendment? Cw Tirsell: I agree with a lot of what you say, Don, but I don't think it's necessary in this application to add that since we haven't had a formal Council position on it. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Mayor Futch: We now have the main motion. Cm Staley: Archer, I would still like to hear from Mr. Varni on that point. Mayor Futch: Yes, I was just getting ready to ask Mr. Varni, would you like to now comment? Mr. Varni: I don't want to seem arbitrary but I don't want to comment at this time. You have already made a motion and second why don't you just vote on it? Mayor Futch: The purpose of having the motion is so you know what to address your comments for. Mr. Varni: I don't agree with the procedure and I'd just rather have you vote on it, Cm Staley: Is Mr. Varni's position that he has nothing to say on our positions on motion? Mr. Varni: No, I'm just saying that you, in effect, have closed the public hearing. Cw Tirsell: No. Ma~or Futch: pu lic, sir. No. We haven't even heard from any member of the Mr. Varni: I don't know why you've made a motion and second. Mayor Futch: That's the usual procedure - to have a motion first. That's the normal parliamentary procedure. Mr. Varni: Well you have just closed the public hearing. Mayor Futch: This is not a public hearing. If you will look on the agenda there are certain items on which there are public hearings then there are other items on which there are not public hearings although we always give the applicant an opportunity to comment and we also give any member of the audience an opportunity to comment. It is not a formal public hearing, however. We have not closed it. Mr. Varni: In light of the criteria adopted in your motion I don't choose to comment at this time. Mayor Futch: Okay, thank you. CM-30-324 September 8, 1975 (Tracts 3641 & 3642) Cm Staley: I'd like to make an amendment to the motion. THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE BEFORE US, THAT THIS IS AN APPLICATION SUITABLE TO QUALIFY FOR EXEMPTION, UNDER OUR ORDINANCE, BY EITHER A LOW OR MODERATE INCOME HOUSING APPLICATION. Cw Tirsell: I'LL SECOND THAT. Ba~e~a~a~eh:What I've said is that I'd like to make another finding an that finding is that there is nothing before us, in terms of the application, or any testimoney, to allow us to make any findings that this is an application for a low or moderate income housing project so as to qualify for some of the contingent sewer capacity. Mayor Futch: We have a motion and a second. Any discussion of the amendment? Mr. Musso: Did we acknowledge this letter from the School District on this school issue? Mayor Futch: Yes. We have a copy of the letter in our agenda from the School District stating that they had no additional capacity. Mr. Varni: May I have the date of that letter? Mayor Futch: May the 16th, 1975. We have not received an additional letter since then. Does anyone in the audience want to comment on the amendment now? Cm Staley: Well they are all amendments with additional findings. Ma~or Futch: Jo n. I thought you stated this in the form of an amendment, Cm Miller: It is an amendment which makes the additional finding. Mayor Futch: Formally, though, we should have a vote on it. em Staley: As we should on all the amendments. Mayor Futch: That was made as a separate amendment. Cm Staley: That was made after I wanted to hear if there was any evidence of the point. There wasn't any evidence to the point and I should think you could make the findings. Mayor Futch: Would the maker of the original motion (Turner) agree that that would be one of the findings? Cm Turner nodded. Cw Tirsell: I will, I seconded it. Mayor Futch: That's now part of the main motion. Audience Member: I had something I wanted to say to that amendment thing; there's an awful lot of us down here tonight because of this one particular issue - this low housing thing and I'm just curious as to how it crept in here that we had to make a resolution on it to creep it out in the second place. If we're not talking about low income housing why do we even need a resolution here in the first place? Mayor Futch: What we have in front of us are two subdivision tract maps. CM-30-325 September 8, 1975 (Tracts 3641 & 3642) Audience Member: I'm aware of that. ~or Futch: There is nothing that has been written that states any- tlilng about low income housing. As far as we know the applicant has made no specific proposal with regard to low income housing. Audience Member: And that isn't going to be handled separately in another place, later on tonight or tomorrow morning? Mayor Futch: Not that we know of. Audience Member: Okay, that's fine. Ma~or Futch: It won't be with my knowledge. Would anyone in the au ience care to comment on the main motion? Ben Hastings: I live at 5460 Cleo Court, Livermore, in the vicinity of the mentioned maps. I'm not an expert on sewage. I'd like to remind the City Council that approximately a year ago the question of permits for Livermore Gardens was approved. The Council, at that time, expressed sympathy for the homeowners over our overcrowded schools, traffic conditions, undergrounding the electricity that was ignored, and some other numbers, but stated that what was happen- ing was not the Council's fault but was an error - a loophole- or something that had been decided by a previous Council. Tonight there are people here. Mrs. Tirsell stated that we've all had a good lesson in government, intimating that the homeowners should not have waited so long to initiate action or dissention; that we should be active and stay on top of what goes on in our neibhborhood. Tonight we are here. I'm here to urge the City Council to not approve the maps until such time as problems of school classrooms, water pressure, sewage, traffic conditions are settled. I also would ask the City Council, that as the gentlemen that preceded me said, this is not going to come up later on or tomorrow morning on the low income housing. That if this is raised that our group out there be given adequate time to prepare our defense, like we did this time, if our defense is being considered as part of the refusal. Thank you. Mayor Futch: I would like to request that the audience please re- frain from any indication of approval or disapproval and please speak to the motion which is before us. John Wysite: I reside at 781 Geraldine, which is also in the vicinity of these proposed developments. It seems that we came down here to defend what is now a nonexistent opponent but in light of the two previous comments concerning perhaps a new proposal sometime in the future, to avoid the issue of sewage capacity by proposing low income housing, I would like to present to the City at this time some 750 signed letters of objection to any additional building in this vicin- ity until the problems of water pressure, overcrowded schools and overcrowded streets are taken care of and there is also a discussion in here of our concerns about low income housing in this area, should that become an issue in the future. Mayor Futch: I'd just like to reassure everyone in the audience that if another application comes up or if this one is renewed it will have to go through the full procedure. Go through the P.C. first and it will have to advertise it and I think everyone will be well aware of it many, many weeks and months in advance. Mr. Wysite: The only point is, it's much easier for a representative of one company to come down and present a proposal, than it is for citizens to get out on the weekend and collect signatures and do a lot of hard work on their own time. I don't think we need to do this time and again as proposals are altered slightly to fit into CM-30-326 September 8, 1975 (Tracts 3641 & 3642) one City ordinance, or another. That's the point with which we're concerned. I just want to give you these letters now and I think there's no further need for our statement. Mrs. Tirsell has taken care of what we wanted to say at this time. Mayor Futch: Thank you, sir. Anyone else in the audience want to comment? Gordon Smith: 5262 Irene Way. I, also in agreement with the pre- vious speakers, would like to recommend to the City Council that they reject the planning map, as presented. I think what you're hearing is the concerns of people for future action as well and so my question is, how long is the building permit and the PUD that exists out there going to continue? I speak to this because I have been living there quite awhile. I know the PUD originally was issue in 1962 for a five year period to 1967, was then granted an extension 1~-2 years and its been going on since that time. I think that's the real issue now. Can the citizens get some date now that this PUD will continue into effect and what is the final? Mr. Musso: If this application or request is denied, any new request is again a first step. There's no PUD, there's no building permits - nothing. Mr. Smith: Then what is the zoning? Shouldn't it revert back to what it was - agricultural? Mr. Musso: It is zoned residential. Mr. Smith: If there is no PUD how can it have a zoning? Mayor Futch: You can have a residential zoning without a PUD. In fact, it is rather unusual to have a PUD. The zoning is just what the City thinks the land has a potential for sometime in the future. We're in the process of reviewing all residential zoning, in fact, all zoning of any nature within the City, as part of the General Plan review. It will have to be consistent with the General Plan which we're in the process of adopting. Mayor Futch: Dale? Cm Turner: You might explain to the audience, who don't know what a PUD really is. Mayor Futch: A PUD is a planned unit development permit and it's a permit that allows a developer to come in and and to make requests for a development that is somewhat different than standard subdivi- sion development. The Council then looks over the permit and decides whether it is desirable or not. In the past it has worked to the ad- vantage, maybe, of the developer. We really haven't had a PUD permit in quite a few years now. Would you care to comment? (To member of audience) Amanda Foster: Yes, I would, thank you. My name is Amanda Foster, I live at 5296 Theresa Way and I would like the Council to clarify. There have been two specific comments which use the words, "there are no words in the application which read low cost housing". Would you specify, if you can, to us. Even though those words do not appear, do they, within their price range, within their structure, within their construction, fall very naturally into a low cost hous- ing unit? Mayor Futch: That's a very difficult question to answer but just judging from standard construction of subdivision in recent years it would appear, at least to me and probably to the rest of the Council, that the standard subdivision like that would not really provide low income housing of the type that the Council has been desirous of having. CM-30-327 September 8, 1975 (Tracts 3641 & 3642) I think we are getting a little off of the motion that's in front of us. I would like to ask one more time if anyone in the audience would like to comment before we have the motion. Budd Steers: 5172 Theresa Way. I am also the Vice President of the Rhonewood Park Homeowners Association and I do function in that capacity. There are 339 homeowners out there, within the confines of the Homeowners Association, and they are very concerned about any type of housing that goes out there. I don't believe we are opposed to building houses for people to live in but what people are opposed to is the problems that have been delineated and out- lined and spoken so many times this evening. The traffic, the sewage, the water pressure and the overcrowding of the schools. The only other point that I would like to make is that although the proposed builder might come forward with all sorts of glowing accolades of what he desires to do with parks and one thing and another, it has been our experience with this builder that he is not one to do more than is absolutely necessary, and not even that. He doesn't even live up to his commitments. If we had some way to bring him into performance of his already committed - the things he has already promised to do, he would be spending a lot of additional time out there. I think this is one of the reasons why the people are here. In addition, too, I would like to even go on record as being in oposition to Kay Building Homes out there. We live in Kay homes, so we know. That's the last statement that I have. I think there are a lot of people that are in oposition to Kay as a builder - maybe another builder might be more desirable than that particular one. Thank you. Mayor Futch: Anyone else in the audience? Cm Miller: At the begnning of this discussion it seems to me that low income housing was not a subject of the application. Nonetheless, I think I would like to hear Mr. Varni's words on it. Mayor Futch: He did not care to speak. Cm Miller: But I'm specifically inviting him to speak. If he doesn't want to, he doesn't have to. Mr. Varni: I think I've already made my position pretty clear on that. I don't want to speak on it at this time. Mayor Futch: Alright, we have a motion and a second. Any other discussion from the Council? If not, all in favor say, "aye". MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. Cm Miller: Mr. Mayor, that was for the amendment. We still have the main motion. Mayor Futch: No, all the amendments were made into one, and will be outlined in the following resolution: RESOLUTION NO. 196-75 A RESOLUTION DENYING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAPS TRACT NOS. 3641 & 3642 Mayor Futch: I would like to thank the members of the audience for attending, and the applicant. RECESS Mayor Futch called for a brief recess after which the Council meeting resumed with all members of the Council present. CM-30-328 September 8, 1975 MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (E. Stanley Blvd.) Mr. Lee stated that the Council raised a question concerning the County's plan for the improvement of East Stanley Boulevard between Isabel and Pleasanton. He has checked on this and finds that they do have plans for improvement widening of East Stanley Boulevard in 1976. This includes the bike path as well as the widening. March was the date given for commencing. It was noted that a bike path has been provided on the south side of Stanley and that when the street is widened there will also be a path on the north side of this street. (Executive Session) Mr. Parness requested that the Council meet in an executive session immediately after the meeting to discuss property litigation. (Annual Barbeque) Mr. Parness asked if the Council would be interested in sponsoring the annual Livermore/Pleasanton barbeque. It was noted that it is Livermore's turn. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO SELECT A DATE FOR THE BARBE QUE AS WELL AS TO TAKE CARE OF ALL THE NECESSARY ARRANGEMENTS. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL (El Charro Road) Cm Miller stated that he has been reading in the newspaper about El Charro Road and it seems that we should be in support of the City of Pleasanton and their stand to get this road built. They are the City that takes the "guff" of the gravel trucks driving on their streets. El Charro Road should be put through and not used just as a private road for two of the gravel companies. CM MILLER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO DRAW UP AN APPROPRIATE RESOLUTION, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. (VMH Hospital) Cm Miller noticed that he read in the newspaper that the Hospital Board has gone into secret meetings with the Comprehensive Health Council. He stated that i~ seems this should be illegal from the ,~) ~tandpoint of ~~.~?~!e~~9sive Health Counci~ but they ~re ~oi~g r\'~~!'''JJ)l.t anywa~. Whl.l~~Ji~tSt' exactly a publl.c cor,?oratl.on l.t l.S ~~~ the publl.c who pays the hl.gher rates they are chargl.ng for the ~~ move to a larger hospital that there will never be a population to serve. He would suggest that if our representatives have not already been to the Comprehensive Health Council, they should go fairly soon and see if they can find out more about these secret meetings. Also we should ask the Hospital Board to reflect on the wisdom of holding secret meetings. Mayor Futch stated that because a quarum was not present it should not necessarily be characterized as a secret meeting. CM-30-329 September 8, 1975 (VMH Hospi tal) Cw Tirsell stated that in the strict letter of the law they are not required to have their meetings in the open but she believes that any body serving the public should do the business of the public, in public. Mayor Futch stated that he doesn't disagree with Cw Tirsell and Cm Miller but would not want to imply they had been involved in a technical violation. Cm Miller stated that he didn't say that there was a technical violation involved. They have a right to meet in secret but he believes it is unwise for a quasi-public organization to meet in secret and that we should indicate such. Cw Tirsell and Cm Turner will speak with the Board and Administra- tion at VMH and report back to the Council concerning this item. (City Protocol) Cm staley stated that the City Manager was looking into the possibility of some type of gift to present visitors and some type of City protocol for visitors and wondered what is happen- ing. Mr. Parness indicated that he has to speak with Cm Turner con- cerning an appropriate gift and will be reporting back to the Council. (Quezaltenango Anniversary) While Cm Staley was visiting Quezaltenango he learned that they will be celebrating Quezaltenango's l50th anniversary in October and he feels it would be appropriate for Livermore to plan some- thing in honor of this celebration. (Downtown Parking) Several merchants have complained to Cm Staley about the down- town parking in terms of non-enforcement of the parking regula- tions for a one hour parking limit on the streets. He stated that the problem has been taken care of but there is dissention among the merchants as to the time limit that should be allowed. He stated that he believes if parking regulations are on the books they should be enforced the way they are written. If special parking zones need to be created, perhaps this could be done. (Council position re BART Services to COVAl cw Tirsell asked if she could submit the Council's position concerning the potential cut in BART bus services, to COVA for a consolidated opinion. The Council concurred. (Coordinating Lights) Cw Tirsell asked Mr. Lee if the City could talk to the people from the State Highway Department about coordinating the traffic signals from Murrieta to the "P" Street intersection. At present, a driver must stop twice and she has received complaints. CM-30-330 September 8, 1975 (First Street Signals) Mr. Lee explained that the lights on First Street are timed for rapid movement through the City, but Stanley is not included be- cause it goes off First Street. If someone goes either east or west traveling on First Street they can go through all the lights on First Street without stopping. They are timed to allow people to travel from 23-25 mph without stopping along First Street out Holmes Street. (List of Requests for Withdrawal from Sphere of Influence Area) Cw Tirsell asked Mr. Parness if the City could obtain a list of names of those people who have requested that they be allowed to withdraw from Livermore's Sphere of Influence at the LAFCO meeting. Cw Tirsell stated that LAFCO will be discussing this item again in November and she feels it would be beneficial to know what properties are making the request and what action, if any, these people have requested of the City of Livermore. She stated that she also believes it would be worthwhile to determine the total number of commercial acreages involved. (Sphere of Influence) Mayor Futch stated that Senator Knox has been reviewing LAFCO's possible modification to our Sphere of Influence and it might be advisable for the City to speak with him. Cm Miller felt it would be an excellent idea to get in touch with Senator Knox. The City Attorney indicated that this was uncovered some time ago but in view of the fact LAFCO has a different attitude towards Livermore's Sphere of Influence, it was felt that the City really shouldn't press the issue at this time. If the City Council has any questions at any time concerning any of the City's law suits he would suggest that the Councilmembers feel free to contact his office. (Legislation re Trucks) Mayor Futch stated that there is a legislative bill concerning the weight of trucks and would suggest the Council oppose any increase in the weight of trucks because the trucks damage our streets. MAYOR FUTCH MOVED TO ASK THE STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION OPPOSING ALLOWANCE OF HEAVIER TRUCKS. MOTION SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Cm Turner noted that the Council was not supposed to act on anything not scheduled on the agenda but it was noted that this bill was going to the governor and there was a time limit involved. IT WAS NOTED THAT THE COUNCIL WILL ADJOURN TO WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, TO REVIEW DATA RELATIVE TO THIS ITEM. (SB 502) (i'l)? St.cp~ ~ ' SEOp'A and Mayor Futch asked for information re SB 502 concerning possibly the Council can act on this bill. CM-30-33l September 8, 1975 COMMUNICATION RE TRI- VALLEY REC. CENTER A letter signed by Susan M. Singleton and James M. Zumstein was submitted to the Council with the request that the Council endorse the concept of a recreational center for the young and old. It was suggested that the former Volkswagon Distribution Plant be converted to an arcade, recreational center, indoor tennis center, and musical fine arts center. CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE ITEM BE NOTED FOR FILING, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. Cm Miller stated that he felt the suggestion was very good. Cm Staley explained that there has already been a private appli- cation for use of the building they have suggested. Cm Turner stated that perhaps the City could obtain information concerning the status of the application and if it wasn't approved perhaps the people who wrote to the Council could furnish informa- tion as to what the cost would be for a tri-valley center such as the one suggested. CM ~BRER WITHDREW THE MOTION AND THE SECOND WAS WITHDRAWN. CM TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE STAFF REFER THIS MATTER TO LARPD, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. COMMUNICATION RE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT A letter was received from the Alameda County Planning Department concerning the Solid Waste Management Plan for Alameda County (draft). Cm Miller stated that he is one of the Mayors Conference appoint- ments to the Alameda County Solid Waste Management Advisory Com- mittee and it is the intent of the Advisory Committee to ask that all cities hold public hearings on this plan so that when the input goes back to the County Planning Commission there will have been some public discussion of it. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE CITY SCHEDULE A HEARING FOR SEPTEMBER 22, 1975, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. Cm Miller stated that this normally dry subject has picked up some color due to the conflict between Oakland Scavenger and others who would like to have publicly owned transfer stations, sanitary land fills, etc. At this time it is not clear what the Advisory Committee will ultimately decide but the issue should be very interesting. One thing that was discussed is the fact that the Joint Refuse Rate Study is proposing that Oakland Scavenger get a 25 year contract - 15 years with an option on either side (cities or Oakland Scavenger) to renew. Cm Miller stated that he is concerned with the 25 year contract proposal because the Solid Waste Management Plan has things that should be re-examined on a shorter time scale. There should be a five year review in 1980 about which should be public and which should be private. It may be determined in 1980 that Oakland Scavenger should do it but there should be sufficient time allowed and the option available to examine all these issues. He stated that there are underlying issues of public jurisdiction vs. private scavengers and it is really very interesting. He urged that every- body read the policy portion of the report because this subject is very important although it may appear to be boring. CM-30-332 September 8, 1975 (Solid Waste Management) Cw Tirsell stated that she has been concerned about this matter since Oakland Scavenger obtained the site in the Altamont. If you look at the capacity of that site and the amount of money they're spending to buy it, that is the Alameda County Solid Waste Disposal Plan. Our ability to require retrieving of metal is going to have to be built in very strongly because the hole is already there and they will have the rolling stock to serve it and the site is a 30 year site. The capacity is in the site right now for the whole plan. Cw Tirsell stated that an excellent article appears in the magazine the Councilmembers received in their agenda packet this week and she believes it is necessary to find out what is happening elsewhere along with what is happening in our area. Also the Bay Area League of Women Voters have a strong position on Solid Waste Management and other organizations with positions on this subject should be encour- aged to participate in the public hearings. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. COMMUNICATION RE BART A letter was received from the City of Antioch, vigorously opposing any reduction or elimination of BART bus service to their City as well as to Livermore and Pleasanton areas. They feel that until rail service is available, BART is committed to provide bus express service and was the reason the citizens of East Contra Costa County voted to support the system. Cm Staley suggested that the City of Antioch be sent a letter indicat- ing that Livermore supports their letter, along with copies of the letter we have sent to the BART Board. It was noted that we have already written to Antioch with a copy of our letter. Cm Staley suggested that the City of Livermore work with Antioch in coordinating testimony for preserving the bus route, with which the Council concurred. COMMUNICATION RE AMEND. TO POSTAL REORGANIZATION A letter was received from Congressman Stark indicating that the Mineta amendment to the Postal Reorganization Act which grants communities the option to choose between curbside or door delivery has his strong and active support. ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO WRITE A LETTER OF THANKS TO CONGRESSMAN STARK. COMMUNICATION RE REVENUE SHARING PROPOSAL A resolution from the City of Belmont concerning the League's revenue sharing proposal was submitted to the Council. It was noted that the City Council has already voiced support of this type of legislation and the item was noted for filing. CM-30-333 September 8, 1975 COMMUNICATION RE HR 8170 A letter was received from Congressman Mollohan of West Virginia, asking for support of HR 8170, a bill which he has introduced, concerning Revenue Sharing funds. The Council agreed, unanimously, that the bill appears to be very good and Cw Tirsell suggested that the City write to him expressing their strong support. Mr. Parness commented that on the surface the bill appears to have some benefits to our City but the staff is looking into what the effects might be with respect to finances. At present it has not been determined as to whether or not the bill would be totally beneficial. The staff will be reporting back to the Council on this item as soon as possible. NOTICE OF BAY AREA AIR QUALITY MAINTENANCE PLAN- NING POLICY TASK FORCE Notice has been received from the Air Resources Board of a meeting to take place on September 10, 1975, at 9:30 a.m. at the State Building, Room l157, 316 McAllister, San Francisco. The San Francisco Bay Area Air Quality Maintenance Planning Policy Task Force will discuss composition for San Francisco Bay Area Air Quality Maintenance Planning (AQMP) and its process. Cw Tirsell wondered if one member of the Council should attend this meeting. It was noted that someone from the Council would attend, if possible. COMMUNICATION RE BART RATES AND CHARGES A report was received from Robert S. Allen, concerning rates and charges for BART, and was noted for filing. Cm Miller suggested that Mr. Allen be sent a letter thanking him for presenting Livermore's point of view to the BART Board. He added that Mr. Allen has presented our views, quite faithfully, dispite the fact that there are times when his personal views differ from the City's. Cm Miller stated that he appreciates this quality and feels Mr. Allen should be thanked. The Council concurred. REPORT RE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT The City Manager reported that at the preliminary budget session the City Council directed the staff to present material concern- ing the formation of a Community Development Department. Cm Staley stated that one of the things he believes should be included in the proposal that he did not see, is that the City also needs a central contact person for people who live in the City and need building plan approval, etc.; not just developers. He indicated that he has received complaints about being told one thing at the Planning Department and another thing at the Public Works Department. A person should not have to go to three or four different departments in order to build something. CM-30-334 September 8, 1975 (Commun. Develop. Dept.) Cw Tirsell stated that she favors anything that could be done to improve the public's contact with the staff; however, she feels that this particular person should not be the mediator for the various departments. Cm Staley stated that he did not intend for this person to be the mediator but would like this department to be the source of infor- mation for a particular citizen. Since the department would be marshalling this type of information for developers of residential housing or industrial/commercial development, it would seem that this would be the appropriate place for contact with the citizens. Cw Tirsell stated that Mr. Musso has indicated that this type of information to the public consumes about 40% of his time and if an administrator will be given this responsibility in addition to what is intended, more people would have to be hired for this department. Cm Staley stated that it is his understanding the new department will have a staff with the Building Inspection and Planning Depart- ment under this new department and he felt there could be a central person designated for information to the public and it should be under this Community Development Department. He added that communica- tion problems with the public will always exist as long as there are three or four departments involved for information on a particu- lar ordinance or subject. Cw Tirsell stated that she would not be willing to add this as a job assignment. em Miller stated that he believes he has a different feeling about this issue than the majority of the Council. After careful considera- tion he has come to the conclusion that such a person is too expensive for the results that the City could reasonably expect. The question is, "can there be a return adequate enough to justify a budget of $30,000/year in a tight year?". There is also the question of the job description and what he reads into it is that the mediator be- tween the public and the staff is really a mediator between the public and the Council. It appears that someone who would deal with the regulations is going to weaken the Council's fair share principles and fair share regulations. He feels that the creation of this department would result in a "developer oriented man inside City Hall", whether it be for residential or commercial/industrial development. The job description calls for someone to smooth, at all costs, the way to getting something done and one of the ways to do this is to "chew up" our regulations along fair share principles. For these reason., the format of doing it in this way bothers him, he will oppose a City of Livermore and Director of Community Develop- ment. ))~~J> Cm Miller stated that what Eih:"~~Jld like to see would be a Valley-wide Community Development Directo~ with the addition that we work out something such as was dO~/the Minneapolis area with a 60-40% share. The recipient City would the 60% and the 40% would be divided among the other entities. This way the valley would be working on a common goal rather than having the destructive competition that has occurred in the past, and joint powers agreements could be entered into. Cm Turner stated that he has favored this position since before he was elected a year ago and it would appear there are three options: I) have our own department; 2) have a valley-wide depart- ment on a shared basis; or 3) have none. CM-30-335 September 8, 1975 (Commun. Develop. Dept.) The primary function of the job would be industrial and commer- cial promotion but he feels that this person could become bogged down in day-to-day routine that could take the person away from the focal point of achieving industrial/commercial development for the City of Livermore. He would suggest that if the Council decides to have a Director for this purpose that it be done on a contract basis whereas certain results have to be attained within a period of two years - perhaps have a contract for two years - and if there are no tangible results during this time the department could possibly be eliminated. He stated that he would also question whether an $8,000 expense for additional clerical help and expenses is really an accurate figure. If the Council isn't careful this department cuuld mushroom into 4, 5, 6, or 8 people, and he is somewhat concerned about this possibility. em Turner added that he has some concerns but feels this depart- ment is important to the City of Livermore, and something we need, but how it would work and how we implement it is very important. Mayor Futch stated that he believes all the valley communities would never get together and agree on something like this. Cw Tirsell stated that she also shares the concerns mentioned by Cm Miller. The ordinances have been hard to get adopted and the regulations are strong, She can invision a staff per- son who would sellout part of the ordinances in order to get what the City is asking for. However, this is one of the duties of the Council - to see that the regulations are met - and the Council doesn't see any commercial applications because there isn't anyone with the time to look for applicants. It is very difficult to attract industry because people will not tell you, until after they have located, what attracted them to an area. She stated that what she has in mind is a real community develop- ment person. There are grants available to the cities all the time and it is very difficult for Mr. Parness to keep abreast of the status of all the various grants the City is involved in. If we could ease the burden on some of the departments and someone could spend part of the time in the field running down leads and pursuing some of his own leads, she feels they don't have to pay for their position. In her opinion, every application they manage to bring before the City is one more than we have going for us right now. There is never a good time to hire a staff. Money is tight and there is never a good time and it is hard to always justify things. She stated that she would really like to see the City take a new turn in government. This is a big town and we need to do big things to balance it. We talk all the time about wanting industry but Mr Parness can't spend three days out of five looking for interested people, and we don't have a single staff person who could do it because they are too busy. Cw Tirsell suggested hiring a person who can at least look for us and if they get some applications it is up to the Council to determine if they will come in and it is up to the Council to uphold the ordinances. She feels this is an~~~tunity the City can't afford not to take. We are not a small~anymore and we need coordination and somebody out looking for industry because it doesn't come to your door step. em Turner stated that he would agree there shoul be someone hired to concentrate strictly on commercial/industrial develop- ment. CM-30-336 September 8, 1975 ~- . \ (Commun. Develop. Dept.) Mayor Futch stated that he intends to support the proposal for a new department because this is an indication that the City is going to take this as a serious goal and that we will try to obtain industry and commerce. It is quite a commitment in view of the small amount of City reserves available and he would hope that this is appreciated. Cm Staley commented that he likes the suggestion made by Cm Miller to contact the valley-wide communities and would urge that the City proceed wihh this plan but at the same time inquire of the other communities to see if they would be interested in entering into a joint powers agreement to hire someone with the understanding that the revenue would be divided on some type of fair basis. Cm Staley added that he believes this plan would help to relieve a major staff problem of too much work with too few people and it does make very clear our commitment to community development, particularly industrial and commercial development. With respect to the comment made by Cm Miller that this would create a person who is "developer oriented", he is not sure that this, in itself, is bad. The final responsibility for determining how the resources of the City will be used, lies with the Council, not the staff. He stated that there is nothing unreasonable about having a staff member that is attempting to find good development for the City. It is true that there is good development and bad development and it is the Council's responsibility to make that decision. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO PROCEED WITH THE PREPARATION OF THE NECESSARY RECRUITMENT MATERAL WITH A RESOLU- TION TO BE ON THE AGENDA NEXT WEEK ADOPTING THE JOB SPECIFICATION FOR INCLUSION IN THE CITY'S PERSONNEL FILE, AND A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY STRUCTURE. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM STALEY. em Turner stated that he would like to comment, once again, that he is very concerned about the jOb description, the possible expansion and ultimate costs. Once a person'is' hired doing a spe- cific job they sometimes get away from that job because of other pending matters and then never get back to the job for which they were hired. Cm Turner stated that he would be opposed to a job description as outlined by the City Manager in his report, even though he supports, 100%, a Community Development Director for the purpose of establishing industrial and commercial development for the City. /"~, I \ ) / ./ William Hurdlow, 1133 Aberdeen, stated that it is certainly true there is good development and bad development. It depends upon whose standards are used in determinig what is good and what is bad. The City of Livermore, over the past few years, has been taking more and more into its own hands and determining what is good development and what is bad development. He stated that he sees this as another move to place more power into the hands of city government in deciding the fate and development of the pri- vate lives of the citizens of Livermore. There have been develop- ments approved by the City in the past that did not gain the support of the citizens and have been very bad, such as the golf course, the airport, and the railroad relocation project. All of these things should be examples of where the City should be getting out of develop- ment and letting private industry and individuals get back to the business of having their own good development. Mayor Futch stated that Mr. Hurdlow has a difference of philosophy because the Mayor feels that the airport and the relocation project are very beneficial to the City; however, Mr. Hurdlow is welcome to his opinion. CM-30-337 September 8, 1975 (Commun. Develop. Dept.) Cm Staley stated that it would appear the City is really doing two or three things in creating the Community Development Department. In the first place we are making major changes in the staffing of the City and is concerned that perhaps there should be a public hearing for this type of thing. His second to the motion indicates that he is in favor of this but in terms of the final proposal, he doesn't assume that they are settled by this vote. The final de- tails still need more work and it would seem that the City staff should have some input if they are involved. The City Manager commented that, theoretically speaking, without the addition of a new staff person it would be the prerogative of the City Manager to realign certain staff functions. He stated that he believes the alignment suggested in his report is most appropriate. In the event the Council determines it does not agree with the subdivisions and their inclusion within the Community Development Department, this decision must be made immediately because in the recruitment for applicants for this position, it must be defined. The responsibilities and the overseeing charges must be stated. Cm Staley explained that he did not mean to imply he disagrees with the proposal as outlined by the City Manager but when some- thing comes from one point of view he would be curious to know what other views might be. MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Cm Miller dissenting) . REPORT RE PUC APP. FOR FIRST ST. OVERPASS Mr. Parness reported that one of the rprocedural requirements for the construction of the First Street overpass is to receive a PUC order allowing its construction. This application, once approved, would be such an order. It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing execution of the application. CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF THE APPLICATION, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. RESOLUTION NO. 194-75 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN AN APPLICATION BY THE CITY OF LIVER- MORE TO THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR AN ORDER AUTHORIZING CONSTRUCTION OF A SEP- ARATION STRUCTURE OVER THE MAINLINE TRACKS OF THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY AND THE WESTERN PACIFIC RAIL- ROAD COMPANY, FOR EAST FIRST STREET IN THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA. P. C. REPORT RE FUTURE WIDTH LINES Mr. Parness reported that the report from the Planning Commission is a response to the Council's referral on the general scheme of the County's plan for three lanes and two lanes on East Avenue. The proposal is that the final design be progressed to the point where it is referred to the City, by the County, for formal adop- tion of future width lines. With the Council's permission the staff would go to the County and indicate that the concept is approved and CM-30-338 September 8, 1975 (Future Width Lines) the design plans would finally establish the future width lines. This would come back to the Council for a public hearing and adoption by ordinance after hearings at the Planning Commiss~on level. The Council voiced concurrence with the design concept. REPORT FROM P. C. RE RESTRICTION OF USES IN NEIGHBORHOOD SHOP- PING CENTERS A report was received from the P.C. concerning the referral from the City Council as to the possibility of restricting the number of retail liquor stores to be allowed in a neighborhood shopping center. By unanimous vote the Planning Commission believes there should be no limitation on the number of retail liquor stores or other mis- cellaneous uses in a neighborhood shopping center. The report was noted for filing. REPORT RE ACQUISITION OF ADDITIONAL PROPERTY FOR MAX BAER PARK (2.4 Acres) The Planning Commission reports that they have considered the referral by the City Council concerning LARPD's proposal to acquire 2.4 acres of land to add to Max Baer Park. It was felt that 1) this would be in conformance with the General Plan; 2) purchase of park land is advantageous to the community; 3) acquisition of this land would be a buffer to future residential development; 4) the acquisition would round out the boundaries of the park-school complex; and 5) the P.C. would be favorable to the purchase if it would be complimentary to the entire park-school complex and was for multi-purpose use. By unanimous vote the P.C. recommended that the City proceed with the acquisition of the subject parcel. Cw Tirsell stated that she would like to know what the land would cost and it was noted that the City must obtain preliminary appraisals. CW TIRSELL MOVED THAT THIS ITEM BE REFERRED TO THE CITY MANAGER WITH AUTHORIZATION TO OBTAIN PRELIMINARY APPRAISALS, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. P. C. MINUTES The minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of August 12, 1975, were noted for filing. REPORT RE COVA JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT ~- The City Council received a copy of the revised Joint Powers Agreement for the Congress of Valley Agencies (COVA). Cm Staley commented that he would like to express the things he feels are objectionable with this revised Joint Powers Agreement. It seems the basic purpose of the Agency is diverted by a change that makes the discussion of local issues "taboo" to that parti- cular agency. He stated that it was his understanding this Agency CM-30-339 September 8, 1975 (COVA Agreement) was created to speak for the Valley about issues that affect the Valley. If we are going to allow this agency to be established, and yet give each member the right to veto any proposal, it means that a lot of problems will prevail. He stated that he is not willing to vote for funding this agency or to participate in it under these conditions. If we are going to have this agency it must be one that can deal with all valley issues and does not require approval of the local jur1sdictions. One of the problems is, what is the jurisdiction of VCSD or Zone 7? There are real problems with this issue and he stated that he believes he has made this point in the past. It is obvious as to how he will vote. Cm Miller stated that he would have to back up what Cm Staley has said about COVA. COVA is now a parody of what we hoped it would be and it's ridiculous to continue an agency that will go nowhere. If Pleasanton doesn't want to have anything they do examined by anyone else, that's their problem, but they should take the respon- sibility for wrecking an agency which could have been very useful. The City of Livermore has gone on record as saying that we would welcome review of anything we do and that Livermore would take into account their input. Nobody is required to take into account the input of other cities but by the old rules all you had to do was listen. It is foolish to compromise to the point you have nothing left and yet think you have something because you don't. Everybody is wasting their time now and COVA has been reduced to the position of the valley Planning Committee. Cm Turner stated that he will vote in favor of supporting the Joint Powers Agreement, as amended, because at this point he does not agree with the position taken by Cm Staley and Miller. Cw Tirsell stated that she really agrees with what Cm Staley and Miller have said but intends to vote differently because she is at the COVA meetings each time and the Council is looking at two very different philosophies. Pleasanton has looked out from a great many law suits and sewage problems, etc., and have identified the enemy as the agencies out there somewhere. Livermore looks at our problems and we see our own problems here at home among ourselves. The problems are us, ourselves, and we are our problems and must work together. Livermore is willing to give up a little power to accomplish a bigger gain but Pleasanton is not willing to do that yet; possibly because they are so beset by with tremendous problems. Hopefully, when Pleasanton gets some of their problems solved they will not be so protective and will learn to trust other cities and agencies and will want to have problems reviewed. At this point to give up would not seem to be the answer. She stated that while this is not what everyone agreed to she would be willing to unhappily support their re- vised Joint Powers Agreement. Cm Miller stated that if Livermore is right, and we believe we are right and willing to look at all Valley problems, then we should stand up for what is right. If the City of Pleasanton is unwilling to join in doing what is right, a COVA should be set up without them. We can work with VCSD and Zone 7 without Pleasanton because this is their problem - not ours. em Miller added that he believes one of the things motivating Cw Tirsell is that COVA has gotten as far as it has because of Cw Tirsell's own personal efforts and essentially Cw Tirsell's- organization and design. Cm Miller stated that if he were in Cw Tirsell's place he w~d hate to see it go when maybe there is a chance of saving ie.~ould ask that everyone consider the wisdom of throwing away a good contract for a bad one. Why not try to reorganize without Pleasanton or some other way; why should we "knuckle under" to Pleasanton. If this were a minor point, it could be overlooked but this is one of principle and he feel's this should not be overlooked. CM-30-340 September 8, 1975 (COVA Agreement) ( Cw Tirsell stated that she can appreciate this point of view because it is one she has also struggled with; however she feels things can be accomplished and some good can come of the Agency. Hopefully the Joint Powers Agreement can be renegotiated in the future. If we find that other cities or bodies say COVA can't review things she would suggest Livermore come back home because this is not the Agency Livermore wants to participate in. Cm Staley stated he realizes there is a strong desire on the part of the Councilmembers to say something about the particular city they feel ruined this agency but he, personally, is reluctant to do that. He added that he is sorry Pleasanton felt they had to take this action but believes the good of COVA has the whole-hearted cooperation and support of all its members. It has to have this cooperation to allow the discussion of all issues within the Valley. It appears that Pleasanton feels COVA should not be allowed to do this which means that this point should be decided now before the agreement is signed. This would mean that the Agency will have the power to review, or never have such power. It would seem that if the Valley has a need for such an Agency it would require the co- operation of the other jurisdictions, including allowance of the discussion of all these things. This is the reason he believes we should say "noli to COVA on these terms. Cw Tirsell stated that if it were any other city or jurisdiction other than Pleasanton objecting to review, she would agree with the comments expressed in opposition to the new agreement. How- ever, she would be willing to give them another chance because this agreement has been pared down, considerably, from what they really wanted. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE REVISED JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cm Miller pointed out that obviously Pleasanton intends to be uncooperative, so why bother with them. Cw Tirsell suggested that the Council listen to the agenda prepared for this year and if the Council feels it is not intersted, she would suggest the whole thing be scrapped. Cm Miller stated that the program for the year sounds fine but it doesn't need to be done with Pleasanton. Cw Tirsell stated that she doubt's that Zone 7 would remain in COVA if Pleasanton is not included because Zone 7 is really a single purpose agency. Cm Staley stated that he really likes the program and wants to support COVA but would hope the motion is defeated because he would rather say "no" now than to become involved in a useless discussion if we don't say "no" now. Mayor Futch reluctantly agreed to give COVA one more chance but noted that if anything else such as this comes up he doesn't want to have anything more to do with COVA. Cm Miller stated that he would like to know when everybody else is going to come up with their share of the money to support COVA and Cw Tirsell indicated that Zone 7 can't give any money until the Joint Powers Agreement has been signed. Livermore and CM-30-34l September 8, 1975 (COVA Agreement) Pleasanton are in arrears since July 1, 1975, Zone 7 is in arrears since January 1, 1975 and VCSD has not paid their funds for this year either but they have signed the agreement and really want to get going. MOTION PASSED 3-2 (Cm Miller and Staley dissenting). CITY MANAGER WEEKLY STATUS REPORT Air Commuter Service The Air Commuter Service was to have started by now but has not. Apparently they will begin service in about two weeks. Airport Master Plan The Airport Master Plan is in its final stages and will be distribu- ted to the City Council and will be ready for a public presentation to the Council in about a month. The draft plan is not ready for public distribution. First Street Medians The First Street medians were installed by virtue of a requirement that the City had with the S.P. Shopping Center and they are being finalized at this time. Springtown Ponds The City is interconnecting the irrigation system in the Springtown pond area, with the domestic water supply so the lake can be re- planted in about two weeks. There is still the problem of the ducks and is one of the major issues the City is wrestling with. Airport Hay The second cut of the hay at the Airport has taken place. The City grossed about $12,000 on the first cut and hopefully will do about the same for this crop. Reclamation Plant The Water Reclamation Plant was to be completed by November 1, but completion will be slightly later. Mr. Parness has been told that the delay is because of the late delivery of the instrumentation Ge'ner-a-r Plan The Scenic Element and the Noise Element of the General Plan are complete and are ready for public hearings. The staff would like to know if it is the Council's intention to wait for all of the elements and have one hearing, or if a series of hearings will be held on all of them separately or possibly two or more. CM-30-342 September 8, 1975 (General Plan) Cw Tirsell stated that she believes the Council expressed preference for having a hearing for two elements at a time or possibly three elements. Mr. Parness noted that the Scenic Element and the Noise Element are ready if the Council would like to begin with these. The Council agreed that there was no reason for delay and they would begin with these elements. Mr. Musso added that these two elements are required to be done by December 1, 1975, and apparently no extension of time will be granted by the state. HUD Application Mr. Parness will be meeting with the HUD staff this week to discuss the HCDA application. The City has very critical questions that must be answered as to the use of that money and as to whether or not the City will be allowed to proceed with a multi-purpose service center. Bike Safety Program Over the past month the police have been concentrating on the Bike Safety Program. From some of the statistics the Council has received they may have noticed that the bicycle citations have been subdtan- tially increased. He stated that he is happy to see this because there have been many violations, particularly on the part of child- ren, of bicycle safety. The police are doing this in addition to making a concentrated effort to visit all the schools and make presentations to all the children concerning bike safety. First Street Patrolling Patrolling has continued on the weekends for First Street and Mr. Parness has been told that this has been done with little incident. Everything seems to be going well with the personal contact out on the street. It is not know whether or not the fact that school is back is session will make a difference. Fire Station #1 Reportedly, Fire Station #1 is 30% complete and is proceeding nicely. We are still trying to get some clarification and decision from the Sunset Development Company on Station #4 site. Conaway Suit Mr. Parness has just been informed that the City has been named in the Conaway suit. The Conaway boy was the one pulled out of the pool in May Nissen park this summer and has remained in a coma. The City has been named as a defendant but LARPD has not. Apparently the City has been named in the claim because the Fire Department responded to the resuscitator call. CM-30-343 September 8, 1975 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, Mayor Futch adjourned the meeting at 11:20 p.m. to an executive session to discuss legal matters and thereafter to 6:00 p.m., Wednesday September 10, 1975, for possible action regarding AB 1352. ATTEST Cl.ty Clerk Livermore, California APPROVE Regular Adjourned Meeting of September 10, 1975 An adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on Wednesday, September 10, 1975, at 6:00 p.m. in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Staley, CW Tirsell and Mayor Futch Absent: None No action was necessary since it has been determined that AB 1352 was on the governor's desk for signature and would become law at midnight unless vetoed. A telegram could not be delivered; there- fore, no action was taken and the meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.m. APPROVE M/~ ATTEST ~~~~erk . Livermore, California CM-30-344 Regular Meeting of September 15, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on September 15, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:10 with Mayor Futch presiding. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Cm Turner, Miller, Staley, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Futch led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. OPEN FORUM (Lights at 4th & Holmes) Page Sexton, 3864 Princeton Way, stated that she would like something to be done about the traffic lights on Holmes Street at Fourth Street for drivers traveling east and west. She stated that as she was going to work one morning she had to wait at the lights for eight minutes. The lights would turn green for the north/south traffic and then green for the traffic going east but for eight minutes would not turn green for traffic going west. Mayor Futch felt this may have been some type of malfunction and asked Mr. Lee if he could explain. Mr. Lee stated that this could have been a temporary malfunction or it is possible that the detectors in the pavement didn't get an indication that a car was there and he will check into it. (Welcome to Visitor) Mayor Futch introduced Arlene Adamson, a visitor from Senator Holmedahl's office, and welcomed her to the Council meeting. CONSENT CALENDAR Res. Rejecting Claim The Council adopted a resolution rejecting the claim of Jon Everett Conaway, Jr. RESOLUTION NO. 197-95 A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF JON EVERETT CONAWAY, JR., ET AL Res. Auth. Exec. of Agree. - CETA Funds /' It has been recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authoriz- ing execution of an agreement for federal CETA funds. This agreement provides for the extension of funds to our City under the CETA II program from the present July 1, 1975 through December 31, 1975. The grant is in the amount of $36,l34 and provides for continuance of six City employees. CM-30-345 September 15, 1975 RESOLUTION NO. 198-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT Alameda County: Re Funding Under CETA, Title II Res. Auth. Exec. of Agree. - Site Plan Approval (Devengenzo) Robert Devengenzo was required to execute an agreement upon the issuance of his permit to allow nursery supplies to be stored on Vasco Road in May of 1975. The agreement was inadvertently not accepted by the City Council and it is recommended that a resolu- tion be adopted authorizing execution at this time. RESOLUTION NO. 199-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (Robert S. Devengenzo) Res. Accepting Parcel Map 1597 - Shaheen Approval of the subdivision (Parcel Map 1597) agreeement has been given; however, a new requirement of law states that parcel maps must be done by resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 200-75 A RESOLUTION APPROVING PARCEL MAP 1597 (R. L. Shaheen Company) Minutes The following minutes were submitted for informational purposes: Beautification Committee minutes of August 6, 1975 Industrial Advisory Board minutes of August 14, 1975 Planning Commission minutes of August 26, 1975 Payroll & Claims Progress payment #1 to the Collishaw Corporation in the amount of $17,988.03, and Progress Payment #14 to Hensel Phelps Construc- tion Company in the amount of $114,782.44, dated September 9, 1975 for a total of $132,770.47, was approved by the City Manager. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (General Plan Revision) Mr. Musso reported that the revised General Plan has been received from Grunwald-Crawford and they would like a response as soon as possible. CM-30-346 September 15, 1975 (General Plan) The revised General Plan will be on the agenda next week and it was noted that it will still be subject to public hearings even if the Council approves the revised edition. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL (Kiosk) em Miller stated that he would like the staff to ask the Beautifica- tion Committee what has happened with the plan for kiosks. The present kiosk seems to be effective and there was supposed to have been one considered for the "P" Street location. It is possible a good place for a kiosk would be the SP Development area. Since it is the City policy there be no off-site sign, there should be communication with the Beautification Committee asking that they reconsider ~ ~.#~ ~ ,~d-ZZLA./ .~ ~i.U4e/'~ Mr. Parness commented that this item has bee~~~ed for the agenda next Monday. (Ribera and Sue Beautification Report) Cm Miller stated it is his understanding that the reports from Ribera and Sue are scarce and he would suggest that a copy of this report be given to every member of the Design Review Committee, Beautification Committee, Planning Commission, City Council, as well as people who are newly appointed. This is a very important docu- ment that was costly and the various people mentioned should have a copy. The Staff was directed to find out those who have copies and those who need copies and to see that they are furnished with a copy. (Mr. Musso has a limited supply and will see to distribution.) (Sphere of Influence) Cw Tirsell stated that she would like Livermore's Sphere of Influence to be placed on an early October agenda for discussion by the Council. LAFCO is again reviewing our Sphere of Influence and in light of our new General Plan the City may wish to reconsider the resolution sent to LAFCO with the large sphere we supported before which was, essen- tially the 1959 planning area. Cm Miller felt this was a good suggestion and would like to add that possibly the League of California Cities could be contacted in order to get information about what other cities are experiencing with respect to their spheres of influence and as to what other LAFCO's have done. Mr. Logan commented that his office has a broad collection of these already and they can be reviewed but at this point he is not sure that they are particularly helpful. COMMUNICATION FROM STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION A letter was received from the State Board of Equalization concern- ing a communication sent by the City of Livermore supporting the City of Monterey's suggestions with respect to administration of property taxation (tax relief issue). CM-30-347 September l5, 1975 COMMUNICATION FROM VCSD RE BART FEEDER BUS SERVICE A resolution protesting discontinuance or curtailment of the BART feeder bus to the Livermore-Amador Valley was received from the Board of Directors of VCSD. Mr. Parness commented that the Council has requested that our City contact the eastern Contra Costa County cities to discuss mutual concerns about this matter. He has already done so and has set up a meeting for the purpose of personally discus- sing the topic with the suggestion that the principal staff members and at least two councilmembers from each of those cities join Livermore, Pleasanton, and VCSD in discussion. A luncheon meeting has been scheduled for September 26th in Concord. REPORT RE EAST AVE. BIKE PATHS A report concerning the East Avenue bike path area has been submitted by a committee, entitled, "East Avenue Bike Survey Committee", as well as a report from the Chief of Police with respect to bicycle accidents on East Avenue as well as a list- ing of the accidents in the Alameda County area on East Avenue. Mr. Lee reported that the Bikeways group has made a survey concerning attitudes of the bicyclists at LLL and Sandia. Gregg Davis is the President of the Bikeways Association and is present this evening to discuss this matter with the Council. Mr. Lee stated that the Chief of Police has reported on the number of bicycle accidents on East Avenue during each year since 1972 as well as the number of accidents in the City of Livermore for those years. During those four years there were a total number of 166 bicycle accidents and 19 accidents on East Avenue just in the City limits, and 5 involving the bike lane. The total number of accidents outside the City limits for the four years were l5 on East Avenue and 9 involving the bicycle lanes; 34 accidents on East Avenue in the four years with 14 in the bike lanes. Mayor Futch stated that the Chief of Police recommended that there not be two-way bike paths and also if the berms are to be used that they should be redesigned to be of less height in order that the pedal does not hit the berm. Gregg Davis, 316 Ontario, spokesman for the Bikeways Associa- tion, commented that the bike survey was initiated because of the County's proposal to remove the berms on East Avenue as a possible solution to a number of complaints. Out of 903 re- turned surveys 37% voted for keeping the berm as it is, 29% voted for a one lane bike lane on each side of the street to Charlotte Way, and 33% voted for the proposal to remove all the berms and provide a bikeway on each side of the street. Comments were solicited on the survey and the most emphatic results were that people wanted some type of physical separa- tion. The next most prevelant comment was that people want better construction, such as a smooth, well drained surface. The third was that people want one-way flow of bike traffic. Mayor Futch commented that a letter was also received from Lloyd Teel expressing concern about the two-way bike path at Stanley and El Caminito. CM-30-348 September l5, 1975 (East Ave. Bike Path) Don Patterson, 757 Avalon Way, Vice President of the Valley Spokesmen and is representing the Bike Committee. In addition to the survey, a letter containing recommendations for an interim solution to the East Avenue bikeway problems has been distributed to the Council. He then gave a slide presentation to help clarify their recommendations. Their recommendation is to provide a path on the north side in addition to the present south side path, with extension of the right-of-way on the north side. It was explained that they would suggest a two-way bike path on the north side along the Wagoner Farms area to accommodate both lab people and children going to and from school. They feel the children would be riding against the bike traffic if the two-way was not provided because they don't want to cross the 45 mph traffic to get to the south side bike path. It was not recommended that there be a two-way path on the south side for the Almond Avenue School children because there is a private road part way through from Buena Vista to Almond Avenue which they feel could be used by the school children if this street could be extended all the way through. Normally everyone is very adamantly opposed to a two-way bike path but because of the school children problem they would strongly recommend that such be provided from Mitra to Madison Avenue. Cm Staley asked if an estimated cost for these improvements could be given and Mr. Patterson indicated that he does not know what the cost might be. Chuck Hartley, 4319 Findley, stated that the Bikeways Association came to the Council in January with a proposal such as this and the estimated cost at that time was $55,000 which they felt could be shared in equal amounts by the City and the County. Cw Tirsell felt that before the Council comments on this matter it should be referred to the staff for cost estimates. Cm Staley also suggested that the staff be asked to suggest sources of revenue that might be used for the cost of this project such as our gas tax money if it can be used for this purpose. Cm Miller added that there is state and federal bikeway money avail- able to cities for projects such as this. Celia Baker, 541 Bell Avenue, stated that she hopes some attempt will be made to save some of the trees that have been suggested for removal for a bike path. J. D. Lee, 622 Bentley Place, stated that he rides the East Avenue bike path daily and also filled out the survey questionnaire. He stated that he voted for the first option which was to do nothing as an interim solution because he would prefer that something be done as a permanent solution. He would like to recommend that the Council work on a permanent solution. In his opinion there cannot be a bike path compatible with heavy traffic traveling at 45-50 mph and he would suggest that a bike path be provided a couple of blocks from the main street, to the north. He suggested connecting Stanford Way with Kathy Way in the Valley East area and then along the arroyo up to Vasco Road. This would not only be of benefit to commuters on bicycles but would give direct access to the Valley East children going to Jackson Avenue School. Cw Tirsell commented that the Arroyo Seco Plan is one of the plans that has been adopted and will include some of the recommendation made by Mr. Lee to go along the arroyo to the lab. CM-30-349 September l5, 1975 (East Ave. Bike Lane) Franklin Halasz, 229 Garnet, submitted a petition which was cir- culated at Sandia, only, and signed by 78 bicyclists. The petition recommends a specific interim solution which is to reduce the speed limit on East Avenue.. He stated that the latest bicycle accident occurred last Friday evening and the one prior to that was his accident. He stated that he would question the figures presented to the Council concerning the number of accidents which have occurred. He stated that he knows of seven accidents which have occurred in the past year. Cm Tirsell commented that she believes the report lists only those accidents that were reported and that the Police Department knows of but there may have been other accidents not reported. Mr. Halasz commented that all of the bike accidents he knows of have taken place in the County area and would not be included in the report given to the Council this evening. The staff was directed to obtain a cost estimate, find out what sources of revenue might be used and whether or not the County would participate in 50% of the cost. Lloyd Teel, 221 Lloyd Street, stated that he does not want to cloud the issue concerning East Avenue but really feels there is a situation at Stanley Boulevard and El Caminito that can easily be solved and would like some word from the Council that his recom- mendation, as outlined in his letter, would be considered. It was noted that the staff will report back to the Council con- cerning the feasibility of correcting the situation at Stanley and El Caminito at the same time they report on the bike path for East Avenue. Cm Miller stated that in the petition it was suggested that perhaps lanes could be narrowed to provide more room for the bike path and this could be done without using a portion of the right-of-way and the County might agree with this suggestion. em Miller stated that with respect to the suggestion to reduce the speed limit, the City has been trying to get the County to reduce the speed for about five years, without any success. Cw Tirsell suggested that perhaps the County might have more sympathy if they received a copy of the bicycle accident report. REPORT RE CBD PARKING The City Manager reported that the staff has been instructed to study various alternates for provision of parking for the CBD area. Time has not permitted a conclusion as to any proposed course of action and an effort will be made to provide some recom- mendation within the next 60 days. It is recommended that the Council adopt a motion instructing the staff to present a report on findings at the October 13th meeting. Mr. Parness reported that consideration has been given to provid- ing parking at the two corners at Livermore Avenue and First Street where it is being reconstructed as well as expansion of the present public parking lot adjacent to the Court offices, and the closure of some of the streets between First and Third Street. These pro- posals do require more study and investigation and the consultant study of the CBD does include the study of parking facilities which is not ready at this time. CM-30-350 September l5, 1975 (CBD Parking Fee) Marshall Kamena, 2476 Merrit Place, representative of the Chamber of Commerce, stated that the Business License Tax Committee does have a recommendation to make to the City Council concerning the specific plan. Cm Staley stated that he is also a member of the Business License Tax Committee and their recommendation is that the method of financ- ing the municipal lot should be shifted from a surcharge basis to a user basis. The recommendation that seemed best to the Committee was the installation of a coin-operated gate with two entrances and one exit which would allow people to pay their money, enter the gate and park for as long as they wish. Cm Miller mentioned that it has been noted in the past that there is a possibility customers would be driven away from shopping in Livermore if they must pay for parking. without a survey, it isn't a proven fact that most of those who park in the municipal lot are using it all day. There may be a lot of short-time parkers in the lot. He stated that if he were a merchant he would have to consider which would be best in the long run - paying a surcharge or possibly driving customers away by charging them for parking. Cm Staley commented that the Committee felt if the fee for the lot parking is used then the limit for street parking should be strongly enforced, which would eliminate long-term parking on the street. He added that this is a complex problem and that all of the problems will not be eliminated regardless of what changes take place. He felt this was the reason the City Manager has requested that the item be postponed until October. Cm Turner asked if all the merchants have had the opportunity to respond to pay parking and Dr. Kamena indicated that they have had the opportunity so many times that if they haven't given input they simply aren't interested. Cm Turner wondered if there has been an organized effort to get responses because often people happen to be out of town or for one reason or another miss meetings and don't get the opportunity to offer input. Rick Corbett indicated that there was a meeting at the Emporer's Garden for the purposes of discussing this issue and it was very highly publicized. The attendance at the meeting was very small and he is sure that every merchant was well aware of the meeting. There were then three other meetings for the purpose of discussing this matter and in his opinion there has been ample opportunity for input. . ~ I ~)J7.. ~ ~:kIJY~ ,/ ;:. Mr. Corbett stated that the R\iBiReSB LieeR~e Tax CORlRli 'tt:cc a~d r!.Zij-O&-i-f__ the Chamber of Commerce feel. that the following recommendations should be adopted: 1) On the south side of First Street there should be 16 spaces of parking in the mini park. It is felt that at present parking on the north side (additional parking) is not needed. 2) That the City look into the parking on "K" and "J" as well as parking on Second and Third Street and consideration of one-way streets. 3) Increased policing of the time limit in the downtown area. 4) A study of the "red zones" in the downtown area to determine whether or not they are really necessary. Cm Turner stated that he would like to know who the merchants want to catch by asking that the police enforce the time limitation. CM-30-35l September 15, 1975 (CBD-Parking Fee) Mr. Corbett stated that the merchants really are concerned about those merchants who park on the street all day and use up parking that should be left for customers - these are the people they want to catch. Celia Baker, stated that she would urge the Council to leave the it parks as they have been designed, without providing parking. She stated that she circulated a petition just on "J" and "K" and received 10 signatures in favor of just the parks only at the corners on First Street and South Livermore Avenue. She added that she is really concerned about the employees of banks using up the street parking around Second Street and the Carnegie Park because these people are not allowed to use the bank parking lots. Mel Luna, 723 via Del Sol, stated that one hour parking means just that and if the City isn't going to enforce the limit then the signs should be removed. He stated that more parking in the muni- cipal lot won't do any good because parking is needed on the street. He added that one of the problems is that it would cost the City about $20,000 for an officer and equipment to patrol regularly and he feels the City can't afford this so it is useless to circulate petitions and other things to get this done. Ray Brice, 2705 Superior Drive, representing the Beautification Committee, stated that he is before the Council to remind them that the Committee is against any attempts to add parking in any of the mini-park areas. The parks are felt to be essential to the development of beautification efforts for the downtown area and the project has been budgeted for parks, only, not to include parking. It is true the downtown area needs more parking but not in doses of 8-10 parking spaces here and there. John Regan, 672 South "Nil Street, stated that his business is real estate and insurance and it is necessary for their cars to be in front of his business because they cannot operate from a municipal parking lot on the other side of town. He stated that the difference, in his case, is that customers don't come to him but rather he goes to them. ~ .. Mayor Futch stated that he can see no solution other than uniform enforcement of the law. Sometimes enforcement of the law is more difficult for one than for another but there simply is no other way to deal with it. Martin Plone, 2127 First Street, stated that he is very concerned that the Beautification Committee has been given the task of beautifying First Street when there is only one merchant on the Beautification Committee. He feels there are things going on through the Beautification Committee for downtown that he knows nothing about nor has any say about and recommendations are being made without consulting the downtown merchants. He stated that he would strongly recommend there be more representation of the down- town merchants or that the Beautification Committee take more time to speak with the merchants to find out how they feel. It is his understanding that 26 parking spaces will be lost on First Street because of red lines and at this point he is very concerned as to what this will do to his business. It was noted that 18 spaces will be removed because of the red lines to be painted along First Street. Dr. Plone also mentioned that Mr. Lee has indicated that it will one day be necessary to have a turning lane at ilL" Street and First Street and this would also require additional red lines to accommodate the other lane which means more parking removed. CM-30-352 September 15, 1975 (CBD Parking Fee) Dr. Plone added that it would be his guess that 90% of the people using the municipal parking lot are employees and customers of the merchants on the north side of First Street and that very few people shopping on the south side use the lot. He feels it is somewhat unfair to be taxed for something he and his customers do not use and would be in favor of installing some type of pay device to allow people to use the lot. Mayor Futch explained that the Beautification Members are selected by the City Council from a list of applications. If one doesn't apply, they are not selected. If there were merchants who were interested they certainly would be given high priority if they would apply. The City simply has never had any merchant apply who wasn't selected. Bobby Silva, merchant and co-chairman of the Downtown Merchants Committee, stated that merchants are getting tired of this whole issue and if something isn't done within the next year many of them plan to move their businesses. Ayn Weiskamp, 1413 Lillian Street, Chairman of the Beautification Committee, stated that they would more than welcome merchants as members of the Beautification Committee and urged that more merchants apply. She stated that Linda Galas, a merchant and member of the Committee, has been fantastic and is full of ideas and has the enthus- iasm for getting things done now. The Beautification Committee is very interested in making the downtown area more attractive so people will want to shop there and they are really trying to help the mer- chants. They want to get more parking, parks, and enable people to shop in a mall type atmosphere. Cm Miller stated that there have been merchants on the Beautifica- tion Committee who have worked very hard and done an excellent job and the Council would be very happy to appoint merchants if they would apply because they like to keep the Committee balanced. People should also take into consideration that this Committee is concerned with the beautification of all of Livermore and can't always concentrate on one specifica area. Cw Tirsell stated that one thing which hasn't been mentioned is the fact that all of these things cost money and the City hasn't been able to come up with an answer as to how some of the proposals might be financed; paying for someone to patrol the parking areas 'ii~h limi~a~ieRe, how to pay for capital improvements, etc. The City needs to find answers to the financial questions before there can be answers to the parking problem. Cm Staley stated that he would like to suggest that the parking fine be set higher than it is presently and perhaps the money collected from fines could go towards the payment of enforcement. Cm Turner felt the City should investigate things mentioned in the letter to the Council from Don Bradley. There are only two years remaining on the lease for the parking lot and if this can't be renewed there is no reason to add improvements. Mayor Futch thanked those in the audience for attending and speaking on this item and noted that this is a very difficult problem and that any real solution will require funds. At present the City's General Fund is very low and it would probably not be used to provide parking. It is possible ~ha~ perhaps aomc~hiR~ could be donc ~Rro'U~h usa of. 'Jas tan funds,.:park fundo, al\d ot.her mc;],no. J ...;r::.~, /), ,~ e~? ~ -a ~-<--~- q~~-6l/," "'-~, d--v ~./,~ U ~~ ~7/--~//-/~ ~ ' I) , #. / /f~' o/r&~I'- CM_30_~:~C~L~-- September 15, 1975 (CBD Parking Fee) Mayor Futch added that he would hope people understand that it is necessary to keep funds separate and used for their intended purpose. He used, as an example, the surcharge which is reserved for leasing the parking lot and improvements specifically connected with this function. He stated that if the City spent the surcharge funds for other purposes the merchants would be very upset, and rightfully so. Bonnie Steele, 541 North "N", representing the Cover-Up, stated that she has spoken with the Finance Director, Mr. Nolan, about taxes and was told that the City is allowed to tax up to a certain portion on the properties and the City Council may vote to tax citizens up to 19~/$100 for parks. She stated that this was not placed on a ballot for vote by the people but rather a decision made by the City Council. She added that Mr. Nolan indicated it might be possible to make the streets into one way streets using the gas tax money and providing diagonal parking because this would be an improvement to a public street but the gas tax money could not be used to provide parking spaces or parking lots, per see Mayor Futch explained that the funds are specified for a specific use on the tax rate and the City does not have the flexibility to borrow from one for another purpose. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED TO OCTOBER 14, 1975. RECESS Mayor Futch called for a brief recess after which the meeting resumed with all members of the Council present. REPORT RE FIRST ST. AND SO. LIVERMORE AVE. INTERSECTION RECONSTRUCTION Construction plans and specifications have been completed for the First Street/So. Livermore Avenue intersection reconstruction but the Council directed that bidding not proceed in view of the indetermination as to parking facilities. It is recommended the Council adopt a motion authorizing receipt of construction bids. It was noted that this item has been tabled and that a motion would be in order removing it from the table. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE ITEM CONCERNING MINI PARKS AT THE INTERSECTION OF FIRST STREET AND SO. LIVERMORE AVENUE BE REMOVED FROM THE TABLE AND CONTINUED TO OCTOBER 14, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. DISCUSSION RE COUNCIL SEATING ARRANGEMENT & PLACEMENT OF MATTERS INITIATED BY STAFF & COUNCIL Cm Turner stated that he has received comments from people who have indicated that it makes them very nervous to address the Council from the podium when the Council is sitting up in front. He stated that the reason he would like to see a different seat- ing arrangement is because it is difficult for him to hear or see Cm Staley or Cw Tirsell and in his opinion the seating of the Planning Commission is better. CM-30-354 September 15, 1975 (Council Seating) Cw Tirsell stated that she has no objection to sitting closer to the audience but this presents a problem when there is a full audience and when there are many members of the press present. The benefit of the present seating arrangement is that the Council can accommodate a full house, see and be seen by those present. Cm Staley felt it is more difficult for the audience to see the council if they are sitting down in front rather than up where they are presently, particularly if there is a large attendance. Cm Miller stated that he has been on the Council for over seven consecutive years and this seating arrangement has been fairly satisfactory. The fact that people may feel intimidated is not because the Council is seated in a particular way but rather because people are addressing an official body. He stated that before he was on either the P.C. or Council, he addressed both bodies on occassion and felt that both were equally intimidating because they were offi- cial bodies. David Eller, Oregon Way, stated that as a citizen he likes being able to see all members of the Council; however, he objects to not being able to see maps when they are on the board but feels there probably isn't a solution to everything. PLACEMENT OF MATTERS INITIATED - STAFF & COUNCIL Cm Miller stated that originally Matters Initiated came at the end of the meeting but Cm Turner had pointed out that many times there are important matters discussed and the public might be interested in hearing them. For this reason the Matters Initiated was placed earlier in the meeting. The Council has been criticized for having such long meetings and Cm Miller feels that perhaps if this item were again placed at the end of the meeting people wouldn't have to stay so late to discuss topics they have come to discuss. Cm Staley felt if the Council expects and wants community participa- tion the Council should make it somewhat convenient for people to come and discuss the item they are interested in and for this reason would be in favor of moving Matters Initiated back to the end of the meeting. Most of the people who attend are interested in either a public hearing or new business and are less concerned with Matters Initiated. He would suggest that this item as well as the Consent Calendar be moved to the end of the meeting. CM STALEY MOVED THAT MATTERS INITIATED AND THE CONSENT CALENDAR BE MOVED TO THE END OF THE MEETING ON THE AGENDA, SECONDED BY eM MILLER. Mr. Lee indicated that many people attend the meeting to hear an item that is routine and this would cause people to wait to the end of the meeting. Mr. Parness stated he does not agree with what Mr. Lee has said because in his opinion there isn't that much on the Consent Calendar that is of interest to the public. When something is placed on the Consent Calendar the staff feels rather sure that the Council will adopt the recommendations. Very seldom are people interested in the Consent Calendar. Cm Turner felt there are times something is an emergency item that comes up during Matters Initiated and the Council feels compelled to act. For this reason he would prefer Matters Initiated remain as is, on the Agenda. CM-30-355 September 15, 1975 (Agenda Items) Cm Staley felt if something is an emergency item that a Council- member feels will be acted upon, he can request that the Council discuss it early in the meeting. Rarely is something acted upon that is not an agenda item. AT THIS TIME THE MOTION TO PLACE THESE ITEMS AFTER NEW BUSINESS PASSED BY A 4-1 VOTE (Cm Turner dissenting) . RES. AWARDING BIDS FOR BIKEWAY PROJECT Competitive bids have been received on unit costs for equipment rental and supplying materials for the construction of the Arroyo Mocho Park/Trailway-Bikeway, Phase I and Hartford Bikeway programs. The low bidder is John Buranis and it is estimated the Council adopt a resolution executing an agreement with John Buranis. The estimated cost for this project is $23,800 and has been authorized in the current budget. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE COUNCIL ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION: RESOLUTION NO. 201-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (John J. Buranis Construction, Inc.) PRIOR TO ADOPTING THE RESOLUTION THE MOTION WAS AMENDED TO INCLUDE THAT THE EXPENDITURE WOULD NOT EXCEED THE BID AMOUNT + 5%. RES. ADOPTING JOB DESCRIPTION - COMMUN. DEVELOP. DIRECTOR The City Manager reported that even though it is proposed that the Council adopt a salary allowance of $2,100/month for a Com- munity Development Director, it is intended that the City will recruit using an open salary. It is possible that someone can be obtained for less salary. A special brochure will be prepared for this position with the widest possible distribution and recruitment among all larger governmental jurisdictions and related institutions. It is recommended that a resolution be adopted approving the job des- cription for a Director of Community Development. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE JOB DESCRIPTION FOR THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, SECONDED BY CM STALEY. Cm Turner stated that last week he indicated that if the job description came back to the Council the way it was initially written he would vote against the motion. The job description is the same as it was initially and he will vote against it. John Regan, 672 South "M" Street, stated that he just does not agree with the City Manager's recommendation for a separate department to recruit industry/commercial development with all the costs that would be involved in having a separate department, in view of the shortage of funds in the General Fund. It is well known throughout California and some of the western states that Livermore has taken an "anti growth" stand as are the development fees. He stated that he is not criticizing these things but wants to point out that they are well known. It is his understanding that this person would oversee the Building Department and he can't understand the reasoning for this either. CM-30-356 September 15, 1975 (Commun. Develop. Dept.) Cw Tirsell stated that the budget is tight and it will get tighter because of the ultimate demands for increased salaries and increase costs. There is never a good time to hire someone to work primarily for community development. The Council has talked a lot about getting industry and commercial development in Livermore, we have reserved sewer capacity for this type of development and there has been talk about trying to expand the capacity. Livermore has never had large amounts of capital - there has always been small shopping centers and little stores. It is foolish to assume that we can continue to go along this way and that development will come to us and fill in the 83 acres of industrial/commercial relocation property. Things need to be done right now and she stated that there are things that can be done immediately and she can think of three things he could work on right now. We need a full time person who can get people together and get people interested in Livermore. At present there just isn't any staff member who has the time to concentrate on this one item and we need someone now. Cw Tirsell added that with respect to Cm Miller's concern that this person would be development oriented, if he is, "so be it". For that purpose he is also a member of our staff and is not independently working on his own to bring industry to town. It is valuable that he work with Mr. Musso and Mr. Lee and if there is anyone that can explain why an ordinance is written the way it is, it is Mr. Musso. Cm Turner stated that he would like to emphasize that he is not opposed to an industrial and commercial specialist but rather is opposed to the way it is set up. He stated that he views this as just another layer of government and that this person will have a job and one of the responsibilities will be to go out and obtain commercial and industrial clients but that this person will be so bogged down in normal day-to-day work that he will never be able to function in the capacity intended. If such a person were paid on a commission basis and assigned fully to this task he would be in favor of it. As this job description is outlined the person will have to be available for staff meetings, answering questions on the telephone and supervising other departments. For this position to be effective this person needs to be out in the field following up contacts and involved in nothing else, every single day. Cm Miller stated that the City has heard of other cities who have tried this approach and there is no overwhelming evidence that this technique works. If this person brings in an $8 million industry and the developer pays his way, this is one more than we have at present; however, if this person doesn't bring industry to Livermore we are $30,000 "down the drain". Every city is looking for something like this and of those cities who have tried hiring someone for this purpose there doesn't seem to be evidence that they are of value. He agrees with Cm Turner that this should be done on some kind of commission basis if the City is going to hire someone, or done on a short-term contract basis. In his opinion the only way to do something like this should be on a valley-wide basis with some kind of sharing of the proceeds. He also agrees with Cm Turner that it starts at $30,000/year and will go up. We can't market if S.P. doesn't want to go along with our recommendations. Cm Staley commented that his primary concern is that the City doesn't have much money and this is the largest negative factor, in his mind. On the other hand, this community desparately needs balancing, econom- ically in terms of a tax base and more jobs locally. Cm Staley added that he believes there is considerable uncertainty about what Livermore's standards are and there is doubt about our commitment to get business into Livermore. He stated that he CM-30-357 September 15, 1975 (Commun. Develop. Dept.) believes these things are products of misinformation and misunder- standings as to what the goals of the City happen to be with respect to growth paying for itself. For this very reason the City needs this type of person - a Community Development Director, who can explain our policies and why they are as they are. people have indicated that because Livermore is a City with low growth, this is a negative factor in attracting industry. Cm Staley stated that he believes this is only part of the issue and anybody who is looking for a location for a store understands that disposable income and competition are key factors and these are the types of things that need to be sold to people because they are not the types of things that "catch the eye" and this is what a Community Development Director can do. He stated that he feels the $30,000 is very low and this amount will not get any better, as pointed out by Cw Tirsell. If the City doesn't do something this year we may not be able to next year at all. This is something like "seed money". You put out the money this year and hope to get a good crop. He added that it does bother him that there is a chance the City won't get industry but at this point he is con- vinced that it is a risk the City must take and is prepared to vote for the Community Development Director. Cm Staley commented that with respect to his commitment to this position, he believes the City is not making any permanent estab- lishment until there are real results. When the next budget is reviewed if there is not at least a beginning of results he, for one, will have no qualms about eliminating this position. This should be made clear to the person who is hired - the position is not permanent at this point. Mayor Futch stated that he believes the City's desire to obtain industry/commerce for Livermore is probably at the top of the priority list and in order to achieve this perhaps it is necessary to spend funds. In spite of the fact Livermore has very limited funds, this would be the only significant thing that could be done with the remaining funds in the General Fund and next year things will probably be much worse. He believes Livermore should give this new department a try and he will support the motion. Bobbie Silva, stated that she can't believe what she is hearing tonight, knowing the financial problems this City is faced with. She stated that she cannot understand why the City Council wants to hire someone for $30,000 a year to bring in industry when the merchants downtown are crying for parking. Mayor Futch stated he is really shocked to hear the comment made by Mrs. Silva because during the eight years he has served on the Planning Commission and Council the main complaint from all the merchants and people has been that the Council is not doing enough to get more commerce and industry in the City. This has been the main criticism of the Council and it is really surprising after hearing this for so long that anyone would criticize the fact that the City is really going to try to do something to provide more shopping. CW TIRSELL CALLED FOR THE QUESTION AND MOTION PASSED 3-2 (Cm Miller and Turner dissenting) . RESOLUTION NO. 202-75 A RESOLUTION APPROVING JOB DESCRIPTION RE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CM-30-358 September 15, 1975 REPORT RE MINOR CLAIMS SETTLEMENT POLICY The City Manager reported that upon the advise of the City's insur- ance agent, it has been the practice to pay minor damage claims (under $100) when it was proven to the satisfaction of the staff that the damage was the the responsibility of the City. Such claims are a nuisance to the insurance carrier and must be processed in the same manner as larger claims besides being expensive. It has therefore been recommended by the City Attorney that the Council give the City Manager auhhorization to settle claims against the City for amounts not to exceed $100 in those instances where the evidence clearly indicates the City was at fault. Cm Miller stated that his interpretation of the letter received from the City Attorney concerning this item is different than that as explained by the City Manager in his report. The City Manager indicated that the City Attorney would like the City to go ahead and do it this way but Cm Miller stated that this was not his impression of the report from the City Attorney. The City Attorney explained that it was not his intent to make a recommendation, one way or another. He was spelling out to the Director of Finance the things that should be valid considerations if the City intends to settle its own claims. The Council should be concerned about the fact that if the City intends to settle claims under $lOO, in order to protect the City from allegations of unlawful expenditures of public money, there should be someone familiar with the field of adjusting in order to determine whether or not the claims should be paid. He stated that he also does not mean to imply that this expertese doesn't reside in the City Manager's office. He did not intend to make a recommendation. ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE A RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SETTLE CLAIMS UNDER $100. RESOLUTION NO. 203-75 A RESOLUTION RE SETTLEMENT OF MINOR CLAIMS REPORT RE RAVENSWOOD PARK BLDG. RESTORATION For several months the City staff has been meeting with representa- tives of LARPD to discuss recruitment and selection of an archi- tectural firm for the purpose of building restoration work at Ravenswood Park. The program is to be finalized by a grant from the state and will be in the amount of $187,000. The architectural firm recommended for retention is Bob McCabe of Sacramento County, and it is proposed that he be retained by LARPD even though the City will maintain involvement in the vari- ous stages of the design and actual construction work. The con- tract (a~tached) has been prepared by the City staff, has been review- ed and approved by the LARPD staff and has been presented to the City Council for review purposes. Unless there are major objections to the contract draft, it need only be noted and filed. ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THIS ITEM WAS NOTED FOR FILING. CM-30-359 .,. -. --."''- ,.--",-'-...-. . ._.--~.--_.._---"_._~.~.... '~-'~-_~'_~___U_""~~_.._,._,..__ September 15, 1975 REPORT RE LA VWMA , ~~ggI:io~c~~~g~A- ~)~lI~t'. The City Manager report ~~there has been an inquiry from LAVWMA as to what our C ty's official policy is concerning popula- tion projections. Th ou~i~~a~~~nounced this on several occas- sions and Cm Miller, a~]al~aee-representative$ did express this to LAVWMA about a month ago but the question is again being raised. Mr. Parness stated that he believes this matter is being brought forth to get the opinions of the other signatory agencies to LAVWMA because at the last LAVWMA meeting this was discussed and there were various views expressed on this topic. This City Council has stated its views and these are familiar to LAVWMA and its participants but Mayor Futch felt it might be appropriate to once again formally discuss the matter to determine if there might be clarifying points the Council might wish to make at the forthcoming special LAVWMA meeting on September 25th. A further inquiry was included pertaining to the financing method as may be used for the local share of possible sewer plant expansion, and building the LAVWMA pipeline. The City Council has formally declared its willingness to accept the State Water Resources Control Board population forecast but with the condition that a similar growth rate be applied valley wide. Local funding methods cannot be determined, as yet, on the project until a more definitive project cost is stated and the legal aspects carefully defined as to the authority LAVWMA may have in incurring debt, funding and a proposed method of apportioning cost to each of the signatory agencies. Such questions should be reviewed by the LAVWMA Counsel. Mr. Parness stated that he believes this matter needs research and staff direction, particularly from the legal offices. When the Joint Powers Agreement was drafted many months ago he recalls that a great deal of study effort went into it on this very point. To pose the question as to how a city expects to fund its par- ticipation is improper, in his opinion, at this stage. The attorneys should respond as to the legal authority of LAVWMA to incur debt. If LAVWMA, in fact, can incur debt for instance in the form of revenue bonds, how does LAVWMA, in turn, apportion that to the respective agencies? At this time the important part is the population projections. Mayor Futch stated that he believes the first point listed on the agenda could be expressed a little clearer because there are two things involved. First of all the Council agrees to use the population projections for the entire valley as the basis for building the LAVWMA pipeline but the second point which should be spelled out is that as far as future popula- tions from now to 1996, we believe that the capacity in the pipeline should be proportional to the growth rate. Cm Miller stated that he remembers the original resolution adopted by the Council which referred to 1 MGD but included in the resolution was the explanation that the City felt the population estimates were high and Livermore would pre- fer that all of the valley jurisdictions would not grow to such large populations. However, in view of the fact they were likely to grow as predicted, Livermore would like its share of the expansion capacity. CM-30-360 Cm Turner stated that in the General Plan there are figures of 80,000 for the City of Livermore in the year 2000. It was noted that this figure is artificial and nobody on the Council feels this figure is what_~~), should be used. Cm Turner asked what the Council means when it says ~", {~~ they will accept the figure for 1996 but they don't like it. ~~~ , 4 Cm Turner asked how the figure will tie into our General Plan and Cw Tirsell explained that not all of our effluent goes down the pipeline. ~~~ ort the statement because he doesn't feel Cm Turner stated that he cannot supp 2000 Someone may come back and comfortable abou~ th: 80,000.for t~;5ye:~d the'total capacity for th: Valley say your populat1on.1nk 19h96t ~s 6t3oo' hig'h but you set a Genera]pP1an~f)~~~O~/ is 149,000 - you th1n t a 1S (!),<:.~.J~;t!t-C:; (!:'L.C. , 80,000, Cm Miller explained that the 80,000 is an estimate and if ~he sewers don't "allow it or the air quality doesn't allow it, that 80,000 1S a number that .) shinmers in the distance and tha t poi nt just has to be .,made, c J e~ r j n the General Plan, and we may not reach 80,000 by 1996,~~~, ~b. I September l5, 1975 (Population Projections) Cm Miller stated that he would argue that the City's position about 1 MGD should be - 1 MGD is a 20 year projection, because the .5 MGD is a 10 year projection. LAVWMA may not want us to be that specific but Cm Miller stated that he would like to argue that this is not unreasonable. A.5 MGD increase in 10 years could accomplish community balance that we are trying to accomplish by trying to gain local jobs and encourage commercial/industrial development, but not residential development until the air quality is better. He stated that he believes we could accomplish this with .5 MGD with the hope that in less than 20 years the air quality will improve so that we can have more residential development for which the extra .5 MGD would be necessary. He believes that each jurisdiction should share in the pipeline according to its current population. The total population as projected by the State Water Resources Control Board is too high in view of the air quality problems in this valley. Our 1 MGD is a 20 year estimate and the .5 MGD a 10 year estimate. Cm Miller stated that he believes this would be a reasonable position for the Council to take in view of the issues being raised about environmental quality everywhere. Mayor Futch stated that he really does not agree that this was the motion adopted before. He would agree that all communities should have the same growth rate but the Council discussed the fact that we want 1 MGD but in order to apply for this it doesn't mean you get that much population growth. The motion was the E-O population growth that the City would accept. Cm Miller stated that he voted against the motion because he didn't want the concept of an outright 1 MGD, because in his opinion this could not be justified environmentally. At that time he mentioned that he appreciates the fact the Council is adopting the words saying that if it were up to the Council they would prefer lower population increases but in view of the political circumstances didn't believe this could happen and therefore would request that Livermore be allowed the additional 1 MGD. Cm Miller stated that the point was the Council would prefer lower growth projections for the valley but since the projections were so high Livermore would request 1 MGD. Cm Miller explained that what he is saying is that 1) for Livermore to get the 1 MGD we want our share of the pipeline - whatever the overall population capacity is; we want our share of the increase according to our population. 2) Whatever the increase is, we believe it is too high and it should be lower, but if it is 149,000, we still want our share. If it turns out to be a lower figure we want our share of this, proportionately. What LAVWMA has asked is whether or not the totals and alloca- tions are acceptable and actually neither the figures nor the alloca- tions are acceptable. We want the allocations to be uniform and Cm Miller is arguing that we can at this point also make the point that the total isn't satisfactory either but whatever the total is, Livermore wants its fair share. He stated that he doesn't feel this position is unreasonable. Cw Tirsell stated that she remembers the resolution being in preamble form and that on environmental grounds the Council felt the total number of predicted population was high but if, indeed, this was the fundable amount of people they were going to work with and the number funding would be provided for, Livermore would request its share in proportion to the amount we now have. Essentially this was the statement adopted by the Council. CM-30-36l 1 September 15, 1975 (Population Projections) Discussion followed among the Councilmembers concerning numbers. /-- Cw Tirsell explained that while the City may not agree with the number set by the State Water Resources Control Board, we will jabide by it and the number we intend to work with and we want our fair share with respect to the funding. /Cm Miller pointed out that the state may claim there will be a .' . )populatl.on of 149,000 but the EPA, controller of 75% of the money, may not go along with this amount. He stated that he may be read- ing between the lines but the EPA has indicated this rather strongly. The EPA wants to do their own EIR and they want to examine the air quality impact which implies they are concerned about the size of the population. It would appear that the City of Livermore is not the only body questioning the high figures. Everyone agrees that Livermore should receive a fair share of the allocation but it would be environmentally responsible for the City to speak for ourselves and the people of the valley to say something if the total allowed for the valley is too high. We are basing our own program on the basis that air quality is a problem in the valley. Cw Tirsell stated that as Cm Turner has pointed out our General '. Plan for 1990 shows more people than what the City would like and Cm Miller stated this is true but it is an arbitrary figure. Discussion followed concerning the figures in the General Plan. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNIL'S POSITION BE THAT LIVERMORE WANTS EACH JURISDICTION TO 1) SHARE ANY INCREASED SEWER CAPACITY AND TO SHARE IN THE PIPELINE, ACCORDING TO OUR PRESENT POPULA- TION; 2) IN VIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS IN THE VALLEY WE BELIEVE THE TOTAL POPULATION GIVEN BY THE STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD, IS TOO HIGH. IF THIS IS STILL THE NUMBER THAT EMERGES, LIVERMORE STILL WANTS ITS SHARE - WE WANT EQUAL GROWTH RATES ASSIGNED TO EACH JURISDICTION. MOTION SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. Cm Turner stated that he will vote against the motion because he doesn't like it. Mayor Futch stated that he doesn't like the way the motion is worded and will also vote against it. Discussion followed concerning the motion and its implication. Mayor Futch asked that this item be continued for one week. Cm Miller explained that at present we have a 5 MGD plant and 1 MGD is 20% more than what we presently have. There are 9.5 MGD being used in the valley, as a whole and if everyone in the valley would get a 20% increase this would be associa- ted with a population of 130,000 and an 11.5 MGD capacity. Cw Tirsell expressed concern that this attitude would translate that Livermore wants to grow faster than Pleasanton and VCSD. MOTION AND SECOND WERE WITHDRAWN. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED TO NEXT WEEK. REPORT RE TRAINING PROGRAM - CALIF. HWY. PATROL The California Highway Patrol provides areas of specialized training available to outside police agencies and one of these CM-30-362 September 15, 1975 (CHP Training Program) is in the area of commercial enforcement. This training is reimbursable and it is requested that the Council adopt a resolu- tion authorizing execution of agreement with the California Depart- ment of Highway Patrol. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED: RESOLUTION NO. 204-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREE- MENT (State of California Department of High- way Patrol). ORD. RE RS (Residen- tial District - Suburban Res. District ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE RELATING TO RS DISTRICT WAS INTRODUCED AND READ BY TITLE ONLY. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 12:15 a.m. to an executive session to discuss litigation. d~ /~:L/-arJ APPROVE ' Mayor ATTESTYLwfff)t~j~ (. City Clerk Livermore, California Regular Meeting of September 22, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on September 22, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m. with Mayor Futch presiding. ROLL CALL Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch Absent: Cm Staley PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Futch led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. CM-30-363 September 22, 1975 MINUTES September 8, 1975 Page 336, next to last paragraph, third line from bottom should read: can't afford not to take. We are not a small town anymore, and....etc. Page 331, last paragraph should be CEQA - not SEQUA Page 329, fifth line should read: it anyway. While the hospital is not exactly a public corporation it is...etc Page 335, next to last paragraph, 4th line should read: The recipi- ent City would gain the 60%...etc. Page 340, 2nd paragraph, line 9: comma should be removed after the word account. Page 340, last paragraph, line 6 should read: is a chance of saving it. However, he would ask that everyone consider...etc. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 8, 1975, were approved, as corrected. SPECIAL ITEM - BICENTENNIAL CO~ll~ITTEE Gib Marguth, Chairman of the Bicentennial Committee, explained that the Elks have presented to the Bicentennial Committee a series of parchment replicas of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitu- tion, Bill of Rights, a draft copy of the Star Spangled Danner, the Monroe Document and the Gettysburg Address. These items have been displayed for the Council to see. Mr. Marguth explained that these particular documents have been singled out as particularly important documents for the Bicentennial era which have been framed and mounted for presentation to the City Council to be displayed at the Library or City Hall or distribution in the City. Mayor Futch thanked Mr. Marguth for presenting the documents. Mr. Marguth stated that he has one other item he would like to bring to the attention of the Council, which is the receiving of a Certificate of Official Recognition designating Livermore as a National Bicentennial Community. Accompanying the certifi- cate was a letter indicating that a National Bicentennial Flag has been sent to Livermore to be presented to the City's senior elected official. The letter, certificate and flag was sent by the American Revolution Bicentennial Administration. The certificate and flag were presented to the City Council by Mr. Marguth who explained that the Bicentennial Committee would also like to present a reproduction of the original key to Independence Hall and would like to request that the key be mounted under the official designation that Livermore is a Bicentennial Community. Mayor Futch asked how the flag should be flown and Mr. Marguth explained that it can be flown under the 50 star flag or under the Bennington Flag or can be mounted in City Hall or flown at the Library or fire station. CM-30-364 I September 22, 1975 (Bicentennial Events) Mr. Marguth announced that the Bicentennial Committee will be having an official Bicentennial costume ball on November 15th at the Vet- erans Hall. They would request that every couple attending the event should wear attire suitable for the era from 1472 through 1975. The plans for the ball include a band which they feel is excellent and that the evening should be superb. Tickets will be on sale soon and will sell for $IO/couple. In the past there have been suggestions for community fund raising events and one of the items mentioned was the possibility of paint- ing addresses on curbs in red, white, and blue. Mr. Marguth stated that he feels this type of address identification is both useful and attractive. The Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts have been contacted and are considering the possibility of undertaking this project. The Scouts would participate in the fund raising as would the Bicentennial Committee and the two entrepreneurs who came to the Committee with the proposal would pay for all the materials, do the training and would share in the profits. The Committee would like to propose that the curb painting be City- wide because if it were done on a volunteer basis it would cover only about 30% of the town. The Committee prefers that this be done City-wide and then ask for donations for painting the curbs. If people do not want their curb painted they can request that it not be done. He stated that they would like this issue to be highly publicized and if people do not want their curb painted they can call a certain number and make this request. Otherwise, if someone isn't home and they want their number painted it might not get painted. In the event a number is accidentally painted on a curb when the owner has requested that it not be painted, the Scouts will go back and remove it. Also, it is not expected that a 90-95% donation will be received but the Committee would like the community to have the opportunity to have this symbol in front of their home. Cm Miller stated that he would like to know what the requested donation would be and also what the division of profits would be. Mr. Marguth explained that the requested donation will be $2 with 30% of the profits going to the Boy Scouts, 30% to the Bicentennial and 40% to the group doing the training and provid- ing the material. > Mayor Futch stated that the members of the Council appreciate the fact that the Bicentennial Committee is a very active Committee and that the members have been willing to give of so much time and energy. OPEN FORUM (Encroachment Permit) David Madis, 1011 Geneva, stated that he is the owner of property at 2290 First Street and he would like permission to encroach upon the City sidewalk for posts to support a balcony which will have a large decorative sign attached to it. Mayor Futch explained that the proper procedure would be for Mr. . Madis to first go to the staff and allow them to present something to the Council for a recommendation. (Request Item on Agenda) Barbara Hartley, 513 Brierly Court, asked that a resolution calling for public information and discussions regarding the nuclear safe- guards issue be placed on next week's agenda. CM-30-365 I Cm Turner stated that he would be interested in knowing what their accounting practice is to determine profits and loss and Mr. Marguth indicated this is a concern of the Committee and that the W~y~ and Means Committee will be actively involved in the Project. ~i-~;~~' , September 22, 1975 (Agenda Item) Cm Miller stated it is his understanding that this resolution asks support for information meetings and he would like to see it on the agenda next week. The item will be placed on the agenda next week, as requested. P. H. RE SOLID WASTE MANAGEHENT PLAN FOR ALAMEDA COUNTY The City Council has declared that a public hearing be scheduled on the Solid Waste Management Plan for Alameda County prior to the County hearing scheduled for later this month. Lois Hill, member of the County Solid Waste Advisory Committee, stated that the Committee became uneasy as the time drew near for the report to be submitted to the cities, special districts and proper county agencies because the text was vague and there was a lack of specific recommendations. In the spirit of SB-5, the Committee chose to recommend that alternatives with the high- est percentage of resource recovery be given first priority for 1980 and 1990. Mrs. Hill stated that she and her husband, with the assistance of other interested citizens have prepared the administrative plan which would place enforcement in the County !\ r Heal th Department with a newly appointed commission to oversee ~J~/(aJ-' J- the coordination of enforcement activities under the ~d of ~i, ' (J Supervisors. Secondly, this would place planned e~reem~ inf the hands of a separate joint powers board with a majority of the members from the cities and special districts and a minority of the members from the County. Specific tasks will be outlined by the Committee in the near future. She stated that this plan has built in safeguards and went on to explain the reasons she feels the Council should favor this suggestion over that suggested by Cm Miller. Mayor Futch asked if the information presented by Mrs. Hill is that of a subcommittee and it was noted that this is from the Solid Waste Advisory Committee. Mayor Futch stated that this is somewhat confusing because the information before the Council is also from the Solid Waste Advisory Committee. Mrs. Hill explained that the information in front of the Council is a staff prepared booklet which has not been completely approved by the Committee. The material endorsed at the last meeting, which she has, supersedes any administrative plan outlined in the book before the Council. She stated that the plan she is presenting to the Council is to be approved by over 50% of the cities as well as the Board of Supervisors and the Council should give it serious consideration. em Miller stated that he too, like Mrs. Hill, is a member of the Solid Waste Management Advisory Committee and the plan is a distil- lation of the very fat stack of documents Mrs. Hill has shown the Council as well as other background material she didn't show the Council. The report represents a draft plan including administra- tive aspects which describe some administrative items discussed that the County staff prepared. The County staff, with interaction with the Advisory Committee prepared this large volume of documenta- tions and did an excellent job. The Advisory Committee has gone over most of the aspects of the draft plan and has not fully resolved all of the material in Section VIII. CM-30-366 September 22, 1975 (Solid Waste Management) The draft plan has some suggestions made by the staff in preparing the document which the Committee discussed and there were differ- ences of opinion by various members. As a result, at the last meeting a preliminary recommendation was adopted as to how the Advisory Committee would like to see the administrative structure responsible for carrying out the plan and for its enforcement. He stated that this was not exactly the same as the staff had originally proposed and there was a counter proposal by Oakland Scavenger who wanted a very different type of structure. Cm Miller stated that Mrs. Hill presented a structure which was not exactly a compromise between Oakland Scavenger and the staff, but had good qualities from both. He stated that he would like to mention that Lois has been a major contributor to the work of the Committee even before she was appointed to the Committee and since her appointment she has been the major force behind insisting on resource recovery. with respect to the report Lois and her husband prepared, the Advisory Committee recommended that the County have a recovery facility that recovers 60% of the materials in 1980 and 90% in the 1990's. The Committee also adopted the general administrative structure with the following underlying ideas: 1) that the enforcement and management/administration portion be separated; and 2) that no major long- term commitment be made on the part of public or private enterprise, until adequate studies and comparisons are made of the efficiency and cost of collection processing resource recovery, energy production and disposal. He stated that this second point was the one in which he and Lois differ on. Cm Miller stated that what was adopted, as a preliminary recom- mendation, has pieces of both - people who want all elected officials, and what Lois has suggested for not having elected officials. The structure of the preliminary recommendation con- sists of a County Solid Waste Enforcement Commission which makes sure all the County and State Health Departments and various regula- tions are done without violating the law. The members for this portion will be selected by the Board of Supervisors. A separate Board will manage the actual plan itself. Mayor Futch stated that Cm Miller has had the advanatage of serving on the Committee and is familiar with all the details but the other members of the Council might wish to review this on their own and schedule another discussion later on. em Miller explained that he is almost finished with his explana- tion and would like the opportunity to continue for a moment. The Solid Waste Management Board will have an administrator to take care of the management of the plan. If there are public agencies involved with Solid Waste Management it can operate them and there would be a joint powers group made up of the cities and the County. The Management Board and the Enforcement Commission are separate - that's the key to Lois's proposal. Cm Miller added that this recommendation supersedes any conflicting portion of the fat document and, in particular, of the summary. Cw Tirsell asked how this plan, if and when adopted, will affect current and existing landfill applications and agreements on file. Will these need to be reviewed and~ro ght into conformance? &/.;.. " ofY Cm Miller stated that if there is~' existing Class I dump, it has been committed in the ~t ~nd .~long term commitments are to be made in the near future~~his would continue under whatever variances, etc. the County has allowed for the operation. CM-30-367 September 22, 1975 Cw Tirsell felt it might be helpful for citizens to know that one document is for comment and one is for reference. Cm Miller explained that actually both are for comment - the matter is very informative but very difficult reading. em Miller added that Mr. Eggers, one of the staff members from the County Planning Department is present this evening and perhaps he might want to comment. He, among others, helped to prepare this document. Mr. Eggers commented that he has nothing to add to what has been said but will be happy to answer questions. Cw Tirsell stated that she would like to see a written document she could compare with the report. Cm Miller stated that eventually all of the Councilmembers will receive a copy of the summary in addition to a copy of the pre- liminary recommendation of the Advisory Committee. Cm Miller stated that he would like this public hearing continued rather than to close it. Cm Turner stated that in the letter received from the County it was mentioned that they need input by the 25th of september and wondered if continuance of the public hearing would be reasonable. Cm Miller stated that the County intends to hold its first public hearing on September 25th but they expect to have other public hearings into October and the last hearing is supposed to take place the end of October. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CONTINUED WITH NO SPECIFIC DATE SET. CONSENT CALENDAR Report re Ravenswood The Chief Building Inspector reported that the Livermore City Code provides for special permits to allow restoration of struc- tures designated by the Council as being of historical signifi- cance, without conforming to all of the requirements of the Building Code under certain conditions. It is recommended that a resolution be adopted declaring the building at Ravenswood Park to be of historical significance. RESOLUTION NO. 205-75 A RESOLUTION DECLARING RAVENSWOOD A HISTORICAL SITE Report re Traffic Signals - Coordination In response to a complaint about signals at Fourth Street and Holmes Street not being coordinated with the traffic signals all along First Street, Mr. Lee indicated that this particular intersection has been modified because of the special traffic problems at this intersection. The problems at this intersection are due to very heavy commute traffic and in the past there were complaints about delays for the Fourth Street/Murrieta traffic. CM-30~368 September 22, 1975 (Traffic Signals - Coordination) Mr. Lee reported that the signals could be interconnected with the First Street signals to allow traffic flow through town and out Holmes Street, including the Fourt Street/Murrieta intersec- tion. A cost study has not been made on such a system required to allow this but it would be quite expensive in comparison to our normal traffic signal budget. Minutes The following minutes were noted for filing: Greens Committee Meeting - July 17 Design Review Committee Meeting - September 10 Res. re Claim Settlement The City Council adopted the following resolution authorizing settle- ment of a claim against the City. RESOLUTION NO. 206-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT OF CLAIM (City v. Oliver D. Rohrback) Departmental Reports The Council reviewed the following departmental reports: Airport - Activity and Financial for Fiscal Year 1974-75 Building Inspection - August Golf Courses - Fiscal Year 1974-75 Mosquito Abatement - July Municipal Court - July Planning/Zoning Activity - June and July Police and Pound Departments - August Revenue and Expenditures - Fiscal Year 1974-75 Water Reclamation Plant - August Payroll & Claims There were 73 claims in the amount of $860,511.42, and 266 payroll warrants in the amount of $91,894.33, for a total of $952,405.75, dated September 16, 1975 and approved by the City Manager. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR Prior to approval of the Consent Calendar, Cm Turner stated that he believes the operating expenses are higher than the last fiscal year for the Springtown Golf Course and that the play has decreased at Las Positas. He requested a detailed report concerning this matter. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CN TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. COVA LETTER TO BART RE DISCONTINUANCE OF BART SERVICE The Council received a copy of a letter from COVA to the BART Board of Directors objecting to discontinuance or curtailment of BART services to the Livermore-Amador Valley. Letter noted for filing, ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM-30-369 September 22, 1975 DISCUSSION RE POPULA- TION PROJECTIONS & SEWAGE FLOW CAPACITIES The matter of population projections and proposed sewage flow capaties was continued from last week's meeting. Cm Miller stated that he read the entire report from LAVWMA and the State Water Resources Control Board and found that it is not consistent with the concept already adopted by the majority of the Council. CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION PRESENTED TO THE COUNCIL REGARDING WASTE WATER CAPACITY ALLOTMENTS IN THE PROPOSED LAVWMA FACILITY, WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS: Under (1) in the resolves: delete the first three lines and the first word (but) in the fourth line. The text will then read: (l) Suggest reconsideration of the population rate pro- jections so that 1) a uniform rate applies to the entire valley community; 2) A more rational total population be established that is consistent with environmental standards. Cw Tirsell stated that the way the Council had the resolution worded before was in preamble form and that what the Council has in mind should be included in the WHEREAS categories because if it is listed in the resolves it would be confusing with what the Council wishes to resolve. Cw Tirsell added that the statement before was that the Liver- more Council would urge reconsideration of the total population allocation for the valley in light of the environmental concern; however, if the figure of 149,000 is to be used, we resolve: (1), (2), (3), etc. It was a preamble statement indicating recogni- tion that 149,000 is the number Livermore is working with but on an environmental basis the Council would urge them to recon- sider the number. Mayor Futch commented that the Council is talking about the capacity of the LAVWMA facilities and not the future population of the valley, as a whole, except to the extent that their popula- tion projections determine the capacity of the facilities. It would seem that this is a simple matter of whether or not the Council would support a facility of this size and this is what he has tried to say. He stated that it is not a matter of whether or not the City is in favor of the projected population. He stated that he believes the Council would be "spinning its wheels" to discuss the philosophy of what the population should be. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION IN FRONT OF THE COUNCIL WHICH WAS PREPARED BY MAYOR FUTCH. MOTION SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES. Cm Turner stated that he looked at the population figures as being a guideline and not an absolute figure. Perhaps the councilmembers are looking at the figures in the context that we have to grow to that figure to receive our fair share. He stated that he feels environmental conditions will dictate the population base and the actual funding of any additional sewer capacity for the valley. Cm Miller stated that in his opinion it is unwise to build a large facility beyond what a city should have on environmental grounds. If you have a large facility there is a need to fill it because it is too expensive to operate unless it is full. CM-30-370 September 22, 1975 (Population Projections & Sewage Flow Capacities) Cm Miller added that this resolution does not suggest that the popula- tion projections are too high, as was originally mentioned. In fact the resolution states that the Council supports the disaggregated E-O population projections. Mayor Futch stated that the resolution says it supports the disaggre- gated E-O population projections as far as determining the size of of the facilities. Not all of this additional capacity would be used for additional population. Mayor Futch stated that the Council is in the process of approving a General Plan that has a population of 80,000. The population this would allot for Livermore is 63,500 and is only a fraction of the population the General Plan will include. Not all of the capacity will go for residential use and it is the Council's intent to reserve capacity for industrial development. It would appear that em Miller is suggesting reducing the population and imposing additional restrictions on sewage capacity. Cm Miller stated that the City is talking about a 20% increase for everybody in the valley and this does not add up to 149,000 any way, form, shape, or size. An additional 1 MGD is 20% of our existing sewer capacity. Cm Miller stated that Mayor Futch is supporting a disaggregated E-O population which is 149,000 and indicated that he cannot understand how this can be supported when it is beyond what is reasonable on air quality grounds. We can say, "if it is going to be 149,000, we want our share". If the City says the 149,000 is too high and the population should be equivalent to an additional 1 MGD he would have no objection. Mayor Futch explained that he is saying he would support a facility of the size that would accommodate a population of 149,000 but the allocation does not need to go towards residential use. Cm Miller stated that what Mayor Futch is saying is that the overall capacity of this line, for the most part, is not under Livermore's influence. If it is going to be determined by population Livermore should have a big pipeline. A population of 149,000 based on 110,000 is approximately a 40% increase and our share at a 35-40% increase corresponds with 2 MGD. If Livermore is to receive its fair share of the disaggregated E-O it should receive a 2 MGD expansion. Cw Tirsell stated that if the State Water Quality Control Board says they will allow capacity for E-O (149,000) do they care how the 149,000 is distributed? Cm Miller indicated that this is not clear. Cw Tirsell commented that the State Water Quality Control Board indicated they would use the\pepartment of Pihahce E a GU1J w.i.ll . not \:lac t.he. l\DAG fi9l:1re.!!. fH6AG.-~1/.-<...-~ t& dL~~ ~'/ / , iJ # ~~/'1 Cm Miller stated that they are using ABAG figures for 1972 with (fl._tfltt/if- no environmental impact whatsoever. /' Cw Tirsell stated that she has no objection to including a statement indicating that they have not included environmental concerns in figuring their number. She stated that if Cm Miller wants to include a statement such as this she would support it. The statement is to notify people that the City does recognize the fact that the environ- mental constraints were not figured into this number. The problem is that the State Water Quality Control Board has already said they will not review this number. CM-30-37l September 22, 1975 (Population projections & Sewage Flow Capacities) Cm Miller stated that what he wants to say is that Livermore wants its fair share of the pipeline but that Livermore should also say there should not be such a large number (149,000). With respect to the State Water Quality Control Board, the decision about what will be funded has not yet been made and the final decision is made by EPA. The EPA has 75% of the funds for this project and if they say they will not fund, the State Water Quality Control Board is in trouble because they can't do it. Cm Turner added that there simply is no way the City can justify supporting a figure of 149,000. Cw Tirsell stated that she still prefers to see the resolution in preamble form but she can't support adding words, as suggested by Cm Miller, under the resolves. Cm Miller stated that he does not have to have his own wording and would suggest the Council take a five minute break to think about alternate wording. Cw Tirsell asked the City Attorney if it would be proper to have some wording in preamble form and it was concluded that it should be listed with the "whereas" paragraphs. RECESS Mayor Futch allowed the Council a five minute recess at this time after which the Council meeting resumed with all members present as during roll call. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION CONCERNING THE FIRST RESOLVE TO BE STATED, AS FOLLOWS: (1) Urge the State Water Resources Control Board to reconsider disaggregated E-O population projections for the Livermore- Amador Valley to include environmental considerations in determining the capacity of the LAVWMA waste water treat- ment facilities. We suggest reconsideration of the popula- tion rate projections so that a uniform rate applies to the entire Valley communities. MOTION SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Cw Tirsell explained that the ABAG figures do not include environ- mental concerns in their projections and the City is notifying them that we urge reconsideration on that basis and to reconsider the rate in relationship to that reconsidered number. Mayor Futch stated that LAVWMA is to make a decision at their meeting tomorrow night and Livermore should not go to them with- out a position. Cw Tirsell and Cm Miller explained that the City does have a position - the City doesn't agree with the l49,000 figure and requests reconsideration. Discussion followed among the Councilmembers concerning their differences of opinion concerning the pipeline and what the line would be used to service. Cw Tirsell pointed out that in the past this position (as in motion) has been presented to LAVWMA and that Cm Miller made the presentation even though the position was contrary to his position at that time. Cm Miller mentioned to LAm~ at that time that he did not agree with numbers the majority of the Council had in mind but he did an excellent job in presenting the majority opinion. At that time Cm Miller favored only a .5 MGD expansion while the majority voted for the 1 MGD. CM-30-372 September 22, 1975 (Population Projections & Sewage Flow Capacities) Mayor Futch stated that he wouldn't want anyone to get the impression he is in favor of smog or anything like that but the reason he feels he cannot vote in favor of the motion is because he believes it would be contrary to what the General Plan shows. The General Plan indica- tes that we are planning for a 1-2% population increase while trying to keep the capacity of sewage at a minimum. He stated that it is not a matter of air quality because the environmental constraints are still there. Cm Miller stated that the ABAG numbers were done in 1971 at a time there were very distorted growth rates throughout the whole region. These figures were put into a model for 1972 and the Council at that time disagreed with the model. There was no consideration whatsoever for air quality and gave rise to the 149,000 prediction. The point is that the growth rate and the assignment for the Valley should be based on environmental considerations - this is what Cw Tirsell's compromise statement says. Mayor Futch stated that he would agree that environmental con- sideration was not taken into account when the figures were prepared. Cm Miller stated that his concern is that if the City doesn't say something about reconsideration of the figures, in essence, it is agreeing with the prediction of 149,000. The City cannot reconcile being against air pollution while at the same time agreeing with a 149,000 population figure. Cm Turner stated that it is his understanding the motion would be agreeing with the 149,000 and the amendment to the motion would mean disagreeing with this figure. It was noted that this is correct. Cm Turner stated that this doesn't make any sense as far as he is concerned because you can't go both ways. Cm Miller explained that the 149,000 is without any concern for the environmental consideration and that the line will be built without this consideration. The State Water Resources Control Board has refused to consider the environmental aspects. He added that the EPA does have to approve the project but if Livermore indicates it would support the 149,000, EPA may feel that everyone wants the line and it is the Valley's problem. The EPA may feel pressure to go ahead and allow the line. Cm Miller commented that he really feels it is inconsistent to support the 149,000 while saying we are concerned about the air quality. Cm Turner stated that he has faith in thEPA and does not agree with the amendment to the motion. AT THIS TIME THE AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION FAILED 2-2 (Cm Turner and Mayor Futch dissenting). Cm Miller stated that the amendment to the motion corresponded with the position the Council adopted earlier and is discouraged that the amendment did not pass. Discussion followed concerning graphs the Councilmembers were given for review showing bad years and good years with respect to smog conditions in the Valley. , Cm Miller stated that one cannot consider an average year because this would not satisfy federal standards - we get the bad years. It just happens that this year we are lucky with air pollution low. CM-30-373 September 22, 1975 (Population Projections & Sewage Flow Capacities) Cw Tirsell suggested that since the last amendment did not pass possibly an additional whereas could be added, as follows: WHEREAS, the Livermore City Council is cognizant that the population predictions by the State Water Quality Control Board do not include environmental concerns, and we would further urge reconsideration of such predictions, and 'VHEREAS, we reluctantly accept the State Water Resources Board....etc. CW TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE ABOVE BE INCLUDED IN THE RESOLUTION, SECONDED BY CM MILLER. CW TIRSELL AMENDED THE WORDING TO THE WHEREAS SHE WOULD LIKE INCLUDED, AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, THE Livermore City Council is cognizant that the population predictions by the State Water Quality Control Board do not include environmental considerations. We would urge reconsideration of these pro- jections. THEREFORE, the Livermore City Council resolves to (1) reluctantly accept the State Water Resources Control Board ...etc. AMENDMENT SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Cm Turner and Mayor Futch indicated they could not accept this amendment either, which was followed by discussion concerning the wording. Mayor Futch stated that what he wants to do is separate the size of the facility from the amount of the population. Cw Tirsell explained that her amendment includes everything in the resolution prepared by Mayor Futch. CM TURNER MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM UNTIL THE END OF THE MEET- ING, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT CONCERNING PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION Gib Marguth, from the Citizens Advisory Committee on Public Tran- sit stated that the Council has a copy of the Committee's recom- mendation which is basically a conclusion of the study the Council directed the Committee to undertake with the support and assistance of a special consultant on public transportation. It is recom- mended that the Council adopt the recommendations of the consultant to move forward with a transit program and that the program be developed around a "dial-a-ride" system where there is both sub- scription and dial-a-ride services offered throughout the day. The Committee would strongly urge the Council to pay particular attention to the cost estimates provided in the report and the possibility for public support through a tax override for the transit system. It is the opinion of the Committee that the system can be initiated and carried out for the next few years through subsidies and support of state and federal government. In order to proceed in a systematic manner it is felt the City Council should study all of the cost figures and ask the citizens if they would be willing to support a transit system with a tax levy. CM-30-374 September 22, 1975 (Public Transportation) Cm Miller stated that he is still a little hesitant about the concept of dial-a-ride but he believes it is important for the City to have some type of transportation. He stated that he would be willing to ask the citizenry to give this program a try. Cm Miller added that he believes the City should prepare for an election to allow up to .25 per $100. If the maximum were collected it would amount to about $15-$20/year for a typical residence. Cm Miller commented that if the City could be successful in provid- ing for some type of public transportation it would mean that some families could get along without the extra car which, for the most part, is essential..-.~ ~L~ ~"-~ ,~~A_C.dL.z:,..;.~. Cm Miller stated that, lastly, this is one of the mitigating factors for improving our air quality and this matter should be offered to the citizens for consideration; they will do what they feel is right. If the City could logically endorse such a program it might be accepted. CM MILLER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO WORK WITH THE CONSULTANTS AND THE COMMITTEE TO PREPARE THE APPROPRIATE REFERENDUM HaRDING FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION AT A FORTHCOMING MEETING, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSIN. Cw Tirsell commented that she would like to thank the people who worked so hard on this Committee. The subject matter is difficult and a lot of effort has gone into the preparation of a suggestion. Cm Turner stated that he is concerned about the dial-a-ride system because apparently it hasn't been successful in other cities. The Council should also keep in mind that this could be very costly, particularly if the City did not receive federal funding. Cw Tirsell stated that obviously there is a need for a subsidy because the City cannot provide a bus system without assistance. Mr. Marguth commented that the consultants are convinced that the City can proceed for some time without the need for a tax levy in the community to support this kind of a transportation system. He added that everyone has questions about dial-a-ride, fixed routes, etc. and the politicians are going to have to respond to the community in the form of answering questions advocating a transit system of some type. This will have to be done in order to impose a successful tax levy. Mr. Marguth continued to say that the Committee believes that by the process of submitting the matter to the public and asking them for approval to proceed, the Council would have to become the advocate of a transit system. In being an advocate the Council will help lead the community towards what the Committee hopes will be the right transit system. The Committee does not know if dial- a-ride is the precise system that is right for Livermore. There is no way to make sure that it is the right or wrong system but the political leaders in the community giving support to this proposal will make it a success or failure. The Committee feels strongly that this should be submitted to the voters. People want to know that the Council has analyzed the situation, understands the alterna- tives and will lead the community in the right direction in a transit ~/ , system. The Committee feels this is an important issue which should receive the full support of the Council and in turn the community should respond and require the taxpayers to support the system. The Committee feels the City should move ahead in this direction and that the approach suggested by the Committee would be the proper procedure as a beginning. CM-30-375 September 22, 1975 (Public Transportation) Cm Miller stated that he does not believe it is true that the City could have a system like the one proposed without some type of subsidy even though the consultant has indicated the City could. Mr. Marguth stated that the Committee could make a recommendation to accept the consultant's report and make application immediately for funds to implement the system. The Committee has every belief that funds could be obtained to purchase the equipment and operate for a year or so; however, the day of reckoning will come and if the political leaders of the community and citizens have not sup- ported it or seen the need for it, it will not succeed. He stated that the Committee believes one of the reason dial-a-ride has failed in other communities is because the community does not really want it or has not demanded it or did not participate. People have to want it and be willing to pay for it when the time comes. Barbara Shaw, member of the Transportation Advisory Committee, stated that it is clear this program will have to be subsidized but it is also important for the Council and community to realize that for a long time we have been subsidizing the automobile. Also, we should be aware of the difference between the capital grant and the operat- ing grant. Both are available to the City but the program cannot work without a capital grant. If it should happen that the City does not receive our grants or if the costs are so high that grants do not cover the cost, the program will simply fold. The City will not have a huge expense on its hands. She stated that the Committee views their recommendation as a cautious approach and it is felt that people will ride the busses if they voted in favor of them. Cm Miller noted that when a report comes back from the staff the Council should have a public hearing. Cw Tirsell stated that she has some concern about a public hearing in which people may object to the proposed system and she intends to vote for the motion which is that it is the intent of the Coun- cil to place this matter on the ballot. If people indicate they don't want it at the public hearing this will not change her opinion that it should go to a vote of the citizens. Cm Miller stated that it is true the Council will want this on the ballot, regardless of the comments at the public hearing, but their statements may determine the wording that should be used for the referendum. The whole community should make the decision as to whether the City should have the system. Cm Turner stated that he is in favor of some type of public trans- portation system but he would like to know if this is the proper time to try to implement this type of program. David Castro, stated that he would like to know if this program would be owned and operated by the City or the public. Mr. Parness commented that it would be owned by the public but it hasn't been determined as to whether it would be publicly or City operated. Joanne Angvick, 2284 College Avenue, representative of the League of Women Voters, stated that they support this proposal for public transportation. The League believes that government, at all levels, should encourage alternatives to the use of the private automobile in order to conserve energy and improve the air quality. The League approves of the use of federal tax funds for this purpose with an increase in local property taxes as a last resort, if and when needed. CM-30-376 September 22, 1975 (Public Transportation) Public transportation is only one strategy in the campaign to clear the air and save energy. The League is pleased to see that the Coun- cil is considering this as well as other strategies such as user fees for parking. One of the lessons of our times is that nothing is free and that public subsidy of the automobile, through roads and other facilities, has contributed to our current problem. A fair share of public resources for transit and taxes or fees on driving and parking can provide means to begin to alleviate air pollution. Mr. Marguth stated that on behalf of the Committee he would like to thank the City r1anager for the time and effort he has put into this subject and the contribution he made to help the Committee move along in its deliberation. REPORT RE CAMERA PUR- CHASE (Police Dept.) The City ~1anager reported that tentatively, funds have been appro- priated for the purchase of some camera equipment for the Police Department. The Council, however, has requested more technical justification prior to acquisition of the camera. A report from the Chief of Police has been submitted to the Council for the purpose of additional technical justification for this purchase. Cm r1iller stated that the report reflects the views of the Police Department and there is actually no backup from anywhere else that would indicate that such an expensive item is required to do an equivalent job. A lot of money is involved and Cm Miller indicated he isn't sure that another type of less expensive camera wouldn't do as good a job. Naturally the Police Department would like the best equipment they can get but he would like to see some type of backup indicating that this is really necessary. Chief Lindgren stated that the need for this type of equipment was recognized many years ago and with the increased rate of crime and calls for service. When considering the best equipment for purchase, other police agencies were contacted with respect to the success of their various types of equipment as well as private industry who use such equipment. The Police Department tried to reach a realistic goal in terms of finances and noted that they could have asked for equipment costing at least three times as much as what they are asking for. He indicated that there are few camera experts in the photography field and they need the type of equipment that can be used by the majority of the officers. This equipment should be the most durable, accurate and practical equipment available. Cm Turner mentioned that in the past Chief Lindgren has indicated that at present the Police Department people have to go to Hayward to pick up photos because Livermore doesn't have proper equipment and he would like to know if the purchase of this equipment would offset the cost of making trips to Hayward. Chief Lindgren indicated that he believes the Police Department has spent many times the amount of the purchase for the equipment, in the past, by making trips out of town and waiting around for photos. Gordon Clark, a camera expert, explained that the Police Department is not requesting particularly expensive equipment, as photography goes. Personally, he has equipment at about seven times the cost of the equipment the Police Department is asking for. He explained that the equipment requested by the Police Department would be durable and should hold up for many years under a great deal of use. There are cameras that would be less expensive but probably wouldn't last. CM-30-377 September 22, 1975 (Camera for Police Dept.) Cm Miller commented that he won't object to the purchase of the equipment requested by the Police Department but feels just a slight objection to the amount to be spent on the equipment. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR PURCHASE OF CAMERA EQUIPMENT, AS APPROVED IN THE BUDGET. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. RECESS Mayor Futch called for a brief recess after which the meeting resumed with all members of the Council present, as during roll call. REPORT RE MODIFICATIONS TO GENERAL PLAN MAP The Planning Director reported that in accordance with the instructions of the City Council, the staff met with the General Plan consultants to review the preliminary General Plan map. The map has been revised to show future multi-family and neighborhood/highway commercial areas in a more generalized manner using appropriate symbols. Mr. Musso indicated that the staff and Planning Commission have reviewed the modifications and Mr. Musso explained the method by which multiple units can be recognized on the map. This was followed by discussion concerning various items illustrated on the map such as the multiple areas, collector streets, open space and commercial/industrial areas. The Planning Commission has suggested a 1~-2% maximum population growth, recognizing that it may be less because of the sewage capacity problem. Cm Miller stated that as he recalls, the last time the Council discussed this item, it was concluded that there would be a 2% growth rate for the next five years. r,d~~ I #ft~/(!./ Cw Tirsell felt the Council needs to have a discu si n with the Planning Commission's recommendation in front of hem because the consultants felt they could not support the~ growth rate. However, if the Council agrees, in concept, with what has been revised on the map it would seem to be a separate issue. It was her understanding that the Planning Commission recommendation would be in front of the Council tonight and she would prefer to discuss it when there is a recommendation in writing. Also, Cm Staley is not present and perhaps it would be best to discuss this item when there is a full Council. Cm Miller expressed concern for all the development indicated north of I-580. Cw Tirsell commented that the consultants stressed that various parts from three maps will be used and if one thinks of a city as having various communities within it there is not a real community north of I-580. Until this area is filled in and made a community, it will always be a II stunted " community. On the south side of I-580 the City is doing in-filling which is a mitigating measure the City is taking to consolidate the area south of I-580. This statement could be made about the north side. North I-580 will be made a viable community within the City, all its own. She stated that she believes it is very important for them to have a population base to warrant a high school, for instance, and a library. New population is to create viability on the north side of the freeway. CM-30-378 September 22, 1975 (General Plan Map) Cm Miller pointed out areas of concern, on the map, north of I-580 mentioning that there are areas designated for growth that would be hard to service. Cw Tirsell stated that if one thinks about how the area north of the freeway should be rounded out, whatever year, the two "wings" of the City should be connected - if only by a circulation route. You do not accomplish a circulation route until the population is there. Cm Miller indicated that according to the map and the plans, one of the areas will be isolated. Cw Tirsell stated that she is satisfied with the map and it would appear to provide for a well-rounded community north of the freeway. THE COUNCIL CONCLUDED THAT THIS MATTER SHOULD GO BACK TO THE P.C. WITH THE REQUEST FOR A RECm-1JllENDATION CONCERNING THE GROWTH RATE. REPORT RE BEAUTIFICA- TION OF PORTOLA & MURRIETA & PROPOSED LEASE Mr. Trotter, of the Planning Department, submitted a written report indicating that Mr. Mehran has agreed to pay a portion of the cost for leasing a vacant lot located at the corner of Murrieta Boulevard and portola Avenue which would accommodate an off-tract sign for Sunset Homes and would be beautified by the City, at the request of the Beautification Committee. The cost of the lease would be $1,200/uear and Mr. Mehran has agreed to pay $lOO/month for as long as he is in need of the sign. The Beautification Committee recommends that the Council form an agreement with Exxon to lease the lot and in turn lease the sign area to Sunset Homes for an off-tract sign. Cw Tirsell stated that she is in substantial agreement with the beautification of that particular site but she has some reservations concerning the sign to be located in that area. That lot is not within the City limits and it would not have to conform with our ordinance. The City has gone through all the problems of getting the sign at the airport into conformance. The City felt it should enforce its own ordinance in the case of the sign at the airport and in her opinion this is a similar case. Although it would be an expense from the Park Fund to beautify this corner if the cost is not supported, she would still maintain it is a necessary beautification project to an entrance to the City. She would recommend that the site be adopted, omitting the sign. /' Cw Tirsell commented that originally when the Beautification Com- mittee proposed that the City purchase this property it was found to be prohibitive from the standpoint of cost. The matter was then referred to the Beautification Committee who investigated the possi- bility of leasing and it was found that this arrangement would be satisfactory with Exxon, the owners. We do intend to lease the property and the Beautification Committee has found a way to finance this project but it would mean City support of a sign that our ordi- nance does not permit. She would approve of this as a beautification project but she simply cannot support a sign that the ordinance does not permit. Cm Miller stated that he feels the Beautification Committee should be commended for finding a way to support the cost but would have to agree with what Cw Tirsell has said about the sign. The City has spent nine years trying to eliminate off-site signs and there is only one left in the City. CM-30-379 September 22, 1975 (Beautification of Corner - Murrieta/Portola) Cw Tirsell stated that we have written the County to ask them to abate the freestanding signs on their land and would be concerned about our legal position if we were to allow one on our land. Cm Miller added that the County has indicated that if the City gets rid of its off-site signs, they will remove theirs. The County is waiting for the opportunity to erect more signs and if Livermore were to allow an off-site sign this might allow them the opportunity for more County signs. CW TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE STAFF BE DIRECTED TO FORM A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH EXXON FOR THE BEAUTIFICATION OF THIS LOT AND THAT THE BEAUTIFICATION COW~ITTEE BE ALLOWED TO GO AHEAD WITH THEIR PLANS, AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Ayn Weiskamp, member of the Beautification Committee, explained that the main concern of the Committee is being able to beautify that spot. If the City prefers to pay the cost of the lease they have no objection. The City Attorney commented that the Council might want to men- tion that it considers expenditure of public money for that site, a public purpose. Mayor Futch stated that this is one of the main entrances into the City and the Council feels it is very important to beautify this area that is heavily traveled. Cm Miller stated that it has been said many times that the initial image of a city is very important in the decision of whether or not people want to locate a business in that city. Not only does an attractive entrance give citizens a sense of pride in their community but it also is advantageous in attract- ing commercial and industrial business. Cw Tirsell stated that it is important, also, in our continuing discussion with the County on the planning of this area, that the County is content to piecemeal and develop that area one by one without any overall plan for the area. Whatever use comes to them, they allow by amending their general plan or what- ever is necessary to accommodate the use. Our City takes a dif- ferent view of that area and we are trying to make it both useful and beautiful. This is the underlying issue the City tries to present each time a piece of land is to be developed for some type of use by the County. If the County continues their method of allowing the uses and zonings, they are destroying what the City is trying to plan, as fast as the City is able to plan it. At least this is a statement that indicates Liver- more really is concerned with what happens in this area with respect to planning, that this is visually important to our community as all other parts of that area and why the City is continually in front of the County and why Livermore con- tinues to stress that the entrances to our City are important to us and integrated with our City. CW TIRSELL RESTATED THE MOTION THAT THE STAFF PREPARE THE LEASE AND BRING COST ESTIMATES FOR PARTIAL BEAUTIFICATION OF THE SITE AND TO ASK THE BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE, UPON EXECUTION OF THE LEASE, TO PROCEED. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM-30-380 September 22, 1975 REPORT RE PART-TIME EMPLOYEE FOR LIBRARY The City Manager reported that the City Librarian has requested that a former technical processing librarian be allowed to work at the library on a part-time basis. The City Attorney has advised that in order for a retired person to qualify for retired allowances, one may not work more than 60 days per year. The Librarian would like approval to employ this person for a maximum of 8 hours per week which would not exceed the allowable 60 working days per calendar year. ~1r. Parness reported that this person has exceptional qualifications that the City does not want to lose but by virtue of her retirement the concern was the conflict with the state statute as to her retire- ment allowances. This is not a budgetary consideration because there is sufficient money in the personnel section of the library budget to cover the cost of this employee on a part-time basis. The City Attorney explained that this would be an appointment by the appointing authority, Mr. Parness, and no formal action is required of the Council. Mr. Parness asked that the Council adopt a motion stating that they have no objections to the employment of Mrs. Shields in accordance with the circumstances mentioned. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE COUNCIL APPROVED THE APPOINTMENT OF MRS. SHIELDS FOR PART-TIME EMPLOYMENT AT THE LIBRARY. REPORT FROM P.C. RE PUD PERMIT PROCEDURE ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE REPORT FROM THE PLANNING CO~~1ISSION CONCERNING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPHENT PERMIT PROCEDURE WAS ADOPTED. REPORT FROM P.C. RE COUNCIL REFERRAL RE OS-UR ZONING The Planning Commission reported that in considering the referral from the City Council on the proposed changes to the OS-DR Zoning District, the Planning Commission did generally concur with the changes proposed by the City Council. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE RECO~~1ENDATIONS OF THE PLANNING CO~~ISSION l~RE ACCEPTED. P.C. SU~~.~RY OF ACTION ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE SUtfr~RY OF ACTION TAKEN BY THE P.C. FOR THE MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 16, WAS NOTED FOR FILING. REPORT RE PROPOSED FEE STRUCTURE REVISIONS RE ZONING ORDINANCE The Director of Planning submitted a report concerning the proposed fee structure revision concerning the Zoning Ordinance. CM-30-38l September 22, 1975 (Proposed Fee Structure Revisions Re Zoning Ordinance) Mr. Musso pointed out that there was somewhat of an increase in the fees, particularly in the Zoning Use Permit area and the matter of a use permit arises very seldom. Cw Tirsell commented that she was in substantial agreement with the recommendations made by the Planning Director and in par- ticular the discussion that the fees charged are not the absolute costs because most of the applications received are made by local residents for additions to their homes which the standard fee covers. Cw Tirsell added that she feels the Planning Director had good justifications that were consistent in determining the fees. CW TIRSELL MOVED THAT ON THE BASIS OF THE REASONING AND CONSIS- TENCY THE ORDINANCE BE ADOPTED. Cm Turner questioned the possibility of waiving certain fees in some cases and wondered what the legal position would be in these instances. Mr. Logan commented that the Council can do what it wants if there is justification for waiving a fee but would caution the Council ~ before this is done the Council might want a cost justifica- tion since this is not intended to be a revenue producing method. The cost is to cover the services of the Planning Department. Mr. Musso pointed out that the fees are the same as they were in the past but a different method of calculating the fee has been recommended. If the Council prefers a change in the fee amount this could be considered. The dollars adopted by the Council in the past are being used and this has not been changed. The pub- lic hearing cost is to be paid by the applicant however and this might range from $20 to $50 for the legal publication. Mayor Futch suggested that this matter be referred back to the staff for a cost analysis and the legality of waiving the fees in certain instances. Cm Miller commented that there has been the suggestion that home occupation permits and variance permits not be allowed for only half of the fee and he would agree with this. Secondly, most of the fees for the permits are about the same with the exception of the PUD permit which is a lot less. The PUD permits cost the staff a lot of time and he cannot believe that it would correspond with less money being spent for pun permits. Mr. Musso explained that is the same amount of money because the cost of the public hearing publication will be charged to the applicant. The PUD permit is $200 in addition to another $30 or $50 for the legal publication, so this will stay about the same. Also, in almost every PUD permit application there is a tentative map involved and the applicant pays the fee on the map in addition to the administration of processing the permit so there is really a double fee on the PUD permit. Cm Miller felt the $250 is too little money in view of the amount of work that is involved in the processing. AT THIS TIME CW TIRSELL WITHDREW THE MOTION. CM MILLER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO EXAMINE THE JUSTIFICATION FOR THE FEES, MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ABOUT ANY COST OF LIVING IN- CREASES AND TO PREPARE A DRAFT ORDINANCE WHICH INCLUDES HOME OCCU- PATIONS AND VARIANCES AT THE REGULAR RATE. MOTION SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM-30-382 September 22, 1975 MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (Res. Auth. Settlement of La,.,sui t - Zepol) The City Attorney asked that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing settlement of a lawsuit (City v. Zepol) which has been distributed to the Council. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION NO. 207-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT OF LAWSUIT City v. Zepol (Rollo and Glenna Jackson) Grade Separation Project Parcel #14 MATTERS INITIATED BY THE CITY COUNCIL (Request for Agenda Item) Cm Turner stated that he has had calls concerning the penalty on the business license fee if someone is late. He asked that this item be placed on the agenda for discussion purposes. Cw Tirsell commented that there is a committee reviewing the business license fee, in general, and would suggest that this matter be refer- red to them as well. The Council concurred. (Money OWed to City) Cm Miller stated that Mr. Mehran owes the City something in the order of $65,000 and would suggest that the City continue to pursue the payment of this money owed to the City. (Legislative Items) Cm Miller stated that a legislative bulletin has been received from the League of California Cities asking for opposition to AB 188 and SB 662 through a letter of opposition to our governor. AB 188 has to do with developer fees and SB 662 relates to exemption from the business license fee in certain categories. (Oakland Scavenger Contract - Agenda Item) Cm Miller stated that there has been talk about awarding Oakland Scavenger a 25- year contract and he would like to see this item placed on the agenda for discussion. (ACAP Meeting) Cw Tirsell reported that there will be an ACAP meeting held in the Valley for Valley residents to give input to the ACAP Administrative Board and the ACTEP Advisory Council with respect to needs for making your community a better place in which to live. This input will be used when considering use of funds for various projects. CJ\1-30-383 September 22, 1975 (LAFCO Court Hearing> Mr. Logan commented that LAFCO is asserting that the hearing for the Sphere of Influence will begin November 6th. Cw Tirsell asked if the Council can expect a staff report that the Council can react to by that time and Mr. Logan indicated that he believes LAFCO will have a staff report available. Cw Tirsell asked if Mr. Parness could communicate with LAFCO to find out if there will be a staff report available before the meet- ing. Mr. Parness stated that he has posed this question and has been told that the Council will receive a copy of the report approximately one week before the hearing. Cw Tirsell wondered if, at that time, the City could request recon- sideration of our request for the Sphere of Influence to be included with the staff re~ort. Also Cw Tirsell mentioned that she had asked for a list of the property owners requesting elimination from our Sphere and wondered how much work this will take. ~1r. ~1usso explained that with respect to what has transpired between the property owners and the City the best source would be his files and his memory but the difficult item might be getting the list of all the property ownerships requesting elimination and this might mean a trip to the County. She added that if 100 people are going to testify at one of the hearings it would be worthless for the City to ask Grunwald-Crawford and Associates to testify but perhaps they could be asked to offer input at one of the hearings. ADOPTION OF ZOo ORD. ~lEND. RE RS DISTRICT ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CONCERNING SECTION 5.00 (RS District) WAS ADOPTED BY THE ORDINANCE. ORDINANCE NO. 870 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 442, OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO ZONING, BY THE REPEAL OF SECTION 5.00, RELATING TO RS - RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, AND THE ENACT ION OF CHAPTER 5.00, RELATING TO RS - SUBUR- BAN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. WEEKLY CITY MANAGER STATUS REPORT Housing & Community Develop. Act Mr. Parness reported the staff has met with the people concerned with the Housing and Community Development Act to discuss the City's application. There are concerns as to whether or not our program will be allowed over the three year term and will require a substantial amount of money and there is a question as to whether or not this will be reimbursed. HUD Officials are impressed with our proposed project but our answer resides entirely within the County Board of Supervisors. This program is under the auspices of the County and they must approve construction and the annual application. The first year's application has been approved and the second year's application will require filing around March of 1976. What we want is some type of confirmation as to the third year's allocation and the County staff does not anticipate problems for the third year either. CM-30-384 September 22, 1975 S. P. Property Last week Mr. Parness met with the people from Southern Pacific Development Company. S.P. has retained a new Senior Vice President for the purpose of representing them and their property development for commercial purposes. This man has been a mortgage banker, an appraiser and has a remarkable background in business, industry and commerce. This person is very impressed with Livermore and what has happened thus far with the S.P. property. Mr. Parness indicated that he was very pleased to hear that they are planning the second phase of their improvement for the area that goes from "P" Street to "L" Street and have preliminary plans of this area. Taxi Service In the first three days of the new taxi service available for senior citizens, two people have enrolled. Hopefully the press will remind senior citizens to contact City Hall to find out if they qualify. The City has the money and would like more people to take advantage of this program. Tour of Public Works Facilities The Industrial Advisory Board spent an afternoon last week visiting some of our public works facilities and the program. They apparently enjoyed this tour which was very informative to them. The reservoir sites, water treatment plants and water reclamation plant were visited. CONTINUATION OF DISCUSSION RE POPULATION PROJECTIONS & SEWAGE FLOW CAPACITIES Cm Miller stated that he would like to add an amendment to the motion to include that the CITY COUNCIL WILL ACCEPT THE FINAL NUl',mER THAT IS CONSISTENT \^lITH THE ENVIRONHENTAL CONSIDERATION. CW TIRSELL STATED THAT AFTER THE "~'lliEREAS II INCLUDE THE SECOND SEN- TENCE: We would accept a total valley population number that is consistent with environmental considerations. Cm Miller stated that this statement replaces what Cw Tirsell had as "reluctantly" agrees, etc. Mayor Futch voiced objection to the amendment indicating that he isn't sure what the Council is suggesting. Cm Miller stated that there is a City smog report that says that without very complex mitigating measures there should be no more growth in the Livermore Valley. A report from A. B. Little says the same thing. Mayor Futch stated that what Cm Miller is asking for is zero popula- tion. Cm Miller stated that from a personal standpoint, zero would be con- sistent but he is not asking that the Council adopt his personal view. However, from the reports the City has, 149,000 is not con- sistent and there is no way one could conceive of 149,000 being consistent; zero growth is. CH-30-385 September 22, 1975 (Re Population Projections & Sewage Flow Capacities) Cm ~1iller stated that the point is there are different days with respect to the amount of smog and the federal standards are still being violated. The whole point of the Clean Air Act is that we are supposed to meet the federal standards. We are supposed to meet them in 1977 but we can't do it. It is clear that 149,000 is not consistent with meeting the federal air quality standards - even in 1990. Mayor Futch stated that he is not referring to a population of 149,000 as much as what the capacity of the line should be to accommodate 1 MGD for industrial and commercial use. If we don't get the additional 1 MGD then what will we do for industrial/commer- cial development? Cm Miller stated~that Mayor Futch's point for Livermore is reason- able but not reasonable with the aspirations of Pleasanton or VCSD. They will try to take the additional capacity away from Livermore and this is the whole point of trying to obtain equal share. Cm Turner stated that he is going to go back to his original position expressed early in the meeting - to approve the resolution written by Mayor Futch. THE MOTION MADE BY CM TURNER EARLIER IN THE MEETING WAS TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION PREPARED BY MAYOR FUTCH WHICH HAD BEEN SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. CW TIRSELL THEN AMENDED THE MOTION TO READ AS FOLLOWS, WHICH HAD BEEN SECONDED BY CM TURNER EARLIER IN THE MEETING: ~mEREAS, The Livermore City Council is cognizant that the population predictions by the State Water Resources Control Board do not include environmental considerations. We would urge reconsideration of these pre- dictions. THEREFORE, the Livermore City Council resolves to (1) Reluctantly accept the State Water Resources Control Board disaggregated E-O population projections for the Livermore- Amador Valley as the basis for determining the capacity of the LA~~ waste water treatment facility but suggest reconsidera- tion of the population rate applies to the entire valley community; Cw Tirsell explained that this still gives the 149,000 but indicates "reluctantly", and continues with the resolution exactly the way it has been prepared by Mayor Futch. The Council discussed the amendment and the fact that "reluctantly" accepts" refers to the figure 149,000. The Council realizes that this is the figure which will probably be used but the Council doesn't agree with the figure. Mayor Futch stated that he agrees the Council reluctantly accepts this population figure but the size of the facility doesn't have to correspond to the size of the population. Mayor Futch suggested that the Council indicate it reluctantly accepts the population figure but agrees to the LAVWMA facility. CM-30-386 September 22, 1975 (Re Population Projections & Sewage Flow Capacities) Cm Miller and Cw Tirsell felt the size of the facility is definitely related to the number of population and did not agree with what the Mayor was trying to point out. Cm Miller pointed out that this Council is concerned about the popula- tion allowed in the valley; however another Council down the line might not be and with the size of pipeline proposed there could be as much population as the line would serve. We intend to try to use the line for commercial or industrial development but someone else may allow all kinds of population by allowing the line to be used for residential development instead of the commercial/industrial. Cw Tirsell stated that the pipeline will not be the only factor limit- ing growth and that there are many ways to get around this but she feels using a figure of 149,000 for the valley is not realistic and they were supposed to have estimated a reasonable number of people for the valley in determining the size of the pipeline. If they haven't taken environmental concerns into the projections then they haven't realistically looked at the situation. AT THIS TIME CM TURNER CALLED FOR THE QUESTION AND THE AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION PASSED 3-1 (Mayor Futch dissenting) . MAIN MOTION PASSED 3-1 (Mayor Futch dissenting) . RESOLUTION NO. 208-75 A RESOLUTION REGARDING WASTE WATER CAPACITY ALLOTMENTS IN THE PROPOSED LA~~1A FACILITY ADJOURNMENT Mayor Futch adjourned the meeting at 12:30 a.m. to an executive session to discuss legal matters. APPROVE ~ //c {dV ayor ATTEST ~~u-'~~ Depu y City er Livermore, California CM-30-387 Regular Meeting of September 29, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on September 29, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:00 p.m. with Mayor Futch presiding. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Cm Turner, ~1iller, Staley, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Futch led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. MINUTES September 15, 1975 Page 353, 4th paragraph from bottom, line 5: strike with limitations Page 353, last paragraph should read: It is not possible to use gas tax funds or park funds to provide off-street parking. P. 347, under (Kiosk) item, the last sentence should read - end of line 5: Since it is the City policy there be no off-site sign, t, there should be communication with the Beautification Committee ask- ing that they reconsider the Exxon lease matter. P. 351, the last paragraph prior to items 1), 2), etc. should read: Mr. Corbett stated that the Downtown Merchants Committee and the Chamber of Commerce feel that the following recommendations should be adopted: P. 360, first paragraph, line 4: Cm Miller, as one of two alter- nate representatives, did express, etc. P. 362, after first sentence, add testimony of Cm Turner: Cm Turner stated that in the General Plan there are figures of 80,000 for the City of Livermore in the year 2000. It was noted that this figure is artificial and nobody on the Council feels this figure is what should be used. Cm Turner asked what the Council means when it says they will accept the figure for 1996 but they don't like it. Cw Tirsell explained...etc. Cm Turner asked how the figure will tie into our General Plan and Cw Tirsell explained that not all of our effluent goes down the pipeline. Cm Miller pointed out...etc. Prior to the motion, add the following sentence: Cm Turner stated that he cannot support the statement because he doesn't feel comfortable about the 80,000 for the year 2000. Someone may come back and say your population in 1996 is 63,575, and the total capacity for the Valley is 149,000 - you think that is too high but you set a General Plan figure of 80,000. Cm Miller explained that the 80,000 is an estimate and if the sewers don't allow it or the air quality doesn't allow it, that CM-30-388 September 29, 1975 (Minute Corrections) 80,000 is a number that shimmers in the distance and that point just has to be made clear in the General Plan, and we may not reach 80,000 by 1996. ON MOTION OF C~'1 TIRSELL, SECONDED BY C~1. TURNER AND BY UUANIMOUS VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE l'lEETING OF SEPTE!4BER 15, 1975, WERE .APPROVED, AS CORRECTED. OPEl>! FORUH (El Charro Road) Ray Faltings, 1018 Via Granada, stated that he would like to speak to the Council about the possible opening of El Charro Road to the public. He \'1ould like the Council to keep in mind that if El Charro Road is opened to the public this may negate the possibility of getting Isabel Avenue as a bypass for the City. He added that Lilianthal Road can be used by both Cal Rock Company and Ideal Rock Company to get to I-S80 or I-68D. The El Charro Road overpass was requested because the accident rate at I-S80, where the gravel trucks crossed, was about as high as the accident rate at I-S80 and First Street. Both overpasses were constructed to protect the public. Cm ~1iller noted that he believes the points mentioned by Mr. Faltings should be investigated and reported on by our staff. Cm Turner commented that it might save some time to know that CaVA is doing a study that will include the concerns mentioned by Mr. Faltings and that the study will be submitted to the COVA Chairwoman, Cw Tirsell. ~1r. Musso is in the process of preparing information for the study. CONSENT CALENDAR Report re Limited Parking Zone The Director of Public ~'Jorks reported that the merchants along lip" Street from First Street to Railroad Avenue have requested that a two-hour parking zone be established. In accordance with the City Code a limited parking zone may be established and it is recommended that a resolution adopting the limited parking be adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 209-75 A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 129-72, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO LHHTED PAP-KING ZONES, BY THE ADDITION OF A TWO-HOUR LIMITED PARKING ZONE, TO WIT, P STREET BETWEEN FIRST STREET AND RAILROAD AVENUE, CITY OF LIVERMORE. Report re Encroachment Permit - Cultural Arts ~ The Cultural Arts Council has requested an encroachment permit to allow closure of certain streets in the vicinity of the Carnegie Building for the 7th Annual Festival, on October 4th and 5th, 1976. Cm Turner noted that he would urge that the Police Department pay particular attention to traffic control problems which might occur on 4th Street as a result of streets being closed on these days. C"l- 3 0- 3 8 9 September 29, 1975 Payroll & Claims There were 125 claims in the amount of $364,280.39, dated Sep- tember 22, 1975, and approved by the City Manager. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. COMMUNICATION RE ARTICLE FROM GENERAL AVIATION MAGAZINE A letter was received from the Chairman of the Airport Committee with the enclosure of an article from General Aviation Magazine. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THIS ITEM WAS NOTED FOR FILING. COMMUNICATION RE AB 625 A letter was received from S. Floyd Mori indicating that AB 625 will be reconsidered by the Senate when the LegiSlature reconvenes in January, and hopefully problems will be corrected and the bill will pass at that time. ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE LETTER WAS NOTED FOR FILING. REPORT RE REQUEST BY PROPERTY OWNERS TO SECEDE FROM SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AREA An effort has been made by the staff to indicate on a map those properties whose owners have requested secession from the exist- ing City Sphere of Influence. The map has been displayed at the Council meeting for explanation by Mr. Musso. Mr. Musso illustrated various properties on the maps and identified some ownerships explaining that there are various categories of properties in which owners have expressed dissatisfaction with the City because of development standards or because of the land use established in that area; primarily the property of Caratti, Gonzalvo, Anderson, and Christian. He stated that most of the properties involved have no development plans. Some of the owners requesting deletion from our "Sphere" have requested variances. The City, in various areas, has granted most variances for lot requests - getting ownerships out of the large acreage into something more suitable for residential-rural living. Mayor Futch stated that the request for secession from this many property owners did not come about accidently. There was a petition circulated and some actual solitation of names to appear before the County Board of Supervisors. There was an active campaign to recruit property owners. Cw Tirsell stated that it would appear from looking at the map that about 5% of our undeveloped area, within our Sphere, has applied to secede from our Sphere of Influence. It would therefore be assumed that about 95% of the landowners understand our Sphere or they are not concerned. CM-30-390 ~eptember 29, 1975 (Resolution Calling for Public Information re Nuclear Power Generation) Cw Tirsell stated that the City Council might request transcripts of the meetings to be forwarded to the City Clerk for placement in our Library. It was concluded that a request for the transcripts would be made for the purpose of placement at both City Hall and the Library. Cy Beebe, Manager of the local PG&E Office, stated that certainly nothing could be said in opposition to an informational resolution such as the one presented but he would like to find out if it would be possible to send a letter to the Committee of Diminishing Energy Resources pointing out that the Council took no stand either for or against the Initiative. The Council expressed no objection to sending the letter as requested by Mr. Beebe. Cm Staley stated that the thing that concerns him is that this Com- mittee is studying the energy problems, generally, but they are concentrating primarily on the nuclear power generation. He stated that these are risks which certainly should be examined but perhaps the Council should stress that there are risks in not develop- ing nuclear power as there are in almost any course of action taken in terms of our power development in the next 20-30 years. He feels that once all the evidence has been weighed a decision should not be made to eliminate something just because there are risks involved. He wondered if there would be some way to transmit this philosophy, if the Council does agree, by letter or in the resolution. Cw Tirsell stated that she appreciates what Cm Staley is saying but she believes this would be more appropriate as part of the discussions and not something which should be included in the resolution. Cm Miller stated that this might be an item of debate if the Council were to oppose or support the initiative but not necessarily something that should be expressed at this time when the Council is not render- ing an opinion. INCLUDED IN THE MOTION WAS THE AMENDMENT THAT A COpy OF THE LETTER BE SENT TO REPRESENTATIVE S. FLOYD MORI, SENATOR HOLMDAHL AND THE COMMITTEE. Cm Staley stated that the point he is trying to make is that the Council should urge the public to become informed with not only the nuclear issue but the entire energy issue. CM STALEY MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE IN THE RESOLUTION THAT THE CITIZENS BECOME FULLY INFORMED ON THE NUCLEAR AND RELATED ENERGY ISSUES, AMENDMENT SECONDED BY CM TURNER. ( Cm Miller stated that it is clear that those who support the Nuclear Initiative are going to talk about alternatives and those who oppose the Initiative are going to talk about the risks of those other alternatives because that is a portion of the issue of the Nuclear Initiative. What Cm Staley is encouraging in the way of further information will undoubtedly be widely discussed in these hearings and, consequently, the City Council shouldn't have to do anything other than what is being done at this time. Cm Miller added that PG&E is going to discuss the needs for energy and what the alternatives are as well as oil costs, etc. Those who are in support of the Nuclear Initiative are going to be con- cerned about radioactive transport risks and other things and all CM-30-393 September 29, 1975 (Discussion re Resolution Calling for Public Information re Nuclear Power Generation) of this will be discussed widely with general energy information presented during the discussions. Cm Staley stated that he agrees with this but what he wants is for the Council to urge the citizens to become informed - not the Committee. The Committee will undoubtedly look at all these issues. AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE WORDING SUGGESTED BY CM STALEY PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. J. D. Lee, 622 Bentley Place, stated that he would like to suggest Council consideration of expanding the resolution to include all initiatives and all points of public interest. He stated that the public should be informed on all things they shall vote on. MAIN MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION, AS AMENDED, PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 210-75 A RESOLUTION CALLING FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION RELATING TO NUCLEAR SAFEGUARDS INITIA- TIVE AND ENERGY. Cw Tirsell asked that the City Attorney's office provide the City Council with initiatives, as they are filed, so that the Council can be apprised of them. The City Attorney advised that such initiatives were supplied to the City Clerk. The Clerk was asked to provide the Council with such documents when she receives them. It was noted that the staff will report on this suggestion. REPORT RE SITE PLAN APPROVAL - FOTOMAT The Planning Director reported that a site plan approval permit has been issued to the FOTOMAT Corporation but an appeal has been filed concerning the public works installation. Mr. Musso commented that the site plan application was approved, including a standard zoning condition, and the matter was also referred to the Design Review Committee who amended and approved the design of the building. The issue involving the appeal has to do with the installation of public works improvements along "M" Street. The original development of the building was first a Safeway, then a Value Giant and again revised to include other commercial uses, did not ever include the improvement of "M" Street. Mr. Lee indicated that a map has been posted for the Council's infor- mation showing the location of the current building and that the brown circle indicates the FOTOMAT building location. The improve- ments are indicated by a red line that would normally be required with the site plan approval for a new building. This would include curb, gutter, sidewalks, street trees, area lighting and all the normal public works improvements required. When the Pontiac-Oldsmobile garage was constructed on the east side of "M" Street it was required that the improvements be done for the north end of "Mil Street but the standard improvements for FOTOMAT would be the remainder of "M" Street from First Street. CM MILLER MOVED TO DENY THE APPEAL, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. CM-30-394 September 29, 1975 (Report re Site Plan Approval - Fotomat) Mr. Stunz, representative of FOTOMAT, stated that FOTOMAT has no objection to the on-site improvements required but this is property that is subleased by them from the Safeway Stores, Inc. This request, for standard improvements, would increase development costs from $10,000 to $25,000-$30,000 and they feel this is unreason- able. FOTOMAT has no interest in any kind of ingress from "M" Street, they do not expect to use it at all and they feel this is an unreason- able request and would urge that the City Council allow them to pro- ceed with the development of the FOTOMAT building without the off-site street improvement omligation. He stated that if someone is proposing a large development and creating access from public thoroughfares, they would be expected to pay for streets but FOTOMAT isn't doing anything like this at all. They are using a portion of an existing parking lot to construct a building, using present ingress and egress from First Street, and increasing the value to the owner. He would re- quest that all of B. (Public Works (City Code): be deleted from their obligations. Cm Miller stated that he can sympathize with the problem because FOTOMAT is the lessee and the lessor could legitimately be asked to pay for the public works improvements but this is a matter that would have to be worked out with Payless Paints and not a question that should be before the Council. Cm Staley stated that he would not be able to support the applica- tion for appeal by FOTOMAT, even though he can understand the hardships this will impose. The problem is that the City Ordinance is very clear in requiring the off-street improvements and the development costs should have been clear at the time the lease was negotiated. Mr. Stunz commented that under normal circumstances, if "M" Street were a through street they probably would have considered the possibility of improvements; however, the street is not any longer than the length of the property and is currently being used as a parking lot. Cw Tirsell pointed out that the City is in the process of revising the Central Business District Plan and the disposition of those stub-streets~ not clear. Therefore, the Council is very careful to protect the standard of those streets because they may very well be access to the new shopping area that will occur between "L" and liP". They have not been capable of becoming through streets because the railroad tracks have been blocking them. Now that the tracks are being moved and the land in that area is being opened up, some of these streets may very well provide access. Our citizens cannot be expected to pay, on their tax rate, for the enhancement of that piece of property. Mr. Stunz indicated that when they developed FOTOMAT on "P" Street they were unaware of the railroad location project that would take place after FOTOMAT's construction and now they have been completely cut off from access and service to people. This happens to be the only area they have found that would be suitable for their business. CW TIRSELL CALLED FOR THE QUESTION AND MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY TO DENY THE APPEAL BY FOTOMAT CORPORATION. CM-30-395 September 29, 1975 REPORT RE GRADE SEPARA- TION PROJECT - VARIOUS CONTRACTOR CLAIMS The Public Works Director reported that the contractor for the Grade Separation Project has posted several claims. The staff has responded to the claims but is in need of City Council re- view and formal decision. The claims discussed in written detail are the following: A. Miscellaneous Asphaltic Concrete, Claim No.5, B. Claim for Payment for Extra Field Welds on Rails, #9, C. Rail Material Claim for Escalation of Prices, No.7, "P" Street and Railroad Avenue Intersection Design, and Retention of 10%. Mr. Lee explained that the contractor has expressed primary concern with Items A and B and the matter of retention of the lOt. Other items have been included in the written memorandum for informational purposes. Item A, which relates to asphaltic concrete is a matter of difference in the interpretation of the specifications. The City feels the specifications are clear but the contractor feels he should be paid for replacement of asphaltic concrete at the special price. The City is sure that it is clear in the specifica- tions that it doesn't come under that category. The contractor has been told that if he has further information the City would be will- ing to discuss this item with him. The City Attorney has indicated that this is a matter which cannot be resolved at this time. The City will remain with its position until the contractor has sub- mitted information that would change the City's position. Item B, relates to extra welds on the rails. The plans called for 16 welds for the entire job and also provided that the rails be brought in 1,400 ft. lengths which would require only the 16 welds. The subcontractor, however, chose to bring in smaller lengths which necessitated 50 welds for which he feels he should be reimbursed. The City's position concerning this item is that the subcontractor did not notify the City of the short length of rails that were to be used. The subcontractor contends that this was necessary in order to keep certain streets open which the City feels is not a substantiated reason for using the short rails. The City has denied this claim. The railroad relocation job is not complete and if the subcontractor provides the City with information substantiating his claim for the additional welds, the City might change its position. It is recom- mended that no further action be taken concerning this claim at this time. With respect to the retention of the 10% of the amount owed to the contractor, the normal procedure is for the City to retain 10% of the amount owed to the contractor until 30 days after completion and acceptance of the job. The way this contract is written there is tion of the 10% can be released after 50% completed at the discretion of the City. would suggest that if the underpasses are season and the work is satisfactory, that to the contractor. provision that a por- of the job has been Mr. Lee stated that he open prior to the holiday 5% of the 10% be released Mr. Lee added that in the memorandum to the Council he suggested the possibility of allowing 2.5% now and the other 2.5% if the eM-30-396 September 29, 1975 (Report re Grade Separation Project-Various Claims) underpasses are open by the holiday season. This is not a recom- mendation but is a possibility that could be considered. Mayor Futch stated that he would agree with the staff recommendations concerning Claims #5 and #9. Cm Miller noted that Claim #7 was mentioned in the memorandum but was not discussed by Mr. Lee at this time and would like some infor- mation on that claim. Mr. Lee explained that Claim "C" (#7) is a claim for additional payment because the contractor claims that the cost for the railroad material has escalated. The contractor makes reference to Item 3 of Addendum A, in the specifications, which provides that in the event railroad material was not available there would be a basis for additional negotiations. The City believes that this is not the case - materials were available and the contractor was able to purchase them. The price of the materials is something the City is not invol- ved in and the contractor made a bid for a unit price on the material. It is the City's position that this portion of the specification does not apply to this case. c,m Turner sta,ted th~t he w?uld be opposed to giving th~ ~~~~"t:~l t~ '1:% be~a.Ese untl.l .the ]ob h~s b7~P~~!:~~~_ ~~~J-dty -C~ . i'lv;r~.:'~~\ /. '. ~l.S was wh~was a9re1!d upo the ~'..l(., City an t e cOntractor prior to commencement of the project. ~ ' If there is a problem and a subcontractor has not been paid, you've got funds to pay him (hopefully within that 10%). Then there is a problem with the title company where you have that 30-day waiting period and there may be additional claims within that period. He would hope to have the contractor perform the contract as agreed. Mr. Lee commented that the points made by Cm Turner are very valid. At some point in the contract, if the project is late but a large percentage of the work has been done, perhaps there might be justi- fication for a reduction in the 10% to be paid to the contractor. 1'/ He emp~as~zed that he is not recommending this but what Cm Turner\A~t has sal.d l.S correct. ~.~ If the Council could determine there were outstanding bill~erJ~ '\ ing the requested 5% the Council would probably be safe in releasing the 5% but the Council may not wish to. Cm Staley felt that Cm Turner is absolutely correct and that it is good business to hold a good portion of the money owed to the con- tractor until completion of the project. On the other hand, the Council has a high interest in having those overpasses completed or open for traffic by December 1st. While Cm Staley is not agreed to allowing the contractor any portion of his money, today, he would be willing to seriously discuss up to 5% being given to the contractor if these overpasses are opened by this date. He felt this would be an incentive to the contractor to get the work done, weather permitting. em Staley also felt the other 5% would be sufficient to cover the remaining construction. Mayor Futch stated that he also favors the position expressed by Cm Staley. The Council wants to do everything possible to encourage early completion of the overpasses. He felt it would be reasonable to advance the 5%vbecause most of the project will be completed by that time. ar .::c.I...v ~ ;::Ut..-<.- ~'U........r-<.4 ~ -t;:,-T-....~:J:llJ/._J, ~c- Cm Staley stated that what the Council is talking about in terms,1 of percentage is a large amount of money but he doesn't deny that there should be a reserve. The 10% of the project going to the contractor amounts to $220,000. If the Council releases 5% the contractor will be getting $llO,OOO on December 1st and the City will retain $110,000. If the project is 90% complete the reserve should be sufficient. CM-30-397 September 29, 1975 (Report re Grade Separation project-Various Contractor Claims) Cm Miller stated that if the project is 90% complete this could be defined in terms of financial or physical completion. If it were financial you are still $220,000 out. Therefore, if you cut back to $110,000 you have $110,000 at risk. Mr. Lee explained that he doesn't agree there would be $110,000 at risk. For example, if they were to discontinue work for some rea- son when the project is 90% complete, assuming there is $110,000 worth of work yet to be done, there are performance bonds which would complete the job and the 10% is used as an incentive to com- plete the work-and to pay any claims that might be made against the contractor within that 30 day period after completion and acceptance. These claims would also be covered by the bonds but it would take from two to five years to recover the money. Mr. Lee commented that the City retains the 10% and if a subcontrac- tor hasn't been paid he will file a claim, and the prime contractor will pay him off within 30 days and then the City will release what- ever has been retained - normally 10%. Mr. Lee stated that 5% would be adequate and this method is used by the state and written into their contract, and this is the reason it is included in this contract. Cm Staley stated that he would like to know, if on December 1st the work is 90% complete the contractor will have received only 81% of the money because the City has been holding lO% of each paycheck. In other words, if the City releases an additional 5% that does not leave the City with only 5% of the total project money - the City will really have 14% of the project money at that point. Mr. Lee indicated this is true. Cm Turner stated that the Council should be aware of the fact that it doesn't matter how far along the project is with respect to per- centage points. The important factor is who has been paid. If the contractor hasn't paid a subcontractor who has done 25% of the work then obviously a 10% hold back will not be sufficient. Cw Tirsell stated that she believes the points that have been raised are very good; however this is an informational item and she is not prepared to make a decision at this time. At this time she believes the Council does not wish to give the impres- sion that they have any intention of releasing money now. em Miller stated that he has a position similar to Cm Turner's in that he is not willing to submit, at this time, release of any of the money. However, he would be willing to again discuss the matter on December 1st but not before that date. He stated that he feels Cm Turner's arguments are very real. THE COUNCIL CONCLUDED THAT THIS ITEM WILL AGAIN BE DISCUSSED AS AN AGENDA ITEM AT THE DECEMBER 1ST COUNCIL MEETING, ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RECESS (--~\ Mayor Futch called for a brief recess after which the Council meet- ing reconvened with all members of the Council present. DISCUSSION RE GENERAL PLAN GROWTH RATE Mayor Futch stated that the General Plan growth rate was continued from the meeting of last week and was inadvertently left off of the agenda. The Council will now discuss this item. CM-30-398 September 29, 1975 (Discussion Re General Plan Growth Rate) Cw Tirsell stated that the Planning Consultants reported to the Council two weeks ago that they were concerned about the question submitted to them by the Council with respect to the cumulative growth rate of 2% for the next five years. The Consultants felt the growth rate was not supportable and asked that the Planning Commission and City Council reconsider this matter. The Planning Commission has considered the matter and unanimously adopted a growth rate consistent with the Citizens Committee recommendations. Cw Tirsell added that, on the basis of the discussions by the P.C. and the Consultants, she would support this recommendation. Her consideration is that the remarks they have made throughout the whole General Plan Study is that Livermore will have many constraints upon the growth of the City; one will be sewage capacity, one will be water availability, air pollution problems, and finances. The Consultants have requested that Livermore not plan our General Plan around any of these constraints but rather look at what should logic- ally be the planning for our City in the Year 2000. Does the Council agree that a City with a population of about 80,000 is best for us in the Year 2000? This would provide for a complete community on the north side with a population of about 30,000 with viability and enough population for commercial development and perhaps their own high school. On the south there would be in-filling. Cw Tirsell stated that she believes the City has said, "yes", given the best of all worlds, were there no constraints upon us, Livermore would be planning for a City of that size and this is the City we would hope to build. Cw Tirsell stated that it isn't the best of all worlds and we do have constraints upon us and the consultants have asked the Council not to make anyone of the constraints a limit upon our ability to grow because they are simply solved by money. The sewer problems can be solved by money, air pollution problems can be solved with money, and what we are planning is the ideal community but we have the listed constraints upon us which are listed in the General Plan. Sewage capacity is the number one constraint and is intertwined with air pollution as the overriding restriction. Therefore, in the first five years it would seem unlikely that the growth rate predicted would be reached because of the constraints that will so be listed. However, the Council is concerned with this "ideal" community that we are try- ing to build and Cw Tirsell feels the Council can support a recom- mendation that comes from the Planning Consultant and the Council assumes this will be challenged. The General Plan will have con- straints in it and our Planning Consultants are telling us that they can defend and will have to defend the 1~-2% growth rate. Cw Tirsell stated that in the Planning Commission discussion she did learn an important point and that is, this is not a cumulative action. In the early part of our General Plan period there will be these constraints that have been mentioned and they will not be solved by any stretch of the imagination. That, in itself, will dictate a lower growth rate. However, the Council will make justification for that and this has been so noted in the ordinance the Council is reviewing this evening. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COM- MISSION THAT THE MAXIMUM GROWTH RATE IN ANY YEAR BE 1~-2%. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MAYOR FUTCH. Cm Miller stated that first of all, the figure 80,000 for the Year 2000, was a number taken by distorting the Citizens Committee's recommendation. The 1~-2% is a distortion of the Citizens Committee's recommendation - it says, in so many words, 1 to 2%. Cm Miller added that Cw Tirsell has talked about the advantages of a population of 80,000 in the Year 2000 having to do with planning issues and if planning were done in an "environmental vacuum" the arguments made by Cw Tirsell would be absolutely correct. We would CM-30-399 September 29, 1975 (Discussion Re General Plan Growth Rate) indeed have a viable City in the sense mentioned by Cw Tirsell. However, that viable City looking at today's circumstances, is a viable City with many commuters and the associated air pollution. It is not true that the City can solve air pollution problems with money. Cw Tirsell interjected that she didn't say "we" can solve the air pollution problem with money but rather "it" can be solved with money. Cm Miller stated that it can be solved with money but that money is not under the City's control. We can solve our sewer problems, if that were our sole problem, by passing bond issues - that is under our control. Schools are under our control - we can pass bond issues or use a tax override but there is nothing we can do in this Valley through the expenditure of our tax money which can help the air qual- ity problem. There is absolutely no way this can be done, so to argue that we can solve that problem with money depends upon money being ex- pended elsewhere, over which we have no control. em Miller stated that he would like to make the following arguments about why the City should not accept the 1~-2% growth rate, as follows: At the LAVWMA meeting last Thursday URS representatives, preparing environmental impact statements, have asked what population would guarantee meeting the federal air quality standards. After some hesitation it was mentioned that their estimates would be 55,000 people in the Valley. Since we have 110,000 people in the Valley it is clear we are not going to meet the federal air quality stan- dards. It is also equally clear that we can't get rid of half the population. The 55,000 is, indeed, an estimate and estimates have error bounds but the point is that this estimate is less than the existing population for the Valley. A similar conclusion was reached in the A. D. Little Report - that there be no further growth in the Livermore Valley if we were to ever meet the federal air quality standards and a similar conclusion was reached by our Smog Study Committee. Our Smog Committee stated that if 1/3 of the Valley can go to public transportation there could be a 1% growth rate until 1990. There is obviously a serious problem and a whole series of reports tell us that residential growth in this Valley will keep us from ever meeting the federal air quality standards. Consequently, for the protection of public health, which is a responsibility of pub- lic officials, we cannot allow residential development in this Valley until the air quality does meet the federal air quality standards. He stated that in his opinion this is not only a duty in principle but is provided for by law in the California Environ- mental Quality Act which says, in part, that "the guiding criteria for pUblic decision is the long term enhancement of the environment". We certainly can't enhance the environment, in the long run, if the short run growth permitted prevents the City from ever meeting en- vironmental standards. Cm Miller stated that he would like to argue that it is, or should be, an obvious principle that you don't take chances with the "public's health". He stated that he would argue that this is a conservative view and would also argue that it is bordering on "reckless" to bet that technology will save us and that the automobile emission controls will work. These kinds of arguments have been used for 40 years in Los Angeles and obviously to no avail. em Miller continued to say that limited growth in the Valley is pri- marily an environmental and public health issue. In his opinion' the issue is clear cut. The facts for the Valley provide the racts for a successful resolution, in the City's favor, in the event of inevi- table developer law suits. The trends of court decisions appear CM-30-400 I September 29, 1975 \" (Request of Property Owners to Secede from City Sphere of Influence) Cw Tirsell continued to say that most of the people in the I-580 area who have requested deletion are requesting zoning. This would mean that if they were to receive the commercial zoning there would be approximately 125-140 acres of commercial zoning requesting septic tanks and the City would naturally oppose a request for septic tanks. This is one of the concerns she has in reviewing this matter. The City Attorney commented that LAFCO will have a hearing on this matter but it will not be a real public hearing at this time. He does plan to attend the hearing and a draft EIR will be submitted as well as a staff report. Cm Miller stated that he would presume our court reporter will also attend this hearing and Mr. Logan indicated that this can be arranged. The Council directed that a court reporter attend this hearing. Cw Tirsell stated that the City has, in the past, sent an excellent letter to the LAFCO Commissioners and would like this information which has been presented tonight, to be included in another letter to them. Cm Miller mentioned that there are land use conflicts involved in this issue and the City would like to know if LAFCO intends to settle land use conflicts, as an administrative body. REPORT RE EAST AVENUE BIKEWAY Mr. Lee reported that he has prepared a progress report concerning the East Avenue Bikeway with some preliminary cost estimates for acquiring rights-of-way and placing improvements on the north side of East Avenue for a bikeway. It is estimated, roughly, that the cost to the County would be $32,000 and the cost to the City $27,000. Mr. Parness has met with Supervisor Murphy on this matter and has asked that Mr. Lee report to the Council that Supervisor Murphy was receptive to the idea of proceeding with a bike path on the north side; however this was not a commitment. At least he did express interest in this proposal and has asked for additional information from the City Manager. em Turner wondered when the final cost figure might be available and Mr. Lee commented that he would assume the County will work on their portion of the cost while the City works on its cost and that this should be at least 2-3 weeks. Cm Turner wondered about how long it would take to get this project underway and Mr. Lee indicated that acquiring the property could take quite a bit of time. The City, however, could be ready for construction at the time the right-of-way acquisition has been settled. Generally, as a rule of thumb, this type of acquisition takes about six months. ~ ( Greg Davis, 316 Ontario, wondered if anything could be done to expedite completion of the East Avenue Bikeway. Mayor Futch commented that the only delay, as far as the City knows would be the acquisition of the property. If the City can negotiate something without having to go to court the process will take less time. If, however, property has to be condemned either by the County or the City the project will take more time. CM-30-39l I September 29, 1975 (Report re E~st Avenue Bikeway) It was noted that initial delay will be getting approval by the Board of Supervisors. Cm Miller stated that as he recalls the Council has not taken formal action to direct the staff to begin negotiations and acquisition of the necessary parcels for this project and perhaps this item should be placed as an agenda item in order for the Council to take some kind of formal action. Mr. Lee commented that when the right-of-way for East Avenue is acquired, on the north side, the City should acquire the total amount needed for the widening of East Avenue. We have a coopera- tive agreement going on with the County with respect to the widening of East Avenue and as soon as the right-of-way lines have been settled for the 108 foot right-of-way then the City would be in a position to acquire the right-of-way needed to serve the bike path. em Miller felt it might be helpful if Mr. Lee would encourage the County to come to a decision on the total widening in order that the City might proceed with this matter. DISCUSSION RE RESOLU- TION CALLING FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION RE NUCLEAR POWER GENERATION At the meeting of September 22nd, Barbara Hartley requested that a resolution calling for public information and discussion on nuclear power generation be placed on the Council agenda. The matter has been referred to this meeting for formal consideration. Barbara Hartley, 513 Brierly Court, stated that this resolution strictly urges that the citizens of Livermore attend or study the hearings that will be held in Sacramento concerning the Nuclear Safeguard Initiative. The hearings will be sponsored by the Committee for Energy and Diminishing Materials and will be held from October 14th, weekly, through December 10th. Through this process all opinions and sides to the story will be aired. It would seem perfectly obvious that this resolution is for the purpose of educating the citizens. Mayor Futch stated that he is assuming Mrs. Hartley is not asking the Council to get into debate of this issue but rather is asking that the resolution be adopted urging citizens to become informed about this matter. Mrs. Hartley indicated this is correct and she believes this is a necessary step in democracy - having citizens fully educated and informed so they can vote intelligently on this issue. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION PRESENTED BY MRS. HARTLEY, AC M1ENDBD BY 'fIlE! COUNCIL. MOTION SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Cm Turner commented that this item is important enough that a re- presentative should be sent to this hearing and report back to the City Council. Mayor Futch noted that there will be a number of meetings con- cerning this item and whether or not a representative would be able to attend would depend upon whether or not someone has the time available. Cm Staley noted that there will be 16 meeting days concerning this item. CM-30-392 I 'WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENT: THE ADDITION OF #5: CONCLUDE THAT THIS RESOLUTION. DOES NOT INDICATE SUPPORT FOR OR OPPOSITION TO THE ABOVE STATED INITIATlVE".:-U l~t Copies of our resolution will be sent to our legislators by cover letter. a'~~~ I 'WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENT: THE ADDITION OF #5: CONCLUDE THAT THIS RESOLUTION, DOES NOT INDICATE SUPPORT FOR OR OPPOSITION TO THE ABOVE STATED INITIATIVE".~ ~t Copies of our resolution will be sent to our legislators by cover letter. . ~~~ ~eptember 29, 1975 (Resolution Calling for Public Information re Nuclear Power Generation) Cw Tirsell stated that the City Council might request transcripts of the meetings to be forwarded to the City Clerk for placement in our Library. It was concluded that a request for the transcripts would be made for the purpose of placement at both City Hall and the Library. Cy Beebe, Manager of the local PG&E Office, stated that certainly nothing could be said in opposition to an informational resolution such as the one presented but he would like to find out if it would be possible to send a letter to the Committee of Diminishing Energy Resources pointing out that the Council took no stand either for or against the Initiative. The Council expressed no objection to sending the letter as requested by Mr. Beebe. Cm Staley stated that the thing that concerns him is that this Com- mittee is studying the energy problems, generally, but they are concentrating primarily on the nuclear power generation. He stated that these are risks which certainly should be examined but perhaps the Council should stress that there are risks in not develop- ing nuclear power as there are in almost any course of action taken in terms of our power development in the next 20-30 years. He feels that once all the evidence has been weighed a decision should not be made to eliminate something just because there are risks involved. He wondered if there would be some way to transmit this philosophy, if the Council does agree, by letter or in the resolution. Cw Tirsell stated that she appreciates what Cm Staley is saying but she believes this would be more appropriate as part of the discussions and not something which should be included in the resolution. Cm Miller stated that this might be an item of debate if the Council were to oppose or support the initiative but not necessarily something that should be expressed at this time when the Council is not render- ing an opinion. INCLUDED IN THE MOTION WAS THE AMENDMENT THAT A COpy OF THE LETTER BE SENT TO REPRESENTATIVE S. FLOYD MORI, SENATOR HOLMDAHL AND THE COMMITTEE. Cm Staley stated that the point he is trying to make is that the Council should urge the public to become informed with not only the nuclear issue but the entire energy issue. CM STALEY MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE IN THE RESOLUTION THAT THE CITIZENS BECOME FULLY INFORMED ON THE NUCLEAR AND RELATED ENERGY ISSUES, AMENDMENT SECONDED BY CM TURNER. ( Cm Miller stated that it is clear that those who support the Nuclear Initiative are going to talk about alternatives and those who oppose the Initiative are going to talk about the risks of those other alternatives because that is a portion of the issue of the Nuclear Initiative. What Cm Staley is encouraging in the way of further information will undoubtedly be widely discussed in these hearings and, consequently, the City Council shouldn't have to do anything other than what is being done at this time. Cm Miller added that PG&E is going to discuss the needs for energy and what the alternatives are as well as oil costs, etc. Those who are in support of the Nuclear Initiative are going to be con- cerned about radioactive transport risks and other things and all CM-30-393 September 29, 1975 (Discussion re Resolution Calling for Public Information re Nuclear Power Generation) of this will be discussed widely with general energy information presented during the discussions. Cm Staley stated that he agrees with this but what he wants is for the Council to urge the citizens to become informed - not the Committee. The Committee will undoubtedly look at all these issues. AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE WORDING SUGGESTED BY CM STALEY PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. J. D. Lee, 622 Bentley Place, stated that he would like to suggest Council consideration of expanding the resolution to include all initiatives and all points of public interest. He stated that the public should be informed on all things they shall vote on. MAIN MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION, AS AMENDED, PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 210-75 A RESOLUTION CALLING FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION RELATING TO NUCLEAR SAFEGUARDS INITIA- TIVE AND ENERGY. Cw Tirsell asked that the City Attorney's office provide the City Council with initiatives, as they are filed, so that the Council can be apprised of them. The City Attorney advised that such initiatives were supplied to the City Clerk. The Clerk was asked to provide the Council with such documents when she receives them. It was noted that the staff will report on this suggestion. REPORT RE SITE PLAN APPROVAL - FOTOMAT The Planning Director reported that a site plan approval permit has been issued to the FOTOMAT Corporation but an appeal has been filed concerning the public works installation. Mr. Musso commented that the site plan application was approved, including a standard zoning condition, and the matter was also referred to the Design Review Committee who amended and approved the design of the building. The issue involving the appeal has to do with the installation of public works improvements along "M" Street. The original development of the building was first a Safeway, then a Value Giant and again revised to include other commercial uses, did not ever include the improvement of "M" Street. Mr. Lee indicated that a map has been posted for the Council's infor- mation showing the location of the current building and that the brown circle indicates the FOTOMAT building location. The improve- ments are indicated by a red line that would normally be required with the site plan approval for a new building. This would include curb, gutter, sidewalks, street trees, area lighting and all the normal pUblic works improvements required. When the Pontiac-Oldsmobile garage was constructed on the east side of "M" Street it was required that the improvements be done for the north end of "M" Street but the standard improvements for FOTOMAT would be the remainder of "M" Street from First Street. CM MILLER MOVED TO DENY THE APPEAL, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. CM-30-394 September 29, 1975 (Report re Site Plan Approval - Fotomat) Mr. Stunz, representative of FOTOMAT, stated that FOTOMAT has no objection to the on-site improvements required but this is property that is subleased by them from the Safeway Stores, Inc. This request, for standard improvements, would increase development costs from $10,000 to $25,000-$30,000 and they feel this is unreason- able. FOTOMAT has no interest in any kind of ingress from "M" Street, they do not expect to use it at all and they feel this is an unreason- able request and would urge that the City Council allow them to pro- ceed with the development of the FOTOMAT building without the off-site street improvement o~ligation. He stated that if someone is proposing a large development and creating access from public thoroughfares, they would be expected to pay for streets but FOTOMAT isn't doing anything like this at all. They are using a portion of an existing parking lot to construct a building, using present ingress and egress from First Street, and increasing the value to the owner. He would re- quest that all of B. {Public Works (City Code): be deleted from their obligations. Cm Miller stated that he can sympathize with the problem because FOTOMAT is the lessee and the lessor could legitimately be asked to pay for the public works improvements but this is a matter that would have to be worked out with Payless Paints and not a question that should be before the Council. Cm Staley stated that he would not be able to support the applica- tion for appeal by FOTOMAT, even though he can understand the hardships this will impose. The problem is that the City Ordinance is very clear in requiring the off-street improvements and the development costs should have been clear at the time the lease was negotiated. Mr. Stunz commented that under normal circumstances, if "M" Street were a through street they probably would have considered the possibility of improvements; however, the street is not any longer than the length of the property and is currently being used as a parking lot. Cw Tirsell pointed out that the City is in the process of revising the Central Business District Plan and the disposition of those stub-streets~ not clear. Therefore, the Council is very careful to protect the standard of those streets because they may very well be access to the new shopping area that will occur between "L" and liP". They have not been capable of becoming through streets because the railroad tracks have been blocking them. Now that the tracks are being moved and the land in that area is being opened up, some of these streets may very well provide access. Our citizens cannot be expected to pay, on their tax rate, for the enhancement of that piece of property. Mr. Stunz indicated that when they developed FOTOMAT on lip" Street they were unaware of the railroad location project that would take place after FOTOMAT's construction and now they have been completely cut off from access and service to people. This happens to be the only area they have found that would be suitable for their business. CW TIRSELL CALLED FOR THE QUESTION AND MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY TO DENY THE APPEAL BY FOTOMAT CORPORATION. (' I CM-30-395 September 29, 1975 REPORT RE GRADE SEPARA- TION PROJECT - VARIOUS CONTRACTOR CLAIMS The Public Works Director reported that the contractor for the Grade Separation Project has posted several claims. The staff has responded to the claims but is in need of City Council re- view and formal decision. The claims discussed in written detail are the following: A. Miscellaneous Asphaltic Concrete, Claim No.5, B. Claim for Payment for Extra Field Welds on Rails, #9, C. Rail Material Claim for Escalation of Prices, No.7, lip" Street and Railroad Avenue Intersection Design, and Retention of 10%. Mr. Lee explained that the contractor has expressed primary concern with Items A and B and the matter of retention of the 10%. Other items have been included in the written memorandum for informational purposes. Item A, which relates to asphaltic concrete is a matter of difference in the interpretation of the specifications. The City feels the specifications are clear but the contractor feels he should be paid for replacement of asphaltic concrete at the special price. The City is sure that it is clear in the specifica- tions that it doesn't come under that category. The contractor has been told that if he has further information the City would be will- ing to discuss this item with him. The City Attorney has indicated that this is a matter which cannot be resolved at this time. The City will remain with its position until the contractor has sub- mitted information that would change the City's position. Item B, relates to extra welds on the rails. The plans called for 16 welds for the entire job and also provided that the rails be brought in 1,400 ft. lengths which would require only the 16 welds. The subcontractor, however, chose to bring in smaller lengths which necessitated 50 welds for which he feels he should be reimbursed. The City's position concerning this item is that the subcontractor did not notify the City of the short length of rails that were to be used. The subcontractor contends that this was necessary in order to keep certain streets open which the City feels is not a substantiated reason for using the short rails. The City has denied this claim. The railroad relocation job is not oomplete and if the subcontractor provides the City with information substantiating his claim for the additional welds, the City might change its position. It is recom- mended that no further action be taken concerning this claim at this time. With respect to the retention of the 10% of the amount owed to the contractor, the normal procedure is for the City to retain 10% of the amount owed to the contractor until 30 days after completion and acceptance of the job. The way this contract is written there is tion of the 10% can be released after 50% completed at the discretion of the City. would suggest that if the underpasses are season and the work is satisfactory, that to the contractor. provision that a por- of the job has been Mr. Lee stated that he open prior to the holiday 5% of the 10% be released Mr. Lee added that in the memorandum to the Council he suggested the possibility of allowing 2.5% now and the other 2.5% if the eM-30-396 September 29, 1975 (Report re Grade Separation Project-Various Claims) underpasses are open by the holiday season. This is not a recom- mendation but is a possibility that could be considered. Mayor Futch stated that he would agree with the staff recommendations concerning Claims #5 and #9. em Miller noted that Claim #7 was mentioned in the memorandum but was not discussed by Mr. Lee at this time and would like some infor- mation on that claim. Mr. Lee explained that Claim "C" (#7) is a claim for additional payment because the contractor claims that the cost for the railroad material has escalated. The contractor makes reference to Item 3 of Addendum A, in the specifications, which provides that in the event railroad material was not available there would be a basis for additional negotiations. The City believes that this is not the case - materials were available and the contractor was able to purchase them. The price of the materials is something the City is not invol- ved in and the contractor made a bid for a unit price on the material. It is the City's position that this portion of the specification does not apply to this case. em, Turner stated that he would be opposed to giving the ssn~~t~c ~~~i Z~^ 9t% bekCl)!se until the job h~s b~~P~~.!-~~~!1~~Aty -C~ ' ~~~:~f': " '. ~l.s was wh~was i9re~a upo~t e f.'..". . it /, ~ ' City an t e contractor prior to commencement of the project. If there is a problem and a subcontractor has not been paid, you've got funds to pay him (hopefully within that 10%). Then there is a problem with the title company where you have that 30-day waiting period and there may be additional claims within that period. He would hope to have the contractor perform the contract as agreed. Mr. Lee commented that the points made by Cm Turner are very valid. At some point in the contract, if the project is late but a large percentage of the work has been done, perhaps there might be justi- fication for a reduction in the 10% to be paid to the contractor. ,J He emphasized that he is not recommending this but what Cm Turner \\.)~l has said is correct. ~~' If the Council could determine there were outstanding bill~e1rJ~\ ing the requested 5% the Council would probably be safe in releasing the 5% but the Council may not wish to. Cm Staley felt that Cm Turner is absolutely correct and that it is good business to hold a good portion of the money owed to the con- tractor until completion of the project. On the other hand, the Council has a high interest in having those overpasses completed or open for traffic by December 1st. While Cm Staley is not agreed to allowing the contractor any portion of his money, today, he would be willing to seriously discuss up to 5% being given to the contractor if these overpasses are opened by this date. He felt this would be an incentive to the contractor to get the work done, weather permitting. em Staley also felt the other 5% would be sufficient to cover the remaining construction. Mayor Futch stated that he also favors the position expressed by Cm Staley. The Council wants to do everything possible to encourage early completion of the overpasses. He felt it would be reasonable to advance the 5%vbecause most of the project will be completed by that time. t:tr ~ ~ :;;lti.-i.-' "aZu..,....;.....w ~ t;:.. /T-ic /,/j!{)j I. _ J1, a~c- Cm Staley stated that what the Council is talking about in termsj of percentage is a large amount of money but he doesn't deny that there should be a reserve. The 10% of the project going to the contractor amounts to $220,000. If the Council releases 5% the contractor will be getting $110,000 on December 1st and the City will ~etain $110,000. If the project is 90% complete the reserve should be sufficient. CM-30-397 September 29, 1975 (Report re Grade Separation Project-Various Contractor Claims) Cm Miller stated that if the project is 90% complete this could be defined in terms of financial or physical completion. If it were financial you are still $220,000 out. Therefore, if you cut back to $110,000 you have $110,000 at risk. Mr. Lee explained that he doesn't agree there would be $110,000 at risk. For example, if they were to discontinue work for some rea- son when the project is 90% complete, assuming there is $110,000 worth of work yet to be done, there are performance bonds which would complete the job and the 10% is used as an incentive to com- plete the work-and to pay any claims that might be made against the contractor within that 30 day period after completion and acceptance. These claims would also be covered by the bonds but it would take from two to five years to recover the money. Mr. Lee commented that the City retains the 10% and if a subcontrac- tor hasn't been paid he will file a claim, and the prime contractor will pay him off within 30 days and then the City will release what- ever has been retained - normally 10%. Mr. Lee stated that 5% would be adequate and this method is used by the state and written into their contract, and this is the reason it is included in this contract. em Staley stated that he would like to know, if on December 1st the work is 90% complete the contractor will have received only 81% of the money because the City has been holding 10% of each paycheck. In other words, if the City releases an additional 5% that does not leave the City with only 5% of the total project money - the City will really have 14% of the project money at that point. Mr. Lee indicated this is true. Cm Turner stated that the Council should be aware of the fact that it doesn't matter how far along the project is with respect to per- centage points. The important factor is who has been paid. If the contractor hasn't paid a subcontractor who has done 25% of the work then obviously a 10% hold back will not be sufficient. Cw Tirsell stated that she believes the points that have been raised are very good; however this is an informational item and she is not prepared to make a decision at this time. At this time she believes the Council does not wish to give the impres- sion that they have any intention of releasing money now. em Miller stated that he has a position similar to Cm Turner's in that he is not willing to submit, at this time, release of any of the money. However, he would be willing to again discuss the matter on December lst but not before that date. He stated that he feels Cm Turner's arguments are very real. THE COUNCIL CONCLUDED THAT THIS ITEM WILL AGAIN BE DISCUSSED AS AN AGENDA ITEM AT THE DECEMBER 1ST COUNCIL MEETING, ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RECESS Mayor Futch called for a brief recess after which the Council meet- ing reconvened with all members of the Council present. ~~ ( \ DISCUSSION RE GENERAL PLAN GROWTH RATE Mayor Futch stated that the General Plan growth rate was continued from the meeting of last week and was inadvertently left off of the agenda. The Council will now discuss this item. CM-30-398 September 29, 1975 (Discussion Re General Plan Growth Rate) Cw Tirsell stated that the Planning Consultants reported to the Council two weeks ago that they were concerned about the question submitted to them by the Council with respect to the cumulative growth rate of 2% for the next five years. The Consultants felt the growth rate was not supportable and asked that the Planning Commission and City Council reconsider this matter. The Planning Commission has considered the matter and unanimously adopted a growth rate consistent with the Citizens Committee recommendations. Cw Tirsell added that, on the basis of the discussions by the P.C. and the Consultants, she would support this recommendation. Her consideration is that the remarks they have made throughout the whole General Plan Study is that Livermore will have many constraints upon the growth of the City; one will be sewage capacity, one will be water availability, air pollution problems, and finances. The Consultants have requested that Livermore not plan our General Plan around any of these constraints but rather look at what should logic- ally be the planning for our City in the Year 2000. Does the Council agree that a City with a population of about 80,000 is best for us in the Year 2000? This would provide for a complete community on the north side with a population of about 30,000 with viability and enough population for commercial development and perhaps their own high school. On the south there would be in-filling. Cw Tirsell stated that she believes the City has said, "yes", given the best of all worlds, were there no constraints upon us, Livermore would be planning for a City of that size and this is the City we would hope to build. Cw Tirsell stated that it isn't the best of all worlds and we do have constraints upon us and the consultants have asked the Council not to make anyone of the constraints a limit upon our ability to grow because they are simply solved by money. The sewer problems can be solved by money, air pollution problems can be solved with money, and what we are planning is the ideal community but we have the listed constraints upon us which are listed in the General Plan. Sewage capacity is the number one constraint and is intertwined with air pollution as the overriding restriction. Therefore, in the first five years it would seem unlikely that the growth rate predicted would be reached because of the constraints that will so be listed. However, the Council is concerned with this "ideal" community that we are try- ing to build and Cw Tirsell feels the Council can support a recom- mendation that comes from the Planning Consultant and the Council assumes this will be challenged. The General Plan will have con- straints in it and our Planning Consultants are telling us that they can defend and will have to defend the 1~-2% growth rate. Cw Tirsell stated that in the Planning Commission discussion she did learn an important point and that is, this is not a cumulative action. In the early part of our General Plan period there will be these constraints that have been mentioned and they will not be solved by any stretch of the imagination. That, in itself, will dictate a lower growth rate. However, the Council will make justification for that and this has been so noted in the ordinance the Council is reviewing this evening. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COM- MISSION THAT THE MAXIMUM GROWTH RATE IN ANY YEAR BE 1~-2%. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MAYOR FUTCH. Cm Miller stated that first of all, the figure 80,000 for the Year 2000, was a number taken by distorting the Citizens Committee's recommendation. The 1~-2% is a distortion of the Citizens Committee's recommendation - it says, in so many words, 1 to 2%. Cm Miller added that Cw Tirsell has talked about the advantages of a population of 80,000 in the Year 2000 having to do with planning issues and if planning were done in an "environmental vacuum" the arguments made by Cw Tirsell would be absolutely correct. We would CM-30-399 September 29, 1975 (Discussion Re General Plan Growth Rate) indeed have a viable City in the sense mentioned by Cw Tirsell. However, that viable City looking at today's circumstances, is a viable City with many commuters and the associated air pollution. It is not true that the City can solve air pollution problems with money. Cw Tirsell interjected that she didn't say "we" can solve the air pollution problem with money but rather "it" can be solved with money. em Miller stated that it can be solved with money but that money is not under the City's control. We can solve our sewer problems, if that were our sole problem, by passing bond issues - that is under our control. Schools are under our control - we can pass bond issues or use a tax override but there is nothing we can do in this Valley through the expenditure of our tax money which can help the air qual- ity problem. There is absolutely no way this can be done, so to argue that we can solve that problem with money depends upon money being ex- pended elsewhere, over which we have no control. Cm Miller stated that he would like to make the following arguments about why the City should not accept the 1~-2% growth rate, as follows: At the LAVWMA meeting last Thursday URS representatives, preparing environmental impact statements, have asked what population would guarantee meeting the federal air quality standards. After some hesitation it was mentioned that their estimates would be 55,000 people in the Valley. Since we have 110,000 people in the Valley it is clear we are not going to meet the federal air quality stan- dards. It is also equally clear that we can't get rid of half the population. The 55,000 is, indeed, an estimate and estimates have error bounds but the point is that this estimate is less than the existing population for the Valley. A similar conclusion was reached in the A. D. Little Report - that there be no further growth in the Livermore Valley if we were to ever meet the federal air quality standards and a similar conclusion was reached by our Smog Study Committee. Our Smog Committee stated that if 1/3 of the Valley can go to public transportation there could be a 1% growth rate until 1990. There is obviously a serious problem and a whole series of reports tell us that residential growth in this Valley will keep us from ever meeting the federal air quality standards. Consequently, for the protection of public health, which is a responsibility of pub- lic officials, we cannot allow residential development in this Valley until the air quality does meet the federal air quality standards. He stated that in his opinion this is not only a duty in principle but is provided for by law in the California Environ- mental Quality Act which says, in part, that "the guiding criteria for public decision is the long term enhancement of the environment". We certainly can't enhance the environment, in the long run, if the short run growth permitted prevents the City from ever meeting en- vironmental standards. Cm Miller stated that he would like to argue that it is, or should be, an obvious principle that you don't take chances with the "public's health". He stated that he would argue that this is a conservative view and would also argue that it is bordering on "reckless" to bet that technology will save us and that the automobile emission controls will work. These kinds of arguments have been used for 40 years in Los Angeles and obviously to no avail. Cm Miller continued to say that limited growth in the Valley is pri- marily an environmental and pUblic health issue. In his opinion'the issue is clear cut. The facts for the Valley provide the facts for a successful resolution, in the City's favor, in the event of inevi- table developer law suits. The trends of court decisions appear CM-30-400 September 29, 1975 (Gen Plan - Growth Rate) to favor a stand on this point of air pollution and environmental matters. Somewhere along the line, when it is clear that residential growth is going to increase the hazards of air pollution, some City Council has to have the courage to stand firm on growth limitation. We have a severe smog area which has not already been covered with houses and it would seem that this would be the place the public officials' responsibility to public health should appear. Consequently, Cm Miller stated that if he believes what the Environmental Quality Act means and if he takes his responsibility about protecting public health seriously, and believes what he has been told by the National Academy of Sciences about air quality standards and reaffirmation of the air quality standards and what happens when you exceed them with respect to your health, then the only plausible and reasonable thing for this Council to do would be to accept a zero growth rate. He stated that the only exception he would be willing to place on this would be a small percentage of low-income housing for which sewer allocation has been reserved. He feels this is a reasonable, conservative, moderate position in view of our "worse part of a critical air basin", and smog second only to the Los Angeles basin situation. The present views about effects on long-term air quality and growth rates at the present are based on estimates. Estimation methods may improve to the point that they may say it is even worse than we thought or could conceivably improve to the position where they say it is better than they thought and some growth might be allowed. It would seem reasonable, therefore, to review this in five years or when better models are available. One of the reasons five years ~,.J would be more reasonable is becapse._the EP~ regulations for stricter~,'t: automobile controls, for examp~~l:back. It is the impositio~~ of these controls which say things might improve somewhat in the next five to sixteen years and if they keep setting them back they are not going to improve things. em Miller stated that his argument is that the City should have no further residential growth with the exception of the 4,000 gallons for low and moderate income housing, until 1980. In 1980 the situation could be reviewed again and a 1-2% growth rate at this time may be perfectly reasonable if we have met the air quality standards. Cm Miller stated that he would like to repeat that he feels the proper and conservative position that should be taken on health grounds for this Valley is that there be no further residential growth until 1980 when this whole issue should be reviewed again. Since this is not consistent with the motion he cannot vote for the motion and would hope the motion will be defeated and discus- sion can proceed about adverse affects of smog with respect to the health of the people and the Council's responsibility to do something about it. Since we are the worst in the critical air basin and since we have repeatedly been described as having smog second only to Los Angeles, the environmental situation in this Valley is not like it is in Petaluma where there are other arguments or in other places where they are arbitrarily trying to limit growth. We have health grounds and legal power to limit growth in this Valley and Cm Miller stated that he believes we need to do what is best for the protection of the Council's constituents. Cm Turner stated that he would like to discuss the issue from a different point of view. At one time there was discussion about a growth rate of .5% through 1980 and at that time there was really no oposition to this figure. In reading the minutes of the P.C. he is not convinced that the 1~-2% would be reasonable. CM-30-40l September 29, 1975 (Gen Plan - Growth Rate) Cm Turner stated that if we were to grow at .5% through 1980 and then grow at 2% through the Year 2000, there would be a population of approximately 71,000. He would suggest that rather than looking at an increase in residential, the Council should look at trying to build up our industrial and commercial base to lend justification to support~ resid~ntial oPula~tion in the City of Livermore. .:zA-L- ~ T..... 7:T *' . ~ ~---r . em Turner stated that it doesn't ap ear to make sense to try to expand the City when there aren't services such as places to work and places to shop, to support the additional growth. He stated that for these reasons he will remain with his original conviction, that a .5% growth rate. for ~hc firs~ fi7e years is reasonable through 1980. Based on the fact it would probably take us three years to expand our sewer capacity the most growth that could be realized would be no more than 3% during the five year period. Therefore, the .5% growth rate for the first five years would appear to be reasonable and perhaps goes along with what the Planning Commission is trying to say. (- ~--j Cm Turner stated that he believes the City has to establish an industrial and commercial base to support the additional popula- tion and feels this is the issue that should be examined first and, hopefully, by 1980 the smog situation will be better. Mayor Futch stated that Cm Staley pointed out earlier in the meeting that any course of action taken has certain risks in- volved. There are some advantages and some disadvantages with anything done and the option would be to do nothing. The comment that the population that would satisfy the air pollution standards is 55,000, is assuming we are not going to have any mitigating measures. Mayor Futch stated that he believes it is obvious we are going to have changes with respect to the size of the automo- bile and in our commuting patterns because of the cost of petro- leum products and this is certainly not a factor that is built into the calculations. Mayor Futch stated that he believes we must make some plans for the future. The plans that we are making in the General Plan will not be possible if we do not get the grant for expansion of the sewer. The difference in the number of days exceeding the air quality if you add a population of 50,000 is four. Mayor Futch stated that the Council has to look at the relative magnitude of the problem that is being discussed and whether some of the desirable effects would not help mitigate those problems. Cm Staley stated that it would seem there are three different categories with respect to barriers or impairment to growth. One is that while there are problems which are theoretically solvable they probably cannot be solved within the next 20 to 30 years. He stated that these things are items such as earth- quake faults and problems of a large magnitude that would pre- vent us from making growth plans. The second group of problems he would classify as environmental problems and would include items such as smog, sewage, and to some extent water which could perhaps be mitigated with regional cooperation and money. The third group could easily be mitigated by the efforts of Livermore without outside assistance such as schools, parks and public improvements, if sufficient funds are available. c em Staley stated that he believes the General Plan should be designed as showing the upper constraints that cannot be solved under any circumstances within the foreseeable future such as steep terrain, earthquake faults and other such items. CM-30-402 September 29, 1975 (Gen. Plan - Growth Rate) It would appear that what the P.C. has said about filling in the City and the mitigating measures for the good of the City are very reasonable and it would seem that our upward limit should be what would be reasonably good for this City in terms of future population as limited by those constraints which the City can probably do noth- ing about. Under these circumstances and with the projections Cm Staley has made, using a 1.6% growth rate for Livermore, it would seem that if Liver- more did not have the problems of smog and sewage that a growth rate of between 1.2 and 1.6 or even perhaps as high as 2% would be appro- priate. Cm Staley stated that he also agrees that the points made by Cm Turner are very good and that within the next three to five years we will almost certainly be limited to not having any growth in Livermore because of the problems of not having sewage capacity and having problems with the environment. Cm Staley stated that for the reasons he has mentioned he feels he could support a growth rate of 1.2 to 2%. Also, by supporting this as a long term growth rate or a long term goal does not require the City to grow at that rate during the next two years, four years or even 10 years. There are different factors affecting our growth and the General Plan growth. rate should use the growth rate with the optimum conditions with the understanding that many intervening variables, such as smog and air quality, may keep us from attaining that growth rate. Cm Miller stated that he would like to respond to some of the comments made by Cm Staley. First of all, Cm Staley has placed smog in the category of which area-wide cooperation and lots of money can solve the mitigating problem. Smog is probably a 10-15 year problem, at best, including mitigating measures for Livermore to meet the air quality standards. He stated that he feels he must emphasize that these standards are set on health grounds. The P.C. did not discuss, in any rational way, the mitigating measures. There is very little in their discussion about them and if you think about what the mitigating measures are, there is only one that would have a significant effect - converting commuters to local jobs. However, this mitigating measure will take some time and if you continue to have a proposed growth rate if we acquire additional sewage and allow residential development, we have wasted our time. -\ Cm Miller added that if there were no air quality problems or other problems the 1.2% to 1.6% growth rate would be acceptable to him. It has been mentioned that in the next five years it would be unlikely that Livermore would reach this growth rate and Cm Miller stated that what he would like to suggest is that this issue is sufficiently power- ful that if the growth isn't going to be reached in the next five years it should be dealt with honestly. The honest dealing with this is that the air quality is bad in this Valley and that residential growth in the next five years is unsafe from a health standpoint and that we are perfectly willing to consider a 1.2% growth rate as a long term growth rate, or whatever figure would be appropriate, but in the next five years while we work on mitigating measures we are not going to add any additional residential growth. Cm Miller urged that the Council speak honestly about this issue and to come out and say that until 1980 the air quality is going to remain bad and we don't dare allow residential growth in the Valley. In 1980 we can review the entire situation if our mitigation measure works. If 1/3 of our commuters go to public transportation it may really make a difference and if it does and the air quality level is down, fine. We can, at that time, grow at a rate of l~-2%. em Miller added that the moral issue is that the City shouldn't take a .5% growth rate but rather we should be working on the mitigating measures. The use of our sewer capacity for mitigating purposes will CM-30-403 September 29, 1975 (Gen. Plan - Growth Rate) have some effect. affect. Cm Miller in this Valley are and development in anything else. We will have to work at it but it should have some stated that he feels some jurisdictions operating extremely irresponsible with respect to growth its connection with air quality and schools or It is true that Livermore will be affected if Pleasanton wants to grow to a population of 3,000,000 in five years and they can get someone to give them the sewage that would allow this growth. The point is that if Pleasanton wants to double their growth in the next five years it affects Livermore because we are down wind from them and we have a better moral justification for looking at the real issue, which is primarily air quality, if we haven't said we will go ahead and take 1~-2% because we know it will really be less. It would be better to look at the situation as it is and not agree to more than the .5%. Cm Miller stated that this Valley has the worst air quality in northern California and the time has come, in this particular area, to pay some attention to the affects of smog to the health of the Council's con- stituents. Our legal and moral position is better by making this point with all the agencies that deal with expansion of utilities in the Valley of any kind. There are no mitigating measures to making a smoother look- ing city and no mitigating measures to filling out the Greenville North area if they are goi~9, to be filled with commuters. That is not a miti- gating measure - it~~es the map look nice. Cm Miller stated that he would be willing to accept the 1.2% to 1.6% in the long run, subject to environmental considerations. However, in the next five years he believes the Council should face the issue. The existance of sewage capacity should not be related to the growth rate - the growth rate should be related to the air quality problems. Cm Staley stated that he realizes we have violated the federal air quality standards but is not convinced that the air quality for this City is so bad that for the next five years, as a pOlicy, we should not grow other than low-income housing residences. He stated that he would be more willing to support a long-term growth rate with the understanding that decisions are being made on the basis of air quality with respect to residential growth over the next five years. This should be based on a different standard than we are looking to for the long-term rate because in any given year it may change. He stated that he sees the General Plan as a long term measure and could support a 1.2% to 1.6% growth rate. Mayor Futch commented that on a short-term basis the growth rate is just not changed to any significance. Cm Miller stated that Cm Staley has indicated he would be in favor of a 1.2% to 1.6% growth rate for long-term planning and there doesn't seem to be any argument from anybody about this figure for long-term planning. The real issue, however, is the short-term figure. The Council had a discussion about this a couple of months ago and came to about the same conclusion. The motion was unanimous at that time that the problem was serious enough that we could accept the lower growth rate between now and 1980, which was about .5%. He would ask that the Council at this time reaffirm what was said a couple of months ago. To go to a higher growth rate because it is ~he long-term rate just doesn't make any sense. Tft~ left~ ~erM ra~e is S~a~8Q in tho Cenoral Plan for aft o~erall 2% subject to ~eview a~ain in 1980.~\~' ~ o CM-30-404 ~ September 29, 1975 (Gen. Plan - Growth Rate) Cw Tirsell stated that she believes the Council is not in disagree- ment with one another. What was submitted to the consultants was the .4% which the consultants say they cannot support. They can support an E-O as a 1.2 to 1.6% and they are prepared to defend this figure, in court. They are not prepared to defend .4% or zero in court. The consultants have said that the natural growth rate, computing the birth over death rate, is about 1.2%. conservatively speaking this number may be less but it means that Livermore will grow at about a 1% rate without anyone moving into Livermore or moving out. Cw Tirsell pointed out that the consultants are asking that the City not make the object of the whole General Plan the worst constraints. This should not be the object of the General Plan where you are supposed to be planning a City. These are a subject matter for ordinances and for all the supplementary material in the General Plan. Just as with any General Plan, we show a complete circulation pattern and the Council also knows that the circulation plan doesn't have a chance unless everybody drives their car con- stantly from now until the Year 2000, because the gas tax money is the way we extend our streets. If the gas tax money continues to disappear the way it has been, there is no way this City can complete the circulation pattern that is on the General Plan. Nevertheless, the consultants do not say to show only a partial circulation pattern because this is all Livermore will ever have because the gas tax money is disappearing. The consultants see this constraint but they are saying that this is the circulation pattern your City should have at a certain point. They do not say to show only a fragmented cir- culation pattern because resources are disappearing. Cw Tirsell added that the consultants have asked that the City not place its hopes and legal defense on anyone constraint be it environmental or economic and neither would they ask us to place it on seismic problems, earthquake faults, flooding, or any of the other environ- mental problems. The General Plan is the general growing pattern and the ultimate design for the City and the major constraints should not be the basis upon which the City will grow. Cm Miller stated the question about what can be defended in court does not apply only to our General Plan consultants. There are people who believe that a case with good facts on air quality grounds has an equal chance to stand up in court. He stated that in large part he agrees with what Cw Tirsell has said about the overall design of the General Plan but the example used by Cw Tirsell deals with the physical aspect of the General Plan. What the Council is doing is trying to determine how to look at the time rate of achieving that ultimate General Plan. He stated that he sees a time rate that indi- cates the City should be careful for the next five years because of the air quality problems but this doesn't mean the Plan should be changed. It would mean that perhaps development should be postponed until about Year 2010 rather than in 1990. There is no reason the City should not be cautious until 1980 and review it again at this time because the situation could be different. It could be possible that, for instance, industry could come in and take 1/3 of our com- muters. ern Turner stated that he would agree with the figure of 1.5% for the long-term planning because this is the figure the consultants have indicated they could support in court. However, he is con- cerned about the short-term figure because he doesn't want to be committed to a 1~-2% growth rate between now and 1980 because of our sewer problems, etc. He stated that he prefers to stay with the .5% growth rate until 1980 and hope that the consultant could defend this in court. Cw Tirsell stated that her concern is winning this little battle and then losing the whole war in court. What if the whole mechanism falls because it has been placed on one constraint. We know that CM-30-405 September 29, 1975 (Gen. Plan - Growth Rate) at this time there is no legislation backing air pollution and yet there is no hope that the Air Maintenance Quality Plan will do any- thing for us. She stated that, unfortunately, Livermore can't look to help from anybody and our consultants are saying that they can defend this plan. She emphasized that she doesn't want to lose the war. AT THIS TIME THE MOTION TO ADOPT THE P.C. RECOMMENDATION GROWTH RATE OF 1~-2% PASSED~ (Cm Miller dissenting). ..3-.:1. ~~ ~ 0if~ . FOR A GROWTH RATE RESOLU- TION TO LAVWMA Mayor Futch stated that last week the Council adopted a resolution which related to the growth rate which was sent toLAVWMA and that the resolution sent to them was incorrect in the final wording. This matter must be reviewed at this time with the corrections and wording clarified. Mayor Futch stated that for the most part the decision concerning the resolution was a deadlock decision with a 2-2 vote up until the very end of the late meeting and CW Tirsell had mentioned that she would like to discuss the item when Cm Staley is present. Mayor Futch stated that he would like to give Cm Staley the oppor- tunity to express his views on this matter. Cm Miller stated that he would suggest this item be continued for one week. IT WAS CONCLUDED THAT THIS ITEM WILL BE PLACED ON NEXT WEEK'S AGENDA UNDER OLD BUSINESS IN ORDER THAT CM STALEY MIGHT HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE MINUTES FROM THE MEETING OF LAST WEEK AND THE WORDING CHANGES SUGGESTED, ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (Executive Session) The City Attorney requested an executive session immediately after the meeting to discuss condemnation of the fire station property and litigation. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL (Greenville Park) Cm Turner asked that the staff furnish the Council with a status report concerning the Greenville North park site acquisition. The City Attorney responded that they were waiting to hear from the court. (Police Department Budget Item) Cm Staley stated that in the past he questioned a~ listed in the budget for the Police Department, in the past. In the meantime he is satisfied that this item is warranted and is no longer question- ing the item. CM-30-406 September 29, 1975 (Trucks Parking) Cw Tirsell stated that on the north-east quadrant of the property at Las positas and Airway Boulevard there are large trucks parking on this property and would like the staff to find out who owns this property and that this be investigated. (Parking Fines) Cm Staley stated that with respect to the problem of parking and financing parking lots, most cities have a schedule on parking fines and this might be an item to be discussed by the Council as an agenda item. Perhaps recommendations can be made to the court as to what a fine should be for an infraction of this type. (Regional Sewage Agencies) Mayor Futch commented that both the Regional Water Quality Control Board and BASSA have stated policies opposed to additional sewage agencies within the Valley. Recently they have adopted a resolution encouraging Zone 7 to become an additional sewage agency in the Valley. It would seem appropriate that the Council write a letter asking them why they have changed their pOlicy and pointing out that both LAVWMA and the City of Livermore are opposed to prolifera- tion of sewer agencies. INTRODUCTION OF ORD. RE SEWER CAPACITY ALLOCATION Cw Tirsell suggested a wording change in the ordinance as follows: Second WHEREAS: WHEREAS, no state or federal funding has been available (omitting "is presently") ...etc. Cw Tirsell stated that the inclusion of moderate housing in this ordinance concerns her because the City has no definition for moder- ate housing. It was noted that the "moderate" income is in the first number and the Council asked for the "low-income" be included. Cw Tirsell asked if the City intends to reserve capacity for moderate income housing and Cm Staley explained that what HUD considers mod- erate housing is a family of four on a salary of $12,000. The City Attorney explained that the definition "moderate to low" refers to where there is a lack of housing for these people. Cm Miller suggested including on Page 2, under (3) the following: (3) to service a development of moderate-to-low income housing, as defined by HUD. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO AMEND THE SECOND WHEREAS, AS LISTED ABOVE, AS WELL AS THE WORDING "DEFINED BY HUD" (3) ON PAGE 2., SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. It was noted that the City Attorney will use the Department of Housing and Urban Development rather than (HUD). CM Miller asked that the Council consider adding some additional "Whereases", 1) after the second whereas to add: "WHEREAS, statistics show the Livermore-Amador Valley has, on the average, the worst air quality in northern California~ and" CM-30-407 September 29, 1975 (Ord. re Sewer Capacity) 2) the second WHEREAS would be on page one before the last whereas, to read: WHEREAS, COMMUTING ALSO INCREASES THE UNNECESSARY WASTE OF OUR ENERGY RESOURCES SUCH AS GASOLINE AND OIL: AND, em Staley stated he did not understand how commuting directly relates to sewer capacity allocation. Cm Miller stated what they are doing is looking at problems that are raised by commuting. It is hoped that the capacity in the sewer plant will be used to try to convert commuters to local job holders and the reason is that it has an environmental affect because of the air pollution and has an energy conservation effect by reducing the amount of gasoline and oil. Cm Staley stated that the city has allocated its sewer capacity based on our present lack of that capacity, and he could not be too sure that commuters have anything to do with that. Cm Miller stated this is why the city is reserving what is left for iDdustrial and commercial. Economic imbalance is one reason and air pollution is another, and he wished to add' a third reason. ' Cm Turner stated he would like to have the word "unnecessary" de- leted from the last "whereas" suggested by Cm Miller as he felt it was redundant, and Cm Miller agreed to the deletion, so that the paragraph would read as follows: WHEREAS, COMMUTING ALSO INCREASES THE WASTE OF OUR ENERGY RESOURCES SUCH AS GASOLINE AND OIL: AND Cm Miller also suggested that in the last line on page 1, the paragraph should end, "...and thus more air pollution and energy waste; and" Mr. Logan suggested that the word "waste" be changed to "consump- tion" as waste is the unnecessary consumption and suggested that after "air pollution" the words "and unnecessary energy consumption" be used, to which Cm Miller agreed. Cm Miller stated he would like to add one other "whereas" after the paragraph just corrected to read as follows: WHEREAS, NEW COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USES WILL CREATE NEW LOCAL JOBS AND THUS HELP CONVERT COMMUTERS TO LOCAL JOB HOLDERS, THEREBY REDUCING AIR POLLUTION AND ENERGY CONSUMPTION; AND MAYOR FUTCH INDICATED HE WOULD MAKE ALL OF THESE SUGGESTIONS AS AMENDMENTS, AND THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Cm Turner asked what the Council was voting for and it was explained that they were doing each item and the motion to be voted on at this time were the changes suggested by Cm Miller. em Turner stated that Cm Miller stated that commuting also increases the waste, and he was not sure that it should be waste. Cm Turner suggested that the second "whereas" added by Cm Miller be changed to read as follows: WHEREAS, COMMUTING ALSO INCREASES THE CONSUMPTION OF OUR ENERGY RESOURCES SUCH AS GASOLINE AND OIL; AND CW TIRSELL SECONDED THE AMENDMENT, AND THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CM-30-408 September 29, 1975 (Ord. re Sewer Capacity) Cm Turner referred to the fifth paragraph regarding the primary source of air pollution and stated that he was not convinced that they have found the automobile exhaust emissions to be the primary source. The Council discussed this point, and concurred that the paragraph should remain as written. Cm Miller stated that he did not remember the exact wording of Resolution No. 55-75, but his thinking was that it adopted a policy of allocating the remaining sewer capacity to low and moderate in- come housing and industrial and commercial uses. CW Tirsell concurred that that the word "commercial" had been left out, AND THE WORDS "AND COMMERCIAL" WERE SUGGESTED TO BE ADDED AT THE END OF THE FIRST PARAGRAPH ON P. 2 AFTER "INDUSTRIAL". Cm Miller asked the City Attorney if the following "whereas" might not have value: WHEREAS, THE GENERAL PLAN REVIEW COMMITTEE HAS FOUND A SUBSTANTIAL POPULATION TURNOVER EACH YEAR SO THAT HOUSING BECOMES AVAILABLE FOR NEW RESIDENTS WHO WISH TO COME TO THE CITY OF LIVERMORE. CW Tirsell stated she had no objection to the use of that paragraph, except that she felt this was based on estimates. em Miller asked Mr. Logan asked about the indication of the right to travel and Mr. Logan stated that he did not have any concern about the right to travel as there was nothing in the proposed ordinance directed toward transients. This last suggested paragraph was not added. Cm Miller questioned the allocation of the 45% of the increased capacity to residential and 45% to commercial or industrial. The City Attorney stated that the Council must be very careful about being consistent with the general plan when another MGD is added to the sewer capacity it is not a critical situation as when there is only 40,000 gallons left. As far as he is concerned the Council does not have any factual basis to justify anything other than 45-45 on 1 MGD. When Cm Miller questioned this statement, Mr. Logan replied that when you add another 1 MGD capacity you have to allocate it reasonably between industrial and commercial. Cm Staley stated that the ordinance draft states that until such time as the effective dry weather capacity is increased over 5.0 MGD, not afterwards. Sec. 18.19.3 is talking about the remaining capacity we have at the plant, not the future expansion. However, the other members of the Council disagreed and pointed out that that it was from the time of future expansion. Mayor Futch stated he would prefer to wait until next week and have the City Attorney comment on that in more detail, however Mr. Logan stated he was not the one to make any comments and added he did not mean to foreclose any idea that the Council might have to use 90% even with an additional 1 MGD, but to his recollection the Council had never really discussed that possibility. To his recollec- tion the Council talked about 45-45 in the General plan, so if the Council wants to study this in a little more detail, there may be findings that can be made to justify 90% on the additional 1 MGD - that would be fine. Cm Miller asked that a copy of Resolution 55-75 be included on the agenda together with an amended draft of the proposed ordinance. He would also want to discuss the II commitment II in 18.19.4 re the right to CM-30-409 September 29, 1975 (Ord. re Sewer Capacity) a connection shall terminate in two (2) years from the effective date of this ordinance. Cm Miller stated he would like to add the following sentence: liThe capacity of such residential connec- tions shall revert to industrial and commercial allotment." CW Tirsell stated she thought they had meant to do just that within the 5.0 MGD as there was no way to reach the 45% reserve for industrial in the remaining capacity as they are over-committed on residential. The Council agreed to the addition of the sentence suggested by Cm Miller. Cm Staley stated that he was not a member of the Council when the vote was taken on the 45-45 and did not know the basis, but from his Planning Commission discussions he did not know how the Council justified the 45-45 of any expansion. The Mayor stated that they needed some figures from the staff as to what is justifiable. Mr. Logan stated that the more discussion and the more factual infor- mation the Council felt secure with the better off they would be. Mr. Logan asked if there were other changes the Council would like to make. Cm Turner stated that he was concerned about Sec. 18.19.5, and stated he would like to see 10% rather than 5%. Mr. Logan explained that the 5% was thrown in only because the Coun- cil determined that it would be a small enough figure for several smaller industries to come in, but if anything bigger came in the Council might have some hand in determining if it would be a better industry. Cw Tirsell stated that if it was an industry like Intel, or anyone else that uses up to 10% of the remaining capacity, it would be a little ludicrous to have the Council haggle over those numbers. It was concluded that the Council would discuss the proposed ordinance further next week. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 11:15 p.m. to an executive session to discuss pending litigation. ATTEST ?/u4 / Z;U , Mayor, APPROVE CM-30-4l0 Regular Meeting of October 6, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on October 6, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:10 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 OF SEPT. 22, 1975 Page 371, third paragraph from the bottom, second line should read: indicated they would use the ABAG figures to determine funding. (end of second line and all of third line deleted). Page 378, third paragraph from the bottom third line should indicate a .4% growth rate rather than a 2% growth rate. Page 365, after the sixth paragraph add the following new paragraph: Cm Turner stated that he would be interested in knowing what their accounting practice is to determine profits and loss and Mr. Marguth indicated this is a concern of the Committee and that the Ways and Means Committee will be actively involved in the project. Page 366, paragraph beginning with Lois Hill, line 13 should read: Supervisors. Secondly, this would place planned policy in.....etc. Page 367, last paragraph, 2nd and 3rd line should read: been committed in the past and if long term commitments are to be made in the near future then this-Would continue under whatever........etc. Page 375, second paragraph, last line should read: part, is essential now without public transportation. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BYCM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 22, 1975, WERE APPROVED, AS CORRECTED. (Cm Staley abstaining due to absence at that meeting.) COMMUNICATION RE BART FUTURE RAIL LINE AND NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE NEGATIVE EIR A communication has been received from Robert S. Allen, Chairman of the LPX Board of Control, indicating that the Board of Control has published a final draft showing the adopted route for the BART future rail line as well as their intent to file an EIR Negative Declaration. Mr. Musso explained that the letter is a response of the City's notice of intention to prepare an EIR for the First Street reloca- tion and the grade separation. He stated that the matter is really a staff referral and should not have been referred to the Council. Cm Miller stated that he would like to inquire about the possibility of compatibility of a BART rail with another track even though the probability that a BART rail will ever come through Livermore is nearly zero. If, however, it does come through Livermore it would be useful to know that everything we are doing up to this point is compatible. Mr. Parness wondered if Cm Miller is referring to the overpass and em Miller indicated that he would like to know if the overpass and the rail lines through town would be compatible. CM-30-4ll October 6, 1975 (re BART Rail) Mr. Parness indicated that there has to be a lot of property acqu~s~- tion made for the lines but with respect to the overpasses this will be brought to the attention of the design engineers. Mayor Futch stated that there would be significant additional cost to provide for the BART line but BART should be willing to pay their share of the additional cost. Cw Tirsell wondered if the grade bed for the overpass is wide enough to accommodate BART and Mr. Parness indicated that there would have to be additional right-of-way for this purpose and it would be a rather large cost but it could be done. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THIS ITEM WAS REFERRED TO THE STAFF. REPORT RE MUNICIPAL INSURANCE INVESTIGATION The City Manager reported that during the budget hearings a discus- sion of insurance raised the question as to the availability of liability coverage and rates. The former insurance agency for the City cancelled our coverage prior to the policy term and be- cause of this our local agent was required to negotiate a pOlicy. The City Council agreed to allow an independent firm to assess our insurance program and prepare specifications for competitive bid- ding prior to expiration of our present pOlicy. For an additional nominal fee the firm will analyze the feasibility of a "risk manage- ment" program concerning Workmans Compensation insurance. It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing execution of an agreement with the firm for analyzing our insurance situation. ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION NO. 2ll-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (Mund, McLaurin & Company) Prior to the vote Cm Staley indicated that it was his understanding there is a study being done at present. Mr. Parness explained that there was a study done in years past and this would be a renewal of the study with the addition of a partial "risk management" proposal. Mr. Parness added that Contra Costa County is using this type of plan and the City intends to keep in touch with them to determine if this City could do the same. Many cities are finding that premiums are so high they simply can't afford the cost and are taking the "risk management" approach. Cw Tirsell wondered where the City will get money to payoff claims if it undertakes liability for its own City. Mr. Parness explained that a significant amount of the General Fund budget is reserved for the payment of premiums and if the City were to undertake a portion of this it would be budgeted. The preserva- tinon would be the amount of what the premium costs would be and would be computed to indicate what the needs would be for a certain number of years. The County, for example, has accrued a substantial reserve beyond their expectations in the amount of money that would normally be budgeted for premium payments. CM-30-4l2 October 6, 1975 RES. AUTH EXEC. OF AGREE. W/STATE RE IRRIGATION OF LANDSCAPING The Director of Public Works reported that an agreement has been received from the state which would make available our treated efflu- ent water for irrigation of landscaping of 1-580. This matter has been under staff negotiation for about a year and with such a con- tract the Doolan Canyon construction project would qualify for an 87.5% federal-state construction grant. Mayor Futch asked about the requirements of State Order 74-7l, and Mr. Lee explained that this is the Regional Water Quality Control Board regulations with respect to the use of the effluent on state property. Mayor Futch asked if these regulations differ from those regulating effluent into their creek and Mr. Lee indicated that they are. The regulations establish monitoring and health considerations. The monitoring will be done by the City at the plant and the matter of effluent was discussed because in the beginning the contract indicated that not any of the effluent could leave the state right- of-way. The question came up as to what if some of the effluent ran into a storm drain and these matters had to be resolved to the satisfaction of both the state and the City. Cm Turner stated that in Mr. Lee's letter there is indication that the state will bear the cost to connect to the City's system and asked that Mr. Lee explain because the letter also says the state will pay the City $20,000 upon connection as partial reimbursement. Mr. Lee explained that the state will pay $20,000 as well as the cost of the meters and actual physical connection. These are two separate items. Mr. Parness commented that this contract would be extremely beneficial to our City. We will be getting a reservoir system that will be of inestimable benefit to our golf course irrigation program, it preserves our treated effluent, and does provide some irrigation to the freeway project. The City will receive $20,000 and 87.5% of the reservoir project will be funded. Mayor Futch wondered if the standards would be less stringent than those for discharging into the creek and Mr. Lee commented that he believes the regulations would be about the same as those for using effluent for the golf course. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION NO. 2l2-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (State of California, Department of Transportation) RES. RE WASTE WATER CAPACITY ALLOTMENTS - PROPOSED LAVWMA FACILITY At the City Council meeting of September 22, 1975, a resolution regarding the waste water capacity allotments in the proposed LAVWMA facility was presented to the Council for consideration, prepared by Mayor Futch. After considerable discussion the Council adopted the resolution which had been amended by adding an additional WHEREAS clause and adding the word "reluctantly" under (1) NOW THEREFORE. CM-30-4l3 October 6, 1975 (LAVWMA Facility) During the retyping of the resolution the WHEREAS clause was omitted and in accordance with Council direction all three copies have been distributed to the Council for review. It is necessary that a resolu- tion rescinding Resolution No. 208-75 be adopted. MAYOR FUTCH MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION (3.3(a)) ORIGINALLY PREPARED BY HIM. MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES. Cm Turner explained that at the meeting of September 22nd he voted in favor of the motion to adopt the resolution because there was indication that it was essential the Council take some type of position that evening. He stated that he did agree with some of the comments made by Cw Tirsell that evening but did not agree with everything that was said. Since the Council is again reviewing the resolution he would like there to be discussion and hopefully a few wording changes that he would like to see included. Mayor Futch commented that one of the primary concerns expressed by Cm Miller has been the air quality grounds and the reason he is oppos- ing the size of the facility. He stated that he and Cm Miller have had the opportunity to review the data contained in the EIR prepared by LAVWMA but the other members of the Council have not had the opportunity to read the data contained in this report on air quality and the projections for the future. He added that since this is such an important item he feels the Council should review the material and has prepared view graphs to show the Council. Cm Miller stated that he has prepared another resolution which has been distributed to the Council and while Mr. Lee is preparing to show the graphs the Council may review this resolution and discuss it. Mayor Futch stated that the fundable population for the LAVWMA facility is l48,7l7, based on the figures from the State Water Resources Board. Mayor Futch stated that he has just read a letter from the State Water Resources Board which indicates they will allow only 89 gallons per day, per capita, in projecting what future capacity should be. Previously the City has been using the round figure of lOO gallons per day. This would give a total capacity for the Valley of l3.26 MGD. The present capacity is lO.7 MGD. There- fore the future growth for the Valley is a difference of 2.56 MGD. If Livermore convinces LAVWMA that all three communities should grow at the same rate it would mean an additional l.19 MGD for Livermore, or a l.09 MGD additional if the State Water Resources Control Board population projections are used. If we assume that 45% will go for 1 industry and commerce, lQ% ~o low income and 45% to residential, then Livermore's population in 1996 would be the present population plus 55% of the l.09 MGD, divided by the 89 gallons per day per person or a total population of 56,736. Livermore does intend to use a significant fraction of the 1 MGD for industry and commerce. If all of the capacity were to service residential growth the population would be approximately 63,000. Mayor Futch stated that these are the reasons he believes Livermore needs the 1 MGD expansion and that anything significantly different would not enable Livermore to go for the 1 MGD. Mayor Futch stated that the LAVWMA Model is basically a statistical model and the model makes a number of assumptions; the most important one being that they assume the oxident level that will be attained in the future is proportional to the reactive hydro carbons. The curve on the graph shows the trend from the present time up to the Year 2000 for population (l90,000) and using the upper curve in the worst case in which they assume Congress will not enforce 1977 auto- mobile emission standards. The bottom curve assumes the automobile standards will be enforced and uses a population figure of 157,000. CM-30-4l4 October 6, 1975 (LAVWMA Facility) Mayor Futch then showed graphs indicating the LAVWMA days exceeding the standard .08 as a function of time for the two populations - 190,000 and l57,000. The graph indicates a typical and average meteorological year as 1973 decreasing to l5 days with a population of 190,000 and 9 days for a population of l50,000. If one assumes a very poor meteorological year which may occur about every 5-l0 years, you will get more days exceeding the standard but the average number, per year, would still be about the same. If there are poor years there are also better years and the average comes to about the same. Mayor Futch stated that last week he estimated what the difference in the population would be and the number of adverse days at the end of the LAVWMA project if we had the present population then as we do now. with no growth the difference would be 2.4 days in 1996. The Mayor indicated that these figures were those given to LAVWMA by Jack Jenkins, the person preparing the EIR for LAVWMA, when LAVWMA requested the figures using no growth. It is coincidental that the figure 2.4 agrees with the estimate made by Mayor Futch last week. In any case, regardless of whether the population is l14,000 or l52,OOO, we will have a significant decrease in the days exceeding the standards during the time period shown on the Model. Mayor Futch added that he feels the Model is very good and assumes no mitigating measure; therefore, if there are mitigating measures and there is capacity to provide for commerce and industry, the number can be reduced. Mayor Futch stated that the figures indicate the City is not trying to plan a large amount of additional population and it would appear to be a reasonable amount that the City needs because the City needs the additional capacity regardless of whether it goes to residential growth or industry and commerce. Mayor Futch stated that he does have figures from the LAVWMA consul- tant showing the population figure for various years and with these populations would meet the Federal Air Pollution Standards: Popula- tion of 35,200 in 1980; 60,000 in 1990; and 48,500 in 2000. The point is, these figures indicate we will never meet the standards. Looking at the matter of growth the Council has indicated in the past that it would support a reasonable figure but if growth is based on air pollution then Cm Miller is correct - zero growth is the only number that would be environmentally consistent with meeting the air pollution standards. Mayor Futch stated that he believes this is not really a reasonable approach and that one must weigh the advantages and the disadvantages of growth. When you are talking about only 2 days exceeding the average it doesn't seem like a significant number and then if mitigat- ing measures can be used this number could even be reversed. He stated that he feels the advantages of growth outweigh the disadvan- tages. Mayor Futch stated that we have already instructed the staff to apply for a 1 MGD expansion and if the City indicates there should be a decrease in the fundable capacity for LAVWMA then this is not really being consistent and we may not get the 1 MGD. Cw Tirsell stated that she would like to know what percentage of our effluent will be going down the LAVWMA pipe. Mayor Futch explained that the size of the pipe should be a size that would handle the 13.6 MGD, which is the fundable capacity. CM-30-4l5 October 6, 1975 (LAVWMA Facility) Cw Tirsell stated that the point is, not everybody will pump all of their effluent down this pipeline. Mayor Futch commented that during the rainy season the effluent has to be disposed of through the pipeline. Mayor Futch felt the City would be more likely to receive the 1 MGD if we go to LAVWMA and say that we need it for commercial and industrial growth, rather than saying that the City feels the size of the pipeline should be reduced. We have a lot of property in the area of the railroad that we would like to see developed and there is a need for the additional capacity. Once the pipeline goes in it may be very difficult to receive future funding. Cw Tirsell stated that using the 89 gallons per day, per capita, would mean an increase of about 7,500 in population. Cm Miller asked Mr. Lee if the plant is running about 4.6 MGD at this time and Mr. Lee indicated that it is above that figure and it could be at about 4.8 or above. It has been over a year since the calculations were done but about a year ago it was 4.6-4.7 and it could be approaching 5 MGD now. Cm Miller stated that Livermore has approximately 48,500 people in the City and our average gallons per day, per capita, is about lOO gallons. Apparently the different sewer plants in the Valley are different. The LAVWMA letter indicates that grant program regula- tions are limited per capita flow for growth population in existing values or lOO gallons per day, per capita, whichever is less. Mr. Lee has indicated that our plant is at 5 MGD with a population of 48,500 which means that our plant is using the 100 gallons per day, per capita. The argument that it will be 89 gallons per day mayor may not apply but the last official report received from the state talked about l4.9 MGD and this is just another mechanism for the fluctuations in the State Water Resources Control Board calculations which change from week to week. Cm Miller stated that the presentation made by Mayor Futch was exellent and good points were made. He added that he would like to say that the Council has talked about mitigating measures but the other jurisdictions have not. VCSD is thinking about something along these lines but Pleasanton hasn't given it any thought. We are downwind from Pleasanton and population increments for the Valley as the result of a larger pipeline will provide air pollu- tion for us. The argument about why we should go for an additional l49',000 is based on the belief that it is essential to get one more MGD per day at all costs, otherwise our industrial needs cannot be met. Cm Miller stated that it is not clear to him that there is a need for 1 MGD to take care of the commercial/industrial. The Council is assuming that this Council and future Councils intend to be rational about the application of our sewer capacity. There has been discussion concerning the number of adverse days and Mayor Futch pointed out that for 114,000 there are only 2.4 days difference from l57,000 to 114,000. He stated that he has no reason to argue with these figures for an average year. Cm Miller stated that there are worse years and the worse years determine whether or not the National Ambient Air Quality Standards are met. According to the graphs the difference between the average year and the worst year means about double adverse days for the worst year, or about 5 more adverse days. CM-30-4l6 October 6, 1975 (LAVWMA Facility) Mayor Futch commented that the worst year will occur only about every five years. Cm Miller pointed out that the National Ambient Air Quality Standards are the law and what the City is supposed to meet regardless of whether or not the Council believes that not meeting the standards lO days out of the year isn't bad. The severe mitigation measures that will be imposed on Livermore by EPA have to do with the fact that we are supposed to reach not exceeding the standards more than one day a year, including the worst year. He stated that the discomfort of the mitigating measures might not be necessary if we have less sewage and less population. He suggested that the Council be consistent with the environmental standards and the State Water Resources Control Board should reconsider these environmental standards, and set a population number based on the environmental standards. Cm Miller added that it may be alright to feel casual about the number of adverse days but each one of these adverse days affect people and the law says that we are to attain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Mayor Futch commented that regardless of the number of excessive days - 2.4 for an average, or 7 for the worst year, he feels that the City would be capable of having mitigating measures if we could get the additional capacity and provide local shopping. If the City could provide local shopping the air quality would probably become better. He added that he is as concerned about the air quality as anyone is and feels that the advantages of the alternative outweigh the disadvantages. Cm Turner stated that with respect to the resolution, last week he had some wording changes he wanted but the Council didn't agree with him and he would like to bring these up for consideration. Last week the Council agreed "reluctantly" with the figure 149,000 and he is a little concerned about this. HE STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION TO INCLUDE AMENDED WORDING AFTER THEREFORE (l): (l) Support the State Water Resources Board disaggregated E-O population projections for the Livermore-Amador Valley as the basis, provided this figure can be shown to be consistent with air and water quality standards. The Council discussed the amendment and agreed that they felt the wording would be satisfactory but placement of the additional wording should be after the word "facility", as follows: (1) Support the State Water Resources Board disaggregated E-O population projections for the Livermore-Amador Valley as the basis for determining the capacity of the LAVWMA waste water treatment facility, provided this figure can be shown to be consistent with air and water quality standards. MOTION SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CM MILLER MOVED TO INCLUDE THE LAST WHEREAS CLAUSE, AS SUGGESTED BY CW TIRSELL LAST WEEK, IN PART, AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, the Livermore City Council is cognizant that the population predictions by the State Water Resources Control Board do not include environmental considerations. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. Cm Staley stated that he is concerned with the wording for the first WHEREAS paragraph and would MOVE TO AMEND THE WORDING AS FOLLOWS: CM-30-4l7 October 6, 1975 (LAVWMA Facility) WHEREAS, air pollution and other environmental constraints are important factors in the growth rate and attendant popu- lation in the Livermore-Amador Valley, and MOTION SECONDED BY MAYOR FUTCH FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES. Cm Turner stated that the wording, as suggested by Cm Staley doesn't really make sense. Cw Tirsell commented that air pollution is an environmental constraint. Cm Staley stated that air pollution is a constraint but it doesn't automatically limit the growth rate and this is why he would like it spelled out. Cm Miller stated that he believes the Council would agreee with the wording: WHEREAS, air pollution and other environmental constraints limit the growth...etc. (omitting growth rate). It is because we exceed the Federal Air Quality Standards so greatly now that the air quality and environmental constraints do limit the rate. He stated that he believes the original sentence does make sense. MOTION TO-AMEND FIRST WHEREAS CLAUSE WAS WITHDRAWN AT THIS TIME. MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION, AS AMENDED, PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 213-75 A RESOLUTION REGARDING WASTE WATER CAPACITY ALLOTMENTS IN THE PROPOSED LAVWMA FACILITY, AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 208-75. RECESS After a brief recess the Council meeting reconvened with all members of the Council present. REPORT RE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 3666 - KAY BUILDING COMPANY Mr. Musso explained that Tentative Tract Map 3666 (Kay Building) is a subdivision located at the corner of Charlotte Way and East Avenue, a former shopping center site rezoned to residential. The issue is centered around the availability to sewer and not the design of the subdivision. The Planning Commission did not consider the design but rather the availability of sewer, policy with respect to the General Plan, and did recommend denial of the application based on findings that the remaining sewer capacity is to be reserved for industrial or commercial development or low cost housing; that the design is not consistent with the amended General Plan; that the design and improvements are likely to cause health problems; and that adequate school space is not available. CM-30-4l8 October 6, 1975 (Tract 3666 - Kay Bldg. Co.) Mayor Futch asked if the applicant is present and would like to speak to the Council and there was no response. Mr. Musso commented that the applicant is not present this evening but he was present at the Planning Commission meeting. em Staley asked if the applicant had been notified that the Council would be discussing this item this evening and it was noted that the applicant has been notified. - CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE PLANNING COM- MISSION AND BASED ON THEIR FINDINGS DENY THE SUBDIVISION. MOTION SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Cm Miller stated that he would like the Council to continue discus- sion of this item in case the applicant or his representative should appear this evening. This item has come up in the meeting earlier than might have been expected and he would like the applicant or representative to have the opportunity to speak to the Council prior to taking formal action on this item. CM MILLER MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM UNTIL THE END OF THE MEETING, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CONSENT CALENDAR Minutes The following minutes were received and noted for filing: Beautification Committee, September 3, 1975 Design Review Committee, September 24, 1975 Greens Committee - August l4, 1975 Planning Commission The following Planning Commission items were noted for filing: Summary of Action taken September 30, 1975 Minutes for Meeting of September 9, 1975 Minutes for Meeting of September l6, 1975 Payroll & Claims There were 295 claims in the amount of $149,570.44, and 133 payroll warrants in the amount of $95,95l.20, for a total of $245,52l.64, dated September 30, 1975, and approved by the Director of Finance. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED WITH THE DELETION OF THE SALARY RESOLUTION WHICH WAS REMOVED FOR DISCUSSION. DISCUSSION RE SALARY RESOLUTION Cm Miller stated that he would like the Council to discuss the Salary Resolution in an executive session so as to be informed by the City Attorney as to what is available in the way of limits to the Council in discussing personnel matters. CM-30-419 October 6, 1975 (Salary Resolution) CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE SALARY RESOLUTION DISCUSSION BE MOVED TO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS THE APPLICATION OF THE BROWN ACT IN MATTERS OF THIS KIND. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cm Turner stated that he would like to know why this needs to be discussed in an executive session if the Council is only determining the limits of the Brown Act in relation to this. Cm Miller explained that if there is a possibility that an action the Council might wish to take might be in violation of the Brown Act, the Council could be subject to litigation. Mayor Futch stated that he is not sure this is grounds for having an executive session and would like a response from the City Attor- ney. The Assistant City Attorney commented that it would appear the Council is pushing an exception to the Brown Act in order to discuss another exception to the Brown Act. Pending litigation is definitely an exception to the open meeting requirement of the Brown Act and threatened litigation or potential litigation very well could be. He stated that he realizes this is not a firm pronouncement of the state of the law but there is really no firm state of the law on that one issue. If the Council does wish to go into executive discussion to discuss this narrow question, he believes it could. It is a question of whether or not it wants to. Mayor Futch commented that last week the City Attorney indicated that it would not be justifiable to have an executive session to discuss the Salary Resolution. Cm Staley wondered if it would be proper to discuss this resolu- tion in an executive session with respect to discussion of the resolution as it applies to particular personnel. He stated that his understanding is that one of the exceptions to the Brown Act is the discussion of personnel. The Assistant City Attorney stated that the personnel matter exception is a matter for which there is a definite split of opinions. Unfortunately, there could be two answers to this question and each answer would accurately sum up one school of thought and each has grounds for support. Cw Tirsell stated that she is not prepared to meet in an execu- tive session to discuss this item. Mr. Logan has expressed some firm opinions as to what can be discussed in an executive session. Cm Turner stated that at this point he agrees with what Cw Tirsell has said about meeting in executive session; however, if Cm Miller wants this discussed in an executive session he would suggest that the Council wait until Mr. Logan and Mr. Reiners can research this matter and let the Council know if it can be discussed in an executive session. Mayor Futch stated that he would be opposed to continuing this because it would mean delaying salaries for a number of people. Cm Turner stated that he didn't mean not adopting the resolution but that the matter to be discussed, as questioned by Cm Miller. Cm Miller stated that if the resolution is going to be adopted anyway an executive session would be meaningless. He stated that he is definately dissatisfied with this resolution and his CM-30-420 October 6, 1975 (Salary Resolution) understanding is that the Council has the ultimate review authority over all City employees and there are about eight employees who are getting raises which he feels are unwarranted and should be discus- sed, but not in open meetings. Mayor Futch commented that a vote tonight would not necessarily undermine a future decision on the legal issue. The vote tonight would be strictly on the salaries. Cm Miller stated that he would like to explain the point of why this should be discussed in an executive session. This is not a private corporation and the Council is responsible to a very large public. The very large public takes an interest in the salaries paid to various members of the City staff and the Council is asked about the performance of the City staff members and the salaries these staff members receive. Cm Miller stated that he has questions and people have asked him about some of these people and these things need to be aired. Some of the comments he has received may be true and they may be false. He stated that there are those whose performance he has personally observed and which he feels do not warrant raises and even if he has a personal opinion, it should be discussed; however, not to the detriment of those individuals, should he be wrong. Cm Miller added that as it stands, he cannot vote for the resolution and wouldn't want to amend the resolution to delete the eight people because if he happens to be wrong they could be the center of a discussion being an innocent victim. There needs to be a mechanism for discussing the performance of the people who work for the Council and the policy provides the Council with the ultimate review. The ordinance provides the similar words but not so detailed. He stated that he has specific things about people that need to be discussed and if they cannot be discussed he has no choice but to vote against the resolution. Cw Tirse11 explained that at the time the Council discussed the October 1st pay increase beyond the July 1st pay increase, the Council gave the parameters to our City Manager and in those param- eters the Council did not say that certain employees are not to re- ceive raises or that the Council would vote on his evaluation or that the Council would pick and chose from the final recommendation. The Council said, "you are the City Manager and here are the param- eters and the levels ~ which we expect you to work under". We gave him the rules and that is what a City Manager is expected to do. She stated that she also has some questions about the staff but she does not work with these people on a daily basis. She stated that she may see them on their very worst day or their very best day. When she has a question she telephones the City Manager and receives an explana- tion. She stated that she does not want to supervise the personnel of this City and this is what the City Manager is paid for doing. If the Council is going to take away his managerial position then the Council is hiring him for the wrong job. She stated that she feels the Council is not prepared to make an evaluation of 250 employees. Mr. Parness did fall within the parameters rather closely and this is what the Council is voting on. She stated that she reviewed the evaluations made by the City Manager of his staff and she can't make him write down things she has observed. This is his evaluation of the people who work for him and he is charged with being respon- sible for these workers. The Council has placed this responsibility with the City Manager and if he is not properly evaluating the workers he will be held responsible. Cm Miller stated that what Cw Tirsell has said about what the Council told the City Manager to do was incomplete because there was a list that the Council expected to have for final review. Executive manage- ment was to have a final review by the Council within those parameters. Cw Tirsell stated that she didn't recall that the Council was to do a final review. CM-30-42l October 6, 1975 (Salary Resolution) Cm Miller stated that he views this situation in the light the arguments made by Cw Tirse11 would be satisfactory for private corporation but we are not a private corporation. are in the same position as legislatures are when they use legislative oversight; they examine what the Executive Branch does and sometimes they examine it in very great detail. He stated that he sees his role as having the public responsibility of not forgetting what goes on below the City Manager level but to pay some attention to everything else. that a We Cw Tirse11 commented that this is a different view than what she expressed. em Miller stated that he is trying to express his view and what he feels his responsibility is - looking below the City Manager level. He stated that he still feels it is the responsibility of the members of the Council to discuss the question of perfor- mance of personnel without jeopardizing their career and the only way it can be done would be in an executive session. Cm Staley stated that he believes there are two issues at hand; l) personnel and whether there should be discussion in an executive session, and 2) the resolution and whether or not it should be adop- ted. Cw Tirse11 has stated some sound reasons as to why the Council should adopt the resolution and he would suggest that the Council vote on the resolution as it stands because it is within the realm of the City Manager's responsibility. Next, the Council should meet in an executive session and discuss the complaints and questions the Council might have with respect to various individuals. If it is determined that questions or complaints are valid then it would be up to the City Manager to make a recommendation as to how the City should deal with specific problems. At this time Cm Staley feels a salary resolution is not the way to attack the issue with respect to complaints. Cw Tirse11 stated that the City Attorney, last week, was trying to point out that the general category of personnel could not be discussed in an executive session but the hiring and firing of a specific individual would be a personnel matter for executive session, but not general complaints. Cm Turner stated that he agrees with what Cw Tirse1l has said in that the Council outlined guidelines for the City Manager and did not indicate that the Council would review who would or would not receive raises. At this point he is sorry that it can't be dis- cussed in executive session and held over but must act on the ad- vice of the City Attorney last week who indicated that it was not a matter for executive session. He would just suggest again that Mr. Reiners and Mr. Logan look into the legalities of this question. Cm Miller stated that every Council he has served with, with the exception of this one, has insisted on the right to review the performance of Department Heads. He feels this review is very important and should be discussed with the City Manager and these are the issues in which the Councilmembers bear a special respon- sibility to the public. Mayor Futch stated that in voting for the resolution he is voting only for salaries that have already been outlined by the Council previously. Any discussion with respect to the right to review or not review performance should be discussed later. MOTION TO MOVE THE SALARY RESOLUTION TO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION FAILED BY A 1-4 VOTE (Cm Turner, Staley, Cw Tirse1l and Mayor Futch dissenting). CM-30-422 October 6, 1975 (Salary Resolution) CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT THE SALARY RESOLUTION, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. MOTION PASSED 4-l (Cm Miller dissenting) . RESOLUTION NO. 214-75 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE ESTABLISHING A SALARY SCHEDULE FOR THE CLASSIFIED AND UNCLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, ESTABLISHING RULES FOR ITS USE, AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. l45-75. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (BART Meeting) The City Manager reported that another meeting has been scheduled with the BART Directors from Contra Costa County and Alameda County. The last meeting was convened by Livermore who met with representatives from Pleasanton, VCSD, Contra Costa County Public Works staff, Pitts- burg, and Antioch. There was discussion concerning the general situa- tion about what might be expected in the future as to the continuation of bus services to the respective areas. The meeting was well received, it was a positive thing and people were complimentary to our City for instigating the meeting and asked that the meetings continue but in the presence of BART Board members. With the Council's permission such a meeting will be arranged on October l5th, during a dinner meeting. Hopefully the meeting can take place in the San Ramon area. There were no objections voiced concerning the date and place pro- posed. (Land Use Planning & Energy Conservation Committee Session) Mr. Parness stated that he has distributed to the Council a packet of information received from an Assembly Committee on land use plan- ning, energy conservation and related matters. This is a very important Committee session that will be convening for the purpose of receiving testimony from local authorities, in the state, on this very important bill (AB 2422). The bill is broad and complex having a lot to do with all matters related to land use planning. Knowing of our interest in this subject the League of California Cities has asked that our City be represented by having someone to testify at this Committee hearing. The two hearings are scheduled in San Francisco for October 9th and 10th, this Thursday and Friday, and the other one in Los Angeles on the 24th of October. Mr. Parness wondered if one or more of the Counci1members would be in a position to offer a brief testimony. Mayor Futch indicated that he would try to attend the meeting for the purpose of giving testimony and Cw Tirse1l also indicated that she might be able to attend one of the meetings. (Insurance Coverage) Mr. Parness reported that with City has a $115,000 premium on $75,000 premium on liability. question raised earlier in the study. respect to insurance coverage, the Workmans Compensation and about a This information was in reply to a meeting concerning the insurance CM-30-423 October 6, 1975 (Springtown Pond Benches) Cm Turner stated that a resident from Springtown has indicated that the people are very pleased with the benches placed in the area of the Springtown pond. There have been questions about hav- ing the pump turned back on that shoots the water up in the air and Mr. Lee indicated that the cost for this is approximately $l.OO/hour. Mr. Lee has suggested that perhaps a 1 hp pump could be purchased for this purpose. Cm Turner requested that this be placed as an agenda item for consideration by the Council and a staff report will be pre- pared by Mr. Lee with respect to the cost, etc. (Personnel Matters) Cm Staley stated that he would really like to see the issue of the personnel matters mentioned earlier in the meeting cleared up and would suggest a future agenda discussion with perhaps a memorandum from the City Attorney as to what matters are appro- priate for discussion in an executive session. He stated that he cannot believe criticism and questions about certain employees cannot be done during an executive session because these things should certainly not be aired in public. (ABAG Planning Board Meeting) Cw Tirse1l reported that she attended the ABAG Planning Board Meeting on Wednesday. The Planning Board received the resolu- tion from the Executive Board to review the Livermore General Plan. Supervisor Cooper spoke at the meeting and asked that they be reviewed together and Cw Tirse11 felt this was very interesting in light of the fact that some of the County Super- visors have been found guilty of performing illegal action in passing it and are not to be working on the plan. Cw Tirsell pointed out to the Board that we are involved in a court case and they wouldn't be done at the same time and the County staff had assured Livermore that they were not working on those plans. Mayor Futch suggested that the City Attorney draft a letter to ABAG stating the essence of the court decision. Cm Staley felt the City should ask the County staff, directly, if they are continuing to work on the plan. The Assistant City Attorney commented that this question has been asked and the City has received several negative replies. It was suggested that perhaps the County should be asked to respond, in writing, and pointing out what happened at the ABAG meeting. Cw Tirsell continued to comment that the Planning Board passed a resolution that their staff will begin to review our General Plan and Cw Tirsell pointed out to them that anything they would review at this point would not be formally adopted because the Plan hasn't been through the public hearing process. They are aware of the fact that there have been no public hearings. Cm Miller stated that if the City wants them to review it then perhaps we should wait for their review prior to adoption of it. They may have some valuable input the City would want to use. CM-30-424 October 6, 1975 (ABAG Planning Board Meeting) Cw Tirsell commented that they don't have any documents yet and they can't do anything until they contact the City staff to find out what stage the General Plan is in and what may be reviewed and ready for comment. They are not going to review the Plan for December but rather will review where we are so they can make plans to review. Mr. Musso stated that he has sent them all the task reports and asked that they make responses directly to Grunwald-Crawford with a copy of their responses to the City. Mayor Futch commented that the resolution coming from the Executive Committee was that they would refer both resolutions from the County to the Regional Planning Committee and let them decide what they want to do. They were not directed to do anything. Cw Tirsell stated that the distinction is that they are not going to do them concurrently - they will do Livermore's now and whenever Las positas is finished the County has requested that they review it again. (Anderson Property) Cw Tirsell commented that the County has put over the matter of the Anderson Property until next July. (COVA Meeting) Cw Tirsell reported that the Alameda Solid Waste Management Study will be presented to all Valley jurisdictions and all members of the Council have been invited. The meeting will take place on Thursday, October 9, at 8:00 p.m. at the airport. The presentation will be made by the Chairman of the Committee, Hiram Wolsch. (BART) Mayor Futch stated that he received a telephone call from our BART representative concerning the statistics and how we compiled them in the letter to the BART Board. He would like the Council to furnish him with an analysis as to how the figures were calculated so that he can use this to support Livermore. Mr. Parness commented that this is tabulated, to date, and that the City keeps a running account. (LAFCO Meeting) Mr. Parness stated that he has spoken with a staff member from LAFCO who has indicated that a report from the LAFCO staff will be received by Livermore about two weeks in advance of the meeting of the 6th. Livermore will receive the staff report and, in addition, the draft EIR. The intent of the meeting is to file the two reports with LAFCO and ask that body to set a hearing on the two reports about two weeks after the 6th. It isn't anticipated that there will be public testimony at the meeting of the 6th; however, this couldn't be promised. em Miller mentioned that if the City wants to speak someone has to be there every time, just in case they do have public testimony. CM-30-425 October 6, 1975 INTRODUCTION OF SEWAGE CAPACITY ORD. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO INTRODUCE THE ORDINANCE RELATIVE TO SEWAGE CAPACITY, TO BE AMENDED WITH THE INCLUSION OF AN ADDITIONAL WHEREAS: Page 2, between the second and third whereas: WHEREAS THE City Council of Livermore has determined to employ a Community Development Director whose primary function will be to attract industry and commerce to the community. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY. Cw Tirsell explained that she believes this would indicate the City is not just setting capacity aside just to hold it there forevermore and that we are serious about it. Cm Turner stated that he doesn't agree with the statement and would prefer that Cw Tirsell suggest this as an amendment to the ordinance rather than to have to vote against the motion and the whole ordinance. CW TIRSELL WITHDREW THE ORIGINAL MOTION AND MOVED TO ADOPT THE ORDINANCE, SECONDED BY CM STALEY. CW TIRSELL THEN MOVED TO AMEND THE ORDINANCE BY THE INCLUSION OF AN ADDITIONAL WHEREAS, AS STATED ABOVE, MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY. Mayor Futch and Cm Staley indicated that they agree with includ- ing the Whereas clause as proposed by Cw Tirsell. Cm Miller stated that he has expressed the same concerns as those mentioned in previous meetings by Cm Turner with respect to a Community Development Director and sees no advantage to include this clause. He stated that he wasn't happy with the format for the Community Development Director. Cw Tirsell explained that she is concerned that the Council might be accused of reserving capacity and then people will look at how much industry comes to our town and will say that Livermore just doesn't want to grow so the capacity is just being reserved. We will be saying that we are reserving the capacity and we are also doing something about trying to get industry for the reserve. Cm Miller stated that in his opinion, industry by itself is not as effective in mitigating the air quality problems as something more specific such as some kind of industry which would use the talents of our existing commuters. For instance if the City would have a Whereas clause which would say that the City of Livermore intends to do a job profile of our present commuters to try to match that with industry that we intend to invite, would sound a lot better to him. AT THIS TIME THE AMENDMENT PASSED 3-2 (Cm Miller and Turner dissent- ing) . Cm Miller stated that he would like to discuss the division of capacity reservation for ordinary housing, low to moderate housing, and commercial/industrial. He stated that he believes 45% for new residential is too much and that there should be concentration on industrial and commercial. He stated that he has two options he would like to discuss: l) zero percent to be used for new residential uses of the ordinary type, 90% for industrial/commercial and 10% for low and moderate housing; 2) a 5%, 80%, 5% division with the 80% for industrial/commercial. CM-30-426 October 6, 1975 (Intro. of Sewage Cap. Ord.) Cm Turner commented that 5% for new residential isn't very much. Cm Miller stated that this is true but the City recognizes that development of middle class housing is taken, overwhelmingly, by the commuter and contributes to the air quality problem which is not consistent with the general ideas of all the whereas clauses. The moderate to low income residential development, however, is a different issue. There are people who commute into Livermore who are not able to afford houses within the City because of the general level of prices. It would seem that in the mitigating aspects of this to reserve some for low and moderate income for people who do work in the Valley and commute here from outside, would be a mitigating measure. He stated that he could justify low to moderate income residential development provided there are controls on this type of development. Mayor Futch asked if the Council is referring to the capacity we now have up to the 5 MGD and it was noted that the Council is speaking of the capacity above the 5 MGD - Section l8.l9.3 (Page 3) of the ordinance. Cm Miller stated that he believes it is difficult to justify more white, middle class, housing in view of the air quality problems and commuters that take advantage of the housing. A very good case can be made for industrial and commercial development and there can be a case to support the need for low and moderate income residential development. He would suggest that there be reservation of 85-90% for industrial/commercial development and 10% for moderate and low income housing and essentially nothing for white, middle class, resi- dential development. Cm Staley stated that he doesn't know what it means to say that 45% will go for industrial and commercial development because as far as he knows this may be enough sewage to service the entire industrial base of San Francisco. Before he would set figures he would like to see a staff report on what the Council is talking about in terms of industry and this type of thing. He would suggest that this particular section of the ordinance be deleted because it refers to the future (5 to 10 years) and would suggest that the Council deal with what we have now and let the future be acted upon when, in fact, there is expansion. Cw Tirsell commented that she has done the arithmetic using the figures in the ordinance which would mean allowing 330 gallons per day, per household, it would allow 1350 houses, not of the low income type and would just about take care of the Hazelhorst property. Cm Staley mentioned that at present we have 40,000 gallons a day set aside for industrial/commercial development and now we are asking for an additional 1 MGD - it would seem that this is an awfully large figure for something so far in the future when we have capacity that hasn't been used. Cm Miller stated that this is the reason he has raised the question in the past about asking for another 1 MGD. CM STALEY MOVED TO STRIKE SECTION 18.19.3, PAGE 3, OF THE ORDINANCE, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. Mayor Futch stated that he believes that when the City applied for the 1 MGD there would be a significant part reserved for industry and commerce and was to be one of the mitigating measures. He stated that he doesn't know how much the City can reserve for this purpose but is certainly not opposed to the philosophy. He added CM-30-427 October 6, 1975 (Intro. of Sewage Cap. Ord.) that he doesn't know what the number should be but would suggest that the number be left in because the philosophy is there. The figure can always be changed by future Councils. Cm Miller stated that he agrees with the general principle offered by Mayor Futch but he doesn't agree with the split or the figures used (45% residential and 45% industrial/commercial). The point made by Mayor Futch about mitigating measures is very important and the majority of the capacity should be reserved for commercial/ industrial development. The intention on the mitigating measures would look better than if 45% will be used for commuters. Mayor Futch stated that he would like to see the words left in there until the City talks with the state and there is a better picture of what they will allow in the way of allocations and then the figure can be changed. MOTION PASSED 3-2 (Cm Miller & Mayor Futch dissenting) CM STALEY MOVED TO AMEND SECTION 18.19.3, TO LEAVE THE FIRST SENTENCE IN THE ORDINANCE, UNDER THIS SECTION, AND CHANGING THE SECOND SENTENCE, WHICH WILL READ AS FOLLOWS: This Ordinance shall remain in effect until such time as the effective dry weather capacity of the sewage treatment plant is increased from 5.0 MGD. From that time no connec- tion shall be made unless the City Council determines that the connection will further the goals of the City in balanc- ing the community and meeting the environmental constraints. MOTION BY CM STALEY TO AMEND WORDING WAS WITHDRAWN. MAYOR FUTCH STATED THAT HE LIKES THE WORDING PROPOSED BY CM STALEY AND WOULD MOVE TO ADOPT THE WORDING AS STATED ABOVE, UNDER SECTION 18.19.3. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY. Cw Tirsel1 stated that the City Attorney has expressed the opinion that allocations and justification of allocating needs to be researched and unless the City Attorney has discussed this with the Assistant City Attorney with a recommendation, she would rather wait until the City Attorney has given his advise on this matter to the Council. MAYOR FUTCH MOVED TO CONTINUE DISCUSSION OF THE ORDINANCE, PENDING A REPORT FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY WITH RESPECT TO SEWER ALLOCATION FIGURES. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED 4-1 (Cm Turner dissenting) . CONTINUED DISCUSSION RE TRACT 3666 - KAY BUILDING COMPANY Cw Tirsell asked if there is a motion on the floor concerning Tract 3666 with respect to the application by Kay Building Company for approval of the Tentative Map. Mayor Futch noted that there is a motion on the floor to deny the subdivision based on the findings made by the Planning Commission in their written report to the Council. CM STALEY MOVED TO AMEND THE LAST WHEREAS TO READ AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, no one appeared on behalf of the developer to present any evidence to the City Council, and CM-30-428 october 6, 1975 (Disc. re Tract 3666) NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Livermore finds as follows: l. That the developer has acquiesced in the findings of the Planning Commission by not appearing to pre- sent any evidence at the City Council hearing. MOTION SECONDED BY CM MILLER FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES. Mr. Reiners, the Assistant City Attorney, commented that "acquiesced" may be rather difficult to define. The applicant was not required to appear before the Council and to infer "acquiescence" in his failure to appear may not be acceptable. Cm Miller suggested adopting the whereas clause as amended by Cm Staley but omit the wording suggested for the first finding. Cm Staley stated that he knows of no reason the wording, per se, would be considered unreasonable with respect to the way the Council feels. He stated that he would be willing to delete the wording for the finding if the Council doesn't want to include them but the developer has appeared each time in the past and since he did not appear this time one might assume that he does acquiesce. Cm Turner felt it wasn't necessary to include the wording in the finding because the minutes will reflect that no representative was in attendance this evening to discuss this particular item. The records will also reflect that the applicant was duly notified. The Mayor has already asked if anyone wanted to speak on behalf of the developer and there was no response. Cm Turner added that he feels it is unnecessary to start adding wording to resolutions and in his opinion there is no need for the additional wording for the finding. AT THIS TIME THE AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION FAILED 1-4 (Cm Turner, Miller, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch dissenting) . CM STALEY MOVED TO AMEND THE WORDING FOR THE LAST WHEREAS, AS FOLLOWS, SECONDED BY CM MILLER: WHEREAS, no one appeared on behalf of the developer to present any evidence to the City Council. Cm Turner stated that he would oppose the motion based on the comments made by him earlier - that additional wording for the resolution is really not necessary. MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Cm Turner dissenting) . Cm Miller stated that he intends to vote in favor of the resolution and that the resolution faithfully reflects the issues raised by the Planning Commission in their testimony and provides for their recommendation to the City Council. MOTION TO DENY THE SUBDIVISION, BASED ON THE FINDINGS BY THE P.C. PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, AND THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION NO. 2l5-75 A RESOLUTION DENYING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP TRACT NO. 3666 CM-30-429 October 6, 1975 ADJOURNMENT Mayor Futch adjourned the meeting at 11:00 p.m. APPROVE Regular Meeting of October 14, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on October 14, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:00 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 September 29, 1975 Cw Tirsell stated on p. 392, 4th paragraph from bottom in her motion rather than "as amended by the Council" it should read "WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENT: THE ADDITION OF is: CONCLUDE THAT THIS RESOLU- TION DOES NOT INDICATE SUPPORT FOR OR OPPOSITION TO THE ABOVE STATED INITIATIVE". In the same paragraph add, "that copies of our resolu- tion will be sent to our legislators by cover letter". Page 395, 3rd paragraph from the bottom, third line: "stub-streets is--instead of are--not clear." Page 393, 5th paragraph from the top, line two: should read "but this recommendation is concentrating,etc." instead of "but they are" Page 406, last paragraph, f~rst line: should be "rifle" not "riple" .. Page 40l, 2nd paragraph, fourth line from the bottom: should read 'automobile controls, for example, have been set back.' Page 404, 3rd paragraph, last line: should read 'it only makes the map look nice. Page 404, last paragraph, last line: delete the entire sentence starting 'The long-term rate......" Page 397, 5th paragraph, second line: should read 'the City should retain 10% of contract money to offset any valid claims after the project is completed. This was,etc.' CM-30-430 October 14, 1975 (Minute Corrections) Page 402, lst paragraph, last line: add existing and projected to make the line read "to support the existing and projected residential population in the City of Livermore. Page 402, 2nd paragraph, 5th line down: after ".5% growth rate" delete the words (for the first five years) Page 406, 2nd paragraph: 2nd line of motion should read "PASSED 3-2 (Cm Turner and Miller dissenting) . Page 397, 4th paragraph from the bottom: should read 'outstanding bills not exceeding.the requested, etc.' Page 397, 2nd paragraph from the bottom: after 'to advance the 5%' insert 'at the time the street is open to traffic,' ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 29, 1975, vffiRE APPROVED, AS CORRECTED. SPECIAL ITEM (Res. Commending City Manager) The following resolution commending the City Manager was adopted unanimously by the City Council and Mayor Futch read the complete resolution to the audience: RESOLUTION NO. 216-75 A RESOLUTION CO~~ENDING WILLIAM H. PARNESS FOR HIS DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AS PRESIDENT OF THE CITY MANAGERS DEPARTMENT OF THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES. (Presentation of Purchase Awards-Cultural Arts Festival) Mr. Ron Carr, 1270 Concord, Pleasanton presented the City Council with the two purchase awards from the Festival. Collage of Shadow Cliff Park by D. P. Mahler and Water color, titled "In the Summer we Often Eat in the Garden" by Gloria Taylor. Mayor Futch thanked the Cultural Arts Council for the awards and commended them for the success of the festival. OPEN FORUM The Mayor invited comment from any member of the audience on any item not on the agenda. The only response concerned an agenda item and was postponed until later in the meeting. COMMUNICATION RE EIR FOR LAVWMA PROJECT A communication was received from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency indicating their intent to prepare an EIR for the LAVWMA project. The Council will request copies of the EIR and would encourage the citizens to become aware of what is going on as far as Waste Water Sewage Treatment in the Valley as it will affect our taxes for many years. CM-30-43l October 14, 1975 COMMUNICATION RE: STUDY OF EMERGENCY AMBULANCE SERVICE A communication was received from Loren W. Enoch, County Adminis- trator with regard to a study authorized to resolve the problems that currently exist in emergency ambulance services for the Amador-Livermore Valley. A motion was MADE TO.:SEND A LETTER OF APPRECIATION TO THE COUNTY FOR CONDUCTING SUCH.A STUDY BY CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. COMMUNICATION RE: AB 2353 Cm Miller stated that the Council already agrees to support AB 2353 and has discussed more comprehensive alternates so (a) we should send a letter stating that we do support the bill and (b) we support some of the comprehensive alternates as well. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO DRAFT A LETTER WHICH IS TO INCLUDE THE FIVE ITEMS ON PAGE FIVE. COMMUNICATION RE VCSD-Ot~ED PROPERTY The Council received a copy of a communication sent to the Director of the Pleasanton Redevelopment Agency requesting that Pleasanton withdraw VCSD-owned property from the City's proposed redevelopment plan. The item was noted for filing, ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. COMMUNICATION RE WASTE- WATER TREATMENT FACILITIES The Council received a copy of a communication sent to the Municipal Wastewater Treatment Agencies from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board concerning construction grants for wastewater treatment facilities, a ten year project list for the San Francisco Bay region. Mr. Parness commented that the letter the Council received is a form letter being sent to all disposal agencies within this region. There is a great deal of technological information that must be amassed and submitted to the Regional Board for qualification for their consideration of enlistment as to an application for award of a grant for plant enlargment. The difficulty is that they need to have it by October 24th which, again, is after the date of the next meeting. We have already accumulated a great deal of this information and the staff would like permission to submit an application in accordance with the Council's discussions and deliberations, to date, as to a capacity allotment - a grant for additional capacity to the extent of 1 MGD, taking into account the mitigation factors which are now under preparation by the staff and also all the various technological parts of the applica~ tion. This is preliminary and is not committing the City but merely qualifies Livermore for consideration under their grant research. CM-30-432 October l~, 1975 (Communication re Waste- Water Treatment Facilities) CW TIRSELL MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE THE MATERIAL FOR APPLICATION, TO BE INCLUDED ON THE PRIORITY LIST, FOR THE STATE WATER QUALITY FUNDING. MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Mr. Lee stated that with respect to the application to get on the priority list for 1976-77, he would like to include funds for a pro- ject to increase our water reclamation capabilities. The last time the plant was upgraded the Doolan reservoir was constructed, as well as transmission lines which helps the City with land disposal for the effluent on the golf course and airport property. The time is right and we would probably get support from the Regional Board and the State Board to expand the land disposal capability of the City. Mr. Lee suggested that this be included in the plant expansion project. He stated that he has some ideas that he would like to present. This would not be a commitment on the part of the City but it would get us on their books. Mayor Futch stated that he believes the Council would be very inter- ested in Mr. Lee's presentation of the details but since a large audience is present this evening for the discussion of other items he would suggest that this be postponed until later in the evening. Mayor Futch added that he would suggest postponement of the whole item. The first part of this item concerns an application for expansion of the present sewer plant by 1 !1GD. The Council has already agreed, in principle, with application for the 1 MGD. COMMUNICATION FROM AERIE FRATERNAL ORDER OF EAGLES RE CIVIC AWARD MEETING The Livermore Aerie Fraternal Order of Eagles extended an invitation to the City Council to attend the annual Civic Award reception to honor Earl B. Duarte as the outstanding citizen of the Livermore Valley for 1975. The event will take place on Tuesday, October 28. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION TO BE PRESENTED TO MR. DUARTE COMMENDING HIM. COMMUNICATION RE RENTAL PROPERTY DISCRIMINATION A copy of a letter sent to Billie J. Wilson from Congressman Stark regarding her concern over the unavailability of rentals in Livermore for families with children, was submitted to the Council. Ms. Wilson has written a letter to the City Clerk asking that this matter be pursued and that she be informed of action the Council might take with respect to the problem of people not being allowed to rent a home, apartment, or duplex, if they have children. CW TIRSELL MOVED THAT THIS ITEM BE REFERRED TO THE SOCIAL CONCERNS COMMITTEE, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. DISCUSSION AND REPORT RE PARKING STUDY A detailed report was submitted to the Council by the City Manager concerning the CBD Parking Study. The City Manager reported that he has prepared a rather lengthy report on this subject which does recite, first of all, some of CM-30 433 October 14, 1975 (Discussion and Report re Parking Study - CBD) the history of parking studies in our city dating back over the last 15-17 years, followed by considerations that have been suggested recently as to the improvement of the downtown parking at least in the section of the business district east of "L" Street between Fourth Street and the railroad track. The matters that have been brought to the attention of the Council are rather segmented. There are suggestions, for example, that some properties recently acquired by the City at the corner of First Street and Livermore Avenue be used for parking purposes and other suggestions are that the street patterns in this area be made one-way and that diagonal parking designs be used in place of the current parallel parking alignments. There are suggestions that something should be done about the merchants parking lot in the way of regulation and per- haps be made self-sustaining through the assessment of a fee thereby relieving the merchants on First Street, "J" and ilK" Street areas. There have also been suggestions that land adjacent to the merchants lot be acquired, by lease, adding to that facility, as well as other suggestions. The staff did not have a great deal of time to analyze these matters because they did involve staff study and analysis in depth. One of the factors that did postpone the staff activity on the report was the fact that the staff did want to conduct an author- itative analysis of the use of the merchants lot. One of the factors involved with the use was the presence of the County offices located in the building in which the Council meets, and the fact that one of the main offices just opened. The staff waited until the office opened prior to taking the survey and the survey was a personal con- tact made with each entering vehicle. , This material was gathered rather hastily but the Council can be assured that the material and conclusions reached are valid and reliable. At the conclusion of the report the City Manager has tried to indicate what his recommendations would be with the con- currence of the staff members that participated in the study, as to what might best be done. Simply stated they are as follows: l. That the City Council instruct the staff to proceed with installing a man-type of regulation at the parking lot that would be conducted by the City over a six-month study term. There should be personnel in attendance for about 11 hours per day for six days a week over the six- month term and to exact a parking fee for the use of the lot. Mr. Parness stated that inadvertently he did not state what the recommended fee should be but it was implied that the fee should be 25~/hour or 75~ for all day use. 2. It would be the intention of the Council that, depending upon the experience during the six-month period, later electronic regulatory devices could be installed on the lot. The cost of such equipment is noted in the report and the devices can be installed to accommodate either coin or tokens or validated cards. 3. As to the addition to the merchants parking lot, 86 addi- tional stalls can be found but it is suggested that this be held in abeyance until it is determined what the exper- ience will be in the use of the existing parking lot through the assessment of a parking fee. 4. That the Council allow the staff to pursue the possibility of leasing property between the merchants parking lot and the retail outlets on the north side of First Street for additional parking facilities. These would separate the lot from the structures and would provide about 74 additional spaces. CM-30-434 October 14, 1975 (Discussion and Report re Parking Study - CBD) 5. That for the reasons cited within the body of the report, by the engineering staff, the Council deny the usage of any additional diagonal parking within the Central Business District, notwithstanding the fact that by physical count it would add approximately 63 stalls over the existing number, or about 30%. The reasons being, the congestion afforded and the hazards that might be experienced in the usage of diagonal park- ing in the heavily traveled streets. Also, that the properties acquired by the City at the intersection of First Street and North Livermore Avenue not be used for parking but rather for their intended purpose - Central Business District beautification. Mr. Parness stated that these are the conclusions reached by the staff and would recommend that these be adopted by the City Council. Rebecca Hundob1e, representative of the Business License Tax Committee, stated that the Committee recommends to the City Council that the question of user charge vs. merchant business license tax surcharge, as it pertains to the municipal lot, be continued until January 1, 1976. The recommendation comes about after extensive discussion for the following reasons: 1) the General Plan Review Report from paid con- sultants is soon due and they may well have pertinent information regarding the parking lots. 2) A shift to paid parking during the forthcoming Christmas season may be improper since any test samples for pay-as-you-go parking at that time may not be accurate because of the heavy parking lot usage. Also, the surcharge has already been paid for this fiscal year and Christmas is the most lively time of all for use of the lot. 3) Last week's survey by the City staff shows 500+ cars per week use the lot for a thoroughfare. Closing this lot as a thoroughfare would only congest First Street further until the railroad relocation project is complete. CM STALEY MOVED, ON THE BASIS OF THE COMMITTEE'S REPORT, THAT THE COUNCIL CONTINUE THE ISSUE OF IMPLEMENTING THE PLAN FOR CHARGING AN IMMEDIATE SURCHARGE FOR USE OF THE MUNICIPAL LOT UNTIL THE FIRST MEETING IN JANUARY. Cm Staley stated that for the record he would also like to comment that the report comes from a committee composed of two members from the City Council, two members from the Chamber of Commerce, and Mrs. Hundoble who is a member at large, for the purposes of studying the business license tax in the City of Livermore and, particularly, the business license surcharge on this particular lot. CM MILLER SECONDED THE MOTION. Cw Tirsell suggested that rather than defer all discussion of the item, there are leases that need to be negotiated if it is intended that private property be leased, that implementation might be deferred until after the first of the year or at least until after the opening of the underpasses but allow the staff to negotiate on the leases. Cm Staley explained that the intent of his motion was to continue the issue of implementing an immediate user surcharge on the lot by methods outlined by the City Manager. There are a couple of issues he would hope the Council can deal with now and one is the negotiation of a lease and the other would be concerning the lot that needs to be explored in the meantime. CM-30-435 October 14, 1975 (Discussion re Park- ing Study - CBD) Cm Staley noted that the other item which needs to be explored is for the City Manager to contact the County to ask for an increase in their percentage of the cost for operation of the lot because the survey clearly indicates that about 40% of the lot is being used by people using the County offices for County business. This, however, is not part of the motion. John Regan, 672 South "N" Street asked for clarification of the motion. Mayor Futch explained that the Council will vote on whether or not implementation will be delayed until the first week in January. There has not been discussion as to how this might be implemented. Mr. Regan asked if this means that everything will be delayed until the first meeting in January. Mayor Futch explained that there are items the Council would like to have the staff investigate prior to making a decision. AT THIS TIME CM STALEY REPHRASED THE MOTION AS FOLLOWS: TO CON- TINUE THE DISCUSSION OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A USER FEE FOR THE MUNICIPAL LOT UNTIL THE FIRST MEETING IN JANUARY AND IF THE USER FEE IS TO BE IMPLEMENTED THE COUNCIL WILL DETERMINE THE METHOD OF ITS IMPLEMENTATION. Cm Staley explained that the reasons behind his motion would be that the General Plan consultant is going to make a general recom- mendation as to the CBD development, which will include parking. This report is due prior to January 1, 1976. Also we are entering into a major shopping time for the downtown merchants as well as the fact that the assessment taxes have been paid for this year. Lastly, the Council would want to avoid further congestion of First Street until the underpasses open. Mr. Regan commented that he is very happy the Council is postponing a decision on the user fee for the parking lot. He stated that he and his partners have violent objections to the implementation of a user tax. He also suggested that any study group the City might have could meet with him and his partners to discuss this matter. em Turner stated that he intends to vote against the motion because he would like to see the matter discussed and settled this evening. He stated that he has serious reservations about any type of fee imposed for the use of the municipal parking lot. Charles Clark, owner of the Beauty College, stated that he feels the Council should take into consideration the fact that many students of the Beauty College use the parking lot and they cannot afford to pay a parking fee. Les Sharp, local resident, commented that he is afraid if pay park- ing is instituted it will mean eventual parking meters for Livermore. Cw Tirsell stated that a study was done in the 60's which indicated that one of the ways to solve the parking problem would be to install parking meters. Every Council has rejected such an idea because the Council does not want to do anything that would discourage shoppers from shopping downtown. The City has received the results from a survey which indicate that the majority of people who park in the municipal lot are not necessarily shoppers and that a small per- centage of the spaces are taken by shoppers. Most of the spaces are occupied by students and other people who work in the immediate area. It is the intention of the Council that there not be barriers for people who wish to shop downtown. CM-30-436 October 14, 1975 (Parking Study - CBD) Marty Wolfenberger, 4150 Vineyard Avenue, Pleasanton, stated that she is a student from the Beauty College and that tuition and books amount to about $190 for the nine months of training and that students really cannot afford an additional $3.75/week to park in the lot. Jerry Bierly, 2008 First Street, stated that he is very happy the Council may postpone a decision concerning this item until January. Manuel Luna, 723 Via del Sol, stated that he does not want to see the Council continue to postpone a decision on this matter. He stated that the merchants have problems and he knows no reason there cannot be a policeman to enforce the parking regulations on the street. He added that the parking problem will never be solved unless the time limit is monitored. MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Cm Turner dissenting) . CM STALEY MOVED THAT THE CITY MANAGER AND THE STAFF BE DIRECTED TO CONTINUE NEGOTIATIONS TO ACQUIRE ADDITIONAL ADJACENT PROPERTY TO EXPAND THE MUNICIPAL LOT AND TO INSTRUCT THE CITY MANAGER TO CONTACT THE COUNTY TO REQUEST THAT THEY PAY A MORE EQUITABLE SHARE OF THEIR COST FOR THE USE OF THE MUNICIPAL LOT FOR THIS PARTICULAR YEAR. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Cm Turner stated that prior to negotiating for additional property he would like to know how long the County offices will occupy the court building. It was noted that the County intends to use the building until 1980. Cm Turner suggested that the City look into this and try to find out when the project for new County offices is expected to be complete. Cw Tirsell suggested including our statistics for the County's edification. Hr. Regan commented that he did a survey of the County's parking lot and ascertained that over a period of a week many of the people using the parking for the County offices were merchants or customers of the merchants in the vicinity. The County is not able to utilize the num- ber of parking spaces allotted to them which is included in their lease. For this reason he would oppose asking either the County or the merchants for money for the municipal parking lot. He stated that he has indicated to the County, who leases the Court building from him, that he would be opposed to an increase in the rental with- out further investigation considering the usage of the municipal lot. Cw Tirsell stated that she doesn't really understand what Mr. Regan is recommending to the Council. Mr. Regan stated that he feels the present apportionment is satis- factory and this was the way it was originally arranged and should not be changed. He then read a portion of Ordinance 623 relative to the method by which assessments for the lot are to be made. He stated that if the status of the parking lot is changed and there is to be a fee it means that he will also have to have someone police his parking lot area (for the Court) at a cost to him because people can get into his area and park for free. Cw Tirsell suggested that Mr. Regan present his concerns to the Council, in writing, for consideration at the January meeting. Cm Miller stated that it is his understanding Mr. Regan is recommend- ing that the present business license fee surcharge remain as is. Mr. Regan noted that this is his recommendation. Bobby Silva, 1275 dePaul Way, stated that as a "J" Street merchant she does not object to paying an assessment or surcharge on her CM-30-437 October l4, 1975 (Discussion re Parking Study - CBD) license fee for municipal parking but she does object to merchants being charged 79% on top of their business license fee when they have their own parking lot located on Second Street. Their people do not use the municipal parking lot and they would be more than happy to pay for parking over on their side of First Street. Cm Turner stated that the Council will be discussing the entire issue again in January and perhaps there should be reconsideration of the usage of the municipal lot by the County at that time. He added that while the staff is negotiating for the lease maybe the staff could also talk to Mr. Regan about leasing another portion of the land for additional parking. CM STALEY INCLUDED IN THE MOTION THAT WHILE NEGOTIATING THE LEASE THERE SHOULD BE DISCUSSION WITH MR. REGAN ABOUT ADJACENT PROPERTY AND POSSIBLE LEASE FOR ADDITIONAL PARKING. Mayor Futch stated that the City will attempt to get an accurate account of those using municipal parking prior to going to the County about the matter. Cm Staley stated that he has no objection to having another survey but he does feel the County should be willing to pay its fair share of the cost for the lot. If it is determined their fair share is about 15%, which is about what they are paying now, that's fine. However, if it turns out that they are using 35% of the lot then they should be requested to pay 35%. Mr. Regan asked if it is the obligation of the lessee or the lessor to provide parking and Cm Staley commented that he would need to read the lease before this type of question could be answered. Mr. Regan stated that he honestly believes he cannot ask the County for more money because it is a written covenant in the lease that he supply their parking. He stated that if the County is going to be obligated to pay additional funds he would just as soon cancel their lease, delete the item concerning parking, and let them have lots of parking in the municipal lot. Cm Staley stated that he feels the Council should discuss the prob- lem of the difference in providing parking for the employees of a lessee and parking spaces for the general public using the County facility. This seems to be the problem in the use of the municipal parking lot - the issue is not a matter of providing adequate park- ing spaces for the individual employees of the County but a matter of who pays for the general public using the County facility. He stated that he believes these are separate issues. Mr. Regan stated that he would like to know if all the contributors to the assessment district "have been properly assessed. The City is saying that the County should pay its fair share, but is everybody else paying their fair share? Cm Staley stated that this is one of the reasons we have a study committee studying the business license tax surcharge and hopefully a fair share for everyone can be determined. Cm Turner stated that it would appear there are a lot of loose ends that need to be tied together before talking with the County. Mayor Futch explained that the City will only be asking the County to pay their fair share and the City intends to be fair in determin- ing what this share should be. CM-30-438 October 14, 1975 (Discussion re Parking Sutdy - CBD) Cm Staley stated that all the Council is asking is that the staff find out if the County would agree, in principle, with paying their fair share. If they want to take another survey this is fine but nobody has spoken against the County's paying a fair share - it just hasn't been determined what the fair share should be. The sense of the motion is that the staff approach the County and try to get them to agree to this, in principle. Cm Miller stated that it is possible the County might wish to partici- pate in another survey if there is one, and this would be a perfectly reasonable request. Bobby Silva stated that what she believes Mr. Regan is saying is that if the County has to pay their "fair share" then there are merchants who are not paying their "fair share". HOTION PASSED BY UNANumus VOTE. CM STALEY MOVED THAT THE CITY MANAGER EXPRESS TO THE CHIEF OF POLICE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL IS EXTREMELY INTERESTED IN FAIR, EQUITABLE AND RIGOROUS ENFORCEMENT OF THE TIME LIMITS FOR DOWNTOWN PARKING ~T LEAST THROUGH THE CHRISTMAS SEASON. MOTION SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Cm Turner questioned if this is an item that is on the agenda that perhaps action should not be taken until the merchants have had the opportunity for input. Some of the merchants may object if cars are ticketed after an hour of parking. Cw Tirsell pointed out that a one hour limit is the ordinance. In answer to Cm Turner's question about this being an agenda item for which the Council should take action, the majority of the Council felt this was also a part of the parking study issue. Manuel Luna stated that the City ordinance is the law and he would like to know if passage of the motion means it will be enforced. Mayor Futch stated that the City Manager will be asked to contact the Chief of Police to request that the law is enforced fairly, equitably, and rigorously. Mr. Parness ask~d if the motion would include the addition of a phrase that would say, "within the limitations of personnel time available" . Mayor Futch stated that the Council would be interested in knowing how much personnel time is being allocated to this. Mr. Parness indicated that the staff will be making such a report to the Council. He added that he realizes the Council is concerned with enforcement of the parking regulations, as is ~1r. Luna and other members of the business community. He stated that he discusses this matter with the Chief of Police every week but there are also complaints about the too stringent enforcement of parking regulations. The City is trying to enforce the law but it is a matter of priority and there are a certain number of man hours to devote to a certain number of requirements with respect to law enforcement in our community. The enforcement of on-street parking is one of the lesser priority items. The Chief of Police, at the request of the City Manager, has reassigned people who mark cars to try to enforce the parking regulations on the days there are more shoppers and traffic. Cm Staley commented that the intent of his motion is not to ask the Chief of Police to place this item as one of the highest on the priority list but merely to express the concern of the CM-30-439 October 14, 1975 (Discussion re Parking Study - CBD) Council on this matter and that it does deserve his attention. The majority of the merchants seem to be in favor of more strictly enforced parking regulations than the present enforcement and he would like this expressed to the Police Chief. o Cm Miller stated that an additional point to be made is that the Christmas shopping season is near which is crucial to all the downtown merchants. Parking regulation enforcement might not be as essential in January but is very important during the very busy forthcoming time. Even though parking enforcement priority may fluctuate during the year, right now it should be somewhat higher on the list. Celia Baker, 541 Bell Avenue, stated that the business people of businesses who park in front or near their business cause the parking problems downtown which means that it really wouldn't have to be policed every day. If the police would check on different days they would get the cars that are parked there all day in front of their shop. This would really help alleviate the problem. Mr. Regan stated that as a citizen he would appreciate it if those asking for stricter enforcement and those asking for less enforce- ment would be more considerate of the City Manager and not telephone him to air every gripe. Cm Turner questioned if a formal motion on this matter is really necessary. He stated that we have an ordinance that needs to be enforced, the Chief of Police is aware of the problem and the City Manager knows of the problem. He then requested that the motion be withdrawn. Cm Miller stated that he seconded the motion and would prefer that it not be withdrawn on the following grounds: The Council could direct the staff in an informal way to do essentially the same thing and the point made by Cm Turner is well taken but the Council is giving its view formally expressed in a motion. Cm Turner stated that as he recalls there was a discussion about an item in the past and a motion was made to direct a staff member to do something about enforcement of the ordinance. It was con- cluded that this matter was covered in the ordinance and for this reason the motion was withdrawn. It would appear that the Council is taking this particular ordinance and directing the Chief of Police to enforce the ordinance. The Chief of Police is apparently trying to enforce the ordinance but perhaps not to the liking of everyone. He added that he believes it is wrong to start select- ing ordinances and making direct motions asking that various depart- ments enforce them when they probably already are trying to enforce them. It would appear that what the Council is really saying is that someone is not doing their job on this particular ordinance. Cm Staley noted that he does not view this as a motion that directs the Police Chief to do anything in particular. There are hundreds of ordinances in our books and some of them get enforced, particu- larly if violence or crimes endangering others are involved. These types of ordinance are seriously enforced but there are hundreds of minor regulations and parking and traffic regulation is certainly a minor ordinance in terms of priority of enforcement. At this particular time we have a special problem downtown that needs some attention called to it. Everyone on the Council believes that all laws and ordinances should be enforced at all times but the fact remains that the Police Department does not have the manpower to enforce all the laws and regulations. The Council CM-30-440 October 14, 1975 (Discussion re Parking Study - CBD) is expressing by this motion, the sense of the Council. The motion is not a directive to the Police Chief to go out and spend $25,000 a year, for example, to enforce parking regulations. It is the sense of the Council that this particular ordinance needs some attention in terms of enforcement over the next six to eight weeks during the Christmas shopping season. Cm Turner stated that he is going to vote for the motion, very reluctantly, but he is going to go back through the minutes and try to find the particular issue he mentioned previously. He added that he feels this type of motion is wrong and he doesn't believe in it; however he will vote in favor of it because he wouldn't want anyone to think that he is not in favor of enforce- ment of the law. AT THIS THm THE MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. Cm Miller stated that there are items to be discussed, independent of the things voted on by the Council. The Council voted to post- pone the discussion of the merchants parking lot and the matter of policing parking as well as the matter of negotiations. There have been questions raised about street patterns, diagonal parking, and ultimately the fate of the mini parks at the intersection of First Street and No. Livermore Avenue. It has been the recommendation of the City Manager that the Council not consider diagonal parking on the basis of traffic hazards. There also has been concern expressed by merchants downtown about possible loss of 18 parking spaces when the street is realigned and the con- cern has been reflected by comments from the Council which in turn have reflected on what the possibility might be for turning one of the parks into a parking lot or a park with parking. Cm Miller stated that the concern about the loss of parking spaces is a real concern and he can appreciate this. For the most part the recommendations of the City staff about not using one-way streets and not going into mass diagonal parking would be reasonable. However, there are several streets on which traffic is very light and they also happen to be close to the area in which parking is a serious problem, particularly "J" Street between Third and Fourth and "K" Street between Third and Fourth and possibly between Second and Third. CM Staley has also mentioned "I" Street between Third and Fourth and then there is also Second Street bet\veen So. Livermore and HcLeod. Cm Miller commented that if these streets are allowed to go to dia- gonal parking a number of parking spaces would be gained downtown to offset the future loss of the 18. In fact, there would be more spaces gained by making diagonal parking on those streets than would match the loss. He would suggest that the Council consider allowing those streets to go to diagonal parking. If the City would do this the mini parks would no longer have to be considered necessary as parking lots. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE STAFF BE DIRECTED TO STRIPE THE STREETS FOR DIAGONAL PARKING AS FOLLOWS: "I", "J", and "K", bet\veen Third and Fourth; "K" Street, between Second and Third; and Second Street between So. Livermore and McLeod. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY. Cm Turner stated that he believes the motion is a good idea and agrees with it but would like consideration of restriping "J" Street, itself, with the entrance on First Street and the exit on Second Street He stated that merchants have a difficult time trying to direct people to the parking on that street and one is committed to make a right-hand turn when exiting from that street and yet some people try to turn left. CM-30-44l October 14, 1975 (Discussion re Parking Study :CBD) Cm Turner stated that from the standpoint of safety he believes his recommendation should be adopted and MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE THAT "J" STREET BE RESTRIPED WITH ENTRANCE FROM FIRST STREET AND EXIT ONTO SECOND STREET. MOTION SECONDED FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES BY CM STALEY. Cm Staley stated that this would be a very good idea but it might require some staff study. CM TURNER WITHDREW THE AMENDMENT AT THIS TIME. Mr. Lee stated that with respect to the streets that have been sug- gested for diagonal parking, the effect would be more severe to some streets than others. If there is some inclination to delete some of the streets (those listed in the motion) he would like to mention those that may cause problems. "I" Street, between Third and Fourth is in an area with considerable commercial activity and there could be a problem as far as safety. The other street would be "K" Street, between Second and Third. This is in an area where banks are located and also a lot of traffic. Diagonal parking is a problem where backing out is concerned and not having a clear view of oncoming traffic. The other streets are not in the same category. Cm Staley stated that he likes the motion as it was made. He under- stands engineering considerations that indicate this might not be the best way to provide parking on these streets but he believes that the need for parking is sufficient to overrule the engineering considerations because in his opinion they are not that critical. with respect to "I" Street, between Second and Third, it is the street with the highest percentage of filled parking spaces on the survey done by the City Manager, and is probably the most critical area in terms of need for diagonal parking. There is probably all day parking by employees of nearby commercial offices because there is no parking limit on this street. It was noted that the diagonal lines will provide for 28-32 addi- tional parking spaces. Cm Turner stated that he drives down "I" Street frequently and would have to disagree with Mr. Lee with respect to there being a lot of traffic on that street. There is a lot of traffic on Second Street and Third Street but not on "I" Street. Celia Baker commented that it is her understanding the Herald and News, which is located at Third and "I" Streets, does not allow employees to park in their parking lot which means that the banks and newspaper employees are probably using the street parking. She suggested that perhaps it would be helpful to find out just how many businesses do make their employees park on the street. If parking on "I" Street is filled it is probably filled with Herald and News employees. AT THIS TIHE THE MOTION PASSED BY UNANHI0US VOTE OF THE COUNCIL. Cm Turner asked that the staff report on the possibility of revers- ing the parking for "J" Street with entrance from First Street and exit to Second Street and that the merchants be contacted, AND SO MOVED. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM STALEY FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES. CM TURNER INCLUDED IN THE MOTION THAT A REPORT BE BROUGHT BACK TO THE COUNCIL WITHIN 30 DAYS. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY. CM-:30-442 October 14, 1975 (Discussion re Parking Study - CBD) Mr. Lee stated that he can report to the Council at this time. The "J" Street mall parking is northbound and the City will soon be going out to bid for "K" Street, between First and Second. This will be very similar to the mall on "J" Street and will be southbound. This was discussed by the Beautification Committee, the Design Review Com- mittee and other groups. The reason they go in opposite directions is to circulate through that block without going around the entire block. He stated that he believes that one should be one direction and one the other direction. He stated that it probably wouldn't make any difference which one is south and which one is northbound but "J" was selected for northbound parking and traffic and the bricks have been constructed to accommodate that pattern. If there is a change it would mean a reduction in the number of parking spaces and unless there is a specific reason for making a change he would suggest that it remain as is. Mr. Parness stated that he would like to mention that when this was discussed in the past and northbound traffic was selected for "J" Street one of the reasons was because southbound traffic would cause traffic congestion for westbound traffic on First Street. Mr. Parness stated that the staff will come back to the Council with a report on this suggestion. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RECESS After a brief recess the Council meeting resumed with all members of the Council present. RES. AUTH. CONSTRUCTION BIDS FOR FIRST ST./SO. LIVERMORE AVE. INTERSECTION The matter of the resolution authorizing construction bids for the First Street/So. Livermore Avenue intersection has been held in abeyance pending a report and City determination on the parking issue. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE ITEM WAS TAKEN OFF THE TABLE. CM TURNER MOVED THAT THIS ITEr1 BE CONTINUED UNTIL THE JANUARY MEETING AND THAT IT BE DISCUSSED AT THE SA~E TIME THE MUNICIPAL PARKING IS DISCUSSED. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONSTRUCTION BIDS, SECONDED BY CM STALEY. Cm Miller stated that he did a recount of the spaces available with the diagonal parking and arrived at a figure of 32 spaces gained. He stated that this should more than cover the number of spaces to be lost in the widening of First Street and even possibly covered twice. The analysis of spaces available in this area and other areas downtown, surveys show that 40% of the parking is un- occupied averaged over a week. Generally there is some parking available on First Street and some on the side streets. Cw Tirsell stated that she has spent a lot of time considering this item and at the budget session in June she asked that this be recon- sidered at the time bids were to go out, for inclusion of parking on the southeast corner. Part of her motion included, "provided that a mechanism be found to repay Park Funds". There is a basic question CM-30-443 October 14, 1975 (Re Constr. Bids for First St./So. Livermore Ave Intersection) of equity involved. The City has not, in the past, had funds to build parking lots. This is a requirement of new construction and reconstruction and our ordinance requires 1 sq. ft. of parking for 1 sq. ft. of building. With the opening of 83 acres that will be accomplished by the track relocation, if the City provides park- ing from City funds for this park then we will have created a basic inequity for those who hope to do new construction as the area opens up. I~ would also be unfair for those who, in the past, have built parking lots, beautified and maintained them. People who have businesses in a shopping center pay for parking in their rent as well as cleaning, beautification and lighting. This is not the case with the downtown merchants. The streets (including park- ing) are swept, lighted, and maintained by City funds. She stated that she does not see how the City, in the future, could require one for one parking for new development unless the City intends to build parking in the CBD. There seems to be no mechanism for fund- ing CBD parking that the merchants would be willing to agree to. The Park Fund is about the only means available and if we begin to pick away at the Park Fund now there soon will be no funds available for parks. Even though she believes in the concept that utilitarian use and beauty can be combined, she cannot find justification on the basic question of equity in this matter. What is equitable for one merchant must be equitable for another. We are going to need new construction in the CBD and the ordinance of one for one is going to have to be enforced. The City cannot pay for parking spaces. For this reason she will vote in favor of going to bid for the mini parks. Cm Turner stated that he has reviewed this item a number of times and believes that what Cw Tirsel1 has said makes a lot of sense. However, he will vote against the motion because he feels this is an excellent opportunity to beautify an area as well as to put it to a valid use. It is difficult for him to justify building parks downtown, strictly as parks, when there is some question as to whether or not the parks will be used and when there are neighborhoods in need of parks for children. He still believes that the best use for this property would be parking combined with beautification. Cm Staley stated that since this item first came up his position has been that there should be no parking or beautification of these particular lots. After studying the matter, however, he has come to different conclusions. He believes the two corner lots are not safe for parking with respect to ingress and egress due to the heavy amount of traffic flow at this intersection. He stated that he was very impressed with the number of merchants who signed the petition indicating their desire for mini parks at both lots and is further impressed that we can recover all the parking spaces that will be lost by diagonal parking. The merchants have indicated that while there is a desperate need for parking in the CBD area there is also a need for beauty and visual relief in the downtown area and he believes that these lots, when constructed, will pro- vide the needed visual relief. For these reasons he will support the motion. Mayor Futch commented that he has always believed the City could get more for its money by using the Park Fund for development of parks elsewhere in the community. The City Attorney has ad- vised that it would be illegal to use the Park Fund money for provision of parking and the City has no money available except through the Park Fund. Therefore, there isn't much choice and he will support the motion. Cm Miller stated that Cm Turner raised a question that he feels should be explained so as to leave no misunderstanding. There CM-30-444 October 14, 1975 (Constr. Bids for First St.- So. Livermore Avenue Intersection) has been a question about Park Fund money vs. need for developed parks for neighborhood areas. It is certainly true that th~r~ is a need for developed parks in the neighborhood areas but there are a series of contracts and ordinances that have been worked out in combination with LARPD that says if the City acquires land for rec- reational purposes LARPD will develop it. In the newer parts of town there is a new ordinance which provides for collection of a park development fund that is turned over to LARPD to be used for the development of those neighborhood parks. Generally, without the park development fee it is the responsibility of LARPD to provide for the development of neighborhood parks. The City develops and main- tains those parks which are not recreation parks - those with visual impact. All the neighborhood parks and community parks are the respon- sibility of LARPD. Cm Turner stated that he still believes the corners can be made to look nice and still provide parking and as for the hazards involved he indicated that a service station was located on the one corner and there were no traffic hazards when people were going in and out at that time. Bobby Silva stated that the taxpayers pay for the parks and it should be made clear that the parks have not been voted on by the people but rather by the City Council and provided by ordinance. She felt this item should be put to the vote of the people. MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Cm Turner dissenting) . REPORT RE P.R. RE RESOURCES, LAND USE AND ENERGY The City Manager reported that the Assembly Committee invited our City to participate in public hearings concerning resources, land use and energy, on October 9 and 10 in San Francisco. Time did not permit a presentation but the City was informed that a written statement receivable within the next two weeks would be acceptable. Cw Tirse1l stated that this is a very large public hearing and the City has been asked to speak to only a small issue. She stated that she would suggest the Council address the problem of municipal growth vs. county growth and the land use conflicts that occur between counties and municipalities. Cm Miller suggested speaking briefly policy on development where the jobs policy to discourage commuting. i~~of regional land use Cw Tirsell commented that she believes the League of California Cities has an excellent position - that the resources and the manpower are in the city, in the decay, and if impetus were given by the state in their funding policies to redo urban cores and keep jobs there, many of our land use problems would be solved. She suggested that the City excerpt the League's position and emphasize it. Mayor Futch stated that he would meet with Cw Tirsell to prepare a statement for presentation that will be distributed to the Council before it is sent. REPORT RE JOINT SOLID WASTE CO~1ITTEE It was reported that over the past 2~ years a study has been underway with 10 participating public agencies within Alameda County that are CM-30-445 october 14, 1975 (Report re Joint Solid Waste Committee) served by Oakland Scavenger. The purpose of the study is to compose an acceptable accounting system and a rate regulation method. Inherent in the plan would be the adoption of a uni- form ordinance among all participating public agencies. One of the controversial provisions of the ordinance draft now under study by the various jurisdictions, is the length of the collection contract that may be awarded to Oakland Scavenger and Cm Miller has requested that this item be placed on the agenda for discussion. In the Finance Director's written report to the Council it was noted that the document proposes a 15 year franchise agreement and with justifications Oakland Scavenger feels it would be to the best interest of all involved if there were a 20-25 year fran- chise agreement. The full membership of the Joint Solid Waste Committee has not yet voted on the proposed revision of time and there is opposition by a minority of the Committee to a 20 or 25 year contract. Cm Miller stated that he is not sure the report from the Direc- tor of Finance would reflect the sense of the Council because the report generally recommends long term contracts for Oakland Scavenger. The Council discussed this item, briefly, about a month ago and there was some question as to whether or not a long term contract would be reasonable. He added that he would suggest the Council direct the Director of Finance to oppose long-term contracts, as our City's representative and member of the Joint Refuse Rate Study Committee, because even the 15 years is too long. It has become clear to Cm Miller in listening to the spokesman for the Joint Refuse Rate Committee that the Committee, in a sense, has become a spokesman for Oakland Scavenger. This position (20 to 25 years) is the support of Oakland Scavenger's desires and is in contrast to the situation as it was three years ago. Cm Miller stated that he attended one of the meetings three years ago and talked with people who were active at that time. There was quite a different outlook at that time. We have to face the fact that this is a matter of politics and that Oakland Scavenger is a very powerful lobby in Oakland and it is the Oakland City staff which is managing the Joint Refuse Rate Study. We need to recog- nize that Oakland Scavenger is a near monopoly - it is not a monopoly because they do not have all of the garbage collection but they do have about 3/4 of the business in the County. They are regulated in a very sporadic way and there is no real competition. The concern about long-term contracts is reflected in a concern by the Solid Waste Management Plan Advisory Committee who have adopted the recommendation that no major commitments to private enterprise or public enterprise be made until all the pros and cons of cost and efficiency (public vs. private enterprise) are available for the solid waste management aspect. Oakland Scaven- ger feels they should receive a 25 year contract or 15 year con- tract and this would be premature until these alternatives have been considered. If a 15-25 year contract were adopted it would pre-empt any rational consideration of alternatives and makes the Solid Waste Management Plan and the directive by the state to have some type of solid waste management plan, essentially a useless study. The majority of the Committee has not taken a position on the length of the contracts but there has been a desire of the Committee to allow the long-term contract. CM-30-446 October 14, 1975 (Report re Joint Solid Waste Committee Cm ~1iller stated that he would like to give the Council examples of what the issues are: ~) Large landfill for Oakland Scavenger in the hills of Altamont and~ private transfer and recovery station paid by all the rate P~~~~~~~~9~~J~1~SCaVenger. It is not clearK t. ~ that it will be, 1::5tiC~-C'6iJ.[CID ery profitable and there may be~~' . meri t in having recovery take place at a transfer station owned by(l;'l the public. ~ The large landfill is a way of avoiding an attempt to get resource recovery moving. Landfills are easy to fill up and there is no pressure on them to have real resources recovery if land is available. It would seem that these issues are very important and should not be pre-empted. Oakland Scavenger cannot be blamed, in any way, for trying to get their private plans approved prior to all these studies taking place. However, the City is not "in their shoes" and we should want to look carefully at all these aspects, as people who will be a part of a Joint Powers Agency that is supposed to administer a Solid Waste Management Plan. If Oakland Scavenger gets the contracts and the Altamont landfill, all possibilities of a plan are essentially pre-empted. The plan will then be Oakland Scavenger's private plan. The argument that Oakland Scavenger is using is that there is an essential need for landfill because landfills are running out of space and this is true. However, there is an existing sanitary land- fill in Alameda County which happens to be on Vasco Road and that landfill could take care of the whole County of Alameda, according to estimates, for at least 10 years. It will take care of Livermore for 400 years but it could take care of the entire County for approx- imately 10 years. Oakland Scavenger does not own this site but, in fact, it is a site that is available. In 10 years it should be possible to work out the resource recovery and if it doesn't work another landfill can be approved. This is enough time (10 years) to do the planning and actually construct a resource recovery. The concern that Oakland Scavenger has expressed, in opposition to the Solid Waste Management Plan, is that something needs to be done immediately and they are ready to do something and that there is no other way to go. However, there is another way to go. Fundamentally, the issues for all of these things are: 1) Who should own the resource recovery site and the recovered materials; and 2) who should own the landfill? Should they be owned by Oakland Scavenger or should they be publicly owned. Let us not make this decision, either for or against Oakland Scavenger or public ownership, at this point but there should be a study made and it should not be pre-empted. The continual push by the City of Oakland, in conjunction with Oakland Scavenger, for long-term commitment is wrong in principle, contrary to the concept of the Alameda County Solid Waste Management Plan and is a very long story. The Council should direct the Director of Finance to oppose any long-term contracts with Oakland Scavenger. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE BE DIRECTED TO OPPOSE ANY LONG-TERM CONTRACTS \VITH OAKLAND SCAVENGER. MOTION SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES. Lou Alberti, representative of Oakland Scavenger, stated that in bringing the garbage from the Bay Area, not going through a transfer station, it would cost $3.75/ton which would mean $ll,OOO/day. There is no economical way to haul the trash up here in their garbage trucks. They would have to bring about 600 loads per day. The transfer station they propose, building it and financing it, would have to be paid for through new rates because there is no lending institution that would give them this kind of money on a five or 10 year contract. It would be advantageous for the City to enter into a long-term contract with Oakland Scavenger. The cost of financing the facility they propose would be about 40% less over a 25 year period than a l5 year period. with respect to the plant generating money, if CH-30-447 october 14, 1975 (Report re Joint Solid Waste Committee) legislation would pass to guarantee the scrap, glass and energy recovery that could be gained from uses of the material, the money would be placed back into the company's income to reduce the rates to the homeowners using the facilities - excluding Livermore because it has a landfill provided for the next 35 years in its contract. If the energy plant could produce $1 million in revenue it would be placed back in to reduce the rates of the people, on a percentage basis, that goes into the landfill. This would be for rates affecting Albany, Emeryville, Oakland, Hayward, Castro Valley, Alameda, and on down the line. There is nothing "sneaky" about this whole operation. It has been discussed for many years. The City of Livermore does not have to go along with a 25 year contract because it is already committed to a landfill for at least 35 more years. Livermore is not included with respect to the transfer station and the cost of paying for the transfer station. This cost will be borne by Oakland Scavenger's cost of operation in the towns served. Cm Staley stated that it is his understanding Cm Miller's primary objection is that this would effectively pre-empt a study for the Solid Waste Management Plan, and asked that Mr. Alberti respond to this point. Mr. Alberti stated that the plan is being circulated through the cities of Alameda County for their approval or rejection. Oakland Scavenger won't know for about a month as to how the various City Councils will react to the plan that was passed by a slim majority of 2 by the Solid Waste Management Advisory Committee. He stated that Oakland Scavenger is not in disagreement with the County plan but they are opposed to certain facets of it because it would mean curtailment of their program to build a transfer station. There is room left for only one year on their landfill site, Alameda's should have been closed, and Marina is going to be full within a year. There is no more landfill available. At present 3,000 tons are being hauled into that area and they cannot be delayed for another 3-5 years. He added that if resource recovery is profit- able they would be the first to want to be involved but they cannot enter into purchase of $3 million shredders without some guarantee from the state or from the federal government that the material will be purchased at a given price. The customers cannot be expected to pay another 509 or $l/month for something like this without guarantees. He stated that he does not feel they would be pre- empting studies. Mr. Alberti pointed out that the Plan has not been approved by the Planning Commission or the cities involved and it has not been approved by the Board of Supervisors and this is the reason they feel they would not be pre-empting anything. Cm Staley stated that what he is trying to say is that Cm Miller has indicated that if Oakland Scavenger does receive a long-term contract, there is no point in doing any more work on this Plan or any other plan because the contract would essentially be the plan. Mr. Alberti stated that Cm Miller is entitled to his op~n~on but he does not agree that this would be the end of the County's plan. If Oakland Scavenger gets the "go ahead" and builds the transfer station then the Committee would evaluate resource recovery and help get legislation to make resource recovery profitable and everyone should benefit. CM-30-448 October 14, 1975 (Report re Joint Solid Waste Committee) John Corley, attorney representing Oakland Scavenger stated that Cm Miller's point is well taken but perhaps he has missed the point. You are talking about a Joint Study Committee and giving a contract for the collection of garbage. In the County Plan, specifically, is the suggestion that the collection of garbage should remain within the jurisdiction of local government. There was never a suggestion that the County should come in and tell the City of Livermore that it cannot contract with Oakland Scavenger for garbage collection. This was not included in the plan and it was deliberately omitted from the plan. If Oakland Scavenger is going to the cities saying they need a trans- fer station because they have a problem today, this is outside of the Joint Refuse Rate Study Committee's recommendation of a 15 year contract. It is suggested that a 15 year contract is needed in order to provide for a transfer station. The City of Oakland feels a transfer station is necessary and he is concerned when one city has solved their prob- lem and goes to a city with a major problem to say they want to study the whole picture while the problems continue. By suggesting that Livermore opposes a long-term contract would be unfair to the City of Oakland. He would also like to mention that it is not the lobbyists of Oakland Scavenger that are suggesting to the people of Oakland that they have a problem that needs to be solved. The Oakland staff is aware of the problem and they believe they have a solution. It is not the Oakland Scavenger influence that is convincing the City of Oakland. All you have to do is look at the facility to realize that there is a problem. f1r. Corley felt it is contrary to the best interest of those cities that contain the majority of the population in Alameda County for the City to request that the transfer station be delayed until such time it can be determined who should own the station or what type of financing should be provided. If Oakland Scavenger proceeds with its plans for a transfer station it would first go to the City of San Leandro, where it will be located, for permission to have a transfer station. Oakland will also have to go to the State of California's Solid Waste Advisory Board, in Sacramento, for permis- sion to proceed with this on the basis that the plan has been approved prior to that time. The Oakland Scavenger plan conforms with the plan approved by the Joint Refuse Rate Study Committee. The transfer station is not a proposal that is out of line, it is within the plan, and it will not pre-empt the plan. Oakland Scavenger would be a part of the plan, not the plan itself, and Oakland Scavenger would not pre-empt the plan. Mayor Futch asked if resource recovery would be hindered and Mr. Corley stated that it will, in fact, enhance resource recovery. The transfer station, itself, has a provision for recycling materials that are economically recycled today. It has the ability to be expan- ded with a larger area and other facilities in order to be able to recycle material when it becomes economically feasible. PG&E has been working with Oakland Scavenger for a facility for the purpose of resource recovery in the form of energy recovery. This is part of the plan and it would be based upon the ultimate development of it. A transfer station is necessary and the City of Livermore should not become involved as to whether the transfer station is owned by the public or a private party. Lois Hill, member of the County Solid Waste Advisory Committee, stated that she addressed the Council two weeks ago concerning the effects in the delay of building a transfer station which cannot be built in a day. The effects include: The environmental deterioration due to extending the life of the landfill, excessive energy costs from using many small collection trucks rather than large trucks, the loss of income from recyclables that cannot presently be recycled because we do not have a transfer station, and undue hardships a delay would place on the collectors. cm-30-449 October 14, 1975 (Report re Joint Solid Waste Committee) Lois Hill continued to say that in the Advisory Committee there were about three Berkeley members and when Cm Miller introduced a resolution regarding a delay until the public vs. private owner- ship determination has been made, the Berkeley members of the Committee were very disturbed, inasmuch as they had made plans for their public disposal system to begin constructing a transfer station in Berkeley. They objected in the same way that Oakland Scavenger is objecting this evening. One of the Committee members then inserted the words, "no major development in collection proces- sing and disposal", which got Pleasanton and Berkeley "off the hook" because they were already proceeding with their transfer station. The Berkeley members then voted in favor of Cm Miller's recommenda- tion for delay while the matter of public vs. private ownership is being considered. If those other three members had voted the other way the resolution would not have passed because the vote was very close. She urged that the Council also take this into consideration and that there are other communities with similar problems. It would seem that it would be advisable to prefer a solution pro- posed by a reliable long-standing scavenger company rather than an unknown, nonexistent public agency. She stated that of course this is her own personal opinion. Cm Turner stated that he would like to know how Mrs. Hill voted on the resolution presented by Cm Miller and she indicated that she voted against the resolution. She indicated to the Council two weeks ago that her personal preference is for private ownership of the transfer station over public ownership. She added that one of the reasons she voted against the motion was because Oakland Scaven- ger is a firm of longstanding reliability and also because of what is presently happening in New York City with respect to publicly owned facilities. The plan provides for review every three years because it is understood that one cannot predict what will happen in 1990. The existence of a transfer station does not mean there will no longer be flexibility, especially if the structure recom- mended to the Committee by her and Cm Miller is followed. Mr. Nolan, the Finance Director, stated that the Joint Solid Waste Committee proposes to submit a report to the various governing bodies of the jurisdictions involved and these governing bodies will have the opportunity to review the proposed model agreement and to approve or disapprove what the Joint Solid Waste Committee has developed over the past two years. A 15 year term is being used in the model agreement and it is up to the Oakland Scavenger Company to document and otherwise present data to the Joint Solid Waste Committee. He wanted to emphasize that no city is bound to the 15 year term, it is just a recommended model agreement. Cm Miller stated that there have been wide ranging number of points made this evening and they are difficult to resolve. The argument that Oakland Scavenger is a part of the plan is only true if they pre-empt the plan. It is clear that Oakland Scavenger is a part of the plan in the sense they want to do it only if they have pre-empted it and it is their plan, not a public plan. Oakland Scavenger will undoubtedly always be a part of the plan because some or all of the cities will continue to deal with them. The part of the plan which indicates everything is in Oakland Scavengers hands is certainly consistent with the plan but it isn't really a plan - that has essen- tially been pre-empted. He stated that he cannot agree with Mrs. Hill, in that even if there is a review every three years it isn't of much value if there is a 25 year contract because you would be locked in. It is true that there was a narrow margin concerning the vote and the Pleasanton representative did not vote in favor of the plan. CH-30-450 October 14, 1975 (Report re Joint Solid Waste Committee) Cm ~1iller added that all of the industrial representatives, including the representative from Oakland Scavenger, voted against the plan and in most situations if we had that same kind of connections in any committees on which we serve as public offials, we would have a feloneous conflict of interest. It should be emphasised that all of this is connected (contract and the Solid Waste Management Plan) even though the Council is talking about the contract only at this time. Oakland Scavenger has its own solid waste management plan and they tried very hard to get the Committee to consider and adopt it. Oakland Scavenger's plan was unacceptable to the Committee, as was the County staff's plan that had a model county agency handling everything. Cm Miller stated that Mrs. Hill proposed an alternate structure for all of this which was acceptable to the majority of the Committee but the point was that Oakland Scavenger has their own plan and their own plan is in the letter received by Mayor Futch and probably the other Councilmembers. Their plan is very interesting - Oakland Scaven- ger essentially does it all and there is essentially zero regulation upon them by anybody, except by extremely fragmented groups who can do no real solid waste planning. Essentially, Oakland Scavenger would retain their near monopoly position without real regulation, in his opinion. We do not have to accept the view of Oakland Scavenger and if it should turn out to be inconsistent with the public interest another position will have to be taken - in his opinion their plan is inconsistent with the public interest, as are the long-term con- tracts. Cm Turner questioned why Cm Miller is saying the long-term contracts are inconsistent with the public interest and Cm Miller explained that the cities involved with the contract would be locked into the agreement with no alternatives from which to choose. Some day it may be felt to be advantageous to contract with a public agency but in all probability it would always be better to contract with Oakland Scavenger because they do a good job. However, Cm Miller stated that he does not want this pre-empted before the questions can be resolved. Cm Miller stated that he does not like the attitude of the repre- sentatives from Oakland who have pre-empted this choice. There are different views about how effective Oakland Scavenger lobbies are. Some people say they are very effective and others say they are not. He cannot say, personally speaking, how effective they might be. With respect to the matter of the need for the transfer station, there is a need to do something and there probably will be a need for landfill if we don't do something else. The transfer station of San Leandro has met with tremendous public opposition because it is in their general plan as recreation space. The proposed transfer station is not opposi- tioned free. There are alternate landfill sites, for a short run, and although the landfill Oakland Scavenger is proposing in the A1tamont Hills has rail access but they do not plan to use rail in the transfer of garbage from their transfer station. They propose to send very large and heavy trucks through the Valley; big heavy trucks would be better than many smaller trucks but the point is rail access is available and there is no real effort to use it for two reasons: 1) because they have the trucks, and 2) the rates would be unfavorable, but no effort has been made to change the rates. . #W~t\t:. Cm Miller stated that landfill could~e~rce recovery and this is a long term commitment. This proposal is a long-term contract for a resource recovery transfer station owned by Oakland Scavenger and he would argue that one should not agree to a long-term contract until the question of who will own the resource recovery facilities or trans- fer stations, until it has been studied and has been resolved. An adequate study cannot be completed if there is CH-30-45l October 14, 1975 (Report re Joint Solid Waste Committee) a 25 year contract with Oakland Scavenger tomorrow. This is the issue Cm Miller is raising and the reason he believes the Council should object to the long-term contracts. Cw Tirsell commented that SB 5 says that an Alameda County Plan must be filed by January 1, 1976. We have received a draft on the Alameda County Plan which she has reviewed in addition to receiving presentations from COVA and Cm Miller. "If adopted by the majority of the cities that contain a majority of the population this plan would be submitted to the state for review." She stated that she can understand Oakland Scavenger's problem. They cannot get financing for what they wish to do and to accomplish what they want to accom- plish unless they receive assurance that they will receive the business over a long period of time. They cannot get a loan unless they re- ceive a long-term contract and this is strictly a business point. However, there is a point involved that concerns Cw Tirsell in that she has read the Alameda County Plan but doesn't know what the con- sensus of the County is or if they would want a board to oversee the plan or implement a separate agency to oversee the plan. The business point is very crucial for Oakland Scavenger and they cannot proceed without the long-term contract. As soon as the Alameda County Plan is filed, on January 1, it will be clear to the cities whether or not there will be an implementation program and if there is, just what it will be. Cw Tirsell stated that when she knows how monitoring of the plan is to be done then she will feel more comfortable. January is not a very long time to wait although she understands that in the world of finances it is a long time to wait. However, she couldn't vote to commit our City and believes our representatives should not vote to commit our City to a long-term contract prior to the filing of the Alameda County Plan. When the majority of the cities contain- ing the majority of the popu~ation have said "this is the plan we want", then we can decide that the contract should be written so that there is mandatory review with options, or whatever is needed and she would be able to agree with a long-term contract at that point in time - when she knows what the Alameda County Plan will be. Cm Staley stated that he does not feel he is adequately informed on this issue to make a decision this evening; therefore, if there is to be a vote he will abstain. He added that he believes the proposal made by Cw Tirsell is very reasonable. Cw Tirsell stated that she would recommend that Mr. Nolan not vote in favor of a long-term contract, if it is to be voted on, until the City knows what the consensus concerning the Alameda County Plan is going to be. After the filing of the Alameda County Plan and when a consensus has been filed with the County then she would probably be willing to vote for the long-term contract. Cw Tirsell added that it is evident that garbage is a household problem but it isn't a household language. She has not talked to anyone other than Lois Hill, Don Miller, the Oakland Scavenger people and a few others who have done a little research, who even perceive what the problem is. The problem of what to do with garbage is an immense national problem and people do not understand that what they are throwing away is really a tremendous problem. A majority of the cities that represent a majority of the popula- tion must approve the Alameda County Plan and it must be filed by January 1. Cm Miller stated that this is the required vote for that plan to be approved by the state. If, however, no plan is approved by Alameda County the state will write one for Alameda County. There has to be some kind of a plan for the County. CM-30-452 october 14, 1975 (Report re Joint Solid Waste Committee) Mayor Futch commented that he doesn't feel he can vote in favor of Cm ~1iller's motion because he would like to have the opportunity to think about this issue. Cw Tirsell suggested that the matter and the motion be continued. Mr. Nolan noted that the next meeting takes place October 23rd and this would be prior to the next Council meeting. Cm Miller stated that undoubtedly there will be a number of other meetings held by the Joint Solid Waste Committee concerning this item. Cm Turner stated that he is not opposed to long-term financing and that from a financial standpoint the long-term agreement with Oakland Scavenger would be very necessary before they could receive any kind of financing for their plan. In his opinion Oakland Scavenger has no intention of cheating the public because there is too much at stake and they have too much to lose. Oakland Scavenger's attorney has said that they would conform to any solid waste management program the County comes up with. Cm Turner added that he believes this would be written into the contract and he would ask if it is in the contract because it is important. He would ask Oakland Scavenger if conformance to the Alameda Solid Waste Management Plan is included in their contract. Mr. Corley, their attorney, stated that the first problem is that the plan itself says that the collection and control of collection will be the responsibility of the individual cities. ~Vhen we speak of the 15 years we are talking about collection only. He would sug- gest that prior to commencement with a transfer station, which is a concern expressed by em Miller, and the sanitary landfill, that at that time they must go to the state for approval. Oakland Scavenger has to tell the State Board that the County will file their plan and if the County plan has not been filed or approved by this time it has to be done on an urgency basis and the Board will look at what the plan is, what it should be, and make a determination as to whether Oakland Scavenger receives approval. If the Alameda County Solid Waste Manage- ment Plan is filed by January 1, and has been approved prior to Oakland Scavenger going to Sacramento with plans for the transfer station and landfill then their plans have to be in conformance with the County Plan. They do not have to conform if there is no plan to conform to, but if one has been filed that has been approved they must conform to it. However, this is not the issue in the 15-25 year contract. Livermore is asking that the other cities not contract with Oakland Scavenger because if they do there is a possibility the plan for Alameda County will be set. Cm Turner stated that Cw Tirse11 has mentioned the fact that the County needs to submit a plan prior to January 1 and he would like to know the schedule for Oakland Scavenger's plan. Mr. Corley stated that with respect to the schedule, the Joint Rate Refuse Study Committee has been working for a long time. Mr. Nolan explained that there have actually been two committees - one was the original technical committee that worked with the Price ~1aterhouse accounting staff in late 1971 through 1972. Then the Alameda rlayors' Conference adopted the Price ~qaterhouse report and suggested that the Joint Solid Waste Management Committee be formed to implement the report and to make recommendations on rate setting procedures. The current study dates from approximately January of 1973, or about 2~ years. CM-30-453 October l4, 1975 (Report re Joint Solid Waste Committee) Mr. Corley continued to say that there have been 2~ years of work on this contract and with respect to the schedule concerning the transfer station, the plans are before the City of San Leandro for zoning. After the zoning and a conditional use permit is granted they can proceed further with the plans. As far as the sanitary landfill is concerned, an application for a conditional use permit has been filed and the staff is working on an EIR. It is anticipated that this will not be reviewed by the zoning adminis- trator until after the first of the year. If the matter has to be appealed they would go to the Board of Supervisors and then to the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Cm Turner stated that this means that if the Council takes the posi- tion of January 1, it wouldn't really conflict with Oakland Scavenger. Mr. Corley stated that this would depend upon what position the City Council intends to take. If the Council decides there should not be a contract for collection of garbage in the member cities until after January l, it would be in conflict; however, this is all the City is being asked to approve - the collection contract. If Livermore's representative would vote in favor of the contract, and all the member cities would approve the contract, then they would return a model contract to the City and begin negotiations concerning rates. It is true that the rates would include a cost for the transfer station. Cm Miller stated that Mr. Corley has spoken about contracts for l5-25 years being for garbage collection only and he is suggesting that Livermore should not be telling everyone else what to do about their garbage collection. Cm Miller stated that he would agree that what people want to do about their garbage collection is their own business. However, it should be made very clear that for garbage collection, alone, a 15-25 year contract is not necessary. Con- sequently, this 15-25 year contract involves a transfer station and landfill despite what Mr. Corley has said. It is the transfer stations and landfills that bear on the Solid Waste Management Plan and is the concern over a long-term commitment. If you are going to take into account the long-term problems of transfer stations and landfills and who will do them, they are tied in with the 15-25 year contract and it is very clear that Oakland Scavenger has said they wouldn't be talking about a 25 year contract if they weren't worrying about the financing of things which really fit under the Solid Waste Management Plan. Consequently, this is the reason he has made the motion to object to these things until there is an opportunity to study them. CM MILLER RESTATED THE MOTION TO DIRECT THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO OPPOSE THE LONG-TERM CONTRACT IN THE COMMITTEE. CM MILLER INCLUDED IN THE MOTION, UNTIL THE ALAMEDA COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN HAS BEEN FILED, JANUARY 1. MOTION SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. MOTION RECEIVED A 2-2 VOTE (Cm Turner and Mayor Futch dissenting and Cm Staley abstaining). CW TIRSELL MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO THE FIRST REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING IN NOVEMBER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Mr. Parness noted that this entire matter will be the subject of even longer debate when the model agreement comes back to the Council probably within a month or two. MOTION WAS WITHDRAWN AT THIS TIME. CM-30-454 October l4, 1975 REPORT RE APPOINTMENT TERM - LIBRARY BOARD Cm Miller requested that the term for Library Board Members be changed from the current 3-year term to a 4-year term in order to be consistent with other City commissions. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE TERM FOR LIBRARY BOARD CO~~ISSION BE CHANGED TO A 4-YEAR TERM TO BALANCE THE OTHER CITY COMHISSIONS. MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cm Miller stated that the only thing remaining would be the existing terms which can be left to the staff. Nobody will serve more than eight consecutive years. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT RE EMERGENCY AMBULANCE SERVICE Mr. Parness commented that he is very concerned about the emergency ambulance service topic but would request that the item be postponed at this time due to matters which have come up just today and the staff will be having another meeting prior to coming to the Council with a recommendation. The staff is not prepared at this time to bring it to the Council's attention. CM STALEY MOVED TO CONTINUE THE ITEM, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT RE LABOR RELATIONS CONTRACT RETENTION Mr. Parness reported that over two years ago the Council authorized retention of a private labor relations firm, Industrial Employers and Distributors Association (I.E.D.A.) to assist the City on con- tract negotiations with our Fire Department. I.E.D.A. was reluctant to contract with our City since it is their exclusive practice of representing employer and all employees but at that time our other employee groups had two years remaining on their contract term. At our request a proposed revised agreement arrangement has been pre- pared by I.E.D.A. which is described in a written report to the Council. The cost for this firm would be about $3,300 higher than the cost normally expended by our staff but there is a substantial benefit accruable to the City in having a professional labor negotia- tion spokesman and staff at our disposal for support and information on a variety of related issues. It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing execution of the agreement. Mr. Parness added that over a year ago I.E.D.A. represented the City in negotiations with the Fire Department and were successful in their negotiations. They made a special dispensation on behalf of our City at that time because in no other instance have they ever taken a par- tial negotiating contract for a group of employees. They did this because the City had a multi-year agreement with the other three employee groups. At the time they agreed to assist the City there was an inference of a moral obligation that the balance of contractura1 relationships would be under their negotiating guidance whenever they became due. Because of the economic situation the City reopened and changed the term of the three other contracts. They did not expire this past June, as was originally intended, but rather provided for variable expiration dates. The City staff feels it is to the City's advantage to use this company and worth the net difference of $3,300 for the next fiscal year. CM-30-455 October 14, 1975 (Report re Labor Relations Contract) CW TIRSELL MOVED TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT WITH I.E.D.A., SECONDED BY CM MILLER. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. The Council gave the City Manager permission to allow I.E.D.A. to act on the City's behalf with adoption of the resolution at the next regular meeting. REPORT RE ATTIC FAN INSPECTIONS An ordinance was recently enacted requiring the installation of attic fans for homes with central air conditioning, prior to the sale of the home. At present a $25 fee is charged for inspection of attic fans, $5 of which is attributable to office work and per- mit processing. Mr. Street has suggested that in light of the number of complaints received concerning this fee it is recommended that Ordinance 848 be amended to read as follows: Section 6.53 "When inspection is required a fee of 4:weft~y ten dollars ($i!9T99) ($lO.OO), to cover the cost of initial inspection and one rein- spection, shall be payable to the City of Livermore at the time of application for a report of residential building record. An additional fee of ten dollars ($10.00) shall be assessed for for each additional reinspection required due to incomplete or incorrect work." Mr. Street stated that he would like to explain that there are two fees involved. One is a $5 fee for a report of residential building record and the other is an inspection fee which is presently $20 and recommended to be $10 which would amount to a total of $15. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE THE NECESSARY AMEND- MENTS TO THE ORDINANCE TO REFLECT THE ADJUSTMENT OF THE INSPECTION FEE. MOTION SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CONSENT CALENDAR Report from Library Board re Extension of Library Consultant Agreement The Library Board has notified the City Council of a request from the Library Consultant, to extend the time for performance of the consulting agreement for two months. The Board has recommended adoption of a motion authorizing a contract term extension to December 31, 1975. Res. Rejecting Claim A resolution was adopted rejecting the claim of Judy Carol Lanum. RESOLUTION NO. 217-75 RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF JUDY CAROL LANUM CM-30-456 October 14, 1975 Payroll & Claims There were two progress payment claims in the amount of $223,738.71, dated October 9, 1975 and approved by the Director of Finance. 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 (County Approval of Reclamation Plan for Stanley Blvd. Quarry) Mr. Musso reported that the County Planning Commission today recommended approval of the reclamation plan for the E. Stanley Boulevard Quarry which will be before the Board of Supervisors where the City will have another chance to testify. The plan was recommended, for the most part, as it was presented with the exception a reduction in the performance bond and another minor matter. (Gen. Plan Consultant Meeting Scheduled) Mr. Musso stated that Grunwald-Crawford is ready to meet again with the Council and asked that they select a date. It was concluded that the Council will meet with the consultants at 6:00 p.m. on Monday, November 3rd prior to the Council meeting. (Request for Executive Session after Meeting) Mr. Parness requested that the Council meet in an executive session after the meeting to discuss litigation. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCILMEMBERS (Departmental Costs) Cm Turner stated that in the past he has questioned the final year end figures and costs for the various City departments and particularly the Las positas Golf Course. Mr. Parness commented that the report Cm Turner requested is being prepared at this time. em Turner requested that in addition, he would like a report on major expenses in the way of capital improvements to the pro shop and the restaurant that were not amortized. The report he has received does not not reflect a true picture of the earning capacity of the golf course and perhaps there could be an explanation of why the City handled the matter as it did. CM-30-457 October 14, 1975 (Decline in Number of Highway Deaths During Gas Shortage) Cm Miller stated that he read an article in the newapaper about the decline in the number of deaths related to highway accidents during the gasoline shortage and during the time of less air pollution. The point of the article was that even though the report was not conclusive there is very strong evidence that there is a connection between air pollution and deaths from respiratory diseases. (Need for Hearing re Solid Waste Management Plan) Cm Miller stated that even though the Council spent a great deal of time discussing the Solid Waste Management Plan this evening it is necessary to schedule a public hearing for the purpose of deciding whether or not to support the plan. The public hearing should take place the last meeting in October or the first meeting in November. (Bike Path to Chabot) Cm Miller stated that someone has suggested that there be prov~s~on of a bike path to Chabot College because at present the road out by the airport is very rough, narrow, and hazardous. Perhaps the staff could prepare a brief report concerning this matter. (Bay Area Council Environmental Award) Cm Miller stated that nominations for the Bay Area Council's Environ- mental Award are being sought and it would seem appropriate to nomi- nate ABAG for their action concerning Las positas and that the staff to prepare an appropriate nomination. The Council concurred with this recommendation. (Truck Parking) Cm Miller commented that there is a bill in the legislature about not requiring a sign relative to parking of trucks and he would suggest that this bill be supported by the Council. (Mayors Conference - Bottle Bills) em Miller stated that according to the newspaper the Chairman of the Mayors Conference was very rude to Mayor Futch when Mayor Futch addressed them concerning bottle bills and Cm Miller would like to attend the next Mayors Conference meeting as a representative of the Solid Waste Management Plan Advisory Committee, along with Mayor Futch who will be presenting backup information. Mayor Futch explained that he will not be able to attend the next meeting and he has asked the City Manager to request that the item be scheduled at another time. There was a request that the cities support a local ordinance concerning beverages and this was rejected. A second recommendation was made that cities support a state ordinance. Mayor Futch asked if the Council would like to back AB 2353 and urge support of it or to support a bill that doesn't yet exist. CM-30-458 October 14, 1975 (re Legislation Concerning Bottle Bills) Cm Miller stated that he believes the Council has recommended that there be support of bills that do not presently exist but have been introduced in the legislature regularly, having to do with bottle bills, but there is no reason why we should not also ask for support of AB 2353 because it is a good bill. Mr. Parness stated that he has been in contact with the League staff in Sacramento who have informed him that there are two bills now residing somewhat dormant but are expected to be reactivated after the first of the year. They are not specifically about recycled bottles but they could be made to include the recycled bottles with an amendment. Mr. Parness has requested that the League staff send these for referral to the Council. (Solid Waste Manage- ment Discussion) Mayor Futch commented that there was a discussion concerning Solid Waste Management that went on for an hour and there was nothing in the agenda that he is familiar with. There are a lot of facts that have to be absorbed with arguments and points concerning the argu- ments and this is very difficult to follow without having had back- ground material. Cw Tirsell stated that she believes the next discussion will be more focused because the Council will have the plan to review and the amendment to it. Cm Miller stated that he did not expect the discussion to be lengthy and didn't expect the outcome ultimatley obtained because he thought the Council had generally agreed earlier that long-term contracts were a problem in view of the circumstances. He added that he is sorry the discussion was lengthy because if he had known he would have requested that it be scheduled at a different meeting. (Saturday Night Cruising) Cm Miller stated that everyone is aware of the fact that there was a very large number of people out cruising Saturday night at a substan- tial expenditure of City money. A report from the Police Department indicates that the advertised cruising night cost the City $1,800, there were a lot of arrests, and approximately 5,000 teenagers were cruising in Livermore that night. The overwhelming majority of those teenagers, young adults, extra costs and the whole cruising situation is a result of irresponsibility on the part of the Valley Times and the Herald newspapers. Cm Miller stated it is his understanding that the Chief of Police asked that the newspapers not circularize something that otherwise would have gone unnoticed, and received zero cooperation from these two newspapers which lead to a great expense to the rest of the City because of a lack of ability to respond to citizens' request for police service since all policemen were downtown shuffling teenagers. em Miller felt the cost to the taxpayers due to this kind of irrespon- sibility on the part of the local newspapers could very well be billed to the Herald and Times and he would suggest that this be placed on the agenda for discussion. Cm Turner stated that he was hoping em Miller wouldn't mention this until the information concerning the local newspapers has been sub- stantiated. CM-30-459 October 14, 1975 (Cruising) Cm Miller stated that he would like the Chief of Police to provide a supplement to his report and what he requested of the local news- papers. Regardless of whether or not the Chief of Police went to the newspaper companies, the articles printed by them were irres- ponsible. Cm Turner stated that he has indicated to the Mayor that he would hope the Council would pursue this matter because it is very critical to the future of Livermore in police service. Mr. Parness stated that as a concerned parent of teenagers who were involved in the mess, he would feel that it would be appro- priate to invite the parents of the teenagers who were the genesis of this to attend the Council meeting. The parents and teenagers were spoken to by the Police Department but Mr. Parness feels they should be made aware of the results. Cm Miller stated that if the citizenry understood the results and the deprivation of police services during this time, those teenagers would take a lot of flack and maybe it would be appro- priate response to the Herald and Valley Times. The item will be discussed at the next Council meeting. (Request for Adjourn- ment of Council Meeting) AND DISCUSSION RE COMMUNICA- TION FROM REG. WATER. QUAL. CONTROL BOARD - GRANTS FOR WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES Cm Staley stated that since it is after midnight he would like to request that the Council continue the remainder of the agenda and adjourn the Council meeting, as the Council has been discussing items for four hours. He stated that he is particularly interested in continuing the communication from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. Mr. Lee indicated that the item should not be lengthy and that there is a problem of time involved. The Regional Board provided the City with a letter that has been included in the agenda and gave the City until October 24th to make a submittal of projects the City might want on the 1976-77 priority list. The Council has approved a 1 MGD expansion and the time is just right to add to our reclamation plant. He explained that this does not commit the City to anything and per- haps the Council would allow the inclusion of expansion of the recla- mation plant. Mr. Lee then illustrated the area proposed for acquisi- tion for purposes of adding to our present irrigation system. This could be done at minimum cost to the City and he believes there is a good chance to get support from the Regional Board and the State Board because the reclamation plan is well established and protects land and open space. Mayor Futch asked why Mr. Lee would want to irrigate this land and Mr. Lee stated that this is a method by which effluent can be disposed and in keeping with the Regional Board and State Board's desire to use effluent. It is consistent with their participation in the reservoir and a transmission line to improve our facilities. Mayor Futch stated that this is not consistent with everything the City is told by the Health Department about land disposal and stable organics going underground. CM-30-460 I October 14, 1975 (Water Treatment Facility) Mr. Lee explained that most of this is used by the plants or evap- orates and this would add to the amount of revenue we get from our crops. Mayor Futch stated that there are chemicals in the effluent and eventually they will build up. Cm Turner stated that if this is allowed to be included in the applica- tion, the question would be, "are we approving anything?". Mr. Lee and Mr. Parness indicated that this would not be giving approval. em Turner stated that he doesn't want to get involved in another long discussion without any facts available but he would be willing to go along with the application process as long as the Council is not approving anything. Mr. Parness stated that even if this item is made an adjunct to the application for a capacity grant it can be deleted later if the Council so desires. Cw Tirsell commented, prior to the vote, that this does not mean she would vote in favor of including this on a formal application. Mr. Lee stated that this is understood. Cm Miller stated that he would like to comment for the benefit of the record, that he would be willing to vote for the motion in order to keep our options open but generally the concept of land disposal is "going out of style" and leaving an option open is not a commitment ultimately to do anything. CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL GIVE MR. LEE PERMISSION TO INCLUDE EXPANSION OF THE WATER RECLAMATION PLANT WITH THE APPLICATION FOR A 1 MGD SEWER EXPANSION, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Mayor Futch dissenting) . ORDINANCES CONTINUED ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE ORDINANCES LISTED IN THE AGENDA WERE CONTINUED. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Futch adjourned the meeting at 12:15 a.m. to an executive session to discuss litigation. APPROVE /Jc6~ J'Zc Z-~ Mayor ATTEST CM-30-46l Regular Meeting of October 27, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on October 27, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m. with Mayor Futch presiding. ROLL CALL Present: Cm Turner, Staley, Miller, 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 Oct. 6, and Oct l4, 1975 Page 445, 4th paragraph from the bottom, second line should read: pOlicy on development where the jobs are (delete rather) as well as land use policy...etc. Page 447, 3rd line from the top should and 2) a private..." and in line 5 the deleted and the sentence should read: station could be very profitable..." line. read: hills second "it" " . . .but the Omit "2)" in of A1tamont should be transfer the seventh Page 45l, last paragraph, first line should read: Cm Miller stated that landfill could hinder (delete enter) resource recovery and this ...etc. Page 42l, 3rd paragraph from the bottom, line 8, delete the word "at" after the word "levels". Page 428, middle of page, paragraph beginning Cw Tirsell, last line should read: the City Attorney has given his advice on this matter to the Council. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETINGS OF OCTOBER 6, AND OCTOBER 14, WERE APPROVED, AS CORRECTED. OPEN FORUM (State Law re Trailers) Mr. Leonard, 1892 Montecito Circle, read portions of the state law concerning trailers, mobilehomes, etc., and commented that he feels some of the law is unfair and other parts of the law are fair and he would like to discuss this item with the Council. He stated that owners of mobilehomes appreciate the fact that the staff is making inspections of mobilehomes; however, it would seem that the law for travel trailers is being used. One is allowed to park a motorized vehicle on his lot (camper/trailer or self-propelled motor home) but not a travel trailer. Mayor Futch commented that before the Council responds, perhaps Mr. Street should explain how the law reads. Mr. Street stated that the law provides that only one vehicle can be parked on the mobilehome lot except for self-propelled motorhomes and campers. The staff checked with the state as to the interpreta- tion of this because they promulgate the regulations and the City en- forces them. Their interpretation was the same as the City's. Only one vehicle which is not self-propelled is allowed on a mobi1ehome lot, and the one vehicle would be the mobilehome itself. CI-1-3l-l October 27, 1975 (State Law re Trailers) Mayor Futch suggested that if Mr. Leonard has a complaint about the equity of the law that he contact the people from the state because this is not a City law - it is only a state law the City is enforcing. Mr. Street explained that the people from the state noted that the law was written to prohibit travel trailers on the mobilehome lots because often they are used as sleeping quarters and they are not easily removed. They limit parking on the mobilehome lot to self- propelled vehicles. Cw Tirsell suggested that the delineation between self-propelled ve- hicles and a car be available to the Council because this will probably be a problem that will affect others also. Cm Miller stated that from what Mr. Street has said, the City is enforcing the law as the state intends it and as the Mayor has said anyone who doesn't agree with the law or feels it is unfair should take the matter up with the state. The best way to start with a problem would be to contact Assemblyman Floyd Mori or Senator John Holmdahl to ask if their office would support state legislation to change the law. It is not within the Council's ability to change the law. Mayor Futch stated that the City would be happy to write a letter to our representatives explaining which law is causing problems if this would be of any help to Mr. Leonard. Mr. Leonard stated that he would appreciate any assistance the City might be able to give because there are 15-20 people in the mobilehome park who are affected by the law. The staff was directed to contact Floyd Mori concerning this item. Mr. Musso commented that there should be a check of the lot against the approved plot plan because people were supposed to have had extra parking in the park for this type of use. He commented that he will check into this aspect. COMMUNICATION RE APPTS. TO SOCIAL CONCERNS COMM. A letter was received from Quintin A. Ramil expressing dissatisfac- tion about the selection of members for the Social Concerns Committee. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO NQTE AND FILE THE COMMUNICATION AND ASK THE STAFF TO WRITE TO MR. RAMIL EXPLAINING THE INTENTION OF THE COUNCIL IN APPOINTING ALTERNATES, WHICH IS TO INSURE THAT THE COMMITTEE WILL ALWAYS HAVE A WORKING MAJORITY. CW Tirsell explained that there are a number of people who have been selected as alternates who could not serve full-time on the Committee and these people are happy with the arrangement. The Committee is so new that she would hesitate to alter the makeup of the Committee and perhaps the intent could be explained to Mr. Ramil and that the Council has tried to balance senior citizens with the youth, minorities, etc. MOTION AMENDED TO INCLUDE A COPY TO THE FILIPINO-AMERICAN ORGANIZATION, MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. It should be noted that a letter was received from The Filipino- American Organization of the Livermore-Amador Valley, recommending that Mr. Ramil be appointed to the Social Concerns Committee and that the letter arrived after the agenda packet had been distributed to the Council. CM-3l-2 October 27, 1975 CO~MUNICATION RE RESIG- NATION FROM COMMUNITY AFFAIRS CO~1ITTEE A letter was received from the Community Affairs Committee informing the Council of the resignations of Carol Brown, Bill Archer, and Ernie Adams. Cw Tirsell commented that the Council should meet in an executive session after the meeting to discuss appointments to this committee. COMMUNICATION FROM LAVWMA RE FINANCIAL STATEMENT The financial statement for LA~~ was noted for filing ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RES. FROM LAVWMA RE INTEN- TION TO WORK WITH ZONE 7 ON l~R QUAL. MGMENT PLANN- ING FOR ALAMEDA CREEK ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE RESOLUTION FROM LAVWMA RE INTENTION TO WORK WITH ZONE 7 ON THE WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLANNING FOR ALAMEDA CREEK WATERSHED ABOVE NILES, WAS NOTED FOR FILING. COMMUNICATION RE APPT. OF HERB STREET TO BOARD OF DIRECTORS - ICBO A communication was received from the International Conference of Building Officials concerning the appointment of Herb Street, Chief Building Inspector, to the Board of Directors. Mayor Futch expressed congratulations to Mr. Street for his appoint- ment. CW TIRSELL MOVED THAT A SPECIAL COMMENDATION BE PREPARED FOR PRESENTA- TION BY THE MAYOR FOR SUCH HIGH ACHIEVEMENT IN THE PROFESSIONAL FIELD, OF ONE OF OUR STAFF. MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT RE SPRINGTOt~ POND PUMP & PARK BENCHES Councilman Turner has inquired about the possibility of operating a water fountain at the Springtown pond as well as the addition of two more benches. The staff has reported that the existing fountain would be very costly to operate but a small fountain could be installed with minimum effort and would be a great asset to the appearance of the area. Two addi- tional benches could be located at the pond area for approximately $270. Subject to Council approval, the fountain and two benches will be installed. em Staley stated that he would like to know what the operational cost for the small fountain would be and Mr. Lee indicated that he did not do a study on this but could present this information if Cm Staley would like. Cm Staley noted that he is just curious and would not ask for a report on the cost. Cm Turner noted that a pump with 50 horsepower costs $l/hour to operate and the small pump recommended would be 2-3 horsepower or approximately 2~/hour. CM-3l-3 October 27, 1975 (Report re Springtown Pond Pump & Park Benches) CM TURNER MOVED TO APPROVE THE EXPENDITURE FOR THE TWO BENCHES AND THE SMALL FOUNTAIN, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT RE ASSESSED VALUE VARIANCES Mr. Nolan, the Finance Director, reported that a letter has been received from the State Board of Equalization in reply to our inquiry expressing concern of the Council over certain ele- ments of the 1975-76 Public Utility Roll valuation which de- creased from the previous year, in contrast to four previous consecutive annual increases. The decrease in land values on the public utility roll is explained by the state as resulting from a transfer to the locally assessed secured roll. Since the increase we realized in land values on the local roll is slightly less than the amount the state says was transferred, we may be seeing the net of factors for which an explanation is needed, as land values are normally expected to increase with inflation. It is recommended that the Council authorize the staff to request a review of the Alameda County Assessor's appraisal procedures as applied to secured property in our commercial districts and to the unsecured property roll which has shown wide variations in recent years. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL AUTHORIZE THE STAFF TO l) REQUEST A REVIEW, AND 2) THAT THE COUNCIL DIRECT A COpy OF OUR CORRESPON- DENCE TO THE GRAND JURY. MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER FOR DIS- CUSSION PURPOSES. Cm Miller noted that a couple of years ago the Council wrote to the Grand Jury concerning assessment practices in commercial areas in Livermore and that they should again be notified. Mayor Futch stated that he would agree with the first part of the motion but isn't sure about the second. Cm Miller stated that there is a second aspect of this which is not on the agenda. About two months ago the City Manager informed the Council that there were some unusual changes in the assessed valuation of various downtown parcels where they were assessed at lower values last year than the year before. This does not make sense and it means that somebody is not paying their fair share of property taxes and the rest of the taxpayers have to pick up the tab. He would like to request that the City Manager provide a formal report with details for the Council's review and if there are more unusual happenings reported Cm Miller would request that the information be sent to the Grand Jury. Mayor Futch suggested that if there is going to be additional infor- mation, perhaps it would be best to wait to submit the information to the Grand Jury, after everything has been reviewed. Cw Turner stated that he would prefer to wait in sending correspon- dence to the Grand Jury until after the County Assessor's office has had a chance to explain their assessment practices. If, after hearing their explanation the Council feels the Grand Jury should be notified, then he would be in favor of sending material to them. Cm Staley stated that he would agree with Cm Turner and the Mayor for the following reason: The assessor fixes the value as of March 1, each year, and it is very possible that the transfer in question, for tax planning purposes, took place after that date. In that case there would have been nothing wrong with the assessments. However, if the report indicates that there are some unexplained disparities, then he would be willing to support the motion. CM-3l-4 October 27, 1975 (Report re Assessed Value Variances) Cm Miller stated that since the state is looking at money that was transferred, this is money that was transferred prior to March 1, and this is the reason it did not show up on the state utility roll. This means that the transfer should have taken place prior to March 1 of this fiscal year and the assessor should have had it this year. It isn't possible that it took place after March l, because the state has the same March 1 operating rules as the assessor. Secondly, March 1st is when changes take place and the 1st of March is approaching very rapidly. If the assessor picks and chooses who he intends to reassess or not to reassess or how he intends to respond, this should be cleared up before March lst or it means that the City will have to wait another year and someone will get a free ride on the tax roll. Anything the City can do to hasten the response of the tax assessor would be valuable. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO DELETE THE SECOND PORTION OF THE MOTION, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED 4-1 (Cm Miller dissenting) . CW TIRSELL MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE THAT THIS ITEM BE SCHEDULED FOR THE AGENDA IN ONE MONTH FOR DISCUSSION OF THE ASSESSOR'S RESPONSE. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED 4-l (Cm Miller dissenting) . MAIN MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM MILLER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE THE REPORT CONCERNING OTHER COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES IN THE CITY, TO BE RETURNED TO THE COUNCIL WITHIN THE NEXT 2-3 WEEKS. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT FROM P.C. RE LOW COST HOUSING RE CN ZONING The Planning Commission report indicated that in consideration of the proposal by the Council to require development of low-cost housing as a condition to CN Zoning, it would appear there is no legal way to require this type of housing as a condition to CN Zoning. Cm Miller stated that the issue spoken to by the City Attorney's office was the requirement for the dedication of land or a fee as part of the concept. The original suggestion, as Cm Miller recalls, was that low- income housing be a portion of the shopping area and this is not quite what was spoken of in the report from the City Attorney's office. Per- haps the construction of residential with some type of review from our Housing Authority could fall into a different category. This would not necessarily be dedication to the public, and this is the point. There could be the requirement that there be low-income housing asso- ciated with the shopping center not necessarily dedicated to the public. Cm Miller would like the City Attorney to indicate whether required development would be subject to the same objections as noted in the report. Mr. Musso stated that he would ask the Planning Commission about this because they will have continued discussion concerning this item. REPORT RE PRELIM. APP. - WATER QUAL. CONTROL BD. PLANT ENLARGEMENT The Council authorized preparation of a preliminary application for the water reclamation plant enlargement grant to be filed by Oct. 24. CH-31-5 October 27, 1975 (Report re Prelim. App. Water Plan~ Enlargemt) Mr. Lee reported that the application to be placed on the 1976-77 priority list has been placed in the agenda for the Council's information and was prepared as directed by the Council. Mayor Futch stated that last summer the staff went to Sacramento to make inquiries concerning this grant. Following the visit the staff was asked to look into the matter of additional mitigating measures that will probably be imposed and the staff was to report back to the Council. Mayor Futch asked if Mr. Lee could give a timetable concerning information the Council has requested. Mr. Lee stated that he will try to have this information available to the Council in a couple of weeks. Mayor Futch commented that some of the members of the Council may wish to make a trip to Sacramento in January to combine a number of reasons for the trip, including lobbying for BART, as well as dis- cussing this issue with the Water Resources Control Board and the Air Resources Board. The Council would like to have the informa- tion available by this time. Cw Tirsell mentioned that on Page 4 of the mitigating measures, the first paragraph has a reservation and the Council has not yet adopted that. The ordinance will come back to the Council for adoption and if the letter is being sent now the statement is not correct. The numbers at this time are not at all certain. The current use of the expansion is 45% low-income, 45% indus- trial/commercial, and lO% residential. Cw Tirsell felt the reservation might make a great deal of difference in whether or not the reservation of capacity will count as a mitigating measure is using one percentage over another and felt that a significant quantity might be reserved but the numbers have not been decided. Cw Tirsell also pointed out that in the application, denitrification is mentioned and would like to know why the City can't dump down the Alameda Creek if we denitrify. Mr. Lee explained that chlorides would probably be a problem because none of the processes we presently have or propose would remove any of the chlorides. As the Council may recall VCSD has a restriction on the number of pounds of chlorides that can be disposed. Cw Tirsell stated that it is a $2 million process, to denit~ and it is a very expensive addition. She stated that she is^sure it is worthwhile sat is ~~~~iR~ ~Ria if it will be shipped down the LAVWMA pipeline. .~_ Mr. Lee stated that this is a matter that was discussed in pre- paring the application and these factors may very well determine what is included in the expansion. However, since this is a pre- liminary application it was felt this should be included. Mr. Lee indicated that the application has already been sent but if the Council wishes he can make a modification to this wording. Mayor Futch stated that there will have to be a lot of negotia- tions and he really doesn't feel strongly about it. Cm Turner and Staley noted that they had also noticed this point and feel that this might be a potential problem but no suggestions as to what should be done at this time. Cm Miller stated that he likes it the way it is and feels that our negotiating position with the state with respect to mitigation would look better when the City begins, if it is left the way it is written. CM-3l-6 October 27, 1975 (Report re Prelim. App. Water Plant Enlargemt) Cw Tirsell stated that there isn't much that can be done if the letter has already been sent; however, at the time the ordinance is adopted she will request at that time that a clarification be Made. REPORT RE BART EXPRESS SERVICE Mayor Futch commented that he requested that the City Manager prepare con~ents concerning the items discussed at the meetings regarding the BART express service and possible discontinuance of this service, with representatives from Livermore, Pleasanton, Antioch, Pittsburg, VCSD, and Contra Costa County Public Works. The City of Livermore initiated these meetings and at this time there have been two meetings with the cities who share the same concerns. It has been decided that it is necessary to lobby with various representatives and people instrumental in getting legislation passed. There will be another meeting in Janu- ary. Also in attendance were Senator John Nejedly, Supervisor John D. Murphy, BART Directors Nello Bianco and Robert Allen and BART staff member Ray Ceder. Cm Staley stated that at present the City has an informal committee composed of Mayor Futch, Cm Turner and the City Manager, who have been working on the item and he believes the Council should formalize the committee structure on transportation because he is very concerned about this BART problem in terms of not receiving the attention it needs. He stated that he does not mean to imply that it has not re- ceived the attention it deserves but he would like to make sure it continues to receive the needed attention and would suggest considera- tion of a formal subcommittee either on regional transportation or on BART specifically. Cm Turner stated that this would be satisfactory with him but would like to point out that he and Mayor Futch feel they are pledged to fight the battle with BART because this is exactly what it will be - a battle. BART directors are spending money but they are not spending it on Livermore and it would appear they have no intention of spending it on Livermore. Cm Staley stated that in speaking with representatives from the other concerned cities, they all feel about the same and it would seem that if Livermore would formalize a committee and the other cities would do the same, there might be a better chance for successful lobbying. Mayor Futch stated that he would like to present this suggestion at the next meeting to obtain an expression of opinions from the other cities. Cm Staley stated that it is also it might be worthwhile to ask that the East Bay Division of the League of Cities be concerned about this because many of the smaller towns are involved. The more information and discussion available with respect to BART's responsibility to pro- vide transportation to this Valley and the outlying regions of Contra Costa County, the more likely it is that we will have success. Cw Tirsell stated that COVA has planned a meeting for September at which time they will discuss intra-community bus service. BART and the School Districts have been invited to attend to discuss existing bus routes and the second part will be discussion about contracting with AC Transit. A member of the BART staff will be in attendance and perhaps the Council would be interested in attending this meeting. CM-3l-7 October 27, 1975 REPORT RE GOLF COURSE FINANCE REPORT Cm Turner has requested that a report be prepared concerning an analysis of the revenue and expenditure experience at Las positas Golf Course over the last fiscal year. The report has been dis- tributed to the Council. Mr. Lee reported that he has nothing to add to the written report submitted to the Council. Cm Turner stated that he still doesn't agree with the policies followed by the City but has no real reason to insist that the City amortize the costs. It would just look a lot better as far as the golf courses go, to have the costs amortized over a number of years. Cw Tirsell stated that she cannot understand how a fiscal year can start with January. The discussion did not agree with the graphs. Mr. Lee apologized and noted that he is sure this is a typing error and that January should have been July, because the large volume begins in July and tapers off towards the middle of winter. REPORT RE FIRST ST. CRUISING EVENT - OCT. 11 Mayor Futch stated that Cm Miller requested that the item concern- ing the First Street cruising incident which took place on October llth be scheduled for discussion by the Council in addition to a report from the Chief of Police concerning the history of the pub- licity leading up to the night of cruising. Briefly, the report from the Chief of Police states that the pub- licity was initiated by a small group of students attending Liver- more High School who had flyers printed and distributed at the Livermore-Oakdale High School football game. The item attracted the attention of the local newspapers in the Valley and then spread to several newspapers outside of the Valley and in addition, some of the radio stations. The Police Chief acted properly in expressing his concerns to the newspapers and did not attempt to supress or prevent the information from being printed. Mayor Futch stated that while he might agree the newspapers used poor judgment, in this case, it is clear that the press is under no obliga- tion to supress news that might harm an individual community or even the nation. Furthermore, they are under no legal obligation to be fair or honest. For these reasons he would feel there would be little grounds for trying to bill either of the local newspapers for the cost of the extra police power, and would suggest that the Council dismiss this item. ~,~~~ ~~~~~ Cm Miller stated that it has been his suggestion to bill ~h0 ~~iO local newspapers; however he has learned that all the newspapers printed stories about the cruising event prior to the night it was to take place and he feels it would only be fair to bill all the newspapers. He stated that he finds it very interesting that people are sensitive about criticism of newspapers but he feels it was irresponsible reporting on the part of the newspapers which resulted in a cost of $1,800 to the City in addition to the loss of police protection for the rest of Livermore. The teenagers who started this by distributing flyers made every effort to minimize publicity after the Police Department had informed them of the problems, in contrast to the Herald and the Times who inflated the story. CM-3l-8 October 27, 1975 (Report re Oct. 11 First St. Cruising) Cm Miller added that the Police Department pointed out that the majority of the cruisers came from out-of-town and the overwhelming majority had never seen the flyer. The cruisers heard of the night of cruising from the newspapers, radio and T.V. Dispite disclaimers by the newspapers, this story was promoted outside the Valley by the Herald, Tribune and possibly the Times. He added that in his opinion this is not a "freedom of the press" issue nor an attempt to suppress the news issue. The real issue is discretion and the responsibility of the newspaper editors. Newspapers do not print everything - they select everything. He would agree that no public official has the right to tell a newspapers what to print and the Police Chief did not demand that the stories be killed but asked for reasonable dis- cretion as to when the story should be printed and where. The cost and loss of police protection to the citizens, due to the cruising, is primarily,a consequence of widespread publicity from the local i-- tJnewspapers ~outside connections. The newspapers could have acted '~l,},responsibly but they did not and in his opinion they are morally, \~~ but,not legally, obligated to re~ay the taxpayers the $1,800, and he " bel~eves most of the people of L~vermore would agree. David Castro, Chestnut Street, stated that Livermore got so much publicity that it is unfortunate the plan didn't include getting money to pay for the Police Department - we need a money raiser in this town and the teenagers attracted everyone from out-of-town free. Robert Freis, 1322 Balboa Way, stated that he would disagree with what Cm Miller has said and that he believes this is an issue of freedom of the press and violation of the first amendment. What Cm Miller has suggested would be contrary to those things, not only in spirit but to the letter of them, and would be setting a dangerous precedent if it were successful. With respect to responsible editor- ials and editorial policies, the crux of this is that as the situation now stands each newspaper and editor has the right to choose what he wants to suppress and this is what freedom of the press is all about. There should be no threat of economic penalty if the editor makes the wrong choice and the choice happens to incur extra public expenses. At this particular time he is sensitive to this issue because at the national level legislation is being considered that many people view as a dangerous threat to freedom of the press and other liberties. For this City to talk about billing the newspapers would seem to be especially dangerous because it would tend to support this type of legislation. Mayor Futch commented that the views expressed by Cm Miller do not necessarily reflect the views of the majority of the Council. Cm Miller stated that he would agree with Mr. Freis about SB 1. This is a very dangerous bill and matters pertaining to possible threat to freedom of the press are important but somehow reporting on cruising with respect to timing and the size of the article is hardly a matter of political supression. Cm Miller added that he is also concerned about freedom of the press but believes that in this case freedom of the press is not the issue. Cw Tirsell stated that she also shares the concern over the cost of this incident; however she believes that it is a first amendment issue and while we might hope the newspapers would have a "public conscience" we know that it is not always the case. Their freedom is to print all the news that is fit to print and in the balance we would probably find that this very freedom works for America. She cited the example of the reporters who "blew the lid off Watergate" because a courageous editor saw to it that the reporters were allowed to pursue their story. Cm Staley stated that in addition to freedom of the press involved in this issue there is also the freedom of choice. Newspapers pub- lished this as a news story but even so, people decided individually to come to Livermore to cruise. The newspapers' responsibility to CM-3l-9 October 27, 1975 (Report re Oct. llth First St. Cruising) make known public gatherings is reasonable. While this particular event cost the City extra money it is the responsibility of the newspapers to make known general news in the community and it would be defensible to say that this was general news in the community. It was not just because the newspapers printed the item, that 5,000 teenagers were cruising in Livermore and that there was a cost of $1,800. Cm Turner stated that his initial reaction upon reading the headlines in the local newspaper was that, "is there really a need to know in this story to blow it up into headlines". He was disappointed in the newspapers who printed the story because Livermore has a very limited police force and in his opinion a responsible person would certainly have known that much of our police force would have to be committed to the cruising event if it attracted a number of people. Also, many calls to the Police Department by the other Livermore citizens probably went unanswered because it was neces- sary for all the policemen to be downtown observing the cruising. He stated that he is really disappointed with our local editor because the other citizens of Livermore were not taken into con- sideration when the editor elected to print this as a front page story and is an example of very poor judgment. John Edmands, editor of the Valley Times, stated that he agrees with Cm Miller in that this is not an issue involving freedom of the press nor is it an economic issue. He stated that he is disturbed that when the newspapers are publicizing an event involving young people, there is a presumption of danger or that a large force of policemen is neces- sary and that there will be damage. At what point do we decide this presumption is made. We get into the area of censoring news before the fact, because a presumption is made that people intending to gather will do bad things. Annually the County Fair and the Liver- more Rodeo attract large numbers of people and require a large commitment of our police force, etc. and he would like to know how this differs from a publicized event consisting of young people. Should we say that because young people are involved there should be no publication? This is somewhat a matter of the right or freedom of assemlby. The Valley Times carried only one article and included in the article was the notation that a large number of young people were anticipated and that the Chief of Police intended to assemble a large force because of the anticipated gathering. Extra police are required for a number of events including street dances, fairs; rodeos and even art shows. Who decides which gatherings should not be promoted or publicized? In his opinion the nature of the assembly was the catalyst of fear in this case, and the nature of it was that young people were going to gather. We make the assumption that if there is to be an "old car" rally the people are older and there would not be the exposure to danger. This is something everyone should con- sider - because it was young people we make the presumption there was a danger. ~.;;ra1t Hecox, editor of the Valley Times, stated that he made the de- cision to publish the story about the cruise and has no apologies for it. em Miller knows that he does not agree with what he has said and that Mr. Hecox's prime concern is freedom of the press. In this case it was a matter of judgment. Mr. Hecox told the Chief of Police that he could not suppress the story and Chief Lindgren indicated that he wouldn't ask that the story be suppressed but would request that it not receive a large headline. The article appeared at the bottom of the page and it was felt that it was in keeping with the subject. The intent of the article was to inform people that First Street in Livermore would be busy on the night of October 11th, without causing alarm. If he had to do it again he might do it exactly the same way. He stated that this issue should never have come up and that this is a matter of freedom of the press and the freedom of the press is one of the greatest defenders of the freedoms of this Country. CM-3l-l0 October 27, 1975 (Report re Oct. 11th First St. Cruising) Mario Pedrozzi, 217 North "N", stated that he is appalled with the press and the City Council for not doing anything about the situa- tion on First Street, not only on October 11th, but every Friday and Saturday night. He has been seeing this for nearly a year. Laws are disobeyed and deliberately broken and nothing is being done because there are not enough policemen in town to do the work. He stated that the October 11th event was not due to advertising but rather an escalation of something that exists every weekend on First Street. He would like to know if First Street is a highway or a playground for the children, and would urge that something be done about the situation downtown between 9:00 p.m. and 1:00 a.m. on weekends. Cm Hiller stated that he agrees with Cm Staley that it is hard to draw a direct connection, in the legal sense, for making newspapers finan- cially responsible. Despite the arguments presented by Mr. Hecox and others, he feels there is a moral responsibility. Secondly, in res- ponse to Mr. Edmands, it is certainly not just kids that people raise questions about - adults create problems too. Cm Miller's objection is not to freedom of the press or to cruising but rather the fact that large numbers of people during cruising time have led to vandal- ism all up and down First Street, as pointed out by Mr. Pedrozzi. The rodeo has an equal problem and the street dance during the rodeo time, with the assembly of both adults and teenagers, was a disaster for everybody and a street dance will not be allowed again because it is known in advance that this type of assembly leads to trouble. He agrees with what Mr. Hecox has said about freedom of the press but this whole issue is a matter of descretion and responsibility. RECESS Mayor Futch called for a five minute recess, after which the Council meeting resumed with all members of the Council present. REPORT FROM P.C. RE POSSIBLE AMEND. TO LAND USE ELEMENT - GEN PLAN ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, A PUBLIC HEARING WAS SET FOR NOVEMBER 10th TO DISCUSS POSSIBLE AMEND- MENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN. REPORT RE BEAUTIFICATION COMM. RECOMMENDATIONS - VARIOUS ITEMS The Beautification Committee submitted a written report containing recommendations for curbside mail boxes, the placement of an addi- tional kiosk at Second and Third Streets, that a study be done on making Second and Third Streets one-way, and that if a lease/purchase option cannot be agreed on with Exxon for the site at Murrieta and Portola, that only minimum improvement be done at that site. Cw Tirsell suggested that the item concerning the kiosk be referred to the Cultural Arts Council because they bear the responsibility of keeping the kiosk current. Perhaps they would like to give input with respect to their ability to provide information for an additional kiosk and as to the location suggested. The matter of the traffic pattern has been deferred until January and is being studied and a decision has been made on the beautifica- tion at Porto1a and Murietta. The only item remaining would be the curbside mail boxes, and Cw Tirsell wondered if this would have to be done by ordinance. ~1r. Lee stated that this is a matter of policy and the notations on the standard could be changed, if the Council desires. However, he CM-3l-ll October 27, 1975 (Report re Beautification Comm. Recommendations) would suggest that the Council consider the matter of painting of the curbside mail box. It is not desirable to have them on the curbs in the first place and if they are to be a variety of colors and designs they would be even more conspicuous. Cm Miller stated that he feels homeowners should be allowed to paint the mail boxes any color they choose. Cm Staley stated that he would prefer not to have a regulation unless there is a problem and Cw Tirsell felt this was a good idea - don't comment until there is a problem. Cm Miller noted that the City has a policy which requires the black mail boxes that would have to be changed if people are allowed to choose colors, AND MOVED THAT THE POLICY BE CHANGED TO ALLOW COLORS OTHER THAN BLACK FOR THE CURBSIDE MAIL BOXES, SECONDED BY CM STALEY. Cm Turner stated that he would prefer to leave the policy the way it is and wondered if there had been requests for colors. Mr. Lee stated that to his knowledge there have been no requests for painting the mail boxes. MOTION FAILED 2-3 (em Turner, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch dissenting) . Current pOlicy concerning mail boxes will remain effective. REPORT RE AIRPORT FARMING LEASE The City l'-anager reported that the airport farming lease for the 8 acres of property situated on the easterly approach zone of the airport will expire November 1. The lessee wishes to renew for an additional year at the same terms and conditions - $14.00 per acre. It is recommended that a resolution be adopted authoriz- ing an agreement to extend the lease. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION EXTENDING THE LEASE, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cm Turner stated that he would question the lease fee. A figure of $112 a year for 8 acres would appear to be very low. em Miller stated that he would question why it would be the same as last year when everything else has escalated. Mr. Lee stated that he doesn't have the answer as to why the figure is so low; however, the land is for agricultural use and could be quite low. Cm Turner asked if the City incurrs any cost and Mr. Lee indicated that it does not. Mr. Lee stated that he is not in a position to say that the lease fee should not be more than $l4 per acre now, but a couple of years ago the Hagemann property in the vicinity of the airport was being leased for $8 an acre. It was noted that the City owns the land and Cm Miller stated that he would really like to know more about leases and why this land would be going at the same rate as last year prior to making a decision. em Staley stated that if this is land that is leased for pro- duction of agricultural crops and he would be curious as to why the City is not on a gross profit lease rather than a set fee. CM-3l-l2 October 27, 1975 (Report re Airport Farming Lease) CW TIRSELL AND THE SECOND WITHDREW THE HOTION. CM STALEY MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM FOR TWO WEEKS, SECONDED BY CM MILLER WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT RE FIRE STATION NO.1, CHANGE ORDER #2 Mr. Lee stated that at the time the agenda was prepared there was not sufficient information available concerning the public works improvements and provision for undergounding utility facilities along the frontage of the Fire Station No. 1 structure but the fact is the undergrounding was anticipated early in the planning for the fire station. There was a list prepared on January 20th of the items to be required and undergrounding was one of the items listed. The City assumed that PG&E would be placing the ducts underground and the City would be entering into an agreement with them to do it, as was done for the Livermore Gardens Apartments; however, as negotiations with PG&E proceeded they opted not to do the underground ducts and they wanted the contractor to do the work. This is the reason the change order is being called for. Cm Hiller asked if the City would have had to pay the $9,448 for this work if PG&E had done it and Mr. Lee indicated that the City would have had to pay this regardless of who did the work. Cw Tirsell asked if this means the City will be paying the $9,448 twice and Hr. Lee stated that the City is being placed in the position of a private developer - we are required to place the ducts underground with our contractor. The money is not being paid twice. Cm Miller stated that the resolution says that the agreement is between the City and Associated Professions. Why are we paying Associated Professions $10,000? Shouldn't the agreement be with the contractor? Mr. Lee stated that the agreement should be, and is, with the contrac- tor. He added that he hasn't read the resolution but it should be with M:&H Construction Company. CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CHANGE ORDER, vHTII THE EXCEPTION THAT ASSOCIATED PROFESSIONS BE REPLACED BY M&H CONSTRUCTION COMPANY. MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 218-75 A RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 (Fire Station No.1) CONSENT CALENDAR Res. Commending Earl Duarte - Outstanding Citizer. A resolution was adopted commending Earl B. Duarte as the outstanding citizen of the Livermore Valley for 1975. RESOLUTION NO. 2l9-75 A RESOLUTION OF CO~J1ENDATION - EARL B. DUARTE CM-31-l3 October 27, 1975 Minutes The following minutes were noted for filing: Design Review Committee - October 8, 1975 Social Concerns Committee - August 21, and September l8, 1975 Planning Commission - September 30, and October 7, 1975 Departmental Reports The following Departmental reports were submitted for information: Airport Activity - September 1975 Airport Financial - Quarter Ending September 30 Building Inspection - September Emergency Services - Quarterly Finance Department - Quarterly Revenues - Expenditures Golf Courses - Quarterly Financial Library - Quarterly Mosquito Abatement - August Municipal Court - August Water Reclamation Plant - Progress - September Cm Staley questioned the Airport Activity report noting that the gross revenues are up but every column is down, with the exception of the lease of the airport and wondered why the revenue is down. Mr. Lee explained that there are fewer aircraft on the field at this time. The whole picture with respect to less activity is a reflection of economic conditions. Cm Turner stated that with respect to the Quarterly Revenues and Expenditures reported by the Finance Department, he has no way of knowing if various departments are within their budget or out of line. For instance, if the Planning Department were continue at the same rate, for the next three quarters, they would be over their budget by 31.2%. Mr. Lee explained that it is possible to make a lot of the capital purchases during the first quarter and this could be a substantial part of the budget for that department. Cm Turner stated that if a certain department is not performing as anticipated, he wants to know this at the end of the quarterly report. The Council should be aware of the fact that the budget is out of line during the first or second quarter rather than at the end of the year. Crn Miller stated that he believes that according to the rules, a department cannot spend outside of its budget without going to the Council for a budget change. Consequently, they may spend money differently in different quarters but everything spent is supposed to have been budgeted and if it wasn't it is supposed to come to the Council. Cm Turner also mentioned that there is no breakdown of the operating expenses - there is a breakdown for the revenue but not operating expenses, and he would like this information. Cm Staley stated that the fines and forfeitures for the Munici- pal Court are running considerably behind the same period for 1974. As he recalls, the City Manager was going to investigate this and he noted concern or the revenues falling further behind this year than last year. Last year they were lower than the year before and he would like to see that this report is expidited. CM-3l-l4 October 27, 1975 Report re Emergency Services Budget for 1975-76 Fiscal Year A written report from the City Manager indicated that consideration was given to the possibility of transfering our Emergency Services to Alameda County. Investigation revealed that there would be a nominal savings with a loss of administrative control and it was decided by the Council to continue this departmental activity as part of the City administrative structure. Inadvertently, the re- conversion of the budget did not take into account certain nominal maintenance items, as listed in the report, amounting to $1,119 offset by matching funds with a net cost to the City of $745. It is recommended that a resolution be adopted amending the Emergency Services Department budget for the 1975-76 fiscal year by the addition of $1,119 for the maintenance items. RESOLUTION NO. 220~75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AMENDHENT TO BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1975-76 Report re Tract 2827 Off-Site Mocho Sani- tary Sewer A report concerning construction of a section of the Arroyo Mocho Sanitary Sewer trunk line which was delayed due to problems con- cerning the right-of-way. The report is for informational purposes since the work is a contractual obligation between the City and the developer. Report re Library Term At the last City Council meeting it was decided that the term of Library Board members should be made consistent with other appoint- ments - that being 4 years. The state statute, however, establishes a term of 3 years. Cm Miller commented that in keeping as closely as possible to a term of not more than 8 years he would suggest the Council adopt a rule that nobody can have more than two reappointments - they could serve as long as 9 years. Res. Auth. Exec. of Agree. I.E.D.A. The matter of retaining the Industrial Employers and Distributors Association as a City labor relations consultant was discussed at the meeting of October 14th at which time approval was expressed by the Council. It is recommended that a resolution be adopted authorizing execution of agreement with I.E.D.A. RESOLUTION NO. 221-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT AHENDMENT OF AGREEMENT: Industrial Employers and Distributors Association CM-3l-l5 October 27, 1975 Report re Radio Equip. Lease The City Manager reported that contained within the existing budget is an appropriation for special radio gear for our Fire Department personnel. This provides for leasing of Motorola home receiver units and other paging communications units as well in addition to the conversion of plectron equipment. The rental rate is $166.33 per month and is expected to commence November 15 through June 30 for a total cost of $1,152.47. It is recommended that a resolution authorizing execution of agreement with Motorola be adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 222-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT Lease and Option to Purchase Radio Equipment (Motorola Communications and Electronics, Inc.) APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (Request for Executive Session) The City Attorney requested that the Council meet in executive session immediately after the meeting to discuss a matter of potential litigation. (Greenville Park) The City Attorney stated that the City purchased the Greenville Park property for $43,400 and the City will own the park in about lO days. (Hensel-Phelps Meeting) The City Clerk noted that Hensel-Phelps has requested that the meeting scheduled with the Council be changed to November 4th at 8:00 p.m. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL (Complaint re Paint- ing in Streets) Cm Miller stated that he has received complaints about the stop signs wording being painted in the streets. Apparently this paint causes motorcycles to skid and is very hazardous. It is recommended that some type of grit be applied to keep bicyclists and motorcyclists from being hurt. Mr. Lee explained that the large red and white stop sign is used very rarely and only in instances where a new four-way intersection is being established or where there are potential problems because of a new situation. CM-3l-l6 October 27, 1975 (PUC Agreement re Use of Taxpayer Money) Cm Miller stated that a couple of months ago the PUC made an agree- ment with the natural gas companies to participate in the exploration for natural gas, using the money from the taxpayers. The PUC was criticized for this action and did it very reluctantly because there was no way of guaranteeing a natural gas supply for the State of California. The reason they felt they had to do this, as it turns out, was because the Federal Power Commission has regulations which allow this to occur. These regulations are up for review and a representative of the PUC has suggested that if the City is interested in this it should write to the Federal Power Commission and suggest that the rule allowing this be eliminated. Cm Miller stated that he would like to make this an agenda item and will provide background information as well as a resolution asking that this regulation be eliminated. (re Community Develop- r.:ent Directors) Cm Staley stated that he learned at the League of Cities meeting that most Community Development Directors are trained and have background in applying for grants and aid and sources of funding for local pro- jects. As he recalls this was not the criteria in the job description for our Community Development Director and he believes it should be included. Experience in knowing how and where to get grants and how to use them should be something our Community Development Director should have a background in. Cm Staley suggested that this be made as an agenda item or that it be included in the description. He stated that it wouldn't necessarily have to be included in the written descriptions that have gone out but it should be considered at the time people are being evaluated and interviewed. (League of California Cities Conference) Cw Tirsell stated that she would like the City to write the League of California Cities to compliment them for this last conference she attended. She stated that the panels were filled with people offering fresh vie~~oints and that everything she attended was well worth going to. Cw Tirsell stated that she would like someone to express our thanks because often we have written to give criticism. The staff was directed to send a letter to the League leadership complimenting them on the conference and the overall quality of the discussions. (Proposed AB 2422) Cw Tirsell stated that an AB has found a significant item must look at very carefully. for the state which places a committees and the governor. 2422 is being proposed and Mayor Futch contained in the bill that the City The bill is proposing an organization political body between all technical Mayor Futch was immediately concerned with this portion and has included this in his comments. CM-3l-l7 October 27, 1975 (Proposed AB 2422) Cw Tirsell stated that in her comments concerning the bill, she has selected three policies and if the Council will read the underlined policies, she used an example for each one. If there is no serious objection to the underlined statements then the rest is just an example. She stated that Mayor Futch and she would like the Council to act on this tonight because it must be sent tomorrow. Mayor Futch stated that he would like to emphasize his concerns that all of the technical boards would go through a department of environmental quality and following this would go through the pro- posed commission. His concern is that the membership of the commis- sion would be chosen in such a manner that it would appear that nobody on the commission would have the technical background or the exper- ience necessary for items to be discussed. For example, the makeup of the commission would be two members chosen by the Board of Super- visors, two by the League of California Cities, two by the Speaker of the House, two by the Senate Rules Committee and one by the Gover- nor. These people would not necessarily have technical background and he would like to suggest that the Technical Boards have more direct access to the elected representatives. Mayor Futch stated that he also observed that this is part of the Executive Branch and yet the Senate and the House would be appointing more members than the Governor would be appointing. It would seem that more of the appointments should be made by the Governor. Cm Miller stated that this might be one way of getting the bill through the legislature and secondly, if the suggestion by Mayor Futch relative to the structure is adopted, it really won't make much difference but if it isn't accepted it would make a difference. Cm Staley stated that this could always be pointed out to the Governor and he could request that he be allowed to make more appointments. Mayor Futch pointed out that this bill would nearly reorganize the whole state government and Cw Tirsell pointed out that it is a monumental bill that would take a year of intense study to comment adequately on this bill. The Council concurred with the written comments prepared by Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch concerning AB 2422. ORD. RE ATTIC INSPECTION FEE The matter of the ordinance concerning the attic inspection fee was discussed at the last Council meeting. CM TURNER ~10VED TO ADOPT THE ORDINANCE, SECONDED BY CM STALEY. READING OF THE ORDINANCE WAS WAIVED WITH TITLE ONLY READY BY THE CITY ATTORNEY. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. ORDINANCE NO. 87l AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 6.53, RELATING TO INSPECTION FEE, OF ARTICLE X, RELATING TO ENERGY CONSERVATION, OF CHAPTER 6, RELATING TO BUILDINGS, OF THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 1959. CM-3l-l8 October 27, 1975 Z.O. AMEND RE VEHICLE & TRLR. STORAGE CM MILLER HOVED TO INTORDUCE THE ORDINANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING AI1ENDMENTS ~VITH RESPECT TO NHEN THE ORDINANCE GOES INTO EFFECT: 1 JULY 1976. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY. Mayor Futch questioned the reason for the change in the effective date and Cm Miller explained that the Planning Commission recommended that it become effective in six months but he would suggest eight months to allow the City time to notify people of violations and time to make arrangements for their trailers, etc., if necessary. Mayor Futch stated that as he recalls he did not agree with the motion made by Cm Miller the last time this was discussed and for this reason would vote against the ordinance. Cw Tirsell stated that for the record she would like to say that she is voting in favor of the ordinance only because the results of the election held in our community. Personally, she is not in favor of the ordinance. Cm Turner stated that he also is not in favor of the ordinance but will vote for it because the majority of the community has indicated they want it. He wondered if the Council would support an effective date in one year. There was no support voiced for the additional four month delay. MOTION PASSED 4-l (Mayor Futch dissenting) . Mr. Musso commented that probably after the first of the year cover letters will be sent along with the ordinance to all recreational vehicle owners. The City Attorney stated that even though the Council made an amend- ment in the effective date of the ordinance it is not necessary that this item return to the Planning Commission because they have discussed effective dates on nunero'lS occasions. READING OF THE ORDINANCE WAS WAIVED \'7ITH TITLE ONLY READ BY TIm CITY ATTORlJEY. AD,JOURH~,lElJT ~ayor Futch adjourned the meeting at 10:55 p.m. to an executive session to dis9JlSS---pes.s~ble litigation and appointments. APPROVE ~'l<' ,'~ ___ ayor Pro Tempore -- I I C~,!:y Clerk more, California ATTEST CN-31-l9 Regular Meeting of November 3, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on November 3, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m. with Mayor Futch presiding. ROLL CALL Present: Cm Turner, Staley, Miller, Cw Tirsell and Hayor Futch Absent: None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Futch led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. OPEN FORUM (Invitation to Pro- ject Survival Program) Barry Bolden, 5442 Betty Circle, invited the Council to attend an educational evening presented by Project Survival at the Dublin High School on Thursday, November 6, at 8:00 p.m. The topic of the evening is the Nuclear Safeguard Initiative which will appear on the June ballot next year. The program will be in two parts with the first part including a 40 minute film illustrating tours through nuclear plants in this country and England and highlighting some of the issues common to both countries. The second part of the evening will be a pre- sentation by the Dean of the Graduate School of Business at Stanford. The presentation will be made in such a way that anyone can under- stand the nuclear issue. (Low Income Housing) Jim Ward, 968 Hazel Street, stated that he would like to speak to the Council concerning low-income housing. Sections 235 and 236 that allowed HUD funding for low-income housing have been eliminated and there seem to be a variety of reasons given for eliminating these sections. The new program is Section VIII and is described as a Search- and Find Program which allows a person qualifying for low-income housing to go out and find a house to rent. The rent is paid by IIUD to the person qualifying or directly to the landlord. This section does not include purchase of a home but rather rental only. There is no federal or state aid for the purchase of a home or to pay a developer to build homes that low-income people could purchase. The Director of HUD recently indicated that she favors redevelop- ment in the older areas of town because of the availability of sewers and schools as well as location convenient for shopping. 'tr. Ward urged that the Council and others working on the low-income situation take these facts into consideration. (Request Change in Agenda) Mike Berger, 3844 Pestana commented that there are a number of people present this evening to discuss the ~railer Ordinance and he would like to ask that this item be discussed next. Mayor ~utch commented that the scheduled public hearing will have to be discussed but the Trailer Ordinance discussion could take place immediately after the public hearing. CM-3l-20 November 3, 1975 (Request for Change in Observance of Holiday - City Employees) Rick Bischoff, 364 North "L", a City employee, stated that la,st week City employees signed a petition requesting that observance of Veterans' Day, November 11, be changed to December 26. Originally the holiday was scheduled to give employees a three-day weekend and now that it has been changed to a Tuesday it is not in keeping with the spirit of the federal law passed making three-day weekends hopeful. He urged that the Council allow the request to change this holiday. Mayor Futch stated that the City Manager has informed him that he has the petition signed by the City employees and will be bringing it to the attention of the Council later in the meeting. CONTINUED P.E. RE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN Joan Angvick, 2284 College Avenue, from the League of Women Voters, stated that in 1972 the League of Women Voters completed a study of solid waste management. The consensus from that study included support for cooperative planning for the management of solid waste. The County Solid Waste Management Plan is a step in that direction. Resource re- covery is a major consideration in planning for solid waste management and the League supports the maximum feasible resource recovery as is described in Alternative "c" of the County plan. The proposed joint powers agreement for plan implementation is an important effort to assure cooperation among governmental agencies and the League supports this effort. The Plan, however, could have included more emphasis on source reduction, waste materials, and source separation plans. Since land disposal will continue to be necessary, especially in the short term, clear guidelines for the selection and operation of land dis- posal sites should be included with emphasis on air and water pollution and land use concepts. Approval of any long-term project should be delayed until the full Solid Waste Management Plan is adopted. Premature long-term commitments could lead to economic difficulties in implement- ing more effective resource recovery methods. The League of Women Voters support County participation and regional planning for waste management. They encourage public participation and education on solid waste issues. Cm Miller noted that there is a representative from the County Planning Department present this evening and he may wish to comment. Ron Eggers, from the Alameda County Planning Department, stated that at the request of the Council he has been asked to sUTIIDarize the points made hy the Solid lV2,ste Planning l\dvisory Com.."Ui ttee, and the rrechnical Advisory Committee. These concepts have been reviewed and "\'Jere in-- eluded in the letter subui tted to ~~r. Parness on October 20, under tlle signature of the County Planning Director. ~he County Plan includes the following concepts presented for the Council's concurrence: 1) The execution of a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement between the cities, Special Districts, and the County, including the formation of a Joint Powers Board of elected officials. 2) The principle of city representation on the Joint Powers Board. 3) The assignment of administration and implementation to existing agencies with specific assignment of enforcement and regulatory functions to the County Hea1thcare Services Agency with a commission and a coordinator separate from the Joint Powers Board. 4) '1odernization of ordinances, the development of local standards and regulations for solid waste manage- ment. Private industry is given full opportunity to perform waste management activities and local jurisdictions are responsible for collection services and for franchising for those services. CH-3l-2l November 3, 1975 (Continued P.H. Re Solid Waste Management Plan) Capital investment programs for material and energy recovery may be publicly funded at some future time, based upon evaluation and decision making of the Joint Powers Board. The goal of at least 67% combined resource and energy recovery by 1980 and 92% by 1990. These are alternatives 1980-C and 1990-C in the Plan, and the options of composting should continue to be explored. Evaluation of application of a Litter Law and Bottle Bill on a County-wide basis should be done. Revenues and charges should be evaluated and a uniform audit procedure and model agreement adopted. Regional coordination through participation and studies and seeking solutions to common problems through the Association of Bay Area Government, is essential. A public information program, a plan review program on a three year cycle, and that no major long-term commitment, either to private or public enterprise, should be made until adequate study and comparison is made of efficiency and costs of collection, processing, resource recovery, energy production, and disposal. These are the recommendations presented to the Council and Mr. Eggers noted that he would be more than happy to answer questions the Council might have. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THE MODEL RESOLUTION, AS PRESENTED IN THE AGENDA PACKET, APPROVING THE PRINCIPLES AND OBJECTIVES OF THE DRAFT SOLID WASTE ~1ANAGEMENT PLAN AND THE RECO~MENDATIONS OF THE SOLID WASTE MAJ~AGEMENT PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE. MOTION SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. Cm Miller stated that there is one item that might be included, in support of the City of Pleasanton. They were concerned about little or no attention given to the Kaiser dump issue and he would be will- ing to accept some type of amendment to his motion. Cw Tirsell stated that at COVA they phrased it to indicate that adequate attention be given to any fill project in County areas in or near municipal jurisdictions, ~rnICH WAS INCLUDED IN THE MO'rION AND AGREED TO BY THE SECOND. Cm Turner stated that he is concerned about the creation of another layer of government and in his opinion there is no need to establish another agency. Mr. Eggers stated that the assumption that another layer of govern- ment is being formed is really quite incorrect. If the County were considering a new layer of gogernment it would be presenting the Conuncil with a concept of a County-wide special district to handle this type of thing and it would be a new layer of government with taxing power and an elected board similar to the East Bay Municipal Utility District. What the County is presenting is something that is required by state law and by assigning this to a joint board they will be achieving coordination on a County-wide basis so that all the decisions made by that board would have some basis in local jurisdictions. There are some joint powers agreements that have stipulations in them that any decisions made by that board would be brought home and discussed in public hearings such as this. There is nothing suggested at this time for the joint powers agree- ment so anything can be included when it is drawn up. This really is not a new layer of government but rather is being assigned to the Health Care Services Agency and coordinated on a County-wide basis according to the recommendations of the Advisory Committee. CM-3l-22 November 3, 1975 (Continued P.H. re Solid Waste Management Plan) Cm Miller stated that the recommendation of the Solid Waste Advisory Committee was that the Joint Powers Agency consist of elected public officials as members, although nonpublic officials could be appointed also. The point of this was that there would not be a new level of government but representative of existing levels of government so there would not be a conflict. All the jurisdictions would have some kind of representation on the Joint Powers Board. A Joint Powers Board cannot be formed unless the local agencies agree to the terms. The Committee, with the exception of the members from Oakland Scavenger, were in favor of the concept of a Joint Powers Agency. Cm Staley stated that he belives this is one of the most valuable parts of the plan - that the voting members will be currently elected representatives of the people. This Committee will basically regulate public utilities in the County and the history of regulation of public utilities has been one where a body primarily of nonelected people regulates the facility. Generally it turns out that those being regulated are doing the regulating of public utilities. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 222-75 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AL&~DA COUNTY SOLID WASTE ~~NAGEMENT PLAN. ORD. RE TRAILER STORAGE !1ayor Futch moved to the item concerning adoption of a Zoning Ordinance amendment relative to trailer storage. Fred Johansen, 854 Keystone Way, stated that he would like to distribute two papers to the Council: 1) The 48% minorities speak out; and 2) a compilation of the vote on Heasure A in the 1973 election. lIe stated that in addition to the papers he is submitting to the Council he would like to say that any ordinance adopted on this matter should reflect the attitudes of the neighhorhood. It should be noted that 52% of the neighhorhoo0s in Liverc"':ore votr:>r1 cgainst t1'le measure; hmv- ever these neighborhoods are zoned with narrow lots, primarily RS-5. The balance of the neig~horhoods voted for the rueasure by a rather large margin in some cases. These neighborhoods are predominately R-4 neighborhoods with wide lots and sideyard access. There are at least three areas in the tmvn (Granada Woods, Springtown and Rhonewood) who have homeowner agreements that limit the parking of vehicles in the front yards and these things had a very strong influence on the vote. This issue is a matter of neighborhood situation and not a community situation. Mr. Johansen stated that he believes enforcement of the ordinance will be difficult and the City is limited in manpower for trying to enforce the ordinance. Eventually it will probably be enforced only on a complaint basis, and the City will become involved in neighborhood disputes. He believes this is an ordinance that works against the people rather than for them. He urged that the Council take another look at the ordinance and perhaps discuss this with the Planning Commission and review what 48% of the voters did not want. Mr. Leonard, 1892 t1ontecito Circle, stated that he spoke to the Council last week about travel trailers and recreational vehicles parking on a mobi1ehome lot and private lots. Mayor Futch explained that the situation Mr. Leonard is referring to is different than the City ordinance on trailer storage. The law which deals with mobilehome lots is a state law. Comments should be restricted to recreational vehicles, in general. CM-3l-23 November 3, 1975 (Ord. re Trailer Storage) Mr. Leonard stated that he believes the state law is not fair to mobilehome owners and Mayor Futch commented that this is not really the item the Council has on the agenda this evening and would like to insist that discussion relate only to the subject at hand which is the ordinance the Council has in front of them and does not apply to Mr. Leonard's concern. Bud Kiehle, 601 Los Alamos stated that his wife attempted to get a copy of the ordinance and wasn't able to get it and would like the City Attorney to read the ordinance before he discusses it. The City Attorney read the specific part of the ordinance applicable to recreational vehicles. Bob Anderson, 925 Dolores Street, stated that this ordinance will severely restrict people with recreational vehicles in excess of 19 ft. and he would hope that the law would apply equally to all such vehicles, regardless of their length. He stated that he believes the attempt to pass this type of ordinance is not constitutional and removes the privileges of the property owner. He paraphrased court cases that appeared in a magazine relative to this type of ordinance. He indicated that it is not legal to enforce an ordi- nance of this type unless there is danger to health, welfare or safety of the community. Mayor Futch commented that the reason the 19 ft. vehicle is allowed is because most driveways are 20 ft. and if a recreational vehicle is longer than this they protrude into the sidewalk area creating a safety hazard. Cm Staley asked if any of the cases Hr. l'\nderson referred to were in California and Mr. Anderson indicated that they were in Iowa, Illinois, and other states. Mr. Hengoia, 6271 Tesla Road, stated that he would like to know if there was or was not already an election on this ordinance and Mayor Futch explained that it was an advisory election. Mr. Mengoia stated that the purpose of the election was to ask people if they wanted to get rid of trailers in the front yards and a majority of the people voted to remove recreational ve- hicles from specific areas. He stated that, personally, he is against this law but the people voted for it and for this reason it should be enforced. He stated that when people voted for the ordinance he spent $12,000 to provide storage for trailers and recreational vehicles on his property, assuming that the ordi- nance would be enforced. Joseph Ramos, 664 Murdell Lane, stated that in his opinion the ordinance is discriminatory against those who do not have as much money as others - the "have nots". It is the people who have less money that live in the older homes with- out sideyard access because of the smaller lots. He added that people with less money generally have the smaller trailer that is not self-propelled and these people cannot afford a certain class of vehicle or home. He commented that he would like to suggest that vehicles not be allowed to park in the front if they are a hazard or if people are living in them and try to get to the problem. Ray McCallum, 1272 Locust, stated that unfortunately he is one of the "have nots" who is retired and on a fixed income. He stated that he sold his motorhome because it was economically not feasible for him to maintain it and he would still like to be able to travel and he has an 18 ft. trailer. He explained that if he has to take his trailer to a storage area he will have to spend $lO to $15/month that would otherwise go towards CM-3l-24 November 3, 1975 (Ord. re Trailer Storage) food or recreation. He stated that he sees no reason to have to do this and emphasized that he is on a very limited income and that he didn't plan for things to be as they are. The ordinance will be imposing restrictions on people such as him. Ira Cruz, 488 Jensen Street, stated that he is opposed to parking trailers in front yards because people park them in the driveways in his area of town and put their cars in the streets which makes the streets very narrow. He added that there are so many cars in the street that the street sweeper can't sweep under them and the leaves clog the drains during the rainy season. Chuck Woods, 830 Pine Street, stated that he objects to anyone telling him that he cannot park whatever he wants in his driveway as long as it is not unsightly or hazardous. He stated that he owns his home, pays taxes for the property and including the driveway area and feels that is his property. He stated that if the City passes an ordinance prohibiting parking in the front yards then they should provide free storage for the people who are forced to move their trailers and that the storage area should be patrolled so that the trailers are safe. Jim Ward, 968 Hazel Street, stated that his home is on a small lot without sideyard access and he has placed his trailer in storage. He added that even if he had a large lot he would still store it in the storage area on Tesla Road because he feels trailers are unsightly when they are in front of the house. The 52% majority who voted to eliminate storage in ~ront yards un~oubtedly voted as they did because of aesthetics. He feels that his boat and trailer are safer behind a locked fence where t~ere is a guard dog than if t:1ey were on the street. TIe stated that tires have been slashed, cars painted, and antennas ripped off of cars that are out in front and he really wouldn't want his recreational equipment out in front where damage might be done. In his oninion, if someone can afford a large recreational vehicle, over 19 ft. long and 10 ft. high, they should be able to pay for the storage of it. Mr. Stribling, 918 Ventura Way, stated that he would agree with what ~1r. Ward has said about people being concerned about aesthetics and lack of value of the recreational vehicles and would even like to see the ordinance include automobiles, motorcycles, bicycles and skate boards. Mike Berger, 3844 Pestana Way, commented that he would like to offer a constructive suggestion that perhaps the City could follow. He stated that people bought their homes (in the older sections without sideyard access) with certain inalienable rights and he feels the areas without the ability to store vehicles in side yards should be rezoned or zoned appropriately. Clay Vaughn, 1846 Spruce Street, stated that he purchased his home 20 years ago and because of poor planning on the part of the City he has no way to get a vehicle into his back yard by alley or ease- ment along the side. lIe stated that to have to pay for storage is another form of taxation and noted that when an ordinance of this type passed in another city the storage fee went from $7.50 to $15/month. This is a form of taxation people do not need. Carl Johnson, 788 El Rancho Drive, stated that he purchased his home l8 years ago and his lot is also too narrow to place vehicles in the side yard or the back yard. He stated that he believes when one thing is enforced it leads to others and next the City will be telling him he can't park two cars in his driveway. He pointed out that more than 52% of the people voted against the railroad relocation but the City did what they wanted anyway. Cm Miller commented that he would like to clarify that there was a vote on the railroad relocation in 1970 and people voted against it and it was not adopted because it would have been a City-wide assessment. CM-3l-25 November 3, 1975 (Ord. re Trailer Storage) The people said they didn't want it and the Council did not adopt it. The present relocation project is being done by assessments of only those involved and these people voted in favor of it. Cw Tirsell stated that she believes it is important to make clear that there was never a ballot asking people if they wanted the relocation. There were numerous public hearings and a lot of objec- tion by the people and because of the public input at the public hearings, the Council itself voted against the plan. She stated that many people in this City believe people voted against the relo- cation project and this is a fallacy. Robert Guest, 88l El Rancho Drive, stated that people boardering the railroad property are also paying for the relocation because they have lost value in their properties. He stated that the trains are going to park in back of his house and now the City is saying that he cannot park a recreational vehicle in front of his house. He stated that he feels a 52% vote in 1973 is not a mandate and that if the vote were taken today there would be the reverse. The number of people in favor of removing recreational vehicles from the front yards is continually declining as the recreational ve- hicles are becoming more popular. William Harland, 443 Colusa Way, stated that he has a 10 ft. side yard but it will cost him approximately $500 to provide for access and storage. He feels it is unfair that people are required to spend this kind of money to provide for something that will raise taxes. He stated that concrete is a permanent asset that will be taxed. Leonard Ray, 945 Hanover, asked what the easement should be between the house and the property line and Mayor Futch explained that they vary, depending upon the zone Mr. Ray lives in. Don Holman, ll90 Rincon, stated that in his opinion able to do what they want with their own driveways. he is fortunate to live on a corner and can get all the back but many people cannot do this. people should be He stated that the vehicles in CM MILLER ~lOVED TO HAVE THE SECOND READING AND ADOPTION OF THE TRAILER ORDINANCE, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. Cm Miller stated that before beginning the discussion he would like to point out that he has a trailer and a boat that are squeezed into his garage and as a result has lost about half the storage available in his garage. Cm Miller stated that he intends to vote in favor of the ordinance because he believes it is the right idea, in principle, and secondly because this was the subject of a public vote and the majority of the public voted to have this kind of ordinance. Not everybody wins when there is an election. He feels the Council has an obligation to the majority of people who voted for an ordinance of this kind and the Council should respond to the vote. The ordinaance he has moved to adopt is actually a weaker ordinance than the one that was in effect for 13 years. If this ordinance goes into effect a person can park in the side yard and the one that was in existence from 1960 until 1972 did not allow parking in the side yard when there was room for one. People who moved to Livermore in 1960 were prohibited from parking recreational vehicles in their front yards so the Council is not adopting anything new at this time but rather reaffirming something that was in effect and in fact something weaker than what was in effect. CH.-3l-26 November 3, 1975 (Ord. re Trailer Storage) Cm J1iller stated that many people are upset by the fact that they cannot store boats and trailers in the front yards and if he couldn't get his hoat in his garage he would also be unhappy about having to take the boat to a storage yard. Nevertheless, this was the subject of a public vote and he believes there is no other choice left to the Council. He stated that on the other hand the public or those opposing the ordinance have the choice of getting signatures on a petition within 30 days and bringing it back to a public vote as a referendum. Cw Tirsell stated that she believes the ordinance is more regulatory than what she would like and she is opposed to it. She stated that she is adverse to regulating liviJ1jJ~,!"l}~)~~~s_.4.-t~e ~~~J~9-. .that it is&K her duty to represent opinion~~e~hat was ~on this,Wt~/.;- tL ordinance was ~n expression of opinions to the Council. I'Jhi1e sheG1C'L:> . is opposed to the ordinance because she feels it is too regulatory, she will vote in favor of it. She added that she has received opin- ions from many people who are not present this evening and that mothers have expressed concern when there are vehicles on either side of them and they cannot see their children up and down the block. She stated that she received many telephone calls of this nature from people who do not want to fight with their neighbors over recreational vehicles. What Cm Miller has said is very true - California law pro- vides for the referendum process and should this ordinance be adopted if there is disagreement with it there is a specific manner in which this can be a referendum item. There are precise provisions in the State Constitution that must be followed and this is an avenue open to the people who disagree with the ordinance. However, in good conscience she cannot sit on the Council and vote against a majority opinion. Cm Turner stated that he would agree with what Cw Tirsell has said, 100%. Cm Staley stated that he was not on the Council at the time the election was held but was a Livermore resident at that time. He believes that the ordinance is an invasion of property rights and is not convinced that it is constitutional and this is the reason he asked Mr. Andersen if he could cite a California case. Cm Staley stated that he has researched the issue and has looked for precedence and can find none in California. Therefore he feels compelled to follow the advisory election and vote in favor of the ordinance. He would say that the invitation to referend the ordinance is the best solution for those people who are against it. Mayor Futch stated that on the first reading of the ordinance he voted against it and will vote against it again this evening. There are many ways to achieve a goal and ways to adopt ordinances to minimize the impact of financial burdens on many of the citizens. When the Planning Commission originally wrote the ordinance they tried to achieve that purpose and specifically included provisions allowing front yard storage if people could not get the vehicle to the rear yard, for a certain length of time. They wanted to allow people a period of time to make use of their vehicles and possibly people would move or sell their vehicles during this amortization period. The original draft took these things into consideration and tried to mini~ize the financial iMpact upon citizRns and he feels this would be a desirable goal and consistent with the majority vote. :~e does not c1isagree vlith the intent of the ordinance but rather he believes it should be amended to !uinimize the effect of implementation. There- fore he will vote against the motion. ~'10TION PASSED 4-1 (Mayor Futch dissenting) . 01-31-27 November 3, 1975 (Ord. re Trailer Storage) ORDINANCE NO. 872 AN ORDINANCE M1ENDING ORDINANCE NO. 442, AS ~lENDED, 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 STRUCTURES AND USES, ALL OF CHAPTER 20.00, RELATING TO GENERAL PROVISIONS; BY THE REPEAL OF SECTION 21.44(g), RELATING TO TRAILER STORAGE, OF SEC- TION 2l.44, RELATING TO OFF-STREET PARKING, OF CHAPTER 21.00, - RELATING TO SPECIAL PROVISIONS. Margo Bodeo, 1080 Batavia, stated that he came into Livermore after the vote and feels it is unfair he is subject to something that was voted on prior to his residency in Livermore. Cw Tirsell pointed out that this is the point of the referendum. If enough people are dissatisfied about the ordinance (10%) sign a petition to place this item on the ballot it could appear on the March ballot. The City Attorney commented that he would like to point out to those who might be interested in a referendum that the rules about referendums are very specific and the rules must be followed. If they are not followed exactly, they will end up without a referendum. He would suggest that if people have any questions concerning the procedure that they contact the City Clerk or he will be happy to answer questions. RECESS After a brief recess the Council meeting resumed with all members of the Council present. CO~~UNICATIONS RE CITY COMMENTS RE LEGISLATION Letters were received from Senator Holmdahl concerning comments expressed by the City of Livermore with respect to support and/or action on AB 2220 (Location of Garbage Dumps) and AB 437 (Drivers Licenses) and AB 625 (Regional Government) . ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS APPROVAL THE LETTERS WERE NOTED FOR FILING. LAFCO RESOLUTION RE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE The Council received a copy of a LAFCO resolution concerning action taken on petitions requesting removal from Livermore's Sphere of Influence. Cm Miller stated that he believes LAFCO should have included the overall ~eneral Plan of Livermore. He stated that they speak to retention of the north side area but there is nothing said about the south - there should be a fifth alternative included and it should be the overall General Plan area of Livermore.' He would like the staff to submit a letter, stating there should be another alternative, so they would have it for their records. Cw Tirse1l stated that she thought the Council was going to set for discussion prior to the LAFCO meeting, submitting the area of our proposed new General Plan. She has suggested that perhaps the proposed General Plan might be reviewed by the Council and supported as an alternative. unfortunately it is too late to submit it and she is disturbed that it wasn't reviewed prior to the LAFCO meeting. She asked if em Miller's suggestion could be included with a proposal vTith boundaries approximating our proposed General Plan. CH-3l-28 \ \, November 3, 1975 (LAFCO Resolution re S?here of Influence) em Miller stated that he would question if this would be wise be- cause this is a Sphere of Influence hearin0 and our General Plan really considers the whole area in our end of the Valley. There are parts of the General Plan that show urbanizing much smaller than that because of environmental considerations, etc., in the coming time period. This does not mean that we might not ultimately become urbanized. Cw Tirsell stated that the object of the Sphere of Influence is those lands which would logically be urbanized within a certain period and this was not clear at the time the original Sphere of Influence was discussed. The LAFCO staff was talking about logical annexation areas and the City was talking about whole planning areas. They viewed Liver- more's position at that time as totally unreasonable. Mr. Husso stated that the City did support the LAFCO staff proposal as a short range proposal. Cw Tirsel1 stated that our first testimony was that we wanted our entire planning units and this is what the LAFCO staff heard at the time they were setting boundaries t~ r~.~lQ .nnQxation~. t!. .i! Cm Miller stated that he believes the iss~e s th~t in a reasonable short to medium run our General Plan map covers what should be urban- ized and the Council should take the position that that is what should be urbanized in the next 25-30 years, at best, and that there should be no other Sphere of Influence because the Valley cannot support more urbanization because of the environmental considerations. Cw Tirsell stated that if Cm Miller would place this in the form of a motion so the Council could convey this by the 6th (LAFCO meeting) , she would support it. CM !ULLER I'1OVED THAT: 1) THE CITY 'NOULD LIKE THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE TO BE OUR ~IOLE GENERAL PLAN AREA, AND AN ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVE WOULD BE 2) IF THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE IS GOING TO BE A SHORT-MEDIUM RUN ASSIGNMENT THE CITY WOULD LIKE Wt~T SHOWS ON OUR GENERAL PLAN MAP HHICH IS LDlITED IN SIZE BECAUSE OF ENVIRONHENTAL CONSIDERATIONS, AND THAT THERE BE NO OTHER SPHERE OF INFLUENCE IN THIS END OF THE VALLEY ULTIMATELY, BECAUSE THE VALLEY CANNOT SUPPORT THE POPULATION OF OTHER SPHERES OF INFLUENCE BECAUSE OF E~NIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS. MOTION SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. Mr. Parness asked if this is to be included in the statement to LAFCO now rather than in testimony to be presented at the next hearing. Cw Tirsell stated that this should be elaborated upon at the hearing and take the map as well so they can see what we are talking about but this should be in our records. The City Attorney commented that there isn't really going to be a meeting on the 6th - they are just going to present this openly to the Commission. A reporter will be there but only for the protection of the City or to prevent them from saying anything untoward. Ilr. Parness stated that he believes it would be more appropriate to make the motion a part of the testimony to be given at the hearing hut it probahly 'vouldn't hurt to present it in writing prior to the ~ei'L'I:-ing . ~he City Attorney stated that the City will probably have to follow the :LAFCO procedures any,;,7ay anJ the procC:G.ures tIle COlrL'TIission ,'/ill aJopt is that they will take the evidence at the time of the hearing and it could be done in 'vriting or any other way but he would like to ~oint out that as he understands, the reconMendation is that either CQ-31-29 November 3, 1975 (LAFCO Resolution re Sphere of Influence) it remain the same or that they go back to their original staff recom- mendation. In view of the way we are talking about planning for our General Plan and how far it will be, north of the 1-580 area, we should seriously consider taking some position that might be consis- tent with previous staff recommendations. Cw Tirsell stated that this could be reflected in the minutes with a request that it be placed on the agenda immediately. CM MILLER M.OVED TO AHEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE THAT THE STAFF PREPARE BACKUP FOR THE TWO SUGGESTIONS. THE GENERAL PLAN ON THE MAP IS VERY SIt1ILAR IN AREA. MOTION SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. ~1r. Logan explained that the Sphere of Influence would be the original staff recommendation and was a recommendation with a northern boundary somewhere coincident with Hartman and Hartford Road which is somewhat below the upper limits of that one area of the General Plan, as far as the City's map is concerned. They listed four alternatives and the fourth was up to the northern boundary of Alameda County which was our original position. According to the staff report they felt this was not a viable alternative. Cm Miller stated that the Council should probably review the LAFCO staff report prior to making a final decision on this and Mr. Logan stated that this is what he would advise. THE COUNCIL CONCURRED THAT THE ITEM SHOULD BE CONTINUED TO ALLmv THEH TDm TO REVIE\^l THE REPORT. COMMUNICATION RE ZONE 7 PLANNING & DEVELOP. OF WTR. QUAL. MGMT. PLAN - ALAMEDA CREEK \^lATERSHED A letter was received from Zone 7 indicating that the Zone 7 Board adopted a resolution on September 17th stating intention to pro- ceed with planning to develop an integrated water quality manage- ment plan for the Alameda Creek watershed above Niles. They requested that each concerned agency advise them as to views on the nature of the problem. Cw Tirsell asked which study this refers to and Cm Miller stated that this is the study whereby they wish to seize control of water management and planning from LAm~ and he would suggest that the Council indicate that Zone 7 is not the proper agency to do this and their proposed role as a new sewer agency is in conflict with staff and regional board policies on environmental constraints. The staff was directed to prepare a letter reflecting this view- point. Cml1l1UNICATION FROM WM. RAYMOND RE CORPS STUDY The Council received a copy of a letter sent to the Corps of Engineers by Wm. Raymond with respect to the proposed study of the upper basin of the Alameda Creek. He indicated that he would like to propose means by which future criticism can be alleviated and participation by interested citizens encouraged, and that the study be available at all libraries in the Livermore-Amador Valley at least two weeks before a scheduled public hearing. The letter was noted for filing. CH-3l-30 November 3, 1975 REPORT RE ENCR01\ClmR:>JT PETh~'lIT APPLICATIONS Applications have been received from David rladis, Duke Interior Decorations and Proctor's, for an encroachment permit to allow encroachments into com~ercial sidewalk areas. The staff has prepared a proposed policy statement concerning this matter also. Cm !1iller stated that he has read the proposed policy statement and he is satisfied with it but would like to request that these three applications also be reviewed by the Design Review Committee, AND SO HOVED. ~lOTION WAS SECONDED BY CT.-,] TIRSELL. Barcus Lipkind, stated that he moved to Livermore about three months ago to start up a small business at 2290 First Street, owned by David r1adis. When he and his partner rented the building the agreement stipulated that the landlord would upgrade the front of the building as they felt it was necessary and their first suggestion was that it be restored to its original look. After reviewing this suggestion they decided it would not be possible to restore it to the original look and decided to add some wood and make it look old. Their first attempt was to construct an overhang completely supported by the build- ing but the contractor found that it would not be structurally feasible. He stated that they have followed the procedures for obtaining an en- croachment permit and he has just read a memorandum from Mr. Lee on this item and feels they received an unfavorable recommendation and this is the reason he is speaking to the Council. He stated that he disagrees with the policy that an encroachment permit can be revoked at any time because this means that someone can spend considerable money to do something that could be revoked. Their intent is to beautify the building but with the recommendation they have received from Mr. Lee and the possibility that the permit can be revoked would make it seem that this project will not be possible. Cw Tirsell asked if ~1r. Lipkind has read the policy statement and he indicated that he had. She noted that all the Council is doing is saying they agree with the policy statement but would require the applicants to comply with the design review requirements. Mr. Lee stated that he believes Mr. Lipkind has misinterpreted the memorandum. The intention is that the staff recommendation would be favorable to allowing the sidewalk encroachment and they do not oppose the columns and he believes the Design Review Committee would also approve them. He believes the recommendations are favorable and it should be possible for Mr. Lipkind to do what he wishes under the terms of the policy statement. With respect to revocation of the encroachment, he believes it should be the right of the City to re- move something from the public right-of-way if necessary. It is not the intention of the City to remove something without sound justifica- tion. Cm Turner stated that he believes some of the confusion lies in the fact that specific statements were made about Duke Interior and Proctor's being acceptable and no such statement was made about the application by Dave ~adis. lIe also interpreted it that Mr. Lee was not recoT'1.mending approval of the encroachMent permit for '1r. t'~adis. ~lr. :Lee indicated that perhClps the Me1"'!oran(lu!"'1 \'!RS not very clea.r but the intent was that all three applications should be approved. :lr. Street cOlnmented that tIle :~~uilding Code ll.as a section in Chapter 45 ~;hich relates to occupancy of public right-of-uay and it specifically prohibits any structure bearing on the public right-of-way. If this permit is allowed (I1adis) it would require a change in the Building Code. crl-3l-3l November 3, 1975 (Cormnunication From Hm. Raymond re Corps Study) Hr. Lee commented that, unfortunately, this is an item that his depart- ment didn't catch but maybe it could be clarified at this time. Per- haps for this particular overhang which is a marquee type structure, it might be allowed. The posts will not really be supporting a structure as such. Hopefully the Building Code refers to the building structure and not the marquee. Mr. Street stated that he would like to read this section to the Council and noted that it is subject to interpretation. He then read that lIa marquee shall be supported entirely by the building". Mr. Parness suggested that detailed matters such as this be refer- red to the Design Review Committee. Cw Tirsell stated that she would like the Design Review Committee to handle this problem. Mr. Madis stated that he does not mind working with the staff and the Design Review Committee and that the biggest problem is trying to attend Council meetings to discuss items such as this. He added that he really disagrees with paragraph 8. of the policy statement as it is written which indicates that the City may revoke the encroach- ment permit at any time without cause. He stated that if the policy indicated that the permit would be revoked with "good cause or good reasonll he might not disagree but he believes that someone should not spend a lot of money for somthing that could arbitrarily be revoked. The city Attorney stated that this is no different than what is done with respect to public utlities - they are in the right-of- way and can be forced out if something is done with that particular right-of-way. This would not be an unusual section but he would imagine the PUC would have limitations in their requirements and that the City would have to be relocating the right-of-way or some- thing specific. Cm Staley stated that he would like to know where the power rests for revoking a permit - with the staff, the Council, or after a hearing? Mr. Lee stated that the City Council would make the decision. If the Council wishes to send this back to the Design Review Com- mittee some of these details could be discussed. ~1ayor Futch commented that he believes this is probably a stan- dard agreement that Pleasanton and everyone else follows. Cw Tirsell noted that Mr. Madis is a lawyer and knows very well what the statements mean - this is terminology used for any encroachment permit. This does not mean that the City will capriciously do something. CW TIRSELL I-.10VED THAT THIS ITEM BE REFERRED TO THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE. Cm Turner stated that he would like to know what is going to be done about the application made by Mr. Madis. It is clear that the other two applications do not have problems. Cw Tirsell stated that this is one of the items that will have to be resolved by Mr. Lee because he has interprested the marquee as being nonstructural and the Building Code says that it is and the Council may have to amend the Building Code in order to allow the permit. Cm Turner stated that he would like a time limit to be set for resolving this matter and would like to know when a staff report could be available. cn-3l-32 November 3, 1975 (Communication From Hm. Raymond re Corps Study) L-1r. Lee indicated that he doesn't knovl when the Design Review Committee will be meeting and whether it can be resolved in one night is another question. If it is resolved at the next meeting the report could probably be back to the Council in two weeks. Cw Tirsell asked that the Design Review Committee be asked to try to resolve this matter during their next meeting and to make recommenda- tions to the Council. Cm Staley stated that in order to clarify what the Council is asking the Design Review Co~~ittee to resolve, the Council is asking them to resolve the matter of the support structure for the ~1adis application and the "step" for the !'Juke Interior application. ~'1OTIO"J ~\7AS SECONDED BY CH STALEY AND PJ\SSED BY UNANH10US VOTE. REPORT RE APP. TO SOLICIT FOR FUNDS - POLISH COM- HlHJITY CENTER OF SAN FRAN. The Director of Finance reported that the Polish Community of San Francisco has applied to solicit for funds in the City of Livermore. In the past, it has been the policy of the City Council to deny such applications when there is no evidence of any local benefit accruing from the solicitations. Mr. Nolan stated that it has not been determined as to what benefit solicitations would accrue to the City, if any, and allegedly, sol- icitations by this group in other cities have resulted in complaints to the police department by their citizens. A report from the City Attorney indicated that if they comply with the Code requirements, and they apparently have, he would have to take the position that they have the right to solicit as long as they have the appropriate tax exemptions to show they are a charitable organization and have registered with the Police Department for door- to-door solicitation. Mr. Parness noted that the Council has previously denied this applica- tion and at that time it was the practice that all such applications were referred to the Council and there were generally 5 to 6 applica- tions on each agenda. These items became repetitive and routine and the Council declared that these matters be processed by the staff and that the staff's discretion be used. The staff has tried to follow the policy guidelines that were practiced at the time but this is a debatable application. Cm Staley stated that there appears to be two issues at hand: 1) the request for the exempt business license, and 2) the right to solicit. Hr. Parness stated that anyone with a business license is allowed to solicit but these people are asking that they be exempt from the payment of the license fee. Cm ~1iller stated that the question of soliciting is not an issue in this case - the question is the exemption from the business license fee. CH HILLER r'10VED TO DENY THE REQUEST FOR AN EXEHPTIGrJ FR0I>1 TEE BUSINESS LICEI"-JSE TAX, SECONDED BY C~l TURNER. !'Jalegor Suchecki, stated that he felt the comments made by '1r. Nolan about trouble in other cOITlI'1uni ties ~'laS unnecessary because he gave no facts concerning the~e allegations. qe state~ t~at he is t~e Director of the Polish Community Center of San Francisco and noted that t~e purpose of this organization is to assist neeJy ~olis~ refu- g"ees \71'10 cone to t:1C ~:ay .2\rea. :'8 stated that this organization is c~- 31-- 3 3 ilovember 3, 1975 (Report re App. to Solicit for Funds - Polish Comm. Ctr) also instructional in Polish culture, history and language and that Livermore residents had the opportunity to attend a language course offered at Hayward High School. In Livermore there are 300 families of Polish origin and five of those families are members of the Polish Community Center. The Polish refugees need help and the Polish Commun- nity Center is appealing to the good will of Livermore citizens to assist these people. He then introduced Sylvia Renolski who spoke to the Council concerning this matter and about the applica- tion and the problems the organization has had with the staff. She stated that they have met all the legal requirements and since they are a charitable organization should be exempt from the busi- ness license tax. Father Joshe of Our Ladys Rosary parish in San Francisco, stated that he is of Polish origin and has been associated with the Polish Community Center since 1961. He would like to attest that the Polish Center does do a great deal of social welfare work in the Bay Area, including Alameda County. Cm Miller stated that it has been a long-standing Council policy that there will be no business license tax exemption unless some- thing is of benefit to Livermore. If they wish to solicit, this is fine, but there is no reason they should be exempt from the fee. Cm Staley stated that as he understands it they have met every requirement to allow them exemption from the business license tax and as far as the City Attorney is concerned and the Director of Finance is concerned, there is no question about the fact that they are entitled to exemption. Cm Staley stated that the next issue is that as he reads the report, the only requirement to solicit door-to-door, if you are a charitable organization, is that you register with the Police Department, and wondered if this is the only requirement. Mr. Nolan stated that this is true it is the only requirement and that the Polish Community Center will register with the Police Department and pay a fee for solicitor identification card if their application is approved. Cm Staley stated that if this is the case he is at a total loss as to what the issue is. Mayor Futch stated that he doesn't understand either. Cm Miller explained that it is the policy of the City to turn down exemption from the business license tax for those organizations which are not local charities. Cm Miller added that there was a time the Council voted on these matters every week and the Councilmembers always voted against those who were not local charities. This is not a local charity and he knows no reason for not denying the application and cannot understand the confusion. em Hiller stated that it is his understanding the Council has the power to deny these requests and if it is determined the Council does not have this power then the ordinance should be changed to allow the Council the power to deny them. Hr. Suchecki stated that for the past two years the Polish Commun- ity Center applied for permits to go door-to-door to solicit and they were not required to pay either the City or the Police Department fees for the license. They cannot afford to pay the business license tax and they were granted the exemption the past two years and would again request the exemption. ;layor Futch stated that he is concerned there are no clear guidelines in the ordinance but Cm'1iller remembers a policy. Cl-3l-34 November 3, 1975 (Report re App. to Solicit for Funds - Polish Comm. ctr) Cm Staley stated that the ordinance says that if an organization qualifies for exemption, this should be the basis for granting an exemption to the business license tax and this is the way he will vote. If there is a compelling reason why they should not be granted the exemption he might feel differently but he added that he is not sure it is even legal to deny the exemption if the ordinance reads this way. For this reason he will vote against the motion. Cm Turner stated that he misunderstood the motion so even though he seconded the motion he will vote against it also. His concern is the statement made in the report from r~r. Nolan about complaints to police departments in other cities and he does not want to approve the application until he knows more about this. In his opinion, if people go to the trouble to contact the police department about a solicitor then the problem is probably serious. Ilrs. Reno1ski stated that there is a difference between complaints to the police department and inquiries as to why an organization is soliciting and she stated that it was inquiries that were made - not complaints. She pointed out that complaints, if there were any, are not a criteria for exemption of the business tax anyway. She stated that they are standing on their legal rights and can see no way the Council can oppose the exemption. Crn Turner stated that the report from Mr. Nolan indicates that there were several complaints to our Police Department ~'Jhen the Polish Commun- ity Center solicited in Livermore in 1974. MOTION FAILED 1-4 (em Staley, Turner, Cw Tirse1l and Mayor Futch dissenting> . cr, STALEY ~1()VED TO DIRECT THE ST,1'..H'F TO ISSUE TEE NECESSARY PER'HTS ~\7J-IEN THE ORDIHAHCr; IS COTlPLIFD FI'I'JI. The City .7\ttorney suggested that rather than to direct the staff to issue permits, perhaps the staff be directed to comply with the Code which means that if these people do not qualify for other reasons including the police permit, then the staff will not be obligated to issue the business license permit. cr~ ST]\LEY ~10VED TO AHEHD TEE MOTION TO InCLUDE 'I'IIl\T SOLICITORS ARE TO COMPLY 1;JITE ".:'TJE CODPAN'D IF THEY DO NOT QUALIFY FOR OTHER REASONS, INCLUDING THE POI..ICE PEllUIT1 r 'r.'HE STAFF HILL PO'!' BE OT3LIGl\.TED TO ISSUE THE BUSINESS LICENSE. HOTIon SEcmm'SD BY c,;-;r TIRSELL. C;l Tirsell asked if the Police Department has the authority to deny issuance of the solicitation identification card if they have received complaints or other questionable material. The City Attorney stated that he really can't respond to this because he does not know what policies they follow but it is his understanding that they refuse to issue permits to people who have criminal records or a background of using solicitations for purposes other than the legitimate collection of money. He doesn't know what they might do if there were complaints. ~1r. Nolan commented that when this organization was here last year he was advised by the Police Department that one of the solicitors was denied a permit by the Police Department. Cw Tirsell felt the motion should cover everything. If an organization complies with the City Code and they have to register with the Police Department this would be the only place where regulation would occur. Cm Turner questioned the need for a motion on this item at all. He stated that he would really like the Police Department to clear this up. CH-3l-35 November 3, 1975 (Report re App. to Solicit for Funds - Polish Comm. Ctr) Cm Staley stated that the intent of the motion is that if there are reservations on the part of the Police Department they will not issue the permit but if there are no problems they will be issued the permit. MOTION PASSED 3-2 (Cm ~1iller and Cm Turner dissenting) . Cr.1 HILLER MOVED THAT THE STAFF BE DIRECTED TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE WHICH ~VILL RESTRICT GRANTING EXEHPT BUSINESS LICENSES FOR CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONS UNLESS THE CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONS ARE LOCAL AND HAVE PREDOMINATELY LOCAL APPLICATION. MOTION SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. Cm Miller stated that the reason he is requesting this is because in the past he has had complaints about organizations coming to Livermore from the outside and annoying Livermore citizens for solicitations for charitable organizations that turn out to be "rip-offs". He clarified that he is not referring to the Polish Community Center. People are willing to support local groups, including students raising money for the band, but they do not like solicitors to request money for organi- zations outside of the City. The motion will reflect the policies followed in the past and approved by the public. Mrs. Renolski stated that the Council hears only from the people who do not like solicitations but she would estimate that 90% of the people are in favor of solicitations for the purpose of helping others and show extreme interest in what they are doing. Cw Tirsell stated that she has been involved in numerous drives and would absolutely refute what ~1rs. Renolski says. There are 600 organizations in this valley and all of them solicit for funds and she kno,\'.1s of too nan:'l fa!'1ilies ~'1ho cannot give money to support organizations in their O\vn area, let alone trying to give help to organizations in San Francisco. HD'I'IOTJ PASSED 4--1 (Cm Staley dissenting) . RECESS ~1ayor Futch called for a brief recess after which the Council meeting resumed with all members of the Council present. REPORT RE APP. FOR Ar1END. OF PUD PERHIT - PALOMAR HORTGAGE CO. A report was submitted by the Planning Director concerning the application by Palomar Mortgage Company for amendment of PUD Permit 1'10. 2, to allO\v extension of time for the development of a shopping center north east of the intersection of 1-580 and Springtown Boulevard. The Planning Commission has reviewed the application and recom- mends that the permittee be granted additional time to October 7, 1976 and that the development of the shopping center be in conformance with the proposed CN District regulations, pending adoption by the Council. The recommendation was based on the findings that the use is in conformance with the General Plan and the shopping center is necessary for the well-being of the residents of the neighborhood; the use would not be detrimental to the neighborhood and residential development would not neces- sarily be the best use of the land. CM MILLER MOVED TO SET THIS ITEM FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON NOVEMBER 24TH, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIHOUS VOTE. CH-3l-36 November 3, 1975 REPORT RE APP. FOR AMEND. TO ZOo ORD. RE PUD - (Carlton Group) ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE RELATIVE TO THE PUD FOR THE CARLTON GROUP WAS SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON NOVEMBER 24, 1975. P.C. SUMMARY OF ACTION The Planning Commission submitted their summary of action for the meeting of October 28, 1975. Cm Miller requested that the Council appeal the approved variance application of Cassel Montgomery on the east side of Hayes Street to allow the creation of two lots or reduction of minimum lot street frontage width from 50 ft. to 20 ft.. Cm Miller stated that the portion he would like to appeal is the reduction of minimum lot street frontage width from 50 ft. to 20 ft. resulting in a flag lot design for one of the two parcels. CONSENT CALENDAR Res. Appointing Member to Planning Commission A resolution was adopted appointing James L. Sadler to the Planning Commission for the term commencing October 1, 1975. RESOLUTION NO. 223-75 A RESOLUTION REAPPOINTING PLANNING COMMISSIONER (James L. Sadler) Res. Auth. Exec. of CAL Air Commuter Lease Agreement A resolution was adopted authorizing execution of agreement with CAL Air Commuter for airline operations and leasing. RESOLUTION NO. 224-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (California Air Commuter) Mr. Lee mentioned that the agreement mentions a total of $2 million insurance liability and the final draft of the agreement has been modified to $1 million. The figure was an arbitrary one and was changed during negotiations. Res. Auth. Exec. of Agree. with County re Purchase of Tax Deeded Land A resolution was adopted authorizing execution of agreement with Alameda County for the purchase of tax deeded property - adjacent to Bluebell. RESOLUTION NO. 225-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREE- MENT (County of Alameda) CM-31-37 November 3, 1975 Report re Accident Study - East Avenue at Seventh Street A written report was prepared by the Public Works Director in res- ponse to a request by the Council for a study on accidents on East Avenue at Seventh Street, and submitted to the Council for informa- tional purposes. Minutes The following minutes were received: Housing Authority - August 26 and September l6 Airport Advisory Committee - October 6 Design Review Committee - October 15 Cw Tirsell commented that in the Design Review Committee minutes it was noted that a dinner has been scheduled on November 12 for mem- bers and spouses and she would like the minutes to reflect that this is not at the City's expense. Cm Miller also stated that the minutes for the Design Review Committee indicate that the Committee finally agreed to conditionally approve plans for the donut shop, etc., and this implies that they approved something against their better judgment. He would suggest that they not compromise if they feel something should not be approved. Payroll & Claims There were 122 claims in the amount of $190,909.61 and 290 payroll warrants in the amount of $94,962.81 for a total of $285,872.42, dated October 21, 1975, and approved by the Director of Finance. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (Springtown PUD Permit) Mr. Musso commented that earlier in the meeting he neglected to mention that the PUD permit for the Springtown area has expired and the application was only for continuance of the shopping center and the only thing the Planning Commission considered. The large apartment house complex permit has expired as well as numerous other multiple complexes. He noted that it reverts back to OS-A. (Executive Session) The City Attorney requested an executive session immediately after the meeting to discuss condemnation matters. CM-3l-38 November 3, 1975 (Request for Exchange for Holiday Day) Mr. Parness reported that he has just received a petition signed by 90 employees requesting that Veterans' Day, November ll, be sub- stituted for the day after Christmas this year. The Police Department and the Fire Department personnel did not sign the petition because a change would not affect them. Mr. Parness explained that the problem is that our holidays are established by ordinance and in order to accomplish this request the ordinance would have to be cancelled. There is a new state statute which allows cities to establish holidays by resolution and this would be preferable anyway. If the Council agrees to grant the re- quest the Council would have to act this evening because of the timing. Mr. Parness stated that he is not sure what the reaction of some of our employee veterans would be if November 11th were taken from them. The federal employees observe October 27th as Veterans' Day and LLL employees will work on November llth and take the day after Christmas as a holiday. Cm Staley stated that he is opposed to the suggestion because moving a holiday two months is a little past the limit and he is not inter- ested in even discussing this suggestion. Mayor Futch commented that nobody will remember that December 26th is a holiday in lieu of Veterans' Day and the reason for the motiva- tion. Cm Miller stated that he appreciates the viewpoint that people like four-day weekends and he has no objection to the request. He would be willing to go along with the change. Cm Turner stated that if 90 people have indicated they want a change he has no objection to allowing it. Cw Tirsell stated that she can appreciate both points of view. Cm Staley stated that if people want to move holidays around, why not say they can have so many days off per year and let them pick them; in essence this is what they are doing. Cm Miller stated that he sees nothing wrong with allowing people a choice. CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT AN URGENCY ORDINANCE ALLOWING THE EXCHANGE OF VETERANS' DAY, NOVEMBER 11th, FOR THE DAY AFTER CHRISTMAS. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED~(Cm Staley and Mayor Futch dissenting). ~'~~~. './ ~~r ~-<:-.-. C-1< '-Lk- tI ( (Pleasanton Redevelop- ment Plan) Mr. Parness stated that he has received a copy of the Pleasanton Redevelopment Plan, as amended, and would like direction as to what the Council wants to do concerning the plan. Cm Miller stated that this is rather serious because the taxpayers, valley-wide, will be paying higher taxes as a result of this redevelop- ment and we should take the position as presented at their public hear- ing. He would suggest that the staff find out what the inequities are with respect to finances having to do with Zone 7, BART and other agencies. Cm Miller suggested that the Council oppose the mechanism of their redevelopment plan. CM-3l-39 November 3, 1975 (Pleasanton Redevelop- ment Plan) Cw Tirsell stated that she would like the statement to reflect that as a similar City we recognize the problems of upgrading the downtown area and the City is not opposed to that concept and wish them luck, but not at the expense of our taxpayers. Mr. Parness stated that if the Council is suggesting that a statement be prepared for discussion on the next agenda, it will be too late for the hearing. Cm Miller stated that he would suggest that the Council receive a draft with the agenda packet on Thursday and if none of the Counci1- members have any objections by Friday, the material could be pre- sented at the hearing. (Complaints re Safeway Store) Cm Turner stated that he has received a number of complaints about the lack of adequate entrances and exits from the Safeway store. He would request that the Fire Marshall report to the Council on this item within the next two or three weeks, through direction of the City Manager. (Speed Limit on East Avenue) em Turner stated that he saw a near tragedy the other day on East Avenue and there was another accident at Almond and East Avenue. He would like to see that something is done about the speed limit and would like to request that the Council support him on an appeal to the County Planning Commission to consider reducing the speed limit on East Avenue between Almond Avenue and Vasco Road to 25 MPH. Cm Turner added that it i~ his understanding the accident he referred to at Almond and East Avenue involved another bicycle accident and asked that the City Manager look into the accident and report back to the Council. The Council indicated that they felt a more reasonable speed would be 35 MPH and Cm Turner stated that he wouldn't object to this speed but is very concerned that a tragedy will one day occur. Cw Tirsell stated that she would suggest asking for a 25 MPH speed limit in hopes that it would be reduced at least to 35 MPH. Cm Turner stated that he would also like to know what the patrol coverage is for that area. (Res. re FPC Advance Payment Program) Cm Miller stated that he has prepared and distributed a resolution to be presented to our Congressional representatives concerning the Federal Power Commission (FPC) advance payment program and would like the Council to adopt it. Cm Miller stated that there is a push for this program because the PUC is essentially being forced to make a deal with Exxon and it would help to send the resolution to the PUC and our congressmen. CM-3l-40 November 3, 1975 (FPC Advance Payments) Mr. Beebe, Manager of the local PG&E Office, stated that he would prefer that the Council not adopt the resolution prepared by em Miller, this evening, because PG&E needs the Alaskan pipeline and PG&E does not want anything to stand in their way of getting it. They would suggest that the Council waits until the outcome of the vote taken by the PUC is known, which should be within the next couple of weeks. Cm Miller stated that he appreciates the comments made by Mr. Beebe but the reason he has prepared the resolution and would like it approv- ed is essentially at the request of a member of the California PUC who feels that the PUC is involved in an impossible situation with the gas suppliers because they plav various parts of the country against each other. He stated that with respect to the whereas and resolves, the FPC is in this program and they should eliminate all future ad- vance payment obligations for any transactions presently in progress and to urge Cogress to pass legislation that would require refunds or credit for all advance payments already made. What is really being required is that the FPC should have a policy on the distribution of gas and the way it is being done now is that PG&E and the rate payers of California are being played off against other people by the gas producers. The object is that there has to be an equitable way, and it could be settled in court if it is inequitable, and the advance payment program is a way for the FPC to avoid responsibility and require the rate payers to pay for the benefit of Exxon and Arco. All of the mem- bers of the PUC are unhappy about this situation and they are request- ing support of this kind. Mayor Futch stated that his understanding of the issue is that the PUC may agree, in principle, but they don't want to gamble and take the risk of not getting their share of the money. Cm Miller stated that this is correct, in the present circumstance, where the advance payment program exists and the purpose is to end this advance paYment program because it is a game in which the pro- ducers play various parts of the country against each other. In this situation it is understandable why three of the Commissioners voted for it, reluctantly, and why all five voted for a similar agree- ment a couple of months ago. They don't know what else they can do. The whole concept of the advance payment program is wrong and the idea is to pursuade the FPC to get rid of the program. Mayor Futch stated that he understands what Cm Miller is trying to say but what Mr. Beebe is saying is that California may not receive its share at this point in time. Mr. Beebe stated that it will be two or three weeks before a final decision is made by the PUC and everyone would be more enlightened after hearing the decision. Cm Miller stated that he can understand that PG&E is concerned that something might happen and California might not get the gas it needs but this is not an issue that the resolution speaks to at this point. Mr. Beebe urged that the Council wait at least a week or two and by that time maybe more information will be available. Cm Staley stated that if the Council takes the position that the advance payments are wrong in principle but are being extorted it would seem that all Mr. Beebe is saying is that PG&E doesn't like them any better then the Council does, but they have to be made, and yet we shouldn't send the resolution to the PUC because it might interfere with California's share of the gas from the Alaskan pipeline. He stated that he can see no harm in sending CM-3l-4l November 3, 1975 (FPC Advance PaYments) a resolution to the PUC that simply states the program should be eliminated. This should not affect the pending deal. Mr. Beebe stated that he doesn't feel there is any rush in getting the resolution to the PUC and the decision should be known in the near future. Cm Miller stated that he would disagree with Mr. Beebe and feels that it would be advantageous for the City to adopt the resolution immediately and send it to the appropriate people. CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Cw Tirsell stated that she feels uncomfortable about acting if there is additional information the Council should have. She wondered if it would be too late for the Council to respond if the PUC doesn't vote for two weeks. em Miller stated that he respects the view of Commissioner Ross and he prefers to accept his view over that of PG&E's. em Staley stated that he believes what Mr. Beebe is saying is that their legal department has not had time to consider what the results will be in terms of the Alaskan gas negotiations for California if the FPC ends its pOlicy. In otherwords, is this option open to the company and do they have sufficiently binding commitments elsewhere in the country? They may say that they don't want to talk to Calif- ornia if they can't get the advance payments. If this is true it would seem that the Council should wait a week to find out if there are commitments which could cause this situation. Cm Miller stated that it is his understanding of this issue, from the longer memorandum from Commissioner Ross, that the FPC power to allocate gas supply. He stated that he is para- the memo but they have backed away from that and have allowed to take place in advance payments. He added that he has a copy of the memorandum and would be happy to give it to the other Councilmembers for review. It is very clear that if there wasn't a second to his motion that the resolution is not about to be adopted. He stated that when the Council feels they want to adopt it they can go ahead. Cm Staley stated that he believes the majority of the Council are in favor of the resolution but the only question is whether it must be adopted this evening or if there is time for consideration. Mr. Beebe stated that the agreement indicates that Exxon has the option to cancel the PG&E agreement if PUC approval is not obtained and Exxon has the right to purchase from another state. Cm Staley stated that even if the PUC in California proposes con- ditions that would change the picture, it wouldn't change the basic fact that the advance paYment policy appears to be wrong. CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND FAILED 3-2 (Cm Turner, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch dissenting). CM-3l-42 November 3, 1975 (Zone 7 Water Rates) Cm Miller stated that the Councilmembers may have noticed from the newspapers that Zone 7 is raising their water rates. It is very interesting that the rate is larger than what is required to actually pay for the cost of the plant and Zone 7 is putting the excess aside so they will not have to go to the vote of the people for an increase or to expand another 9 MGD. This means that Geldermann could develop and the people wouldn't have a say on the development. He added that this may not be the motive of Zone 7 but it could be the outcome. It turns out that the water rate increase proposed to be levied on all of us cannot be done because the City has a five year contract with fixed fees. He would suggest that the City insist that the rates remain as agreed to in the contract and urge that Zone 7 be more reasonable about protecting the rate payers in the valley. Cm Miller stated that, lastly, Zone 7 violated all their promises to the voters when they passed Project II. They could have at least had the grace to increase the water connection fees for the develop- ers rather than to penalize the water users. Mayor Futch stated that he feels there isn't much of a problem for possible rate increases because the City already has a five year contract with fixed rates. Cm Staley stated that Zone 7 primarily services people outside of the Livermore area and he isn't sure the Council should get involved with rates for Zone 7 users. Cm Miller stated that the reason he is concerned is because the Chair- man of the Board for Zone 7 addressed the Council about Project II and assured the City that there would not be rate increases to pay for the project. Cm Turner stated that he feels it is appropriate to respond to all the voters. Cm Miller stated that most of the City's people have Cal Water and these people will pay the higher rates. The people are paying the higher rates and he feels the increase is irrational. CM MILLER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE AN APPROPRIATE LETTER TO BE SENT TO ZONE 7, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. (Hospital Board/Hosp. Move) Cm Miller stated that Cw Tirsell was going to contact the Comprehensive Health Care people concerning the move of Valley Memorial Hospital. Cw Tirsell stated that the hospital is purchasing land and they are closing the deal. Cm Miller stated that the point is whether the hospital can actually move is up to the Comprehensive Health Care Board. The hospital board can purchase land if they choose. Cw Tirsell stated that she and Cm Turner have discussed contacting the Comprehensive Health Care Board but they really don't know what can be done and the whole thing is very discouraging. CM-3l-43 November 3, 1975 (County Offices) Cm Miller suggested that the Council urge the County not to use extra taxpayer money in locating a County center, but to use the existing Santa Rita site which is owned by the County, because they will be voting on this issue. The Council concurred. Cm Turner stated that he believes the dollar difference in of using another site and using the Santa Rita site should be brought to the attention of the voters and tax payers. that he has heard there is a difference of $700,000. the cost really He stated (Transportation Seminar - COVA) Cw Tirsell stated that the Council was all invited to a Transportation Seminar at COVA a week from.Thursday, November 13, at the Shannon Center. She stated that the BART representative would be there and a representative from AC. She urged the Councilmembers to make reservations to attend. . (Park - Carlton Square) CW Tirsell asked where the park was in Carlton Square. This matter had been presented to the Council during the summer, and the Coun- cil approved in concept what had been done, but two of the members were gone and it was her thinking that the matter would be brought before them again. Mr. Parness explained that as he understood i~the owners were going to try to sell the subdivision to another developer interest, and a month ago when he talked to them they had retained an engineer who is preparing the new base map, listing the new owner. Cw Tirsell stated the problem was the setbacks in the back yard on several lots, and they had shaved a corner off and the Council in- dicated it had to conform to the ordinance. Mr. Musso stated that the final map will come before the Council for approval. (Gas Tanks - Airport) Cw Tirsell stated at budget time there was a discussion concerning moving the gas tanks at the airport and she did not think the Coun- cil had ever approved that move, and asked what had happened. Mr. Lee explained that the work has not been commenced as yet. Cw Tirsell asked if they had automatically approved that in approv- ing the budget, and the City Manager stated that it was approved. (Bike Paths - East Avenue) A MOTION WAS MADE BY THE MAYOR TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS FOR BICYCLE PATHS IN FRONT OF THE FIRE STATEION AND ROBERT LIVERMORE PARK ON EAST AVENUE. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. The staff was directed to draft a resolution to be placed on the agenda for the next meeting. CM-3l-44 November 3, 1975 (Litter Control Conference) Mayor Futch asked if the Council had received a communication re the Conference in San Francisco on Litter Control and stated that he received a phone call asking if someone from the staff would care to attend. It is to be held November l4 at the Jack Tar Hotel. (de Anza Expedition) Mayor Futch stated he had received a letter from the committee con- cerning the de Anza Expedition requesting funds because Livermore is one of the cities associated with the expedition. Cm Staley suggested that this letter be placed on the next agenda as a communication, and the Council concurred. PROPOSED ORDINANCE RE ESTABLISHMENT OF OS-UR DISTRICT ZONING FOR CERTAIN PROPERTIES MOTION WAS MADE BY CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER, TO INTRODUCE AND FILE THE ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE BY ESTABLISHMENT OF OS-UR DISTRICT ZONING FOR CERTAIN PROPERTIES. MOTION WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE TITLE ONLY WAS READ. REPORT FROM THE CITY MANAGER Shaheen Industrial Tract: Mr. Parness advised that this was com- pleted. Mocho Bikeway is completed and Mr. Parness suggested that the Council take a look at it when they have the time. Fire Station No. 1 is 35% complete. Social Concerns Committee is surveying some 60 different agencies in the Valley to ascertain what types of uses they may suggest for the proposed multi-purpose building. He has been advised that we now have a new bargaining unit being established in the City made up of supervisory employees. ADJOURNMENT 'I ATTEST ~ Regular Adjourned Meeting of November 4, 1975 An adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on Wednesday, November 4, 1975, at 8:05 p.m. in Department 2 of the Municipal Court Chambers. CM-3l-45 The meeting was requested by Hensel Phelps in order to discuss par- tial paymen~s and retention of funds as related to the current pro- ject under way for relocation of the railroad tracks. Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch Absent: Cm Staley (seated later) DISCUSSION RE RAILROAD PROJECT WITH HENSEL- PHELPS CONSTRUCTION CO. At the request of Hensel Phelps a meeting was held to discuss partial paYments and retention of funds as related to the current railroad relocation project. A problem with the overpass bridges has arisen and Mr. Robert Ruyle, representing Hensel-Phelps, indicated that until this problem is solved to the satisfaction of all concerned further discussion on the fund retention matter will cease. The firm of Howard Needles Co. was retained by Hensel-Phelps to make a study of the structural in- tegrity of the piers and to come to some conclusions regarding what can be done with the architectural appearance of the piers. Mr. Ruyle indicated that they did not know of the problem when the meeting was originally requested but will be working to solve this problem to their own, the City's and the railroad's satisfaction. The City will be kept informed as to time for the study. They are still hoping that P Street can be opened December 1st. In answer to a question by Mayor Futch regarding progress of the balance of the work, Mr. Ruyle replied that work was progressing normally, and that all work would be moving ahead in the interim when the pier in- vestigation is going on. Brian Robinson, Project Manager, indicated that they could possibly open the underpasses on a temporary basis. Mr. Ruyle requested the City designate someone to coordinate with the City Council new items in this project, to explain the schedul- ing problems and Mayor Futch volunteered to be the Council's repre- sentative. A question arose as to availability of funds to complete the project. Mr. Parness assured that there are sufficient funds as the City envisioned the project to be. Some claims are disputed but will be dealt w~th later. Mr. Lee explained also that some change orders were anticipated. Mr. Ruyle noted that there were no serious defects in the work, in his opinion. The meeting c~ty C er -Livermore, California APPROVE ATTEST Special Meeting - November 6, 1975 A special meeting of the City Council was called by Mayor Futch for Thursday, November 6, 1975, at 7:20 p.m. in the Conference Room, City Hall, 2250 First Street, Livermore, California. Present: Cm Staley, Tirse1l, Turner and Mayor Futch Absent: Cm Miller The meeting was immediately adjourp~d to an executive session for the purpose of discussing litigation/condemnation - ACORD Property matter. APPROVE City Clerk ) Livermore, California ATTEST CM-3l-46 Regular Meeting of November 10, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on November lO, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:05 p.m. with Mayor pro tempore Turner presiding. ROLL CALL Present: Cm Turner, Miller, and CW Tirsell Absent: Mayor Futch (excused for business trip) and Cm Staley (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. MINUTES - Oct. 27, 1975 Page 6, 6th paragraph from the bottom, 3rd line, delete wording but is questioning this. Second line, end of line should read, She stated that she is not sure.....etc. Page 8, last paragraph, first line should read: Cm Miller stated that it has been his suggestion to bill two of the .....etc. Page 9, first paragraph, fourth line from the bottom should read: newspapers with outside connections. Page 15, concerning "Library Term", Cm Miller stated that he believes the Council adopted the policy at that meeting that no one could serve more than two consecutive terms and there may have been a motion to this effect. The City Clerk was directed to review the minutes to see if there was a motion and if there wasn't a motion there should be a policy resolution. ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 1975, WERE APPROVED AS CORRECTED. OPEN FORUM (RV Vehicles) Leonard Raye, 945 Hanover, stated that a petition concerning RV vehicles is being circulated and one of the questions on the petition asks what precinct the voter is in and he asked if there is a current list available from which this information can be obtained. The City Clerk explained that Mr. Raye would have to contact the County Registrar of Voters because he is the only person who can supply the list. Mr. Raye stated that he has been told a list is available but is being revised. He asked if a signature would be considered valid if the voter lists the wrong precinct and the City Clerk commented that she believes it would be valid. The City Attorney stated that the precinct doesn't make any difference. As long as someone is a registered voter he may sign the petition and it does not matter if he is in one precinct or another. Cm Miller stated that if a new list is not available the old list could be used and the County can take care of it if a precinct has been changed. The City Clerk stated that this is correct. CM-3l-47 November 10, 1975 (RV Vehicles) Mr. Raye stated that last week Cm Staley stated that he would like to find a case in the State of California which would indicate that a precedent had been set concerning RV vehicles and Mr. Raye asked if Cm Staley would give a legal point of view as to what he was looking for. Cm Staley stated that his understanding of a precedent is generally a legal decision that has been rendered by a court of competent jurisdiction, which in this case would probably be an appelate or the Supreme Court in California, that has ruled on the point of question. P.H. RE LAND USE ELEMENT OF GENERAL PLAN A public hearing has been scheduled for the purpose of hearing testi- mony concerning the Land Use Element of the General Plan as it relates to commercial zoning assigned to property located in the vicinity of portola Avenue at the 1-580 off-ramp area. Mr. Musso explained that the Planning Commission initiated this proposal for several reasons, one being that the state law requires that the zoning be in conformance with the General Plan and the particular area to be discussed does not conform. The second reason for considering this General Plan amendment was to eliminate the ID Zoning. Mr. Musso explained that years ago when this property was zoned it was done with the intention of establishing an automobile service center for used cars, new cars, and car servicing. The Planning Commission and the staff was directed to also consider alternate zoning because the plans for the area did not fall under the category of Commercial Office, Neighborhood Shopping, or Industrial/Commercial or Retail, which resulted in a CS Zone. In the interim the property was zoned 10 to allow for commercial type uses. The ID zoning is obsolete and the Planning Commission would like this zoning deleted and has adopted a CS Zone. It is also intended that this would bring the zone into conformance with the General Plan land use for the area. The Planning Commission initiated a General Plan amendment for this area to recognize the commercial uses existing. Cw Tirsell asked if the map included in the agenda packet would be adopted as a formal portion of the General Plan map and Mr. Musso explained that it would not. The change in the General Plan will consist of some very minor changes. The map in the packet is far more detailed than the General Plan would show. Cw Tirsell stated that her only concern is that some of this is really specific planning and some of it is general planning and is concerned that some of the specifics might be adopted as part of the General Plan amendment. Mr. Musso assured cw Tirsell that they wouldn't show as part of the amendment. The changes will be designations from ID to CS. Mayor pro tempore Turner asked if there were communications concerning this item and the City Clerk noted that a letter of opposition to the proposed General Plan amendment was received from Robert Sakia, attor- ney representing Audlan Development Company. Mayor pro tempore Turner opened the public hearing at this time. Robert Sakai, representing Audlan Development Company, 1137 Hayward, stated that his client is primarily concerned abou his property designated as open space. He illustrated the a by Audlan Development Company and noted that ingress and eg Wallhurt, 75% of ea owned ess for CM-3l-43 November 10, 1975 P.H. re Land Use Element of General Plan the property is difficult but if necessary it could be solved by the installation of a traffic signal or the entrance could be from Rincon Ave. The third suggestion would be to extend Murrieta Blvd to North Livermore Avenue. Cm Miller stated that he doesn't understand the last suggestion and Mr. Sakai explained that in the past it has been proposed by the City staff that Murrieta Blvd be extended to North Livermore Avenue from the Las positas intersection area. Cm Miller stated that this extension has been suggested by the Public Works Department numerous times during the past 8-10 years and the suggestion has been rejected each time. There are various reasons for rejecting the suggestion and one is that it would be very costly and no public convenience would be gained. Cw Tirsell asked if the Council is adopting the open space desig- nation by this General Plan amendment; the portion owned by Audlan Development Company, or is the Council reaffirming the residential designation of that piece of property? Mr. Musso stated that, essentially, there is no change on the rear portion or on the basic land use in the area. The present General Plan shows open space along the freeway at 4 d.u./acre in the remainder of the area. There is a small change in one leg of the property, which he illustrated, and he stated that if the Council wishes to avoid conflict it could be eliminated so there is no change. Cw Tirsell asked what the leg shows now and Mr. Musso explained that when PU #11 was done a lot of time was spent concerning the designation of the land use and the P.C. finally concluded that the best solution would be that density transfers would occur and the land use would be transfered to another location and a portion would be open space. In the General Plan amendment itself it hardly shows. Cw Tirsell stated that she would like to know if the Council would be able to show this as open space. The City Attorney stated that ultimately the Council, if they determine to, will have an Open Space Element to the General Plan and under this element the Council would tend to show areas in the City considered to be open space. He added that he is also confused about the Land Use Element and isn't sure what Mr. Musso has in mind. Cw Tirsell stated that she is used to working with the old General Plans but the map in front of the Council is confusing because she agrees with the multiple residential, service commercial, etc., but the only designation for this piece of property shows open space but below it says Urban Low Residential which is a reaffirmation of what the Council said before. If the Council is adopting a General Plan that shows their property as open space, then she can understand why they would be concerned. Is the Council adopt- ing a General Plan amendment that has a specific use on the back part of that property (Audlan Development Company) which shows open space. Mr. Musso stated that the General Plan designated use on the rear half of the property now is open space (on the existing General Plan) and the plan, as proposed, would be a minor extension of this open space to reflect PU #11. It has been assumed that in the event the public does not acquire the open space, the land use of the adjacent area might be assumed. In this case it would be 4 d.u./acre. CM-3l-49 November 10, 1975 (P.H. re Land Use Element of General Plan) Cm Miller stated that this was a point mentioned by Mr. Reiners at the Planning Commission meeting - the designation does not mean acquisi- tion and if the property is not acquired it might be something else. There is no touch of condemnation by General Plan labeling and if there is any concern over this perhaps a formal report could be prepared by the City Attorney's office. The City Attorney advised that the City Council recognize that they are not adopting the Specific Plan which was proposed for PU #11 - the map on the left is an apparent specific plan and probably has been presented to give the Council some clarification as to what the area might look like or what was discussed in the past. What the Council is talking about is the adoption of a General Plan which generally sets out areas of general size - for instance, residential or commercial. It just happens that what is being adopted in this case, is a crossover with the Open Space Element, but at this point in time the Council is not discussing specific planning. There was brief discussion concerning the flood plain and Cm Miller explained to Mr. Sakai that this isn't something you need - one would prefer not to have it. Cw Tirsell asked Mr. Musso if the Corps of Engineers flood plain zone has been reviewed and if this is the area indicated as a flood plain area. Mr. Musso stated that the staff has reviewed it and this area is shown as a flood plain, as indicated by our consultant. The staff used the information from the consultant - not the Corps of Engineers. Mr. Sakai stated that as a couple of legal points, Mr. Reiners in the past has noted that the Selby case has foreclosed any inverse con- demnation action on their part and the Council probably realizes that it is their contention (Audlan Development) that either Selby doesn't apply because of other cases and because of the fact that upon the attaching of the General Plan amendment that this property would suffer a loss in value and they would ask for this loss in value and secondly, upon the annexation of that property the City would have to rezone the property from the current County zoning of Commercial down to Open Space Zoning. Upon this action he believes they would have very firm grounds for claiming inverse condemnation. He stated that this is down the road and would suggest that these problems could be avoided if the City didn't extend that open space down to the intersection of ~~urrieta, and leave it as it appears in the current General Plan. It does not appear that the Planning Department was very strong in pushing the open space down that far. Mr. Musso noted that all of that property located in the County is not zoned commercial; about half of it is commercial and if it were annexed to the City it is not customary to zone it for open space. It would generally be zoned for open space only if it is agricultural or if the public acquires it for open space purposes. He stated that he has already informed Mr. Sakai that the City does not zone land for purposes of adverse condemnation. The City never has done this and he believes the City Attorney would never allow it. Mayor pro tempore Turner suggested that perhaps the item should be continued until the Public Works Director has had an opportunity to discuss some of the items mentioned. Mr. Logan stated that there is no significant problem with respect to whether or not Mr. Lee said the property would be an appropriate flood plain or in Flood Plain Zoning. The possibility that it might be a CM-3l-50 November 10, 1975 (P.H. re Land Use Element of General Plan) flood plain area is only one of several factors in the Council's determination of how this is to be set up in the General Plan. The General Plan action is clearly a legislative action - the Council is not zoning anything at this time and he would like this to be very clear to the audience. The Council at this time is only creating a General Plan - not zoning anything. ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Cw Tirsell asked if the Council is required to make findings and the City Attorney explained that the Council is not required to make specific findings on a legislative action. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ADOPT THE PROPOSED LAND USE CHANGE, AS DETAILED ON THE MAP. MOTION SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Cw Tirsell stated that she would like to include in the Council action, statements made to the Council and the letter from the Planning Commission. The City Attorney noted that the Council may make the findings made by the Planning Commission or it can agree to the resolution including the findings and conclusions contained within that reso- lution. CW TIRSELL RESTATED THE MOTION TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, PROVIDED THAT THE COUNCIL AGREES WITH THEIR RESOLUTION AND THE FINDINGS THEREIN. MOTION SECON- DED BY CM MILLER. The City Attorney stated that if the Council has no objections he would like to place this in the form of a resolution which will corne back to the Council on next week's Consent Calendar. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CO~~UNICATION RE FUNDS FOR RE-ENACTMENT OF DE ANZA EXPEDITION The letter received from Mayor Coniglio concerning funds for the re-enactment of the de Anza Expedition as part of the bicentennial year, was noted for filing. Cw Tirsell commented that this is a prime example of what happens to national policy as it is sifted down to the state and then to the cities. It seems to rest on the city door-steps to provide funding for various projects such as this. The cities have the least amount of money and when it comes to funding a program that would benefit so many people, it is the cities that are asked to pay for it. All state funding has been withdrawn for this par- ticular program and now the cities are expected to fund it. APPEAL OF DENIAL FOR HOME OCCUPATION ZON- ING USE PERMIT (Jay L. Garber) Mr. Musso explained that the home occupation permit has been approved for a period of a year. Prior to this, the permit was approved at another location. The occupation is upholstry pick-up and delivery service, requested by Jay L. Garber, 538 Oriole Avenue. CM-31-51 November 10, 1975 (P.H. re Land Use Element of General Plan) Mr. Musso reported that upon renewal of the permit the staff denied it based on complaints made by the neighbors and advertising done by the business - this is not a use that should be operating in a residential area. As of this date the City has not allowed this type of activity in a residential area. Mayor pro tempore Turner asked where the complaints came from, spe- cifically. Mr. Musso commented that the City can't really use the complaints as evidence because they were unsigned letters and telephone calls, etc.; however the complaints were the reason the occupation was investigated and it was found that the use was more than just an office use or telephone answering type of service~ There was a large amount of storage of upholstry material in the garage and also a large amount of activity connected with the use as well as advertising the use on the premises. Cm Staley stated that the letter from the Planning Department indicates that most of the complaints were received after October 15th and he would like to know if this was in response to a notice to the neighbors. Mr. Musso indicated that this was after notices were sent. Cm Staley asked if there had been independent complaints prior to the notices and Mr. Musso replied there had not'been, to his knowledge. Mr. Musso explained that the notice is that the City intends to approve the use and neighbors have the right to appeal this decision. A hearing is not really held at this time but people are entitled to respond. Because of the response that was received the City did in- vestigate further and on the City's own grounds did deny the use. Mr. Garber, the applicant, stated that the Telephone Company requires the address where one of the telephones are located. He also has an answering service but couldn't list that as the address, and is the reason he placed his own address in the telephone book. He stated that he has substantial bills from an upholstry business in San Jose to indicate that the work is not done from his address and that it is used only for pick-up and delivery. Occasionally, if furniture cannot be delivered he will store it in his garage until it can be delivered. He stated that he is only doing this type of service to supplement his income and he has had a permit for the past 2~ years - originally it was for an East Avenue address. Mr. Garber stated that he goes to school at 6:00 a.m. and generally does not get back home until 2:00-4:00 in the afternoon and this is the reason he has an answering service. He stated that in the past he did some upholstering but he doesn't have the time anymore, and the address is used for pick-up and delivery only. Mayor pro tempore Turner asked Mr. Musso if the use would be considered an authorized home occupation if the use consists of only telephone answering and pick-up and delivery and Mr. Musso indicated that it would. Mr. Musso stated that originally the use was approved as a business office in conjunction with an effective delivery service. This does not allow bringing the furniture to the premises and then off again and this is where the complaints arose and the cause for the investi- gation by the staff. The issue was bringing the furniture to the home and storing it in the garage. Mayor pro tempore Turner asked Mr. Garber how often the furniture is stored on the premises and Mr. Garber replied that this is done once or twice a month. CM-3l-52 November 10, 1975 (Appeal re Home Occupation Permit - Jay L. Garber) Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that personally he does not favor home occupations but he knows of no reason the permit should be denied on the basis of what has been presented this evening and according to the testimony given by Mr. Garber. Cm Miller asked how many complaints had been received and Mr. Musso reported that there were two telephone calls and one written response but names were not furnished with the complaints. Cm Miller then asked about the nature of the complaints and Mr. Musso noted that the complaints concerned storage of materials on the prem- ises. Cm Miller asked if this is what the staff discovered upon investigation and Mr. Musso stated that he does not know if that particular aspect was checked by the staff. Cw Tirsell stated that she is generally concerned when complaints are expressed by neighbors, but on the other hand if people are not willing to sign their complaints and won't give their names for the Council to work with, it is difficult for her to try to protect their neighborhood. She stated that there are businesses located in town who do upholstering also but they pay for a store, the overhead, lights, and employees. The Council tries to do everything possible to focus commercial activity in the downtown area and to protect those people who have a great deal of capital invested. For this reason she agrees with the home occupation permit procedure followed by the City. However, if Mr. Garber has only a telephone service from his home she would vote in favor of allowing the permit. The ordinance is rather specific and says that furniture may not be stored on the premises and she would suggest that Mr. Garber make other arrangements. If the furniture cannot be delivered on the day it is picked up in San Jose, then it should not be picked up. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ALLOW THE PERMIT, PROVIDED THERE BE THE STIPULA- TION THAT NO STORAGE TAKE PLACE ON THE PREMISES. THE PERMIT WILL BE ALLOWED FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cm Staley stated that at this moment he is not sure how he will vote on the motion but his inclination would be to vote against it for the following reasons: Horne occupations, at best, are difficult for neighbors to tolerate and they must be conducted in a manner so as not to cause justified complaints. The home occupation is really an invasion of people's living area and there are numerous businesses in the commercial district conducting this type of business. On the other hand, he would have to agree with what Cw Tirsell has said about complaints that are not signed. Cm Miller stated that he agrees with what the other Councilmembers have said about home occupations and would vote no on this applica- tion if the complaints had been signed. At this point he will re- luctantly go along with the motion but the applicant should recognize that if there are complaints made which are signed because of the storage of furniture his permit can be revoked at any time. The permit does not automatically run for one year. It is incumbent upon the applicant to make sure the conditions of the permit are satisfied so there will not be grounds for a complaint and revoca- tion of the permit. Mr. Logan explained that the capacity in making this determination is termed "quasi-judicial" which means that there should be evidence to support a Council decision. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM-3l-53 November 10, 1975 RESOLUTION NO. 229-75 A RESOLUTION APPROVING HOME OCCUPATION ZONING USE PERMIT (Jay L. Garber) CONTINUED DISCUSSION RE LAFCO RESOLUTION RE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE The City Council asked that the discussion continue this week concerning the LAFCO resolution on Livermore's Sphere of Influence. LAFCO has scheduled public hearings for December 4 and 11. Cw Tirsell stated that she and Mayor Futch met with the City Attorney last week to discuss the procedure for giving testimony at the LAFCO public hearings and she asked the City Attorney if there was any change in what was discussed as a logical procedure, and is the time schedule still current. Mr. Logan stated that as far as he knows it is. LAFCO was going to set time schedules after he left and they were contemplating setting the schedules as of the dates the Council has. If anything, the dates the Council knows of will be the earliest dates and nothing is set earlier than these dates. Therefore, what was discussed is basically the position the City will take and will work with that schedule. ern Miller stated that according the newspaper accounts, the LAFCO staff was directed by the Commission to rewrite their report and he wondered what this was. Mr. Logan stated that basically it was a question of Mr. Mayne's allegation in the original staff report, that if the Sphere of Influence were set for Livermore on the City limits it would pre- sume there would be no development anywhere outside of the City limits and taking the position that the whole purpose of the Sphere of Influence is to determine where a city will go in the future. Mr. Murphy took a strong position that the County is a local body, as is the City, and they could develop that area so the report really didn't say there would be no development. The redete~ination, as far as the argument was concerned, did not delete that portion - all they did was add another possibility which was to draw the Sphere of Influence line exactly like the 1973 staff recommendation which showed the northern boundary as Hartman and Hartford roads. Cm Miller stated that it was his understanding that this boundary was already in their list. Mr. Logan stated that of the first four, they took the original staff recommendation and on the staff's own initiative determined to redraw that because it was coincident with the proposed General Plan for the City of Livermore, which incidently is fairly coincident with the Las positas proposal in that they both include the real developable area in the Las positas Valley. The staff felt that was the most reasonable tact to take because that really delineated the issue - that there be one unit in the east end of the Valley or two units in the east end of the Valley. The staff felt that was extremely important and that the Commission reach some decision on that major issue. Cm Miller wondered if the LAFCO staff intends to approve their former plan which includes undeveloped areas to the south because the list indicates only the northern undeveloped areas. It would appear that they intend to include some of the areas north and limiting the City to the City limits on the south. CM-3l-54 November 10, 1975 (Discussion re LAFCO Res. - Sphere of Influence) Mr. Logan stated that the lists are confusing because one list was in the Environmental Impact Report that listed the four alternatives and one list was in the staff report that listed four alternatives and the two were not consistent. The staff said that alternatives 2 and 4 were the only viable alternatives and specifically those are the present Sphere of Influence, as it now exists, and the alternate Sphere of Influence which would take in the Planning Area of the Livermore General Plan and the north would remain generally the same throughout the south, west, and east. The other two they cast aside as being generally unreasonable. Cm Miller asked if they plan to consider the proposals submitted by the City of Livermore for the entire General Plan area and Mr. Logan stated that this was one of the two considered to be unreasonable. Cm Miller stated that this was in the EIR and not in the staff report but there is nothing that says Livermore's General Plan in the LAFCO resolution before the Council. Mr. Logan stated that it was in the staff report and believes that it was the first alternative. It is in 3) of the LAFCO resolution before the Council which indicates up to the County boundary on the north and areas to the south of the City of Livermore. Cm Miller noted that it indicates "developed areas to the south" which means our City limits. Mr. Logan stated that this may be just a mistake because the staff report is spelled out in detail what they intend to do. It may be that the staff report delineates anything south of the City in terms of undeveloped area also but in either event they are suggesting that the Commission not consider that. em Miller asked if the Council would receive copies of the staff re- port and Mr. Logan commented that the only reason the City has not received the report is because the Commission requested that a por- tion of it be rewritten. Mr. Logan added that if the Council will notice, 4) of the resolu- tion is not an accurate statement of the facts either. In fact, it is a new alternative that was not presented initially. Mr. Musso noted that LAFCO is having a public hearing on the EIR and another public hearing on the Sphere of Influence. Cw Tirsell stated that in the discussion with the City Attorney it was felt that the City Attorney, the Mayor and the City Manager should prepare testimony to give at the LAFCO hearing, if the Council would concur. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO WORK WITH THE MAYOR ON PREPARATION OF TESTIMONY. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM STALEY. Mayor pro tempore Turner asked that the testimony be prepared in time for the Council to review it. The City Attorney stated that the time for submission of testimony concerning the EIR is December 31, and this is the first item that the City should respond to. It may be necessary, at some point in time, to bring in Grunwald and Crawford or some other outside testi- mony. Cw Tirsell commented that her motion is designating those respon- sible for the preparation of testimony but this does not mean that they are the only persons who should give testimony. CM-31-55 November 10, 1975 (LAFCO Res. re Sphere of Influence) Cm Miller stated that he will vote against the motion because he believes the appearance before LAFCO is going to be fundamentally a legal matter and everything that is done must be coordinated in terms of a matter that will ultimately go to court. He stated that the motion is to leave this to the Ma or and he would rather have the whole thing coordinated by the Mayor. ~ Mayor pro tempore stated that Cw Tirsell asked Mr. Logan, Mr. Parness and Mayor Futch to prepare testimony. Cm Miller stated that he wants the primary coordinator to be the City Attorney. Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that he believes the primary coordina- tor should be the Mayor with Mr. Logan as the legal advisor. CW TIRSELL RESTATED THE MOTION - THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY, MAYOR, AND CITY MANAGER PREPARE TESTIMONY TO BE DELIVERED AT THE LAFCO HEARING, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. The City Attorney commented that written testimony will be submitted to LAFCO prior to testifying at the hearing and the Council will have the opportunity to read the testimony in advance. REPORT RE PARKING REGULATION ENFORCEMENT A report from the Chief of Police indicates that the hours available during the week for enforcement of the parking regulations is 12 hours which has been assigned to the Police Assistant. Currently the Police Department has assigned the Police Cadet to enforce parking regulations for an 8 hour period on Saturdays. Total enforce- ment per week is approximately 20 hours. Cm Miller stated that it was not clear from the report how many hours had been spent on enforcement of parking regulations in the past. Mr. Parness stated that he believes the 20 hours is the number of hours spent on the enforcement of parking regulations during the past several months. Cm Miller stated that this would mean there is no increase in the amount of enforcement - everything is the same as in the past. Mr. Parness stated that basically this is the case and that the problem is a lack of manpower available for this purpose. Cm Miller stated that he is not satisfied with the number of hours spent on enforcement and that there should be more time devoted to it. If necessary, something else should receive less attention. The Council requested that there be additional time for the enforcement, particularly as Christmas approaches, and this does not satisfy that request. Cm Staley stated that he believes there has been more devotion to parking regulations because the Police Cadet has been assigned to this task on Saturdays since this problem has been brought to the attention of the Council by the merchants. Prior to the complaints there was no enforcement on Saturdays, and this makes a big difference. Cm Miller stated that if people have been talking to Cm Staley and Cm Staley feels the enforcement is satisfactory he would be willing to accept Cm Staley's judgment. CM-3l-56 November 10, 1975 (Parking Regulations) Cm Staley stated that he, personally, has had no feedback since the last discussion on this item but he would assume that enforce- ment is adequate because if it wasn't there would have been complaints from the merchants. Cm Miller stated that if there are complaints the Council can again discuss the item. Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that from the letter it is clear that the Chief of Police is using the Police Assistant as best he can in the number of hours available. He added that he voted in favor of increased number of hours for this task and would be willing to con- sider an increase in manpower for the Police Department in the form of a Police Cadet specifically for the purpose of parking enforcement if the Council would support this suggestion. Cm Staley stated that he would be willing to add a Police Cadet to the force but first he would like to know what the cost for this addition would be. The staff was directed to report on the cost of an additional Police Cadet at the next Council meeting. REPORT RE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT - EMERGENCY AMBULANCE SERVICES After months of negotiating between the three parties concerned with the emergency services joint powers agreement, a clarifying amend- ment to the agreement has been prepared. The amendment has been drafted by the legal departments of each of the public agencies. The three agencies will pay an equal share in the accumulated finan- cial losses of the ambulance company for fiscal years 1973, 1974, and 1975, in the amount of $32,288. The monthly subsidy would be raised from the current $1,173 to $1,600, and lastly the amendment specifies that any financial obligations due from or to the public jurisdictions by the contractee shall be cleared by the end of the fiscal year. It is recommended that a resolution authorizing execu- tion of the amendment be adopted. Mr. Parness reported that the Council is aware of the problem the Val- ley has been facing on emergency ambulance services, over the past several years. About three years ago a joint powers agreement was drafted and finally executed and it was one of the first of its kind in Alameda County and he is told that it was one of the pione- ering efforts in the state for provision of emergency ambulance ser- vices and its subsidization. The City was alerted by the owner of the company, at that time, that the business operations were in such a state that unless there was a subsidy paid for this kind of service, it was going to be discontinued. A critical problem was faced at that time at the eleventh hour and almost under urgency conditions the three signatories to the subsequent joint powers agreement met and formulated this arrangement. It was decided with the concurrence of the former company owner that a reasonable subsidy amount, based upon a competitive bid, would be $700 per jurisdiction, per month. This seemed to be adequate enough to take care of any deficit amounts that the company was then sus- taining. That represented the first year of the new plan. A contract was executed with the company which specified that the signatory agen- cies would guarantee an amount netted to the company equal to 10% above "allowable expenses", over revenues. Allowable expenses were very carefully defined and it was felt that this would suffice. The CM-31-57 November 10, 1975 (Ambulance Services Contract) results of the administration of that contract over the three year term has not been very satisfactory from a financial standpoint. It might be noted that the company was sold immediately after this con- tractural arrangement was consumated and was purchased by the Tri- cities Ambulance Company which has been performing quite satisfactorily since then. The problem encountered in administering the contract and the lO% guaranteed formula was that there was a deficit in each one of the year's operations which was post-accumulated. The first year there was a deficit of $11,250 but the next fiscal year was begun with a raise in the subsidy because of the cost experience the pre- vious year with the intention that the raised subsidy and raised rates would help pay the deficit and hopefully eliminate it. Unfortunately, this has not happened. Rather than erasing the deficit it has com- pounded and there has been an accumulation of debt owed to the company for the fiscal years, 1973, 1974, and 1975, amounting to $32,288. The joint powers signatories (Livermore, Pleasanton and the County) have finally decided that there must be another answer to this problem and it was felt a consultant analysis of the whole issue was in order. Alameda County has agreed to fund the analysis which is presently under way. The consultant has indicated that it would be about three weeks before a conclusion is reached. The amendment to the joint powers agreement will allow the deficits owed to the contractor to be erased. Further, it will raise the monthly subsidy per month, per agency, payable for the balance of this fiscal year, which is as far as the contract goes. The agreement was written this way purposely so as to allow an interval to receive the consultant's study and to analyze it in hopes that some corrective course of action can be taken. Mr. Parness stated that this is a matter of great concern to him just because of the financial reprecussions it has from this point on. He stated that he does not know how the City will be able to fund the service but if not legally obligated the City is morally obligated to fund the service. It really is a worry. Cm Miller stated that it is his understanding the emergency service subsidy is supposed to take care of not all emergency service but rather those emergency services which are not paid. Mr. Parness indicated that this is not correct. Cm Miller stated that he beleives people who need emergency service are supposed to be billed by the ambulance company and if they do not pay the cities have to pay for them. Mr. Parness stated that this is another part of the arrangement with the ambulance company. Those are uncollectable bills and the cities have to guarantee to pay a portion of this amount. Another type of payment is obligated by the signatories which is the so-called "dry runs". All this has to do with is supplementing the amount of revenue which the company earns through the operation of this service. He just received statistics which indicate that it is costing the ambulance company approximately $91 per emergency ambulance call and the amount paid by the joint powers agencies is about $40 of the $91. The amend- ment does not have reference to the uncollected bills, but rather is a supplement to the total earnings of the company so they can respond to approximately four calls per day that are emergency in nature. ern Miller asked if the 10% profit is based on the total profits of the company rather than profits based on their emergency service and Mr. Parness stated that this is based on total profits of the company for ambulance services with no reference to the transportation of indigents. CM-3l-58 2 I November lO, 1975 (Ambulance Service Contract) Cm Miller stated that he has had the feeling since the beginning of the joint powers agreement that the whole thing is a "rip off" and the concept of providing backup for dry runs and unpaid emergency service is one thing but to guarantee 10% on the overall operations is not reasonable, in his opinion, and he will not vote to amend the agreement. Mr. Parness stated that Cm Miller is making a philosophical point and he can't help but agree with him - this is about as repugnant as par- tially subsidizing a hardware store that has financial difficulty. The difference is that this is indeed an emergency type of need which the community is going to demand and the City must afford. If it is not done by means of a private company it must be done by the govern- ment, which some cities do, as is done by Berkeley, Hayward, San Leandro, and piedmont. If this service is done in-house, it would cost the City a great deal more than if provided through the joint powers agencies. Cm Staley wondered what the procedure is for providing ambulance service to the County hospital. Mr. Parness stated that there are various procedures throughout the County which are different than we have our here in the Valley. We are the only area in the County wherein the County Government is participating financially. He stated that he does know that all areas in the County are suffering under this very problem and under a new emergency medical service plan that has been under for- mulation for the past year, hopefully, some of the burden will be eased. Cm Staley stated that he feels the same concern for guaranteeing a 10% revenue for the overall operations but it certainly would be reasonable to see that delivery of emergency ambulance service is possible. Would there be any way to provide for emergency service without subsidizing the overall operations? Apparently a schedule is being set up in such a way that the company is guaranteed a lO% return which is being investigated. The issue before the Council this evening is the request to authorize the payment already owed to the ambulance company and obviously if the City owes them money it must be paid. What he is suggesting is that in terms of the consultant study, he would be interested in an alternative that would allow the signatories to provide or underwrite a subscription of emergency ambulance service without guaranteeing a 10% profit on all services. , ( Mr. Parness stated that the parties to the agreement are underwrit- ing a guaranteed 10% above revenues for allowable expenses of just providing emergency services for the community. This has nothing to do with hospital bed rentals or oxygen rentals or transportation of indigent patients or anything else. These are entries that do not qualify even though the company does engage in them. If all of this were something the City had to underwrite it would be an additional 60% in cost over what is now being experienced. Cm Miller stated that he may have misunderstood but it was his understanding that the 10% was paid on the overall operations for the ambulance company - not just emergency services. Mr. Parness is now saying that the 10% is based only on the emergency services. Mr. Parness commented that it is based upon the cost of providing ambulance services and the largest portion of this is emergency responses. Cm Miller asked if this includes transporting people by ambulance, not on an emergency basis, and Mr. Parness stated that it does not include this type of service. CM-3l-59 I November 10, 1975 (Ambulance Service Contract) Cm Miller stated that he wants to get this item clear because it seems to be the issue. what Mr. Parness is saying, then, is that they are guaranteed 10% above their revenue for emergency ambulance service only. Mr. Parness stated that it is difficult for him to define service other than emergency service. There are many adjuncts to the business and many of them are not qualifiable. There is a list of allowable expenses contained in the contract and the question about what portion of the business enterprise we are talking about cannot be definitively answered. The major portion of the business is emergency responses but this is only four calls per day in the way of emergency response in the Valley. Cm Staley stated that he believes what Mr. Parness is saying is that, basically, the purpose of the agreement is to subscribe the emergency ambulance services but because of the way the costs are allocated in any given situation it makes the formula complicated. For instance, one ambulance costs so much in depreciation and there is the problem of allocating the depreciation to emergency ambulance service as opposed to non-emergency ambulance service. Mr. Parness stated that this is correct. Cm Staley stated that he is satisfied that what we are doing at this time is authorizing money that is owed to the ambulance company and at this point there is no choice but to pay it. However, for the future he would like to see the reports from the consultant. CM STALEY MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PAYMENT OF THE EMERGENCY AMBULANCE SERVICE SUBSIDY. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CW .., TIRSELL. Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that it irritates him that someone ~ has to be guaranteed a profit and he believes this is wrong. He asked if the 10% profit is before taxes or after taxes have been paid. Mr. Parness stated that this is one of the problems the coordinating agent, Valley Memorial Hospital, had in going over the ambulance company's books - as to whether or not it was taxable income. As he recalls it was before taxes. Mayor pro tempore Turner asked if this is going to be reviewed in July 1976, and Mr. Parness stated that it will be reviewed in about a month. MOTION PASSED 3-1 (Cm Miller dissenting) . RESOLUTION NO. 226-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PAYMENT OF THE EMERGENCY AMBULANCE SERVICE SUBSIDY RECESS Mayor pro tempore Turner called for a brief recess after which the Council meeting resumed with Councilmembers Miller, Tirsell, Turner and Staley present. REPORT RE ISABEL AVE. RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION The City Manager reported that as previously authorized by the Council the agreement with the County provides for the purchase of 19.3 acres of property at a cost of $100,000 which is to be shared by the County. CM-3l-60 ., Cm Turner asked who sets the officers' salary for the ambulance service and Mr. Parness indicated that the owner does. He also asked if this would be considered an authorized expense and Mr. Parness indicated that it was. He also asked if appreciation is considered in the overall computation of the 10% profit and the~~ City Manager indicated that it is. &K ~c November 10, 1975 (re Isabel Highway) The County will pay 45% of the cost and the City will pay the remain- ing 55%. It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution auth- orizing execution of the agreement. Mr. Parness added that the contract with the County is not firm, binding or final. It yet has to go before the Board of Super- visors but he believes the County would be highly in favor of seeing Isabel Highway installed to relieve the truck traffic through Pleas- anton. At least this is an inducement to get the County to look at our Plan for the Isabel Highway. Mr. Parness noted that he is concerned with Item 6, Section I. He stated that he has discussed this item with our Supervisor and the Director of Public Works. Public Works is concerned about having $45,000 of the County's money reside interminably with the City with possibly nothing happening towards development of the highway. Mr. Parness stated that he believes this is a remote possibility but he can appreciate this viewpoint because CAL-TRANS promised the City that something would be done with Isabel Avenue for many years. There was discussion concerning liberalizing the terms of Item 6, and they would be willing to expand the six years to ten and with the insert of the phrase, "ten years from the date of this agreement unless said term is extended by mutual agreement of the City and the County". Mr. Parness stated that he firmly believes that something will happen with respect to a highway along this alignment within the next 10 years. Mayor pro tempore Turner asked what would happen if the property is purchased and then there is no highway development. Mr. Parness stated that the title is vested with the City and it would mean that the $45,000 would have to be paid back to the County unless they would be willing to extend the 10 years. Mayor pro tempore Turner aasked if this would still be considered a good investment if there were no development in 10 years and Mr. Parness stated he believes it would be. Cw Tirsell noted that there is a resolution for the Council to adopt and wondered if the portion of Item 6 can be changed to incorporate what Mr. Parness has just said and it was noted that this would be satisfactory. ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECTION OF THE AGREEMENT WAS ADOPTED, WITH THE INCLUSION OF THE CHANGE SUGGESTED BY MR. PARNESS. RESOLUTION NO. 227-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (County of Alameda) REPORT RE SB 634 (Bottle Bill) A copy of SB 634 (pending bill) was distributed to the Council at their request. SB 634 pertains to disposable containers and will be discussed at the Alameda County Mayors Conference at their December meeting. Cw Tirsell stated that her concern is that no appropriation is being made with this bill and experience has shown that any policing action, when there is no appropriation made, means that very little happens. CM-3l-6l I November 10, 1975 (SB 634 - Bottle Bill) Cm Miller stated that this is the type of bill the Council directed our Mayor to support and to urge support at the Mayors Conference to be adopted locally as well as statewide. He will be doing this at the December 3rd meeting. Cw Tirsell stated that the Council could support this bill and the Mayor could be aware of this and be prepared to read the bill and then respond. The Council concurred. The Council directed the staff to place this item on the Consent Calendar as well as a copy of the bill for Mayor Futch at that time. It was also requested that the resolution supporting this be placed on the agenda at the same time. RE PROPOSED ENERGY CONSERVATION COMMITTEE The Planning Commission submitted a report indicating that the Commission is concerned with the impend~ shortage of energy. They believe that much can be done through planning, building codes and public expenditures for improvements that might mitigate the problem we are facing. The Planning Commission suggests that a technical committee be organized to prepare and submit to the Commission an energy conservation element to be considered and presented to the Council. The Council concurred with the suggestion but agreed that the Council should make the final affirmation of the appointments to the Com- mittee. COUNTY REFERRAL - CUP RE RETAIL SALE OF BOATS 5715 South front Road The Planning Commission considered referral from Alameda County Zoning Administrator of the application of H. R. Perry for a Condi- tional Use Permit to permit retail sales of boats and boat motors at 5715 Southfront Road. The Planning Commission has recommended denial of the application. CM MILLER MOVED TO ACCEPT THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL OF THE APPLICATION UNTIL THEY CAN CONNECT TO THE SEWER LINE. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNTY REFERRAL - REZONING REQUEST- 6271 TESLA ROAD (John J. Migliore) The Planning Commission has considered the referral from the Alameda county Planning Commission on the application of John J. Migliore for rezoning from A (Agricultural) District to M-l (Light Industrial) District, property located at 6271 Tesla Road for continued use of an existing storage facility. The Planning Commission did express its support of the specific use in that specific location but suggested that the County find some other means for allowing the use to continue for an additional period of time, including the possibility of amending the "A" District to allow such a use as a Conditional Use. The Planning Commission recommended denial of the application however on the basis that neither the use nor the proposed zoning conforms to the General Plan. CM-3l-62 November lO, 1975 (Rezoning Request - Migliori) CW TIRSELL STATED THAT SHE WAS PREPARED TO SUPPORT THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION WHICH IS FOR DENIAL BUT SUPPORT OF THE SPECIFIC USE IN THAT SPECIFIC LOCATION; MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Cm Miller added that it was suggested that the use be allowed to continue as a non-conforming use which he felt was the best way. Mr. Musso explained that this was the position the Planning Commis- sion took, however the County took the position that it was granted a use variance for storage and since then use variances are no longer allowed and on the expiration of that use variance it is no longer a permitted use so this is the problem the County faced. John Migliore, 6271 Tesla Road, read a petition that had been pre- pared and submitted to the Board of Supervisors which supported the storage facility and asking that the property be spot zoned so as to allow the use to continue. Mr. Migliore stated that his attorney had also drawn up a petition to this effect and all of his adjoin- ing neighbors signed that petition. Cw Tirse11 stated that both the Council and the Planning Commission recognize that Mr. Migliore provides a very necessary and useful service for the community and are interested that he be allowed to continue the use, however to designate that property as indus- trial is not something the Council is prepared to support. Mr. Migliore stated he could understand the Council's position; however, he wanted the Council to realize his position. Cw Tirsell stated the City would support him in maintaining the agricultural or conditional use in another kind of zoning, but the Council cannot support industrial zoning. Cm Miller stated they must be sure that their letter makes it very clear that the Council supports some other alternative that would allow the use but that they do not like the concept of spot zoning. Cw Tirsell stated that the Planning Commission's letter supports the Council's finding, but they should add a statement in the third paragraph as follows: "The Council finds that the use is of a service to Livermore and that they would support its continued use, however not as an industrial area." Marlin Ebert, 1447 Sunset Drive, stated that he stores his boat at the facility and was notified that this matter was pending, and from the meeting tonight he understands that an alternative is possible and asked if the Council felt that alternatives were possible, and if there were factual basis for an alternative. The Council stated that this was entirely up to the Board of Supervisors, but the Council would prefer that the use remain as it is presently. Mr. Ebert stated further that there are other very nice storage places now available but they are terribly expensive, whereas the storage that Mr. Migliore provides is very reasonable, and he felt that the people who used the storage controlled the situation extremely well. ern Staled asked what possible action that the Board of Supervisors can take on this application. CM-31-63 November 10, 1975 (Rezoning Request - Migliori) Mr. Musso stated that the County 1) could zone the parcel industrial or some other zone that allows the use as a permitted use, 2) they could go to a PD District and allow a PUD permit or 3) amend the County agricultural zone to consider this as a conditional use. Those are the three practical uses - the other is to try to establish some vested interest as far as being a non-conforming use which is strictly up the County Planning Department or County Council. em Miller stated that the Industrial zoning and PD are spot zonings, of a kind, but it is the Council's intention to recommend not that they rezone, but provide some other alternative that would not create spot zoning. Mr. Musso stated that if this parcel were rezoned to Industrial it would possibly put the neighbors in a different category also as far as taxation. CW TIRSELL REFERRED BACK TO HER MOTION THAT SHE WOULD SUPPORT THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION, BUT ADD THE WORDS THAT THE CITY RECOGNIZES THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS USE HOWEVER THE COUNCIL IS CONCERNED ABOUT ANY SPOT ZONING IN THE AREA SUCH AS INOUSTRIAL OR PD AND ALSO THE ASSESSMENT ON ADJOINING PROPERTIES SHOULD SPOT ZONING BE ALLOWED. THE COUNCIL WOULD PREFER THAT THE USE BE ALLOWED AND, HOPEFULLY, CAN BE ALLOWED IN THE AGRICULTURAL AREA OR BY NON-CONFORMING USE. CM MILLER SECONDED THE MOTION. The City Attorney pointed out that this probably would not qualify as a non-conforming use as the agricultural zoning was set in that area long before this use ever came into effect. To be a non-con- forming use it has to be a use in effect at the time it is zoned. The Council concurred that the County be urged to find a way to allow the present use to continue without spot zoning changes. A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN AND DRAFT EIR A report was submitted by the Planning Commission concerning the Solid Waste Management Plan and Draft EIR. The Council indicated that they had held public hearings regarding the Solid Waste Management as prescribed and a resolution approving the plan had been adopted and forwarded to the Board of Supervisors and County Planning Commission. SUMMARY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING NOVEMBER 4, 1975 A summary of the action taken at the Planning Commission meeting of November 4 was presented to the Council. CM MILLER APPEALED THE ACTION ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION CONCERNING THE VARIANCE APPLICATION OF CHRIS BERATLIS FOR 6 LOTS AT THE SE CORNER OF WALL STREET AND STANLEY BLVD. The City Clerk advised that this matter will probably be set for the meeting of November 24. Mayor pro tempore Turner stated the Council's appreciation of the summary of action report prepared by the Planning Commission in that it gave the Council an opportunity to appeal an item if warranted. CM-3l-64 November 10, 1975 CONSENT CALENDAR (Appointment of Member to Library Board) ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL, THE FOLLOWING RESO- LUTION APPOINTING ROGENE FIELDS TO THE LIBRARY BOARD WAS APPROVED: RESOLUTION NO. 228-75 A RESOLUXION APPOINTING MEMBER TO LIBRARY BOARD (Rogene Fields) Cm Miller asked that a letter of thanks be sent to Arthur Henry for his able and long term of service. (Lease re Exxon Parcel) This item was removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Cm Staley stated that his objection to the lease was the same as that of the Beautification Committee - the cost of $8,000 for beautifica- tion of the lot which would be an unjustifiable expenditure for a one year lease. Cm Staley also questioned the $1,200 for the lease amount. Mr. Parness explained that Exxon receives that amount for the ad- vertising billboards on the property, and added that he had appealed to the company in an attempt to get the lease term extended claiming that if the City was going to install costly improvements, it should be for a longer period, but the company merely wrote back their heartfelt sympathy. Cm Staley stated he also objected to paying a first and last install- ment as the City should not be required to do that. Cw Tirsell reminded the Council that they had endorsed the idea for beautification of the lot and were aware of the price at the time the lease proposal was submitted and had referred it to the Beautifica- tion Committee who reported back with suggestions for partial or full improvements. CW TIRSELL MOVED THAT THEY ENCOURAGE PARTIAL IMPROVEMENT OF THE SITE AND REMOVABLE OBJECTS, IF POSSIBLE. She felt that much could be done with plants and questioned the estimated cost. CW TIRSELL RESTATED HER MOTION THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE LEASE AND AUTHORIZE PARTIAL IMPROVEMENTS. MAYOR PRO TEMPORE TURNER SECONDED THE MOTION. Cm Miller stated his reason for hesitating was that he felt the Council should explore the lease-purchase aspect even though he did not believe that Exxon would agree. Mr. Parness advised the Council that they had already explored the possibility of purchase, and Exxon indicated their willingness to sell, but the purchase price was about $70,000. CW Tirsell stated that if they had not pursued a lease-purchase as- pect, that she would suggest that this be done. CW TIRSELL WITHDREW HER MOTION AT THIS TIME. The Council discussed the terms of the lease, and Cm Staley stated he would prefer to continue the approval of the lease until the Beautification Committee reports back to the Council with a less expensive plan for beautification of the site. He felt with the one year term of the lease, it would be very difficult to justify anything more than the lease price itself. CM-31-65 November lO, 1975 (Lease of Exxon Property) em Miller stated that even though Exxon had refused to consider an extended lease, that the staff try one more time, and Cw Tirsell stated that the lease with Mr. Mehran was up at this time, and that was the reason for the urgency to execute a lease. If the City executes the lease with Exxon, then Mr. Mehran will be forced to abate the sign. MAYOR PRO TEMPORE TURNER SUGGESTED THAT THE STAFF BE DIRECTED TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION AND IN THE MEANTIME THEY CAN EXPLORE THE POSSI- BILITY OF A LONGER LEASE. Mr. Parness referred to a letter he had received from Exxon which stated that the first one year period of the lease would be firm, and thereafter either party shall have a cancellation prive1ege with a six-month written notice to the other. The letter went on to say that the staff's request for an initial term of five years was given consideration however the amount of the proposed rental was far short of an acceptable return on the market value and Exxon's investment in the property and they could not lease the property on a long term basis. By removal of the billboards, Exxon's return on the property was being reduced by 50%. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO HAVE THE STAFF DRAW UP A RESOLUTION APPROVING EXECUTION OF THE LEASE AS DRAWN UP, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM, AND DID NOT PASS DUE TO A TIE VOTE, CM MILLER AND STALEY DISSENTING. MAYOR PRO TEMPORE TURNER MOVED TO SET THE ITEM OVER FOR TWO WEEKS, SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Cm Staley suggested that they instruct that the resolution be drawn up to come back at that time. Cm Staley asked also if the item concerning the deposit not negotiable, and the staff was asked to check into that also. A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION WHICH PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. MATTERS INITIATED BY STAFF (Quarry) Mr. Musso advised that the matter concerning the quarry on Stanley Boulevard would be coming before the County Board of Supervisors again soon and asked the Council if they wished to take a position on that. The Planning Commission has taken their position - they are opposed to the grade of the slope especially. Mayor pro tempore Turner asked that this item be placed on the Council agenda for discussion. agend (Washington Health District Citizen's Advisory Counsel) Mr. Don Bradley stated that the last several years he has represented the City on the District Citizen's Advisory Council for the Livermore- Amador Valley area, a group of some 2l members who advise the Health Care Services Agency of Alameda County. It is that time of year when we have to indicate our interest in serving, and the thought occurred to him that now that we have the Social Concerns Committee, perhaps it should be a citizen who represents the City on this group and this member could come from the Social Concerns Committee. He asked the Council for their thinking on this matter. The Council felt this was an excellent idea and suggested that this be put to the Social Concerns Committee for them to pick a representa- tive to be confirmed by the Council. CM-3l-66 November lO, 1975 (Galloway Park Area) Mr. Parness stated that the Council was briefed a couple of weeks ago about the interest of the new owner of the Galloway Park area indicating that the staff has negotiated for that purchase and he explained that the same owner owns the balance of the property which together totals 68 acres. As instructed he has written to LARPD concerning any aid they might foresee, however he has not received a reply. The owner is still interested in selling the whole piece to the City for a reasonable price. He asked the Council if they were still interested in acquiring the 68 acres. Cm Miller stated the staff might ask for all the alternates of the land to the north and the Council agreed. MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCIL (Executive Sessions) Cm Staley stated that traditionally the Council holds executive sessions after the meeting, and asked if there might be any interest in holding the sessions prior to the meeting. He would prefer to begin a Council meeting at 7 p.m. if there is to be an executive session rather try to make decisions at 11:30 or 12:30 p.m. It was suggested that this subject be placed on the Council agenda for the meeting of November 24. (Sister City Anniversary) Cm Staley stated that Quezaltenango, our Sister City, has celebrated their l50th Anniversary, and felt that the Council should do some- thing suitable for the occasion. The celebration took place between the 20th and 30th of October and representatives from all the South- ern American countries participated. He did not know what the Council could do at this time. The City Manager was asked to think of something that could be done. (7th Street as Through Street) Cw Tirse1l stated that she had been asked if 7th Street could be made a through street as there are many people who ride their bikes from Vancouver area, across the bridge, down College Avenue and then take 7th Street and come out on East Avenue thus avoiding 4th St. Cw Tirse11 asked if this possibility could be explored. (Signs) Cm Miller stated that Ozzie Davis still has a sign up turned down by the Planning Commission some time ago. about the Texaco sign which he felt was amortized some and Mr. Musso explained that this was being handled. that was He asked time ago, (Complaint re Hillcrest Signal Light) Cm Miller stated he has had complaints from people stating that the yellow light on Hillcrest is so short that it is impossible to get through it and asked if this could be checked. CM-3l-67 November 10, 1975 (Meeting -Alameda County Compo Health Care Committee) The City Manager was asked to set up a meeting with the Alameda County Comprehensive Health Care Committee sometime other than a Thursday night for Cm Turner and Cw Tirsell. (City Hall Plans) Mayor Pro Tempore Turner asked the staff if they could dust off some of the old plans for the proposed City Hall as he would like to look into the feasibility of a new City Hall. PROPOSED ORDINANCE RE RESIDENTIAL BUILDING RECORDS - SEC. 6.40 A report and proposed ordinance was submitted by the Chief Building Inspector re amendment of Sec. 6.40, Article VII, Ch. 6 of the City Code concerning residential building records. Cm Miller stated he could not understand the reason for the suggested change, and Mr. Street explained that the code now requires a report of residential zoning record on sale of a residence but it exempts all first sales in a subdivision not more than two years old. There are several subdivisions which are older than that and the houses are still being constructed and the houses are going to be subject to a report of residential building records. He sees no point in issuing such a report on a brand new house. Cm Miller stated that was not true as one of the purposes for the residential building records was to make sure that all street assess- ments, liens, etc. were disclosed to the purchasers, and the two year exemption had something to do with state statute. The exemption for the first sale of the subdivision is only a measure of the power of the subdividers to exempt themselves from regulation of the law. He felt the need was the same on a new house as on an old one. Cm Staley questioned if the house is exempt for two years, what changes at the end of that time would make it necessary on a brand new house. Cm Miller stated things change with respect to zoning requirements in the course of time, and the point of the residential building records is to make sure that the history of the zoning is available to any purchaser. Cm Staley asked what information is furnished in this report, which was explained by Mr. Street. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE BE TABLED, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL, AND MOTION PASSED 3-1 WITH CM STALEY ABSTAINING, MAYOR FUTCH ABSENT. PROPOSED ORDINANCE RE REGULATIONS RE GAS The Chief Building Inspector had reported that Ch. 11 of the City Code should have been deleted by adoption of the Uniform Plumbing Code and submitted a proposed ordinance. CM MILLER MOVED THE FIRST READING OF THE ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE BY REPEAL OF CHAPTER ll, RELATING TO GAS. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL, AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY, AND TITLE ONLY READ. CM-3l-68 November 10, 1975 PROPOSED ORDINANCE RE OS-UR ZONING The City Attorney suggested that the proposed ordinance regarding OS-UR Zoning of certain parcels be continued until the new map delineating the areas to be zoned is completed. (East Bay Division - League Calif. Cities Questionnaire) Mayor Pro Tempore Turner stated he had received a questionnaire from the East Bay Division of the League of California Cities and one of the questions was whether or not the City would host a quarterly general membership meeting. It was indicated that we would. REPORT FRm-1 THE CITY MANAGER Public Works Items - the De Anza Way sewer line has now been com- pleted. It was a cooperative project with the subdivider. California Water - City Water interconnection on East Avenue has been designed and is expected to go to bid shortly. This is in the hands of Cal Water and is an important project. Civic Center Irrigation Plant - due to the new addition to the engineering City staff these plans are now being worked on. Hydrocele treatment - this process is being used to seed the landscaping at the new sewage treatment plant. Off-street parking plan has now been converted to diagonal parking. The taxi plan is moving, but slowly. Housing and Community Development Program - The City has authori- zation to move on this program, and the first year of the plan which has been allocated calls for planning studies to be undertaken. This would include a site plan selection, and Mr. Parness asked for the Council's direction in how to proceed in recruiting an architectural firm. The City could use the architectural firm we have for recent structures, or could give it wide circulation, and straining of applications and interviews and references, etc. The Council felt it would be proper to solicit proposals, and Mr. Parness stated he would proceed on that basis. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to corne before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 11:00 p.m. APPROVE M!MV 1 ;' .. ~- ___1 ~,.i(; .\..' Clerk er~ore, alifornia ATTEST CM-3l-69 Regular Meeting of November 17, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on November 17, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:05 p.m. with Mayor pro tempore Turner presiding. ROLL CALL Present: Cm Miller, Tirsell, Turner and Staley Absent: Mayor Futch PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor pro tempore Turner led the Councilmembers as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. MINUTES (Nov. 3, 1975) Page 42, 5th paragraph from the bottom, beginning of line five should be the word "extortion" rather than tagging. Page 27, second paragraph, line 4 should read: her duty to represent opinions, as expressed ~ the electorate, and the vote that was taken on this...::-etc. - Page 29, 4th paragraph, last line should read: time they were setting boundaries. (Strike the remainder of the line). Page 39, the motion on that page should indicate that it did not pass by a 3-2 vote because this was an urgency ordinance. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 3, 1975, WERE APPROVED AS CORRECTED. COMMUNICATION RE LIBRARY FEE FOR NON-CITY RESIDENTS A letter was received from the Library Board indicating that the sug- gestion of the City Council to charge fees for users of the Library who do not live in the City would require more administrative cost than it would be worth. No Council action was taken concerning this item. The letter also expressed surprise that the issue was raised at the Council meeting and that the Board would prefer that matters such as this be done through the staff. Cm Miller stated that the Council can raise any issue they would like to discuss and the reason he raised this issue was because one of the librarians suggested that this be done. He stated that he disagrees with the conclusion of the Board noting that 12% of the books not returned to the Library are by people outside of the City. He added that people in the City pay $l5-$20/year in their taxes for use of the Library and there is no reason people outside of the City should not pay something. Cm Staley stated that he does not want to charge people outside the City for the use of the Library unless it is clear that use without charge is an infringement on the City residents using the Library. Cm Miller felt the people in the City should not be subsidizing people who live in the County and do not pay City taxes. CM-3l-70 November 17, 1975 (Library User Fee) Cm Staley stated that he would agree but in this particular case it would be advantageous for the City not to charge a user fee because of the administrative costs that would be involved. Cw Tirsell commented that she has spoken with someone who has retired from the Library Board and discovered that when the Library was being built many of the people living outside the City donated their private libraries to the City and the Library has been allowing service to outside people because of the initial help in getting the Library started. Mayor pro tempore Turner also indicated that he would prefer not to charge a fee for outside residents. COMMUNICATION FROM SCHOOL DIST. RE SEWER CAPACITY ALLOCATION A letter requesting that there be an exception in the ordinance with respect to sewer allocation for land owned by public agencies which may become surplus, for one reason or another, was received from the School District. Cw Tirsell wondered if the School District is referring to the Las positas School site that has been abandoned by the School District. Mr. Musso indicated that they would probably include the Olivina School site, the Alameda School site and Granada II as well as portions of the Las Positas High School site. Cw Tirsell stated that this would mean considerable property and if figured in would mean a considerable amount of residential housing property available. She stated that she can appreciate that the School District does not want to hold the property forever if they intend to sell it but on the other hand the Council does not know when they will sell it or file a map on it. She would be opposed to a change in the ordinance, as requested, at this time. Cm Staley stated that he understands that sites are reserved for purchase by the School District but Mr. Musso explained that the School District is concerned about the sites that have already been purchased by them. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO SEND A LETTER TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT EXPLAINING THAT THE CITY RECOGNIZES THEIR PLIGHT AS FAR AS SURPLUS LAND IS CONCERNED BUT OUR REMAINING CAPACITY IS ALREADY OVERCOMMITTED TO RESIDENTIAL GROWTH AND RESERVATION WILL BE MADE FOR INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. MEMO RE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM A memorandum was received from the Metropolitan Transportation Com- mission concerning the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) which is a mandatory preparation of a regional Transportation Improvement Program to cover a 3 to 5 year period to include all federally fun- ded and non-federally funded transportation projects. ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE ITEM WAS NOTED FOR FILING. CM-31-71 November 17, 1975 LETTERS OF RESIGNATION A letter of resignation from the Design Review Committee was submitted by Robert Wendt. A letter of resignation was received from Ted Jenkins a member of the Industrial Advisory Committee. Cm Miller asked that the staff be directed to send letters thanking these people for their service on these committees and at the same time ask the committees for suggestions concerning replacements. Mayor pro temore Turner asked that any suggestions from the committees for which appointments need to be made be submitted by December 15th. COMMUNICATION RE SOUND LEVEL OF BANDS AT THE ARTS FESTIVAL '75 A letter was received from H. Bruce McFarlane which indicated that he believes the noise level of the band at the Arts Festival was disturb- ing to many people. He suggested that permission not be granted to rock bands to play at future festivals or that groups be requested to limit the noise decibels not to exceed 45 db. Cw Tirsell suggested that the two Council representatives who communicate with the Cultural Arts Council discuss this item with them. Cm Miller stated that he would agree with what Mr. McFarlane has said about the noise level of the band and that he was also disturbed by the same rock band. Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that the next Cultural Arts meeting will be on December 3rd and he will discuss the matter with the president and then bring a report back to the Council. RESOLUTION RE ADVANCE PAYMENT PROGRAM - PUC The item of the FPC Advance PaYment Program was discussed by the Council a couple of weeks ago but no action was taken pending information that might be available to the Council from the PUC concerning their vote with respect to the allocation of gas from the Alaskan pipeline. Mayor pro tempore ~urner commented that the Cgunc~l postponed this item at the request of Mr. Beebe, manager of the local PG&E Company as he felt there should be no Council action until the PUC vote result is known. Mr. Beebe, from PG&E, stated that some of the facts from the PUC de- cision have been made available. In essence, the PUC approved the amended application - that PG&E use corporate money to advance the cost of piping gas from Alaska. This means there will be no charge to the consumer until gas actually flows through the lines to the consumer. At that time the PUC will set the appropriate rates to include the total costs. This would probably be 5-6 years away. He added that this is the way all the facilities are built and have been built in the past. In essence, the Advance Payment Program is not being used. He added that he would like to clarify an error made in the newspaper saying that people would have to pay $8/month for the pipeline - the people would be charged only about 38~/month. CM-3l-72 November 17, 1975 (Advance Payment Program - Alaskan Pipeline) Cw Tirsell commented that possibly the resolution presented by Cm Miller concerning the FPC Advance Payment program, could be amended to include support of the recent PUC decision reported on by Mr. Beebe. Cm Miller stated that he contacted the office of Commissioner Ross and his Chief Assistant thought the PUC would be very happy with the resolution prepared by Cm Miller. Cm Miller stated that there is nothing in the resolution that needs to be amended. Cw Tirsell stated that she would suggest adopting the resolution, but in addition, express support for the PUC decision. Cm Miller stated that he believes the portion concerning the PUC decision should be left open - this is just one decision and it does not mean they would do the same another time. The issue of this particular resolution is the Advance Payment Program and the res~lution speaks to the principle of the program being wrong. Cm Miller added that the FPC has not made a decision. The PUC did make a decision but the FPC is still considering the Advance Pay- ment Program and the resolution to them and to our representatives of Congress may persuade the FPC to eliminate the program, in its entirety. CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AND MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM STALEY FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES. Cm Staley noted that PG&E didn't list endorsement or opposition to the resolution and wondered if PG&E has expressed a position. Mr. Beebe indicated that PG&E is not taking a position. It is felt the Council should corne to a decision concerning the resolution and the advance payments. Cm Staley stated that he would agree with what Cm Miller has said. Apparently PG&E has funds by which the advance payments can be made but this doesn't mean that every power company in California can do this. Basically it is wrong to allow the basic supplier to bargain among the states according to who can make the advance payments. On this basis he would vote in favor of the motion. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 230-75 A RESOLUTION OPPOSING ADVANCE PAYMENT PROGRAM APPEAL RE VARIANCE APPLICATION - Cassel Montgomery (Hayes St.) At the Council meeting of November 3rd Cm Miller requested that the Planning Commission approval of a variance concerning a site located on Hayes Street to reduce the required frontage, be appealed. Mr. Musso explained that the Planning Commission granted the variance for the front yard rather than to grant a variance for the side yards. There is also an easement involved that was to be used for the street - a no access easement that was to have been abandoned 6-8 months ago. He stated that there was discussion about subdividing into 5 lots and concern over the land-locked parcel on the VanArkel property. Cm Miller stated that his appeal referred only to that the other variances appear to be reasonable. REMOVE ITEM 2 WhICH ALLOWS THE FLAG LOT, SECONDED DISCUSSION PURPOSES. the flag lot and CM MILLER MOVED TO BY CW TIRSELL FOR CM-31-73 November 17, 1975 (Resolution re Advance Payment Program - PUC) Cm Miller explained that Item 2, was an alternative allowing the flag lot and what he wants is to delete the alternative having to do with the flag lot. The City has been trying to discourage flag lots for a long time. Cw Tirsell stated that the objection of the flag lots is the difficulty in getting emergency vehicles to the property behind the house. ern Miller stated that if the Council reviews the lots that are per- mitted, they would appear to be reasonable and feels it makes sense to allow a variance in the case where the lot is longer than usual and can see a case for it here. Mayor pro tempore asked what Cm Miller's opposition is, concerning the flag lots. Cm Miller stated that a flag lot does not allow enough access, there is very little frontage and as pointed out by Cw Tirsell the design is very poor for allowing emergency vehicles to get into the area, as well as being isolated from passing police surveillance. Cassel Montgomery, 880 Cherokee, (applicant) stated that the flag lot was an alternative suggested to him by the Planning Commission and was not one that he requested. He indicated at the time that he would not consider building on a flag lot and he has no objection whatsoever to the motion. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. The City Attorney indicated this item would appear on the Consent Calendar next week as a resolution to formalize the Council's Action. CONTINUED DISCUSSION RE REQUEST FOR ENCROACHMENT PERMIT (David Madis - Burt Duke & Proctor's) Several firms have requested sidewalk encroachment permits to allow encroachments in the sidewalk and the matter was referred to the Design Review Committee. The Design Review Committee has reviewed the Policy Statement proposed by the Public Works Director concerning encroachments into commercial sidewalk areas and recommended that the policy be amended to allow certain projecting elements, permitted by the Building Code, to be supported on commercial sidewalk areas provided that: 1) there be a minimum of three (3) feet clear between the face of the curb and the column; 2) a minimum of ten (lO) ft. clear width of sidewalk between columns and the adjacent building; and 3) the projecting element be supported by columns attached over the exterior wall surface of the building in such a manner that removal of the projection will not necessitate structural changes to the building. Mr. Lee stated that he had prepared the original suggested policy which the Council referred to the Design Review Committee and now they have come back with recommendations for modifications in the policy. In addition, there are three encroachments being requested and per- haps the Council should deal with this in two steps: l) review the policy; and 2) consideration of the three requests for encroachments after the policy has been established. Mr. Lee then presented examples of what might be allowed in the way of a projection from the building into the sidewalk area, which he explained. Cm Miller stated that it was not clear from the Design Review Commit- tee's draft why a section was deleted from property lines to 10 ft. from the base of the curb, unless this had to do with the 3 ft. plus 10 ft. CM-3l-74 November l7, 1975 (Continued Discussion re Request for Encroachment Permits) Mr. Lee explained that the encroachment would be acceptable if there is a lO ft. opening. CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THE AMENDED POLICY STATEMENT, AS RECOMMENDED BY THE DESIGN REVIEW COR~ITTEE. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. Cw Tirsell stated that the Committee expressed concern for possi- ble increase in City liability with the proposed encroachment policy and she asked that the City Attorney respond. Mr. Logan stated that encroachment, per se, does not really increase the City's liability but the question always raised is whether or not it would be an unsafe condition of public property. He would assume that by approving the encroachments by the staff an unsafe encroachment would not be allowed. Cw Tirsell asked if this would alter the sign requirements? Would there be signs hanging down from the structure? Mr. Musso commented that policy does not allow signs to hang from a canopy. He could visualize the problem of people wanting to place signs on them, and also the problem of a canopy blocking the sign on the adjacent property. Cm Miller stated that each application will be reviewed individually and if it is found that a structure blocks the vision of a sign owned by somebody else, this would have to be taken into consideration. Cw Tirsell asked that the minutes reflect that the Council does not want something approved that would obstruct the view of a sign owned by somebody else because the City doesn't want a "domino" effect down First Street. Mr. Lee commented that any encroachment would not be allowed for the purpose of advertisement - it would have to be for architectural purposes. Marcus Lipkind, 881 Los Alamos, stated that he expressed concern the last time this item was discussed that the Council has the authority to revoke an encroachment permit at any time in the future, without cause. He would like the Policy Statement to reflect that it would never be revoked capriciously. Mr. Logan stated that he believes this is not a legal question - it is a policy question and allows the Council to be arbitrary and capricious if it desires. If the Council wants to have this flexibility the Policy Statement should be adopted as it is written. If the Council would rather have something that would offer security to those applying for encroachment permits, then the wording could be changed, or the "without cause" could be omitted entirely. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO DELETE THE WORDS, "WITHOUT CAUSE", SO ITEM 8 WOULD READ: The City shall reserve the right to revoke the encroachment permit at any time in the future and the permittee, or his assigns, shall promptly remove the encroachments at his sole cost. Etc. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES. Discussion followed concerning the amended wording. Cm Miller stated that he believes the wording, as it is, allows the City to revoke a permit without having to go to court to do it. CM-3l-75 November 17, 1975 (Con't Discussion re Request for Encroachment Permit) AMENDMENT PASSED 3-1 (Cm Miller dissenting) . CW TIRSELL MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO AMEND NO. 3 OF THE POLICY STATEMENT TO READ AS FOLLOWS: Any permitted encroachment is not to be used for the purposes of advertising. MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Cm Miller stated that he has wording to suggest to be added as a No. lO. Cm Staley stated that while Cm Miller is drafting wording for No. 10 he would like to mention that he is not as familiar as some of the other Councilmembers with the Sign Ordinance, but it would seem that if the canopies are built the only practical type of sign would be something appended from the canopy. He noted that in Castro Valley there is a shopping center with numerous canopies and each shop has a small sign hanging on the canopy identifying the particular shop. If the Council adopts a policy of not allowing signs on the canopy it means there will be no way of identifying the shop so it can be seen from the sidewalk. Mayor pro tempore Turner stated that it would be the prerogative of the owner of the store to install a canopy or not install one. Cm Miller stated that he belives the ordinance allows a 2 sq. ft. sign to hang below a marquee. Also, a sign can be located on a building either above or below the canopy parallel to the building. CM MILLER MOVED TO ADD NO. 10, TO READ AS FOLLOWS: No encroachment shall be permitted which (a) is used for any advertising purpose or to support a sign, other than the 2 sq. ft. canopy sign; and (b) will block the signs of any other business. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM STALEY. Cm Miller explained that this would mean that something like the McDonalds arches would not be allowed because this is used for advertising purposes and it would not be allowed. Mr. Lipkind asked about the sign that would be allowed and Cm Miller explained that the business would not be allowed a sign more than l8-inches from the face of the building. AMENDMENT PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. MAIN MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Lee asked if the Council would like to introduce the ordinance and it was concluded that the Statement Policy could be followed as a guideline and that the ordinance would not be introduced at this time. REPORT RE GREENVILLE PARK SITE ACQUISITION A written report from the City Manager indicated that a court judgment recently issued on the condemnation of property by the City for the Greenville Park, established a unit value of $6,707.89 per acre. At one time the Council expressed the desire to pur- chase adjoining property as an adjunct to the park site to pro- vide for street exposure on the easterly side. This portion is owned by Kissell Company who is willing to sell the property. It is recommended that if the Council still desires City acquisi- tion of the additional property (.6l+ acres) a motion be adopted directing the staff to proceed with acquisition at the unit price established by the court judgment. CM-3l-76 November 17, 1975 (Report re Greenville Park Site Acquisition) CCM MILLER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO MAKE AN OFFER TO KISSELL COMPANY FOR THE PURCHASE OF THE .6l ACRE, MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY. Mayor pro tempore Turner asked if this would require a resolution and it was noted that a resolution could corne back to the Council for formalization after Kissell has agreed to the sale. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RES. RECOMMENDING INSTALLATION OF FREEWAY INTERCHANGE It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution recommending installation of a freeway interchange at Collier Canyon Road and I-580 to provide easier and safer access to the Junior College campus area. Cm Staley stated that he understands the City is being asked to adopt a resolution so this item can be placed on the low priority list that CAL-TRANS has. Mr. Lee explained that the resolution would put the City on record as desiring the access and of having the access to Collier Canyon Road. He added that he wouldn't anticipate anything of this type being developed in the near future because he has been told there just is not money available and the warrants are not met. There is some merit in letting the state know that this is important, however, even though results in the near future are not anticipated. He stated that the construction of the Isabel route may make a differ- ence with respect to the timing. Cm Staley asked if the Collier Canyon Road overpass would be rather close to the alternate Airway Boulevard overpass and Mr. Lee supplied a map showing the locations of the proposed overpasses noting that the Collier Canyon overpass would be very close to the Airway Boule- vard overpass and he explained the reason the overpasses were planned at the specific locations. Cm Staley stated that the overpass would represent a lot of money and at this time he can see no reason to provide an overpass at Collier Canyon Road. He stated that he believes the Isabel extension is needed far more than the interchange. Cm Miller noted that the Isabel extension would be of very little value without an interChange. Cm Staley stated that this is the point he is trying to make - the interchange should be done at the time the Isabel extension is done. Mr. Parness stated that he would like to add that if the City wants to impress CAL-TRANS with the need of the Isabel Freeway, the overpass is a good complimentary feature, and now with the financial assistance of the County all of it blends together. He believes that CAL-TRANS would be impressed with the need of developing the interchange. Cm Staley stated that as he understands what Mr. Parness is saying, this would be a compliment or completion of the earlier package of the Isabel freeway and not a highlight over the Isabel extension. If this is the case he would change his opinion and agree to it. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION FOR THE AGENDA NEXT lVEEK TO RECOMMEND INSTALLATION OF THE INTERCHANGE AT COLLIER CANYON ROAD, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CM-3l-77 November 17, 1975 REPORT RE ADDITION OF POLICE CADET At the November lOth Council meeting it was requested that the staff provide information as to the cost of an additional Police Cadet for the Police Department for the purpose of enforcing the downtown parking time limit regulations. A written report from the Chief of Police indicated that the pro- jected cost for a Police Cadet for a six month period would be $2,689.27 and the cost for the same length of time for a Police Assistant would amount to $5,905. It is felt that the hiring of a Police Assistant would be more desirable because a Police Cadet is limited in the number of hours available due to school schedules. Cm Miller noted that if the most of the parking problem takes place during school hours, the Police Assistant would be of more value. However, if most of the problem occurs on Saturday or after school hours a Police Cadet would be satisfactory and a Cadet would be of less cost to the City. It was noted that the parking problems are primarily on Thursday and Friday afternoons. Cm Staley noted that the Police Cadet is a college student and it shouldn't be too difficult to find a Cadet that could be out of school on Thursday and Friday afternoons. Chief Lindgren commented that the Police Department has had a prob- lem scheduling the Police Cadets because they are majoring in Admin- istration of Justice and all the classes are offered one time during the week. He stated that the reason they listed the cost for the Police Assistant is because it is felt the Assistant could assist the Police Department in ways other than parking regulation enforce- ment. Mr. Parness noted that with the addition of the Police Assistant who could be employed for 40 hours per week, the regulation of parking could increase from the present 20 hours a week to 48 hours per week. Chief Lindgren stated that this would be 48 hours of enforcement, without exception. Cw Tirsell asked if there is a lot of processing or paper work that is involved when parking tickets are issued and Chief Lindgren indicated that there is not a great deal involved with the citing of parking violations but processing is necessary when complaints have been received, etc., but there are a number of other duties the Police Assistant could assist with. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ADDITION OF A POLICE ASSISTANT FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, FOR THE NEXT SIX MONTHS. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY. Mr. Parness stated that he feels compelled to bring the cost of the Police Assistant to the attention of the Council and the Council indicated that they were aware of the cost involved. Mayo pro tempore Turner noted that the report from the Police Chief demonstrated that, dollar for dollar, the Police Assistant would be of more value. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM-31-78 November 17, 1975 RES. RE~IMAL SHELTER SERVICES The current contractural arrangement with Alameda County expired June 30th and the new agreement introduces a mechanical change whereby the agreement will continue, annually, unless terminated by either party. During the budget session the Council instructed the staff to conduct studies concerning animal control, including the possibility of re-establishing a local shelter facility. It is recommended that a resolution authorizing execution of an agreement with Alameda County be adopted. CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION, AS RECOMMENDED, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. Cw Tirsell stated that she believes Cm Miller asked for information on our own shelter, during the budget session, and wondered if the staff will be doing comparisons on the figures when this period has expired and in the next budget. Mr. Parness stated that the staff is trying to compile a major study on all aspects of the Animal Control Program, in accordance with instructions from the Council, which will be available prior to the next budget hearing. Mayor pro tempore Turner noted that the new agreement provides that it would continue unless either party terminates and wondered if there would be a review process each year, with respect to cost. Mr. Parness stated that the staff reviews costs and there are periodic meetings with the County staff and other cities that are co-signatories to the arrangement. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 231-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (County of Alameda) CONSENT CALENDAR Departmental Reports The following Departmental Reports were submitted for informational purposes: Building Department Activity - October Fire Department - Quarterly Mosquito Abatement District - September Municipal Court - September Police Department - September and October Res. Rejecting Claim A resolution rejecting the claim of Michael O'Toole, in the amount of $23,000 alleging personal injuries sustained by the claimant was adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 232-75 A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE CLAIM OF MICHAEL P. O'TOOLE CM-3l-79 November 17, 1975 Report re Traffic Flow - "J" St. Mall A written informational report was received from the Director of Public Works concerning the traffic flow through the "J" Street Mall between First and Second streets. Res. Recognizing Mid- management Assoc. As Bargaining Unit A new employee's organization has been established for the purpose of mid-management representation in labor relations matters.' In order to have association officers entitled to represent them the Council is required to officially recognize the Midmanagment Association as a bargaining unit. A resolution of regognition was adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 233-75 A RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING THE CITY OF LIVERMORE MIDMANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION AS A BARGAINING UNIT Res. re SHARED Recruitment Program The City Manager submitted a written report indicating that the major participant in the SHARED Recruitment Program, Alameda County, is not satisifed with the program and has decided to discontinue a major portion as of December 31, and to analyze all aspects of the program. It is recommended that a resolution be adopted providing for the City's participation for the current six-month term ending December 3l, 1975. RESOLUTION NO. 234-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (County of Alameda) Payroll & Claims There were twenty-two claims in the amount of $112,746.58, dated November 13, 1975, and approved by the City Manager. , APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED WITH THE DELETION OF ITEM 5.6 (SB-634 and AB-2353) WHICH WAS POSTPONED UNTIL NEXT WEEK. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (ACORD Res.) The City Attorney asked that the Council adopt the ACORD settlement resolution so that the escrow can be closed as soon as possible. CM-3l-80 November 17, 1975 CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SETTLE~mNT OF CONDEMNATION ACTION OF ACORD, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 235-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT OF CONDEM- NATION ACTION (City v. Acord Investors, et al) (Keys to City for Dignitaries) Mr. Parness stated that the Council requested that the staff gather items that might be appropriate gifts for visiting dignitaries. The staff gathered what is available in this line noting that everything is rather expensive. em Miller felt the keys would be a waste of money and of little interest to any visitor. He stated that if the City wants to present a gift to a visitor he would suggest giving a bottle of good Livermore wine. He felt the wine would be more appreciated and would be used. Cw Tirsell suggested the possibility of getting hand carved items as gifts for visitors because there are a lot of people in town who do this type of thing. Mr. Parness commented that the problem is that there may be at least five visitors in a group that the City would have to give gifts to. Further discussion will be held. ~mTTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL (Campaign Cantribution Ordinance) Cm Miller stated that he and Cm Turner have requested the City Attorney to prepare amendments to the Campaign Contribution Ordinance which will probably be before the Council next week. He stated that the Councilmembers will probably receive a draft during the week and would appreciate it if they would review it so that it could be adopted at the time it is on the agenda as an urgency ordinance. (Computerized Grocery Store Prices) Cm Miller stated that he received a telephone call from someone very concerned with the proposed mechanisms for pricing in grocery stores - the little lines on the labels, which will be used instead of showing prices. This allows the possibility of customers not knowing what the prices are for grocery items, or making it difficult, and also the possibility for "rip offs". It was pointed out that all the grocery stores intend to adopt this method of pricing and the shopper cannot show dislike of this method by patronizing a store which doesn't employ this means of pricing. Cm Miller asked if it would be possible to adopt an ordinance which would require pricing on grocery store items. Cm Miller felt this would be an item of substantial importance to the consumer and would like to request that the City Attorney report back to the Council concerning this matter. CM-31-8l November 17, 1975 (Computerized Grocery Store Prices con't) Randall Jennings, 702 Moraga Drive, stated that he is the person who telephoned Cm Miller concerning this matter and explained to the Council how the computerized type of pricing will be used. Mr. Jennings indicated that the unit pricing will appear in computer language on each item and that in time the prices will not even be available on the shelf under the item and people will not know prices of anything unless they ask. Cw Tirsell wondered if it is true that the price located on the shelf will also be eliminated and suggested that the staff gather material concerning information on this item. Mr. Jennings stated that he would like the Council to adopt an ordinance which would not allow the stores to eliminate notice of prices. ern Miller stated that everyone is familiar with the vertical lines appearing on grocery store items and the computer reads this and looks up what the price is for that stock number, as recorded in a table. The point is, the price in the table can be changed lO times an hour if the store wants to do this. The consumer is essentially at the mercy of the grocery store on price changes that can take place in this manner. There is no way people can know prices unless there is some type of a reader easily available to the consumer. The item will be placed on the agenda within the next two weeks. Cm Staley stated that he would like a report from the Ciy Attor- ney as to our power to legislate on this issue. (Resolution re Quezaltenango) Cm Staley stated that he had requested that a resolution be prepared by the staff congratulating the people of Quezaltenango for the l50th anniversary of Quezaltenango. The resolution has been distributed to the Councilmembers and he would MOVE THAT THE RESOLUTION EXTENDING CONGRATULATIONS TO THE PEOPLE OF QUEZALTENANGO BE ADOPTED. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 236-75 RESOLUTION EXTENDING CONGRATULATIONS TO THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF QUEZALTENANGO, GUATEMALA IN HONOR OF QUEZALTENANGO'S l50th ANNIVERSARY. (Parking Fines, etc.) Cm Staley stated that he had the opportunity to discuss the parking fine schedule and other fines with Judge Lewis, and apparently there are two separate problems involved: 1) the fine schedule has not been updated; and 2) problems with parking citation payment. Judge Lewis indicated that most cities collect the parking violation fines in their own offices and only if they are delinquent do the courts become involved with the parking fines. He has suggested that this type of procedure be investigated for implementation in this City. Cm Staley stated that there may be a backlog of several thousands of unpaid parking tickets because of the lack of enforcement ability in municipal court. CM-3l-82 November 17, 1975 (Parking Fines, etc.) Cm Staley suggested that perhaps a report on this matter should be prepared by the City Manager and a determination made as to whether or not the parking citation fine schedule should be revised and as to whether or not a fine should be collected by the City for a period of time as is done in other cities. He stated that this should be investigated and discussed as an agenda item. Mr. Parness stated that he has asked the Police Department survey the amount of bail that should be paid to the City in order to have some grasp as to the total of funds that might be involved. Cm Miller noted that if there are thousands of tickets that have not been paid and the average ticket is $2, there could be something in the order of $10,000 owed to the City. Mr. Parness indicated that this could be correct but at this point it hasn't been determined how much is involved. (Policy re Drunk Driving Violations) Cm Staley commented that there has been a policy with respect to drunk driving violations, of suspending a major portion of the fine in return for the person agreeing to attend a school for the purpose of rehabilitating drunk drivers. This has caused a sizeable decline in revenues from bails because of the suspended portion of the fine. Cm Staley stated that he believes this policy is very commendable because drunk driving is a major social problem. (Corps of Engineers Policy Meeting) Cw Tirsell stated that last Thursday she and Don Bradley attended the meeting held by the Corps of Engineers group concerning urban land study. She stated that they had everything ready for a public hearing and ABAG was there as well as the State Water Quality Control Board, Zone 7 and Pleasanton. It was evident that there is a lack of coordination because the ABAG 208 funds are in and they won't be ready to finalize their study until March 1. Hopefully a few of the studies can be coordinated. She will continue to attend their meetings and report back to the Council. She stated that she did make the point again that our City would oppose any point source study in this Urban Land Study and the State Water Quality Control Board affirmed that they had sent a letter to that effect. em Miller stated that the City might also want to oppose any engin- eering of flood control and water supply structures in any area not now urbanized. (Council Microphones) Mayor pro tempore Turner asked if anything could be done about the microphones in the Council Chamber, as the audience generally cannot hear the Councilmembers. Mr. Parness stated that the staff is regularly looking into the microphone situation and part of the problem is the amplification system in the building. CM-3l-83 November 17, 1975 ORD. REPEALING CHAPT. 11 RE GAS ON MOTION OF CM STALEY, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 1959, RE- PEALING CHAPTER 11, RELATING TO GAS, WAS ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. ORDINANCE NO. 873 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LIVERMORE CITY CODE, 1959, BY THE REPEAL OF CHAPTER 11, RELATING TO GAS. ORD. RE ASSIGNMENT OF OS-UR DISTRICT ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING THE ASSIGNMENT OF THE OS-UR DISTRICT WAS ADOPTED. ORDINANCE NO. 874 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 442, AS AMENDED, OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE BY AMENDING SECTION 3.00 THEREOF RELATING TO ZONING. (Legal Matter - CAL-TRANS) The City Attorney noted that the City of San Marcos is having some problems with. CAL-TRANS and asked if Mr. Lee would ex- plain the background of the problem. Mr. Lee stated that it is the same kind of problem the City has had with our grant for the underpass on the railroad relocation. The City of San Marcos has had some of the same legal problems with the state legal advisor. The legal advisor for the state had given a certain opinion in a manner similar to what was done with the City of Livermore and the courts reversed that and it is being appealed by the CAL-TRANS attorney. Financial Support of an Amicus brief supporting San Marcus, has been requested. The City Attorney stated that they are requesting $100 from only three or four cities and that this money will be used to pay for a brief that will be written by a recent graduate of Hastings. Cm Staley stated that he is not sure what the Councilor City is being asked to support and the City Attorney explained that it is a writ of mandate to force CAL-TRANS to expend funds and apparently CAL-TRANS is reticent to do so and CAL-TRANS has an attorney who continually sets forth his own ideas which appar- ently created problems for San Marcos as well as the City of Livermore. Cm Miller noted that we have an overpass project that we are concerned about and wondered if Livermore would have the same problem with the overpass. Mr. Parness noted that there is no doubt about it - we would. Cm Miller stated that in that case it would be justified to support the appeal and he would like to see the details. CM-3l-84 November 17, 1975 CITY MANAGER t-ffiEKLY REPORT Track Relocation Project Mr. Parness has been told today that the consulting engineer for the contractor on the track relocation project has finished his investigation work and has been meeting with our engineering firm and have jointly concurred in what must be done regarding some of the minor defective concrete pour work and the architectural defects. The footings around the base of the pillars will be poured, as was originally going to be done and then additional concrete will be poured up and around the pillars. Water Reclamation Plant The work for the water reclamation plant is about 95% complete but is going slowly at this time because they have not been able to receive some of the materials. It is anticipated that the entire plant will be operational next month. First & Livermore Ave. Intersection The entire plan for the First Street, Livermore Avenue intersection is in the hands of CAL-TRANS. They have almost finished the review and it is anticipated that bids will be solicited on December 1. If things are in order, the Council should be able to consider bids in mid January for this work. Finance Department The Council instructed that there be an insurance analysis done this year preparatory to receiving bids in the spring. The analysis is underway by a consultant firm and is a very comprehensive job. Police Department The Police Department has just reported, today, that there is a state statute which requires all of our police officers to receive or renew their first aid certificates and CPR training (Cardiac Pulmonary Relief Training) every three years. Regrettably this will require about $6,000 in overtime which the City did not anticipate and which was not budgeted. Mr. Parness stated that he is looking into the possibility of being reimbursed for the $6,000 through SB-90, but if this is not possible the costs will have to be sustained by the City. Bids for Police Cars The City will be soliciting for bids for a portion of the police cars and as the Council will recall this will be divided up between this year and next year. Bids will be received on six compact cars. Elaborate research has been done by a number of other cities concern- ing the use of compact cars and it appears that experience has proven to be fairly good. Unfortunately the milage figures are not as good as Mr. Parness anticipated but there will probably be a 4 mile per gallon gain, and maintenance costs will be much less. CM-3l-85 November 17, 1975 Quarry Committee The Quarry Committee is meeting regularly and Mr. Musso has in- formed Mr. Parness that the companies have joined together and have hired a consultant firm for the purpose of preparing a study that will encompass all the operations here in the Valley, as to environmental considerations and particularly reclamation of the properties which now have permits and those properties forecasted to receive permits. Community Development Director The final date for filing an application for the position of Community Development Director for the City was today and 76 applications have been received. The staff will begin the task of screening the applicants and Mr. Parness will bring a recommendation back to the Council as to the procedure for recruitment and selection for the position. Hopefully, there will be lO to l2 very highly qualified people in this batch of applications. Cm Staley commented that while Mr. Parness was on vacation the Council discussed the suggestion made at one of the League of California Citites conferences, that a Director of Community Development should have training or experience in grant applica- tions. Mr. Parness noted that this subject had been mentioned to him by Cm Miller and this would be one of the criteria. ADJOURNMENT Mayor pro tempore Turner adjourned the meeting at 9:50 p.m. APPROVE !k4 /llft:;t! ATTEST CM-31-86 Regular Meeting of November 24, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on November 24, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m. with Mayor Futch presiding: ROLL CALL Present: Cm Turner, Miller, Staley, Cw Tirsell and Mayor Futch Absen t : None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Futch led the Counci1members as well as the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. MINUTES (Nov. 10, 1975) P. 56, first paragraph, last word should be City Attorney - not Mayor. P. 62, second line under CONSERVATION COMMITTEE, should indicate impending shortage - not impendent shortage. P. 60, after the motion authorizing payment of ambulance service subsidy, insert the following paragraph: Cm Turner asked who sets the officers' salary for the ambulance service and Mr. Parness indi- cated that the owner does. He also asked if this would be considered an authoriz7d e~~enE~~,~~~~~~Parn7ss ind~cated that it was. He. also asked 1f ~ec1~10n 1S cons1dered 1n the overall computat10n of the 10% profit and the City Manager indicated that it is. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE (Mayor Futch abstaining due to absence at that meeting) THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 10, 1975, WERE APPROVED, AS CORRECTED. THE REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF NOVEMBER 4th AND THE SPECIAL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6th WERE APPROVED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. SPECIAL ITEM - BEAUTIFI- CATION AWARDS - 1975 Mayor Futch announced the 1975 beautification awards as selected by the Beautification Committee, as follows: Livermore Station, 20 South ilL" Street Valley Church of Christ, 20ll Locust Street Hector Lopez, 342 Rincon Avenue Robert & Gayle Hold, 525l Theresa Way Springtown Association, 931 Larkspur Drive Rodney and Maedean Williams, 5243 Theresa Way Emma Shoepe, 5934 Crestmont Avenue George and Fran Wiley, 713 South "I" Street Timothy and Belinda Maegher, 1436 Oxford Place Norman and Ruthie Taylor, 1023 Innsbruck Street William and Georgia Lawrence, 2245 Norwood Road Proctor's (Linda Galas), 2196 First Street Security Pacific Bank, 60 South "P" Street Park Grove Apartments, 388 Park Street Tim Cody for a more beautiful community OPEN FORUM (Buenas Vidas Ranch) Sally Bystroff, 330 Scott Street, stated that she has distributed Buenas Vidas Youth Ranch land use program proposals to the Council CM-31-87 November 24, 1975 (Buenas Vidas Ranch) and thanked the Council for its long-standing support of the Buenas Vidas project, the support and encouragement from the Council have really meant a lot to her. She stated that it has been six months since she addressed the Council on this item and it is now time to go back to the County with submission of the data on the project. Buenas Vidas would like to inform the Council as to what has been accomplished in the six months, to seek cooperation in working out their operating budget and lastly to again request a letter to the County Board of Supervisors indicating the vested interest of the City of Livermore and of our community in the continued use by Buenas Vidas and other community groups involved. Mrs. Bystroff stated that they have tried to demonstrate that there has been large scale community support and at a pace that would justify the continued existance of the use by Buenas Vidas at that site. She added that they were very fortunate in having the assistance of Supervisor Murphy in the way of federal assistance. This is located on County land and there have been numerous volunteers that have been dedicated and have worked very hard to accomplish a few things. They have allowed a six month period for evaluation of the project and they are very proud about what has been accomplish- ed in the six months. She added that it is their desire to be a community group responsive to community needs. She then reviewed portions of the budget which have been changed. With a license they will be able to go through the Bay Area Placeme~t Council for placement of youths and they will receive their group rate. She commented that the merchants have been wonderful in making donations to Buenas Vidas and she would request that the Council give serious consideration to a donation of $1,500/month to cover the costs of two youths at Buenas Vidas, in order that this can continue to be a community based and community operational facility. Mayor Futch stated that at this particular time it is his under- standing that Mrs. Bystroff is informing the Council of the status of the project and to give the Council the opportunity to think about future requests for funding and a letter of endorsement to the Board of Supervisors. ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE COUNCIL AGREED TO SEND A LETTER OF ENDORSEMENT TO THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. PUBLIC HEARING RE SITE ON MURDELL AVENUE - CARLTON GROUP A public hearing has been scheduled to discuss six acres of land located on Murdell Avenue owned by the Carlton Group requesting rezoning from PD to CN and amendments to Section 19.15 relative to neighborhood commercial and extension of permit regarding completion date or development of that site. Mr. Musso explained the difference between the various types of shopping center zoning, noting that the request to remove the shopping center zoning (by the Carlton Group) would require an amendment to the ordinance. CM-3l-88 November 24, 1975 (P.H. re Site on Murdell Avenue - Carlton Group) The P.C. felt that even though the population did not warrant the shopping center, the convenience to the neighborhood property owners warranted the continued existence of a shopping center, especially in view of the fact that there may be some type of crossing of Stanley Boulevard and the railroad tracks. It was recommended by the P.C. that the PD zoning be amended to allow another year on the shopping center development. Mayor Futch asked if the P.C. discussed the possibility of reducing the size of the shopping center because of the population that would serve it, and Mr. Musso indicated that they did discuss reduction in size. Mr. Musso explained various proposals by the P.C. concerning access and it was determined that the area was designed as a shopping center and access should remain as originally designed. Mario Bertone, representative of Carlton Development, stated that they have been trying to establish a shopping center in this area for a number of years and they have asked for an extension on the time limit two or three times. The shopping center was nearly started on numerous occasions but because of financial conditions developers did not begin construction. At this time there are two good prospects for development of the area as a shopping center. Mr. Bertone stated that the developer interested in developing the shopping center would not be interested in developing if the size of the center were to be reduced. Hopefully the Council will allow them another year for development and that something will be started witin a year. CM MILLER MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL, AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECO~~fENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMIS- SION TO ALLOW EXTENSION OF TIME LIMIT FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE SHOPPING CENTER FROM JULY 1, 1975 TO ONE (1) YEAR AFTER FINAL ADOPTION OF THE ORDINANCE EXTENDING SAID DATE, AND TO ADOPT THE FINDINGS AS NOTED IN THE STAFF REPORT. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cm Miller stated that he is concerned about this item because Liver- more presently has seven shopping centers equivalent to a population of 70,000 and Livermore has a population of only 50,000. This par- ticular parcel is very close to the Granada shopping center and very close to the downtown shopping area. He stated that he is very con- cerned with allowing an eighth shopping center although he can sympa- thize with the Carlton Development people. He added that the idea of having a neighborhood shopping center in that ..i).rea J~/no~ w~dis- turbs him but a six acre site is very large,~w~ulrarrten~~orr~upport something in the nature of a 7-11 Store, but not a 30,000 sq. ft. grocery store. Cw Tirsell stated that she would have to agree with a lot of what Cm Miller has said and believes that this is probably one of the reasons it has not developed up to this time. However, she is a resident in the Sunset area and many people in the central part of the Sunset area are flooded with people traveling back and forth to the Granada shopping center. She stated that about 15,000 people shop in that center for their neighborhood conveniences and this is far more than the amount needed to support a neighborhood commercial center. She believes that some of the traffic generated in the Granada shopping center area would be relieved with the development of a shopping center in the Carlton area. CM-3l- 89 November 24, 1975 (P.H. re Site on Murde11 Avenue - Carlton Group) MOTI~N PASSED 4-1 (Cm Miller dissenting). It should be noted that a letter was received from Arline Higuera opposing any commercial development in this area because the Gra- nada Shopping Center is in the near vicinity. An ordinance will be introduced at one of the next Council meetings as a result of the passage of the motion. P.H. RE AMEND. TO PUD RE SHOPPING CENTER - PALOMAR MORTGAGE COMPANY A public hearing has been scheduled concerning the application of Palomar Mortgage Company to amend PUD #2 by the extension of com- mencement and completion dates for the shopping center and con- ditions relative to the development. Mr. Musso stated that this shopping center is another type of shopping center in that it is not a CN Zoning or a PD or Planned Development zoning. This is allowed with a permit in an agricul- tural zone under the rules established in 1960. In the permit there are provisions that in the event the permit expires the permit is valid for those uses that are in existence. This time, for the first time the P.C. took the position that if an applica- tion was not made this would not apply for undeveloped property. There was one application from Palomar for commercial, perpetuat- ing the neighborhood shopping at that location. There were some other uses that have now expired - one being the multiple zoning which he illustrated on a map, as well as commercial across the street. These areas will have to come in for rezoning in order to reclaim the uses previously approved. Albert Strang, Secretary of Palomar Financial, of San Diego, stated that he would request that the Council give consideration to the Planning Commission's recommendation that the permit be extended because it is felt that this area needs some type of shopping services and efforts have been made to locate the small market in a convenient location which is available for use as a City Library in the future. The people in this area definitely want some type of shopping and they intend to continue to seek a developer who might wish to provide the shopping. This would be a proper location for commercial development and they would ask that the Council express support for this type of development on that property. CW Tirsell asked if anyone has shown interest in development in the area and Mr. Strang stated that last month an inquiry was made but there was no follow through on the part of the in- terested party. Cw Tirsell asked if Palomar Financial has an active program and Mr. Strang indicated that there is a listing in the Shopping Center Directory for the west coast. Mr. Strang noted that there have been people who have showed interest in development but there generally is concern over the amount of population to be served and this is one of the problems in getting people to develop. CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE P.C. TO GRANT CM-3l-90 November 24, 1975 (P.H. re Amend to PUD re Shopping Center - Palomar) ADDITIONAL TIME FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE SHOPPING CENTER, TO OCTOBER 7, 1976, AND TO BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH CN DISTRICT REGULATIONS. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cm Miller stated that the justification for his motion is the find- ings made by the P.C., as listed in the staff report. He stated that in his opinion this application is distinctly different from the previous application he opposed in that this particular parcel is isolated from other parcels that are zoned cCN. There is a segment of the City's population that needs the services and conveniences associated with the neighborhood commercial and the justification for the need, with respect to this particular parcel, is very clear. The Council expressed the desire for commercial development in this area as soon as possible. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. The City Attorney explained that there will be a resolution on this item that will be on the agenda next week. INCLUDED IN THE MOTION WAS THAT THE P.C. RECOMMENDATION BE ADOPTED AND DIRECTION TO THE STAFF THAT A RESOLUTION BE PREPARED BY THE STAFF AND PRESENTED AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING. COMMUNICATION RE POPULATION PROJECTIONS A letter was received from the City of Pleasanton concerning the population projections made by the State of California and their resolution concerning population benchmarks for inclusion in the tentatively adopted General Plan. This item was noted for filing. COMMUNICATION RE NAT. HEALTH PLANNING RESOUR- CES DEVELOP. ACT OF 1974 A letter was received from the League of California Cities concerning the National Health Planning and Resources Development Act of 1974 which consolidated previous legislation into one comprehensive program for health planning and facilities development. By July l, 1976, each state will be required to designate the area-wide health system agenccies and in California there will be l4 such agencies. Mr. Parness stated that there has not been a great deal of informa- tion provided about the formation of an agency in our general area but presumably it will include Alameda and Contra Costa Counties. He would inquire of the Council if it would be interested in this agency, and if, so, would the Council be interested in being repre- sented on such an agency and would the Council like the staff to pursue this matter further. em Miller stated that he believes it would be very much to our advantage to be represented because this is similar to the Comprehensive Health Council and it is important that we be repre- sented. The staff was directed to keep the Council informed on this matter. CM-3l-9l November 24, 1975 COMMUNICATION RE HR 9560 - FED. WATER POLLUTION CON- TROL ACT OF 1974 A letter was received from BASSA to urge support of HR 9560, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1975. em Miller stated that this is a response to the public hearing that was held by EPA several months ago and most of the things BASSA has resolved appear to be very unreasonable, in his opinion. He would recommend that the Council not support HR 9560, and that the Council send a letter to all Bay Area Congressmen and to our Senators to present the position taken by the Council prior to the hearing, which is briefly that any revisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act should require the following: l) that eligible projects be restricted only to those which are simul- taneously consistent with clean air, clean water, and energy conservation legislation; and 2) that the funds be primarily for cleanup and not primarily for expansion; and 3) that EPA retain overall control. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE STAFF BE DIRECTED TO PREPARE A SHORT LETTER TO BE SENT TO OUR BAY AREA CONGRESSMEN, SENATORS, AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS, BASED ON OUR PREVIOUS TESTIMONY WHICH STRESSES THE THREE POINTS MENTIONED ABOVE. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. COMMUNICATION RE BART FINANCIAL PROBLEMS A letter was received from BART's General Manager concerning the financial problems of BART. He indicated that he is opti- mistic that the problems can be worked out and will be happy to meet with representatives concerning efforts to continue the express bus service. Cm Turner commented that Mr. Herringer has agreed to meet with representatives of the Valley concerning the proposed cut off of bus service in June of 1976 and he would like to suggest that he and Mayor Futch as well as the other representatives meet with Mr. Herringer to discuss this problem. Mayor Futch suggested that perhaps Mr. Herringer could attend the January meeting but would like to know if em Turner has something else or additional in mind. Cm Turner stated that he would like to know how much would be accomplished if there is a room full of people and possibly it would be better if there were a small group of representa- tives to ask questions.and discuss the issue. Mayor Futch asked what Cm Turner would hope to accomplish and Cm Turner replied that hopefully Mr. Herringer would admit it would be a big mistake to eliminate these services. Cw Tirsell stated that there seems to be an item Mr. Herringer is not aware of which is that the Valley is paying the cost of the bus service and this is not a drag on the BART budget as has been mentioned in the past. These points need to be made to Mr. Herringer, directly. Not only do we pay, but we turn in a profit for BART and this has not been emphasized strongly enough. She would agree that to get all the cities together to talk might not be as productive as the committee that has been meeting with BART. CM-3l-92 November 24, 1975 (Communication re BART Financial Problems) Mayor Futch explained that he didn't mean that all the cities should meet with Mr. Herrington and both Cw Tirsell and Cm Turner indicated that they are sorry they misunderstood. Cm Staley stated that he would suggest that before services are cut off from the Valley that there should be pruning of expense accounts and administrative salaries. He stated that the expense account re- ports are very disturbing and this is something he doesn't want to see swept under the carpet, that the point Cw Tirsell is trying to make is that the financial problems of BART would be more severe without the millions of dollars poured into BART from this Valley and Contra Costa County and this point cannot be made too strongly. The Council was asked to submit any suggestions, in writing, for discussion during a January meeting. \ APPEAL RE VARIANCE APP. PROPERTY AT WALL STREET & STANLEY BLVD. - Beratlis Cm Miller stated that he has requested appeal of the P.C. approval of an application for a variance of the Zoning Ordinance to permit construction of single family dwelling units at the corner of Wall Street and Stanley Boulevard., with reduction of required setbacks. Cm Miller stated that he asked that this item be appealed due to lack of all the facts that went into the P.C. decision. After reviewing all the information and public testimony he finds that he is in disagreement with the P.C. recommendation. He stated that he believes the findings for these types of variances cannot be made, since this is all one big parcel and it can be redivided so that variances are not necessary. This parcel has been zoned RG and it is now to go to single family which would require it to go to RS Zoning. RL-6 corres- ponds, in lot size, to RS-4 and it would seem that in preliminary examination with 5 lots this would satisfy the RS-4 standards. The lots can be developed as they are without granting variances but some of the lots would have very small houses. On the other hand, when the parcel is purchased and the ordinance says it should be RS, this is something the purchaser has to take into consideration. Cm Miller stated that it is quite common for someone to speculate on the purchase of a parcel with the hope and expectation that variances will be granted so that it will be profitable to develop. The City is not required to promise a profit to someone speculating on the hope of getting a variance. In his opinion the variance should not be granted and if necessary the property could be re- divided into the number of lots which will provide for the RS stand- ards. The standards are designed to protect the buyers of the homes that will ultimately be built to provide for adequate setbacks and side yards. RL Zoning is a zoning which the City has effectively abandoned for seven years and it does not seem reasonable to re- create it, even on this parcel. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE VARIANCES ON THESE PARCELS BE DENIED, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE EXTRA WIDE SETBACK BACKING ON STANLEY BOULEVARD; OTHERWISE, ALL RS SETBACK STANDARDS WILL HAVE TO BE MET, MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. Cw Tirsell stated that she can't see applying an old zoning ordi- nance to accommodate the developer's wishes, in this case, when the lot sizes can be reduced and conform to an ordinance currently in effect, and to provide for better lots that people will buy. CM-3l-93 November 24, 1975 (Appeal re Var. App. Property at Wall St. & Stanley Blvd. - Beratlis) Cw Tirsell stated that it is the responsibility of the Council to protect buyers and to make sure that the size of the lots is reason9ble for families who might purchase them. This is the reason the RS standards were developed. Glen Dahlbacka, from the Planning Commission stated that during the course of conversation with the Planning Commission they were led to believe that the property had already been subdivided under the RL Ordinance and that the zoning could not be changed. This was part of the reason for his action and probably the action of the ot~e~:~ ~.~' Cm TurnerAaskea whom was responsible for allowing the P.C. to believe this and Mr. Dahlbacka indicated that the staff did. Cm Miller noted that it is subdivided and commented on what he believes to be the situation. The lots were created at the time the parcel was zoned RL. It was subsequently rezoned RG and while it did not do away with the lots it did away with the zoning. When the zoning comes back again the lots, even though they are lots of record, are subject to whatever zone comes out of the RG - that zoning is RS. Consequently, the RS standards now apply to these lots. If it turns out they are unsatisfactory from the standpoint of building a house the size the purchaser chooses to build, then he does have the option of redividing the lots. He has the choice of building houses that meet the standards or the choice of chang- ing the lots. In this case, it would be changing the lots which would be a reasonable solution. Mr. Musso stated that with respect a change of zoning, he stated to the Commission that the Council considered changing the zoning at one time and concluded that,based on the fact of some vested interest in the property the zoning would not be changed at that time (two years ago). It is not a fact that it cannot be changed but rather that the Council decided not to do so. At the time it was changed to RG, if they chose to use single family it would revert to RL-7 and at a later date if the RG regulations were changed so if they chose to go to single family, they would go to RS. This is what created the problem. There was a change in the RG regulations that caused the problem an d obviously if the properties were sold individually they could each develop under the RS regulations or the RG regulations as multiple. Mayor Futch commented that it appears the setbacks on Stanley Boulevard would prevent Lot il17 from developing but it is not clear that the setback would prevent the other lots from developing. There was discussion concerning the setbacks and the type of house that could be accommodated on some of the narrow lots. Chris Beratlis, applicant, stated that he would like something clarified and possibly everything could be clarified without go- ing back to the Planning Commission for further explanation with regard to the side yard setback. In the variance applica- tion a 5 ft. and 7 ft. setback was requested in order to be in conformance with the setbacks across the street. It came out of the Planning Commission that there should be a 10 ft. setback under the new RL-6 regulations. They asked that regu- lations prior to 1970 apply. He stated that he would like to go CM-3l-94 November 24, 1975 (Appeal re Var. App. Property at Wall St. & Stanley Blvd.-Beratlis) back to the Planning Commission and ask that they reclarify their stand on this aspect. He stated that the lO ft. requirement was a complete surprise to him this afternoon. Mayor Futch commented that there has been so much trouble with lots so narrow that trailers cannot get into the back of the property and this is the reason the wider setbacks are insisted upon. Mr. Beratlis commented that because of the topography of the lots, they are elevated from 8 ft. up to 15-20 ft. and this means that a trailer cannot be placed in the back anyway. Mayor Futch suggested that a cluster development be considered because this would be an ideal location for cluster development. Mr. Beratlis stated that rather than deny the application this even- ing he would request that the item be continued for a couple of weeks to allow further discussion. Cm Miller stated that he would argue there is no reason to continue this item. If the Council believes this should be RS lots then those are the conditions that would be required. If the Council feels they should not be RS lots then it could be sent back to the P.C. as a separate motion. Cm Staley questioned if the applicant is requesting continuation to reconsider the side yard setback or the entire application. Mr. Beratlis stated that he would like reconsideration of the new RL setback vs. the old RS setback. Cm Miller explained that if the motion passes the question is moot because the motion would require setbacks of l2 ft. and l2 ft. Mayor Futch stated that he does not see support for the old RL regulations at all. Cw Tirsell pointed out that the flexibility of RS-4 allows for clustering or anything provided for in the RS Ordinance. Cm Miller explained that if the owners would like to redivide the property they might like to know that if they come back with a new subdivision map, the sewer connections as existing lots of record would be preserved and the City could agree to this because no additional connections would be involved. Burke Critchfield, attorney representing the owner of the property, Mr. Guy Willis, stated that on behalf of his client he would request postponement to give them an opportunity to discuss this with the staff. Cm Miller stated that he would like to argue against a continuance. The issue is whether or not RS standards will apply to this property. If the applicant wishes to work something out with the staff as far as to what can be done with RS standards, this is fine, but it is not necessary to continue. Cm Staley stated that in the event the application is denied, does it mean that the applicant has to start at the beginning of the application for variance procedure and pay all the fees that go along with an application for a variance? It was noted that the fees would have to be paid again and the applicant would have to start allover. CM-3l-95 November 24, 1975 (Appeal re Var. App. Property at Wall St.& Stanley Blvd-Beratlis) ern Turner stated that if a vote is taken on the motion he would vote against it because he feels the request for a continuance is reasonable. Apparently some new issues have been raised that the applicant was not aware of and Cm Turner feels it is not un- reasonable to allow the postponement as they have requested. Cm Miller stated that what the applicants wish to do is a func- tion of whether the RS standads will apply, or not. The motion provides for one of the major variances they asked for. It is a question of whether or not the Council wishes to abide by the standards that have been developed over the years for single family lots against some way to reduce the standards by the appli-- cation for another variance. He stated that he cannot see a situa- tion in which he would want to grant variances against the standards that the Council have fought hard to get. em Staley stated that he knows of no reason to depart from the RS standards with respect to the lots on Stanley Boulevard, as part of the motion, but on the other hand he believes that the points made by Cm Turner, Mr. Critchfield, and Mr. Beratlis, was that there was not an opportunity to consider some of the ramifications and they would like the chance for review to see what can be done. This would not seem to be an unreasonable request and for this reason he would be in favor of allowing them a continuance for a reasonable period of time. CM STALEY MOVED TO TABLE THIS ITEM UNTIL DECEMBER l5TH, SECONDED BY CM TURNER WHICH 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. PRESENTATION OF GIFTS TO DIGNITARIES DISCUSSION Mr. Parness stated that at the Council's direction the matter of presentation of gifts to dignitaries was placed on the agenda this week. Various articles have been suggested as gifts that the Council may wish to consider purchasing. Mayor Futch stated that he believes there is a need to present a gift to visiting dignitaries but none of the items presented for viewing by the staff would seem to be appropriate. He suggested that perhaps something in the nature of a desk set with a pen might be appropriate and the gift wouldn't look as inexpensive as some of the items that have been suggested - those items have been expensive and appear to be of poor quality. Cm Staley stated that last week Cm Miller suggested giving a bottle of good wine from our Livermore wineries and he feels this was a very good suggestion. The winery might even be willing to print a special label that would be appropriate. The Council enthusiastically concurred with this suggestion. Mayor Futch did express concern about customs problems and em Staley stated that there would be no problem in exporting the wine and if there is a problem with respect to importing it into their country they are welcome to drink the wine and take the bottle home. CM-3l-96 November 24, 1975 (Presentation of Gifts to Dignitaries Disc.) CM STALEY MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO INQUIRE OF THE LOCAL WINERIES IF THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO PROVIDE A SPECIAL LABEL FOR BOTTLES OF WINE FOR VISITING DIGNITARIES AS WELL AS SPECIAL BOTTLING AND REPORT BACK TO THE COUNCIL CONCERNING THEIR FINDINGS IN TWO WEEKS. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. Bill Hurdlow, l143 Aberdeen, stated that he really is angry the Council did not discuss this at the end of the meeting because there are people in the audience to discuss business. Mayor Futch explained that it is normal procedure for the Council to follow the agenda and if they moved this to the end of the meet- ing they might be accused of not wanting the pUblic to know what is going to be spent on gifts for visitors. REPORT RE PROPOSED MUNI. TAX OVERRIDE Mr. Parness reported that in the past the Council has discussed the possibility of a municipal tax override for services of public safety in the way of fire and police protection and Transportation. SB 90 stringently regulates the means by which additional taxing can be allowed and it requires the approval of the majority of the electorate. One other regulation is that the ballot measure cannot specify the intended tax use. It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution submitting a ballot measure for the next municipal election seeking a tax override in the amount of 25~ for local tran- sit services and an additional 25~ for public safety. Mr. Parness stated that he is concerned about this item because he is convinced that these two tax measures must be submitted to the electorate to solicit their attitude, but there is a lot of confusion as to what our legal entitlements might be in the drafting of the ballot propositions, and there has not been a lot of precedent concerning this matter. We have contacted the City of Sacramento as to their experience, however, and we have also contacted the Legislative Counsel as to what can be done and what cannot be done. The staff would Ii ke a decision from the Council as to whether or not these issues should be on the March election ballot and if so, under what terminology. Mr. Parness stated that just this afternoon one of his colleagues sent a statement his city used in a tax over- ride election conducted just last year. They followed the very careful admonition of one of the leading bond attorneys who advised the City of San Jose on similar measures and it was the opinion of the bond counsel's office that the declared intent can be used as a ballot measure. Cm Miller stated that the Council must declare its intent by the end of December and would like to know when the ballot statements have to be prepared. Mr. Parness stated that the City Clerk has indicated that two weeks after the December deadline which would be sometime in the first two weeks in January. CM TURNER MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING, SECONDED BY CM MILLER. CM-3l-97 November 24, 1975 (Report re Proposed Muni Tax Override) Mayor Futch stated that with respect to pledging the intent of the Council and future Councils as well, he stated that he does not believe there is any way future Council intent can be pledged. Mr. Parness stated that the City Attorney can always address this issue but in the opinion of the Sacramento County Counsel's office the adoption of a resolution accompanying a ballot measure can be binding on subsequent Councils. He stated that he has been told that if we can declare the intent, in the ballot measure, that in effect constitutes a contract between the electorate and the City Councils. Glen Dah1backa, Planning Commissioner, stated that with respect to the transportation tax override that has been proposed, after con- sidering this matter quite carefully the 25~ tax override will hinder the cause of public transportation in Livermore. He feels the 25~ proposal is excessive and he believes that the excessive proposal will mean defeat at the polls and this defeat will hinder the ability of obtaining funds in the future. He stated that the amount is excessive because in the consultants report to the Trans- portation Committee of the City indicated it is conceivable that the transportation system proposed for the City could be operated for five years without tax increase, by using state and federal funds that are presently available for public transportation. Naturally, the budget would be lean but it is conceivable that it can be done and he believes this is important at a time the electorate is not especially willing to spend additional funds for public purposes. Mr. Dahlbacka stated that the report indicates that the maximum cost at the end of five years would require a 2l~ tax override - not 25~ and he believes it is not necessary to go around rounding off numbers in taxing when there is not a partic~lar justification for it. Mr. Dahlbacka added that allowing for 25~ assures that it will be used. In other words, if the 25~ is used, even though the itent is that the money will not be used, its availability will guarantee that the money will be used much more rapidly than if we went into the transportation system with the idea that as money is needed it would be requested. It is a matter that if there is a pot of money available for use, it will be used. He stated that he is sure the 25~ for transportation, if voted upon, would be defeated and would be viewed by other agencies as a vote against public transportation in Livermore. This would then make it very awkward to go to agencies to ask for funding for public transpor- tation. With the present atmosphere that BART is creating with Livermore and the fact they do not want to continue providing service out here means that it would be advantageous to them to see the tax override fail. He would suggest that Livermore be- gin a transportation system with available resources from the state and federal grants and in addition, investigate new possi- bilities for getting resources. He stated that for example, the transportation system could be used for parcel delivery and pick- up system for local businesses and people around town. Cm Turner stated that his understanding of the report from the consultant was that a tax subsidy would not be needed only if the busses would be run completely "lean" without any union people involved, and Mr. Dahlbacka stated that this was the assumption. Cm Turner stated that the other side of the story is that if there are union people involved the cost would be 2-3 times as much and the City would have to come up with $250,000 and this is where the 2l~ comes in. CM-3l-98 November 24, 1975 (Report re Proposed Muni tax Override) Mr. Dahlbacka stated that he would just prefer that the City try to establish some type of transportation system using other means for its success rather than to begin by asking people for a tax override to provide for it. Cm Turner pointed out that the Council has not really even discussed the issue and the tax override has not been determined. Cm Miller felt if the consultant suggested 2lc it would not be un- reasonable to ask for 25c, taking the possibility of inflation into account. William Hurdlow, stated that it is morally reprehensible that the City is considering taxation to supply transportation for other people. He stated that he worked at the Lab for l2 years and has ridden his bicycle out there for 10 years and didn't ask anyone for a subsidy for getting to and from work. He stated that he now works in San Francisco, rides to work on a private bus line, and now the Council is proposing to reach into his pocket to support a transportation system for people working at the Lab. Mayor Futch explained that there are many citizens in Livermore who are not strong enough or capable of riding a bicycle to work and the purpose of the public transportation system is certainly not to provide transportationAfor people working at the Lab.-s,eeifieally. ~~~ G.K~' MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS V~E. ~~. REPORT RE INDUSTRIAL PARCEL MAP. NO. 1807 - CAPITAL METALS VASCO & NAYLOR AVENUE A written report from the Planninng Department indicated that the owner of industrial property located at Vasco and Naylor Avenue would like to divide the ownership and that there is a critical timing problem with the Company necessitating that this be accepted by December l. The property is presently occupied by Capital Metals. The agreement requires that the usual full public works improvements be installed, including reservation of lO ft. for a bicycle path and the City is making efforts to assist the industrial applicant in the way of expediting the usual review process by approving both the ten- tative and final map which seems to be in order in view of the fact there is no dispute concerning the requested improvements. It is recommended that the Council approve Tentative Parcel Map 1807, Final Parcel Map 1807, and authorize execution of agreement for Par- cel Map l807. Mr. Musso stated that the proposed subdivision of land within the industrial area located on the south side of Naylor Avenue is to be divided into industrial lots and the main principal issue is whether or not the subdivision of the property would require any additional streets or cul-de-sac to provide access to the property. It was the conclusion of the Planning Commission that additional streets would not be required. The next issue is the provision for installation of pUblic works improvements, and the last issue is the provision for a bike path, for which there are three alterna- tives - 1) provided within the travel lane; 2) a separated bike path; and 3) a separated bike path with a sidewalk. CM-3l-\99 November 24, 1975 (Report re Indus. Parcel Map No. l807-Capitol Metals Vasco & Naylor Ave). The Planning Commission recommended approval of subdividing with the provision that the bike path be established separate from the travel way with pUblic works improvements installed as indicated in the staff report. In addition was the requirement that they meet the building code standards including the setbacks. Cm Miller asked Mr. Musso to expand on the comments concerning Naylor Avenue. From the staff report it would appear they felt there was no need to improve Naylor Avenue. It was noted that the Council had voted to allow Naylor Avenue five years to be improved, or until the adjacent property develops and this gives them until 1977. Cm Miller stated that he remembers voting no on that motion and this is the reason he was concerned about no development. Mr. Lee then showed the Council diagrams of the typical bike path that would be required and explanations of the bike path for an industrial area. Mr. Musso commented that there was brief discussion by the P.C. concerning the bike path and it was felt they did not want to create another Efst Avenue bike path problem and the reason they proposed an additional lO ft. for the bike path away from the travel lane rather than within the travel lane. He also noted that this would be a straight bike path and that the type that "weave" are used for recreational bicycle paths. Mr. Lee indicated that the path, as shown in the General Plan appears "weavy" but for the most part the path is rather straight. Greg Davis, of the Bikeways Association, asked if it is necessary to determine the type of bike path required or could the additional 10 ft. be required and then later the determination made as to whether it should be on-street or off-street. Mr. Lee explained that at the time the additional width is re- quired the improvements for the path would also be required. There is some merit in making a decision and requiring that everything be taken care of at the same time. Mr. Davis stated that it doesn't appear that there are many intersections involved in this particular bike path but people are becoming leary of bike paths because of all the accidents which have taken place at intersections. He wondered if there would be a lot of driveways in an industrial area that might be as hazardous for the bike riders as intersections. Mr. Lee commented that in an industrial area the City tries to limit access from the street but there would be driveways at intervals. Mr. Davis stated that the Ca.Lifornia Association of Bicycle Organizations strongly opposes off-street bicycle paths and were in favor of providing adequate width for bike riders on the side of the road. Apparently there have been too many problems with the separated path. CM-3l-100 November 24, 1975 (Report re Industrial PM l807 - Capitol Metals) Earl Mason, Civil Engineer representing the applicant stated that research he has done corresponds with what was said by Mr. Davis. There is beginning to be more resistance and concern about the bike rider's safety in having to cross driveways and intersecting streets from a separated path. He would suggest that the lO ft. in the park- ing lane be used for the bike path to serve bikes in an industrial area because the parking lane will be used for emergency parking only and it may as well be used for bikes - it will already be paved. Mr. Mason stated that if the Council wants the developer to provide an off-street bike path then the City ordinance requires that in an indus~rial zone the major streets must have a 25 ft. building setback of which 15 ft. must be landscaped. He stated that if there is another 5 ft. of landscaping behind the sidewalk it would mean a total of 20 ft. of landscaping. If the Council will remember when the Shaheen industrial property was discussed it was concluded that a 5 ft. concrete bike path would be an easement within the landscaped area which serves two purposes - it places the path throuth the landscaped area and does not add another 10 ft. on each side of the street for additional street right-of-way. If the Council adopts the P.C. recommendation for 21 ft. of widening and then the 15 ft. of landscaping and setback it means reduction of paved travel yard area and driveway for trucks that have already been planned for implementation in his processing of trucks through the plant. Mr. Mason stated that he would like to suggest leaving the 110 ft. right-of-way with the bike path located in the street, or to pro- vide a 5 ft. easement within the landscaped strip. The rest of the engineering considerations have been reviewed that are standard improvements that would normally be called for at some stage in the development and he then explained why the map was filed and which public works improvements have been done or delayed. He stated that the only reason the map was filed is because the owner wants to put some financing against one of the three parcels and the lender wants a tax split on the records. The only way to split it would be to file a parcel map and under the ordinance it becomes a subdivision, and therefore the staff is asking for improvements. There will be no ownership change, no development change, and nothing at all will be changed with the property. Duane White, the Assistant Manager is present this evening and would like to discuss, with the Council, the possibility of delaying the improvements until a later date until there is further development. Duane White, representative of Capitol Metals, stated that he would like to make one clarification. The agenda indicates the "Capitol Metals Inc., and some of its subsidiaries wishes to divide the ownership". He stated that this is not true - they have absolutely no plans whatsoever to divide ownership. The property is owned by an investment company who owns Capitol Metals Company, California Steel Works and owner of the whole parcel of property. There is no intent to get rid of any of the land or to do anything other than to encumber a portion of the property for Capitol Metals, as a subsidi- ary. Mr. White stated that since he has been working in Livermore he has heard a lot of negative remarks but he has found that the City has been very cooperative, from one end to the other, concerning Naylor Avenue. He believes that since they are not a developer there is no need for the improvements at this time and would request con- sideration of the same type of thing that was done with respect to Naylor Avenue as far as completion is concerned. CM-3l-101 November 24, 1975 (Report re Indus. Parcel Map l807 - Capitol Metals) Mr. White stated that bonding has been discussed and there is no way a bond can be written for five years unless the developer puts up lOOt of the cash - Naylor Avenue was to be delayed for five years. The point is that the intent is not to avoid doing the improvements - when there is a necessity for sidewalks they will be happy to install the sidewalks and they believe this is an obligation they have. When curbs are needed they will be more than happy to install curbs. At this time they want to go to a lender for money and the City is asking them to come up with $35,000-$45,000 in cash to pay for improvements that are not needed. Cm Staley stated that as he understands it Mr. White is asking for a delay in the improvements but yet is willing to install sidewalks, etc., if a permit is taken out for development in that area. He stated that he is not sure he understands what Mr. White means. Mr. White stated that they are perfectly willing to leave the matter to the Council. When the Council says street lights are needed, they will be installed. When the Council says sidewalks are needed they will be happy to provide sidewalks. They have been given a five year delay but only at the option of the City Council. Cm Staley stated that what is being asked, then, is that this be extended until such time as the City actually requests installa- tion of various improvements and Mr. White indicated that this is correct. Cm Turner stated that he understands that the only reason Mr. White is before the Council is because Mr. White has financing needs and the property must be separated for the lenders in order that a portion of the property can be encumbered. Mr. White stated that they feel they need a certain amount of money and they do not want to encumber 33 acres. Cm Turner stated that he understands this - Mr. White wants to encumber only a part of the 33 acres which would be acceptable to the lender. He stated that he understands there will be no additional development in that area and that nothing will change. Mr. White stated that at this time there are no plans for expan- sion of any type, no expansion and no new buildings - nothing changes. em Turner asked Mr. Lee when the improvements would normally have to be installed if this application were not made and Mr. Lee commented that installation of the improvements would not be required until some type of development were to take place. em Turner stated that he understands the intent and he has seen this done in banking practices and would like to phrase a motion to say, "yes, they can make the split" and at some point in time when there is further development they would have to install the normal improvements that the Council has not waived. Cm Staley stated that he could make a motion but prior to a motion he feels the bike path should be discussed. CM-3l- 102 November 24, 1975 (Report re Indus. PM l807 - Capitol Metals) Mayor Futch suggested that perhaps if the improvements are to be delayed the matter of the bike path could go back to the Planning Commission for a recommendation as to what the procedure should be with respect to bike paths, generally, in an industrial area. Cm Turner asked if the City would normally have required installation of a bike path previous to further development in the area. Mr. Lee stated that, again, it would be required at the time of sub- division, which is being done, or at such time as there is development. The bike path normally would not have been required if there was no further development or sub-dividing. CM STALEY MOVED TO ADOPT THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RESOLUTION WITH THE ADDITION THAT THE IMPROVEMENTS ON NAYLOR AVENUE AND VASCO ROAD BE THE SUBJECT OF A WRITTEN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE OWNER AND THE CITY vlliICH COULD BE RECORDED AND WOULD PROVIDE THAT THE INSTALLATION OF THOSE IMPROVEMENTS WOULD BE AT THE CITY'S OPTION. The City Attorney commented that if the Council is going to have a motion, the motion would have to be in terms of approving the Tentative Subdivision Map, subject to additional conditions other than what the P.C. has. The Council will have an entirely new resolution which will include all of what the P.C. has and additional conditions the Council might wish to include. The motion, itself, is to approve the Tentative Subdivision Map 1807. Mr. Parness stated that the resolution will make reference to a subdivision agreement that will be prepared in accordance with Council direction now. If the Council doesn't mind the staff can consider what terms might be suggested for the allowance of the improvements, for Council consideration. These would be when the property on either side develops, or on the option of the City Council, or within a certain number of years, etc. These can be drafted for the Council and they can be modified as the Council chooses prior to its formal adoption. Cw Tirsell stated that the land is going to be split three ways and asked what would happen in the event the front portion were to be sold - how would the City get the improvements? The City Attorney explained that in the agreement it could be required that upon any sale the improvements would have to be installed prior to the sale, or at the same time there could be an alternative in the agreement directing that if the property is sold they have to make a requirement, as a part of the sale of the property, that the new purchaser enter into an agreement with the City for installation of the improvements by a certain date. Mr. White asked if this could be recorded with the deed and Mr. Logan indicated that it certainly could. Cm Turner stated that he did not second the motion because as he recalls the motion indicated that a specific date for the improve- ments would be set - perhaps he did not understand the motion. Cm Staley stated that his motion, originally, did read this way but on the information of the City Manager that the staff draw up the conditions and present them to the Council in resolution form he feels this would be acceptable. Cm Staley stated that it is his belief that the legitimate interest of the City requires that these improvements be made but on the other hand there probably is not a requirement that they be done at this particular time. There are two or three conditions that would trigger installation: l) sale of the property, 2) taking out a building permit, or 3) the option of the City for installation of the public works improvements. CM-3l-l03 November 24, 1975 (Report re Industrial PM 1807 - Capitol Metals) ern Miller stated that he has heard these kind of requests for 10 years and his experience is that the City gets "burned" with con- siderable frequency. The concept that the City determines when the improvements go in is sure to cause trouble with respect to legal enforcement. Apparently there will be no bonds, no guaran- tees that any of this will go in and what he sees happening here is the same thing that happened to Springtown Boulevard. In 1967 the City was told the improvements would be done - in 1975 nothing. Nothing has happened there and nothing will happen. The only real time the City has any leverage at all is at the subdivision map level and when the building permit is taken out. It is quite un- likely that a building permit will ever be taken out and the only opportunity the City has for ensuring that the public works improve- ments will be installed would be at the subdivision map level. It has been City pOlicy for many years to require those improvements to be put in. It is very hard to get another chance to get the improvements and there are many places in the City where someone wanted to develop and the public works improvements are in but right across the property line they have not been put in because development has not taken place. However, when development does occur all the public works will have been taken care of. em Miller stated that although he seconded the motion for discus- sion purposes, he cannot go for a long time delay in completing public works improvements. The applicant wishes the subdivision and this is the time we require the pUblic works. Occasionally there might be an exception, but those are dangerous exceptions in his way of thinking. If there is to be a time delay, it should be short enough so that there can be a bond posted. However, even a bond is a bad idea, because it takes two to five years to collect on that basis. ern Staley stated he felt there could be a proper legal document drawn up to protect the city's interest to call for those improve- ments. Since the City has the right to impose those improvements now, he cannot understand why the owner cannot agree to allow the City to exercise that option at will at a later date. Secondly, the concern is that the city will not ultimately get stuck with the cost of putting in the improvements. He felt that putting them in now may be more costly to the City than they are worth as there will be maintenance. This is an industrial area that is remote for the use of a lot of those improvements. For instance if they widen out the road, it will have to be barracaded at both ends simply because it won't be used and Naylor is a deadend road and there are no plans to extend it. In terms of security, he under- stands that a deed of trust or some similar device could be drafted to assure the City that these improvements will be put in. He agrees a bond might not be such a good idea as the City has ex- perienced and they are expensive to the applicant, particularly if they run over a year. Cm Staley stated that he felt the problems are legal and not problems of philosophy, and if they let the motion go to the staff and ask the staff, including the City Attorney, to report back both as to an acceptable position and an acceptable instrument to accomplish these purposes, the Council should be able to work out something to the benefit of the City and of the owner. Mr. Musso remarked that Cm Staley had stated the matter well, but he would like to point out that this is a different situation in that it is only for financing purposes. In addition, he felt con- fident that the legal staff can draw up a binding document. As far as Springtown Boulevard is concerned, it was a big blunder created by the City, in part, and hopefully we have learned by that experience. CM-3l-l04 November 24, 1975 (Report re Industrial PM 1807 - Capitol Metals) Mr. Lee stated that he felt the mechanisms we already have are more than adequate to handle this situation. If this development were pro- ceeding like any other development, there is a subdivision agreement that is tailor-made for it - we would require a bond and it would run for one year and the applicant would subdivide the property and make the improvements within the year period. Should the City wish to extend this for a three year period for the reasons outlined by Cm Staley it is a simple matter - we simply write in "three years" and if it isn't convenient for them to obtain a 3-year bond, they simply provide the City with a I-year bond and they are obligated to put in the improvements within that one year, but if that expires they can replace it for another bond for the following year, and yet another bond for the third year. There can be a provision that rather than the bond expiring, they can simply put in the improvements. If the City wants the improvements earlier than the three years, they will put in the improvements within six months after notice. Mayor Futch stated he felt that the staff could corne up with the necessary agreement. Mr. Logan asked if the matter could be put over for two weeks to allow time due to the holidays. Mr. Lee reminded them that this is a tentative parcel map approval and an agreement is not necessary. These are simply the conditions that the Council wishes to have included in the subdivision agreement that would be signed and executed prior to the filing of the final map and the acceptance of the final parcel map by the Council. ern Miller stated that one thing he has learned by experience is that everything has to be worked out at the tentative map stage because that is the actual final decision and the final map is practically ministerial. He felt the Council would need to see what it is they are going to agree to. Mayor Futch asked Cm Staley if he was agreeable to an amendment to his motion to allow the City Attorney time to prepare the agreement. ern Staley stated it was perfectly agreeable with him, but it was his understanding that the applicant had a December 3rd deadline problem with the lender and suggested that the applicant might speak to that. Mr. Mason stated that this would put it out of the realm of the big rush for them. But with the conditions the way they are it doesn't make much sense for them businesswise when they are in a position where they feel they need to borrow money to keep their business going the way it should be running, to be borrowing money to put in street improvements. ern Turner asked the City Attorney if he planned to answer this, and Mr. Logan replied that what the applicant is saying is that he is concerned about the approval of the tentative subdivision map -whether it be tonight or two weeks from tonight. The answer is that if it is tonight the Council merely add a provision that there be as a con- dition of the tentative subdivision map an acceptable agreement drawn for the subidivision for improvements between the City and the devel- oper. It isn't necessary that the Council have that agreement this evening because by saying an acceptable one to both - if it's not acceptable the final will not be approved. Mr. Logan added that he would not put a final before the Council until he has an acceptable agreement. The only thing a tentative does is set the rules for the acceptance of the final and all the Council is doing is spelling out the conditions for performance for the final all of which will be put into the final. Part of the performance of the tentative is entering into the agreement. CM-3l-105 November 24, 1975 (Report re Industrial PM l807 - Capitol Metals) Mr. Mason stated that with the tentative they would like the Council to make the decision with regard to the location of the bike path. Cm Turner asked why the Council had to change anything - why did they have to impose the bikeway? He felt that ern Staley's motion suggested that they put time constraints on when they think improve- ments should be placed. It seemed that even though this was not in the motion em Staley wanted in the agreement dates as to when im- provements will be made on this property. em Staley stated that was not the intent. em Miller stated the reason one wants to make a change at this point is because it is the only effective time the City has to require the improvements. There is no other effective time. Cm Turner stated the reason he asked the question is that he thought it was em Staley's intention to require certain im- provements at certain times. Mayor Futch stated that the City Attorney has suggested that the Council can approve the tentative map subject to appropriate agreement to provide for the public works improvements at the time the City requires them, and asked if ern Staley would restate his motion. CM STALEY RESTATED THE MOTION TO ACCEPT THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATIONS AND TO ADOPT THE TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP WITH THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS, AND THAT THE ADOPTION BE SUBJECT TO THE DRAFTING OF THE AGREEMENT AND THE APPROVAL OF IT BY THE CITY ATTORNEY AND CITY MANAGER IN SUCH A WAY THAT IT WOULD COVER THE CONDITIONS FOR WHICH THE IMPROVEMENTS WOULD BE IMPLEMENTED AND THE CITY ATTORNEY WAS SATISFIED OF THE LEGAL AFFECTS OF THE AGREEMENT IN TERMS OF INSURING OUR RIGHT TO GET THOSE AGREEMENTS. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Mayor Futch asked Earl Mason if he agreed to this motion, and he replied that he did but stated that it still left the question of the bike path in the air as the Council was requiring an extra 10 feet of widening of public right-of-way that he felt very strongly was unnecessary. He asked if the proposed bike path could be in- corporated either as an easement within the landscaped strip or in the street similar to what had been done on the Roger Shaheen property. Mayor Futch stated he felt the intent was to look at that situa- tion and determine more precisely what they want to require in an industrial zone. The Council may be a bit uncertain and they would like to send it back to the Planning Commission and give it a little more thought. Earl Mason commented that it would take a considerable length of time for the Planning Commission to review that matter and report back to the Council. He asked why since it was acceptable on Vasco under an identical situation, that it couldn't be put in the easement which would leave the option of either building it off-street in the easement or in the street. Mr. Musso remarked that this was not really comparable to the Shaheen situation in that there was no bicycle path planned south of East Avenue at that time. Also the widening of South Vasco Road to a the greater width was somewhat of an after thought and for those reasons the Planning Commission incorporated it in the setback area as they felt there was a commitment there to the street width because the future width lines were there. CM-3l-106 November 24, 1975 (Report re Industrial PM l807 - Captol Metals) CM TIRSELL ASKED THAT THE MOTION BE AMENDED TO INCLUDE REFERRING THE BICYCLE PATH BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION; MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Mr. Logan pointed out that this is the time for the Council to make the requirements, and if the question of the bicycle path is put off indefinitely, he asked the Council when they would require it. If it is the intention of the Council to approve a tentative subdivision map it should be approved subject to particular conditions. The bicycle path could corne into the agreement as to configuration, but it should not be left indefinitely as there will soon be a final map and the bicycle path will still be left up in the air and the Council may end up without any bike path. Mayor Futch stated that the question is whether the standard bike paths that the Council has adopted should apply to industrial zones. Cm Staley stated there is a question also concerning alternatives - in terms of whether it should be in the roadway or with the landscaping. Cm Miller remarked that the Planning Commission had discussed this matter and made a recommendation to the Council. The exact configu- ration of the bicycle path may not be too important, but the right- of-way width for it is important, and he felt that this should be a part of the motion independent of its location. Cm Tirsell asked if they adopted the Planning Commission recommendation with only one amendment if the agreement was acceptable as it concerns public works improvements. Cm Staley stated it seemed they could condition the agreement the staff is going to approve with the developer and put the bicycle path issue into that agreement. Mr. Logan stated that if the Council intends to do that they would also have to amend the Planning Commissions recommendation because that 130 ft right-of-way picks up the bicycle path. Mayor Futch stated he felt they should require the width - it is the design that they want to send back to the Planning Commission for consideration as to whether it should be in the street. ern Miller stated if that was the amendment he could go for that. CM TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION IN REGARD TO THE BICYCLE PATH. ern Tirse1l was reminded that there is a motion already on the floor, and asked to restate her motion, which she stated WAS TO REFER THE DESIGN OF THE BIKE PATH BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. Mayor Futch pointed out that the amendment referred to the design and was separate from the width, and he asked the City Attorney if there was any problem with the amendment. Mr. Logan stated he still saw a problem, because depending on the design there would be a great deal of influence on what the Council would require in the subdivision agreement. The Planning Commission and the Council are talking about two different things. CM TIRSELL WITHDREW HER AMENDMENT AT THIS TIME and stated she would stick with the Planning Commission's recommendation, and Mr. Logan stated the recommendation was pretty straightforward - what they are talking about - instead of requiring the additional dedication of land, they are willing to put in the bicycle path, but they want to put it in their 15 feet of front landscaping. That is the difference between the two alternatives, and since Cm Tirsell changed her mind, that would settle issue. CM-3l-l07 November 24, 1975 (Report re Industrial PM 1807 - Capitol Metals) Cm Miller made one last comment that he was concerned about adopting a tentative map without having the agreement before him, and to him it seemed they were repeating a IIbad dream", and they would never get the chance to put in the improvements properly, and they should not make a decision tonight. Mr. Musso pointed out that a tentative map does not speak to any delays, and every tentative map that the Council has considered has included the requirements. It is in the course of the final map that the Council puts in the bond for the improvements, delayed im- provements - these are in the subdivision agreement. Mr. Logan stated in hopes of alleviating Cm Miller's fears, he intends to set this up as a condition subsequent in such a way that it will be impossible for the Council to approve a final map until they have an agreement that is acceptable to them. The conditions subsequent will never be met if the Council doesn't have any agreement first that they find acceptable. The agreement will not be made after the final approval. A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MAIN MOTION WHICH PASSED 4-l WITH CM MILLER DISSENTING. COMMUNICATION TO BD OF SUPERVISORS RE CAL ROCK-LONE STAR QUARRY PLAN A communication directed to the Board of Supervisors from the Plan- ning Commission concerning the reclamation plan - quarry permit by California Rock-Lone Star Industries was continued to the meeting of December l. SUMMARY OF ACTION PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF NOVEMBER l8 Cm MIller stated that the agenda item referred to in the summary of action taken at the Planning Commission meeting of November l8, was mixed in the minutes and he could not understand why the Conditional Use Permit was approved as it was a retail use which was not permitted. Although the applicant talked about the use as retail, he stated it was a wholesale use, so he was confused. Mr. Musso stated that some of the earlier discussion related to re- tail and was reflected in the minutes, but in the presentation by the applicant, he convinced the commission that he was primarily dealing in major building materials - lumber, roofing paper, etc., and the Planning Commission felt this would be more like a lumber yard and not adaptable to downtown location. em Miller asked if he could appeal this item as a Consent Calendar item rather than an agenda item in case it is satisfactory to the other members of the Council. Mr. Logan stated that this is a decision the Council will have to make if they intend to do something about it based on certain evi- dence, and it should be placed as an agenda item. The Council agreed and the matter will be placed on the Council agenda for discussion in December. CM-3l-108 November 24, 1975 REPORT FROM CITY MANAGER RE CBD ASSESSED VALUATIONS A report had been submitted by the City Manager concerning the CBD assessed valuations. The Council asked that this matter be continued to the meeting of December 1. RE AIRPORT PAVEMENT STRIPING A report was submitted by the Public Works Director concerning the airport pavement striping and budget amendment. Mr. Logan asked if it was the intention that a resolution be adopted for a budget amendment. Mr. Lee explained that this matter would come before the Council again after bids are solicited for the striping work. CM MILLER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE THE RESOLUTION LATER WITH THE APPROPRIATE SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. CONSENT CALENDAR Re Settlement of Condem- nation Actions (Zepol, Inc., Uliana; Bailey; Duarte - DePaoli Settlement of condemnation actions concerning property ownerships involving Zepol, Inc., Uliana; Bailey, et al; Duarte, et al - DePaoli were previously discussed by the City Council and the following reso- lutions were prepared: RESOLUTION NO. 237-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT OF CONDEMNATION ACTION (City v. Zepol, Inc. - Uliana Parcel) RESOLUTION NO. 238-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT OF CONDEMNATION SUIT ( City v. Bailey, et al) RESOLUTION NO. 239-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT OF CONDEMNATION SUIT (City v. Duarte, et al - DePaoli) Resolution Urging Construction of Off-Ramp RESOLUTION NO. 240-75 A RESOLUTION URGING CONSTRUCTION OF OFF-RAMP FROM I-580 TO COLLIER CANYON ROAD. Amendment 75-76 Budget re Police Assistant The addition of a Police Assistant was discussed at the meeting of November 17 and the Council authorized the preparation of a resolution approving this budget amendment. CM-3l-109 November 24, 1975 (Res. re Budget Amend.) RESOLUTION NO. 241-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AMENDMENT OF 1975-76 BUDGET (Addition of Police Assistant) 16th Amendment to Livermore General Plan The public hearing was closed concerning the 16th amendment to the Livermore General Plan concerning the area in the vicinity of Por- tola Avenue and I-580, and the staff was directed to prepare the appropriate resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 242-75 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE LIVERMORE GENERAL PLAN 1959- 1990 BY ADOPTION OF THE SIXTEENTH AMENDMENT REGARDING ZONING OF THE PORTOLA AVENUE - INTERSTATE 580 AREA Support of AB 2353 and SB 634 re Beverage Containers AB 2353 and SB 634 were discussed by the Council and the staff had been directed to prepare a resolution supporting the bills. RESOLUTION NO. 243-75 A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING BILLS RELATING TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT (AB 2353 and SB 634) Variance re Lots on Hayes St. Cassel Montgomery An appeal concerning the application for variance from applicable zoning regulations for property located on the east side of Hayes Street, easterly of Hayes Court had been discussed by the Council and the staff was directed to prepare a resolution granting the variance. RESOLUTION NO. 244-75 A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCE ( Cassel Montgomery) Lease Agreement - Exxon Corporation A lease agreement with Exxon Corporation concerning beautification of the southeast corner of portola Avenue and Murrieta Blvd had been discussed at the meeting of November lO, and the Council had authorized that a resolution be prepared. em Miller asked that this item be removed from the Consent Calendar, stating that this item had been continued for two weeks in order to get an estimate from the Beautification Committee for something of a smaller size and to contact Exxon again about ameliorating the conditions of the agreement and this information was not furnished the Council. Cm Miller asked that this be continued until the in- formation is available. Mr. Parness explained that the cost of the limited improvement was inadvertently omitted by him, and he stated that the cost of the full improvements is $23,000 and for the limited amount would be $6,135 and the Council was given a drawing for that. CM-3l-ll0 November 24, 1975 (re Exxon Lease) Mr. Parness added as to the rechecking with the company, he did not get that direction from the Council about rechecking with the company and extending.the lease term. Cm Staley stated he had asked that they not have to pay the last month.ls rent in advance and see if they would increase the term, and Cw Tirsell had asked that an attempt be made for a lease purchase agreement. eM TURNER MOVED THAT THE MATTER BE REFERRED BACK TO THE STAFF, AND IF THE AMOUNT OF $6,135 IS FIRM FOR LIMITED IMPROVEMENTS, THAT AN ALTERNATE PLAN BE PROVIDED - INVESTIGATE THE POSSIBILITY OF SOMETHING EVEN LESS THAN THAT AMOUNT. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. Departmental Reports The following Departmental Reports were received by the Council: Revised Golf Course reports - quarter ending September 30 Revised Airport reports - quarter ending September 30 Airport Activity Report - October Minutes - Various Minutes were received from the following committees: Airport Advisory Committee for November 3 Design Review Committee for November 5 Planning Commission Minutes for October 28 Payroll and Claims There were l83 claims in the amount of $562,971.62, dated November 7 ordered paid as approved by the City Manager. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL, THE ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR WERE APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. MAYOR FUTCH ABSTAINED FROM VOTING ON ITEMS HAVING TO DO WITH RESOLUTIONS 24l-75, 242-75, AND 244-75.BECAUSE HE WAS NOT PRESENT AT THE TIME THE COUNCIL DIS- CUSSED THESE ITEMS. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (Amicus curiae Brief.re Dept of Transportation Rules and Regulations) The City Attorney explained that he had previously approached the Council about the possibility of entering an amicus curiae brief along with the City of San Marcos. The gravamen of the complaint and of the appeal is that the Department of Transportation or CAL TRANS should be obligated to have adopted rules and regulations as opposed to informal rules set by their attorney. Mr. Logan personally, be- lieves it is a good appeal and advised the Council that if they would agree, he would put it on the docket as an item to approve $100. CW TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY BE AUTHORIZED TO SPEND FROM HIS BUDGET THE AMOUNT REQUIRED TO FILE THE AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF AND REPORT TO THE COUNCIL. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. CM-3l-lll November 24, 1975 REPORT RE HFH Ltd. v. SUPERIOR COURT Mr. Logan referred to a report he had mailed the Councilmembers con- cerning the comments he had made to the California Supreme Court in HFH Ltd.v. Superior Court, and stated he had received a copy of a letter sent by Carlyn Reid to fifty other cities enclosing copies of his letter to the Supreme Court and an excerpt of the decision on the case. She had asked that they address a similar communication asking for clarification of purely legislative zoning actions, in- dicating it was the only way that a clarification or modification of this portion of the decision might be obtained. Without a clari- fication this apparent ruling of the court would detrimentally affect not only local legislative process but also the rules of judicial review of legislative actions. Mr. Logan stated there is already support from Walnut Creek, Pleasanton, San Diego and San Jose and he felt there will be a lot of support. HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT GRANT Mr. Parness informed the Council that it is necessary to follow a scheduled procedure for the conduct of at least one public hearing this year for the second year's allocation for the Housing and Com- munity Development Act grant. This is pretty much of a formality since the Council has already determined how the money is to be used. with the Council's consent, the staff would like to have the hearing on the 8th of December, as this is the time schedule the County re- quires. CW TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE HEARING FOR THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT GRANT BE SET FOR DECEMBER 8; MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL (Arroyo Road- Vancouver Intersection) Cm Turner stated that regarding the Arroyo Road-Vancouver intersec- tion, there is a concern that when people turn left going towards College from Vancouver they are turning into the oncoming traffic lane which is not very well defined and it is necessary to make a wide sweep. Mr. Lee stated that this has been checked into and the problem is a little more extensive and involves Alameda County. There is a need to shift the centerline over to allow more north bound traffic that would accomplish the problem mentioned as well as correct other problems on that street. It is necessary to coordinate this with Alameda County. ("L" Stree~.T~~f.~_ic) A few people have expressed the idea that a divider strip be put on "L" Street to clearly define the four lanes and Mr. Lee stated he did not have an answer to that, but felt that the traffic sit- uation will be relieved when "P" Street and Livermore Avenue are opened up, but stated he will check into the matter. (Proclamation - Granada High School) Cm Turner stated that Granada High School had been outstanding in having won the EBAL title and he asked that the Council support CM-3l-ll2 November 24, 1975 (Granada Football Team) and declare "Sports Week in the City of Livermore" honoring all sports. He stated it is his understanding that this can be done by proclamation. Cm Miller commented that Granada also had the most National Merit Scholars and he felt that learning is more important than sports, but learning is always downgraded and so he had reservations concerning a proclamation as he felt intelligence is more important and should not be pushed aside. Cm Turner stated that he was not pushing aside education, and as he had stated before he had been asked to bring this up at the Council meeting. (Revised Campaign Con- tribution Ordinance) Cm Miller referred to the draft of the revised campaign contribution ordinance which he and Cm Turner had asked the City Attorney to prepare. He indicated that anything which will apply to the upcoming election must be adopted at the next Council meeting and encouraged the other members of the Council to read it carefully and discuss it and resolve all the issues next week. (Rules of Order re Agenda Items) Cm Miller stated there are people who speak before the Council who regularly abuse the 5 minute" time limit which the Council has imposed by its Rules of Order. He felt that it should be made clear that when an item is requested to be on the agenda by applicants or others that they be informed in advance by being given a copy of the agenda with that particular part circled saying that anything exceeding 5 minutes should be presented to the Council in writing and they would be given five minutes to summarize, if necessary, but new material should not be given at the Council meeting to be expanded on POLICY FOR SCHEDULING EXECUTIVE SESSION MEETINGS A discussion had been set re policy for scheduling executive session meetings before or after City Council meetings. Cm Staley indicated that he would agree to have this item continued for one week. The City Clerk advised the Council that if it was their intention to have meetings other than at 8 p.m. it would be necessary to set a certain time; otherwise, it would be a special meeting or a meeting to which they have adjourned. An executive session called is a special meeting and she is required by law to notify everyone twenty-four hours in advance. Miss Hock said as an alternative the Council could adjourn during a regular meeting for an executive session and then return to the regular meeting. Mr. Logan added that if the Council declares an executive session, every time they declare it they declare a purpose for it, and if they set a regular meeting for regular executive sessions, you do not properly follow the law in declaring the purpose for the executive session. Mayor Futch stated while on the subject of executive sessions, the meeting will adjourn to an executive session to discuss condemnations. C~-31-113 November 24, 1975 STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE CITY PRINT THE CANDIDATE'S STATEMENTS BUT DO NOT INCREASE THE LENGTH TO 400 WORDS AND NOT ALLOW THE ENCLOSURES, MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. PROPOSED CITY CODE AMENDMENT RE SEWER CAPACITY ALLOCATION CM MILLER MOVED TO CONTINUE THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER l8 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE CONSERNING SEWER CAPACITY ALLOCATION TO THE MEETING OF DECEMBER 1, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND APPROVED UNANI- MOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 11:35 p.m. to an executive session to discuss condemnations. APPROVE du4 /I Mf/ Mayor ~ I , , .. Cl.ty C erk ' . Livermore, California ATTEST CM-3l--ll4 Regular Meeting of December 1, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on December 1, 1975, in the Municipal Court Chambers. The meeting was called to order at 8:07 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 - Nov. 17, 1975 ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 17, 1975, WERE APPROVED AS SUBMITTED. MAYOR FUTCH ABSTAINED FROM THE VOTE DUE TO ABSENCE AT THAT MEETING. SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT RE RAILROAD RELOCATION COMPLETION DELAY Mayor Futch stated that he has been contacted by Hensel-Phelps, con- tractors for the railroad relocation project who have indicated that because of the structural problems concerning the columns of the bridge, there will be a delay in the opening of both South Livermore Avenue and South "P" Street for through traffic. It is anticipated that the earliest date for opening of these streets will be the first or second week in January. Mayor Futch stated that he has mailed letters to those businessmen who might be affected by the delay explaining the circumstances which necessitated the delay and urging that they express any sug- gestions that might help alleviate any problems occurring with the closure of these streets. SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT RE COUNCIL ELECTION Mayor Futch stated that he would like to also announce that he has decided not to seek re-election to the Livermore City Council. He stated tahat he would like to devote more time to scientific work and to his family and that he appreciates the privilege of having served the citizens of Livermore for four years as a member of the Planning Commission followed by four years as a Livermore City Councilman. It has been a time of significant change and the problems of the next decade will be different than the problems of the past. Although the battle is never won, impressive progress has been made in preventing the Livermore Valley from becoming the San Fernando Valley of Northern California. Eight years ago there was no National Environmental Protection Act, no California Environ- mental Quality Act, no EPA, and the environmental problems were generally ignored on all levels of government. Today these same problems are generally recognized by national, state, and regional government. Unfortunately, Neanderthal thinking still prevails in Alameda County. Geldertown has been an active conspiracy by the Alameda Board of Supervisors to promote the real estate ventures of one man at enormous public expense to the citizens of Livermore. CM-3l-ll5 December 1, 1975 (Special Announcement re Council Election) Mayor Futch continued to say that this planning nightmare has been stopped by the Livermore City Council, along with help from the Association of Bay Area Government. He stated that he is confident that any Council candidate, elected by the citizens of Livermore, will continue this struggle along with the remaining Council majority. He added that he will miss the present Council and this has been a challenge he has enjoyed. COMMUNICATION RE DOOR DELIVERY OF MAIL A letter was received from Senator Cranston indicating that HR 8603, relative to mail delivery, has passed the House of Repre- sentatives with the Mineta amendment intact and that he intends to support this amendment. The staff was directed to send a letter to Senator Tunney asking whether or not he intends to support the bill and urging him to do so. COMMUNICATION RE TRANS- FER OF PARK DEVELOP. FUNDS A letter of justification concerning the request from LARPD to transfer park development funds to the LARPD was submitted to the Council. Mr. Parness noted that the Council is obligated, by contract, to transfer the funds and no action is required. Item was noted for filing. CLARIFICATION RE PARKING OF VEHICLES - MOBILEHOME LOTS A copy of a letter to the Chief Building Inspector concerning definition of vehicles on mobilehome parking lots was submitted to the Council for informational purposes. The letter was noted for filing. (See also later discussion) . CONTINUED DISCUSSION RE TAX OVERRIDE FOR POLICE & FIRE PROTECTION A written report was submitted to the Council concerning SB 90 - Overrides for Specific Purposes, as well as suggested wording for a proposed measure to appear on the ballot. This item was postponed to allow additional staff time for research and the City Attorney has concluded that if the Council decides to proceed with the tax override measure the suggested wording, as provided in his report, should be used. Mr. Parness stated that it was the original opinion of the City Attorney that the City could not declare the intent of the usage of an override tax and in addition, the maximum tax rate had to be specified. Both of those items would have caused a great deal of confusion and probably would have resulted in a fatal blow to the measures. In discussing this matter with other city repre- sentatives who have gone through tax override measures, the CM-31-1l6 December l, 1975 (Con't Disc. re Tax Over- ride - Police & Fire protection) initial op1n10n was not necessarily the case. The state's leading bond counsel indicated that the intent can be declared in a special tax override and it is not necessary to specify what the maximum tax rate would be. Therefore, wording has been provided by the City Attorney's office, if the Council so desires, for use on the March ballot. Cm Miller stated that he would like to discuss the items of trans- portation and fire and police protection separately. He would like to direct that the staff prepare the appropriate resolution to place a property tax override, not to exceed .25 per $100 for supplementing the operational c.osts of police and fire services. em Miller stated that he believes the necessity is there and this would be received favorably by the public because they can see the problems we have and taxing limitations which otherwise do not allow the Council to take care of these problems. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A TAX OVERRIDE, NOT TO EXCEED .25 PER $100, FOR THE MARCH BALLOT TO SUPPLEMENT POLICE AND FIRE SERVICES. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM TURNER. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. Cm Miller stated that he believes it is important that the measure say that the override would be used exclusively for police and fire services. No other wording would be acceptable to him or would be acceptable to the public - they must know what it is going for. Mr. Parness stated that the rate of 25~, by virtue of this year's assessed valuation, will generate approximately $350,000. It should also be pointed out that if adopted a rate of up to 25~ could be used but this does not mean to imply that the 25~ would be used - this would be at the discretion of the City Council. Cm Miller explained that the reason he has requested that the police and fire be discussed separately from the transportation tax override is because after talking with Commissioner Dahlbacka he agrees that a transportation tax would a) be defeated, and b) would be unwise. He stated that he has argued with Cm Dahlbacka twice on this issue and in the beginning felt this should be included in the override. He has become convinced that if a transportation tax override were to pass it would mean an immediate institutionalized and unionized system with very high expenses with the availability of this money. There is a chance that a system can be generated with local trans- portation contracts with Pioneer Lines, for example, where there is a chance for the system to run for some time without the need for an extra property tax rate. In subsequent years, if the system is unionized and operational expenses rise then the people will know what it is they have had and can decide whether they want the system to continue or not, if an override is placed on a ballot. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE TAX RATE FOR PUBLIC TRANSIT SUBSIDIZATION BE TABLED. THIS DOES NOT IMPLY THAT THE CITY SHOULD NOT TRY TO BEGIN A TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM. MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY. Cw Tirsell wondered if there would be a required local share if a grant is received for transportation (UMTA grant) . Mr. Parness stated that there would be but the local share can be realized by state monies so for the capital expense there would be no cost to the City. There are supporting monies from federal CM-3l-ll7 December 1, 1975 (Con't Disc. re Tax Over- ride - Police & Fire Protection) sources for operational costs as well. The point is, that accord- ing to the consultant's analysis the City could operate by having a transportation system completely subsidized by federal and state monies as long as the operational arrangement is non-unionized. Mayor Futch pointed out that there can be no discussion concern- ing the transportation portion because there has been a motion to table. MOTION FAILED 2-3, Cm Turner, Cw Tirsell, and Mayor Futch dissent- ing. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL NOT PLACE A TAX RATE OF UP TO 25~ ON THE BALLOT TO SUBSIDIZE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM STALEY. Cw Tirsell wondered if time is of the essence in applying for UMTA funds and Mr. Parness indicated that he is not sure the timing is critical. The City has been told that money is available for this purpose and the City would be allotted monies for capital expenses and operational costs. em Staley stated that he has seconded the motion because he agrees with most of what Cm Miller has said. The City is going to be in the position of asking the voters for a 25~ tax override for the purpose of supporting our fire and pOlice departments and there is a tremendous example of funding projects before they are off the ground - in terms of BART, and eventual costs to the taxpayer. The points raised by Mr. Dahlbacka last week are very difficult to argue with and many of the points made carry a lot of weight. em Turner stated that in the report from the consultant it was indicated that a transportation system would service 1% of the population and at this point he is not sure how he will vote on this issue. He stated that he believes we need to tie in a local transportation system but is surprised about the suggestion made by em Miller to contract with a private group such as Pioneer Lines. This issue carne up some months ago and he proposed that something like a contract with Pioneer Lines be investigated and he did not receive support for the suggestion at that time. It would appear that perhaps the Council has changed its position on this suggestion. However, he felt it was a good suggestion at that time and he still believes this would be a good idea. He agrees that perhaps the request for an override might be defeated but believes the question should be answered by the public. We have a fuel problem, smog problems, and many of our problems can be controlled with a public transportation system. He added that he believes this is a matter that should be put to the vote of the public and is a question that must be answered now. For this reason he will vote against the motion. Cm Staley stated that he would like to see the question answered also, but is not sure the question of asking people if they would like to have a 25~ tax override for public transit is the right question. He stated that he is in favor of a public transporta- tion system but is not sure that this may be the wrong question at the wrong time. He feels we need more work done on how much money the City needs and how the system can be financed and begun without going to our local tax rolls for the money. If it is put into operation he believes that would be the time to ask voters if they would be willing to support it on a continuing basis. ,.:t" CM-3l-ll8 December l, 1975 (Con't Disc. re Tax Override - Police and Fire Protection) Mayor Futch stated that it would appear the Council would like to consider this matter and wondered what the time constraints would be. Mr. Parness stated that if the Council is interested in implementing a local transit system the Council need only instruct the staff to proceed with the ground work and analyzing various operational sources. Mayor Futch indicated that what he meant was different wording to appear on the ballot for the transportation subsidization. He indicated that the request for the 25~ override for transportation needs has not really been supported by factual evidence that the 25~ is needed. Mr. Parness stated that the Transportation Committee has discussed all these points at great length and what Mayor Futch is talking about is political strategy. This subject has been one of elaborate analysis over the past three years and has been studied in depth. It is true that the consultant has said that a transportation system can be implemented without a request for local funding but the point of the Committee has been that it is inevitable that this type of operational experience is going to result in a unionization effort. Apparently TVA monies are not available unless they can be directed towards transit agencies currently operating - this would mean AC Transit and BART. In order to qualify for state grants, which are a portion of this, it is almost a foregone conclusion that AC would have to be contracted with to operate our system or we would have to join the AC District or become a Special District. It is inevitable that unionization would occur and the larger operational expense would be realized by the City. The Committee concluded that rather than to begin the new type of public utility service and then have a unionized operation come about, ballooning the cost so that it could not be financed at all, it would be best to place the measure before the people at this time and explain what the ultimate circumstances would be. Cm Miller stated that he does not agree because in looking at the present economic climate, to ask the public for an extra 25~ which everyone knows will be spent if it is received, will get an automatic and overwhelming "no" from the public. This means that a system will not be started or if it is that it could have been done without going to the voters. As pointed out last week this would give Livermore a black mark by regional agencies for whom a public transportation system is a mitigation measure for air pollution. ern Miller stated that he believes a transportation system is essen- tial and it will not be started if the question is whether or not the public wants to pay 25~ for it - there will be a resounding "no". He stated that he would suggest trying the system without the 25~ for as long as possible. As pointed out by Cm Turner only about 1% of the people will use the system and most people have no reason to vote to pay taxes for the system at this time. A system of this kind must be in operation for awhile so that people get used to using it and in two or three years down the line hopefully enough people would use it to support a tax override if it becomes necessary. You can't get people used to a transportation system if it doesn't exist but if people are asked to pay 25~ and they refuse this means that it will not be started. The problem of asking the voters for 25~ now is that he believes the City will lose. However, if the system is operating the City can always have such an election at three times during a year when elections are held. It is important to get a system started and it will not be started if the public is asked for 25~. CM-3l-ll9 December l, 1975 (Con't Disc. re Tax Override - Police and Fire Protection) Cm Staley stated that one relative item that concerns him is the problem the Valley is having with the BART bus and intra-valley transportation - not just in the City. The reason he does not want this to go on the ballot at this time is because he would like the City to try to work out a more comprehensive solution so that we will have a transportation system that will service the whole Valley. The administrative costs, etc., that would go with this measure are high and at this time there is a question of how much longer the BART feeder bus will be available to us. To begin a local transportation system might mean a loss of the BART feeder bus service. Cw Tirsell stated that she has had mixed emotions on this item and she wanted to hear discussion before expressing her views. It would seem that there are not any good choices available to the Council. If the City applies for UMPTA grant money and we are not unionized, we will not receive the money. On the other hand, if we ask for a 25~ tax override per $lOO, and the measure is defeated, this would very definitely affect our sewer expan- sion grant because we will have said that we have eliminated a mitigation measure. She added that at this time she would vote in favor of the motion - not to place it on the ballot at this time, but would make a motion later on to ask the staff to pur- sue a transportation system. She stated that while she agrees with what Cm Staley is saying about having a transportation system for the Valley, the fact is that someone has to go ahead and launch a bus system; it's up to Livermore. She stated that this is a very difficult decision for her to have to make but she believes the measure does not have a chance to pass. Mayor Futch stated that he will vote in favor of the motion be- cause of the financial burdens that may be imposed by the state in starting a system with a tax override. Cm Turner commented that his concern is that if the City starts a bus system and then the City goes to the people for additional money and a measure asking for this money fails it means that the bus program will have to be scrapped or operated from the City's General Fund. If the system is scrapped it would mean a very large loss in the way of capital outlay for the bus system. MOTION PASSED 4-l (Cm Turner dissenting) . Mr. Parness asked for direction from the Council. CM MILLER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE THE NECESSARY REPORTS AND ANALYSIS FOR THE START OF A TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM. Cm Miller stated that the reason he would like to make the motion is because eight years ago he made the motions that started the study for transportation in the Valley as a re- sult of being told by his constituants that public transpor- tation is needed. MOTION SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. Cm Turner indicated that he does not understand what the motion is aSking for and Cm Miller explained that the Council needs reports as to what is required for starting a system including applications for grants and an analysis of the cost, etc. CM-3l-l20 December l, 1975 (Con't Disc. re Tax Override - Police and Fire Protection) Mayor Futch explained that included in the motion is that the staff prepare the necessary documents for application of funds. If the Council is satisfied with the reports and the fact that a system can be started then the staff would be directed to apply for grants. Cm Turner stated that he would vote for the motion, in that case, because he would be interested in reviewing this type of report. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. Mr. Parness noted that the Council took the initiative in urging the other two urban centers of the Valley to join with us in a consolidated intra-city transportation plan and at that time they were not interested. COMMUNICATION RE QUARRY RECLAMATION PLAN The Council received a copy of a Commission to the County Board of Industries, Inc.-California Rock mation plan. communication from the Planning Supervisors concerning Lone Star and Gravel Company quarry recla- CW TIRSELL MOVED TO ADOPT THE REPORT PREPARED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND DIRECT THAT THE STAFF SEND THE REPORT TO THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AS THE CITY'S POSITION. Cw Tirsell stated that she is concerned about Item 2. (Land Form) because if this goes through at a 1 to 1 slope the land would be virtually unreclaimable for anything except water enterprises. There are some excellent points made with respect to what can be needed in 25 years and she would suggest underscoring the P.C. point about the 1 to 1 slope, AND INCLUDED THIS IN HER MOTION. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY eM TURNER. Cm Turner would like to know if the reclamation plan can be implemen- ted and what guarantees the City might have. Possibly there could be some type of tax imposed for the loads of gravel going out of the plant to be placed in some type of trust fund to guarantee the reclamation plan as well as an implementation schedule adopted by the County that would be adhered to. If this were done the City would have the schedule and the funds to carry out the plan. Cw Tirsell commented that she believes this is an excellent idea. Everyone knows that a 25 year old bond wouldn't do anybody any good. She added that she would prefer that the County Board of Supervisors not grant the permit until a study is done but it is unlikely that the Board would adopt this suggestion. Cm Turner wondered if the wording could be included in the motion and Cw Tirsell expressed concern for the statutory authority to impose a tax such as that suggested by Cm Turner. Perhaps the staff might have some information on this aspect. Mr. Parness indicated that he is not sure if this could be done or not. Mayor Futch noted that apparently traffic, noise, and other items were not included as part of the EIR draft and wondered why they were not included. Mr. Musso explained that the EIR is on the reclamation plant - not on the quarry. The quarry was approved 5 years ago and the EIR was done at that time. It is difficult for everyone to understand that this is not an application for a quarry permit but one of the re- quirements listed in the permit. CM-3l-l2l December 1, 1975 (Comm. re Quarry Reclamation Plan) Cw Tirsell stated that she cannot understand why a reclamation permit is being presented so long after the quarry permit was granted and wondered if the 1 to 1 slope was in the original permit. Mr. Musso stated that he believes the slope was 1 to 1 in the original application. The quarry is not in operation and this is the vacant land for which quarrying is not allowed until they have filed a reclamation plan. Discussion followed concerning the slope and Mr. Lee indicated that it would depend upon the type of soil used for reconstruc- tion of a 3 to 1 slope, for example. If the soil could be com- pacted and consolidated there would probably be no reason why it couldn't be reconstructed. Cw Tirsell commented that the point that Cm Turner made was that the funds for reclaiming land should be derived from the profits or the industry itself. She believes this is a point that should be made strongly at the end. In the past these decimated lands are farmed out to some public agency to come and buy and reclaim and we pay for it on the tax rate - like Shadow Cliffs. We pay for the land on which a great profit was derived and the point that Cm Turner is making is that people who make a profit on decimating that land should also be charged in some manner, or required to be charged with the responsibility of reclaiming that land and if they put it to another profitable use, this would be their own business. It should be reclaimed to a good planning use~t~~~~~o~~value rather than leaving a hole in the groun~w~~~~-~PQRSQ to us. A statement to that effect should be added to the letter to the Board of Supervisors. em Miller stated that in the P.C. minutes it was pointed out that just the water alone to fill that hole is $1 million worth of water that will undoubtedly be a public expense. Obviously $25,000 for a performance bond is too small and a performance bond should start at $l or $2 million and go up if the P.C. recommends it. He added that these are very large companies that are involved and they can put up the $1 million in cash. Cm Miller stated that if an extraction tax is collected there can be assurance that there will be enough money to carry out the reclamation. The $25,000 isn't going to be enough and it isn't sure that the County has the right to collect a tax but perhaps it could be done by contract as a condition of approval. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. DISCUSSION RE CBD ASSESSED VALUATIONS Mr. Parness stated that in response to Council instructions there have been a series of tabulations made on valuations of different properties in the City - commercial (CBD) and residential properties. He stated that he has just provided the Council with another brief tabulation on bulk acreages located in the City to show what has happened over the past five years and over the last year and fluctuations in assessed value. Mr. Parness added that the tabulations were initiated based upon some glaring problems discernible by our Finance Director in the reports recently received by the County Assessor, as opposed to what the estimates were several months ago. CM-3l-l22 December l, 1975 (Discussion re CBD Assessed Valuations) During the past week the City received an answer to inquiry made by the Finance Director and the communication was not clear and one question was overlooked completely. The City intends to pursue these questions further. with the information from the Assessor, the City Finance Director has prepared a brief analysis to bring the Council up-to-date with respect to the Assessor's response. Cm Miller stated that he will ultimately move that the City send a letter to the Assessor pointing out the obvious discrepancies which exist with the whole series of assessments and the pattern of increase in commercial, industrial, and bulk acreage properties, as compared with continual increases in residential assessed valua- tions, including some of the decline on commercial property. He would suggest that the City ask for an answer and at the same time send a copy to the Grand Jury. If we don't get a response from the assessor in three weeks he will suggest that this item be placed on the agenda to send a letter to the Grand Jury with a copy to the assessor. He stated that he would like to give the arguments as to why he has made the above suggestions. In looking at the residential property assessments, the average increase last year was 8%. The average and median increase in residential properties in the last five years is 40%. This is the increase in the assessed valuation - not the taxes. Taxes, however, have gone up also because of the increases in tax rates. These assessment inequities are a national scandal which have brought up time and again. The question of tax assessment and those inequities was an issue a couple of years ago when it was noticed there were decreases in property values in t~~ commercial areas. This was taken to the Grand Jury and there .~ been three years without any change in assessments for the downtown properties, for example, and the Grand Jury inquired of the Assessor who reassessed our downtown out of the order in which it would nor- mally have been done. The thing that is important to note is that the Assessor consistently increases residential properties every single year and the Assessor consistently leaves commercial constant for several years and some of them are even lower now than they were five years ago. Mayor Futch commented that procedure requires that there be a motion on the floor prior to discussion and requested that Cm Miller go ahead and make a motion. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE CITY SEND A LETTER TO THE ASSESSOR ON HIS FAILURE TO MATCH KNOWN INCREASES IN PROPERTY VALUES, INCLUDING PROPERTIES THAT HAVE LOWER VALUES NOW THAN THEY DID FIVE YEARS AGO AND THAT A COpy OF THIS LETTER BE SENT TO THE GRAND JURY. THE SECOND PART OF THE MOTION IS THAT IF THERE IS NO RESPONSE FROM THE ASSESSOR IN THREE WEEKS, THE ITEM BE PLACED BACK ON THE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION OF A LETTER TO BE SENT TO THE GRAND JURY WITH A COpy TO GO TO THE ASSESSOR. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. Cm Miller stated that the point he is trying to make is that resi- dential property value increases every single year but commercial property remains essentially the same for two, three or four years. This means that relative to the commercial properties, residential properties are sharing a larger burd~n of the overall tax than are the commercial properties. There is no reason a relatively constant factor couldn't be placed on commercial property each year and mis- takes can be adjusted the same as with residential properties at the time they are reassessed. This is a point that needs to be made CM-3l-l23 December l, 1975 {Discussion re CBD Assessed Valuations) to the Assessor when the letter is sent to him. This year there was an 8% increase for residential property and very few increases for commercial property. Since the business properties are approx- imately 10% of the assessed valuation of the City, there are approx- imately $l4.2 million worth of assessed values. Since it should have been approximately 8% higher for commercial property, it would mean about $l.14 million more that the City should have had but did not receive because the Assessor does not treat commercial property the same as he does residential property. This also means that with a tax rate of $l.50 per $lOO the City has lost about $l7,000. If the same thing happens next year and residential property goes up, the disparity is another $l7,000 next year on top of the $17,000 we lost this year. Cm Turner stated that he would agree commercial property assessments stay at the same valuation for longer periods of time than residen- tial but assessments are based on numerous sales in the area. He stated that he thought Cm Miller mentioned there had been a zero increase in commercial assessments and wondered if Cm Miller was referring to 1975-76. Cm Miller stated that for 1974-75 the commercial properties, for the most part, are relatively constant. About 3/4 of the properties listed have the same assessment for 75-76 as they did for 1974-75, and a couple of them are lower for 1975-76. Cm Turner stated that for commercial properties there was a 42% increase over the last five years. Cm Miller stated that this is true, generally, but there are very large variations. Cm Turner stated that in 1975-76 there was an increase for commer- cial property of 8.9% - this was between 1974 and 1975 and his calculations indicate that there was a 9.2% increase for residen- tial property for 1975-76, over the assessment of 1974-75. He stated that he agrees that residential properties are carrying the bulk of the load because of the increased assessments each year. In many cases the only way the increase can be off-set is to sell the home. Commercial business at least has the opportunity to make up the increase through sales. There seems to be some inequity but he is not convinced there is an inequity to the extent em Miller has indicated because the average increase over five years is about equal. He would argue that there has been an increase in the assess- ments for commercial property, on the average. em Miller pointed out that if one looks at the statistics for 1974-75, almost all of the commercial properties are the same this year as they were the year before. There are some sharp increases for some properties but this is because new develop- ment has taken place in the ~bqt__~~~~~~ere are no new buildings the assessments have^cha~~liE!large increases on a few properties greatly affect the average that Cm Turner is referring to. For most of the houses there is no new development either but they went up 8% anyway. Every house on the list received an increase - some more than others, but the variation around the 8% average is very small. The thing that is prominent is that 3/4 of the commercial properties had no increase in their valuation between last year and this year. em Turner stated that he would agree there are some inequities but he wanted to show that on the average there was an increase for commercial properties equal to the increase for residential assessments. CM-3l-l24 December l, 1975 (Discussion re CBD Assessed Valuations) Cm Miller pointed out that one large increase can distort the average. Cm Turner stated that Cm Miller used the word "zero" which means that there were no increases for commercial properties. em Miller explained that he indicated that almost all of the proper- ties had no increase. Surely some of them did, but most did not. em Staley stated that he has nothing to add that hasn't already been said. In looking at the list of properties there are disparities and he would suggest that the Council ask for specifications for specific changes, or lack of change, but in general terms rather than for a specific property until more information is available. A VOTE WAS TAKEN AND THE MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. Cm Miller stated that the Herald and News recently di~ected a very nasty editorial against him for having the effrontery to suggest that business properties should pay their fair share of property taxes. The evidence for his stand was the fact that all residen- tial properties have had substantial increases in assessed valua- tions this year and, in fact, every year, whereas most business properties were unchanged from last year and some are even lower than five years ago. No one can honestly argue that there have been no increases in commercial property values in the last year or In the last five years. Consequently, the Herald's reaction which is clearly beyond their customary semi-weekly attack on the Livermore City Council must mean he struck a sensitive nerve, and indeed he did. It turns out that the Herald and News occupies a property which has a 15% lower assessed valuation than it did five years ago. Contrast this 15% lower with the average and median, 40% higher assessed value for residential properties in the last five years. The Herald and News does not own their building; they lease or rent. However, the present owner, Mr. Regan, told the Council in a dif- ferent context that leases usually require renters to pay increases in taxes. While the Herald and News lease is not a public document it does seem very likely that the Herald and News would have to pay more if the building had had the same assessed valuation increases as all the rest of us received. This suggests that the Herald and News is very likely involved in a cover-up of their own financial interests in keeping downtown property assessments low. The Herald and News may not print any of the above discussion because they frequently suppress stories critical of their image but he would hope that other papers will let the public see the hilarious hypocrisy of the Herald's editorial writers. RECESS After a brief recess the Council meeting resumed with all members of the Council present. RETURN TO COMMUNICATION RE MOBILEHOME LOTS & PARKING Mr. Leonard, 1892 Montecito Circle, stated that he received a letter from HUD indicating that the law regarding parking vehicles on a mobilehome lot is unclear as presently written. CM-3l-l25 December 1, 1975 (Mobilehome Lots & Parking) He stated that he has a recreational vehicle he would like to park on his mobilehome lot but since the law is not clear he does not know what he can do. Mayor Futch commented that Mr. Leonard has spoken to the Council concerning this matter in the past and the Building Inspector contacted the state to make sure his interpretation was the same as theirs. Until the law is changed or until something is received from the state to indicate that there should be a different inter- pretation, there is nothing the City can do. He added that this is a state law and the City has confirmation that the interpreta- tion of it is correct. REPORT RE MITIGATION MEASURES - ENV. CONCERNS The City Council instructed that a tabulation be made as to all of the prospective mitigation measure that might be considered officially that would be effective for environmental improvements. A list has been submitted to the City Council for formal endorse- ment with any modifications the Council might wish to make. The endorsement of the list is necessary as a supplement to our pend- ing application for a federal-state grant for treatment plant expansion. Mr. Parness explained that the staff prepared a series of mitiga- tion measures under the broad categories that EPA seems to favor. The staff has tried to respond to all areas but there may be items the Council might wish to list or some that they may wish to con- solidate or delete. Mayor Futch suggested that the Council select a half dozen items that are pertinent and that the Council feels will have the most effect and to try to determine what quantatative effect might be anticipated from the mitigating measures the Council deems desire- able. He believes that some of the measures are not 9Rly mitigat- ing but may have the opposite affect. For example, if shopping is eliminated by eliminating parking spaces in downtown Livermore, people will prefer to drive to larger shopping centers in another location where this type of mitigating measure has not been taken. Mr. Parness commented that this type of thing presumes that another mitigation measure will be taken to satisfy the need, such as a local transit system. Cm Turner wondered if there is any support for the suggestion made by Mayor Futch to consider half a dozen of the items and Cw Tirsell stated that she was going to suggest reorganizing them with about six major categories. Cm Turner asked if there could be a sub-committee of the Council to do what Cw Tirsell has suggeste.d and bring a suggestion back to the Council rather than to sit and discuss it this evening. Cm Staley stated that he would like to make one request and that is that the word "disincentive" be substituted with another word. He indicated that he finds this to be a "non word" and does not like it. Mr. Parness explained that this is EPA semantics and the staff tries to use the same type of applicable wording. Cw Tirsell stated that she would suggest rewording of B. 1. "Consideration of conversion of one lane in commuter direction for car pools and possible public transportation.", or to add CM-3l-l26 December l, 1975 (Report re Mitigation Measures - Env. Concerns) wording "on Highway I-580" or a 5th item under "B" with wording as follows: "We support the six lane widening of I-580 with one lane preserved for buses and car pools." This is an important miti- gating measure and she would like to add this to the list. Cm Turner stated that he really doesn't want to discuss this item because everyone has made their views known concerning the widening and reservation of the lane for buses, etc. ern Miller stated that part of the reason for this discussion is that there is a letter from Lila Euler of LAVWMA asking a series of questions which require submission to LAVWMA. They have asked that the City respond to these questions by November 30, and obvi- ously the City did not meet that date but the staff should prepare a response to be sent to LAVWMA. The Council should, have a sub- committee to think about these items also.~~~_ ~ fhn~~~~ Mayor Futch suggested thatAthe Director of Public Works meet with the Ceafteilm~mS8~G to discuss some of the items and to help clarify some of the concerns with a report to the Council that can be for- warded to LAVWMA. REPORT RE EIR FOR GENERAL PLAN (Grunwald Crawford & Assoc.) The planning consultant firm has prepared a proposal for the prepara- tion of an EIR for the General Plan program that will qualify for state requirements. It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution concerning a contract amendment. Mayor Futch stated that he would like to know on what date the EIR can be ready. Mr. Parness stated that he can't answer that question at this time but Mr. Crawford, the consultant, has indicated that it will not be a monumental undertaking. He will try to obtain this information from the consultant but he would assume it would be ready prior to hearings concerning the General Plan. Mr. Musso stated that he spoke with Mr. Crawford today and he indi- cated that the EIR could be ready in a week or two. After this is done the notice of completion can be sent out and there would be a period of about 30 days in which individual agencies can have the opportunity to respond to the EIR. Cw Tirsell stated that this would be an expenditure of public funds and would assume the Council needs a resolution. She wondered if this could be approved with a subsequent resolution to appear on the agenda. Mr. Logan stated that this is the third amendment to the agreement and there will also be a resolution. Due to the short week, last week, the resolution has not been given to the Council and the third amendment to the agreement is not quite consistent with their pro- posal at this time - it has to be adjusted. If the Mayor feels the resolution is not consistent at the time he is to sign it, he can bring it back to the Council for discussion. Cm Miller stated that there is a condition he would like to impose on the contract - that the draft EIR include the results of the air quality material from the LAVWMA Environmental Impact Statement. They have made it clear that no additional air quality analysis will be done by them and there was some concern that their EIR was not as complete as it could be. CM-3l-l27 December l, 1975 (Report re EIR for General Plan - Grunwald Crawford & Assoc) Mr. Musso stated that he did suggest that the growth inducements be included in the plan because the City made such a point of this with the Las positas Plan. Cm Miller stated that the air quality aspects of this are important with respect to what the City does in the future and in dealing with the County and the Geldermann project. CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION REGARDING THE CONTRACT AMEND- MENT, SUBJECT TO INCORPORATING THE APPROPRIATE AIR QUALITY MATERIAL INTO THE PLAN OF THE EIR AS TAKEN FROM THE EIS. MOTION SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. The City Atorney suggested that rather than to incorporating this into the agreement the Council just suggest to them that this be done but not include it as a contractural requirement. MOTION AND SECOND WERE WITHDRAWN AT THIS TIME. CM MILLER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE THE RESOLUTION RE- GARDING THE CONTRACT AMENMENT AND THAT A LETTER BE SENT TO GRUNWALD, CRAWFORD & ASSOCIATES POINTING OUT THE WEALTH OF VALUABLE MATERIALS IN THE LAVWMA EIR WITH RESPECT TO THE AIR QUALITY MATERIAL, THAT SHOULD BE INCLUDED. MOTION SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. Crn Turner stated that in the estimated cost the consultant is going to charge the City an additional $320, in addition to the contract cost, for each public hearing and he would like to know if this is necessary. Mr. Musso indicated that apparently they have satisfied the con- tract, relative to the number of public meetings they are to attend for the whole project. Anything additional as far as future hearings by the Planning Commission or the Council will be charged separately. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. The City Attorney explained that the resolution for this item will not appear on the Consent Calendar next week because it is an important item that he will prepare for signature by the Mayor. CONSENT CALENDAR Res. Amending PUD #2 - Palomar Mortgage Co. The following resolution reflects Council action taken on Novem- ber 24, relative to amendment of PUD #2, for Palomar Mortgage Company. RESOLUTION NO. 246-75 A RESOLUTION AMENDING PLANNED UNIT DEVELOP- MENT PERMIT NO.2 (Palomar Mortgage Co.) Res. Approv. Tent. Parcel Map No. l807 The following resolution reflects Council action taken at the meeting of November 24th. Cm Miller indicated that he would vote against this item in approving the Consent Calendar. CM-31-l28 December 1, 1975 RESOLUTION NO. 247-75 A RESOLUTION CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 1807 (Capitol Metals Company) Resolutions re Notice of Completion The following resolutions have been prepared accepting improvements of the Heather Lane bridge the Arroyo Mocho bikeway, and IIartford Road bikeway. RESOLUTION NO. 248-75 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING IMPROVEMENTS (Heather Lane Bridge and Related Improvements) RESOLUTION NO. 249-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO RECORD NOTICE OF COMPLETION RE PROJECTS 74-7 AND 75-39 (Arroyo Mocho Bikeway and Hartford Bikeway) Res. Auth. Exec. of Agree for Federal Grant - STEP PROGRAM A resolution has been prepared authorizing execution of agreement by the City Manager for a federal grant application to the Criminal Justice Planning Board for our STEP program. The budget is in the amount of $50,751 of which the City is required to contribute $2,538. RESOLUTION NO. 250-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR GRANT AND AUTHORIZING MATCHING FUNDS (Stra- tegic Team Enforcement Program). Report re Request for Crossing Guard - Florence & Vancouver A report from the Public Works Director indicated that at this time there is not a need for a crossing guard at the intersection of Florence Road and Vancouver. Cm Turner stated that he asked that this item be on the agenda and a report prepared. He would like to suggest that the City contact the School Board with the suggestion that students be used as cross- ing guards for some of the less critical crossings. There are some areas that do not meet the warrants but yet the parents are concerned about various crossings. The Council concurred. Minutes - Various The following min~tes were submitted for Council information: Social Concerns Committee - October 16 Planning Commission - November 4 Payroll & Claims There were 23 claims in the amount of $112,746.58, dated 11/13/75, and approved by the City Manager. CM-31-129 December 1, 1975 APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM_STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED. NOTE THAT CM MILLER CAST A DISSENTING VOTE ON THE ITEM APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. l807. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (Offer to Sell Land to the City) Mr. Parness stated that the owner of property located in the Springtown Golf Course area has offered to sell a small parcel to the City, which Mr. Parness illustrated to the Council. He stated that it consists of about 3.3 acres of property. It is not critical to the use of the golf course but they would like to know if the Council would be interested in purchase and at what price. The adjacent ~O acres of property has been appraised at $47,000 and this amount has been offered to the owners. The value has been raised because there are public works improvements to the property. Mr. Parness indicated that the property is of no real value to the City other than possible enlargement of the golf course or use of the maintenance building on this site. Mr. Parness asked the owners if they would be interested in selling the 3.3 acres to the City along with the 10 acres appraised at $47,000, for $50,000 and they indicated that they would be interested in doing this. The City Attorney explained that the important thing to note is that if the Council deletes the improvements from the original Galloway Park property value, there would still be about $2,000 or $2,500 per acre of land that is unimproved. Therefore, $900 per acre would be an exceptionally good price if the company is willing to sell all of this for the $50,000. Cm Turner noted that the money to pay for this land would have to corne from the Golf Course funds and wondered if money of that amount is available. Mr. Parness stated that this kind of surplus is not available and that it would have to be an accounting matter and work it into the budget in the corning years. There would be $3,000 against the golf course and $47,000 against the Park Fund. (Purchase of Elliott Property) Mr. Parness stated that he has not been contacted formally, but he understands that the County has agreed to the purchase of 19 acres of land owned by Mr. Elliott in conjunction with the Isabel Highway project. Prior to purchase it should be decided if there should be an access way to the highway. At one time this property was to be developed residentially and two lots were reserved for this purpose and inadvertently a building permit was issued for one of the lots. The other lot remains open and the developer has requested a building permit for that one. Access to the residential area is very poor and it would seem reason- able that some means be found to provide access to the intended high- way from the residential area. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO SEND THIS ITEM TO THE PLANNING CO~MISSION AND ASK THAT THEY LOOK AT ACCESS POSSIBILITIES, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CM-3l-l30 December l, 1975 MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL (Signs) Cm Miller stated that he noticed that there was some concern at the County about making the Concannon Winery and the Olivina property put in smaller signs. The question was raised that these are his- torical properties and that the signs should remain due to their historical nature and that they should be allowed a variance of some kind. It was suggested that Livermore should send a letter to the County suggesting that because these signs have historical significance and that the County should consider an exemption from the ordinance. The Council concurred. Cm Turner stated that he agrees that the signs have historical significance but Concannon Winery, for example, is conducting a business to make a profit and to give them a variance might cause problems. There may be other merchants in the area who might de- cide to take the same approach if one variance is allowed. Mr. Musso was asked to check into the age of the signs and report back to the Council. (Junk Yard Sales) Cm Miller stated that he has had a complaint about a junk yard and auto parts sales off of South front Road and it mayor may not be in the City because he is not sure of the exact location but it is on McGraw Road. Mr. Musso indicated that he believes this is located in the County. Cm Miller asked Mr. Musso to check into this and if it is in the County a letter should be sent to them asking if this use is permitted. (Re AB 15) Cm Miller stated that there is a measure in the Assembly which is under a lot of pressure, called AB 15, having to do with protection of prime agricultural land. He added that the Council has discussed preserving agricultural land in conjunction with the General Plan and he believes AB 15 deserves the support of the City Council and we should ask that our Assemblyman, Floyd Mori vote for it. The Council also requested a copy of the bill from the staff. (BASSA Hearing) Cm Miller stated that a couple of weeks ago there was a BASSA hear- ing at which LAVWMA and Zone 7 were, "competing", for who will do waste water management for the Valley. We have supported LAVWMA and we have not supported Zone 7, but there were people at the hearing in support of Zone 7. Those in support of Zone 7, or at least some of them, were associ- ated with Mr. Geldermann's project and the City should send a letter to BASSA pointing out that there are people with a very private inter- est who were testifying in favor of Zone 7. Cw Tirsell stated that Lila Euler was given the opportunity to present a rebuttal to Zone 7 supporters and Cw Tirsell is sure this very point was made by Mrs. Euler. While Zone 7 continues to say that they have no interest in building sewage treatment, the fact that land owners are in favor of Zone 7, is an indication that makes everyone very nervous about the designation. CM-3l-13l December 1, 1975 (BASSA Hearing) Cm Miller stated that he sees no harm in expressing this more than once and would suggest that a letter of this nature be sent to the BASSA Board and their committee. Cw Tirsell felt that sometimes a point can be overdone and she believes that Mrs. Euler has done a very good job. It was noted that the Council has requested a list of the names of people who spoke in favor of Zone 7, and after the list has been received perhaps it can be pointed out that the same people testified at the ABAG hearing, and what they said. The Council concurred. <Acquisition of County Administration Center) Cm Staley stated that he read in the newspaper that the Board of Supervisors will have a public hearing concerning the acquisition of property for the County Administration Center in Pleasanton. He would suggest that the Council and the staff send one or two letters opposing acquisition of the Pleasanton property. In the past the Council has sent a letter or two opposing the acquisition of the Pleasanton property and wondered if it would be customary to send somebody to testify at the meeting. Cm Miller felt this would be reasonable and that perhaps someone from VCSD would also be willing to testify and point out what fraction of the population of the Valley is represented. Cm Staley stated that he would be willing to give testimony and will try to reiterate the points made in the letters. (Newspaper Article re Planning for the Valley) Cw Tirsell stated that she read a letter in the newspaper today written by Fred Cooper in response to Lila Euler's letter about the planning efforts in the Valley and hoping the County will upgrade their planning efforts to agree with the levels of population we have agreed to which is essentially E-O funding. Mr. Cooper pointed out that all the smog blows in from outside of the Valley and 80,000 people here or there doesn't mean a thing. It doesn't matter whether or not the Valley has 80,000 more people. . '0 Cw Tirsell stated that 1~ tion and certainly has wondered if VCSD could report for his perusal _ pollution study. ~ Mr. Cooper also claims J nothing as , haS- ~ nothing and ~S Cm Miller suggested that the LAVWMA EIS might also be sent to him for informational purposes. apparently Mr. Cooper is not receiving informa- not received the latest information. She be asked to send him a copy of the A. B. Little on air pollution in addition to our own air a copy of the the Vall out that He evidently Livermore ne rowth has read ion the letter that rowth and h CM-3l-l32 December 1, 1975 (Funds re Construction of Bikeways) Mayor Futch stated that in reviewing the pamphlet from the League of Women Voters there was information on two legislative bills to provide funds for the construction of bikeways. One bill allows $9 million, annually, for the construction of Class I bikeways for commuters and to eliminate hazards on existing bikeways. The second bill provides $5 million for commuter and bicentennial bikeway routes. The Bicentennial Committee expressed interest in this type of thing and perhaps the staff could obtain copies of the two bills. ORD. RE MUNI. CODE AMEND. RE SEWER €APACITY ALLOCATION CM TURNER MOVED TO POSTPONE THE ORDINANCE CONCERNING A MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT RELATIVE TO SEWER CAPACITY ALLOCATION, TO THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING. He stated that the reason for his request is so the Councilmembers will have the opportunity to review information presented by the Planning Director just this evening, in written form. MOTION SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Cm Miller stated that Section l8.19.3 talks about what the City can do after the size of the sewer plant is increased and it was his understanding that the Council voted to delete that entire section as something to be resolved later. Mayor Futch stated that he has some wording he would like to suggest. His concern is that he doesn't know what the City will have to agree to and what will be required as a mitigating measure in terms of per- centage for commercial and industrial. Therefore, he would like to leave a loophole and would suggest the following wording for Section l8 . 19 . 3, I tern (1): (1) a new residential use, provided that such use is consistent with mitigating measures proposed in the City's application for additional sewage capacity above 5 MGD, and provided that no more than 45 percent of the increase in capacity has been used for resi- dential connections, other than low or moderate income as provided for in Item (3). Mayor Futch stated that if the City has to promise not to use any residential or very residential in order to get the sewer plant capacity, then it would be consistent with the wording he has suggested. The Council asked that this wording be prepared by the staff and included in the agenda packet for discussion next week. The City Attorney asked if it is the Council's intention that the ordinance be amended, and the Council indicated that they would like this wording on a separate sheet of paper indicating a proposal for amendment. Cm Miller stated that he would like to see this section deleted or to ask for a larger percentage of allocation to commercial and industrial with a much smaller percentage allowed for resi- dential development, and to specify the mitigating aspects of this stand. HOTION TO CONTINUE PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM-3l-l33 December l, 1975 PROPOSED MUNI. CODE AMEND. RE ELECTION CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS, ETC. Cm Miller stated that the amendment to the Municipal Code rela- tive to election campaign contributions and expenditures has been proposed and drafted at the request of Cm Turner and himself. The purpose of the amendment is to clarify language and tighten up the wording to provide for a complete dis- closure prior to the election and to provide penalties for those who cheat. During the last election there was a willful violator of the existing provisions. There is nothing unusual about the pro- posed amendments because all of them are already contained in ordinances of other cities, particularly San Diego and Chula Vista. The changes being proposed are l) that the value of services be counted in contributions if they are provided by somebody in their professional or customary occupational field. In other words, if a commercial artist provides fliers, this would be a contribution; however, if the commercial artist serves as a treasurer he would be considered a volunteer. 2) is to reduce the $5 limit either to $1 or zero and all contributions are reported. It is not that difficult to report all contribu- tions because he has done it as have Cw Tirsell and ern Turner. There is some resistance to that plan, however. 3) if there are no reports for names in a "kitty" then it is an anonYmous contribution and is treated as a anonYmous contribution. 4) no outside group can spend money for a candidate without permission. The candidate cannot "fake" a committee, thereby, nor can a committee embarrass a candidate because that committee is subject to the penalties for violating the Section. There could be a committee organized solely to make a candidate go over his expenses and he is not liable in this circumstance, but the committee is: 5) false names cannot be generated and a contribution cannot be made for someone else without disclosing who that somebody else is. There are no corporate or business contributions and it has been suggested by Cm Staley that we include labor organizations which Cm Miller feels is a good addition: 6) that there be no contributions, expenditures, or contracts, after the 10th day before the election so there is a complete disclosure of everything before the election takes place and the public knows of everything that will be expended and where the money came from. This means there will be no expensive "last minute" smears a couple of days before the election. 7) the candidate is not penalized if somebody spends money without his knowledge - this should edeter the phoney committee. 8) failure to file properly before the election or after the election will dis- qualify a candidate from office. These provisions may appear to be tough but they do exist in other cities. Since the candidates will know of all of this in advance they will have to be sure that there is no inadvertent failure to file. If they have to duplicate records or whatever, they can do so but they can't claim that they didn't know what was expected of them. Cm Miller stated that, in fact, he will ask that the City Clerk provide each candidate with a copy of the ordinance and a summary to show the provisions and penalties, at the time of final filing so there will be no question about what is required. He stated that the issue here is that in order for all of the pro- visions to apply for the next election, it must be adopted as an urgency ordinance this evening and requires four supporting votes. If the Councilmembers are dissatisfied with one section or another that portion would have to be deleted unless there are four votes. Cm Miller suggested reviewing the ordinance, page by page, discuss- ing the various amendments. Beginning with Page 1, he suggested an addition of the following wording: CM-3l-l34 December 1, 1975 (Proposed Muni. Code Amend. re Election Cam- paign Contributions, etc.) In order that all candidates be fully aware of the provisions and penalties of this article, the City Clerk shall provide to each candidate, at the time he files his nomination papers, a copy of this arti- cle together with a summary of its provisions and penalties, including the dates for filing disclosure statements. The Council concurred with this additional wording. Cm Turner suggested that the candidate sign an evidence of receipt of the abovementioned material. The City Attorney explained that the Council is amending the ordinance rather substantially and he would suggest that if the Council wishes to adopt it that it be introduced this evening and final adoption next week. The law requires that the ordinance to be adopted is to be in writing before the Council at the time it is adopted. It cannot be amended page by page. If there are to be amendments to any great extent he would have to advise that the Council not adopt it until next week. It was noted that candidates may file beginning December 4th and the next Council meeting will not take place until December 8th and it is necessary to adopt the ordinance prior to the date papers are taken out by candidates. Cm Miller suggested that if the Council wishes to adopt a resolution with the amendments suggested an adjourned meeting could take place prior to December 4th, for adoption of the ordinance. Cm Staley suggested that all the wording be discussed this evening and the ordinance can be adopted at an adjourned meeting. This ordinance could become effective the date it is adopted because it is an urgency ordinance. Cm Miller reviewed the other proposed changes with the Council beginning with Page 2. (d), as follows: (d) Committee means (1) a committee, person, or group of persons organized......etc. (d) (2) any committee, person, or group of persons aiding directly or indirectly.......etc. (e) Contribution means a payment, gift, subscription, pur- chase, assessment, contract, payment for services, dues, advance, legally enforceable, to or on behalf of a candidate, committee.....etc. Page 3, has to do with furnishing services, etc. and Mayor Futch expressed concern that a candidate may not know if he is violating the law with respect to services. For instance, he may ask someone to help paint signs and possibly someone painting signs for him did professional painting in the past and is now employed at a different type of occupation. Cw Tirsell asked what the advantage would be in having the amend- ment relative to the services. Cm Miller stated that if a professional sign painter volunteers to do sign painting it is equivalent to a very large amount of money. He would argue that placing "services" in this category CM-31-135 December 1, 1975 (Proposed Muni. Code Amend. re Election Campaign Contributions, etc.) is that "services" is in the state statute and the state statute already requires that services be given a value. The only dif- ference is that a reported minimum contribution is lower because these are local elections and this is the only difference. Many other cities have "services" included in their contribution reporting. Cw Tirsell stated that she would have to agree with what Cm Miller has said because essentially one could construct a professional campaign without any cost to the candidate. She added that at the time she was a candidate she had friends that offered~.dl- do signs for her and this was a very large savings. She have been required to include this in her campaign report.~~~~ , ern Miller stated that the point of this issue is that the ordi- nance is spelled out so that these are in the summary. Anybody who is a campaign treasurer or organizer knows that this is one of the things that has to be reported and they have to watch out for certain things, everyone will have adequate notice. The Council concurred that the following wording should be included on Page 3, beginning with the third paragaph to read as follows: The term "contribution" shall include goods, materials, services, facilities or anything of value other than money contributed or expended, and the monetary value thereof shall be the fair market value; provided, however, it shall not be necessary to establish a monetary value for truly volunteer activities in other than the volunteer's pro- fessional or customary occupational field and the furnish- ing of insignificant goods, materials, and facilities of a de minimum nature (e.g., coffee and cake or the use of private homes on behalf of a candidate) . -- Fourth paragraph, Page 3, should read as follows: The term "contribution" shall not include loans except forgiveness of loans or payment of loans by a third party required to be reported by subdivision (i) of Section 11518 of the California Elections Code, or amendments thereto. The term "contribution" shall not include the payments made by an individual for his own travel expenses...etc. There was discussion concerning the amount of contribution to be reported and Cw Tirsell stated that her treasurer went to more work to separate those who contributed over a certain amount from those who contributed less. She felt it is easier al the way around to report all contributions because all of ave to be noted by the treasurer anyway. Cm Miller and Cm urner concurred. ern Staley stated that he believes the ordinance is designed to limit campaign spending and that it is reasonable to require disclosure of amounts that are contributed to a candidate which are so great as to bring in potential conflict of interest situations. On the other hand, the suggestion that the general public is entitled to know the name of anybody who gives a penny to any candidate is going further than he is willing to go. This is almost as bad as saying that someone is not entitled to a secret vote and if anyone gives any contribution to a candidate his name and support becomes public property. He stated that $5 can, in no way, be construed as influencing a candidate and on that basis will not support lower- ing of the $5 limit. He would support the ordinance as it stands at $5. Clvl-31-136 December 1, 1975 (Campaign Contributions) Mayor Futch stated that he agrees with what Cm Staley has said. Page 4, relative to the dollar amount will remain $5 rather than $1 as proposed by Cm Miller. Cw Tirsell stated that this amount really caused her treasurer a lot of work and Mayor Futch stated that this is not necessary because any amount can be reported, it is just not required that anything under $5 be reported. Cm Turner stated that the point is, the treasurer has to keep track of anything that comes in, according to the law, and there is no reason ,the records can't be made public. Cm Staley stated it is true the treasurer can report anything he wants to, but this is a matter of principle and people should be allowed their rights as private citizens. Cm Miller stated that the whole concept of disclosure is that disclosure be total. Every name and amount should be reported. Discussion followed concerning Section 2.50.1, Independent Organiza- tions, Page 5. Cm Staley stated that he believes contributions should be limited to individuals. There is no need, in a municipal election, for any organized group of people to make a contribution and this is the type of thing that sways a candidate and allows large amounts of money to be donated to campaigns of favored people. He would suggest that campaign contributions be limited to individual people and individual names and contributions by any group or fictitious entities should be prohibited. Cm Miller stated that what Cm Staley has said is a good point but the ordinance says that any committee must disclose - all committees and committee members must report what they contribute. The groups that are difficult to control are the labor unions and the business organizations, but there are provisions on the next page or the page after that to prohibit labor contributions, etc. He believes that Cm Staley's concerns will be taken care of in the ordinance with the present wording. Discussion followed concerning Section 2.50, Anonymous Contributions. Cm Miller stated that with respect to a contribution to a "kitty", if there is a kitty in which people dump in $5 there name is to be associated with the contribution. If there are no names asso- ciated with the contributions they are not given in the report and deemed to be an anonymous contribution and anonymous contribu- tions go to the City treasury. Section 2.50, Anonymous contributions, last sentence should read: Any contribution to a "kitty" for which the report required by Section 2.49(g) (1) cannot be made shall be deemed an anonymous contribution. Cw Tirsell stated that she believes she sees a loophole in this wording. A candidate could sell 8,000 tickets, for example, and place them in the "kitty" as anonymous contributions. Cm Turner stated that even though you do not report such contribu- tions, as far as the treasurer's official records there has to be some name associated with that donation before it can be accepted. CM-3l-l37 December 1, 1975 (Campaign Contributions) Cw Tirsell stated that for the candidate's own bookkeeping pur- poses maybe, but not for disclosure purposes. Cm Turner suggested to Cm Staley that he might want to reconsider his position, and Cm Staley stated that he had considered it and he was about to suggest an amendment. For the legitimate pur- poses of the ordinance, he felt if you put a percentage on the amount of contribution of $5.00 or less - 10% of the gross rate or something like that - and it exceeds that, then they would have to disclose the name. Cm Turner and Cw Tirsell both felt that would be too complicated, and Cm Staley agreed it might be a problem, but not sufficient to make him change his mind. Cw Tirsell stated you have to raise money somehow and a person could buy a hundred $4.00 tickets and give a $400 contribution that would not have to be reported and Cm Staley stated he would be very happy to go along with a limitation on anonymous contri- butions or contributions of less than $5.00, but was just not willing to presume that will happen, but he was told that it has happened. Mayor Futch referred to a clause in the ordinance that limited the number of tickets for fund raising events, and asked if that did not take care of the matter, but Cm Miller stated that it did not as someone could buy a hundred $4.00, report two of them and then resell them to others. Cm Turner stated that the ticket situation is a real issue and can be exploited and there definitely is a loophole. He continued that he could see no basis for the argument that there should be some privacy for donations of under $5.00. This point was further discussed and Cm Staley stated they could require a record of all doners, because a ticket is not really a contribution, or doesn't have to be a contribution. It can be a raffle and all tickets sold would require a name and a person could give a candidate a small amount of money and show their support, then they are covered. His point is that if a person wants to give some money and doesn't want his name known but isn't out to evade the contri- bution statute and isn't out to influence the candidate unduly by a large amount of money and he feels that protection should be covered in the ordinance. This point was dropped at this time with the hope that Cm Staley and Mayor Futch would reconsider their position. Cm Miller offered the following changes in Sec. 2.50.1: To insert the word committee in the first line, to have the sentence read "Any committee, person, or group..." Insert committee in the 5th line of the same paragraph so that the sentence would read, "All contributions or expenditures by such committees, persons, or groups of persons..." In the 4th line after the word "authoriza- tion add "in writing". Insert the word committee in the last sentence of the section to read: .Anyone contributing money, materials, or services for or from another committee, person or persons must file the name and the other items of Section 2.49 (g) (1) for that committee person or persons." In (d) of Sec. 2.50.2 "special election fund" was changed to "General Fund". CM-3l- 138 December 1, 1975 (Campaign Contributions) em Staley suggested a change in the title of Sec. 2.50.2 to read: "Prohibition of Corporate and Business Contributions", and (a) to read as follows: "(a) Only a natural person shall payor contribute, or offer, consent, or agree to payor contribute, directly or indirectly, any money, property, free service, or other thing of value to any candidate, committee or cam- paign treasurer, or to any person for the purpose of influencing an election." Cm Miller changed the 2nd paragraph in accordance with Cm Staley's suggestion to read as follows: "Failure by any candidate or his or her treasurer to file on the 5th day before the election will disqualify that candidate for election to office, unless such report is filed on the next working day accompanied by a penalty filing charge of one hundred dollars ($100.00). No late report will be accepted without the penalty filing charge." Cm Staley explained his reasons for adding the penalty for late filing which was added. It was decided that a regular adjourned meeting should be held at 8:15 a.m. Wednesday, December 3, to further consider this campaign ordinance which is to be rewritten to incorporate the changes made this evening. ADJOURNMENT There being meeting was on December Street. no further business to come before the Council the adjourned to a regular adjourned meeting at 8:15 a.m. 3, in the City Hall conference room at 2250 First { ( ATTEST ~/~ _ a1~~ayor,~~ Livenr'nia ( t APPROVE CM-3l-l39 I Adjourned Regular Meeting of December 3, 1975 An adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was called to order at 8:25 a.m., on December 3, 1975, in the City Hall Conference Room, 2250 First Street. ROLL CALL Present: Cm Miller, Staley, Tirsell, Turner and Mayor Futch Absent: None Ck~PAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS AND EXPENDITURES The Council discussed the proposed municipal code amendment re- garding election campaign contributions and expenditures. The following changes were investigated and it was decided to incor- porate them in the draft: a) Sec. 2.49 - Definitions (h) (1) should read "The full name, complete mailing address and occupation of any person..." b) Within the draft, any place where $5.00 is listed it should be changed to $1.00 as the contribution to be reported. c) Sec. 2.5 - Filing of Verified Campaign Statement - changed to indicate "a final campaign disclosure statement declaring all contributions...." d) Add a severability clause ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER, THE ABOVE CHANGES ~mRE APPROVED BY A 4-1 VOTE WITH CM STALEY DISSENTING. Cm S~ale. to state that in his view the legitimate of these ordinanc 'mit campaign s . . 1 Y con- tributuL::i. -~-aU'es'.n~t'.irlLo..'..' ---'---'make contributions to a candidate~hat-i. vate and at some time not V10 prin- oipaI-purpQses of this ordinance. A MOTION WAS MADE BY CM MILLER TO INTRODUCE AND ADOPT THE ORDINANCE, SECONDED BY eM TURNER, AND PASSED BY 4-1 VOTE, CM STALEY DISSENT- ING. ORDINANCE NO. 875 AN URGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE V, RELATING TO CAMPAIGN STATEMENTS, OF CHAPTER 2, RELATING TO ADMINISTRATION, OF THE LIVE~ORE CITY CODE, 1959, TO REGULATE ELECTION Cfu~PAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS AND EXPENDITURES. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to corne before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 9:00 a.m. APPROVE /k4 / f!:!T ~rd C1 :erk Li ermore, Californ1a ATTEST CM-3l-l40 I em Staley wished to state that in his view the legitimate purpose of these ordinances is to limit campaign spending and identify con- tributors of such large amounts as could influence a candidate's vote. It is not right to require a complete disclosure of amounts that are not that large because it is an invasion of privacy of the individual and will have a chilling affect upon contributions to some cand~dates. Regular Meeting of December 8, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore was held on December 8, 1975, 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. MINUTES (Nov. 24, 1975) Cm Turner stated that he would like to make a correction in the correction of the minutes for the meeting of November lOth - on page 60 next to last line should indicate "depreciation" rather than "appreciation". P. 89, second from last paragraph, 3rd line from the bottom should read: disturbs him but a six acre site is very large. (Omit and) continue with - He would tend to support....etc. --- P. 94, 3rd paragraph should indicate that both Mayor Futch and Cm Turner asked whom was responsible for allowing the P.C. to believe that the property had already been subdivided..etc. P. 99, 5th paragraph, last line should read: provide transporta--. tion exclusively for people working at the Lab. CM STALEY WAS SEATED DURING CORRECTION OF THE MINUTES. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 24, WERE APPROVED AS CORRECTED. P.H. RE HOUS. & COMM. DEVELOP. ACT GRANTS Federal procedures require that a public hearing be scheduled for rece1v1ng public testimony concerning the second year grant funding under the Housing and Community Development Act. It is the City's intention that the entire three year grant will be applied to the financing cost of a new multi-service center. The estimated amount for the second year grant is $214,25l.00. Mr. Parness commented that the proposed multi-service center will require the devotion of the entire three year grant monies for realization of the structure. The first year's grant will be for planning purposes, such as architectural studies and preparation of construction plans and specifications. The City is now soliciting architectural submissions from various firms who have indicated interest in this type of work. The second year's grant allocation will be forthcoming after the first of the next fiscal year. There will be one additional year grant after that. The total amount ex- pected to be received is in excess of $600,000 and the purpose of this meeting is to hear public input as to the utilization of the grant monies. Mayor Futch opened the public hearing at this time. CM-3l-l4l December 8, 1975 (Hous. & Develop. Funds) No public testimony was offered concerning this item. ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. No Council action was required on this item. P.H. RE SIDEWALKS NEEDING REPAIR Mr. Parness explained that it has been brought to the attention of the staff that sidewalk repair is needed for several properties in the City. Most of these properties have proceeded with the repair of the sidewalks but one property will require proceeding with the statutory authority for the City to cause work to be done and the cost imposed as a property lien. A public hearing has been scheduled to receive public protest and it is recommended that at the close of the hearing a resolu- tion be adopted overriding protests and confirming the assessment. Mr. Parness explained that if the sidewalks are not repaired by the property owners a public hearing is held for the purpose of listening to any grievances or objections to the assessment of the fee for sidewalk repair. The Council can thereafter modify or confirm the assessment against the property owner and it be- comes a lien against the property. About seven have been done over the course of the past year. David Castro, 2276 Chestnut Street, stated that he has noticed the need for sidewalk repair in the business district as well as in the residential area. He added that in the area where the garbage trucks park there is no sidewalk - only a graveled area and he felt this should also be an area with a sidewalk. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Cw Tirsell suggested that the complaint by Mr. Castro be filed by him with the Public Works Department. CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT, SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Mr. Lee noted that in this case it is a matter of repair to the curbs and gutters, but the matter was spoken to, in general, in his memorandum to the Council. Cm Miller noted the resolution pertains to repair of sidewalk and it should be amended to indicate curb, gutter and sidwalk. Mr. Logan indicated that this wording could be included in the resolution. CM MILLER MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO CONFIRMING THE ASSESSEMENT FOR CURB, GUTTER AND SIDEWALK, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 25l-75 A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING REPORT OF SUPERINTENDENT OF STREETS AND CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT AGAINST REAL PROPERTY. CM-3l-l42 December 8, 1975 APPEAL RE P.C. APPROVAL OF CUP FOR LUMBER CO. (John W. Rickey) Cm Miller stated that the appeal of the approval of a CUP for a lumber company located on First Street, west of Trevarno Road, was made at his request. He stated that in reading the staff report and P.C. minutes it appears that the retail aspect of the use is very large and in his opinion it would have a negative effect on any residenti~ development across the street, contrary to the sixth finding of the -ti: " P.C. He added that he believes this would be an extension of,stri~ ~~ commercial and each one of these extensions has been allowed with the indication that it really wouldn't make much difference. Each one allowed means commercial uses all the way out to I-580 on First street. He stated that he does not believe this application would fit in and it is primarily a retail operation and that the Council cannot justify the CUP for this particular area. eM MILLER MOVED THAT THE CUP BE DENIED FOR THE 84 LUMBER COMPANY. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Mr. Musso indicated that the conditions made by the P.C. could be modified and explained that the Council can deny the appeal, approve the appeal or conditionally modify the permit. CW Tirsell stated that the persuasive argument in the P.C. minutes was that this is major bulk sale operation and not primarily a lum- ber yard nor a hardware store. Mr. Musso stated that as he recalls the discussion it was noted that the use in not a Grossmans or a Handyman but rather small retail type items like hardware, and primarily bulk sales of lumber which would not be suitable in a downtown area. Cm Miller stated that the P.C. considered denial and then they were persuaded that it was not a retail use even though the application reads retail. CM TURNER MOVED TO UPHOLD THE DECISION OF THE P.C., SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL WITH THE FOLLOWING COMMENT: Cw Tirsell stated that aside from the properties closer to town and the CS, there is really not an area in town where a use such as this could go. Mayor Futch stated that the use is specifically allowed, by ordinance, with a CUP and the P.C. has unanimously recommended that the use be allowed and he is in favor of the motion. Cm Miller stated that of course he will vote against the motion but would like to say that these are the same type of arguments that led to the commercialization of Portola and First Street out towards I-580. Mayor Futch pointed out that it is not entirely the City's fault that portola is commercial because the County allowed a lot of commercial leaving the City with no choice but to allow other property to go to commercial use. Cm Miller stated that the City did have control over each piece that the City allowed to go to commercial use and each one was justified by the one allowed before. CM TURNER CALLED FOR THE QUESTION WHICH PASSED 4-l (Cm Miller dissenting) . CM-3l-l43 December 8, 1975 REPORT RE SEVENTH STREET SIGNALIZATION The Director of Public Works reported that at the Council meeting of November 10th Cw Tirsell recommended making Seventh St. a through street with bike lanes. The staff has studied the area and concludes that this change would be of benefit to the area as well as an increase of safety for motorists and bike riders. It is recommended that this suggestion be implemented. Cw Tirsell stated that she is very happy the staff investigated the suggestion and added that she knows of many people who do use Seventh Street as a through Street from "L" to East Avenue. CW TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE STAFF BE DIRECTED TO IMPLEMENT SIGNALI- ZATION ON SEVENTH STREET FOR A THROUGH BICYCLE AND CAR ROUTE. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CM STALEY. Cm Staley asked why stop signs are suggested for the intersection of Seventh and "I", on Seventh Street and Mr. Lee indicated that one street should be a through street going north and south. Cm Staley stated that Livermore is a through street going north and south and so is "L" Street, and wondered why it would be necessary to include "I" Street, which would break up the through traffic for Seventh Street. Mr. Lee explained that the staff really doesn't want to make Seventh a collector street but they would like to make it con- venient for people. Fourth Street and College Avenue have been designed for use as collector streets for the east/west traffic. Cm Staley felt that Seventh Street is much more direct than College Avenue or Fourth Street to East Avenue and development off of Arroyo Road. He indicated that he believes the stop sign at "I" Street will discourage use of Seventh Street because it really won't be a through street. Mr. Lee stated that Seventh is going through a residential area and if there are no stop signs on it this may place an excessive burden on the home owners along Seventh Street. Also there is a jog from at the intersection of Livermore Avenue and this is one reason a great deal of traffic for Seventh Street is not encouraged. Cw Tirsell stated that the reason the through street was sug- gested is because of the number of bicycle riders who use this street as a through street from "L" to East Avenue and she is not concerned that there will be that many automobiles using Seventh Street. The bike riders feel that Seventh is a safe path and they are the primary users of the street. Mr. Lee is correct in saying that the City would not want to encourage use of this residential street for automobile traffic. Cm Staley stated that he would have to agree with what Cw Tirsell has said. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT RE "L" STREET TRAFFIC STRIPING It is recommended that the Council authorize the staff to imple- ment a striping plan as outlined in Alternate Two of the staff report. CM-3l-l44 December 8, 1975 ("L" Street Striping) CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR STRIPING OF SOUTH "L" STREET, AS OUTLINED IN ALTERNATE TWO OF THE STAFF REPORT, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT RE PROPOSED SALE OF PROPERTY TO CITY - SPRINGTOWN AREA (99-24-9-16 & 99-24-9-11) An offer has been received from a representative of an owner with 71.54 acres of land located in the Springtown area. The land abuts other property that has been reviewed for potential purchase. The item was referred to LARPD who has indicated that the land is not usable for public purposes and the staff recommends that the owner be informed that the property would be of no public utility. Mr. Parness stated that today he discussed with the staff the possi- bility of using the entire area as a regional recreation area because of the amount of land and the fact that the price would be reasonable. Mr. Musso noted that he believes this property would be compatible with the FCC site and LARPD chose the FCC site as possible surplus land in the future. CM TURNER MOVED TO DENY PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL WHICH PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. REPORT RE PARKING TIME LIMIT ENFORCEMENT A written report concerning the enforcement of parking limits was submitted to the Council. The report indicated that part of the problem with enforcement is the lack of manpower and that a recent count of unpaid traffic fines indicate that 1,150 citations were on file. Assuming that these citations would generate a fine of $5 each because they have not been paid for a period of time, the revenue due to our City would be an amount in excess of $5,500. Mayor Futch stated that the problem seems to be the assurance that the fines will be collected rather than seeing that more fines are handed out. It really doesn't make much sense to hand out twice as many fines if they aren't collected. Mr. Parness indicated that thousands of citations are handed out each year and the number listed in the report are nominal as com- pared to the number issued. Mayor Futch felt there should be more impetus on collection of the fines and Cm Miller stated that he would agree with this but also feels more fines should be given or that there be more enforcement of the parking regulations. CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE REPORT BE REFFERED TO THE MUNICIPAL COURT, SECONDED BY CM STALEY FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES. Cm Turner stated that the report from the City Manager points out that the judge establishes the fine structure and we would want his comments prior to discussion by the Council. Cm Staley stated that he spoke with Judge Lewis about this matter and one of his concerns was the ability of the Court personnel to effectively service collection of the fines. Chief Lindgren's CM-31-145 December 8, 1975 (re Parking Fines) letter indicates that there is no advantage to the City in terms of the parking fines collection being a function of the City. Cm Staley would agree that this is obviously true because it will take more manpower and time to enforce parking regulations and to collect the fines. However, he is not sure how open this op- tion is to the City - not to move towards collection of parking fines. Mr. Parness stated that he believes Chief Lindgren was indicating the option the City might have to require that the actual, physical, collection be done in some City office. If someone wants to pay a fine they could pay it at the Finance Department, for example, rather than the court, and Chief Lindgren is indicating that no purpose would be served in doing that. As to the collection of unpaid fines, this is another matter. The court used to do this for the City but it no longer provides this service because it requires personnel time to try to effectuate collection. Cm Staley stated that he believes that Judge Lewis was pointing out that the court does not have the manpower to follow up on the fines and that it is probably a police function and not a court function, and that most cities have their own collection procedure and do not use court personnel to collect parking ticket fines. Cm Staley added that it was his impression that what Judge Lewis was saying was that the collection of the parking fines is a burden on the court personnel and that the City look into taking over that function. Cm Miller noted that this is also a burden on the City. Cm Staley stated that this is true but the City is receiving 100% of the amount collected from the fines and so what is happening is that the court personnel is collecting the fines and the City is getting the benefit and while Cm Staley feels this method is good he can also see the Judge's point of view. Mr. Parness commented that the financial problem the City is faced with in the collection of the overdue fines is that it probably costs the City about five times the amount of the fine to pay someone, such as a police officer, to collect the fine. Cm Staley stated that after reviewing all the information pre- sented to the Council he believes there should not be an increase in the parking fine but some consideration should be given as to how the fines can be collected. For the time being he would sug- gest that no action be taken. Cm Miller stated that he will vote against the motion because the Judge has, effectively, asked the Council for a recommendation and Cm Miller feels it is not necessary to refer the matter back to him. Secondly, he does not agree with Cm Staley that the $2 fine is sufficient. The fine was established many years ago and the cost of collection and operation has risen with the value of the dollar having gone down during that time period. In terms of inflation, alone, one can justify an increase to an amount of $3 or $4 rather than $2 for parking violations. Since the Judge sets the amount he would suggest a motion requestion a $3 to $4 parking fine. Cm Staley pointed out that the Council should consider whether there is a desire to raise money from parking fines as a source of revenue, or whether the purpose is to encourage circulation. If the purpose is to encourage circulation then the $2 should be sufficient. CM-31-146 December 8, 1975 (re Parking Fines) Cm Miller stated that the City should have both the revenue from the fines as well as circulation of parked cars. The Police Department is paid, in part, from these parking fines and the fact that the fine is only $2 hurts everyone at budget time. The revenue aspect of this is important, as is the deterrent effect. Cw Tirse11 and Cm Turner indicated that they are not prepared to raise the parking fee at this time. Cw Tirse11 stated that she does not want to impose another "hidden tax" on citizens who inadver- tently park longer than the limit for the downtown area. She added that she realizes the fines are a source of revenue for the City but it should not be used as a major source of funding for the Police Department. The $2 amount should be ample for penalizing someone who parks overtime. Cm Miller stated that the suggestion to leave things as they are is costing the City the amount of one policeman. The fine structure is currently $2 and the City receives approximately $50,000 worth of fines. A $3 fee would be a very substantial increase in revenue to the City. It is unwise to allow this source of revenue to decline. Cm Staley stated that a lot of the points made by Cm Miller have been very good but he would suggest that since the City has recently approv- ed an additional man for the Police Department for enforcement of the parking regulations, perhaps this item could be postponed for a couple of months to evaluate the effectiveness of enforcement. Cm Miller stated that the budget session will be coming up and he is sure the City Manager will indicate that money will be very tight. The City will be lucky if there are any reserves, at all, and this is the time the Council should think about where money to run the City will come from. There is not an infinite number of sources from which money can be derrived but this is one of them. This is an important source of revenue to the City in the order of about 3~ to 4~ on our property tax rate. Cm Turner stated that he cannot understand the rationale Cm Miller is using when he wants to raise the parking fine as a source of revenue when he just voted this evening against a CUP to allow the 84 Lumber Company to do business on First Street because this is also a source of revenue to the City. ~I f!5{(&~-" Cm Miller stated that h~~~',no objection to a lumber yard but his objection was to s~ommercia1 on First Street and that the lumber yard should be located elsewhere in the City. Objec- tion to a location is not an objection to a business - there is a very large difference. David Castro commented that people don't mind paying a $2 parking fine and he would suggest that the fee be raised. He stated that he has paid $5 on two occasions for a parking fine and with the increase in the cost of living a $5 fine is not unreasonable. Back in 1936 a friend of his paid a parking fine of $2.50. MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Cm Miller dissenting) . REPORT RE LAVWMA PAYMENT A formal request has been received from LAVWMA for payment of $53,590 in accordance with the applicable budget allotment - Joint Powers Agreement to implement a Regional Water Quality Management System (LAVWMA pipeline). It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing payment of the funds to LAVWMA. CM-31-147 December 8, 1975 (LAVWMA's Request for Funds) CM TURNER MOVED TO AUTHORIZE PAYMENT OF THE FUNDS, AS REQUESTED, SECONDED BY MAYOR FUTCH. Cm Miller stated that he will oppose the motion because it re- quires the City to put up our money because the EPA and the state will not pay their bills. In his opinion it is not the City's job to impair our reserves because the state won't pay. The state says they will pay the 87.5% but, in fact, they do not pay. Things may come to a halt on LAVWMA if the City does not pay but that is the problem of the state and EPA. We do not have $50,000 lying around and our reserves are very low. Cm Turner asked if Cm Miller is convinced that the state is not going to pay and Cm Miller replied that they will pay in time but the point is the City of Livermore will have a severe cash flow problem if we pay it now because the state doesn't want to do what they are supposed to do. Mayor Futch stated that he believes this is a question of policy and whether or not the City wants to inform the state that it will not fund the cash for a year and lose the interest on it. em Miller added that if, in fact, we even have the money. Cw Tirse11 stated that this is a state and federally mandated agency and the study has been expanded many times because of things they have required of the City and now they are asking the City to fund the cash for it. They can keep their money in the bank and collect the interest. She would suggest that when they pay the City will pay. MOTION WAS WITHDRAWN, SECOND WAS WITHDRAWN. CM MILLER MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO SEND A LETTER TO LAVWMA SAYING THAT THE CITY FEELS THE REQUEST FOR PAYMENT FROM LAVWMA CANNOT BE MADE BECAUSE THIS IS A FAILURE OF THE STATE AND EPA TO PROPERLY AMEND AND PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE ON OUR CONTRACT. MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cm Miller stated that he does not object to wording changes for the motion if the Counci1members would like to suggest alternate wording. Mayor Futch stated that he would like the motion to indicate that the Council feels the City cannot afford the cash flow, and let it go at that. The City is very short of funds. Cw Tirse11 stated that she believes a matter of equity and pOlicy is involved. If the state can get the cities and VCSD to run the agency on their cash and then contribute at the end, after they have had the interest accumulate for 3-5 years, it appears that this is what they have in mind. Cw Tirse11 stated that if she reads the contract correctly the City is paying ahead all the time. Services are not paid for after they have been rendered. She stated that she would like to see a simple statement to the effect that it is our policy that we are in this agreement, jointly, and it is a mandated agency. Upon receiving their funds ours will be immediately forthcoming. She stated that she does not believe that the City does not have the funds and this should not be implied. Cm Miller felt it would be reasonable to add that our re- serves are very low and Cw Tirse1l concurred. CM-31-148 December 8, 1975 (LAVWMA's Request for Funds) Mr. Parness commented that this is not uncommon practice with the state and EPA. The City has always had to administer the grant monies with reimbursement after the monies have been expended. LAVWMA is asking for our participation because it is a division of the responsibility among the three signatories to the joint powers agreement. In the event that we do not pay, he would suspect that one or both of the remaining three will have to pay. The obligation has already been made for the expenditure and probably has been encum- bered. Somebody is going to have to pay it and once the services have been received, certified claims will be filed to enable the City to recover the funds. Cm Miller stated that the point is, they have not amended the contract to insure that the City will ultimately be reimbursed. There is no guarantee, except orally, that they will even go along with this. Cm Turner stated that he understands that the state will not reimburse the City immediately and in the resolution it indicates that the City will have to file a claim after the money has been expended. However, Cw Tirse11 mentioned a period of time of four or five years and he wondered how this was determined. Cw Tirse11 explained that she doesn't have any idea how long it will be before the City would be reimbursed because the City hasn't re- ceived anything in writing. Mr. Parness requested that the Council postpone this item until he has the opportunity to speak with the BASSA staff. There is a clear inference in the resolution that there have been written assurances received by virtue of a contract dated May 3, for a $223,000 alloca- tion and yet further on it states that they have not received any assurance that the contract will be amended. There seems to be a bit of a contradiction involved and he would like to speak to someone about it prior to a decision by the Council. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE ITEM WAS CONTINUED. CONSENT CALENDAR Res. re Ballot Measure Wording for Tax Override A resolution was prepared by the staff incorporating the wording agreed to previously by the Council concerning the ballot measure wording for the tax override for police and fire protection. Cw Tirse11 wondered if the measure is graphically depicted as it will appear on the ballot - the "yes" has a small square and the "no" has a large square. She indicated that this has a psychological affect. The City Clerk noted that the voting squares will be of equal size for both the "yes" and the "no" vote. RESOLUTION NO. 252-75 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 ELECTION TO BE HELD AND CONDUCTED IN THE CITY OF LIVERMORE ON MARCH 2, 1976. CM-31-149 December 8, 1975 Minutes - Various The following minutes were received: Beautification Committee - October 1 Housing Authority - October 21 Cm Turner commented that in the Housing Authority minutes there is mention that "junk cars" cannot be removed from a street until the street has been dedicated to the City. Cm Turner has checked with the Police Department and found out that they can be removed and would suggest that the Housing Authority contact the Police Department concerning problems of this nature. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED WITH REMOVAL OF ITEM 5.1, RELATIVE TO THE P.C. SUMMARY OF ACTION TAKEN AT THEIR MEETING OF DECEMBER 2. DISCUSSION RE P.C. SUMMARY OF ACTION Cm Miller stated that he is surprised to see that the P.C. con- ditionally approved what appears to be an application for whole- sale variances in Tract 3607 and requested that this item be appealed by the Council. Cw Tirse11 stated that she is also concerned about this item and would like to see it appealed. Mr. Musso explained, briefly, that approval was given primarily because it was a subdivision approved during the course of amend- ment to the RS. The P.C. allowed a variance to allow regulations that were in effect at the time the subdivision was approved. He added that this has been a custom over the years. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF AND COUNCILMEMBERS (League Alternate Rep.) Cm Turner stated that the League of California Cities East Bay Division has requested an alternate representative. Cm Turner is the representative and Cm Staley offered to be the alternate representative. Cm Turner indicated that he would not be able to attend the League meeting of December 18th and asked that Cm Staley attend as alternate representative and that the staff inform Shirley Sisk, the president, of the selection of Cm Staley as the alter- nate representative. (Recycling & Garbage Separation program) Cm Miller stated that he received a note from Herb Newkirk con- cerning his inquiry to people in Oregon about a recycling and garbage separation program. One of the articles Mr. Newkirk received in response to his inquiry was very interesting and Cm Miller requested that the information be copied by the staff and distributed to the other Counci1members. CM-31-150 December 8, 1975 (Wine Bottle Labels) Cm Staley stated that the staff was to report back to the Council concerning the possibility of special labeling for bottles of wine from local wineries for visiting dignitaries and he wondered if the staff has received any information. Mr. Parness commented that he has asked the wineries about this possibility but has received no word. He will check again. (Health Council) Cw Tirse11 stated that she and Cm Turner will be attending the meeting of the Alameda Comprehensive Health Council on Wednesday, December 10th. If the Council has any input they would like con- veyed in the way of testimony, they should let them know before this date. Cw Tirse11 added that it would be helpful to have a written state- ment concerning the Council's resolution on growth for Livermore as well as the letter from P1easanton on their resolution for 2 percent growth to be taken as official documents. (BASSA Hearing re Mgmt. Agency for Water Management Plan) Mayor Futch stated that BASSA held a pUblic hearing concerning which agency should implement the Water Quality Management Plan for the Alameda Creek Watershed above Niles. ~i1a Euler spoke in support of LAVWMA and did a beautiful job in pre- senting the case for the City to LAVWMA. Zone 7 was asked to submit additional information indicating its financing ability for treatment and disposal works. Trustee Boland noted that such information had already been received from LAVWMA. Mayor Futch suggested that a letter be sent to Lila Euler commending her for her presentation and testimony. Mayor Futch added that he believes there is a communication gap with Zone 7. The City is very concerned because we don't know what their policy would be if they were in the position of being able to imple- ment sewage resources adjacent to our boundaries. The power to pro- vide these utilities is the power to implement a land use decision by an agency that does not have any land use planning ability or power. In other words, this would be the power to destroy the City's planning efforts if they would decide upon land uses contrary to those planned by the City. Perhaps it would be reasonable to ask Zone 7 what their policy is regarding service of utilities that would be in an area adjacent to our boundaries. Cw Tirse11 suggested that they be asked about their policy concern- ing building facilities, in general. MAYOR FUTCH MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO SEND A LETTER TO MRS. EULER COMMENDING HER FOR HER PRESENTATION TO BASSA AND ALSO A LETTER TO ZONE 7 CONCERNING THEIR POLICY, AS MENTIONED ABOVE. MOTION SECONDED BY CM MILLER. Cm Turner wondered if this is a matter of urgency or if the staff could be directed to prepare a draft letter for review by the Council. CM-31-151 December 8, 1975 (re Water Mgmt. Agency) Cm Miller felt there would be merit in acting as fast as possible because Zone 7 has been asked by BASSA about their sewer authority and if Zone 7 proposes to push sewer authority, this is something the people of the Valley should know. People need to know what the Board of Directors is going to do. If Zone 7 is not going to have sewer authority then their position for being a lead agency in water management is weakened. It was noted by Cm Turner that unless this is an urgency matter, Council policy should be followed and this should be an agenda item for action by the Council. The item was postponed and will appear as an agenda item. How- ever, the letter to Mrs. Euler will be prepared and sent by the staff. (ABAG Planning Meeting) Mr. Musso noted that the ABAG Planning Committee meeting will take place Wednesday at 3:00 p.m. and Cw Tirse11 indicated that she will be able to attend the meeting. Cm Miller noted that it should be pointed out that the lack of a General Plan is being used against the City. Mr. Logan commented that a letter was sent from his office indi- cating to ABAG that we have no information which would lead us to believe that specific plans will be available for comparison with respect to Las Positas. He did receive a reply and if Cw Tirse11 would like to have this information prior to the meeting it will be available to her. Mayor Futch asked if the City Attorney could briefly paraphrase what the comment was and Mr. Logan indicated that basically the response was that they did not know what the situation was and if the City would like to appear and bring them up-to-date on the situation they would willingly hear what the City has to say. (Location of Alameda County Offices) Cm Staley stated that he appeared before the Alameda County Board of Supervisors concerning the location of the County Government Center. However he had been advised by Supervisor Cooper that a formal presentation would not be necessary because the decision on this item would be postponed. The item was continued until after the first of the year as to where the site should be located. Cm staley requested that the Board notify him of the meeting date they plan to discuss this item, with the intent that he will pre- sent formal testimony. (Arroyo Bikeway) Mayor Futch stated that he has seen the bikeway along the arroyo and commended the Public Works Department for the nice path. It doesn't go to the end of the property behind the college site and wondered why it didn't even go as far as the college. Mr. Lee explained that the City ran short of funds and that the path was continued under the Holmes Street bridge which was not planned originally, as well as the crossing to the Granada High School. CM-31-152 December 8, 1975 (Arroyo Bikeway) Mayor Futch noted that the path under the bridge is not useab1e because it is flooded and would like to discuss a solution. Mr. Lee stated that when the heavy rains are over with the Public Works Department will take care of draining the water and the path will be good for the summer. Mayor Futch stated that he would like the staff to come up with a more permanent solution to the drainage problem. This is a safe way for bicyclists to cross a very heavily traveled street and it is a shame that the path under the bridge cannot be used. ORD. RE SEWER CAPACITY ALLOCATION The City Attorney explained that at the beginning of the ordinance relative to the amendment to allow sewer capacity allocation, the Council should note there are several findings. This is a legislative act and findings are not really necessary but in this case there are a lot of justifiable re'asons for the Council's actions. Over the past year all of the matters pertaining to the various findings have come before the Council one way or another - either through the General Plan amendment or reports from the staff. The findings, in the view of the City Attorney, are all legitimate and made to reflect the evidence concerning the situation. The City Attorney requested that if the Council agrees with the findings that they be adopted as they are. If the Council does not agree, amendments should be made at this point in time. Cm Miller stated that on Page 3 of the Ordinance, he had suggested specifying 80% for industrial/commercial, 10% for new residential and 10% for low or moderate income residential development. This is in Section 18.19.3. Cm Futch stated that his feeling is that the General Plan calls for a population of 80,000 and 10% would not really be inconsistent. He stated that the mitigating measures may take care of the develop- ment but he would rather not set it for as low as 10% for both new development and low to moderate income housing. Cm Miller stated that it was his understanding that the Council had voted to delete the entire portion that had to do with the sewer plant expansion so that the City would not have to be specific about what it would do after expansion. Cm Staley stated that he had made that motion based on various things. In the first place, the Council does not really know what conditions will prevail at the time the expansion is being done. Secondly, he suggested that with respect to the commercial/industrial development, the Council is setting a percentage without any real knowledge of the source of commercial and industrial expansion capabilities. These were the concerns he expressed before. Mayor Futch stated that the Ordinance recognizes that there should be a significant fraction of the expansion allocated to industrial and commercial development. In addition, the Council recognizes that it must be consistent with the mitigating measures. MAYOR FUTCH MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE WITH THE SUGGESTED WORDING CHANGES PROVIDED ON A SEPARATE SHEET, INCLUDING THE FINDINGS THAT HAVE BEEN SUGGESTED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. CM-31-153 December 8, 1975 (Ordinance re Sewer Capacity Allocation) The City Attorney explained that his suggestion was made for a specific reason. It is reflective of the General Plan policies. He added that the ordinance can be changed at any time to reflect the needs of the community. Mayor Futch stated that the wording he has suggested on the separate sheet was done with the intent of limiting any problem the City might have in proposing mitigating measures, with re- spect to the percentages. em Staley stated that he would like to know how much commercial and industrial development is being provided for, relative to the 2.45 MGD. We have already reserved a significant portion of our remaining capacity. The Counci1members indicated that very little is being reserved - only 40,000 gallons. One industry could use all of the reserve. em Staley stated that in the City's calculations the Shaheen Industrial Park and the Sears warehouse were included before anything else was reserved. Cm Miller noted that these properties would use a very small amount of the sewage. em Staley stated that he does not disagree with reservation of sewer capacity but what he is saying is that when the City first set the amount remaining, included in the committed was a sig- nificant amount of commercial and industrial that has not yet been developed. Cw Tirse11 commented that speaking, practically, there are only 40,000 gallons that can go towards the industrial/commercial because all the committed residential would use far more than the 45%. Practically speaking the City can reserve only 40,000 gallons extra. It is probable that the residential uses will be realized prior to industrial/commercial uses and will use the entire re- maining capacity with the exception of the 40,000 gallons which has not been committed. Cw Tirse11 added that it would be very nice if the City knew what uses would come to Livermore but there is no way of knowing. If an industry such as Intel were to come to Livermore it could use 50,000 gallons. On the other hand the City may get a ware- house that would use only 70 gallons a day. Cw Tirse11 noted that the City went to the state and told them that as a mitigating measure and in order to acquire a grant that residential development would be allowed under such a grant with the mitigating measure that some of the grant would be reserved for industrial and commercial development. Hopefully there would be industry for residential development to convert them to local uses. The Air Resources Board was very interested in that proposal and they have to approve the grants. They will not allow expansion grants in critical air basins and we have been turned down twice. Mayor Futch noted that if uses come in that use a lot of water two or three industries of this type could use all of the capacity available after expansion, or the 450,000 the City intends to reserve for ~his purpose. Cw Tirsell mentioned that it should also be pointed out that a City will receive only one grant - this grant may have to suffice for the life of the General Plan. CM-31-154 December 8, 1975 (Ordinance re Sewer Capacity Allocation) Cm Miller stated that a 10% reservation for low income housing is equal to 40,000 gallons per day and he asked what figure is used for industrial. He explained that at the time the Council discus- sed allocation there were 400,000 gallons and that 10% of this (40,000 gallons) was to be used for low income housing. Mayor Futch stated that as he recalls there was 400,000 gallons but after deducting the committed number of hook-ups there was 40,000 gallons left with 4,000 gallons available for low income housing (10%). Cm Miller stated that he understands what was done and this means that there are approximately 36,000 gallons available for indus- trial and commercial development. em Miller stated that he wants to take the position of not taking a position, or one which would limit the residential development. Mayor Futch has talked about the mitigating measures but there is no conceivable way the City can make up, by mitigating measures, the increase in population. Cm Miller commented that going back to his original argument, the LAVWMA EIS says that if Livermore intends to meet the Federal Air Quality Standards there can be only half the population Livermore presently has. If any population is added it just makes it impos- sible for any successful mitigating measure to bring us to the federal air quality. This means that the successful mitigating measure is the use of the industrial and commercial development to convert existing commuters to local job holders. In that case the City should reserve everything possible, with the exception of that really needed for social services such as low income housing in the Valley, for industrial and commercial development. The automatic assumption is that there is a need for an additional 1 MGD but there is justifi- cation for only .5 MGD for commercial and industrial. The other .5 MGD would then have to go for residential development if there was a 1 MGD expansion and yet residential development is directly contrary to what the City is trying to accomplish. What the City wants to do is to let commercial and industrial development take the residents who are commuting to jobs outside of the Valley, and give them jobs locally. The City cannot devote half of its sewage capacity to residential and come anywhere near making the mitigating factors. It would seem that either the City should not say anything at all about the expansion, as Cm Staley suggested, or do not offer that 45% be reserved for residential development. To be consistent with the mitigating measures, no residential development can be allowed at all. Mayor Futch stated that he understands the point Cm Miller is trying to make but he still believes that this would be inconsistent with the General Plan. Cm Miller noted that the General Plan has not yet been adopted. em Turner asked Mr. Lee about the application and Mr. Lee explained that the application is for a position on the priority list since the staff of the Regional Board will be making up a recommendation list to be presented to the State Board. A draft of the list and the recommendation will be received in approximately a week for comment. Cm Turner stated that the point is he would agree with Cm Staley that no figures should be specified. As he recalls, after many hours of discussion the Council agreed to a 1 MGD expansion. He CM-31-155 December 8, 1975 (Ordinance re Sewer Capacity Allocation) noted that this was not his position because he wanted a larger expansion and it wasn't Cm Miller's position because he argued for less expansion. He added that his concern now is that it has been mentioned that we will be allowed only one application for expansion and also that two or three large industries could take all of the 1 MGD. Mayor Futch explained that one application takes care of 20 years of growth which means that in 20 years another application can be submitted. Cm Turner stated that he understands this but his concern is that perhaps the 1 MGD expansion will not take care of the needs expressed in the General Plan. In his opinion it would not. The City doesn't know what demands will have to be met and he would suggest that percentages not be specified. Cw Tirsel1 stated that what Cm Turner is saying, then, is that there should be no reservation for commerce and industry. em Turner stated that he is concerned about this also. Cw Tirse11 stated that the City already went to the state and they said that some percentage has to be established. Cm Turner stated that if the State Board indicated something has to be specified for reservation of commercial/industrial development he would have to go along. Cw Tirsel1 pointed out that the Council is working with facts of today and that the ordinance can always be amended if the facts change. Everyone should understand what the application is for. This is one application for the General Plan and she asked Mr. Lee what figure is used for determining daily usage for residential. Mr. Lee indicated that roughly it is about 360 gallons per day per residence. Cw Tirsel1 stated that our General Plan says there will not be much development south of I-580 except for fill in and it also says that the City will develop on the north side. If that community is allowed, for the next 20 years, to sit there with 3,000-4,000 people fragmented, everyone of those people has to get in their car to get milk or do shopping of any type. Also this is not a socially viable community and there is no sense of community. It would seem that a reserva- tion that would allow a certain amount of residential use will not violate the principle of the General Plan. The principle is that when and if we grow, it will be in that area with hopes of making it a viable community. She believes that there is a problem in not showing the intent of the Council. There is no doubt that each future Council will look at this ordi- nance and rework the figures to suit it. They will not be able to rework the figures past what the grant says and for this reason she believes that what Mayor Futch has said is important. Whatever is written into that grant that we must do as a mitigating measure, we will agree to. The sense of this is that the Council is reserving our current capacity and to the best of their knowledge believes this might be a balance to achieve a viable community on the north side and to cut down the commuting that those people do every single day back and forth to downtown Livermore and to Dublin. There are advantages CM-31-156 December 8, 1975 (Ordinance re Sewer Capacity Allocation) to making the north side a viable community that will help them cut down the amount of air pollution. She believes that the statement suggested merely reflects what this Council worked on and she agrees that the Council does not have a crystal ball by which they can make decisions but the numbers specified are those felt to be reasonable with present facts. em Staley stated that he would like to offer an alternative that does not specify figures. It would seem that the City would like to do things by the reservation of sewer capacity. He would suggest athat a statement be included with the following wording: No connection to the sewer service system shall be made unless the City determines that the connection applied for is anyone of the following: Cm Staley stated that it seems there could be wording in such a way that no connection could be approved if it exceeded the growth rate provided for in the General Plan, which would basically be a reservation of not more than the 45,000 gallons per day. This does not necessarily mean that 45,000 is being reserved. Secondly, the Council could make a requirement that any sewer appli- cation require a finding of fact that such use would be consistent with the mitigating measures proposed in the City's application for additional sewer capacity. This does not reserve specific capacity but Cm Staley believes this would accomplish the two objectives. Mayor Futch stated that he would like the City Attorney to comment as to whether or not he felt the numbers should be included in the ordinance and if so, why. The City Attorney stated that the numbers can change according to what is done with the General Plan. In his opinion there has to be something in the ordinance to handle the contingency that the City will receive additional sewage cap~city. If the Council wants to delete this completely he would advise that something be included to allow the Council some control if, in fact, another increase of expansion is granted. As far as the 45-45-10%, this is a reflection of what he has seen in the proposed General Plan and if the Council does not follow this as a policy of the General Plan there would be an affect on this particular ordinance. If, however, the policy of the General Plan is followed, and the ordinance is different, then there is a problem. At present, as long as the figure is flexible he would remain flexible. If, the Council adopts the General Plan without flexible figures and figures not consistent with the ordinance, he would withdraw his support. Mayor Futch stated that he would like a comment, specifically, to the three proposals suggested by Cm Miller, Cm Staley and himself. If there is no residential provided for, would it be inconsistent with the General Plan? The City Attorney replied that it would be inconsistent only if the Council adopts a General Plan with a policy different than what is provided for in the ordinance. At present the proposed policy in the General Plan shows a 45-45-10% reservation. If a policy is adopted that is 90% industrial/commercial and 10% low income then it would be consistent with changing the ordinance - but only in that event. At this time the General Plan has not been adopted so the figures are flexible. CM-31-157 December 8, 1975 (Ordinance re Sewer Capacity Allocation) Mayor Futch asked if the pOlicies he has proposed would be con- sidered inconsistent with the General Plan. Mr. Logan stated that as he reads the change he doesn't see this as being inconsistent with the General Plan. He stated that he is not sure he knows the meaning of what is consistent with mitigating measures unless specific mitigating measures are used that are consistent with the ordinance. Mayor Futch explained that at this time it is not known what the state will mandate. The City Attorney stated that there is nothing in the wording prepared by Mayor Futch that would change anything. Mayor Futch stated he would assume that Cm Staley's suggestion would not be inconsistent either. The City Attorney commented that he didn't follow em Staley's recommendation that closely. Cm Staley explained that part of his suggestion was that no sewer connection for residential could be made unless the con- nection would not exceed the growth rate, as provided for in the General Plan. The City Attorney stated that this would be acceptable. em Staley noted that the other portion of his motion was that no application for sewage hook-up would be approved unless the findings of fact could be made by the approving body. Mayor Futch wondered what could be done if half of the 1 MGD was used and the City continued to grow at the 2% rate, and there was still no industry. Cm Staley stated that as he recalls, the calculations in setting the 1 MGD projected the 2% over the period of the plan. It was noted that this is not the way projections were made. Mayor Futch explained that the Council took the total capacity the EPA would fund based on population projections, and then said that we would use a significant fraction of the allocation for industry and commerce. After a certain number of years there will not be any sewage left for industry and commerce. em Turner stated that he is willing to support Cm Staley's position. Cw Tirse11 stated that her only concern is that there are many more applications for residential hook-ups than commercial or industrial with the wording suggested by Cm Staley it means that as long as there is only 2% of residential allowed a year the entire capacity could eventually go entirely for the residential development. Cm Miller stated that to get to the 80,000 population means a little more than 2.5 MGD - 11,000 additional people for 1 MGD, and this is what it takes to have this growth rate. The point Cm Futch and Cw Tirse11 have made is correct - all of it will be used for residential growth. Cm Miller stated that a portion of the wording is the best statement that can be made with respect to EPA and the State Water Board and State Air Board, which he repeated: CM-31-158 December 8, 1975 (Ordinance re Sewer Capacity Allocation) No connections shall be made unless the Council determines that the connection is consistent with mitigating measures proposed in the application for additional capacity. em Miller stated that he believes this would indicate where the City is going. He added that he does not believe that residential growth can be consistent with mitigating measures, but it is possible. If it is consistent, then fine. The point is that the intent to try to solve the air quality problem with sewers, is in em Staley's second statement. The first statement would commit every bit of sewage to go to residential and he would be happy to support the second part of the wording if it were made a motion. Cm Staley stated that it is not his intention to deny residential growth and he believes there can be residential growth that is a mitigating measure. It depends on the amount of residential growth allowed and where it is allowed, as well as a lot of other conditions. There are real needs to fill and he believes that under certain circumstances this can be a mitigating measure. Cm Staley stated that furtheremore, he recalls that the Council took a position as to a growth rate and it would be inconsistent with our proposed General Plan if some provision is not made for residential growth. His intention in his proposed wording was that we should not allocate because we are too far away from it but on the other hand recognizes that there must be something in- cluded relative to the mitigating measures. Mayor Futch stated that the ordinance and the General Plan at this time are consistent and he would not want to go through the discussion concerning figures for the draft of the General Plan. Cm Miller noted that a public hearing will be coming up concerning the General Plan and there will have to be discussion at that time. Mayor Futch stated that he realizes this but he would not want to make changes prior to the public hearing. Cm Staley stated that, on the other hand, if the Council adopts this particular policy, at a later date the Council may say that the num- bers for the General Plan should not be changed because there is already a Sewer Ordinance that allocates it a certain way. He felt this would be putting the "cart before the horse". He believes the General Plan decision should be firmly made before the allocations and percentages are included in the ordinance. Mayor Futch asked if Cm Staley is suggesting that the adoption of the ordinance should be postponed until after the General Plan has been adopted and Cm Staley stated that he is suggesting that the future commitment be deleted from the ordinance. Cm Turner stated that it would appear three opinions are being voiced and he would like to see a vote taken on the matter. Dis- cussion could take place the rest of the night and he would like to propose a change in Section 18.19.5 (last page) to read as follows: No sewer connection shall be granted to any commer- cial or industrial use that will require more than ten percent (10%) of the total capacity allocated to such uses...........etc. CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT THIS CHANGE, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. CM-31-159 December 8, 1975 (Ordinance re Sewer Capacity Allocation) Cm Turner stated that he would like the 5% changed to 10% because every application would go before the Council for approval. Cw Tirse11 commented that Intel would not be passed, on that basis. em Miller stated that he believes the suggestion is not good be- cause the Council should try to make sure that a big water user will promote the maximum local employment. The 5% is a big user. Cw Tirse11 stated that this means the 5% would be turned down. Cm Miller stated that they would be turned down unless the Coun- cil determines that use is justified in promoting local employ- ment. This is the reason the 5% maximum is good because the City needs to look at the big water users to make sure it will really promote local employment and not just use up our sewer capacity. Mayor Futch stated that he cannot visualize the Council turning away any industrial or commercial applicant as long as there is sufficient sewer capacity. Cm Miller stated that this is great as long as it will maximize local employment. MOTION PASSED 4-l (Cm Miller dissenting) . RECESS Mayor Futch called for a brief recess after which the Council meeting resumed with all members of the Council present. Mayor Futch suggested that this item be continued. CM TURNER CALLED FOR THE QUESTION ON THE MOTION TO ADOPT THE WORDING AMENDMENTS PREPARED BY MAYOR FUTCH. MOTION FAILED 2-3 (Cm Miller, Staley and Turner dissenting) . CM MILLER MOVED TO ADOPT THE FOLLOWING WORDING FOR THE ORDI- NANCE, UNDER SECTION 18.l9.3 TO READ AS FOLLOWS: This Ordinance shall remain in effect until such time as the effective dry weather capacity of the sewage treatment plant is increased from 5.0 MGD. From that time no connection shall be made unless the City Council determines that the connection a~~~~ea-re~-i8-afty-er-~he-re~~ewift~~ is consistent with the mitigating measures proposed in the appli- cation for added capacity. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. MAYOR FUTCH MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM FOR ONE WEEK, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND PASSED 4-1 (Cw Tirse1l dissenting) . em Staley requested that the staff be directed to report on the points discussed. Mayor Futch commented that the Council would be interested in knowing how much industrial and commercial capacity exists in the City at the present time, and how much was committed but not on line. Initially there was 400,000 gallons available and the Council would like to have figures as to what amount was reserved for commercial and what amount allocated to residential use. CM-31-160 December 8, 1975 CITY MANAGER WEEKLY STATUS REPORT Oak Street Oak Street is under reconstruction as part of the track relocation project and should clear up that block of commercial properties. R.R. Project The footings at Livermore Avenue are installed and ready for pour- ing of concrete. This should be completed over the next couple of days. Springtown Golf Course A pump station is being installed at the lake area to allow the City to start a pressurized irrigation system in a more efficient way than has been available in the past. Leaf Pick-up In the leaf pick-up for this year the cost is less than last year of about 50%. Cross Valley Pipeline The staff has been in contact with LAVWMA concerning the cross Valley pipeline and the staff has been informed that they are beginning the design for the alignment. They will be discussing the reasoning for the alignments with the staff and they have asked for input from the staff. Budget In deference to the Council's concern about being rushed at budget time last year, the budget session will be a month earlier than usual. Discussion concerning the budget will begin right after the first of the,year. -- Cm Turner stated that for the record he would like to say that he has been through two budget hearings and he is not a bit happy with the one day session to take care of the entire budget. ~ ~rou1d prefer ~ha~ ~his he done in a a~udy acoaioR or ~hat thoro be 00:0 type of oyatcffi that is difforeRt for 3pprov31.2~/3d9pti9~ pfL, the S"Hj'ifG~. ~{jL':t!t~eu.~:- Cw Tirse11 stated that she would like this to be an agenda item because she has some ideas she would like to present concerning the budget session. It was-requested that this item appear on the agenda for the meeting of January 12, 1976. Business License Committee The Business License Committee has been active over the past couple of months and he understands that they have drafted a proposed ord- inance amendment for presentation to the Council within a month. Social Concerns Committee The Social Concerns Committee has been active and last week they conducted a tour of cities on the pennisu1a looking at mu1ti- CM-3l-161 December 8, 1975 (Social Concerns Committee) purpose service centers of the type Livermore is considering. They looked at the Menlo Park and Daly City centers and received mixed reactions from the two cities. They will be visiting other cities with similar centers and the members are looking forward to the planning of the structure. The Committee has circularized some 70 organizations in the City asking what uses they would like to see considered for housing in the structure, and why. Eighteen responses have been received, all of which will be helpful in planning the use of the building. Health Plan for City Mr. Parness stated that the City is obligated, by contract with two union organizations, to provide an alternate health plan to the one now in effect. The staff has studied several plans and have come up with three that have been very carefully analyzed by the staff and union representatives. The plans were explained to the Police Association and to the Public Works Union last week and ballots were distributed as to the choice of the employees. The ballots have been received, covering about 100 employees, with a 99 percent response in favor of one plan. There was one employee who favored the continuance of the existing plan. The Council will have a chance to see the plan selected at the time a contract is to be offered for the modified plan. The modified plan would be at no cost to the City but rather an ex- pense the employee would have to bear. General Plan Hearings for the General Plan have been set by the P.C. to begin December 16th with three additional hearings following in January. The Council should have the Plan by the first of February. Community Development Dir. The applications for the Community Development Director have been screened with a list of those most qualified. Mr. Parness would like to schedule interviews within the next three weeks and he would like to suggest that a City Counci1member sit on the interview panel as well as a member of the Industrial Advisory Committee, one outside source, and Mr. Parness. There were 82 applications and 14 people will be interviewed. Undoubtedly selection will be a difficult task and interviews will take all day. Interviews are scheduled for December 30. ADJOURNMENT There being no further Council business, Mayor Futch adjourned the meeting at 10:45 p.m. APPROVE ~//~ Mayor . l' . / ,\ if ~..~' /41 (I',jc- ,---.-\:X.-.---, - \L.t"-t:: / . !J 'eity Clerk Livermore, California ATTEST CM-31-162 Regular Meeting of December 15, 1975 A regular meeting of the City Council was held on December 15, 1975, 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 Tirse11 and Mayor Futch Absent: None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Futch led the Counci1members and those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. MINUTES - Dec. 1, 1975 P. 123, fourth paragraph, fifth line from bottom, last word should be had rather than have. P. 124, 2nd paragraph from the bottom, line six should be: buildings the assessments have not changed. P. 140, Cm Staley's wording should be amended to read as follows: Cm Staley wished to state that in his view the legitimate purpose of these ordinances is to limit campaign spending and identify con- tributors of such large amounts as could influence a candidate's vote. It is not right to require a complete disclosure of amounts that are not that large because it is an invasion of privacy of the individual and will have a chilling affect upon contributions to some candidates. P. 122, 4th paragraph next to last line should read: the ground. A statement to that effect...etc. (strike without an expense to us.) P. 132, omit the next to last paragraph. P. 136, second paragraph, next to last line, last word, omit She should and use She could. P. 136, next to last paragraph, next line should read: report all contributions because all of them have to be noted.....etc. P. 126, fifth paragraph, line 5 should read: He believes that some of the measures are not eft~y mitigating.....etc. P. 127, 4th paragraph should indicate that Mayor Futch suggested that he, Cm Turner and the Director of Public Works meet. Omit the Counci1members. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF DECEMBER 1, 1975, WERE APPROVED AS CORRECTED. OPEN FORUM (Assessments) Mr. John Regan, 672 South "N" Street stated that he has been gone since the middle of October but has been keeping up-to-date as to Council action by newspaper articles. The articles concerning Cm Miller's comments about unfair assessment practices of commercial properties imply that Mr. Regan has been involved in some type of "skullduggery" CM-31-163 December 15, 1975 (Assessments) with the County assessor and/or the Herald and News. For this reason he would request a public meeting with the Council on a specified date to allow him the opportunity to present factual data pertaining to the lower assessment on the Herald and News building. The exhibits he will present indicate factual information concerning the methods and reasons for the reduced assessments. Cm Turner suggested that this item be placed on a Council agenda, and the Council concurred. Cm Staley stated that he would appreciate rece~ving the information Mr. Regan would like to present to the Council but would like to add that he believes the comments made by Cm Miller were not a charge, in any way, against Mr. Regan personally and would hope that Mr. Regan feels it would not be necessary to rebut the remarks. Cm Miller stated that no charges of "skullduggery" against Mr. Regan have been implied. The discussion with respect to the H&N was their conflict of interest over the question of assessment practices down- town. Cm Miller added that he also would be very interested in ob- taining more information about all of this. COMMUNICATION FROM CITY TO COUNTY COMPo HEALTH PLANNING COUNCIL A letter expressing the City's concern over announced intentions to establish another major medical treatment facility in the western section of the Livermore-Amador Valley, was prepared by the staff for submission to the County Comprehensive Health Planning Council. Cm Miller commented that he believes the letter was excellent. Cw Tirse11 noted that the meeting was cancelled due to lack of a qu~um and that they will be meeting in January. There was brief discussion concerning the letter and Mr. Parness indicated that not only growth issues are of concern but also the problems of land use which is reflected in the letter. Cm Turner stated that he received a phone call this afternoon relative to the joint committee of the comprehensive Health Planning Council to whom the letter was directed. The letter points out some of the problems the Council sees with the estab- lishment of another hospital in the P1easanton area. He has been told that the consultant's study and recommendation is, to a large degree, direct input from the Comprehensive Health Council during closed door meetings with Valley Memorial Hospital. Cm Turner stated that he does not know that this information is correct but he certainly intends to pursue it. If the information is correct it is his understanding that once they receive the application from VMH to build a new hospital they would have the opportunity to approve or deny it. If they approve the application they would send a favorable recommendation to the state for final approval by the state. If they have par- ticipated in the study it would be unlikely that they could be objective about the application. em Miller suggested that possibly Cm Turner and Cw Tirse11, as representatives, could talk to the Comprehensive Health Council staff concerning this matter prior to meeting with the Board to find out if some of these things are correct. CM-31-164 December 15, 1975 COMMUNICATION FROM COUNTY RE RECLAMATION PLAN - LONE STAR, INC. & CALIFORNIA ROCK & GRAVEL Cm Turner stated that it is his understanding that the Board of Super- visors has agreed that a $25,000 bond is acceptable for the reclamation plan for Lone Star Industries, Inc. and California Rock and Gravel Company. He has prepared the following statement that he would like included in the records, as follows: The bonds of $25,000, starting, to insure compliance of the reclamation plant are obviously, as stated, faithful performance bonds. These bonds do increase at the rate of $2,000 per year. It would seem obvious to the layman that $25,000 will not repair the quarry damage in the event of default. There should be other financial methods available to insure compliance. We (City Council of Livermore) suggested a tax on extracted gravel but I have been told that this is illegal. I am going to ask our legal staff to look into the possi- bility of a royalty tax. I don't particularly fear that the recipients of the gravel permit, Q-76, won't be able to perform, as contracted, but I never suspected Penn Central or W.T. Grant's would be unable to perform either. There is that outside chance that they would not be able to perform. A $25,000 bond doesn't make me feel warm and comfortable allover and I don't want public dollars to reclaim the quarry. I think Cw Tirse11 raised this point last week - that many times public dollars have to repair private damage. Cm Turner stated that he believes the County can do better but is not sure as to whether or not this can be further pursued. Cw Tirse11 noted that this is also a request from COVA and if three lawyers look at it there is a better chance of getting results. Cm Turner stated that he became concerned about this matter when it was pointed out by Cw Tirse11 that sometimes public dollars are used to repair private corporation damage. This is very true and $25,000 is not sufficient to repair the damage. Cm Miller pointed out that in doing some arithmetic on the 25 year term for this. The total amount raised is $75,000 and as was pointed out i~ the P.C. meeting by Commissioner Dah1backa, it would cost $l^~for the water to fill the pit. The $75,000 compared to the $1 million for the water, only, is completely inadequate. COMMUNICATION RE CORPS OF ENG. URBAN PLANNING STUDY WORKSHOP & COMMENTS Cw Tirse11 stated that she attended the Corps of Engineers meeting with respect to the Urban Planning Study with Don Bradley and she requested that the item be placed on the agenda because in the minutes of the meeting one item is missing. The minutes show items 1 through 11 but somewhere in the minutes there should be indication that the City of Livermore opposed the Urban Study, including point source in their studies. She pointed out that there was a letter from the State Water Quality Control Board saying there should be no point source study. This should be indicated in the minutes and she would suggest that the City staff write to them to request that this be included in their minutes so everyone will know they have clearly been told. CM-31-165 jDecember 15, 1975 ,~(urban Planning Study - .~ Corps of Engineers) , - Cw Tirsell stated that in 18 of the minutes, ABAG has received ,$4.5 million for the 208 Waste Water Manage~UdY and it be- ~ came apparent that these two studies would . cxae't1y opposite . Mr. Bradley suggested that the Corps of Engineers Study be postponed. They ~ were ready to conclude their study with all pUblic hearings by ~the end of January. The ABAG study will not even have plans completed as to what will be studied until after March. The ABAG people may want to contract with the Corps of Engineers to do some of this. The Corps of Engineers agreed to wait until March so that ABAG could coordinate rather than to duplicate efforts. Cw Tirse11 would suggest that relative to #8, a letter be directed to the Corps of Engineers supporting the delay in their schedule. They indicated this would be very helpful with their headquarters. Cw Tirse11 stated that she really doesn't know what to do about the point source item because the co-sponsoring agency is Zone 7 and it was made known that the position of Livermore is that there should be no point source study but it was her impression that the Corps of Engineers would do whatever they wanted to do anyway. Cw Tirse11 felt that for this reason the position of the City should be emphasized at public meetings and that a letter should be sent to Congressman Stark to remind him of the agreement that was reached. Cm Miller stated that this is a Valley project and it would seem reasonable to request that meetings be held in the Valley. Cw Tirse11 stated that this was a point she intended to make but during the meeting she noticed that there were representa- tives from a number of state agencies and apparently they work in the San Francisco area. Possibly a portion of the policy meetings could take place in the Valley. APP. - WALL ST. PROPERTY (Berat1is) The matter of the variance application by Chris Berat1is for reduction of setbacks for property located on Wall Street was postponed from the meeting of November 24th at the request of the applicant. Burke Critchfield, attorney representing the applicant stated that the applicant has requested that this item be dropped. After further consideration the applicant believes there is no way to work out a compromise with the City or to proceed with his project. Hopefully another plan can be brought to the Council that would be acceptable to both the City and the owner for development of this property. Cm Staley stated that in light of all the problems that have occurred with respect to the property located at wall Street and Stanley Boulevard, perhaps the P. C. should be asked to take a look at the zoning and consider rezoning so that some- thing can be done with it. Mr. Critchfield explained that the owner has lost the buyer for the property and they would like to find someone who is CM-31-166 December 15, 1975 (Wall Street property) interested in the property and then come back to the Council with another suggestion at that time. Mayor Futch commented that there were a number of variances for the property for which the Council voiced no opposition and if the buyer can live with some of these things they wouldn't have to go through the entire procedure again. CM MILLER STATED THAT THERE WAS A MOTION TO DENY THE VARIANCES WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ALLOWANCE OF REDUCTION OF SETBACKS ON STANLEY BLVD, MOVED BY HIM AND SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. (Prior Meeting) Since the item is back the motion is still on the table. The City Attorney advised that the Council is wasting its time by taking any action because the matter has been dropped. Otto Eckert, 177 Wall Street, stated that there is a beautiful view from that property and he would be very concerned about development on it. Also, Wall Street already has a tremendous traffic problem and people would not be happy living on that property. He stated that there has been a history of vandalism in that area and people would also have to contend with this if their homes were there. Mayor Futch stated that consideration for development does not include Pioneer Park and Mr. Eckert noted that he understands this but develop- ment in that area would destroy the park. Cm Miller stated that the City considered the parcel for a park but one of the problems is that the title is not exactly clear in the sense that there is a homeowners organization that could act against the City. One of the problems the owner has is getting quitclaims from all the members of that subdivision. Perhaps if Mr. Eckert could help the owner gain the quitclaims the City might reconsider the park as an issue because it was offered at a reasonable price. Mr. Musso added that this property is a site zoned for apartments and it is conceivable that 18-19 units could be built on the property in the form of apartments. It is not just a simple case of six single family dwelling units. Dick Petrini, 237 Wall Street, asked if the owners would be notified when discussion concerning this property is brought to the Council at a later date. It was noted that the property owners would be notified of any plans for a variance or rezoning. However, the owner could develop on the property as long as the development were in conformance with the zon- ing allowed for that property and the owners would not be notified. Mr. Musso commented that it is ironic that a setback variance of 2 ft. can be fought but an apartment house cannot. They have a right to go in an build an apartment house in conformance with the regula- tions. Mr. Eckert wondered if this type of development would be allowed assuming that the apartment house would increase the value of surrounding properties, or degrade the value, and it was noted that this point is irrelevant. Mayor Futch explained that the present zoning allows for the develop- ment of an apartment house and such development can take place as long as it is consistent with the zoning. If they request something that is not allowed then they would have to come before the Council to request a variance. CM-31-167 December 15, 1975 (Wall Street Property) Cm Miller stated that there is another option open to the residents if they wish to do it. They can go to the Planning Commission and request initiation of a rezoning. REPORT RE EXXON PROPERTY LEASE Mr. Parness reported that the Council asked that the staff inquire of the property owner (Exxon property) their attitude about possible lease modifications. He has written to the owners setting forth the Council's position on the modifications and he would like to give the Council a copy of the letter of response. The staff recommendation is that a resolution be adopted authoriz- ing execution of the lease and a resolution authorizing a budget expenditure for the minimum improvement costs in the amount of $1,400. CM TURNER MOVED THAT THE RESOLUTION BE ADOPTED, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO WITHDRAW THE STATEMENT ABOUT THE LAST MONTH'S PAYMENT - PAGE 2 OF THE LEASE, Item 2 SHOULD READ AS FOLLOWS: 2. Rental: Lessee agrees to pay Lessor a monthly rental of ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS AND NO/100, payable in advance on or before the first day of each month for which due commencing January 1, 1976. Rental paYments, as specified above, shall be made payable to Exxon Company, U.S.A., and shall be sent to the following address: MOTION SECONDED BY CM STALEY. Cm Staley explained that he feels $100 is not a major issue but knows of no reason the City should pay $100 to Exxon which is, essentially, an interest free loan of $100 for the term of the lease. Cm Turner stated that he would like to publicly thank the Beauti- fication Committee for their efforts in seeing that the area is beautified. AMENDMENT PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. MAIN MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. RESOLUTION NO. 253-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF LEASE AGREEMENT (EXXON CORPORATION) AND EXPENDITURE OF PARK FUNDS FOR PARK LOCATED AT SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PORTOLA AVENUE AND MURRIETA BOULEVARD. REPORT RE LAVWMA PAYMENT REQUEST LAVWMA has requested that the participating agencies for the completion of the LAVWMA pipeline forward funds for this pro- ject. In discussing the item the Council expressed opposition to forwarding funds until the state agrees to participate. Mr. Parness stated that he has discussed this matter with the LAVWMA staff and has asked that the staff obtain information from the state and federal authorities as to their intentions, CM-31-168 December 15, 1975 (LAVWMA Pipeline Payment) and whether or not certification can be received to guarantee reimburse- ment, or whether or not advance payments can be made for them as the City is being asked to do. Mr. Parness stated that he made inquiries after the last meeting and was told that they would respond without delay but there has been no word, as yet. Unfortunately the item will have to be continued again. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE ITEM WAS POSTPONED. Cw Tirse11 stated that she has spoken with Lila Euler who has indicated that if the City does not forward the money in the near future, VCSD will have to make it up out of their reserve causing VCSD to lose interest on their money to cover our payment. The City should press the state and federal people for an answer as soon as possible because it wouldn't be fair for VCSD to have to pick up the tab. Cm Miller stated that in addition to pressing for an answer, the City needs to press EPA and the State Water Resources Control Board to sign the agreement. REPORT RE TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP #1783 (Cassel Montgomery) A report from the Planning Commission was submitted to the Council concerning approval of Tentative Parcel Map 1783 for Cassel Montgomery for property located on the east side of Hayes Avenue north of East Avenue. Cw Tirse11 wondered why this item is in front of the Council again and it was explained that the last time the Council granted variances and now they are submitting their parcel map. Mr. Musso explained that the variances were necessary to allow this parcel map. Cm Miller noted that this is just the tentative map and that the Council will again see the item when they want to build. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 1783 WAS APPROVED. RESOLUTION NO. 254-75 A RESOLUTION CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 1783 (Cassel Montgomery) . It should be noted that the map was approved for the same reasons the P.C. approved it, and with the same findings. REPORT RE CETA CONTRACT EXTENSION Notice has been received that the CETA contract for federal funding for 16 employees has been extended from February 1976, through June. It is recommended that a resolution authorizing execution of agree- ment be adopted. ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION NO. 255-76 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AMEND- MENT TO CONTRACT (Alameda County - CETA Program) CM-31-169 December 15, 1975 REPORT RE ALTERNATE EMPLOYEE HEALTH PLANS Current contracts with the union for the Police Department per- sonnel and Public Works Department call for making alternate employee health programs available to the employees. A survey indicates that 90% of these employees favor transferring to the health plan offered by Operating Engineers Local 3. A request has been received from the Mid-Management Association to allow the choice of the alternate plan to their members. Though the City Council is not obligated, it would seem proper that an alternate health plan be made available to both the Mid- Management Association and to the executive management group as well. Mr. Parness reported that the City is required to make available alternate health plans for two of the five employee organizations. At present we are contracting with Blue Cross. A comprehensive study was done of alternates and it was concluded that three should be reviewed and presented to both employee organizations. After the exp1anitory information was given to the organizations it was almost unanimously a vote in favor of transferring their health coverage to the Operating Engineers' health plan. This does not mean that there will be an additional cost to the city. The same amount paid by the City will continue, with the addition- al cost borne by the employee. These employees would have the choice of extending the Blue Cross plan affording more alternates or of transferring to Kaiser. It is recommended that the Council allow this choice since it would be of no additional cost to the City and would allow the employee a more favorable plan. Inadvertently Mr. Parness did not include all employees since this matter was initiated by the Mid-Management Group he would recommend that in all fairness if this is to be allowed with some of the groups it should be made available to all other employee groups as well. Cm Staley wondered if all employees would be included and Mr. Parness noted that all employees would be included. Mr. Parness added that if the alternate is made available it should be by majority decision because Blue Cross requires that a minimum of 100 people be maintained. with the trans- fer of the Police Department and the Public Works people, this is close to the lOO level. If the City drops below the 100 it falls into another premium bracket. Rather than a group plan it would be an individual customer plan and he is told that there would be a substantial increase in the premium. Cm Turner stated that with respect to the Police Department contract, there are four policemen who would not be eligible for the program because of their position - the three captains and a lieutenant. He has spoken with Lt. Souza who has indi- cated that all four of these people are in agreement. They have investigated a similar program that would give them the same benefits but they have found that they cannot obtain a lower premium because they don't have the same buying power as the rest of the group. They are concerned that they do not have the same health coverage that the rest of the Police Dept. will have. They understand that Mid-Management wants to review alternate health plans but they do not want to join Mid-Management CM-31-170 December 15, 1975 (Report re Alternate Employee Health Plans) as a group or organization. After talking to Lt. Souza, Cm Turner would like to suggest a proposal to the Council for consideration. Cm Turner recommended that the Personnel Director shop for, a comparable program for the four Police officers who are not eligible for the alternate program and that the four officers be required to pay into an acceptable program the same amount they would pay if they were members of the Police Health Plan and that the City pay the dif- ference exceeded. In other words, if the policemen pay $80 for the alternate and these four officers found a similar program and had to pay $100 for the same program, the City would pay the $20 differential. Cm Turner stated that the four officers have indicated they do not want to join the Mid-Management Union and Cm Turner believes that they would not be able to join Mid-Management if they were to re- ceive the choice of the alternate plan. This is a problem because apparently the Chief of Police can chose the alternate plan and the City Manager could chose the alternate plan but because of their positions, four police officers do not have a choice. em Miller stated that he may have misunderstood but from what Mr. Parness has said, only those who belong to the Operating Engineers Union could join the Operating Engineers program and that some other alternate plan with additional benefits would be available to all the other employees. This means that the City Manager and the other department heads could not join the Operating Engineers health plan. Cm Turner explained that the Chief of Police could join and the City Manager could join, but Mr. Lee, for example, could not join. The issue is somewhat confusing. Mr. Parness stated that he doesn't understand what Unions allow sometimes either but executive management is allowed to participate. He, for example has a choice but he is not sure whether or not the Police Chief has the choice. Mr. Parness could buy the Operating Engineers health plan without becoming a member of the union and there are two or three others that could do likewise. Police Lieutenants and Captains are specifically exempt from that privi- lege. They could, however, qualify in the future if they were to join the Mid-Management Association and that Association joined Local #3. Mr. Parness stated that he can sympathize with what em Turner has just said. It is true that the four police officers would not be able to obtain this alternate coverage which is not at all inex- pensive. He would suggest that all employees be allowed the choice of Blue Cross with alternates or the Kaiser Plan be available for all City employees other than Operating Engineers Local #3 members. For the City to pay the difference for the four police officers, as suggested by Cm Turner would introduce untold complications for the other 33 management people employed by the City. He added that these four police officers have enjoyed a substantial increase in the con- tribution by the City to their health plan that the other officers of the Police Department have not had. The other police officers have had $5 per month for dependency coverage as opposed to $26.50 per month for the four officers. There are many variances and it is a very complex issue but the simple answer would be to allow the City Manager to afford the two alternate plans to all employee groups and all employees, including the four officers. Cm Turner stated that he does not mean to give these four officers preferential treatment but he believes they feel the present health plan is not adequate and they are being excluded because they pre- fer not to join Mid-Management. CM-31-171 December 15, 1975 (Report re Alternate Employee Health Plans) em Miller felt Mr. Parness is offering a reasonable compromise - the fact there is a Mid-Management group is irrelevant because the four officers and department heads would equally qualify for either an extended Blue Cross plan or the Kaiser Plan. They can join in the option without joining the Mid-Management group. em Turner stated that perhaps there has been some misunderstand- ing because it was felt that everybody had to belong to some type of group or union to be eligible for the option. Mr. Parness stated that this concept is not correct and this is what he hopes to clarify by having this as an agenda item. Doc Blalock, 1698 Sunset Drive, stated that he is one of the Captains involved. One of the problems is that there has been a lack of communication. The Police Department was not made aware of any of this until last Friday and they were told to vote on it and have it ready by Monday. They have not been allowed any input and they would like to voice their opinions. Mr. Parness stated that the point expressed by Captain Blalock is valid and offered an apology concerning the short notice to a vote on alternate plans. unfortunately he ~as not aware of the short notice and if he had been he would not have had the notice sent out in that manner. Doc Blalock stated that the other thing is that it was his understanding there were other alternates to chose from and he would like to know who selected the present three. The employees would like to be involved in some of the decisions that will affect them, in the future. Gary Souza, pOlice officer, stated that the only point he would like to make is that in the Operating Engineers plan, due to their buying power, they have an exceptional hospital- ization plan. The sergeants and patrolmen, because of their membership in the Operating Engineers Union, are eligible for that plan. The lieutenant and three captains are not eligible but the Chief of Police is eligible. The plan that the City has offered will be at their expense and in his opinion they are not the best plans available. He stated that his concern is that sergeants and patro11men can get an outstanding health plan, as can the Chief Plan but the other four employees are being penalized because they cannot be an executive manager and they also cannot be in the Union. Their families are suffering because of their classification. None of the Police Department personnel have elected to join the Mid- Management Association because they do not agree with some of their philosophies and some of the things they were trying to do. THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED AND A REPORT FROM THE STAFF WILL BE FORTHCOMING WITH RESPECT TO ALTERNATE HEALTH PLANS. REPORT RE REVISIONS TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR ALAMEDA COUNTY em Miller stated that he is a member of the Solid Waste Manage- ment Advisory Committee and the Committee discussed the revisions that were made without any input from the Advisory Committee. It was very clear that Oakland Scavenger has emasculated the Solid Waste Management Plan. However, the Advisory Committee has made a number of suggestions for re-revision which they will recom- mend to the County Planning Commission and details will appear in a letter in about a week. When the item comes before the CM-31-172 December 15, 1975 (Report re Revisions to Solid Waste Plan) Council from the Advisory Committee the City's recommendations can again be made to the County. He stated that he agreed with almost all of the changes the Advisory Committee made and most of the changes received unanimous approval. Most of the changes bring back some strength of some of the original recommendations of the plan but are still not as strong as some of the members feel they should be. However, there are some important statements that the Committee will recommend as a portion of the Plan and hopefully when the Council reviews them they will agree recommendation to the County. Cm Staley stated that perhaps there should be communication with the County ind~~1n2-~~~~~~~ ~ounci1 will schedule a public hear- ing on January -So-~~ can be forwarded to the County by January 6th but in view of the fact this is such little time for the request it may not be possible to reach a recommendation for them. If it takes another week for a response from Livermore they shu1d be willing to consider it. No Council action is required at this time and the item will be discussed at the January 5th meeting. CONSENT CALENDAR Departmental Reports Departmental reports received: Airport Activity - November Alameda County Mosquito Abatement District - October Building Department - November Police and Pound Departments - November Municipal Court - October Water Reclamation Plant - October and November (Progress Report - Stage 3 Improvements) Cm Staley noted that according to the Airport Activity Report there has been a sizeable decline in usage of the airplanes for this month as compared to 1974 and would like to know the reason. Mr. Lee explained that a new record keeping system is being used and the person who prepared the report stopped on the 25th of the month and did not take into account the activities and sales of fuel on that date which gave a false figure. A revised report has been prepared which is more accurate. The report the Council received reports only 25 days out of the month. Airport Advisory Committee Minutes The Airport Advisory Committee minutes for the meeting of December 1, 1975, were submitted for informational purposes. em Turner asked what FBO stands for in the minutes and it was noted that this refers to fixed base operator - operator that leases land from the City. Cm Turner added that the information that will come from the subcommittee concerning the Master Plan will be very important and would hope that the Council is kept abreast of their discussions. Mr. Lee indicated that they would make sure the Council is informed of their discussions. CM-3l-173 December 15, 1975 Consent Calendar Con't Report re LAVWMA Effluent Pipeline An informational report concerning the LAVWMA effluent pipeline was distributed to the Council. Res. Auth. & Dir. Condemnation of Property - Grade Sep. Proj. The City Council adopted a resolution authorizing and directing condemnation of Parcel 39 relative to the grade separation project. RESOLUTION NO. 256-75 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, LYING WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT/RAILROAD TRACK RELOCATION ASSESSMENT DISTRICT WITHIN THE SAID CITY. (Parcel 39) Res. re Emergency Services On-site Assistance Program The Council adopted a resolution authorizing execution of a promulga- tion statement relative to the emergency services on-site assistance program. Cm Turner stated that concerning the draft of the resolution and it lists a number of things people are required to do in the event of an emergency. He stated that he believes it would be a good idea if the Counci1members have some type of official identification. The Mayor becomes the Chief Executive Officer in the event of an emergency and he should have proper identification. He requested that the Counci1members receive laminated identification cards and the Counci1members concurred with this suggestion. RESOLUTION NO. 257-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF ON-SITE ASSISTANCE SUMMARY AND ACTION PLAN Payroll & Claims There were 297 payroll warrants in the amount of $97,204.33, and 82 claims in the amount of $278,645.22, for a total of $375,849.55, dated November 26, 1975, and approved by the City Manager. There were 79 claims in the amount of $77,042.62, dated December 9, 1975, and approved by the City Manager. There were 47 claims in the amount of $l27,978.55, dated December 10, 1975, and approved by the City Manager. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CM TURNER AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE CONSENT CALENDAR WAS APPROVED, INCLUDING THE COMMENTS MADE BY THE COUNCILMEMBERS ON THE VARIOUS ITEMS. CM-31-174 December 15, 1975 MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (Building Permits Taken Out for Kissell Area) Mr. Parness reported that building permits (26) have been taken out for completion of the Kissell development by the Great American Land Company, successor to Kissell. (Receipt of Sales Tax Receipts) Mr. Parness reported that the City has just received the receipts from the state for the first quarter of this fiscal year for sales tax. The receipts for this quarter (July through September) are up 13.4%, which is a substantial increase and the first quarter is not the largest quarter. The increase is certainly welcomed. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL (Ambulance Contract) Cm Turner asked when the staff will be discussing the ambulance contract and Mr. Parness indicated that he has received the draft report from the consultant last Friday and he has to review it with the staff members involved and probably the matter will be before the Council in about a month. (BART) Cm Turner asked if all cities have been notified of the BART meeting scheduled for January for discussion with the BART Director. Mr. Parness stated that a letter has been sent to the BART representa- tives and the BART General Manager explaining the concerns raised at the last City Committee meeting, and announcing that there would be another meeting in January and that, hopefully, the other cities would attend the January meeting. Mr. Herringer, the General Manager indicated that if at all possible he would attend the meeting. (Agenda Item re Traffic Signals for Downtown Area) Cm Turner stated that a number of merchants have contacted him with respect to getting signal lights on Second and Third Streets to connect with "L" Street. Apparently there have been a number of accidents at these intersections and the Chief of Police can support this information. The merchants would like the Council to consider a one-way traffic pattern for these streets and Cm Turner would request that this be placed on the agenda for discussion. The merchants would also request a count of the bike riders using Third Street as they feel the bike lane eliminates some parking spaces and that it is not being utilized as it should be. It was noted that the Third Street bike lane is part of the General Plan and it would have to be amended if this were to change. However, the number of bikes should be monitored. CM-31-175 December 15, 1975 (Agenda Item re Traffic Signals for Downtown) Cw Tirse11 commented that some of these items will be discussed at the time the parking issue is reviewed in January. Cm Staley wondered if there is a study going on at this time to consider making those streets one-way streets and the Planning Director indicated that there is a CBD study being done by the consultants which includes the issue of street alignment and traffic. Mr. Parness stated that traffic signals have been discussed and are a part of the Capital Improvements Budget. The Second and ilL" Street signal has been brought up numerous times and is on our priority list. Cm Turner suggested that Mr. Lee contact the Chief of Police con- cerning traffic signals at Second Street and "L" Street and perhaps there would be a compelling reason for moving this project up on the priority list. If there is a reason to move it up Mr. Lee could come back to the Council with a report. The merchants have asked that this be given consideration. Mr. Lee indicated that he would prepare a status report of the various needs with respect to signalization in the City. (Measure of Popula- tion Turnover) Cm Miller stated that the General Plan Review Committee did a study concerning the population turnover in the City and he would like to see that the Planning Department continue to do such a study. Cm Miller stated that this study was done a couple of years ago and it would be very helpful to do another study because this is statistical information that may be useful in court, if necessary. The study should be done every year or possibly every two years. J~ X2"?// .~ ~k~ -Z c4 ~~ cU ~ -!7-~ 6?~.f 6. pt/ .~(!~~~~a.~ ~ ~~ (Ambulance Contract (!i:J;:;::~, Study) I Cm Staley stated that it is his understanding that the Ambulance Contract is being reviewed, in part, and wondered if this is true. Mr. Parness stated that the consultant is doing a very comprehensive study of the ambulance contract and the cities of P1easanton, Liver- more and the County are obligated, by contract extension, only until June 30, 1976. Hopefully, during this interim study period by virtue of the consultant study there can be some type of alternate administra- tive means for emergency ambulance services. This is the item Cm Turner inquired about and it will be before the Council in about a month. (Livermore's Incorporation) Cm Staley noted that Livermore's 100th anniversary for incorpora- tion will be on April 1, 1976, and possibly this might be cause for some type of local celebration. CM-31-176 December 15, 1975 (Truck Parking) Cw Tirse11 stated that a truck has been parking on E1 Padro at Orange Avenue and she requested that someone from the staff look into this matter. (ABAG Meeting) ABAG will be meeting on Thursday night and will receive a recommenda- tion concerning the time schedule for review of the General Plan. They will hear a discussion by their attorney concerning the Regional Planning Committee's recommendation that they be allowed to review the Livermore General Plan upon receiving favorable advice from their attorney. This item has to do with Livermore's law suit against the County and someone from the Council should attend that meeting. She stated that, unfortunately, she will not be able to attend the meeting. The question also came up as to whether or not the City could furnish them with the General Plans - they need 20 copies just for the RPC. She indicated that she couldn't make this commitment but the City would do everything possible to apply the necessary number of copies. She added that ABAG would be willing to duplicate summary information but did not offer to make copies of the General Plan. The whole General Plan is not relevant to what they want to consider so perhaps they could indicate the divisions they deem to be of regional signifi- cance so that the City could send this portion to them, or if they want all of the General Plan. (Letter to Zone 7) Mayor Futch prepared a letter to be sent to Zone 7 and Cm Miller stated the City wants an actual answer from Zone 7 to apply to our particular area and would suggest a change in the third line of the letter. Cm Miller suggested that the wording "facilities near to, adjacent to or in the area around our City" be included in the third line. Also at the very end of the letter he would like to add the following sentence: We believe all residents of the Valley need to know the answer to this specific question, very soon. Namely, is Zone 7 going to become an operating or supervisor sewer agency anywhere in the Livermore- Amador Valley? Cm Miller stated that the question of sewer agencies in the Valley will be discussed by BASSA very soon and the City should receive an answer from Zone 7 before the question goes to BASSA. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO SEND THE LETTER, AS ~1ENDED, SECONDED BY CM MILLER. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CONTINUED DISCUSSION RE MUNI. CODE AMEND. RE SEWER CAPACITY ALLOCATION Cw Tirse11 read a statement from the General Plan that she would like included in the Sewer Capacity Allocation Ordinance, and the Council Concurred. CM-31-177 December 15, 1975 (Con't Disc. re Muni. Code Amend. re Sewer Capacity) Cm Miller stated that he would like to add the following wording to what Cw Tirse11 has read, as follows: Moreover, no connection shall be made unless it be consistent with the mitigating measures proposed in the application for additional capacity. Also, under Section 18.19.2, second paragraph, there is one ambiguity. A 'commitment' is defined as the amount of capacity required to service a valid lot of record7..etc. Cm Miller stated that in his opinion, a commitment for a valid lot of record is one sewer connection whether it be multiple or not, or whether it be a large 400 acres inside the City. That would be one lot of record. One sewer connection should be allowed for only one lot of record. The City Attorney commented that the commitment itself was intended to be directed to the valid lot of record as it stands under the present zoning or the zoning as of the time. Therefore, if it were a multiple it would have been for a number of commitments, depend- ing upon the availability of the use. The more intensive use, the more commitments. Mayor Futch stated that the City estimated the amount of sewer ca- pacity that would be used for residential and he wondered if that assumed multiples that were zoned multiple. Mr. Logan stated that this would be his understanding. Mr. Musso stated that at the time the staff looked at the multiple sites that were available - at that time there were very few. There were about four major sites that were included and then an estimate was made of the other miscellaneous lots around town that were zoned multiple. Cw Tirse1l stated that in this case she believes the reservation is based on the zoning - the legal lot of record, as referenced to the zoning. em Miller stated that in reading the ordinance it sounds as if somebody with a property zoned RS-5, with no tentative map, accord- ing to the zoning is entitled to a certain number of units but there is no tentative or final. It was the intention of the City that unless there is a final or tentative map by April 7, 1975, it does not qualify for anything other than one unit for the whole parcel. Is that what the words say? Mr. Logan stated that he may be confused but in order to be a lot of record there has to be an approved tentative or final map of record. Cm Miller stated that there are many lots of record that are 40 acres, for example, in an area zoned for five units per acre but no tentative or final map has been proposed. It is the intent of the Council that there be only a single connection - not one that corresponds to 40 x 5. Do these words actually say that? Mr. Logan stated that the words do indicate this. Discussion followed concerning various types of lots of record and multiple use. CM-31-178 December 15, 1975 (Con't Disc. re Muni Code Amend. re Sewer Capacity) The City Attorney commented that there is a problem because there are lots of record with a multiple use not requiring subdivision. For example, if someone has 40 acres and within the 40 acres there is RG-16 zoning - they could build RS-16 zoning on the 40 acres without having to subdivide it. There could be 16 units without any type of subdivision. The Council's question is whether a 40 acre parcel would have one commitment or 16 commitments depending on the zoning. It was noted that perhaps this portion should be reworded because it is not very clear. There is no urgency to adopt this particular ordinance because there is a resolution that says the same thing in an equally binding manner and he would suggest postponement to allow rewording. CW TIRSELL MOVED THAT HER WORDING FROM THE GENERAL PLAN AS WELL AS CM FUTCH"S WORDING BE PREPARED TO READ FLUENTLY, AND TO INTRODUCE THE ORDINANCE. MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER. CM MILLER l<l.OVED TO SAY "NO" TO QUESTION NO.1, IN THE LETTER TO THE COUNCIL FROM THE PLANNING DIRECTOR: 1. There are many large lots in the community that lend themselves to lot splitting. This is particular- ly true in the older part of town. My question is, "Should the ordinance make an exception for minor subdi- vision of say four or less lots, or more particularly two lots?" Cm Miller stated that the City has always tried to eliminate lot splitting and this is the reason the question should receive a "no" answer. Discussion followed concerning possible lot splitting. Cw Tirse11 commented that on the General Plan the high density housing will be recommended for north of the CBD in the older areas and Cm Miller stated that in this case it is done by rezoning. Mr. Musso illustrated cases in which people may wish to divide their lots. em Staley stated that there couldn't be too many lots in the older section of town that could be split and Cm Miller indicated that there are 500 lots of this nature - 500 scattered lots that are not part of a subdivision. Mayor Futch wondered if item one was considered at the time there was a count of commitments with respect to the amount of sewage capacity and it was noted that this item one was not considered at that time. Mr. Musso noted that a lot the size of 100 x 100 was considered as one lot without regard for possible lot splitting. Cm Miller expressed concern for encouraging lot splitting and using more sewer capacity and Cm Staley agreed that the City would not want to encourage this but on the other hand he would like some way of allowing people to do this if they choose. Cm Miller stated that if lot splitting is allowed it means allowing an increased demand beyond the count and commitments on our already existing sewer capacity and in his opinion it would not be wise to do this, at this point. em Staley stated that he simply cannot believe there are many lots in town that could be split and Cw Tirse11 concurred. CM-31-179 December 15, 1975 (Con't Disc. re Muni. Code Amend. re Sewer Capacity) Cm Turner noted that there are 632 vacant lots in town on which homes can be built and it was noted that only a small portion of these could be split. The majority of the Counci1members felt the lot splitting should be allowed. em Miller pointed out that if someone has a 10 acre parcel they could split it into three lots, and again into three lots, and again into three lots and again into three lots. Each split is permitted by the step the Council proposes to allow. em Staley wondered if there are any 10 acre parcels that would be involved and Cm Miller stated that there are all types of properties that do not have tract maps on them. The City Attorney advised that if lot splitting is allowed it is approval for lot splitting allover town and not just in the older section of town. The Council next went to Item #2, which Cm Miller indicated is a shuffling of lot lines and he be1eives this would be reasonable. The Council concurred. The Council moved to Item #3 with respect to allowance of low or moderate income housing and it was mentioned that perhaps this should include housing for the elderly. After brief discussion it was concluded that it wouldn't be right to make ~~cia1 provisions for the young, old, blind, etc. It was felt tha~low to moderate, as stated, should be sufficient. It was concluded that #4 should be reworded. Mr. Musso commented that he felt churches should be included in Item #4. em Staley stated that churches would be covered under the wording proposed this evening under the General Plan, and it should be applicable. The City Attorney stated that it would be for anything in excess of the presently available 5 MGD. He noted that there is not really that much to deal with if there is only a 5 MGD capacity and yet the Council is spending a great deal of time spelling out each little thing that could have a commitment. The commitments are virtually gone, in any event. If the City gets any industrial development of any size it will use all of the industrial commit- ment and the low income housing would use the rest of the capacity. The Council is talking about what should be allowed if the City is able to get the additional capacity. He would suggest that the City let the ordinance remain as is, because there is not enough capacity to worry about. Item #5 asked if the City would consider granting a sewer con- nection to property in the County presently being served by a septic tank and Cm Staley commented that he doesn't know how the City could agree to serve someone in the County when sewer connections are not being given to people in the City. The Council concurred. Item #6 spoke to giving preference to industrial/commercial properties over residential connections and Cm Miller indicated that he would refrain from discussion on this item because he owns land that would fall into this category and represents a conflict of interest. CM-31-180 December 15, 1975 (Con't Disc. re Muni. Code Amend. re Sewer Capacity) Mr. Parness stated that relative to Item #6, there is a case in point - all of the commercial property reviewed and approved which is the location along North Front Road. The property is owned by Mr. Busick and the planning for this has gone a long way. There have been recent inquiries by some of the owners as to what might happen and when Mr. Parness was asked if there would be sewer capacity for development, he responded that there is very little sewer capacity but the Council has indicated that capacity could be used for indus- trial development. It was noted that the Council will allow commercial or industrial development of land in the City and the Busick property is in the City. The City Attorney commented that the problem concerning #6 would be solved because if the City wants to bring in more commercial that exists in the County the City could merely annex them into the City. The Council concurred. MOTION AND SECOND WERE WITHDRAWN AT THIS TIME. CW TIRSELL MOVED TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO PREPARE THE ORDINANCE, AS AMENDED, FOR INTRODUCTION. MOTION SECONDED BY CM MILLER AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Futch adjourned the meeting at 10:55 p.m. to an executivJr session to discuss appointments and thereafter to an adjourned regular meeting on December 22, 1975, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 39 So. Livermore Ave. ~ //-ZJ/ Mayor ~~~ i . I ' ~,' ! ~~.. - . Liver -;~ .~fornia APPROVE ATTEST Regular Adjourned Meeting of An adjourned regular meeting of the 1975, at 7:30 p.m. in the Municipal Avenue. All members of the Council December 22, 1975 Council was held on December 22, Court Chambers, 39 South Livermore were present. The meeting immediately executive session to discuss APPROVE ATTEST Regular Meeting of December 22, 1975 A regular meeting of the Livermore City Council was held on December 22, 1975, 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. Present: Absent: ROLL CALL Cm Turner, Miller, Staley, Cw Tirsel1 and Mayor Futch None CM-3l-181 December 22, 1975 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Futch led the Counci1members as well as those present in the audience, in the Pledge of Allegiance. MINUTES OF DEC. 8 P. 161, second paragraph under Budget, omit the last sentence of that paragraph. P. 143, first paragraph, sixth line, last word should be strip. P. 147, 7th paragraph, second line, word should be strip commercial rather than strict commercial. ON MOTION OF CM MILLER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 1975, WERE APPROVED AS CORRECTED. ORAL COMMUNICATION RE ASSESSMENTS - John Regan John Regan 672 South "N" Street, stated that he would like to speak to the Council concerning assessment practices for commercial prop- erties in the City of Livermore, and more specifically, the Herald and News property which he owns. He indicated that he has prepared factual data from his records which he has delivered to all members of the Council. He then explained the various exhibits included in the data presented to the Council. Mr. Regan stated that it is clear from the information he has presented to the Council that in the past the assessor had been over-assessing the property by 33-1/3% for many years and that the tenants of the building paid several thousands of dollars in additional rental which would not have been necessary if the owner of the property had complained about the assessments. He stated that he has urged owners of other commercial properties to follow the procedure he has taken because he has received a substantial reduction in the assessment of his property because of over-assessments in the past. To believe that commercial properties increase in value along with residential properties, at the same rate, is false. Mr. Regan commented that he cannot understand why the Council and staff have decided to pick on commercial properties, alone, and wondered why other inequities are not being cited. He pointed out that in reviewing assessments for residential properties some are assessed 30% lower than market value while his com- mercial property is assessed only 10-15% lower than the market value. If the Council doesn't "shut up" about unfair assessment practices, the residential properties may be reviewed and their assessments raised. He then suggested that there be a committee comprised of residents from different areas of the City with the instructions to more thoroughly explore the accusations of unfair assessment practices with respect to commercial properties. Cm Miller stated that he appreciates the information Mr. Regan has prepared for the Council and in view of what has been pre- sented concerning the Herald and News property, there is no question of the fact that in 1973 the assessment was changed to something that was reasonable. In this case the decline in the assessment has a very reasonable explanation and he has no objection to this. Cm Miller added that he does not agree, however, that the interest of the Council in equitable tax assessments, is ridiculous. There are many inequities - in particular the con- stant percentage increases that this Council has spoken about in the past. He would agree that the assessor's valuation of CM-31-182 December 22, 1975 (re Assessments) his home does seem low, compared to what the actual market value would be. However, he owns a home on Martin and the assessors value is right on the button in estimating the market value. It seems that the more expensive the property, the lower the assessment, so they don't reflect the actual market value and this is unreasonable. Cm Miller stated that he does not agree that all commercial prices are sinking and that all the properties in the City are down. In the particu1a~q~~se cited by 11r. Regan the assessment should have been 10wered~lio~ever, the property is in the same categories as 80-85% of the other commercial properties in Livermore which have not been changed with respect to assessments for two years and this is what is unreasonable and deserves investigation. If there are no changes in assessments for commercial properties it means that residential properties are paying more because there always is an increase in the market value. The Herald and News profits from having assessments low or unchanged in a commercial area but this will not be disclosed in one of their editorials. The public should, however, be aware that the H&N has many financial interests that are reflected in their editorials. Cm Turner stated that he didn't appreciate the remark made by Mr. Regan about the Council shutting up about assessments because it is the Council's responsibility to the public to investigate what might appear to be unfair practices in the assessments. The com- mercial properties have been assessed equally, on the average, with residential properties but there are some major pieces of property which have lower assessments and it is the responsibility of the Council to investigate. Cm Staley stated that one of the problems in re-eva1uating property is comparable sales. With residential property it is much easier to find a comparable sale but it is difficult with respect to commercial property. commercial properties are not built uniformly, are not situated the same, and have different tenants. It is diffi- cult to set the market value on the property until it actually sells. In his opinion, not being re-assessed for two years for commercial property is not unreasonable. No action was required concerning this item. COMMUNICATION RE FORMA- TION OF FILIPINO VOTERS LEAGUE OF ALAMEDA COUNTY A letter was received from the Filipino Voters League of Alameda County, announcing its formation. No action was required and the item was noted for filing ON MOTION OF CW TIRSELL, SECONDED BY CM STALEY AND BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. TRACT 3607 APPEAL RE P.C. APPROVAL OF VARIANCE APP. FOR EARL MASON (Gr. Am. Land) The Planning Commission approved a variance application by Earl Mason for Clarence Overaa to allow reduction of a back yard setback from 25 ft., average 35 ft., to 10 ft. average 25 ft. for lots located in Tract 3607 at the intersection of Scherman and Murde11 Lane. Cm Miller stated that this item was appealed at his request. that time he has met with Mr. Schwarer and Mr. Mason and has the map. He can see a case for a few variances but he would discuss some of the other lots. Since reviewed like to CM-31-183 December 22, 1975 (Variance Appeal - Gr. Am. Land) Cm Miller stated that there has been a request for variances for all but seven of the lots and this would prevent the ordinance from being satisfied. The lot can be built on with houses of a different design, for example. Variances are not supposed to be granted because of the shape of the building but rather because of unusual conditions for the property itself. None of these lots are that unusual but there are seven for which a case can be made. Secondly, logical application of the new ordinance requires the setting of a deadline, beyond which the new rules have to be satis- fied. If exceptions are made it means that the new rules really never are applied. The fact that other properties have different rules is not grounds for a variance. In part, this property could have been "grandfathered" in if they had submitted their final map early on. For their own reasons and desires they tried to get the RS property returned to RL and then they tried to get variances for floor coverage against the RS. As a result of trying to carryon that program they exceeded the dea1dine for being "grandfathered". If they had submitted their map directly, they would have been covered by the "grandfather clause". The whole point of the changes for the RS and in the rules, is to protect the buyers and to give them adequate back yard open space and play space for their children as well as storage room access. People would not get this type of protection if variances were granted based on a desire to place a specific house model on a piece of property, because it is possible to satisfy the ordi- nance by using a different model. Cm Miller then pointed out the seven lots he believes have grounds for variances. Cm Miller continued that the setback requirement can be satisfied if the developer uses a 45-foot deep model. Great American Land does not have a 45 ft. model but they could if they wanted to. They have three models with just about the same amount of sq. ft. - Models 1, 2, and 5, but the models of 2 and 5 are such that they can't make the setbacks because a garage is out in front of the house. The point is, they have models that can meet the criteria. It is a poor design to have the garage out in front, as it turns out. Cm Miller stated that he would agree that the lots he indi- cated to the Council - the cul-de-sac lots or odd shaped lots - could reasonably have a variance but the rest of. the lots problems could be solved by using different models - it is a question of design only and this is not a justification for granting a vari- ance. Cm Turner stated that he is a little concerned about this applica- tion because at the time the ordinance was being changed he does not recall that Mr. Musso advised that this application was in the mill. Mr. Musso stated that he believes that at the time the variance was being reviewed it was probably noted that a change in the ordinance was in the mill. The variance came up during a period when the RS Ordinance was an issue in the background. At that time it was anticipated that the map would be final during this period and it would have qualified under the present ordinance. Mayor Futch stated that when this item was discussed a few months ago the Council did not indicate that approval would be given if variances were required. The Council indicated that if develop- ment would conform to the RS Ordinance the Council would approve it. Nothing in the way of a variance was approved. CM-31-184 December 22, 1975 (re Variance Request - Great American Land) Mr. Musso noted that the change was not anticipated at the time the developers spoke to the Council about development in that area. He added that he assumed the lots would be developed by the time the new ordinance went into effect. Cw Tirse11 stated that she is confused about this application because the last time the Council reviewed it the developer was going to take about three feet from the park and everything fit - what happened after that? Mr. Musso commented that the ordinance changed and the setback changed. CM MILLER MOVED THAT VARIANCES, CORRESPONDING WITH THE P.C. RECOM- MENDATIONS BE ALLm^lED FOR LOTS 9, 11, 14, 15, 19, 22, and 36, WITH DENIAL OF ALL THE OTHER VARIANCES APPROVED BY THE P.C. MOTION SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES. Mr. Earl Mason, developer for Great American Land Company, stated that he would like to speak to the Council about timing because this is very important. In August they came to the Council to request a reduction in lot coverage variance and they were denied. They asked the Council if they would be given approval if they came back to the Council with a map in conformance with the ordinance with respect to lot coverage and all other aspects of the RS Ordi- nance at that time. On August 25th they came in with such a map, which the Council reviewed and on September 12th the final map was submitted to the Planning Department. The map was in conformance with the ordinance at that time. Mr. Musso noted that the ordinance requiring the 35 ft. average setback went into effect in October. Mayor Futch asked if this type of problem has occurred in the past and Mr. Musso indicated that there have been similar problems but nothing exactly like this. Mr. Mason stated that they are not asking for anything special but would request that they be required to conform to the old RS Ordi- nance. Mayor Futch stated that he believes the applicant has voiced a good argument concerning this issue and he will not vote in favor of the motion. He stated that he believes there should be some time period to allow development after the final map has been submitted, without having to conform to an ordinance that is adopted after the map has been submitted. He would like to support the recommendations of the Planning Commission. Cm Miller stated that he would like to point out that a final map is for property - not for models. It is the property that has to be different to qualify for a variance. In no case is this property different. The ordinance can be met by using one of the models, which the developer has. There are two other models exactly like it that have only 100 sq. ft. more and those two models could satisfy the ordinance if the garages were not out in front. The point is, the ordinance can be satisfied by using his own models. Cm Staley stated that he intends to vote against the motion also because the final map was approved prior to adoption of the new ordinance. Cm ~1i11er noted that the map was not approved - it was submitted. Cm Staley stated that he believes it simply is not fair to change the rules when someone is 95% complete with the planning. CM-31-185 December 22, 1975 (re Variance Request - Great American Land) Cm Miller stated that the map was filed for the property and not the houses and he knows of no way the Council can legally grant a variance. MOTION TO GRANT A VARIANCE FOR ONLY SEVEN LOTS FAILED 1-4 WITH CM TURNER, TIRSELL, STALEY AND MAYOR FUTCH DISSENTING. Cm Miller pointed out that in voting the way the Council intends to vote, to support the Planning Commission's recommendation, they are allowing a "blanket variance" and all the houses can be only 10 ft. from the back yard line. Cm Miller noted that if someone is going to make a motion to adopt the recommendation of the P.C. perhaps the motion should include providing a different model for Lots 29 and 33 and this would make four lots conform to the ordinance. CM STALEY MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE P.C. AND THEIR FINDINGS, TO GRANT THE VARIANCES FOR THE FINAL MAP WHICH WAS SUBMITTED ON SEPTEMBER 12, 1975. MOTION SECONDED BY CM TURNER. Cw Tirse11 stated that she would have to support the motion because she believes every effort was made b~,~~ ,~~ve1oper~b~~~ develop and be in conformance with t~~.1 C i . -- that the park land remain open spaoe and they agreed to do 'this a1oo. They ha~o boen very oooperative aad really ha~e 'tried 't~ oonform. MOTION PASSED 4-1 (Cm Miller dissenting) . RECESS MAYOR FUTCH CALLED FOR A BRIEF RECESS AFTER WHICH THE COUNCIL MEETING RESUMED WITH ALL MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL PRESENT. REPORT RE MEMO OF UNDERSTANDING RE LIVERMORE POLICE - HEALTH PLAN The City's current labor relations agreement specifies that an alternate health plan be offered to the employees. Of the several alternates studied, all but one employee from the Livermore Police Department and the Public Works Department voted in favor of the plan sponsored by the Operating Engineers. Therefore, all of these employees will be transferred for coverage from the exist- ing Blue Cross plan to the Operating Engineers plan, effective January 1, 1976. It is recommended that a resolution authorizing execution of an addendum to the Memorandum of Understanding be adopted. CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT THE. RESOLUTION AS RECOMMENDED, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. Cw Tirse11 commented that it is her understanding that this item was discussed last week and that this would apply only to the Operating Engineers and the Police Department and she would like to know if the City is still looking into the possibility of a plan that would satisfy all other City employees. Mr. Parness indicated that this is correct. Employees will be given the opportunity to indicate whether or not they want the Blue Cross plan with additions or the other alternate plan which is the Kaiser plan. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. CM-31-186 December 22, 1975 RESOLUTION NO. 258-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF ADDENDUM TO MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (LIVER~ORE POLICE OF THE OPERATING ENGINEERS, LOCAL #3). RESOLUTION NO. 259-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF ADDENDUM TO MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (LIVEffi10RE PUBLIC WORKS EMPLOYEES OF OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL #3) REQUEST FROM P.C. RE CONSULTANT DUTIES - RE GENERAL PLAN A report from the P.C. indicated that they have conducted a public hearing on the General Plan and from the hearing it is evident that changes will be requested on the map and within the General Plan text. In addition, further studies may be required to substantiate or clari- fy certain aspects of the General Plan. The consultant's responsi- bility ends with the pUblication of the Plan and it is requested by the P.C. that the Council authorize additional consultant services, if necessary. Cm Turner stated that in the letter Mr. Musso indicates that apparently the consultant's responsibility ends with the publication and he asked if it does or does not end with the publication. Mr. Musso commented that at the time the consultants file a General Plan they are to be paid in full. They have used all the meetings contracted for and it means that the City must pay for any additional meeting. Cw Tirsel1 wondered if the City would be charged for any amendments or corrections to the draft of the General Plan. ~1r. Parness stated that he believes any additional work on the part of the consultant would result in an additional charge to the City. If there are public hearings during which the consultant is asked to be present the cost would amount to about $1,500 for travel time, etc. This cost is estimated to cover about five hearings. Mr. Musso commented that the one outstanding obligation of the con- sultant is the printing of the final map. There was some discussion concerning the possibility of allowing an additional $1,500 for consultant services and Cw Tirse11 commented that she is amazed that the City would write up a contract for con- sultant services that didn't include everything through to the end. Mr. Parness explained that the need for the additional financing is due to the inordinate number of meetings and public hearings that were not anticipated. The City Attorney advised that if an additional expenditure is to be approved it should be done by resolution. The Council can vote this evening and the resolution will be prepared during the week. CM TURNER MOVED TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN ADDITIONAL EXPENDITURE NOT TO EXCEED $1,500. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL. CM-31-187 December 22, 1975 (re Additional Gen. Plan Consultant Fees) Cm Turner commented that in the letter from Mr. Musso he states that any questions the City might have of the consultant con- cerning the General Plan, would be answered at no extra charge. This should really be clarified because the consultant could decide to charge the City on each call to him. Mr. Musso stated that he would interpret this to be that if no additional staff time is required there would be no charge. The City Attorney suggested that a decision be postponed because there will be both Planning Commission and Council hearings, and if the Council intends to review everything the Planning Commission does, there would have to be the same number of meetings. Mr. Musso remarked that the Planning staff will do most of the mechanical work such as redrawing maps or preparing alternatives. Mayor Futch indicated that the staff would come back with a reso- lution later and with a clearer understanding as to the specific obligations of Grunwald Crawford and Associates under the contract from this point on. A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION AT THIS TIME AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. REPORT RE FORMATION ENERGY CONSERVATION COMM. A letter was submitted to the Council by the Planning Commission with a list of names of people who had volunteered or been proposed for consideration as members of the Energy Conservation Committee. Mayor Futch commented that since this is to be a permanent committee, appointments should be made by the Council. Cm Miller suggested that the Planning Commission furnish names of people interested, and Mr. Musso stated that was the intent of the letter. Mayor Futch suggested that the Council set an executive session to discuss the appointments, perhaps on January 5. The Council directed the staff to check with the people whose names were listed to make sure they were interested in serving on the committee. Mr. Logan asked if it was the Council's desire to formally esta- blish this committee, and was advised it had not been discussed but perhaps it should be discussed prior to appointments being made. Cm Miller suggested that the Committee be a formal committee of the City Council as the charges would be laid ou, and this would keep it in the purview of the Council. Mr. Musso explained that one of the reasons the Commission has proposed it be a formal committee is that it has to do with in- terest in the Lab. Commissioner Selden felt that the City might get a better level of cooperation from the Lab if it were a formal committee as it would be something of a pilot project for Livermore. Mayor Futch agreed that there are funds available for a pilot project, but suggested that the matter be continued for further discussion at a later time, to which the Council concurred, and the suggested date was January 12, 1976. CM-31-188 December 22, 1975 SUMMARY OF ACTION - PLANNING COr1MISSION MEETING DEC. 16 At the Planning Commission meeting of December 16, the Commission approved application of Sunset Development Co. for Variance to allow continuance of corporation yard on a portion of property located at the northwest corner of Concannon Blvd. and Cordoba Street. Cw Tirse11 asked the Planning Director the reason for extending the application for continuance of the corporation yard, and Mr. Musso explained that the biggest argument was that it would be better to have it remain there rather than some other location within the two tracts, and this was only with the condition that it be allowed to remain for the time it would take for the last of the houses in the tract to be completed, which was estimated to be six months. em Miller pointed out that it should be located within the subdivision that is being constructed rather than in a tract that has been com- pleted for six or seven years. Mayor Futch suggested that a letter be directed to the developer notifying him that this would be as long as the Council would allow the use. Cm Miller disagreed as he felt the same argument would be used if another tract is commenced. CW TIRSELL MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL APPEAL THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION, SECONDED BY CM STALEY. CW TIRSELL ALSO ASKED IF THERE WAS ANY OFFICIAL ACTION TAKEN BY THE CITY ON THE PROPERTY THAT THE COUNCIL BE GIVEN A REPORT ON IT. THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. REPORT RE PROPOSED ORDINANCE REFERENDUM (Vehicle and Trailer Storage) The Mayor explained that a petition has been submitted for referendum of Ordinance No. 872 and received sufficient signatures to qualify. The two options are either to repeal the ordinance or submit the matter to the electorate at the forthcoming general election in March. CM MILLER MOVED THAT THE MATTER BE SUBMITTED TO THE ELECTORATE IN MARCH, SECONDED BY CM STALEY. Cm Miller stated that he had spoken to the City Attorney concerning the ballot wording and was told that the wording suggested was as it should be since that was the title of the ordinance. However, Cm Miller stated that the title of the ordinance did not indicate pro or con what the whole thing was all about. It is his understanding that the City Attorney is supposed to provide an impartial analysis, and he felt that the pros and cons could be included in the ballot statement to explain the issue. Mr. Logan explained that what Cm Miller was referring to is that the legislative counsel writes impartial statements for state ballot pro- positions. There is no requirement. Mayor Futch stated he was in favor of this option at this point in time, however he felt that this action reflects somewhat on the Council as a failure on their part to come up with an ordinance that would be adopted in a way that would lessen the hardship on particular people. He felt that the Council made a mistake by not adopting the ordinance submitted to them by the Planning Commission as he felt it was less harsh on the people who owned trailers and it may not have resulted in the action now being taken by the Council, and even if it had, the outcome might have been different. Now, regardless of which way it goes, there is going to be approximately 50% of the people CM-31-189 December 22, 1975 (re Proposed Referendum - Trailer Storage) who will be unhappy. Even though they were putting it to the vote of the citizens, he felt the Council could have done a better job of providing leadership and coming up with an ordinance that would not have been so controversial. He added that he regrets that it turned out as it did, but the Council has no choice at this time. Cm Miller felt he needed to respond to the remarks made by the Mayor and stated that the Council certainly made a mistake, and the Commission too, by deliberately dragging their "feet" for two years instead of doing as the public had asked them to do in 1973. The proposal originally sent by the Planning Commission to the Council was in total conflict with the vote in 1973, which they recognized when they reconsidered it. Mayor Futch stated that the Commission had no choice as they were directed to reconsider the matter by the Council. Cm Miller continued that the present ordinance reflects the original public vote, and the one that they are facing now has been brought by the people who think that it is changed, and while he does not agree with the referendum, he commends the people who felt strongly enough to take the issue back. Cm Turner commented that since the Mayor had elected to go after the other four members of the Council, he would have to say that when the issue first came up if the Mayor had the courage to make a deci- sion, they wouldn't be faced with this issue now. Cm Turner added that he was happy to take the responsibility now. A VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION AT THIS TIME AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY, AND THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED. RESOLUTION NO. 266-75 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 ELECTION TO BE HELD AND CONDUCTED IN THE CITY OF LIV- EID10RE ON MARCH 2, 1976. Cm Miller stated that the question of the ballot statement should be resolved and he indicated that he would be happy to write the state- ment. Cm Turner stated he would prefer to have the staff write the state- ment for the Council's review, however Cm Miller stated that he would not prefer that and requested permission of the Council to write the sta:tement. ~./?r1~~~~ ~&U?~ ~ ~ en-J '~ U> ~ ~ .P-aLL..,r. ~.~,<!'~~b . Mr. Logan pointed out that repealing Ordinance 872 repeals several other areas that are not necessarily the brunt of all of the objec- tions, and he was not certain at this time whether the repeal of that in effect puts the old ordinance back into effect because the old ordinance was repealed. In other words, he was wondering if two negatives made a positive, and was willing to looking into the matter, but he wanted to point out to the Council that the effect of the repea1e would wipe out most front yard requirements completely, and in addition if it is voted for, the Council cannot act on it again for another year from the date it is voted upon. That holds true whether the Council repeals the ordinance directly this evening or whether the citizenry repeals it by the vote. Cm Miller asked what the option would be, and Mr. Logan replied that if there is an option at all, and if the repeal doesn't repeal the repeal there would be back to where they were before. If the repeal effectively puts the old ordinance back into effect again, then the Council will be okay, if it doesn't the only reasonable alternative is to put another ballot measure on to make it clear that the adop- CM-31-190 December 22, 1975 (re Proposed Referendum - Trailer Storage) tion of this measure repeals the whole works, but the adoption of the other ballot measure only repeals those areas which are the areas of concern which can be complicated especially to the elec- torate which is usually uninformed. Mr. Logan added that the Council is very limited as to whether it can be put on the ballot proposition or not. If it isn't decided tonight it isn't going. Cw Tirse1l asked if it was possible to repeal parts of the ordinance, and Mr. Logan stated it is possible if the referendum had been worded in such a way as to repeal particular sections, but it would repeal the whole ordinance. Cw Tirse11 asked if they went back to the original ordinance wouldn't it be more strict than this one? Mr. Logan replied that if the repeal does not effectively put the other ordinance out of business, the Council would go back to the more restrictive ordinance, however he has not reached a conclusion on that issue. It would seem logical that if this ordinance is repealed which repealed the old ordinance it would put the old ordinance back into effect again. em Miller stated what he can see as the problem is that if it repeals everything else, then for the person who writes the ballot statement against the referendum, he would have to point out that the whole ordinance would be repealed, and that would help get some votes to vote down the referendum, but that isn't where the issue is. If you are going to have a vote on this, you should really have it where the issue is. Cm Miller asked if they should consider another ballot measure. Cw Tirse11 felt they would be severely criticized with two ballot measures. This one alone was confusing enough, let alone another one. If this one went back to either of the other ordinances, the second ordinance that has been in effect is more to the liking of the RV people. But if that is not in case, they would go back to the old ordinance which is more strict than this one. Cm Miller stated that the ordinance which was in effect before they adopted Ord. 872 was the interim ordinance which allows front yard storage in the older part of town. Mayor Futch reminded them that ordinance could also be repealed. em Miller stated that he knew that, but if Ord. 872 puts another ordinance back into effect, it is the least restrictive one and he and Cw Tirse11 both felt it would be agreeable to the RV people, which would be in keeping with the spirit of the appeal. Mr. Logan pointed out that if the referendum is specific - you either say yes or no on it, that's the way the vote will go, but if you put on an alternative and they vote yes, that is only advisory and you will have to tell the electorate that it is only an advisory vote, you don't have to go along with that. The Council decided they could do nothing more to clarify the issue. Fred Johansen, 854 Keystone Way, representing the trailer people, stated he would like to suggest wording of the analysis of the referendum to be made out by the attorney and modified so that it will be a little less confusing to the people. He felt they had re- ceived a lot of response to the petition which shows that there was a certain amount of confusion on the last issue. There are many things that are not at all clear to the people. The City Attorney has stated CM-31-19l December 22, 1975 (re Proposed Referendum - Trailer Storage) that the measure can be written only in the form that it is written on the petition which he felt was unfortunate as he wasn't sure how many people would actually read the arguments. Mr. Logan again explained that the whole ordinance could be repealed by the vote and there is nothing he can do to change that in the ballot wording. Anyone who indicates there is anything different than that is wrong. It will repeal every front yard ordinance, every off-street parking ordinance section of that whole particular ordinance unless the repeal puts back into effect the interim ordinance at which time most of the sections will come back into play again. The un- fortunate part of the whole thing is that that ordinance was not only used to direct itself to a specific item, but it was used as a cleanup measure to clean up other items which in the process brought in all kinds of things that might not necessarily have had to come under that particular designation. Irrespective of that particular problem, the whole ordinance will be repealed, and the Council has no choice as the referendum forces them into that position. The people had no choice as the normal attack on an ordinance is to re- peal the ordinance, which is the appropriate procedure to take. Cm Miller stated that hopefully when the City Attorney takes a closer look at what is being repealed, it will all come out so that it will not repeal the whole ordinance. He added that although Mr. Johansen and he are on opposite sides of the issue, they both had the same idea - ~hat the measure should state what the issue really is. Cw Tirse11 asked Mr. Johansen if he felt that the 80% of the people who signed the petition is any indication of the support for it. If so, he is being misled, because she has walked many petitions, and it is a rare American who wouldn't sign their name to have some- thing on the ballot. She cautioned him that if he was strongly be- hind the issue he should not think he has it won. Mr. Johansen felt that the City should put forth every effort so that the people will understand the issue. If they had not had the heavy vote from the newest parts of town the last time, the measure. would have been defeated. The City Clerk reminded the Council that a time must be set to have arguments submitted, and so she has set December 29 through January 9, at which time all arguments have to be presented for both the Council and the proponents. There cannot be more than 300 words in the argument. Mr. Logan stated that he would prepare a statement for the Council, officially or unofficially, on whether the ordinance will repeal the old ordinance or if it will go back into effect, and that posi- tion will be made well in advance of the election so everyone will know what it is. FARMING LEASE re 8-ACRE PARCEL ABUTTING KITTYHAWK RD. The City owns an 8-acre parcel abutting Kittyhawk Road on its easterly side. This land was obtained so as to protect development encroachment under the easterly approach zone of the airport. It has been leased for farming purposes for the past several years by the lessee of all of the surrounding property except that to the west. Rather than to grant a lease extension it was decided to solicit bids on the property. There were no lease proposals re- ceived other than a statement from the current lessee whose adja- cent land use and available water supply precludes any others. CM-31-l92 December 22, 1975 (re Farming Lease) CM TURNER MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF THE LEASE, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL, MIICH PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. RESOLUTION NO. 260-75 A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID (Norman L. Marcie1) REPORT RE EAST AVE. WATER MAIN EXTENSION Construction plans and specifications have been prepared for a water line extension on East Avenue that will permit the interconnection of the City system at Mitra Street to that of California Water Ser- vice Co. system at Buena Vista Avenue. This project is to be equally shared in cost with California Water Service Company with our amount estimated to be $13,700. The extension of the water line was further explained by Mr. Lee by a drawing on the board, showing it to be about 680 feet long and it will be beneficial in the event there is a failure of the City's system and it could be used as an alternate source to take care of that particular area. CM TURNER MOVED TO AUTHORIZE SOLICITATION OF CONSTRUCTION BIDS, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL, AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. CONSENT CALENDAR Vehicle Bid Results (Backhoe and PU Truck) Bids have been received and results tabulated for the purchase of a tractor-loader-backhoe and it was recommended that the award be made to the low bidder, Hoyt Buettner, in the amount of $24,080.85. RESOLUTION NO. 261-75 A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID (Hoyt & Buettner Tractor Co.) Bids were also solicited and received for a 1976 model Sub-Compact Pickup and it was recommended that the bid be awarded to Codiro1i Ford in the amount of $3,819.16. RESOLUTION NO. 262-75 A RESOLUTION AWARDING BID (Codiro1i: 1976 Pickup) Lease Amendment (Calif. Air Commuter) The City Manager reported that proposed amendments are submitted for the existing lease by California Air Commuter providing for a very nominal office space in our administration building. The pro- posed lease rate for an area of 72.25 sq. ft. has been calculated to be $91.04 per month. It is recommended that the amendment be authorized. RESOLUTION NO. 263-75 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT (Calif- ornia Air Commuter) CM-31-193 December 22, 1975 Res. of Condemnation for Park Purposes (Woelffel Property) Negotiations have been conducted over the past year for the acqui- sition of a parcel of land comprised of 24.4 acres to the west of Murrieta Blvd. and along the Arroyo Mocho channel alignment. It is part of the area of about 100 acres intended to be obtained for a major community park in this area. Financing is to be by means of a state bond issue grant. It is recommended that a resolution be adopted authorizing the condemnation procedure. RESOLUTION NO. 264-75 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 PARK AND RELATED USES, LOCATED PARTIALLY IN THE CITY OF LIVERMORE AND PARTIALLY IN THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, GENERALLY 945 FEET SOUTH OF OLIVINA AVENUE AND 505 FEET WESTERLY OF MURRIETA BOULEVARD, AND COMMONLY DESIGNATED AS 548 EAST STANLEY BOULEVARD. Res. of Condemnation re Railroad Track Reloca- tion (George T. Devany, et ux) A small parcel of land is required for the grade separation project and it is recommended that a resolution be adopted authorizing con- demnation of this parcel. RESOLUTION NO. 265-75 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 USES, SAID REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, LY- ING WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE RAILROAD TRACK RELOCA- TION ASSESSMENT DISTRICT PROJECT WITHIN THE SAID CITY. (39b) Minutes - Social Concerns Committee Minutes of the meeting of the Social Concerns Committee for November 20, 1975 were received by the Council. payroll & Claims There were 112 claims in the amount of $203,087.60 dated December 12 and 285 warrants in the amount of $95,174.99 dated December 1, 1975 ordered paid as approved by the City Manager. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION OF CM TURNER, SECONDED BY CW TIRSELL, THE ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR WERE APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE STAFF (Water Treatment Plant) Mr. Lee stated that the staff has made application for position on the priority list with the Regional Board for a 1 mg increase in capacity of the Water Treatment Plant. The Regional Board staff CM-31-194 December 22, 1975 (Water Treatment Plant) prepared a list, just received, of the priority list they will be submitting to their Regional Board in January and they would like to have the City's response by January 2. We are on the list, we have an "II" priority listing that goes from "A" to "H", and there is a reasonable possibility we will be in a reachable position with that priority listing. The Regional Board staff has indicated it would do no harm to reaffirm the City's interest and ask for a higher position on the priority list. Mr. Lee suggested that the Council allow the staff to prepare such a communication to the Regional Board, and stress our interest in additional capacity for industrial and commercial needs and more or less state what has been previously discussed. He did not feel that mitigating measures were a big issue and probably would not affect a decision at the Regional Board level but it is something we could press at a later date. Cm Hiller felt we should leave things in about mitigating measures as final decisions are made by the State Board. Mayor Futch felt we should reaffirm the mitigating measures because the State Board is going to insist on something like that. Cw Tirsel1 asked if they are restated would the statement concerning reservations which was a part of the ordinance be used, and Mr. Lee replied they would. i1r. Lee suggested that the Council do something before the 2nd of January and they can arranqe to meet with him. Mr. Parness stated that unless the Council opposes it, the staff would like permission to reaffirm the interest of the City in the application already submitted. Cm Miller stated if it is to be done in writing before the next Council meeting it would be helpful if he would read the text to the Counci1members over the phone or send a copy if there is time. Cm Turner asked if an application had been submitted and Mr. Lee replied that it had been - an application for position which is the procedure. Mr. Lee added that there will be no more grants for the next fiscal year 1976-77 until the Regional Board has recommended the priority list to the State Board and they adopt it. When they adopt that and we are up in a reachable position, we have a project. (Re Proposed Ordinances) Mr. Logan stated there are no ordinances on the agenda as the sewer ordinance was withdrawn at his request. He would ask that the Council be patient with him and it will not be brought back to the Council until January l2 as he would like to present several alternatives which he thinks would legally apply rather than just pick apart the ordinance. He asked if this would be agreeable and the Council concurred. (Questions re Election) Mr. Logan stated he has received numerous calls from people now seeking office and the problem is that there are a lot of questions that now arise because of Proposition 9, because of the new City ordinance and because of general campaign laws. He and the City Clerk feel that if sometime in the middle of January they might set a symposium for all the candidates who want to attend and ask all the questions they have and they will answer all of a general nature. As a public servant he feels inclined to answer all the questions the candidates have, but does not want to favor anyone. He asked CM-31-195 December 22, 1975 for the Council's approval to set up such a symposium, and the Council was in complete agreement with the idea. CITY MANAGER'S WEEKLY REPORT General Plan EIR Report Mr. Parness stated that the General Plan EIR Report is being de- livered to us to tomorrow, and the staff will review it to see if it is adequate in its coverage and then will ask for the final report to be sent to us over the succeeding few days. Gifts to Dignitaries Mr. Parness reported that the staff met with both wine companies and both were very receptive to the idea and would participate. Rather than to substitute for one of their products labels, another label would be prepared to be affixed to the bottle on the reverse side with an appropriate emblem and it would be properly packaged in a two-bottle type of box which they felt would be appropriate. The staff is now working with alternate designs for such a label which will be ready in a couple of weeks. Letter to County Assessor The City Manager has written to the County Assessor asking for a response by December 22, as per Council instructions. The letter of response was written today and hand delivered this afternoon. Mr. Parness noted that the letter is rather difficult to under- stand and the assessor did not respond to the points concerning the disparity in assessments, at least to the satisfaction of the City Manager. em Miller requested that this item be placed on the agenda for discussion by the Council. Wording for Ballot Measure re Safety Tax Mr. Parness reported that he is preparing the argument for the public safety tax, for the ballot, which will be available for Council review at the next Council meeting. LAFCO EIR The City Attorney has distributed copies of draft comments made by the consulting firm on the General Plan as to the LAFCO EIR. If the Council is satisfied with the points made, Mr. Parness would suggest that the comments be incorporated with the material to be transmitted to LAFCO which is to be received by them no later than December 31. Mayor Futch commented that he believes the Council would want input from the City Attorney concerning comments on the EIR. The City Attorney stated that he spoke with the City Manager and is not sure what points he has in mind but from a legal standpoint everything possible should be included. However, from a political standpoint there may be several items the Council might not want to do. Mayor Futch offered to write a cover letter which would include the comments made orally by him to LAFCO as well as suggestions the Council, City Attorney or City Manager might have. CM-31-196 December 22, 1975 (re LAFCO EIR) Cm Miller stated that if there is no objection he would like some reference to the LAVWMA EIS - the latest full document on the air quality problems and implications. Mayor Futch explained that this was included in his oral comments to LAFCO. MATTERS INITIATED BY THE COUNCIL (Committee Member Hospitalized) Cm Turner commented that prici11a Payne from the Community Affairs Committee had a heart attack and is at Oak Knoll Hospital. She has asked that Cm Turner wish the Council a merry Christmas, on her behalf. em Turner stated that prici11a has put a lot into the Bicentennial celebration activities such as the Bicentennial Ball and he feels the City should send flowers to her. Cw Tirse11 suggested that the Counci1members contribute, individually, and not charge the City. The Council concurred. (Comprehensive Health Planning Council Meeting) Cm Turner stated that he and Cw Tirse11 will attend a meeting with the Comprehensive Health Planning Council on January 8, 1976, at 10:30 a.m. If the Counci1members have questions they would like asked at the meeting they should let them know before the meeting date. (Executive Session to Discuss Appointments) Cw Turner wondered if the Council will be meeting in an executive session after the meeting to discuss appointments that were not made at the last executive session. Mayor Futch announced that the Council would adjourn to the last executive session for this year, directly after the meeting. (Comment re Hospital Expansion) Cm Miller stated that he read in the newspaper where one of the members of the Hospital Board commented that the statement expressed by the Council concerning the hospital expansion is a "no growth point of view". Cm Miller stated that this statement is utter nonsense and they are essentially trying to cover up the fact that higher room rates will be charged and that they are irresponsible in proposing expansion that would be beyond belief. This Council is hardly a "no growth" Council and it would seem that Mr. Patterson has lost contact with reality. CM-31-197 December 22, 1975 (Traffic Signal Reimbursement) Cm Miller stated that it seems the city has waited a very long time for the $65,000 from Mr. Mehran for the traffic signal installed at Holmes Street and Concannon Boulevard. Mr. Mehran owes the people of Livermore the $65,000 and this should be pursued. Mr. Logan stated that he is inclined to believe that Mr. Mehran will pay the $65,000 but he will send a notice to him. (Appointments to Air Quality Board) em Miller stated that he feels two people have been appointed to the Air Quality Board who are completely unqualified. Cm Miller stated that it was his understanding that there would not be any business discussed at the Mayors Conference meeting, when these appointments were made, because the legislators were going to be there. He asked Mayor Futch if he was aware that all of this was going to take place. Mayor Futch commented that one appointment was on the agenda but Jack Ma1tester was appointed without it being on the agenda. Cm Miller suggested that the City submit a formal protest to the Mayors Conference about having items discussed that are not on the agenda. It was noted that the Council would consider submitting a formal protest. (Mayors Conference Discussion re I-580) Cm Miller stated that he believes there was some discussion at the Mayors Conference concerning I-580 and wondered what com- ments were made. Mayor Futch stated that he would not be surprised if they would take the position of widening I-580 to six lanes. He believes that this is what is coming but they haven't taken the position, as yet. Cw Tirse11 stated that if this is the case perhaps the City should submit information that if this goes back to litigation it is almost certain the funding would be lost and the funding would go to southern California. (City Policy re Recovery of Lost Items) Cm Staley commented that he noticed in a letter to the editor of a newspaper that a boy has written about the City's policy con- cerning items found and turned into the Police Department. Appar- ently the boy found something, turned it into the Police Department and then requested that it be returned to him after a certain length of time if the item was not claimed. The boy was told that items which have not been claimed must be auctioned off and would not be returned to the boy because this is City policy. The City Attorney commented that the Police Department holds an item for a certain period of time and if there is no locally adopted ordi- nance the lost property will be returned to the person who found it. CM-31-198 I December 22, 1975 (re Lost Items) However, there is another ordinance which has a specific set of rules concerning lost property and the Police Department has the authoriza- tion to sell unclaimed items at an auction. This is rather complicated and not as simple as it would appear on the surface and the Council may wish to review this ordinance but at this time it is required that unclaimed property be sold at a public auction. It was concluded that a policy change concerning lost property might be in order and the City Attorney was directed to prepare a report at which time the item will again be discussed. (LAFCO Meeting) Mayor Futch stated that very little happened at the last LAFCO meet- ing. He did make the comment that he intended to make at the meeting. The owners who attended the meeting were confused as to the purpose of the meeting and instead of commenting on the EIR their comments were that they did not want to be included in Livermore's Sphere of Influence because they do not want to pay City taxes. That type of comment was not an item of discussion and the owners were reminded that if they do not want to be included in the Sphere of Influence that this could be discussed at a later date. No action was taken at this meeting. The Regional Planning Committee was given the authority to report directly to Livermore on the General Plan but there was not suffi- cient time for the Executive Committee to get the Regional Planning Committee's report and review it for a recommendation prior to the time of adoption of it by the City of Livermore. (Zone 7 Meeting with LAVWMA) Mayor Futch stated that he also attended a joint meeting with Zone 7 and LAVWMA and one of the topics discussed was the meaning of what is lIadjacentll to our City. They asked that Livermore clarify what is meant by this so they can see what they would agree to. em Miller noted that the developable area in Livermore and the General Plan area can be shaded in and this is all the information they need. Mayor Futch stated that he believes that if Zone 7 gets involved in a big study they are concerned about where the funds would come from and they asked if the cities would be willing to help. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, Mayor Futch adjourned the meeting at 10:50 p.m. to an executive session to discuss appointments. APPROVE ~~%d Mayor ~~ i . I " ~< " J,,' ,. C.1t C1e ~ Livermor , Ca ifornia ATTEST CM-31-199